Chiming in on the D&D minis (merged with "anyone buying the new Mini's?")

[MadScientist]

I've bought a few packages of the mini's and over all I'm more satisfied than I thought I would be. BUT there are deffinately contrast issues with some of them. I'm not an old man and have pretty good un-corrected vision but the goblin x-bowman for example looks like a blob of brown plastic from any reasonable distance. Some of the mini's the color schemes are pretty good but overall there is deffinately an over-use of browns and black.

With a miniature contrast is very important. You should try to use bright, contrasting colors as much as possible. This isn't an issue with the quality of the paint jobs but rather the design of their color schemes. Would it really be so bad to give goblins green skin so it could stand out against their brown weapons and clothing? I like painting mini's but simply do not have the time to do that and run my campaign so I think these are a great alternative. I just hope they pay more attention to contrast in the next release, so can tell mini's apart from each other and tell what they are from accross the gaming table.

 

[Psion]

I don't mind minis, and use them (when I feel it appropriate) myself.

I just don't think the rules should ONLY support minis-oritented play, and should be written in a way to accomodate play without minis when appropriate.

 

[qstor]

The paint job on some of them is bad, I agree. The ghoul and the sword of Hieroneous is worse than some of the others I've got. I bought the main box and 4 expansion sets...They kind of remind me of the plastic army men as well. I like the price around a dollar and the fact that they're prepainted. The Mage knight painting looks a lot better to me. It must be the quaility of the production. What bothers me is the collectability of them. I want an orge and I dont want to have to get 18 boxes to get one..Getting some cheese with my whine. A retailer near me said they were going to sell them individualy. That's cool with me as long as they keep around the same price as they are in the box..

Mike

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

I don't mind minis, and use them (when I feel it appropriate) myself.

I just don't think the rules should ONLY support minis-oritented play, and should be written in a way to accomodate play without minis when appropriate.

The new rules don't require minis any more than the old rules. I really don't understand this complaint. All they did is replace the little Tordek counters with little Tordek minis - how does this change the rules?

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

I've bought a few packages of the mini's and over all I'm more satisfied than I thought I would be. BUT there are deffinately contrast issues with some of them. I'm not an old man and have pretty good un-corrected vision but the goblin x-bowman for example looks like a blob of brown plastic from any reasonable distance. Some of the mini's the color schemes are pretty good but overall there is deffinately an over-use of browns and black.

I would think if my job description were "goblin sneak," I'd try to avoid as much contrast as possible.

 

[shadow]

I really enjoy using minis for gaming. However, I hate 3.5e's overemphasis on miniatures. I always saw minis as something that you could use or do without depending on the game.

With that said, I HATE WotC's new minis. Why? First, I hate the cheap plastic. Second, I hate the crappy paint jobs. I can see this not being an issue for people who don't like to paint, but painting is one of my hobbies, so the cheap paint job is a real turnoff for me. Third, I don't like style. The minis look like they (naturally) follow 3e/3.5e's artwork complete with mismatched armor and bondage/fetish clothing. Finally, I hate WotC's attempt to turn D&D into a mage knight ripoff, complete with random packaging.

I guess I'll stick with Reaper.
End Rant

 

[Mystery Man]

The new rules don't require minis any more than the old rules. I really don't understand this complaint.

I personally don't give a tinker's dangle if someone else uses or does not use minis. I use 'em. I like 'em but then I don't expect anyone to be moved one way or the other by that either.

As far as the paint jobs go, for obvious reasons one cannot argue the difference in quality from a handpainted mini and WoTC's. However, its nice to have something with color on it that (IMHO) that I didn't have to spend hours on. But does this mean anyone should stop buying reaper or warlord or whatever? Heck no, I know I'm going to keep giving them my business.

 

[buzz]

The new rules don't require minis any more than the old rules. I really don't understand this complaint. All they did is replace the little Tordek counters with little Tordek minis - how does this change the rules?

I don't thknk the emphasis is as great as some people here do, but I noticed that 3.5e *addresses* mini use a bit more than 3.0 did. The use of the term "squares", the increased diagrams, more specific info on terrain affecting movement (spoken of in terms of "squares" again), etc.

It may not be a drastic change, but it's a more mini-centric POV. Whether it precludes players from playing w/o minis is debatable, though, as written, it seems like minis suit the system.

 

[Psion]

The new rules don't require minis any more than the old rules.

Actually technically, it does. Compare your old books to the new ones. The new ones only mentions that you might want to use them. The new ones state that they are a required component of the game.

I really don't understand this complaint. All they did is replace the little Tordek counters with little Tordek minis - how does this change the rules?

No, what they did was replace rules that could be safely used with GM fiat (like the cover rule) with rules that are applicable primarily when using minis on a matt by tracing lined to corners and suchnot, replacing scales that are intelligible if you aren't using minis to scales that explicitly reference the grid scale.

Sure, if you are sharp, you can skirt around them. But the more rules they convert to explicitly referencing a grid in this way, the more steps players who don't want to use it have to take to avoid their use. That's extra effort I don't need.

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

Actually technically, it does. Compare your old books to the new ones. The new ones only mentions that you might want to use them. The new ones state that they are a required component of the game.

PHB Pg. 133: "To help visualize events in the fictional world of the D&D game, we recommend the use of minature figures and a battle grid."

Note the word "recommend," not "require."

No, what they did was replace rules that could be safely used with GM fiat (like the cover rule) with rules that are applicable primarily when using minis on a matt by tracing lined to corners and suchnot, replacing scales that are intelligible if you aren't using minis to scales that explicitly reference the grid scale.

How is it bad that cover is explicitly spelled out for those using minis? If it leads to fewer arguments, it's good in my book. For those not using minis, pretty much every situation is going to be up to GM fiat anyways. Would you prefer that the rules defined cover as "more or less, whenever the DM decides you have cover, you have cover?"