D&D Miniatures - looking for stats
- Thread starter MerricB
- Start date
Thaumaturge said:
Thank you so much, Thaumaturge!
I've got the miniature stats for 43 of the miniatures now up on my webpage: http://www.geocities.com/merricb/ministats.htm
Cheers!
Critique
I haven't bought any, just looking at the stats kindly posted by MerricB. It seems that there is an inherent problem in everything doing at least 5 damage. I realise this is so the option is there, and that 5 damage essentially equates to the smallest noticeable amount, but it bugs me. A human evoker has a +0 chance to do 5 damage while Tordek the 1st level dwarf has a +5 chance to do 5 damage. In d&d, their damage might be more like 1d6-1 for the evoker and 1d8+2 for the dwarf, or a difference of 3 and 6.5. I admit, both round easiest to 5, but the fact is Tordek is doing at least twice as much damage per hit (probably).
Off the bat I'd say the halfling veteran is very good value for 11 pts, but that is just from a cursory glance (2 attacks at +9, while only 5 damage is twice the chance to crit a round). Compare him to the Elf Ranger who costs 10 more points but has 2 attacks at only +3 (still 5 damage). Of course the ranger is a commander and does have a decent ranged attack (+5, for 5 damage). The real disparity comes from the halfling's 35 hit points versus the ranger's 15 and the 3 points difference in AC (halfling is 19, ranger 16).
I think its safe to say 2 halfling's would take down 1 ranger with ease. It would take 7 shots to take down one of the halflings, and with the same speed (4) the halflings should be able to close in on the ranger. The worg comes close to matching the halfling, but has less AC, hit points, and a smaller attack bonus (only 1 attack). He does do 10 damage and have 10 speed, which is head and shoulders ahead of the hafling, but he is difficult 4, which if it is anything like chainmail, means he can get away from your commander easily (which can be as good as dead, especially with new units like the Executioner).
Also, did they do away with the "save" category all the figures had in chainmail? I liked how doughty dwarves usually had large bonuses whereas humans had lower saves. Clerics also usually had better saves than fighters, which was part of their utility (after spells are spent). I only see a reference to Tordek having a +4 save and I would think classes like the monk would have large save bonuses.
I plan on getting some...at some point. I don't want to go through another big collection process like I did with chainmail (I have an almost complete set, as of now, 1% painted of course). Mainly because I do have so many miniatures, Im not eager to buy more. I am definitely thinking long and hard about the miniatures handbook, I have all the old chainmail books and I'm sure I can find some places where the old info. meshes nicely.
In a sense, D&D miniatures is Chainmail 3.5. Instead of releasing a few small (splat)books, there is one hardcover, much like the new policy (?) with regards to things like Sword and Fist being replaced (and improved upon) by The Complete Warrior. One hope I do have is that they get around to doing stats for some Oriental Adventures figs, I have quite a few L5R miniatures (all round-based, to mesh with Chainmail figs) and would love to create some of my own "factions".
Speaking of which, has anyone thought about blurring the lines between alignments and making "factions" for the new game? It could prove to be a lot of fun to mix up the basic factions (and rules like the Cleric of Grumuush will always keep things interesting).
Technik
I haven't bought any, just looking at the stats kindly posted by MerricB. It seems that there is an inherent problem in everything doing at least 5 damage. I realise this is so the option is there, and that 5 damage essentially equates to the smallest noticeable amount, but it bugs me. A human evoker has a +0 chance to do 5 damage while Tordek the 1st level dwarf has a +5 chance to do 5 damage. In d&d, their damage might be more like 1d6-1 for the evoker and 1d8+2 for the dwarf, or a difference of 3 and 6.5. I admit, both round easiest to 5, but the fact is Tordek is doing at least twice as much damage per hit (probably).
Off the bat I'd say the halfling veteran is very good value for 11 pts, but that is just from a cursory glance (2 attacks at +9, while only 5 damage is twice the chance to crit a round). Compare him to the Elf Ranger who costs 10 more points but has 2 attacks at only +3 (still 5 damage). Of course the ranger is a commander and does have a decent ranged attack (+5, for 5 damage). The real disparity comes from the halfling's 35 hit points versus the ranger's 15 and the 3 points difference in AC (halfling is 19, ranger 16).
I think its safe to say 2 halfling's would take down 1 ranger with ease. It would take 7 shots to take down one of the halflings, and with the same speed (4) the halflings should be able to close in on the ranger. The worg comes close to matching the halfling, but has less AC, hit points, and a smaller attack bonus (only 1 attack). He does do 10 damage and have 10 speed, which is head and shoulders ahead of the hafling, but he is difficult 4, which if it is anything like chainmail, means he can get away from your commander easily (which can be as good as dead, especially with new units like the Executioner).
Also, did they do away with the "save" category all the figures had in chainmail? I liked how doughty dwarves usually had large bonuses whereas humans had lower saves. Clerics also usually had better saves than fighters, which was part of their utility (after spells are spent). I only see a reference to Tordek having a +4 save and I would think classes like the monk would have large save bonuses.
I plan on getting some...at some point. I don't want to go through another big collection process like I did with chainmail (I have an almost complete set, as of now, 1% painted of course). Mainly because I do have so many miniatures, Im not eager to buy more. I am definitely thinking long and hard about the miniatures handbook, I have all the old chainmail books and I'm sure I can find some places where the old info. meshes nicely.
In a sense, D&D miniatures is Chainmail 3.5. Instead of releasing a few small (splat)books, there is one hardcover, much like the new policy (?) with regards to things like Sword and Fist being replaced (and improved upon) by The Complete Warrior. One hope I do have is that they get around to doing stats for some Oriental Adventures figs, I have quite a few L5R miniatures (all round-based, to mesh with Chainmail figs) and would love to create some of my own "factions".
Speaking of which, has anyone thought about blurring the lines between alignments and making "factions" for the new game? It could prove to be a lot of fun to mix up the basic factions (and rules like the Cleric of Grumuush will always keep things interesting).
Technik
Technik4 said:
It's the figures along with the ranger that are a problem.
The ranger is giving them all +1 to their ranged attacks, and allowing them to move freely. The Commander ability is extremely important - don't underestimate it.
Saves are based on Level. (d20+Level vs. DC); some figures have additional bonuses to saving throws, like Tordek and the Dwarf Axefighter.
Quite right - for myself, I don't have many miniatures, so I'm looking forward to these.
It's Chainmail made simpler, with more differentiation between commanders.
Yes.
Cheers!
Green Knight
First Post
I'd still like to play a Purple Dragon (Originally a Bard/Paladin, now I'm thinking a Marshal/Paladin) with the Leadership Feat (And Followers appropriate to the situation, whether they fit into the D&D Miniatures Faction rules or not) who works his way towards becoming Baron of the Stonelands, and has to defend the outskirts of Cormyr from all manner of enemies, whether it be Zhentarim spies, roving Goblin hordes, or the like. I think it'd be awesome to have a D&D campaign which has miniature battle games integrated into it.
D&D Tactics
Green Knight:
Your post just made a little spark go off in my head. What about a d&d game run like Tactical video games, like FF Tactics. The DM would adjucate terrain, determine NPC prices, and provide the opposition, but with an even-tempered friend you could have an entire game on your hands. Each of you choose 2 starting warlords on their way to conquering the kingdom. Each session you both bring 1 scenario and play them out, the victor comes closer to conquering the kingdom. You could have special tables assigned for the victor (and the loser) so perhaps the victorious warband gets access to a powerful NPC and the loser ends up raiding some wagons to raise more money for a new warband. A simple d20 and a chart can provide a lot of options.
This would also be spiced up a little more than I am detailing, especially if the Miniature's Handbook includes rules for levelling up characters in the mini game. Heck, some days you could bring a 3rd friend as another outlying warlord looking for some action, or band together against him.
The possibilities are endless and while it may not be traditional roleplaying, I think it has a big potential.
Technik
Green Knight:
Your post just made a little spark go off in my head. What about a d&d game run like Tactical video games, like FF Tactics. The DM would adjucate terrain, determine NPC prices, and provide the opposition, but with an even-tempered friend you could have an entire game on your hands. Each of you choose 2 starting warlords on their way to conquering the kingdom. Each session you both bring 1 scenario and play them out, the victor comes closer to conquering the kingdom. You could have special tables assigned for the victor (and the loser) so perhaps the victorious warband gets access to a powerful NPC and the loser ends up raiding some wagons to raise more money for a new warband. A simple d20 and a chart can provide a lot of options.
This would also be spiced up a little more than I am detailing, especially if the Miniature's Handbook includes rules for levelling up characters in the mini game. Heck, some days you could bring a 3rd friend as another outlying warlord looking for some action, or band together against him.
The possibilities are endless and while it may not be traditional roleplaying, I think it has a big potential.
Technik
Green Knight
First Post
Technik4 said:
Sounds like that old Genghis Kahn game from the NES.
Something else I've long wanted to do was to have battles which occured in the setting, and which served as the backdrop of the campaign. For instance, I once ran a campaign in which the Dwarves of Underhome were at war with a local Drow city. In that case, I just said the Dwarves won. But in that case, I could've played a miniature battle against one of the other players, me as the Drow, with the other player being the Dwarves. Either one game or a series of games, and that could have determined who won the actual war. If the Drow win, then the area in which the PC's were travelling would've suddenly become more perilous, as the Drow now had the run of the land. So the results of those miniature battles would have had an affect on the campaign, itself, as the party would've had more encounters with Drow patrols on the road, and finding burned out villages which were unable to defend themselves from the Drow attackers. That could then lead to the PC's either A) Try their best to get out of the area, which is swiftly coming under the dominion of the Drow, or B) Forming a resistance against the Drow. Perhaps recruiting allies from what's left of Underhome.
Just one way I've thought of of integrating miniature battles with a D&D campaign. Even at the least, you can always just have it something in the background, which doesn't actually affect your campaign. For instance, when at the local inn, the party hears some gossip about a skirmish between a Cormyrean patrol and a band of goblin bandits, which could've been the last miniature battle game you fought. Has no effect on the campaign, but you throw it in to add some more color to your campaign. Just a thought.
To my knowledge, there were two series of modules written for AD&D which integrated miniature play into the action.
The most famous is the Dragonlance Saga. In DL8 (Dragons of War), DL9 (Dragons of Glory) and DL14 (Dragons of Triumph), large miniature battle scenes may be run as an adjunct to the action.
The other major miniature series was the Bloodstone Pass series (H1-4); indeed, it was built around showing off the new (at that time) Battlesystem rules.
Cheers!
The most famous is the Dragonlance Saga. In DL8 (Dragons of War), DL9 (Dragons of Glory) and DL14 (Dragons of Triumph), large miniature battle scenes may be run as an adjunct to the action.
The other major miniature series was the Bloodstone Pass series (H1-4); indeed, it was built around showing off the new (at that time) Battlesystem rules.
Cheers!
I now have the miniature game stats for 51 of the 80 regular miniatures up on my webpage - the identity of the "Special" miniature is still a mystery!
D&D Miniatures statpage
Cheers!
D&D Miniatures statpage
Cheers!
