GrumpyOldMan
First Post
No, i do it all of the time
-
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!
Is gaming without map and minis really bad?
- Thread starter Settembrini
- Start date
greywulf
First Post
We never, ever use miniatures. Ever. Minis are the Stunters of Imagination and the Bane of Cool Combats. They are the Antithesis of Action and the Killer of Real Gaming Everywhere (KORGE).
Imagination is cheaper, quicker, less distracting and better painted. Imagination needs no freaking battlemap. It needs no carrying case, and (most importantly) can't be knocked over in the middle of round 13.
Here's a little story from a few months back. In the interests of anonymity, I'll call the player Paul, because that's his name.
Paul had heard about our gaming group, and asked to join. He's a recent gamer having migrated from computer games, picked up 3.5edition and decided he liked what he saw. He's a great guy, and much fun to be with, so we let him in. He wanted to GM, but (his words) "hadn't bought all the miniatures I need to run the adventure yet". We choked our coke at that, and explained our "no miniatures" policy. It took a lot of persuading that We Are Right and He Is Wrong, especially as he had the rulesbooks on his side of the argument. He'd got a miniature of the character he was playing. Except he wielded a sword and the mini had a spear. And wore the wrong armour. Hey, at least the sex and race was right.
He was much relieved that he didn't need to spend £100s just to GM one scenario. But let's face it, a strict reading of the rules (to someone without a thousand years gaming experience as our group has) would interpret it so. He thought that Only The Rich GM, because at least the players only have to buy one mini at a time.
Now, he's regularly attending Miniatures Anonymous and makes a great contribution to our game.
Long live Paul and long live mini free gaming.
Imagination is cheaper, quicker, less distracting and better painted. Imagination needs no freaking battlemap. It needs no carrying case, and (most importantly) can't be knocked over in the middle of round 13.
Here's a little story from a few months back. In the interests of anonymity, I'll call the player Paul, because that's his name.
Paul had heard about our gaming group, and asked to join. He's a recent gamer having migrated from computer games, picked up 3.5edition and decided he liked what he saw. He's a great guy, and much fun to be with, so we let him in. He wanted to GM, but (his words) "hadn't bought all the miniatures I need to run the adventure yet". We choked our coke at that, and explained our "no miniatures" policy. It took a lot of persuading that We Are Right and He Is Wrong, especially as he had the rulesbooks on his side of the argument. He'd got a miniature of the character he was playing. Except he wielded a sword and the mini had a spear. And wore the wrong armour. Hey, at least the sex and race was right.
He was much relieved that he didn't need to spend £100s just to GM one scenario. But let's face it, a strict reading of the rules (to someone without a thousand years gaming experience as our group has) would interpret it so. He thought that Only The Rich GM, because at least the players only have to buy one mini at a time.
Now, he's regularly attending Miniatures Anonymous and makes a great contribution to our game.
Long live Paul and long live mini free gaming.
jdrakeh
Front Range Warlock
For the better part of two decades, playing without minis was the default assumption of most RPGs by design (very few RPGs from the mid-1980s to the late 1990s assumed miniatures by default). So, no, it's not "really bad" -- if anything, it's how the vast majority of people played prior to the new age of gaming that D&D 3.0 ushered in (although minis have been used in the past, they just weren't the default for most RPGs by design).
[Note: As an aside, I recently had somebody express utter disbelief on another message board when I mentioned resolving combat without minis or maps. The idea was totally alien to them and they genuinely wondered how such a thing was even possible. I could scarcely believe it, but the exchange did nicely illustrate the fact that D&D has had a huge impact on how most people perceive the hobby today.]
[Note: As an aside, I recently had somebody express utter disbelief on another message board when I mentioned resolving combat without minis or maps. The idea was totally alien to them and they genuinely wondered how such a thing was even possible. I could scarcely believe it, but the exchange did nicely illustrate the fact that D&D has had a huge impact on how most people perceive the hobby today.]
Last edited:
wedgeski
Adventurer
Well the OP's quote is a little misleading. I'm sure it was meant to divert people from the idea that D&D was a traditional boardgame like Monopoly or Scrabble. Adding miniatures combat to D&D does not make it a board game.
However, I've played 3ed both with and without minis, and *with* minis makes personally for a more satisfying and entertaining game, despite the fact that the game is pretty playable without minis, assuming you have a very good DM who the players trust.
Interestingly, a new Eberron game I've just started is being run by a DM who has never used minis in any D&D or roleplaying previously to this, and who said he would try to avoid using a battle-mat as much as possible. Despite the fact that we're running a pretty stripped-down 3.5ed while he acclimatises himself to the more esoteric rules, he's already embraced the battle-mat fully for combats with more than one bad guy. He's bringing a lot of 'imagination-based' combat experience to the table as well, adding lots of cover and elevation markers to the fight, making for an even more tactically satisfying combat.
Considering I was scared that the complexity of 3rd Edition would scare him off pretty quickly, he's taken to the newer rules like a duck to water. That says a lot about the quality of the game if you ask me.
However, I've played 3ed both with and without minis, and *with* minis makes personally for a more satisfying and entertaining game, despite the fact that the game is pretty playable without minis, assuming you have a very good DM who the players trust.
Interestingly, a new Eberron game I've just started is being run by a DM who has never used minis in any D&D or roleplaying previously to this, and who said he would try to avoid using a battle-mat as much as possible. Despite the fact that we're running a pretty stripped-down 3.5ed while he acclimatises himself to the more esoteric rules, he's already embraced the battle-mat fully for combats with more than one bad guy. He's bringing a lot of 'imagination-based' combat experience to the table as well, adding lots of cover and elevation markers to the fight, making for an even more tactically satisfying combat.
Considering I was scared that the complexity of 3rd Edition would scare him off pretty quickly, he's taken to the newer rules like a duck to water. That says a lot about the quality of the game if you ask me.
Been playing since about '83 or so. For the majority of those years, we didn't use minis. We use 'em now though for about the past 5 or 6 years. I have to say, I prefer running combats with the minis. (besides, I find it relaxing to paint 'em).
It is a matter of personal preference and gaming style. If you run complex combats (large numbers of combatants, AoO, facing, etc) I would recommend them highly. If you are more 'fast and loose', probably not so much.
I would recommend picking up a pack or two of the D&D pre-painted minis and try it with and without and see what works best for your group.
It is a matter of personal preference and gaming style. If you run complex combats (large numbers of combatants, AoO, facing, etc) I would recommend them highly. If you are more 'fast and loose', probably not so much.
I would recommend picking up a pack or two of the D&D pre-painted minis and try it with and without and see what works best for your group.
Psion
Adventurer
GrumpyOldMan said:
What he said.
Monte Cook wrote a column about this, and I basically agree with what he said there: all you have to do is be willing to make a DM call. I knew how do it before I got 3e. I still know. If you declare the wizard has two big burly guards or the otyugh is next to the door, it should be pretty apparent what happens when you try to rush past. If you run from melee, it should be pretty apparent.
It's really not hard.
I do feel the need to break out the minis for large combats with multiple assailants, but that's more to keep track of who is where and attacking whom. For AoO considerations, it's convenient, but not a requirement.
As a side note, I might add that for some people (like my wife), the minis AID immersion because it helps them picture the situation. When my wife started playing with us, she had trouble because of my "the battlemat is only there for emergencies" attitude.
delericho
Legend
I mostly use battlemap and minis (well, counters). However, I have also run some games recently without, and I found that the game, and particularly combat, runs faster without, at the expense of exactness.
I have found that it's generally best to remove (or at least de-emphasise) AoOs when not using the battlemat - particularly when adjudicating movement it can be quite difficult to guage intentions and distances without the map, where it's simplicity itself with it.
I have found that it's generally best to remove (or at least de-emphasise) AoOs when not using the battlemat - particularly when adjudicating movement it can be quite difficult to guage intentions and distances without the map, where it's simplicity itself with it.
Similar Threads
