Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WalterKovacs" data-source="post: 4672204" data-attributes="member: 63763">Generally it's about finding something that, if it doesn't look like the character, is easily recognized. We may not have the exact race/weapon/armor combo. But the halfling is the halfling, the fighter is the fighter, the paladin is the paladin, the dragonborn is the dragonborn and so on. Whether it has a shield or not is also useful. In games I've DM'ed, we've mostly used the common "box" of minis that is kept at the store. This meant a basic set of minis to represent the PCs, and then the "recurring" monster creatures that would generally be get enough that look the same to represent similar groups of creatures. On the other hand, I would sometimes use different figures for each of the monsters just to make it easier to track which is which (since I would track conditions, in addition to damage, on the monster stat blocks themselves.) The game I play in, it's usally an approximation for the monsters. It speeds things up to not have to look for the exact fig, also it helps cut down on metagaming by needing to recognise the vague descriptiion of the monster (or actually making the knowledge check) instead of just recognizing the monster that we're up against. It's ussally attemped to have, in addition to size (of course), the humanoid/non-humanoid distinction correct.</blockquote>