• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Forked Thread: all about the minis!

MadMaligor

First Post
Forked from: 4E, as an anti-4E guy ...

Raven Crowking said:
:lol:

All too true......

:lol:



:lol:

Well, you can (and will) believe whatever you like. Miniatures wargaming was bigger when D&D first came out, and it was under that umbrella that D&D was best described. Again, it was certainly minis rulesets that were cobbled into the first rpgs.

At that time, miniatures battles were played on often elaborate tabletop landscapes, similar to those shown in the Battlesystem 2e products. Most of the miniatures available were for units, rather than for individuals. Indeed, were Gary & Co. to attempt to represent their characters using minis, one wonders where they would have gotten them from.

Around the time Tim Kask and Gary Gygax were working on dividing D&D into a Basic and an Advanced game, miniatures for rpgs had become a viable market, but there were still far more minis being sold for tabletop battles than for rpgs. Ral Partha was an early adopter, and did quite well. TSR signed a deal with Grenedier to produce official minis, and endorsed them in the AD&D books (while at the same time declaring them unnecessary). One might well imagine that the admonisions to buy only "official" minis was aimed at gaining some of Ral Partha's market share.

There were plans to produce products (similar to the modern Dungeon Tiles) when AD&D came out. They have been mentioned upthread. Interestingly enough, although TSR tried in several ways, interest in AD&D minis was not sufficient to ever produce said Dungeon Tile-like products. The idea was mothballed.

So rare was the useage of minis in AD&D 1e, that the language of minis was expunged in 2e. By the time Battlesystem came out for 2e, the writers assumed that the readers would need a painting guide as well as a guide to making terrain. This certainly wasn't true of the initial adopters of D&D, who were all tabletop gamers, who understood the language of miniatures, and who were able to understand the difference between using the language of miniatures and using the miniatures themselves.

In the most recent issue of Dragon Roots (#3), Tim Kask talks about learning how to play D&D from Gary, and the idea of wrapping his head around an imaginary space that no one could actually see. I guess he wasn't using minis and foamcore either.

That this jibes exactly with WotC's pre-3e market research should come as no surprise.

(In fact, Tim has some words for how the early experiences/rulebooks have been interpreted by some later adopters that certainly apply to this topic.)

Anyway, I, too, apologize for thread distruption. I'd be happy to discuss this topic on a forked thread, however.


RC

Forked...

Its not neccessarily a matter of belief when things are true.

Mini's have been in use in every edition, and have rule sets in every edition. To say they don't is to completely ignore specific text and pages of manuals/supplements. Its just that as I said, the cost effectiveness of marketing minis on the scale 4E has was not possible. Some of what you mentioned provides some insight into how and why that came about.

So many gamers gravitate to what is economical, and easy to use. Graph paper and pencils. That doesn't negate mini's or the battle grid and tactical combat. It mearly replaces them as a useful visual aid.

Some gamers refuse to believe that Dungeons and Dragons is a game that is meant to be played while using aids such as miniatures. I understand how that belief came to be, and you certainly dont have to use them. The interesting thing is just that though, its a belief. The facts are printed on the cover of the very first box produced, and in the manuals, supplements, magazines, and so on and so forth, even 2E (I am not at home but I will be more than happy to at some point reference pages, sourcebooks, etc...if you wish).

Heck you can play D&D without pencils, paper, even dice. I have seen it done and participated myself. That doesn't mean those aids weren't intended to be used while playing the game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Lord Xtheth

First Post
Back in the highschool days of D&D (2ed) I remember seeing the big maps for mini use included in some box sets and I remember thinking "Wow, this is way too bulky, I'll never use Minis for this game!" and we didn't.
Then the turn of the millenium came about and 3E made its way into our group, and I remember all of us groaning "Oh no, they're forcing us to use minis!" but in the end we refused and continued playing the game mini-free.
Then 4E poked its head out... and I didn't think about minis for 10 seconds... until I read the books. "Oh no, they REALY made this game rely on minis now... but lets try it without and see if we can do it" so we tried, and it worked. But then one day we decided to try with minis.

I've gone back and played 3.5 now a couple times and I find myself saying "wait, lets get some minis out so we can see whats going on!" or "He can't flank, pull out your minis, I'll show you what I mean". I can't go back to playing without some kind of mini representation.

The adult in me likes the tactical layout of things
The kid in me wants to kick the adult in me's ass
 

Raven Crowking

First Post
Mini's have been in use in every edition, and have rule sets in every edition. To say they don't is to completely ignore specific text and pages of manuals/supplements.

But that is not what I said. I did not say that people didn't use minis in every edition; I said that TSR didn't assume that the average gamers were using minis.

Its just that as I said, the cost effectiveness of marketing minis on the scale 4E has was not possible. Some of what you mentioned provides some insight into how and why that came about.

I wonder. If Gary could produce plastic minis, and had the marketing data that WotC had when 3e came out, he may well have made a game pushing minis as much as 3.0, or even 4.0. But it was impossible to have that data when 0e came out. There wasn't the growth phenomenon of D&D to measure it against, and there weren't the hoard of gamers required to poll.

Gary certainly wasn't a saint, and certainly wanted to make a buck off of his work.

Some gamers refuse to believe that Dungeons and Dragons is a game that is meant to be played while using aids such as miniatures.....The interesting thing is just that though, its a belief. The facts are printed on the cover of the very first box produced, and in the manuals, supplements, magazines, and so on and so forth

Indeed. Each and every edition includes, in print, that miniatures are not needed to play the game. That they might be a help, if you want them, but that is all. And yet some gamers choose to believe that Gary & Co. meant otherwise, no matter what.

Btw RC. Its interesting to note your leaving Arneson out of the conversation. :hmm: Hmmmmm

No choice. I've had no contact with Arneson.

Back in the highschool days of D&D (2ed) I remember seeing the big maps for mini use included in some box sets and I remember thinking "Wow, this is way too bulky, I'll never use Minis for this game!" and we didn't.

Which ones? I have never seen a map for mini use printed by TSR. (Poster maps of dungeons, yes, but not on mini scale unless those were some really itty-bitty minis! :lol: )


RC
 

MadMaligor

First Post
Xtheth...so true, so true.

My first miniature experience was during a run through of Keep on the Borderlands. One of our new players was lucky enough to have parents who spoiled him rotten and he had a sack full of metal miniatures (all horrendously painted I might add...I think I still have a few somewhere). From that day on, whenever possible, we used them.

Just like drugs, they are addictive. You just had to remember you weren't supposed to let your baby sister put the lead minis in her mouth.

:lol:
 

Lord Xtheth

First Post
Which ones? I have never seen a map for mini use printed by TSR. (Poster maps of dungeons, yes, but not on mini scale unless those were some really itty-bitty minis! :lol: )


RC

Night Below has a couple, 1 or 2 others had some that I can't remember. I didn't buy that many modules back in the day, but the few I did buy (that are long gone now) had at least 1 mini sized map in them.

As far as the itty bitty minis are concearned, I actually thought about getting the small 5-7mm minis I've seen on some websites so I can DM my games and not have to set up dungeon tiles, just a peice of grid paper.
 

MadMaligor

First Post
RC...

I think we are close to the same viewpoint, but are looking at the mirror from different sides.

Your opinion (if I am understanding correctly) is that Dungeons and Dragons was a game that could be played with miniatures, but was not meant to be. My opinion is that Dungeons and Dragons is a game that was meant to be played using miniatures, but you weren't forced too.

4E is really no different. You do not need miniatures. Graph paper and pencil do just fine, and at times is alot easier to manage (set up time, etc...). Having said that, I do freely admit, not having mini's or graph paper/pencil, is for the first time, very difficult as far as gameplay is concerned.

My viewpoint is that if the rules included discusion about the use of minis and setting up a good visual for your players (by whatever means), then they were meant to be a part of the system.

Great discussion btw...gotta run but will check in tonight. :D
 

Mark

CreativeMountainGames.com
My opinion is that Dungeons and Dragons is a game that was meant to be played using miniatures, but you weren't forced too.


As someone who played (O)D&D, AD&D 1E, AD&D 2E, D&D 3.0/3.5 and 4E, mostly using minis with all editions (because I like them), I believe that 3.0 was the first edition where it was easier to use minis then not to use them and that with 4E it is much more difficult to play the game without them. It's not impossible to play without them, but it really is a different game and not written to be played without minis, IMO.
 

Raven Crowking

First Post
4E is really no different.

Scott Rouse differs in opinion to yours. And, as I accept Gary and Tim's statements about 1e, I certainly accept that Scott knows WOtC intentionally made the game more mini-focused.

And, if you believe that our positions are so close, why wouldn't accept that the designers knew which side of the mirror they were on?


RC
 
Last edited:

Raven Crowking

First Post
Night Below has a couple, 1 or 2 others had some that I can't remember.

Night Below is one that I never bought, so I can't speak to that one. :(

OTOH, if NB did have mini-scale maps, it was very unusual.

I note that NB contained:

Inside this box are:

Three 64-page books compromising a single grand-scale adventure, which can be placed in any AD&D world.
16 Player Handout sheets featuring art, maps, charts, and letters.
8 two-sided DUNGEON MASTER Reference Cards providing cutouts, monster rosters, and two new evil deities.
An eight-page booklet of new MONSTROUS COMPENDIUM entries, detailing three new races and two new monsters.
6 full-color poster maps detailing all the important locations in the entire campaign setting.​

Nothing specific about mini maps, although the DM reference cards seem likely to contain counters of some sort, making mini maps believable.

----

As an aside, can someone explain to me how, previously, 3.0's focus on minis was a good thing because it avoided all the vagueness of position that plagued earlier editions, when (apparently) everyone was playing every edition with the same use of minis?

Colour me confused.

RC
 
Last edited:

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top