Wherefore "mini-less" D&D assumptions?

[Jeff Wilder]

We almost never used minis in 1E or 2E. (I can only very vaguely remember how, in fact, we managed combat back then, not using minis.) My use of minis actually began with Champions and continued with Shadowrun.

We certainly never considered not using minis in 3E, 3.5, or 4E. I think it's very clear that large chunks of those games depend on precise tactical positioning. I also think it's very clear that 4E relies on it more than 3.5, which relies on it more than 3E.

That said, in our group when the minis hit the table the focus on roleplaying stops and the focus on tactical gaming starts. No question. Whether one considers that a good or bad thing -- or, like me, something of both -- will depend upon one's own preferences, of course.

 

[MerricB]

My association with miniatures has been a funny one. Back when I was introduced to AD&D and Moldvay D&D (at pretty much the same time; I swapped between them a lot), Miniatures were rarely used. Our beginning games never used them.

Then, as we got a little older, we bought some of the minis available in game stores. My brother painted several of them - I've never been a painter, although I really should be now with my many unpainted BattleTech, BattleLore and Space Hulk figures... These minis were used primarily to represent party order and whether a combatant was in melee or not.

The big difference between this use of minis and that in 3e was this: once a mini entered melee, it stopped and was static. There was no repositioning (5' steps). Little things like actually having walls depicted didn't happen.

However, for most of my AD&D (1e and 2e) lifespan, I didn't use minis.

When Combat & Tactics came out, I delighted in actually having solid rules for using miniatures and, with my small collection, used them quite a lot, but, again, not in every encounter. As my earliest experiences were with miniatureless combat, so it has continued.

With 3e, we used glass beads and dice on a chessboard for early sessions, and then came the revelation of the D&D Miniature range (of which I was an early adopter and promoter of). I have somewhere over 2000 D&D Minis and only sporadically buy them now (I missed about three or four sets entirely), primarily because I have the bulk of what I need from them. I proxy a lot, but I also have 3 Beholders, lots of Mind flayers and other useful creatures which get dragged out from time to time.

However, even with all these minis, throughout 3e and 4e, I've alternated between using minis for combat and not using them. My players generally prefer the use of minis, as it helps them greatly in visualising the encounter, but there are times when it's just quicker not to use them. My last two sessions of the "Nentir Vale" campaign haven't used minis, despite having 9 combats between them.

Cheers!

 

[Ariosto]

For 1E, I felt some of the nuance was lost when minis play wasn't used -- for instance, burning your allies with fireballs or lightning bolts, or getting whacked by the orc with the spear when you charged him without wasting a turn to carefully engage him.

We do not lose those features. We play with just whatever aids to communication are needed on a case-by-case basis. We recognize how the situation being modeled is different from the misleading tableau that figures often so easily suggest.

The charge-move assertion is puzzling. The key questions are (a) whether you want to attack this round or not; and (b) whether you have a charge move available.

With fire balls and lightning bolts, I would expect complete and perfect knowledge of the relevant spatial relationships to bode against such mishaps!

 

[Voadam]

Try telling that to someone in a Goblin warren or Ankheg burrow. Using Fireballs as written in 1E and 2E is one of the most fun memories from my early gaming days, both as a DM and a player.

AD&D, requiring you to calculate out how a large expanding defined spherical volume fills various often irregularly shaped confined spaces. This is why I always preferred lightning bolts, much easier to figure out line distances quickly.

One of my friends in grade school played D&D before I did during the Moldvay/AD&D era. He was playing a wizard with a fireball, threw it at somebody who charged him in melee in a small underground chamber. He hit his target with laser guided pinpoint precision, he just didn't realize it would blow him up as well. He ended up killing himself in his first round of combat with his own spell. It ticked him off so much it was his last experience ever with D&D as far as I know.

 

[jaerdaph]

Meanwhile, at the Hall of Justice...

Actually the box reads "paper and pencil and miniature figures"

So "yes" to minis, just like it says on the box.

The picture clearly shows "and Miniature Figures"

Thank you, Super Friends, for once again saving us mere mortals by stating the obvious to us!

 

[Clavis]

I've DM'd and played since 83, and until 3rd edition came out I never even met anybody who played with miniatures. We never used them, or even considered using them, for AD&D. They seemed like they would be a lot of money to spend, and a lot of fuss at the table. In my experience, running 3rd Edition without miniatures is difficult. I can't see how 4th could even work without miniatures.
Personally, I dislike miniatures. I think they break immersion, create unrealistic combats (the decisions someone makes from a "god's-eye" view are not the ones they would make in a dark room where they can't be sure where everybody is), and encourage players to focus on the game board, rather than each other and the DM.
Incidentally, the Moldvay Basic rules clearly state that the game does not use a board or playing pieces. They mention that the player may want to use miniatures, but categorically deny that miniatures are needed for play.

 

[Bullgrit]

I've used minis for D&D since my first game, in 1980, as all the game books and rules of the time suggested. We even bought the official AD&D miniatures.

The following images are at/from Back in '81 (note the dates):

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YZQKE8VlN...R1_RI/s1600-h/grenadier+specialists+sheet.jpg

grenadier+thieves+sheet.jpg (image)

grenadier+fighting+men+sheet.jpg (image)

grenadier+denizens+sheet.jpg (image)

grenadier+dwellers+sheet.jpg (image)

grenadier+dwellers+sheet.jpg (image)

grenadier+fighting+men+sheet.jpg (image)

tsr+minis+heroes+back.jpg (image)

tsr+minis+monster+tribes+back.jpg (image)

tsr+minis+heroes+back.jpg (image)

tsr+minis+clerics+druids+back.jpg (image)

tsr+minis+fighters+rangers+paladins+back.jpg (image)

tsr+minis+monks+bards+thieves+back.jpg (image)

tsr+minis+magic-users+illusionists+back.jpg (image)

Bullgrit

 

[ExploderWizard]

I didn't have or use minis when I first started playing. We drew marching orders and door opening positions on graph paper. We played sitting around on a carpeted floor in those days so a battle board wouldn't have worked out so well. Around 1988 or so I moved up to a place that had a local hobby shop so I started collecting and painting minis. We started using them in our games around that time, it was 1E AD&D. We have used minis in our games since then no matter what the system was because they looked cool and kids like to play with thier toys.

As far as tactical "requirements" are concerned, the D&D rules of any edition require no minis or battle board. The level of precision and exact spacial simulation are decided by those playing. If the group isn't overly concerned with tactical matters everything runs fine without so much as a marker. Those that get the most enjoyment out of precisely defined tactical maneuvers will be the ones claiming that minis or maps are required.

 

[Raven Crowking]

And, again, a poll was taken....by WotC. A considerably larger poll than could be taken here. Fewer than half polled claimed to have ever used minis.

It is notable that WotC discovered that those who did use minis spent about 10 times as much as those who didn't.

Now, I wonder why WotC-D&D is more mini-centric than TSR-D&D?

 

[Wombat]

Let me sum up miniatures use by my various groups by edition versus what the rules seemed to imply by word choice (this coming from my background in proofreading and editing).

OD&D: We never used minis. Oh, we painted minis, but a lot of that was due to the fact that we had been playing miniatures wargames for the previous 4-5 years. Part of the problem was finding appropriate minis, but more importantly we never felt the need for them. The rules, conversely, which, to be honest, were more of a glorified collection of notes, seemed to suggest that they could be used ... or not ... or replaced with Avalon Hill's Outdoor Survival ... or maybe something else.

AD&D (1st & 2nd): I didn't play often during this time, but of the dozen-odd games that I played only one time did we use minis, and most of the players in that game found that excessive. The tone of the rules was that minis were a nice option, but far from necessary.

3e: We only rarely used minis, and that only for "boss fights". We simply didn't want to bother drawing out a battle board ever time and taking up room. Equally, I was the only person in my groups who was significantly trained up in painting minis and only one guy in our group really liked the official line of WotC D&D minis. The rules very, VERY strongly suggested that the game was meant to be played with minis, but that there were work-arounds for those who did not have them or did not wish to use them.

4e: The only games of this I ran we used minis; I have yet to see a session where people do not use minis. The rules, as written, imply that minis are absolutely required and that lack of minis will mean the game is unplayable. At absolute minimum, some sort of counters are required -- the tone of the rules now is that no minis = no D&D = no game.

From a editor's point-of-view, the requirement of miniatures has been ramped up dramatically with each edition through word choice, diagrams, and the like.