(3.5E) Aw, crap...

[Desdichado]

I like tactical miniatures games well enough. I play Blood Bowl quite a bit, and recently I've gotten into Heroclix a bunch.

But roleplaying and miniature gaming are two very different experiences for me. I've already just about decided to ignore most of the combat rules next tim e I GM, having players describe what they want to do and assigning ad hoc rules on the fly ("OK, sounds like a jump check DC 25", etc.) which will not only get rid of the battlemap mentality (and withdrawal from the cinematic picture in the players' heads) and encourage more creative approaches to combat. I was thinking the revisions were must haves, I'm now -- with just this news -- moving to a "I'll have to see the books first" mentality. This blows.

 

[Apok]

From what I (re-)read, I understood that the assumption was already there, and that the flavor text will be changed to show clearer how to use the minis that were already implied.

And as pointed out before, i can´t see how they could change the rules to be more mini-based.

The only thing I can think of is them using the term "squares" instead of an actual distance. One square will still equal a 5'x5' area, but when talking about tactical movement they will reference it in squares. A 5' step will become a single square move. I can only hope that they will clean up & clarify the rules for movement, action, and AoO's in combat since it's very difficult to explain the system to new players or players who don't understand it 100%.

I have no problem with this since we have been using minis and battlemats in one form or another since 3e came out. I find it much easier to visualize the battlefield this way and actually encourages tactical thinking and creative use of the environment.

The real beauty of the Revision, though, is the fact that you don't have to buy anything. All of your new rules and revisions will be available via the SRD. There really is no cause for complaint on this issue; if you choose to use the revised rules, great and if not that's fine too. It won't cost you a dime to at least check it out (unless you don't already have internet access).

 

[mooby]

Ya know, I never used mini's until I joined up with a new gaming group a short time ago.

Maybe it's the new group, maybe it's the mini's, but I've never had a clearer, or more fun time paying D&D before.

 

[aNenuphar]

Stercor! I hate minatures; we never use minatures.

Of course, unlike anyone else who doesn't use them, we have rational reasons:

1) they slow the game down

2) they slow the game down

3) they slow the game down

4) they are too much like minature wargaming. Which, I understand, is a British thing.

The question is:

What rules do I have to ignore or change since we don't use minatures?

 

[Aaron L]

I hate miniatures. I still wanna buy the new books though, UNLESS they make all measurements in 5x5 squares or some other equally foolish thing.

 

[Quasqueton]

I seem to remember this argument and bemoaning of minis from almost 3 years ago.

"They slow the game down" ? Huh?

Without minis, this is what you hear:

"Can I see the wizard?"

"Can I get to the back of the chamber?"

"How many orcs are within fireball radius?"

"Is the next giant within range of my 5' step?"

Etc.

Often the DM has to answer the same question for different players at different places in the battle, and whenever the positioning changes.

With minis, all such questions are answered with a momentary glance at the battle grid. The only time I've seen minis/grids slow down play is when the DM lets the players move their minis around like chess pieces -- allowing changes and re-moves until the player is satisfied and takes his hand off the mini. But this is purely a DM fault.

I have played since circa 1980, through BD&D, AD&D, AD&D2, and now D&D3, and I have used minis for 90% of my DMing. I have never enjoyed a battle session where there were no minis (of some type -- even coins, dice, or pieces of paper on a table top) in use to help with the logistics of running the scene. It always took at least twice as long to play out a battle with no table-top representation.

Claiming that using minis slows down a D&D game is as incomprehensible to me as saying playing without dice improves the game.

But, like others have said, D&D3 is already designed around using minis. I don't see how they could take it further. And remember that AD&D was originally designed for use with minis -- 1" meant 10 feet indoors and 10 yards outdoors. Movement and ranges were given in inches. This is nothing new to the game.

Quasqueton

 

[Gumby]

Jesus Christ, what's with all the pissing and moaning? The 3E rules have assumed you use miniatures since their inception; all the designers are doing now is coming out of the closet and saying so.

You can continue to not use miniatures. Just say everything's in increments of five feet, and remember where every creature, spell effect, door, and item of furniture is at all times while you play, just like you do now.

I doubt that the 3.5 Player's Handbook comes locked, and the only way to unlock it is to rub the base of an "official" D&D3.5E miniature along the magnetic sensor strip built into the spine of the book.

Oh, and while some people find that minis slow the game down, others find they obviate the need for a lot of questions about distance and obstacles. Just because one person finds that miniatures are unwieldy, doesn't make it a universal truth.

 

[Corinth]

COUNTERS!

For the love of the Dice Gods, people! Use counters! They do all that minis do, and they do it on the cheap. Dungeon gives them away- that's how cheap counters are. There's no excuse for not using the full tactical rules, people.

 

[WayneLigon]

Don't get me wrong. I've no objections to them including rules for minis, as they did in 3E original. But don't require them! Don't assume them!

Funny, I always assumed the current rules were written for using minis; look at all the examples for spell effects, AoO's, etc. I don't see any change.

 

[zero skill LPB]

ya, ditto on the 3.0 minis assumption

otherwise, how can movement rates particularly matter?