On using minis in D&D - approach of AD&D1 vs. D&D3

[Quasqueton]

I think that the focus on battlegrids and exact position is something that comes with 3E. Not that some people didn't use them before that, but now it has become part of the "culture" of D&D gaming.

The facts be damned and ignored?

To the detriment of enjoyment, from my personal perspective.

To the continued support of enjoyment, in my personal perspective.

Quasqueton

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I think that the focus on battlegrids and exact position is something that comes with 3E. Not that some people didn't use them before that, but now it has become part of the "culture" of D&D gaming. To the detriment of enjoyment, from my personal perspective.

I'm one of those guys that's always used minis, to one degree or another. I tend to go through phases on the abstraction level, though. Sometimes I like more abstract play, and sometimes I get the bug to have more tactical/battlegrid play. Heck, that could even be true within a single adventure: some encounters may merit tactical detail that other encounters don't. I'm hoping to satisfy both needs/urges with the combat sequence approach I've adopted. The full, detailed, tactical sequence I linked to, above, has a cut-down and simplified variant that has the same essential concept, but suits looser and more abstract play. It's new for me, so I'm excited to see how it all works out...so far, so good, though.

 

[bento]

We never used minis playing 1ed and I didn't use counters until I found Marvel Super-Heroes basic set. As for determining position in combat, we used graph paper with an 'x' marking the spot for monsters.

I missed out on 2nd Ed, so when I started back with 3.5, minis have greatly increased my enjoyment of the game. Sometimes I use metal, other times paper counters. Occasionally when I'm GMing an especially social-focused evening I leave the mat and figs at home, drawing a crude map when its needed.

My enjoyment of using miniatures has led to another hobby - painting them. I'm not that great yet, but enough to impress my players!

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Hey Bento, I see you're running the Lost City. I am, too. Do you have a campaign journal/session reports? (Just curious to see how other groups are doing.)

 

[Korgoth]

The facts be damned and ignored?

You mean I'm ignoring the 'fact' that minis were used only very rarely, and battlegrids not at all, in all the different gaming groups I played in from the early 80's until the advent of 3E?

I told you what my experience was like over nearly 2 decades of gaming leading up to 3E. Those are facts. They may not be the facts you like, however.

If your experiences were different, bully. If you enjoy using battlegrids now, bully. But please don't tell me that I did use them when I didn't, or that everybody I gamed with used them, because they also didn't.

The "facts" are that some people may have used battlegrids, but I know for a fact that many, many people did not. The rules accomodated both styles of play, and I was informing you that my overwhelming experience among a wide variety of gamers was one particular way. If you can't handle my reporting the facts to you, you might want to reconsider starting such threads.

I mean, do you really want to hear people's actual accounts of their experiences, or is this just an exercise for you to sell a line of revisionist history? I was hoping it might be the former.

 

[Raven Crowking]

From Blue Box on Christmas Day 1979 to the advent of 3.0, I seldom used minis (although I sometimes did). The rules made it easy to go either way. My experiences span Wisconsin, Indiana, Virginia, California, Louisiana, and Missouri as far as game play goes, and also Ontario, Canada. In all these locations, from Basic to & through Skills & Powers, 90% no miniatures.

With the advent of 3.0, I started no minis, but 3.X is very mini-centric, and I now end up using minis about 90% of the time.

Make of it what you will.

 

[Quasqueton]

Wow!

I have not questioned or doubted or argued against your personal experiences with any edition of the game. But your personal experiences are not necessarily the *written rules of the game*. (Mine aren't either.) The *facts* I'm referring to is in the OP -- quotes from the published rules.

I mean, do you really want to hear people's actual accounts of their experiences, or is this just an exercise for you to sell a line of revisionist history?

"Revisionist history"? Um, I quoted directly from the *book* of AD&D1. I'm not revising anything -- I'm presenting it as it actually was written, even in context. If you doubt the veracity of the quotes, look them up yourself -- I gave the page numbers.

You said

I think that the focus on battlegrids and exact position is something that comes with 3E.

Thinking this ignores the facts of what the books directly state. It's like saying, "I think that the focus on combat and killing monsters is something that comes with 3E." Believing this means ignoring the facts of what was actually in the earlier-edition books.

but now it has become part of the "culture" of D&D gaming.

It was part of the written rules then, and taking evidence from many people who played at the time, it was also a part of the culture of AD&D1 gaming. This fact does not invalidate your own personal experiences, but also your own personal experiences do not invalidate what the books actually said in print.

There are some people (HellHound, for example) who don't use minis with D&D3 -- does his experience mean using minis on a battlegrid is not part of the culture now?

Quasqueton

 

[Korgoth]

Wow!

I have not questioned or doubted or argued against your personal experiences with any edition of the game. But your personal experiences are not necessarily the *written rules of the game*. (Mine aren't either.) The *facts* I'm referring to is in the OP -- quotes from the published rules."Revisionist history"? Um, I quoted directly from the *book* of AD&D1. I'm not revising anything -- I'm presenting it as it actually was written, even in context. If you doubt the veracity of the quotes, look them up yourself -- I gave the page numbers.

Maybe the misunderstanding is based upon the interpretation of the texts, then. I wasn't aware those were the "facts" you were specifically referring to (then again, some people have suggested that since the 1E DMG contains rules on diseases that therefore 1E campaigns constantly made you roll to catch a disease; most people look on the 1E DMG as a "DM's toolbox" rather than "Required Rules of D&D", so I admit there's a serious interpretive issue here).

I don't see the 1E texts doing any more than promoting the use of minis. I don't think their use was ever assumed. 3E pushes minis really hard; 1E says they might be fun or useful and leaves it at that. Hence the texts you quoted which say that minis "add color".

I'd frame the difference as "assumed use of" (3E) and "compatible with" (1E). I think that compatibility was a big deal since the whole hobby evolved out of minis wargaming in the first place.

 

[Quasqueton]

I'd frame the difference as "assumed use of" (3E) and "compatible with" (1E). I think that compatibility was a big deal since the whole hobby evolved out of minis wargaming in the first place.

See, I'd say it was more than just "compatible with". The ranges and movement rates were all given in table-top scale. (This is kind of ironic considering how D&D3 assumes the use of minis and 1" = 5' table grids but gives all ranges and speeds in feet instead of always only in squares.)

From what I've gathered from reading message boards and design talk, it seems that D&D3 went with the minis/tablegrid assumption because most people were already using them, and it went back to the AD&D1 roots that D&D3 was trying to emulate. So it's ironic that some complain that minis/grids *started* with D&D3, when it seems to me that D&D3 actually went back to the original assumptions.

It's like saying that dungeon delving came with D&D3. Or that PCs grabbing for magic items started with D&D3. Etc.

Quasqueton

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

The ranges and movement rates were all given in table-top scale.

I think the use of inches for ranges and movement is one of those artifacts from Chainmail (and OD&D), more than something that should be associated with AD&D's "design goals."

The AD&D rules for movement in combat were clearly (to my mind, anyway) designed with abstract, non-mini play in mind. That's (obviously) not to say that minis were to be excluded, but the system's abstract positioning, its definition of being engaged in melee, and especially its use of random targets for melee attacks all point towards a deliberate effort to make the game work well without minis. As I've said, I even think the AD&D RAW make using minis somewhat problematic. You either need everyone to accept that the mini's position can vary by up to 10' from its perceived location, or you need to house-rule things so they make sense for your group (i.e. forget about "random selection of melee target" and use the position of the minis to determine who attacks whom, etc).

IMO, AD&D is the least-mini-centric of the editions, because of its rules-as-written.