What's wrong with Mini-Centric?

[JDJblatherings]

No way? Really?

I didn't say the game was not designed for minis use. I said minis were not required for play. There is a difference.

Yes, they have alwys been a part of the hobby, but you did not need them to play. Today, you do.

i was respondig to the assertion that miniatures were not an bulit-in presumption since the earliest version of the rules...they were, as you agree.

They were not required and they still aren't. One needn't create house rules for abstract combat resolution one simply applies the rules in a more abstract fashion.

 

[JDJblatherings]

Another problem I have with mini's is that they actually create unrealistic combats. Real-life hand-to-hand combat is not orderly, and you don't really tend to get opportunities to create perfect tactical situations. You certainly don't have the benefit of a "top-down" view of the field! Movement and position are constantly changing in a way that the battlemat cannot, and will never be able to, accurately represent. For one thing, people move in more than 8 directions!

miniatures don't require the use of battlemats.

 

[pawsplay]

I think they are fairly synonymous in this regard.

Minitures facilitate tactical table-top combat.

When/why would you use a mini outside of combat?

To see if the bartender has line of sight when you try to pick someone's pocket.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

see now this right here is part of the reason that i like using mini's (or at least tactical representation):

it does not match up with what you can conjure in your mind after the GM describes the scene.

The battlemat to me just reduces the game visualization to a tan grid and that us all I can see when I play in some games.

With the mini's and battlemat there's no discrepency between what the DM describes and what you see as far as obsticles and positioning goes. No arguments over where your PC was and who has complete and partial cover. And to say that the mini's and battlemat limits roleplaying has more to do with the mindset of the players than it does with the fact that theyre using mini's.

Also sometimes the representation adds some tension to the game. Sure I can say "there are more Grimlocks pouring out of the east and western passages toward your positon" But when you see me lay out 5 coming from the east and another 6 coming from the west on top of the 4 that the PC's just dispatched, you can see the the concern (or bravado) on your players faces as they start to decide whether they should run or fight (of course, they stay and fight...) But that's just how it is with my group.

Of course there are situations where mood and atmosphere take priority over tactical movement / placement and I've actually run those situations without a mat. But then again my players trust me not to screw them and nerf their tactical based stuff on a whim. That's a big part of it too.

 

[werk]

To see if the bartender has line of sight when you try to pick someone's pocket.

Because that is better than asking the DM?

He controls the position of the bartender and the layout...

Mini use in this example would only serve to slow down play for very little gain.

Like you are going to trust the DM more if he has models?


"No, you don't have line of sight."
"No way! I do to!"
<Puts out minis as previously described>
"Oh, I see now...OK"


Maybe you want the mini's so you can prep for combat? (which is what they are good for)

 

[pawsplay]

Because that is better than asking the DM?

He controls the position of the bartender and the layout...

Mini use in this example would only serve to slow down play for very little gain.

Like you are going to trust the DM more if he has models?


"No, you don't have line of sight."
"No way! I do to!"
<Puts out minis as previously described>
"Oh, I see now...OK"


Maybe you want the mini's so you can prep for combat? (which is what they are good for)

Uh, no. The minis example above could be followed by, "Okay, so because I see where everything is, I do X instead."

Also, he does not control the position of YOU, and of course, he might have visualized the scene in a nonsensical way. The DM does not control "what makes sense."

 

[GreatLemur]

I think they are fairly synonymous in this regard.

Minitures facilitate tactical table-top combat.

When/why would you use a mini outside of combat?

Even if you wouldn't, it's still worth drawing a distinction since one can certainly run combat without miniatures. You can't reasonably talk about miniature use and combat as if they were interchangeable activities.

 

[Hussar]

Like you are going to trust the DM more if he has models?

100% yes.

If we are using properly scaled models and the room is done right, I know EXACTLY where everything is in that room. No fudging, no questions. All I have to do is use my eyeball to see whether or not that bartender can see me or if I'm screened by patrons.

With no minis, it's entirely DM's fiat.

So, yes, I would trust a scene that is rendered in models much more than a scene described by a DM. I honestly can't think of any reason why I wouldn't. The DM could be mistaken, the DM could be fudging, the DM could be distracted and forget something. None of those factors come into play if we have the scene out.

 

[EATherrian]

Well, mini's are fine in some respects, and to each his/her own, but...

in my opinion, the overuse of mini's makes the game more of a tactical combat game rather then a role playing game. The use of mini's is also, in my opinion, a factor that can limit the boundaries of one's imagination. The terrible troll is now no longer some image conjured in the mind, but a piece of plastic to be tactically and emotionlessly defeated using mathematical rules of movement and causes and effects (AoO etc.).

Too much clarity leaves not enough room for imagination. although mini's are wonderful toys and in some instances can be very helpful explaining positions, personally I would rather play without them...

This is the best expression of how I feel that I've read. I think if you want to play wargames play wargames and if you want to play D&D play D&D, they are different systems with different strengths and weaknesses.

 

[Hussar]

On another note...

I can feel for those who talk about the scale of D&D being really hard to work with sometimes. I tried running a naval style campaign a couple of years back. 5 foot squares and 6 second rounds don't work when encounters can easily start miles apart and combat can start at over 1000 feet. When you're fighting with siege weapons and extended fireballs, you can have REALLY big maps.

Living Imagination did help a bit by breaking out two other scales for doing naval combat (in their Broadsides!! rules), but, unfortunately, their rules were too detailed and combat ran VERY slowly. Great for the simulationists among us, but, boring as hell to everyone else.