What's wrong with Mini-Centric?

[Turjan]

I find nearly all minis ugly. As simple as that. Plus, I don't like the random sales model. I don't buy stuff like that out of principle. I don't spend lots of money on singles, and I hate painting. That should answer the question .

That said, I use counters for visualization, if necessary. I have quite a few from Fiery Dragon.

 

[Fifth Element]

I think you are interpreting mini-centric to mean 'using minis'.

Mini-centric to me is as I described in my post.

Using mini's is great, and greatly enhances the experience for me, but my games are far from mini-centric.

I still don't know what you mean by mini-centric. Do you mean that all combat uses minis? If that's the case, it's still not a board game as you suggest, unless 100% of the game is combat. Are you arguing that D&D is now supposed to be 100% combat?

And even if that's the case, there is still roleplaying in combat.

I think the "it's fine if you enjoy that, just don't call it roleplaying" attitude is irksome. It smacks of condescension (it's not an RPG, it's only war game). There is no single definition of roleplaying, and that sort of assertion moves us toward BadWrongFun territory quickly.

 

[Fifth Element]

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.

Okay, how much mini use is best then? If the "overuse" of minis makes the game too tactical to be called a proper RPG (whatever that is), what is the limit?

How much can you use minis in a game and still have the right to call it an RPG?

 

[pawsplay]

Okay, how much mini use is best then? If the "overuse" of minis makes the game too tactical to be called a proper RPG (whatever that is), what is the limit?

How much can you use minis in a game and still have the right to call it an RPG?

There is no limit. OD&D was simultaneously an RPG and a fantasy wargame.

 

[Li Shenron]

"The game is becoming more mini centric" is a complaint I've hear a number of times. I don't understand it though. What's wrong with using minis in D&D?

Discuss.

For me the #1 reason is very simply the added cost.

 

[Whisper72]

Okay, how much mini use is best then? If the "overuse" of minis makes the game too tactical to be called a proper RPG (whatever that is), what is the limit?

How much can you use minis in a game and still have the right to call it an RPG?

First of all, this is kind of a silly question. There is no 'best' amount, at least, this differs per individual / group who plays. It is for everyone out there themselves to decide when too much is too much.

Well, I am saying 'more like', I am not saying it is no longer an RPG. My personal definition, but remember, to each his own, is that a game stops being an RPG the moment the personalities of the PC's no longer matter. This in itself does not have any DIRECT relation to the use of mini's, all I am saying is that by using mini's a lot, as a general trend, people are more inclined to think about the powers, position and items in possession of the PC's.

For me, if all I am doing during combat is measuring distances and looking and thinking of the optimal way of attacking, and no longer think 'what would my PC do, because of WHO he is, not because of WHAT he has', then IMHO it has become a wargame and no longer an RPG. At that moment! Naturally, if ppl fight their combats that way, and roleplay the 'rest' of the game, the entire GAME is still roleplaying as far as I am concerned, it has simply become a little less so overall.

Now, if you like this style of playing, you should definately do this, and since wargaming is a perfectly cool gaming style anyhoo, I do not see anything wrong with that. The answer to the original questioner, regardless on whether this is actually currently the case, is for me that I personally rather NOT play with mini's. This implies that if the game becomes such that I feel forced (I KNOW, nobody actually forces me, but I hope you understand what I mean, by FEELING forced) to start using mini's because otherwise plenty of rules do not make sense anymore (such as the 5 foot schuffle, the flanking stuff, AoO etc., which are practically impossible to adjudic without the use of mini's or counters), then for ME, who does NOT want to use mini's because of my previous post reasonings, will feel that the game is getting less fun.

Understand, as ppl have said, under any edition, mini's were used and available, however, the rules then were so generic and fuzzy, that there has never been any moment in my DM'ming life (22 years now) that I ever even remotely felt the need for mini's. Now I do. In the past any one could CHOOSE freely whether to use them or not, now there is a tendency that one cannot use certain rules effectively WITHOUT them. This is the difference. Nobody is saying or has ever said that anyone is 'playing DnD wrong using mini's', but nowadays, it almost seems as if the rules are starting to say, 'if you're NOT using mini's, you're not playing DnD, cause it is meant to be played with them'. It is THAT which has some people riled....

 

[AllisterH]

Well, I am saying 'more like', I am not saying it is no longer an RPG. My personal definition, but remember, to each his own, is that a game stops being an RPG the moment the personalities of the PC's no longer matter. This in itself does not have any DIRECT relation to the use of mini's, all I am saying is that by using mini's a lot, as a general trend, people are more inclined to think about the powers, position and items in possession of the PC's.

For me, if all I am doing during combat is measuring distances and looking and thinking of the optimal way of attacking, and no longer think 'what would my PC do, because of WHO he is, not because of WHAT he has', then IMHO it has become a wargame and no longer an RPG. At that moment! Naturally, if ppl fight their combats that way, and roleplay the 'rest' of the game, the entire GAME is still roleplaying as far as I am concerned, it has simply become a little less so overall.

..

I have never used minis in my time as a player or as a DM, but the above makes no sense.

Your character SHOULD be thinking tactically. He or she should be evaluating the terrain and not willy-nillying attacking without sizing up the field/situation.

I mean, in the real world, from soldiers to athletes, evaluating the field and the current situation is basically understood to be an essential skill. Why would it be different for your character?

 

[Whisper72]

I have never used minis in my time as a player or as a DM, but the above makes no sense.

Your character SHOULD be thinking tactically. He or she should be evaluating the terrain and not willy-nillying attacking without sizing up the field/situation.

I mean, in the real world, from soldiers to athletes, evaluating the field and the current situation is basically understood to be an essential skill. Why would it be different for your character?

Yes and no. To a large extend you are correct, however, and I am talking in archetypes here, the knight will charge, even if maybe stealth is a better option, and this should not simply be the result of rules which make a knight more effective at charging, but should primarily be driven by the fact that it is in the nature of the personality of the knight to charge. Said knight could be a simple fighter in game mechanics terms, but FEELS himself a knight, and plays that ROLE.

 

[GreatLemur]

How much can you use minis in a game and still have the right to call it an RPG?

That's kinda like saying "How much J-pop can you listen to and still be Canadian?" Miniatures are used in wargames, and wargames are not RPGs. However, it is not the use of minitaures that keeps wargames from being RPGs.

For me the #1 reason is very simply the added cost.

There are ways around that.

 

[White Whale]

In my experience, there are far better games than D&D if you don't want to use minis or want to deemphasize combat.

I play D&D and its close relatives specifically to emulate the experience of a console Tactics/RPG - a series of (hopefully) awesome and tactically interesting encounters wrapped up in a (hopefully) awesome and intriguing story. d20 is the best tabletop tactics/RPG I've played, especially in its Star Wars Saga incarnation.

If I want more melding of combat and non-combat events, or to focus more on the style or theme of a combat than on the tactics, I want a game like Spirit of the Century, which does abstracted combat in a way that is also totally awesome, albeit quite different.

Playing D&D for cinematic, thematically-weighty encounters with little dice rolling strikes me as inefficient at best, just as playing SotC for deep, tactically challenging combats where every roll counts does.

Quoted for truth!