D&D 5E D&D Next: How Miniatures Should Fit?

[Paraxis]

You would think that being owned by Hasbro they could just make a tub or bag of generic plastic miniatures (zombies, goblins, skeletons, orcs, ect...) pretty cheap and to scale on a 1 inch grid.

You don't even need painted, just different colors like old army men, green for goblins, green/grey for orcs, off white for skeletons, ect.....one color of plastic for each mold.

They can have the D&D logo on them and everything but trust me they could just stock them next to the army men and little plastic dinosaurs.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I'm with Dausuul on this one. Quality and inexpensive. After all... WotC doesn't care if their miniature packs are sold directly to me, or sold to the Re-seller (who then opens the crates up and sells each of them individually). So why shouldn't I buy them from the Re-sellers and get exactly what I want in the quantities that I want? There's no reason to buy directly from WotC (or expect them to package their minis in a format that I want), because they're getting their money from the Re-seller, and the Re-seller is getting their money from me.

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

I think WotC would be better served by outsourcing miniatures similar to what Paizo has done. Frankly, they need to focus whatever resources they have on the actual game.

Obviously I agree with you too much as I can't XP you

The Paizo minis are exceptional for the most part (you'll always have a model or two that you personally don't like). It felt like a core set for DnD.

I'm interested in seeing the line that WotC puts out this summer.

 

[the Jester]

The primary thing about minis in 5e should be that they are explicitly optional and the rules are written to accommodate non-mini users at least as much as mini-users.

I'd love to see more focus on the game itself and less on product marketing (e.g. dungeon tiles, UGH!).

I do love me some minis, though!

 

[steeldragons]

The primary thing about minis in 5e should be that they are explicitly optional and the rules are written to accommodate non-mini users at least as much as mini-users.

I'd love to see more focus on the game itself and less on product marketing (e.g. dungeon tiles, UGH!).

I do love me some minis, though!

Agreed...in fact, so far as to say that the rules need be written without accommodating mini's at all.

Use of mini's in your game as an optional add-on-module. Nothing more.

Playing the game ought not need the use of miniatures or "battle mats" at all.

 

[JoeGKushner]

The primary thing about minis in 5e should be that they are explicitly optional and the rules are written to accommodate non-mini users at least as much as mini-users.

I'd love to see more focus on the game itself and less on product marketing (e.g. dungeon tiles, UGH!).

I do love me some minis, though!

There are some people who have a problem wit the dungeon tiles?

I've used those for Rolemaster, GURPS, and of course D&D/Pathfinder so I'm trying to figure out why they could possbily be a 'bad' thing when we have so many map companies out there that it's called out on 'product marketing'.

 

[enigma5915]

I agree that the game should be the priority and writen for use with and without minis.

I am though a visual DM and I love the hell out of the minis. The pre-painted plastic minis are the greatest thing since the wheel...IMHO. Once this was let loose there is no going back. I’ve been collecting minis since 1979 and the idea of light, inexpensive, painted minis, that don’t scratch the paint off easily….is amazing! I can’t see going back to metals or unpainted minis. After the release of the Harbinger minis I gave away my entire collection of hand painted metals. It was sad to see them go…but in reality, carting around a ton of metals in foam cases so they wouldn’t scratch was a pain in the @55. I gave away about 1,000 minis, but I now have about 7,000 D&D pre-painted minis and I intend to keep adding to my collection as long as they maintain a consistent quality pre-paint them. As far as price.... In the 80’s it was not unheard of to spend 1-3 dollars on a man sized mini and then go home, clean it, glue it, primer it, and paint it…. C’mon! Not to mention a large dragon or giant mini, which were not that great could cost 20-100 dollars and not glue together right, even with pinning them… My vote is for pre-painted with quality being mandatory and random or cheap….I can go with either.

Besides nice looking minis make Dwarven forge dungeons look even cooler..

 

[the Jester]

There are some people who have a problem wit the dungeon tiles?

I've used those for Rolemaster, GURPS, and of course D&D/Pathfinder so I'm trying to figure out why they could possbily be a 'bad' thing when we have so many map companies out there that it's called out on 'product marketing'.

The problem with Dungeon Tiles isn't the tiles themselves, it's using them in published adventures to make crappy maps, sometimes with notes like "the big pipe is actually an altar" or "the dead bodies are actually bushes".

I mean, how many times do we need to have the same layout and the same four crystals growing from the ground? How many reflavorings do we need to do before we realize that an actual decent map in the module is far better than one pieced together to help sell the tiles?

I look at the way a good module uses maps, say Red Hand of Doom, and it's nothing like the way tile-based maps are used. Good cartography is a module is more important than good art IMHO. Not only do Dungeon Tiles fail to build a good map- they're just ugly- they are repetitive, they encourage WotC to give short shrift to maps in adventures and they utterly fail to correspond to any scene other than the one they actually depict- the one where the sewer pipe is an actual sewer pipe and the corpses are corpses. If the whole point of tiles is to enhance the game experience, it doesn't work to say, "Here's a picture of the area- except A, B and C are all different." Why use the tiles at all then?

Now, don't get me wrong; I have no problem with anyone using them as they see fit, but to me, they actively detract from immersion 9 times out of 10, they don't add much to the game (AFAIHS) and they end up with WotC deciding that tile-based maps are a great way to save money on module construction!

HINT: Black and white is a better option. Cheap but sturdy paper is a better option. One book per module, rather than the two-booklet format used in 4e's HPE series, is a better option. Crappy maps is a horrible way to save money, and tile-based maps are universally crappy IMHO- they shoehorn adventure designs into predetermined shapes with predetermined features when at their best.

All of this, again, is IMHO- but it's a pretty damn strong HO.

 

[VGmaster9]

Miniatures would be a great idea. They're always good to give visual of what's going on.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Sounds like you're talking about when WoTc was using the Dungeon tiles in actual Dungeon adventurers.

Yeah, that pretty much sucked donkey balls. Lazy and highly unusuful especially since they didn't provide full sized tiles you coudl print out but had to actually own those tiles to begin with.

But as far an an individual product of it's own? I love 'em. Highly useful for any fantasy game that you use miniatures with. The art is usually top notch on them as well.

The problem with Dungeon Tiles isn't the tiles themselves, it's using them in published adventures to make crappy maps, sometimes with notes like "the big pipe is actually an altar" or "the dead bodies are actually bushes".

I mean, how many times do we need to have the same layout and the same four crystals growing from the ground? How many reflavorings do we need to do before we realize that an actual decent map in the module is far better than one pieced together to help sell the tiles?

I look at the way a good module uses maps, say Red Hand of Doom, and it's nothing like the way tile-based maps are used. Good cartography is a module is more important than good art IMHO. Not only do Dungeon Tiles fail to build a good map- they're just ugly- they are repetitive, they encourage WotC to give short shrift to maps in adventures and they utterly fail to correspond to any scene other than the one they actually depict- the one where the sewer pipe is an actual sewer pipe and the corpses are corpses. If the whole point of tiles is to enhance the game experience, it doesn't work to say, "Here's a picture of the area- except A, B and C are all different." Why use the tiles at all then?

Now, don't get me wrong; I have no problem with anyone using them as they see fit, but to me, they actively detract from immersion 9 times out of 10, they don't add much to the game (AFAIHS) and they end up with WotC deciding that tile-based maps are a great way to save money on module construction!

HINT: Black and white is a better option. Cheap but sturdy paper is a better option. One book per module, rather than the two-booklet format used in 4e's HPE series, is a better option. Crappy maps is a horrible way to save money, and tile-based maps are universally crappy IMHO- they shoehorn adventure designs into predetermined shapes with predetermined features when at their best.

All of this, again, is IMHO- but it's a pretty damn strong HO.