D&D 5E Theatre of the Mind or Miniatures?

[Grainger]

Thanks for the heads up on their War Machine system. I will check that out.

It's found in the Companion boxed set (in the Dungeon Master's Companion). However, I don't think that is available as a (legal) PDF.

Luckily, the Rules Cyclopedia is available, and that (more or less) collects the entire BECMI system, including the War Machine rules, and it also includes rules for handling sieges. It is available here:

http://www.dndclassics.com/product/17171/DD-Rules-Cyclopedia-Basic?it=1

Note, however, that is does have some BECMI concepts in the unit stats, the most important being Hit Dice (which is different from 5e Hit Dice - it basically means the number of D8s rolled to determine the monster hit points, and is the raw indicator of monster power; CR would be the (rough) 5e equivalent). This means that it will take a bit of work to get this system working with 5e, but not a huge amount - most of the concepts are universal (e.g. the amount of time the unit trains together, the quality of the equipment, etc.).

 

[Grainger]

Thanks for the heads up on their War Machine system. I will check that out.

Around our store, minis were almost always the norm (for 33 years), but we had some very good, even professional, painters from the very beginning, so that encouraged the minis use. Players liked having a painted mini of their character.

I often looked for minis to represent my character (without any thought of using it in a grid), but could never find one I was even remotely happy with! I think it's almost better to start by looking for a mini you like, then building the character concept around that - it never works for me the other way around (and people always end up saying "he pretty much looks like that, except he has a beard, and he doesn't use an axe, he uses a sword", which sort of defeats the purpose of a visual representation, as far as I'm concerned)! Now for wargames, where the figures represent non-specific individuals, I can see the appeal somewhat more, even if I still don't like them, and would rather play with counters.

 

[thalmin]

I have had fun finding a cool mini, then creating the character. As a DM I've designed some great npcs that way. I've also used some monsters that I had previously ignored.

 

[spinozajack]

Actually, 2e was over 6 years before Combat & Tactics brought in the optional assumption of miniatures. And were are nearly a year into 5e, so just 7 years out of 40. And I am not sure how much of Basic D&D expressed the use of miniatures. But yes, the assumption by game designers that miniatures were used was in place for the majority of the game's history. However, at least during 1E and 2E days, I think you will find the majority of games did not use miniatures. The game was very easy to play without minis (or tokens or whatever).
Third edition changed that, as combat became more tactical. And 4E made miniatures all but mandatory. Sure, you could play theater of the mind, but it was more work converting the game to work with that play style.
As for 5e, the default assumption is no minis, and the game plays very well that way. I just have a rough time running a game without the minis. They have become a crutch for me. I have a hard time breaking away from a nearly 4-decade habbit of using minis to describe the encounter, plus I like my figures (and continue to feed my addiction by buying more). BUT I do recognise the game runs a bit faster without the figs on the table.

I played D&D from 1e and then mostly AD&D for years before 3e came out and had not only never seen miniatures or a grid used, at dozens of tables, but I'd never even heard of one being used. Ever.

If you can play a game without a suggested aid, and hardly anyone ends up using it, can one really say the game was designed with that in mind? No, not really.

Without crunchy rules support making those aids necessary or at least more helpful than their use is a time sink, they just get in the way, cost money and time, and are anti-immersion. People stare at the board instead of the picture in their minds.

5th ed was ingeniously designed by keeping complexity modular, and in the DMG, thus allowing both styles. I'd say that's a win win for everyone. Hardly a reason for anyone to claim that 5e "sucks" because it was designed well enough to allow both.

The notion that most people in D&D's history played the game with minis or that it was designed to require one is a forum meme that is completely separate from the reality of how the game was played : on a table, with friends, and pizza in the middle of the table, not a grid with miniature representations of your characters laid out on it.

The only important thing to discuss is what kind of pizza to order

 

[Tony Vargas]

Anecdotal Evidence ahoy: I played and ran BECMI, played 2e (and knew people who played 1e) during the 80s and early 90s, and I never encountered the usage of minis, or any consideration of doing so (I realise that many people did, but it wasn't the norm 'round these parts). It was the non-gamers who assumed that D&D required a board and minis to play it.

Contrary anecdote: I played 1e from 1980 on, and attended conventions, so saw lot's of D&D being played. AD&D was played heavily, 0D&D still saw some play, BECMI hardly at all. Mini's were the norm, lots of them, all lead - they got pretty damn heavy, en masse. Even then, though, there was a generational split. Kids, like myself, who had entered the hobby as teens with D&D usually had only a few minis, for our characters (if that), and improvised for everything else (dice and pencils saw a lot of re-purposing back in the day). Established gamers had armies of Napoleonics or whatever, and were much more into collecting and painting minis, monster as well as character. I fought a lot of Orcs that looked suspiciously like grenadiers back in the day. (Heck, Grenadier was the company that made the second-best fantasy minis - after Ral Partha, of course.)

The idea of a 'board' was an outsider misperception based on the prevalence of family boardgames in the 50s-70s, though, you're right about that. No battlemasts for the first half of the 80s (I first encountered those playing Champions!). Mostly bare table-tops, but DMs with that wargaming background might break out terrain.

By the 90s, things had changed. The old-school wargamers weren't so much in evidence, and RP, including the elitist 'role not roll' BS, was taking center stage. D&D lagged that trend, as always, but I can see how, if you started with BECMI/RC or 2e, you might have missed the wargaming influence to an extent.

Where Mind's Eye Theatre - I mean, Theater of the Mind - came into vogue was with the rise of Storyteller games, and the role v roll 'debate' (a conflict comparable to the edition war in counter productive rancor and futility, but with all D&D firmly on the "Roll Playing" side of the divide). That's also when we got the bad-rules-make-good-games and less-is-more 'Rules Lite' philosophies, and extreme case of those ideas, Freestyle RP, being tried out.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Quick question - which I expect to become a lengthy thread - Are you playing D&D 5E mainly with miniatures or without?

Cheers!

Mainly without. Miniatures or scraps of paper get broken out for complicated scenes. I'm trying to explicitly use sketches and miniatures more because my players seem to like it, but I often forget or feel that it's unnecessary in a particular scene.

 

[Grainger]

I'm not sure about a 0e/1e and BECMI/2e divide... I never played 1e, but know people who did... again, no minis. That's not important really, though. No-one is saying "everyone played with minis" or "no-one at all did". The issue is that mini usage was at least highly variable by the mid 80s, and (it's before my time) perhaps before*.

By the way, "role-playing, not roleplaying" was around in the UK in the 80s, and I heartily approve! I don't call that elitist; I call it not attacking everything you meet, which the game often veers towards if you just roll-play. It doesn't have to equate to excessive emo-ing (but if people want to do that, then fair enough).





*By "using minis", we can set aside buying one to represent your character (which again, I never saw anyone else doing; I tried to, but never found minis that looked anything like my PCs). I mean using them with a grid to resolve combat.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Preposterous. 5e is the first ed of D&D to advocate for TotM as the default, and this poll shows that, even so, we're in the minority running it that way.

The only combat example in the 2nd edition PHB was fighting a troll in TotM mode. Maybe you mean "first to advocate explicitly"? If it does.

I honestly see 2E as slightly better than 5E for TotM due to larger spell and missile ranges and less mobility in combat, such as being unable to move while spell casting. You can handwave ranges in 5E as "you're close enough", but details matter more often than in 2E, and then you need to break out the sketches and mini tokens.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm not sure about a 0e/1e and BECMI/2e divide... I never played 1e, but know people who did... again, no minis. That's not important really, though. No-one is saying "everyone played with minis" or "no-one at all did". The issue is that mini usage was at least highly variable by the mid 80s, and (it's before my time) perhaps before*.

You want to repeat your anecdote, fine. You didn't see minis being used from the mid 80s. I saw them being used from 1980 on. Of course, there are group and regional variations. I occasionally played with groups who lacked minis, in which case you used whatever was available when you needed to track positions, or even lacked a surface and resorted to sketching things out.

By the way, "role-playing, not roleplaying" was around in the UK in the 80s, and I heartily approve! I don't call that elitist;

The on-line debates on UseNet were decidedly elitist. Not that the elitists doing it called themselves that.

*By "using minis", we can set aside buying one to represent your character (which again, I never saw anyone else doing; I tried to, but never found minis that looked anything like my PCs). I mean using them with a grid to resolve combat.

"The Grid" was a different innovation, entirely. In the early 80s and before, you're talking old-school wargamers. So you had a felt table or sand table, or bare table-top, mabye with some 'terrain' elements (elaborate model, or improvised stand-in). And you measured everything. Grids weren't unknown, they were just usually in the more chit-and-board style wargames than the miniatures types. The 1e DMG, did have a blurb about using a grid or hex surface. But it was really in the mid 80s that battlemats came into vogue - though, even then not so much for D&D - it was late 2e C&T that took full advantage of such surfaces. And, it wasn't until 3.0 that D&D finally stopped trying to ponce around on the 'role' side of the role v roll divide, and went 'back to the dungeon.,' and, thus, it's miniatures wargame roots.

The only combat example in the 2nd edition PHB was fighting a troll in TotM mode. Maybe you mean "first to advocate explicitly"?

Emphasis on 'advocate,' yes - perhaps even 'evangelize.' From the playtest on through publication, Next/5e has been very enthused about TotM, really pushing it as some sort of ideal. Much like it did for DM Empowerment - which has been a definite success, and, for my money, saved the game this edition cycle.

I honestly see 2E as slightly better than 5E for TotM due to larger spell and missile ranges and less mobility in combat, such as being unable to move while spell casting. You can handwave ranges in 5E as "you're close enough", but details matter more often than in 2E, and then you need to break out the sketches and mini tokens.

2e, IIRC did drop the old wargame jargon of scale inches (with two different scales, no less). Like 5e after it, 2e used familiar (to Americans) measurement in feet. While that in no way facilitates implementing TotM, it may make the decision to use TotM feel more natural.

 

[spinozajack]

The only combat example in the 2nd edition PHB was fighting a troll in TotM mode. Maybe you mean "first to advocate explicitly"? If it does.

I honestly see 2E as slightly better than 5E for TotM due to larger spell and missile ranges and less mobility in combat, such as being unable to move while spell casting. You can handwave ranges in 5E as "you're close enough", but details matter more often than in 2E, and then you need to break out the sketches and mini tokens.

QFT.

Ahh, some clarity on the subject.

If we could play 2e perfectly well at 12 years old without minis and a grid, that's all the evidence you need that the game supported it. We read the books back to front so many times, we practically memorized it. And we played the heck out of it, with all our friends, until we got sick of it. Then we played some more.