WOTC Business Strategy and miniatures

[Numion]

No, but his logic holds up. What has changed in 3.5 that makes the 5foot = 1 square formula so much more bewildering?

Then why did they do it? I just feel that the right way would be to assume that no miniatures are used. This because I think that a miniatureless game is the baseline, and minis may enhance the game for some. Not the way that minis are the baseline, and if you don't use them, your playing experience is somehow lessened.

Mostly this has to do with the feeling of the rules for me. I can make 5 ft = 1 square calculations, but thats a step backwards since I didn't have to do it in 3.0e.

 

[Numion]

Miniatures are nothing more than elaborate position markers. A pile of spare change, a bag of poker chips, scratches on a piece of scrap paper and bottle caps will do the same thing with less cost. This is why the anti-miniature arguements are so much hot air; it's a lot of whining about nothing.

In the DM screen thread a while a go it became apparent that a large percentage of D&D groups don't play around a central table. Some groups prefer to sit around a room with open space in the middle, just like my group does. Two sit on the bed, DM is in front of the computer table, couple are on the couch, or something like that.

With a set-up like this any counters would be next to useless. Hence the whining isn't about nothing. It's actually one of the main reasons I'm not getting 3.5e. They can forcefeed their miniatures to someone else

 

[MonsterMash]

Minis and 3.5

Its made very clear in the PHB and DMG for 3.5 that WotC expect the game to be played with figures, as a wargamer who does Fantasy Stuff I don't have a problem with this as I have plenty of minis of the basic types and will just substitute something of an appropriate size for a monster I don't have, but I can definitely see a strategy of trying to build up their revenues from this.

 

[Corinth]

In the DM screen thread a while a go it became apparent that a large percentage of D&D groups don't play around a central table. Some groups prefer to sit around a room with open space in the middle, just like my group does. Two sit on the bed, DM is in front of the computer table, couple are on the couch, or something like that.

Anectdotal evidence provided by participants in an online fan forum regarding the norms of gaming culture doesn't make for a convincing arguement. The majority of gamers do maintain the traditional setup, for otherwise WOTC wouldn't sell products that worked best with it. WOTC is a very savvy company, and they'd be well aware of any changes in the culture that would affect their bottom line. That they've not changed things like selling DM screens and miniatures is proof enough that most gamers still play around a central table.

With a set-up like this any counters would be next to useless. Hence the whining isn't about nothing. It's actually one of the main reasons I'm not getting 3.5e. They can forcefeed their miniatures to someone else

No, they're not. Lay the mat on the coffee table and have one of the players move the counters around; let another draw on it as needed. Hell, you can just pass around a pad of graph paper and let the players use that as the battlemat. Same utility as a traditional group would enjoy for the same hassle, so it's still not an issue of any substance.

 

[pogre]

Re: Minis and 3.5

Its made very clear in the PHB and DMG for 3.5 that WotC expect the game to be played with figures,...

Monstermash - can you give me an example of this in the books? Thanks - have not gotten mine yet.

Are you refering to just the grid thing or are the other areas as well?

 

[Zaruthustran]

Bingo, Dragonblade. His full post is below, and it's right on.

Miniatures make the game accessible. How many people do you know who didn't try D&D because they couldn't "get" it, couldn't understand that it all takes place in one's imagination? Think of all the folks that you never approached about playing, because you knew that they just wouldn't understand.

Minis make the game accessible to those folks.

It's worth repeating that the minis are the playing pieces for WotC's new game called "D&D Miniatures". They are not, repeat not, miniatures designed for the D&D RPG game. Of course they can and will be used by D&D RPG players, and each D&D Miniature stat card also comes with D&D RPG stats, but again--D&D Miniatures figures are designed for the D&D Miniatures game, and are packaged and sold in the way that most makes sense for the D&D Miniatures game.

The D&D Miniatures game competes with the Mage Knight game, since like Mage Knight it is a collectable miniatures game with prepainted plastic figures sold in randomized packs.

The playing pieces for D&D Miniatures do not directly compete with unpainted metal minis such as Reaper, since unlike the D&D Miniatures playing pieces, Reaper figures are individually-packaged models intended for fantasy gamers to paint and use in tabletop RPGs.

D&D Miniatures figures and Reaper figures are dissimilar products that appeal to dissimilar target markets. This should be obvious, but I see many (too many) posts comparing Reaper models to the playing pieces for the D&D Miniatures game. It's nonsensical, but I see posts saying "If I want one specific unpainted metal figure, then I'll buy that one specific unpainted metal figure from Reaper." As if that were some kind of valid point, or anything other than the most obvious of statements.

Sigh.

Anyway, Dragonblade's excellent post is repeated below.

-z

I think a positive note for minis is that it allows WotC to give D&D more of a boardgame feel.

To be brutally honest, pretending you are a fantasy person in a fantasy world and speaking in character, etc. does not appeal to most people. They find it childish or strange.

Having minis, grids, etc. allows WotC to emphasize the war game and tactical aspects of D&D and thus possibly appeal to a more diverse group of people.

If you walk into a room and see people sitting their with pencils, paper and dice and just talking in strange voices will seem strange.

But if you see them sitting their with pencils, paper, dice, and a big square grid with minis and people moving minis around and shouting actions to each other etc. It seems much more like an elaborate boardgame. With visible playing pieces, D&D feels more like a game and less like some strange form of acting. Better to appeal to the masses that way.

 

[Zaruthustran]

Re: Re: Minis and 3.5

Monstermash - can you give me an example of this in the books? Thanks - have not gotten mine yet.

Are you refering to just the grid thing or are the other areas as well?

I think he's referring to the fact that the combat examples in the Combat chapter use top-view photographs of plastic miniatures on a battlemat. These graphics replace the black-and-white illustrated counters that were in the 3E books.

What I don't understand is why there's any controversy over this at all. People have played D&D with miniatures since before D&D was formally introduced as D&D!

So what's the problem? Are people upset that the rule books provide clear rules for using minis in games, making it easier than ever to keep track of positions, cover, and spell effects?

Seriously, maybe some folks are upset that D&D--always a turn-based tactical fantasy combat game--is becoming even more of a turn-based tactical fantasy combat game. By this I mean that before 3E, movement was pretty generalized, there were no AoOs, and spell effects were kind of fuzzy. In 3E (and 3.5) movement and spell effects are very clearly defined, and the use of a grid makes the combat much more... defined. Maybe some players are worried that putting so much emphasis on the positions of playing pieces on a physical table, the game is pulling emphasis from the richly imagined battlefield in the mind.

I know that happens to me. When I play D&D without minis, I remember the battles like battles in a good book: dynamic, visceral, realistic. When I play D&D with minis, I remember the battles as little pieces moving around on a table crowded with pop cans and cheetos.

-z, suddenly undertanding the anti-mini view and realizing what he's been missing from "the old days".

 

[Dragonblade]

Thanks for the moral support!

I think going towards minis is a very good marketing strategy for WotC and anything that helps WotC is good for D&D and gaming in general.

However, I personally don't like minis and have found that it sucks the life out of combat. When players can't see where everything is at a glance, combat becomes less an exercise in die rolling and more an exercise in imagination.

You are forced to use your imagination to describe the scene, the atmosphere, the actions and reactions of PCs and NPCs. All of this is unnecessary in a minis heavy game.

Now the pro-mini people will say that you can have all this description with minis, but I have found in practice that it doesn't work that way. Using your imagination requires effort and if you have minis sitting there, the old imagination becomes less frequently used and starts to gather dust.

Since converting over to 3rd edition from 2nd, my group found the combats becoming stagnant and stale. It was fine for some of the more mathematically minded of the players, but for the DM and those players who thrive on creativity and pulling off all sorts of crazy stunts in combat, they were being suffocated with all the mini-based combats.

We found that combats are much more exciting and memorable when you play it out in your head than on a combat mat with figures. As soon as we dropped minis our games became way more exciting again.

I don't mind WotC being pro mini because it helps D&D appeal to the masses. But it would be nice for a set of cinematic rules for us, not anti-mini but pro-imagination, people.

 

[mmu1]

It's worth repeating that the minis are the playing pieces for WotC's new game called "D&D Miniatures". They are not, repeat not, miniatures designed for the D&D RPG game.

Wow, you're so brilliant and non-obvious...

Now if only WotC was really marketing these minis the way you say they are, instead of pushing them hard as miniatures for use in role-playing, you'd also be right.


"Inexpensive, durable plastic, prepainted miniatures for Dungeons & Dragons? Welcome to the Golden Age of Fantasy Gaming!"

"These things are really going to be an asset to just about anyone who wants to use minis in a D&D game. There's no grace period between the time you buy these minis and the time they make it through the queue to get assembled, primed, and painted. It's an instant collection of gaming accessories referenced right inside your D&D rulebooks."

"Random packaging of trading cards has been popular for 10 years (much, much longer if you count bubblegum cards). It is, however, relatively new for miniatures, so we'd like to lay out some of our reasons for random packaging. It has real benefits from the gamer's perspective.
First and foremost is simplicity. If you're a long-time role player, "simplicity" might sound suspiciously like "dumbing down," but it's not."

"Actual game-play can also benefit from random packaging. Wizards is aiming with the D&D miniatures not only to boost miniatures use in role-playing but also to build up competitive tabletop play within the D&D universe."

For miniatures that are primarily intended to be a collectible game competing with Mage Knight, it's curious how in every press release or "spotlight" on the WotC page the collectible game aspect of it has taken a backseat to trying to convince role-players this is something they'll want to use in their games. The actual "mini game" hasn't really been previed at all, instead we get things like a miniature gallery full of "PC types". Hmm.

 

[francisca]

Started playing in the early 80's, quit about the time 2E showed up. Never, ever used minis.

Picked up 3E in 2001. We use minis, but it sure seems that we bog down during combat. Players seem to be more concerned about min/maxing and than ever. I'll stop short of saying minis promote min/maxing and munchkinism, but not that short.

On the other hand, as the DM, I've gotten more adept at using tactics which are appropriate for the monsters and NPCs, much to the PC's dismay . But this is exactly why combat bogs down. Don't get me wrong, we're all enjoying the tactical slant, but it does slow down combat.

Having said that, I think the arguments about AoO and blast radius, etc.. would be un-ending, as some of my group is pretty tactically oriented. They might even be more drawn out than combat, and lead to bad feelings if someone felt they were gipped. So in my case, using minis, even though it is against my basic instincts, saves us time and headaches.

So, I guess it depends on your group, no?

Oh, and we use plastic figs from HeroQuest, and cardboard counters from Firery Dragon and Steve Jackson. This is a potentially great time for Claudio Pozas/FDP and Dragon Scale Counters.

I think the collectible nature of the new mini line sucks. If need 10 orcs, I want 10 stinking orcs.