3.5 Without Minis?

[Jemal]

I used figs/representations much more often back in 1st/2nd and even the begining of 3rd than I do now. As I learned to DM and describe better, they became more of a hassle and less help. Looking at the board and seeing a bunch of things that're supposed to represent 'this and that' actually makes it HARDER to visualize that that giant leggo block there is supposed to be an Enlarged, Winged, Feral Tarrasque (or whatnot). It's hard to be scared of lego.

You just need to make sure everyone knows their OWN position in relation to others, not the exact positiosn of the whole field (though the DM should). If anybody's confused : Ask Questions. If someone does something, warn them if you think they've forgotten something (like a previous posters example of "that'll provoke AoO's you know" or another one's of "Do I get an AoO for him casting a spelll? I threaten him, right?"


The other reason I don't use Mini's is b/c the characters are not supposed to be able to accurately judge the exact position and location of everyone(Unless they've got exceedingly high Intelligence scores), just "Bob's about 10 feet to my side, those two orcs are about 30' away, and the pit is 10' behind them".

Using Mini's makes it more of a strategy wargame and less of an RPG. That's not saying you can't have large, tactical fights w/o mini's, though... I do it all the time!

 

[Steel_Wind]

Using Mini's makes it more of a strategy wargame and less of an RPG. That's not saying you can't have large, tactical fights w/o mini's, though... I do it all the time!

I think that's probably fair - in the sense it makes it more "wargamey"; however, this "less of an RPG" conclusion you grafted on like a flesh golem's arm does not belong and shows you to be a little confused, I think. Just what is it that you imagine D&D to be?

I suggest you forget where this little game we play comes from. D&D was born from historical miniatures and wargames. Those are the roots of the game and the rules were created by Gary to assist the players in using those miniatures to describe their battles, give them context and make it fun.

It is hardly surprising that those of the old-skool prefer to use them - nor is it surprising they we find them fun to play with.

I'll take a tabletop data projector, dozens of minis on the table and cool maps depicting the scene any day of the week, thanks.

 

[JRR_Talking]

we do use minis.

of course u still get some people who ask how far they are away from the nearest orc when its there turn, even though iof they had been paying attention and looked at the mat they could see they were 25ft away!

 

[Glyfair]

I suggest you forget where this little game we play comes from. D&D was born from historical miniatures and wargames. Those are the roots of the game and the rules were created by Gary to assist the players in using those miniatures to describe their battles, give them context and make it fun.

In my my most recent post to my Dragon Review thread, I covered one of Gary's Sorcerer's Scroll columns that covers the history of the game (and where he intends it to go). In it he points out that Dave Arneson added miniatures to the dungeon crawl game.

While D&D did develop from the fantasy rules for Chainmail, it appears that miniatures weren't used in the early stages of D&D. It wasn't until Dave Arneson used them in his games that they started to work their way in. IIRC, recent comments from Gary imply they weren't common in his games either.

 

[Doug McCrae]

We play without minis. For some complex fights we use scratch paper to show locations of walls of fire and the like. Adjudicating range, charges, AoOs and flanking works as previous posters have described, purely verbally. We rely on the DM to make the call. I can see how this might not work for some groups, but it works well for us.

 

[Steel_Wind]

In my my most recent post to my Dragon Review thread, I covered one of Gary's Sorcerer's Scroll columns that covers the history of the game (and where he intends it to go). In it he points out that Dave Arneson added miniatures to the dungeon crawl game.

While D&D did develop from the fantasy rules for Chainmail, it appears that miniatures weren't used in the early stages of D&D. It wasn't until Dave Arneson used them in his games that they started to work their way in. IIRC, recent comments from Gary imply they weren't common in games either.

Gary says:

"In 1976 a movement began among D&Ders to portray characters with actual miniature figurines. Miniature figure manufacturers began. to provide more and more models aimed at the D&D market — characters, monsters, weapons, dungeon furnishings, etc. Availability sparked interest, and the obvious benefits of using figures became apparent: Distances could be pinned down, opponents were obvious, and a certain extra excitement was generated by use of painted castings of what players “saw”. Because of the return of miniatures to D&D, the game is tending to come full circle; back to table top battles not unlike those which were first fought with D&D’s parent, CHAINMAIL’s “Fantasy Supplement”, now occurring quite regularly."

It's also clear from the rest of the article that Gary and his crew used them. Gary's group at the LGTSA were historical miniatures enthusiasts and had access to them and Gary had a sand table in his basement IIRC.

They certainly were not common elsewhere as D&D broke into the market for the simple reason that there were no easy sources of D&D minis to acquire. If you didn't have historical minis to use, you couldn't go into most shops to buy them. Nobody was making D&D specific minis until 1976 and medieval historical minis were an extreme niche product.

My point: miniatures combat is at the roots of the game we play. They were not bolted on afterwards, nor are they some modern contrivance out of place in a pnp RPG; the game evolved out of miniatures - not the other way around.

There is an old slang we use from my gaming group that derives from this in the 70s. Instead of asking "whose campaign", we asked "whose board?". It's a reference to the referee of the "board" that you played on, meaning miniatures. We still sometimes use the phrase "whose board?" when we are asking who is/was DMing and we get odd looks from those who are not from that era.

Man, I'm getting old...

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Allow me to comment on your reasons a bit:

1. Our group is large and our space is limited. Battlemats mean all books go on the floor and we can't have drinks or snacks at the table.
2. I'm a transient DM and I'm tired of packing all my stuff every week.
3. I'm spending a ton of money on DDM, and I'm still unable to get what I really need to run most encounters.
4. The intricate movement of miniatures on the battlegrid takes a lot of time, especially with so many players.
5. I feel it detracts from narrative descriptions and takes the game from the realm of imagination to a more physical board game.

1. Everyone knows that Wizards has a secret agreement with Ikea to force people to buy larger tables

2. I had that problem, too, that's why I converted an unused room of the house into the Dungeon, where all the books are within arm's reach, and the minis in display cases along the wall.

But the problem I had wasn't the minis: It was the books. I could never use all the books I wanted, and still had to break my back schlepping a dozen books around. We were using whatever we had lying around for minis (old metal minis, dice, the legendary S. Cow - a Playmobil Cow with a paper cape with "S.Cow" written on it). I only had special minis with me for the player characters.

3. Well, even if you distrust those online shops and/ebay, with Reaper getting into the PPM market, that problem might go away in time!

4. I don't know about you, but we don't have any problem with it: People usually count squares in advance, so they step up to the enemy as soon as it's their turn. If they don't plan ahead , the 10 seconds moving the minis around isn't nearly as bad as the 30+ seconds they take planning what to do, what spell to cast, and so on.

5. I don't have that problem, mainly because We only ever use the minis in combat. It's not so bad I'd say.


That having been said, I have seen the ugly side of playing without miniatures, and I find that I prefer the ugly side of playing with them

 

[debalkez]

We don't use actual miniatures. We use like pieces from monopoly, and for the bigger monsters, we use those golden coins. (That's the one I DM)

In another group I'm in, we use the colored pieces from Risk as PC's, gray ones as NPC's, and black ones as enemies. I'm the red horse. Haha.

 

[w_earle_wheeler]

We don't use actual miniatures. We use like pieces from monopoly, and for the bigger monsters, we use those golden coins. (That's the one I DM)

I used colored stones to represent creatures I don't have minis for. Just toss up a print-out of the creature in front of your DM screen and it works just as well.

I certainly feel the OPs pain about lugging around so much from game to game, and the pain of buying DDMs and not getting what a DM actually needs for a game.

 

[Odhanan]

I'm guessing there are not that many players in your group - not that many monsters - and no players playing Druids using multiple summoning Natures Ally like no tomorrow - right?

I've been gaming for twenty years my friend, so I can safely say that I've played with all kinds of group sizes and encounter circumstances using all kinds of rulesets. The issues you're talking about are non-issues.

I need a visual reference? I pick up a piece of blank paper and draw a rough map of the area with Xs or initials marking the positions of the PCs and arrows to show movement. No counting squares, no counting distances like in a wargame... just rough approximation for reference really. The time it takes for me to do so is approximately between 10 to 30 seconds per map, and I will not use one every game session, much less more than one per session.

You can check out my blogs in my sig to find out I'm using a lot of miniatures in my 3.5 or AE/IH games. That's not because it's "necessary": it's mostly because it's a big part of the pleasure for the players and myself, much like playing with legos or dolls, and because we actually appreciate the tactical intricacies the rules set may provide to us. We do have entire sessions (including combats) without minis, however.

If you are prepared to fudge or leave flanking and movement, tumbling and AoOs out of it - sure. It can be done.

No, again. It can be done: see my example of verbal gameplay as well as the other examples provided by other posters on this thread. I mean, it's okay for you to say you find it hard or you don't like it, but saying "it can't be done without leaving this, that, that and that out of the equation" is wrong, since myself and others have already spoken about ways to do so.