D&D 5E Miniatures, or Theater of the Mind

[discosoc]

Rarely use minis unless it's a complicated setup, and even then it's only for general reference rather than a grid system. My experience is that a decent GM can describe combat without resorting to them, but an inexperienced GM often uses them as a crutch. Like they don't have to actually describe a scene or mood or atmosphere because it's all about the mini's.

 

[aramis erak]

Other/Explain in Comments. There are other methods out there! Why don't you share yours? However, do not use this just because you are using a hybrid Theater of the Mind / Miniatures system. Please try and classify the system you are using by the primary method of combat resolution. For example, if you mostly run Theater of the Mind, but occasionally run a big battle with miniatures, then choose Theater of the Mind. On the other hand, if you run miniatures for most battles, but will resolve a small and insignificant conflict with Theater of the Mind, choose Miniatures.

Okay, so what if you run/play one or the other depending on the campaign or who is the DM? Then choose your preferred method.

mostly, I use non-representative bits on maps - I specifically avoid use of full on miniatures for both the representation and the costs. Not even counters with silhouettes - just numbered squares with a facing indicator.

Miniatures, as opposed to numbered tokens, have a profound psychological effect on players thinking about combat and visibility. They imply postures, species, and armaments. And when substituted for others, creates more misunderstandings about what's there than I care for. I really first noticed this when running Fasa's Star Trek RPG. The use of counters with silhouettes got different play than simply using counters with just numbers and a direction arrow. The one time I used 3d figures, the effect was more pronounced.

For long ranged, I use overhead pen to mark numbers on a laminated map.

I sometimes use TOTM, especially when the threat is a long way away.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I don't like playing with codified grid rules like in 3e or 4e. I only like minis/drawings as a visual support to enhance the roleplaying experience. Codified rules turn D&D fights into a really bad boardgame.

Same, after 10+ years with grids and mini's, I am so glad to be back to TotM style as both a player and DM - with the caveat that we often draw a sketch of the area to help understand placement. There is definitely no grid however, positioning is rough. The grid somehow makes us more boardgamey, less roleplayey.

As DM in particular, I find TotM waaaaay more adaptable, and able to jump straight into it/quicker.

 

[redrick]

Used to run mostly theater of the mind. Then switched to minis on Roll20. Lately doing mostly theater of the mind.

I actually find that theater of the mind works best in dungeons, because the positioning is usually more intuitive, and we also often have a map going anyway. I (or a player) sketch out a very wide-angle map on a sheet of paper as we go, so we have an overview of the general layout, but not enough space to actually position minis. Combat zones can usually be identified as "back there," "by the door," "in the southwest corner," etc. I prefer this because we can fit a much larger game-area on the table this way, without having to redraw or flip over battlemats as PCs move from one area to another. I hate transitioning to a battle-mat.

In larger and/or outdoor areas, on the other hand, minis can be much more helpful, as there's a much wider range of possible character positioning and movement. The other night, I did this with coins and beer caps on a blank tabletop, but we sometimes use a battlemat and minis or pathfinder pawns. Distances also tend to become more important in large or outdoor areas. And, of course, the scope tends to change more dramatically, as you're moving between a "miles" scale and a "feet" scale when you step into a wandering encounter.

 

[redrick]

mostly, I use non-representative bits on maps - I specifically avoid use of full on miniatures for both the representation and the costs. Not even counters with silhouettes - just numbered squares with a facing indicator.

Miniatures, as opposed to numbered tokens, have a profound psychological effect on players thinking about combat and visibility. They imply postures, species, and armaments. And when substituted for others, creates more misunderstandings about what's there than I care for. I really first noticed this when running Fasa's Star Trek RPG. The use of counters with silhouettes got different play than simply using counters with just numbers and a direction arrow. The one time I used 3d figures, the effect was more pronounced.

For long ranged, I use overhead pen to mark numbers on a laminated map.

I sometimes use TOTM, especially when the threat is a long way away.

I might try this. Added bonus is that you can match the numbers up to NPCs in your notes instead of trying to remember which orc mini has 3 hp and which has 15!

I bought a box of Pathfinder Pawns a while back, thinking that they would be fun for tabletop. Ironically, we almost only ever use them as PC minis. For monsters, I have an old set of unpainted HeroQuest skeletons and orcs. A beautiful mini is awesome, but, overall, the benefits of truly generic minis greatly outweigh them. I'd rather use a set of generic figures and then show a printed picture if I have one.

 

[was]

Miniatures..it's easier to keep track of everybody and their movements.

 

[Sunseeker]

I like using minis, but I've gotten to dislike a grid, too clinical. So we have a world map and then imagine the local stuff.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

What I don't like about minis is the square counting and due to the nature of AOE spells on a grid get wonky. I'd like to switch to an ungridded battle map.

 

[strider13x]

TotM! A

 

[Remathilis]

Honestly, its like 50/50, most quick combats at TotM, but the longer or more complex ones are minis and grids.