| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Markustay |
Posted - 28 Jan 2012 : 00:13:43
Rather then further clogging-up Therise's thread with my own 'grand plan', I decided to work-out what I perceive to be a perfect product list (all items I would buy). Note that I've changed-around the way some books are laid out (former sources reconfigured) - I like to see a more organized approach to both the setting and the game. I've also changed many names from ones we've grown familiar with (because of the confusion that causes), and also because I had to consider the marketing angle - how many kids are going to pick-up (and look at) something called 'Kara-Tur'? The idea is to get them to look at it, and artwork isn't always displayed (most printed books sit spine-out on a shelf). Of course, I'm old-school (pre-Kindle), so this approach may not be as important as it once was. I also tried to use names already used elsewhere, or ones that are in-line with the naming conventions of 4e.
Link to regional map some of this was based on, form the other thread. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Markustay |
Posted - 09 Dec 2013 : 15:15:33
So today I was thinking about D&D in-general, and what changes I have always longed for but that they've never implemented (although 4e seems to to have come close).
One thing that always irked me about D&D were how the spell levels were different then the caster level - that never made much sense to me. In Monte Cook's Book of Experimental Might (which I own) he has divided the standard D&D spells into 20 levels, which I feel is brilliant. Its always been a bit weird (especially for new players) to have to be double the level of a spell to learn it, and I think this one, simple tweak would go a long way in simplifying the new rules. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 11 Nov 2013 : 16:19:37
You know whats funny?
The one thing I never see anyone wanting back is Gilgeam.  |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 06 Nov 2013 : 17:27:56
Forgotten Realms Adventures style book.
I'd also like to see very focused region books, lots of fluff. Web enhancements to the cities of those regions... you know, something to make DDI worth subbing to. I'd like to see every supplement have a strong.. I hate to use this term... DLC offering.. after hitting the shelves. Have the authors of the supplement do the work when they're writing the supplements instead of trying to fit it into a DDI Dragon/Dungeon budget. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 06 Nov 2013 : 04:43:54
quote:
Originally posted by Firestorm
Bring Back the Mulhohandi Pantheon and god kings!
Bring back all the gods. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 18 Oct 2013 : 19:30:09
quote:
Originally posted by Entromancer
I would like to see the dragonborn and genasi stick around. I've enjoyed their presence in the setting.
I as well, though they're races that have been in the game for quite a while, not just in 4E. |
| Entromancer |
Posted - 18 Oct 2013 : 18:59:56
I would like to see the dragonborn and genasi stick around. I've enjoyed their presence in the setting. |
| Tyrant |
Posted - 18 Oct 2013 : 18:46:26
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
$40 for 12 minis? Do they at least kiss you first?
This game is seriously becoming an 'elitist hobby' - how are kids supposed to even get into it, without hundreds of dollars of investment?
My point was that when you see that price, the price for the random boosters doesn't look so bad and they just might have been honest about the assortment keeping the price down. I agree that it is quite high and I haven't bought any of them myself. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 18 Oct 2013 : 16:55:59
$40 for 12 minis? Do they at least kiss you first?
This game is seriously becoming an 'elitist hobby' - how are kids supposed to even get into it, without hundreds of dollars of investment?
|
| Tyrant |
Posted - 18 Oct 2013 : 16:48:04
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Get rid of the the random packs and make the boosters more like Heroscape's boosters - just look at that phenomenal packaging! Were the guys who designed the D&D and SW minis boxes freakin' blind?!
As someone who bought a lot of the D&D minis, I can at least tell you what the WotC folks kept telling us when these types of questions arose. The reasons for random boosters were basically two fold. The first was that stores (and/or distributors) didn't want static boosters. They knew that some will always sell better than others and given the way they were likely to be manufactured and delivered that meant some were destined to be peg warmers. For those of you who don't collect action figures or if you can't figure out what that means, it is the term for something that hangs on a store peg seemingly forever. The other reason was to maximize variety. Sure a box of orcs, undead, or drow would sell, but what about githyanki or bodaks or some other random thing most RPGers are likely to use once in a lifetime? Let's face it, the Monster Manuals aren't all made of gold.
There is also the matter of cost. By having so many commons and uncommons for every rare they could keep down the cost per miniature. The current, non random minis illustrate this point.
Personally, I think the first reason is only valid if their manufacturing isn't very agile (although Hasbro constantly runs into the peg warmer problem, so maybe it is valid). To me, the second reason is valid. Not every set could be a winner and sooner or later the sets will just be variations of the safe choices until we are drowning in orcs and drow.
I am surprised that you guys haven't mentioned that they do have non random minis now. There are 5 sets. 1 Orc/Gruumsh set, 1 Undead set, 1 Drow/Lolth set, 1 Goblin set, and 1 Cormyr set. Each one has 12 minis and a MSRP of $40.
As for the topic, my wishlist would include new minis. Hopefully with a skirmish game similar to the old one only this one won't be dependent on any one particular rule set so it doesn't have to needlessly change when D&D The Next Generation roles along. I also hope there is a Neverwinter Nights type of game released. Along with that, it would be nice to see any other games (Icewind Dale, Balder's Gate, etc) use the same engine and have a level of cross compatibility. Make the games stand alone games, but make it so if you have more than one the areas and quests of the other are now open so the world gets expanded with each additional game and expansion. Along with that, make some new games that aren't just "Older Game Part X". Let's see one set in Cormyr, or Thay, or Narfell, or anyplace but the Sword Coast. If they decide to make games set in other worlds, stick to the same plan only have portals connecting the worlds.
I agree with others that some type of wider media presence is needed. Either a decent cartoon or a movie. For either one I would focus the title on Forgotten Realms (or whichever setting they choose) and not D&D. Ease the people into the fact it is a D&D series/movie they are watching.
More novels would be nice too. If 12 a year is too many, how about 8-10? Along with that, giving the writers a little more room to explore (particularly the past and generally uncovered areas) would be nice. New anthologies couldn't hurt. Maybe let Ed and Bob write about other characters beyond El and Drizzt. Throw Erik a bone too, he got the short end of the ebook stick and that's just not right. See if anything can be worked out with Elaine to write either Reclamation or The Serpent's Daughter (or, if we are lucky, both). Follow ups to Sandstorm and Venom In Her Veins would be great. Some kind of follow up to the Blades of the Moonsea trilogy would be nice too. The overall point is there are a number of talented authors and decent books that could keep on going and a few that were criminally cut short that could fill a printing schedule for a while. |
| Firestorm |
Posted - 18 Oct 2013 : 00:56:51
Bring Back the Mulhohandi Pantheon and god kings! |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 17 Oct 2013 : 17:51:14
quote:
Originally posted by daarkknight
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
^^^ I was just reading through Lost Empires for the umpteenth time, and a thought struck me - the climate in Calimshan was artificial, created by the warring genies trapped in their crystal. That means that that region (which I am guessing was overrun with dragons, judging by the timeline), was probably a 'verdant paradise' originally. Since the Calimemnon Crystal was destroyed at the outset of the Spellplague, and those two Dgen Lords freed, shouldn't the terrain and weather have returned to its former type?
In Lands of Intrigue, it is mentioned that what was the forest of Tethir (current Wealdath and Forest of Mir) once stretched to the edge of the sea. So I'd say you're right Markus, that it should have been (and with time, would be again) a verdant paradise.
And don't even get me started about the 12 Cities of the Sword mega-dungeons. My poor players... 
Not necessarily. The crystal was only one half of their prison. Th desert itself was the other half. Their complete freedom required bringing the two halves together (body & soul). So it would depend upon what destroying the crystal in spell chaos did to that half - perhaps it was flung out into the cosmos or perhaps trapped in "Abeir's" dimension. Who knows... |
| daarkknight |
Posted - 17 Oct 2013 : 17:19:13
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
^^^ I was just reading through Lost Empires for the umpteenth time, and a thought struck me - the climate in Calimshan was artificial, created by the warring genies trapped in their crystal. That means that that region (which I am guessing was overrun with dragons, judging by the timeline), was probably a 'verdant paradise' originally. Since the Calimemnon Crystal was destroyed at the outset of the Spellplague, and those two Dgen Lords freed, shouldn't the terrain and weather have returned to its former type?
In Lands of Intrigue, it is mentioned that what was the forest of Tethir (current Wealdath and Forest of Mir) once stretched to the edge of the sea. So I'd say you're right Markus, that it should have been (and with time, would be again) a verdant paradise.
And don't even get me started about the 12 Cities of the Sword mega-dungeons. My poor players... |
| Markustay |
Posted - 14 Oct 2013 : 19:31:34
^^^ There are a few of these out there now, but the one you were probably talking about was Skylanders. Hybrid toys of this nature seem to be catching on now, and they'll be a big 'must have' item this year during the Holidays.
And now the real reason why I brought back this thread - I was looking for a "things we'd love to see in 5e FR" thread, and there are a few with that kind of theme, but I figure I'd just Rez one of my own.
I was just reading through Lost Empires for the umpteenth time, and a thought struck me - the climate in Calimshan was artificial, created by the warring genies trapped in their crystal. That means that that region (which I am guessing was overrun with dragons, judging by the timeline), was probably a 'verdant paradise' originally. Since the Calimemnon Crystal was destroyed at the outset of the Spellplague, and those two Dgen Lords freed, shouldn't the terrain and weather have returned to its former type?
So I guess what I am looking forward to in 5eFR is a few people who know the setting well going over all the 4e changes with a fine tooth-comb, and ironing-out all the inconsistencies. Its one thing to want to shoe-horn tons of new ideas into a setting, and quite another to have it all make sense (which was 4e's problem in a nutshell). I had more here, but rather then knit-pick, I'll get right to my point:
With the sea receeding, all the cities of Jhaamdath should be exposed now, ripe for the picking. The 12 'cities of the sword' should be uber-dungeons just waiting to be explored by PCs! |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 03 Apr 2012 : 21:50:51
-What are the miniature toys things that plug into video games made for them? I saw some at Gamestop a few weeks ago when I went out and got a Playstation 3, and I vaguely recall seeing a commercial for a Digimon/Pokemon version. Basically they're plastic miniatures that come with some kind of board that gets plugged in, that have chips in them that interact with the board to keep track of whatever (HP? Power? Something). Anyone? |
| Markustay |
Posted - 03 Apr 2012 : 16:30:50
Kids love toys - thats a universal rule.
How old were you when you discovered D&D? I'm talking about Hasbro's primary audience - children. Hasbro tends to lose their customers around late-tween - however, by letting them know there is a 'big-boy version', you lead them from child into early teen - D&D's perfect starter-age. Get them hooked young, and you've got fans for life (like most of us here).
Of all the kids I taught to play, only a handful 'grew-up' and stopped playing altogether (and I am talking about HUNDREDS of kids over 30 years). Quite a few of them went on to be DMs of their own, and now teach the game to others.
The minis (during a session) serve the same purpose in selling a tabletop RPG as a beautiful model does in selling a car - its just to draw your eye and generate interest. Once the learn about D&D, they get hooked.
Also, terrain is important. Using minis just for determining marching order is efficient, but not very fun. Of the 7000 miniatures I used to own, I'd say at least 500 of them were scenic in nature (treasure-piles, tables & chairs, wizard's labs, bookshelves, etc). I even had a few boxes of those take-apart wall sections (VERY cool product) - the visual aids help a player roleplay better, because they can actually see certain options they hadn't thought of.
You create a toy-line that is based on the SW micro-machine ones or the Mighty max/Polly Pocket model (little self-contained playsets), and its pure win. The minis sell themselves, and D&D just becomes an option. You now have D&D-compatible minis selling at regular stores, like Walmart, and not just niche shops where the only folks buying them are the people who already know about them. The minis - and a good cartoon - are key to D&D's future. without them, we just become a footnote.
Minis aren't for everyone, and I myself only used them abut half the time (my regular, older group only used them for combat), but they are a great way of breaking down the wall between niche and mainstream. Most of the time you can't even find the Heroscape boosters right before Christmas - at around $8 they make great stocking-stuffers (once you go over $10, you enter the 'real present' area). And my kids only used the rules once or twice, and then just played with the figures after that. There was even a cool Super-hero edition (with not nearly enough minis, but still decent enough). I even used the Ironman from that box for a warforged.
They need to do it similar (but better) to how Zombies!!! does it - why can't we get a big ol' bag of monochrome (yellowish white) skeletons in a great big bag? How expensive could that possibly be to produce? I can cheaply purchase bags of farm animals, dinosaurs, etc in those kinds of bags, and they are even 2-3 colors. Those would be fine for Orcs or other 'pack monsters'. The figures that represent PCs should be a little better (a few more colors and more detailed) - those are the kinds that should come in boosters. |
| Varl |
Posted - 03 Apr 2012 : 16:25:31
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I think one problem with the D&D minis was forcing people to buy them blind. Yeah, it works great for CCGs -- but if you're wanting to use the minis to supplement your D&D sessions, having to buy 83 packages to get that one mini you really need for the next session really sucks.
This is the primary reason I purchase from the secondary market. I despise the idea of buying something sight unseen, especially when it comes to miniatures. If I truly wanted to invest in something totally random, I'd take my dice to the game store and roll it to see what I should buy off the shelves.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 22:08:45
When I got into D&D, I didn't even know minis existed. And knowing about minis wouldn't have mattered to me. I've never, in D&D, used minis for anything other than visual aids like knowing party order or where everyone was positioned in the room.
I do own minis, but all of mine are for Battletech (which I no longer play), 40K (which I never played), and Warmachine.
I don't play BattleTech anymore for various reasons, including the fact that the Dice Gods hated my Mechs, and because I issues with a lot of minor things (like the vulnerability of Quads, from the sides).
I don't play 40k because I never got motivated to do more than paint 2 minis (a squig and an OOP Space Wolf Scout). I've dumped most of the ones I had.
Warmachine I play, but I'd be less likely to play if I didn't have a standing deal with a friend to get my minis painted.
The same friend tried to get me into Dystopian Wars, and I really like some of the minis, but there wasn't enough backstory to make it interesting to me -- I need the setting to interest me as much as the minis.
I have some of the Shadowrun Duels figures, because those figures are oh-so-friggin' sweet, particularly Lothan the Wise. Never had any interest whatsoever in the now-defunct game, but those figures were just too pretty to not buy.
My point is that minis may be what attracts some people to a game, but it's not a universal draw. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 21:45:45
I'd never heard of Heroscape before, but this description really just makes it sound like the modern version of Chainmail. Of course it's not the same game, but it serves the same niche; while the mini games have spawned a fine tradition of wargaming grognards, and while sneaky attempts are made in D&D literature to force some degree of dependence/integration, I still see that in the end D&D survived and thrived on the same market which turned Chainmail into a half-forgotten nostalgic collectible. This isn't because the wargame sucked, it's because the wargame is a different hobby from the RPG - I personally think that marrying the two can make a better game only when it appeals to all the players. Formal RPGs evolved from wargames, so early RPGs were almost exclusively recruited from the wargaming crowd ... but these days most new players people do D&D after cutting their teeth on CRPGs and MMORPGs, their thinking is very different from the wargaming crowd. They don't like complex formations and intricate rules which duplicate "realism", they like using their character builds to tank and blast things, combat is seen as the "grind" necessary to level up to their final objective: that being a "maxxed and optimized" character playing with the best toys the game can offer, one who can demonstrate personal prowess (l77t pwnage) in terms of killing power and coolness.
If you're talking in terms of eye-candy, armies of figs will never win battles against digital hordes, detailed paintjobs are just not as visually exciting as 3D animation. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 19:41:02
I've always used minis. Its what attracted me to the genre in the first place (that, and my love of fantasy).
When a group of 13-15 year-olds enter an LGS, and they see a group of (usually overweight and nerdy) middle-aged men rolling dice and talking, you will also usually see that same group ignore those men and look around at the covers of books and games. If there is a miniatures glass case to display painted ones (some LGS's have these, to showcase clients/workers talents), then you will see them surround that google-eyed (and maybe a little drool running form their mouths).
If those same boring-looking middle-age men are using scenery and miniatures, watch the shift in interest. The kids will ask questions, and even eventually ask, "can I play?"
I have been teaching D&D/RPGs to 'kids' since 1981 - the miniatures are a VITAL part of the game, to generate interest. Do we need them to play? NO... but in this day & age of incredible graphics, D&D BETTER HAVE some competing eye-candy, or its dead in-the-water. I speak from experience - the miniatures are what attracts new players. Sometimes I would even throw a Beholder or a McFarland dragon on the table, even if I had no plans to use them. They are a great draw (and YES... I should have been in advertising).
By detaching the miniatures from the mandatory D&D rules, and re-attaching them to the Heroscape IP, you've created a robust and fascinating toy-line that is completely independent from the gaming aspect, while still allowing miniatures-support in D&D through those same minis, all the while separating the aversion some parents might still have to "anything D&D". Put Heroscape on the box (of minis), and then include the stuff about its 'D&D compatibility' inside, in the little catalog-booklets that kids drool over. D&D players won't need to see it on the box - we will all know (from playing D&D) about the connection, and their usefulness.
Get rid of the the random packs and make the boosters more like Heroscape's boosters - just look at that phenomenal packaging! Were the guys who designed the D&D and SW minis boxes freakin' blind?!
Offer one big 'starter set' with LOTS of minis around the holidays - everyone will buy it - with a battlemap (reversible?) and some simple rules (make Heroscape's rules the D&D 'quick start' rules). By marrying the two lines, you use resources more efficiently, and provide cross-support (and interest). You also bring it into the mainstream. They have to make the starter a worthwhile deal, though - a handful of expensive (and random! ) minis in a box you can't see through was moronic, and would only appeal to a subset of a niche community. The profits from that initial venture should be minimal (per unit) - you have to hook them first, and then milk them buying boosters and expansions. The cartoon ads would make this the next hot-ticket item, and the cross-support with the comics and novels could not only revitalize FR and D&D, but make WotC one of Hasbro's most lucrative cash-cows.
Did someone say "Tickle-me-Drizzt"? |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 19:20:31
-Even if it were semi-free, or something- have some kind of password that is found in sourcebooks, that a person has to enter to access the content keyed to that specific sourcebook or novel- that's something. Online content is the best place to put all of that 'extraneous' stuff that clutters up sourcebooks that isn't necessary. We were talking about stats before- Drizzt can be labeled a Male Drow Ranger 10/Fighter 5 in the sourcebook and can be given an extended stat block online. Or, since it's talked about a lot, Khelben's genealogy- heraldry and genealogy charts, another thing that takes up a lot of space, that can be put online to save room in physical books. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 19:13:47
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-That's something that would help 5e if they embraced it more- web enhancements and free online content.
Indeed. We used to get free online content, plus the web enhancements, plus the magazines. From what I've seen, the content behind the paywall now is somewhat more than the free online content was, but still less than the magazines, and still far less overall.
More content is always good, and giving us more free stuff would also be great. I realize they've got to make money, but they gave us free content for years, and while it may not directly generate revenue, there are still ways to use that to drive sales (referring to books/paid content, use online material to test the waters for potential paid content, etc). |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 19:02:33
-That's something that would help 5e if they embraced it more- web enhancements and free online content. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 18:57:34
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And it's prolly a minor quibble, but I didn't like how in the waning days of 3.x, the default assumption seemed to be that you were using the minis to play. I think minis can be very useful during a gaming session, but they should be purely optional. Game material in particular should not be written with the assumption that you're using not just minis, but specifically D&D minis.
-Did they? I never really use too many books outside of the core three, picking through PrCs or feats or whatever from other books, but I never noticed that. What was it, a lot of stuff tied to movement or whatever?
They started doing that "encounter format" crap, with maps for minis and a list of exactly what minis to use, and even listed minis in the "what you need to use this book" section. And this wasn't core stuff, this was Realms books. Some of the online articles did the same thing, with focusing on how to use minis to run a particular encounter.
Are you talking about that thing they did where they'd partition out the encounter from the main "story", and shove it in a big back section of encounters?
If so, I agree. I didn't like that at all. It completely broke the flow of going through the adventure, because the themes and story were in one area and you'd have to flip back to the end sections for the actual encounters. They'd have a map, parsed for minis, with all the stat blocks and so on. It irked me less that minis were involved, and more that organization was broken.
The idea behind the encounter format was valid, but the execution was flawed. The idea of condensing, in one location, everything needed for an encounter, has a great deal of merit. But the idea was to prevent people from having to flip back and forth in the book -- and putting the encounter descriptions in a separate location from the area description required flipping back and forth. So they solved a problem by duplicating it. 
In an ideal world, the encounter descriptions would have been released as a second web enhancement -- the first WE containing additional content (I loved when they did that!) and the second being the encounter descriptions. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 17:15:41
The thing with minis: D&D originally comes out of miniatures wargaming, so there will always be a strong undercurrent of minis gaming in anything D&D-related. That said, D&D should never REQUIRE you to use minis. 3.5 was getting that way, and 4e obviously took another step that way. As auggested at Emerald City ComicCon (I should know, as I was sitting next to the WotC designer on the panel at the time), D&D-Next is moving away from requiring minis. They're still an option--they always should be, for those who want to use the minis--but they aren't going to be REQUIRED.
Otherwise, carry on. This is a cool thread with some compelling ideas.
Cheers |
| Therise |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 16:31:03
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And it's prolly a minor quibble, but I didn't like how in the waning days of 3.x, the default assumption seemed to be that you were using the minis to play. I think minis can be very useful during a gaming session, but they should be purely optional. Game material in particular should not be written with the assumption that you're using not just minis, but specifically D&D minis.
-Did they? I never really use too many books outside of the core three, picking through PrCs or feats or whatever from other books, but I never noticed that. What was it, a lot of stuff tied to movement or whatever?
They started doing that "encounter format" crap, with maps for minis and a list of exactly what minis to use, and even listed minis in the "what you need to use this book" section. And this wasn't core stuff, this was Realms books. Some of the online articles did the same thing, with focusing on how to use minis to run a particular encounter.
Are you talking about that thing they did where they'd partition out the encounter from the main "story", and shove it in a big back section of encounters?
If so, I agree. I didn't like that at all. It completely broke the flow of going through the adventure, because the themes and story were in one area and you'd have to flip back to the end sections for the actual encounters. They'd have a map, parsed for minis, with all the stat blocks and so on. It irked me less that minis were involved, and more that organization was broken.
|
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 16:25:25
-Hmm. Well, in terms of pre-made adventures, like Shadowdale, Cormyr, and Anauroch, I can't really get on anyone's case or anything. I actually think that if pre-made adventures came with those grid mats that you use miniatures with, that's pretty cool. Telling you what ones you need, eh. Given that you can use pennies, nickles, dimes and breadcrumbs in place of actual miniatures, whatever. There are neurotic people out there that won't play/will get real upset unless they have the proper, specific miniature, though. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 15:46:55
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And it's prolly a minor quibble, but I didn't like how in the waning days of 3.x, the default assumption seemed to be that you were using the minis to play. I think minis can be very useful during a gaming session, but they should be purely optional. Game material in particular should not be written with the assumption that you're using not just minis, but specifically D&D minis.
-Did they? I never really use too many books outside of the core three, picking through PrCs or feats or whatever from other books, but I never noticed that. What was it, a lot of stuff tied to movement or whatever?
They started doing that "encounter format" crap, with maps for minis and a list of exactly what minis to use, and even listed minis in the "what you need to use this book" section. And this wasn't core stuff, this was Realms books. Some of the online articles did the same thing, with focusing on how to use minis to run a particular encounter.
The Realms books of particular note were those comprising the 3e mega-adventure module trilogy -- Shadowdale, Cormyr, and Anauroch -- which each included those special ENCOUNTER sections in every tome. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 10:55:25
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And it's prolly a minor quibble, but I didn't like how in the waning days of 3.x, the default assumption seemed to be that you were using the minis to play. I think minis can be very useful during a gaming session, but they should be purely optional. Game material in particular should not be written with the assumption that you're using not just minis, but specifically D&D minis.
-Did they? I never really use too many books outside of the core three, picking through PrCs or feats or whatever from other books, but I never noticed that. What was it, a lot of stuff tied to movement or whatever?
They started doing that "encounter format" crap, with maps for minis and a list of exactly what minis to use, and even listed minis in the "what you need to use this book" section. And this wasn't core stuff, this was Realms books. Some of the online articles did the same thing, with focusing on how to use minis to run a particular encounter. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 06:12:01
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And it's prolly a minor quibble, but I didn't like how in the waning days of 3.x, the default assumption seemed to be that you were using the minis to play. I think minis can be very useful during a gaming session, but they should be purely optional. Game material in particular should not be written with the assumption that you're using not just minis, but specifically D&D minis.
-Did they? I never really use too many books outside of the core three, picking through PrCs or feats or whatever from other books, but I never noticed that. What was it, a lot of stuff tied to movement or whatever? |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 02 Apr 2012 : 05:53:51
I find minis are largely useless. The figs represent marching order or formation, a couple of my players take great pride in somehow finding/modifying figs to exactly suit their characters.
Unless it's time to run a megabattle. The figs indicate who's who, where they stand and their facing, firing arcs, lines of sight, etc, it's very handy for at-a-glance description and resolution of events. Some D&D mini rule versions are quite streamlined and really speed up these large/complex combats, while other D&D mini rule versions can get more bogged down than old Battletech and are best avoided. I'll admit that I'm not one of those hobby-model guys who ever constructs elaborate 3D miniature battlescapes filled with lovingly handpainted little armies. Hex/square grids overlayed onto drawn map outlines (sometimes using books or other props to indicate relative elevations) all suffice for my group - as do the lego, dice, coins, chips, and tokens which populate them. Cheap little plastic stands supporting vertical unit representations were good enough for ancient BattleTech; no need to buy into the wargaming crowd (or the corporate one) convincing you that costly little tin soldiers, pewter/lead figs, or plastic minis are required. |
|
|
