Miniatures = Tactical Combat

With the announcement of the new miniatures line, that tells me that they already have the tactical combat modual splat offering and will most likely realease it along with the core rules or very soon after. Alons with the mini release would be my guess.

nice 27 meter conclusion jump.

trebor_rjf wrote:

nice 27 meter conclusion jump.

 

Well, Capt. Hindsight,  sounds simple enuogh now, but all of their products so far have been geared around TotM, so it's kind of a big deal. Also, there was no telling when a tactical release was going to happen, so this is actually pretty revealing.

Spykes wrote:

 

trebor_rjf wrote:

nice 27 meter conclusion jump.

 

 

Well, Capt. Hindsight,  sounds simple enuogh now, but all of their products so far have been geared around TotM, so it's kind of a big deal. Also, there was no telling when a tactical release was going to happen, so this is actually pretty revealing.

 

 

There will definitely be a tactical package, they talked about Facing a while back.

Brock_Landers wrote:

 

Spykes wrote:

 

trebor_rjf wrote:

nice 27 meter conclusion jump.

 

 

Well, Capt. Hindsight,  sounds simple enuogh now, but all of their products so far have been geared around TotM, so it's kind of a big deal. Also, there was no telling when a tactical release was going to happen, so this is actually pretty revealing.

 

 

 

There will definitely be a tactical package, they talked about Facing a while back.

True enough, but now with a mini release, I think it's safe to say it will be sooner rather than later.

The thing is that the game is already set up for miniature play; just because there aren't detailed grid rules doesn't mean the game can't already support it. We've been using grids and minis pretty much since day one of the playtest. Unfortunately, we felt that the game system delivers a poor tactical feel.

While I will agree that minis enhance tactical combat, it would be wrong to equate them to tactical play. Tactics is something that ought to be addressed at the system level, independent of maps and minis.

So long as they're blind-buy, D&D Minis aren't much more useful than pocket-change for Grid combat.

It does seem an odd conclusion to draw. Minis are used for a lot of things besides tactical combat, and it doesn't speak at all to the level of focus on the grid.

 

We all ready know they're using 2e's Combat & Tactics as their inspiration for the tactical module (a seminal book regardless of edition preference). We'll see if they can deliver something as inspiring as what they're starting with.

Qmark wrote:

So long as they're blind-buy, D&D Minis aren't much more useful than pocket-change for Grid combat.

 

Yep.  Blind buy killed any enthusiasm that I had for the minis.  Of course, the product was coming from WizKids.  So, I expected them to be blind buy anyway.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Lego + Miniatures = tactical combat module on release (most likely).

I would never buy minis blind. I don't buy minis anyway, but if I were to buy them it'd be specific ones for specific purposes or not at all.

kadim wrote:

I would never buy minis blind. I don't buy minis anyway, but if I were to buy them it'd be specific ones for specific purposes or not at all.

 

The majority of people I play with, have the same attitude to mini's. Shame Whizkids and WotC have not realized this.

Prom wrote:

 

kadim wrote:

I would never buy minis blind. I don't buy minis anyway, but if I were to buy them it'd be specific ones for specific purposes or not at all.

 

 

The majority of people I play with, have the same attitude to mini's. Shame Whizkids and WotC have not realized this.

 

Maybe we're only the secondary market.  Will WizKids be putting out a D&D minis game as well?  Or, just the minis?

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

MechaPilot wrote:

 

Prom wrote:

 

kadim wrote:

I would never buy minis blind. I don't buy minis anyway, but if I were to buy them it'd be specific ones for specific purposes or not at all.

 

 

The majority of people I play with, have the same attitude to mini's. Shame Whizkids and WotC have not realized this.

 

 

Maybe we're only the secondary market.  Will WizKids be putting out a D&D minis game as well?  Or, just the minis?

 

I had not really considered that, maybe my friends are the secondary market. 

 

I think Wizkids want to put out a mini's game, but there's no details. This is discussed in another thread in more detail, which I can't remember the link too.

I find minis can augment, or diminish an encounter.

Prom wrote:

 

MechaPilot wrote:

 

Prom wrote:

 

kadim wrote:

I would never buy minis blind. I don't buy minis anyway, but if I were to buy them it'd be specific ones for specific purposes or not at all.

 

 

The majority of people I play with, have the same attitude to mini's. Shame Whizkids and WotC have not realized this.

 

 

Maybe we're only the secondary market.  Will WizKids be putting out a D&D minis game as well?  Or, just the minis?

 

 

I had not really considered that, maybe my friends are the secondary market. 

 

I think Wizkids want to put out a mini's game, but there's no details. This is discussed in another thread in more detail, which I can't remember the link too.

 

They did say something about games:

 

"We're here because we're excited to announce a partnership with Wizards of the Coast to commemorate the 40th anniversary with an all-new line of pre-painted miniatures and games."

 

 

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

When will people realize that miniatures and a grid do not make a system tactical. 

 

To make 5e a tactical game you would need to give all classes a variety of meaningful choices to make each and every round. That would require a complete redesign of all the current non spellcasting classes. 

 

Adding miniatures isnt isn't going to do anything for making 5e a "tactical" game. 

Prom wrote:
Shame Whizkids and WotC have not realized this.
They certainly realized that, but they also realized that the people wanting this are the ones who have not realized the costs that would entail and wouldn't buy once they are faced with the costs of their wish.

 

Like someone once said:

 

1. Wide range

2. Cheap prices

3. Non-random

-> chose two

 

Imsolost wrote:
Adding miniatures isnt isn't going to do anything for making 5e a "tactical" game.
It's enough to allow me to move around cool painted mini plastic men. I am happy

Meanwhile, 3d printers start at $300 nowadays.   That's just 30 boxes of minis at $10 or 20 at $15.

Imsolost wrote:

When will people realize that miniatures and a grid do not make a system tactical. 

 

To make 5e a tactical game you would need to give all classes a variety of meaningful choices to make each and every round. That would require a complete redesign of all the current non spellcasting classes. 

 

Adding miniatures isnt isn't going to do anything for making 5e a "tactical" game. 

 

In another thread, an idea popped into my mind that would make the game more tactical and it would not require much redesign, just adding to each melee PC.    I'm sure others have had the idea before too.

 

Give each of the melee classes something like Cunning Action designed especially for that class.    This would let fighters do extra maneuvers which might include push, trip, grapple, etc. in addition to a regular attack.   At the lower levels, the class would get 3 choices...and then 2 or 3 would be added later on just like Cunning Action adds extra choices later on.

 

They can also give an option that is more like a default option for players who don't want to be bothered by making tons of choices each round.

 

This would give each melee PC more ways to make tactical choices when using a grid.   It might work.

A Brave Knight of WTF - "Wielder of the Sword of Balance"

 

Rhenny's Blog:  http://community.wizards.com/user/1497701/blog

 

 

Mirtek wrote:

 

Prom wrote:
Shame Whizkids and WotC have not realized this.

They certainly realized that, but they also realized that the people wanting this are the ones who have not realized the costs that would entail and wouldn't buy once they are faced with the costs of their wish.

 

Like someone once said:

 

1. Wide range

2. Cheap prices

3. Non-random

-> chose two 

 

You know miniatures were sold unpainted as singles for years. Painting miniatures was just foolish and has pushed the cost up since it started. GamesWorkshop came make it work and they don't charge based on cost of production, they just estimate peoples disposal income. Not saying Gamesworkshop is a good manufacturer, but it doesn't cost as much as people believe to make plastic mini's.

I wouldn't mind buying an assortment, I just want to see what I'm buying.

Prom wrote:
You know miniatures were sold unpainted as singles for years.
Yes and unpainted these already cost more than just 4-5 Dollars

Prom wrote:
Painting miniatures was just foolish and has pushed the cost up since it started.
No, it was a genius move because it gave me a reason to buy minis for the very first time. I have as litte interest in painting minis as I have in repairing my car. I pay others for that. And obviously I am not alone in that, as sales exploded with painted minis

Prom wrote:
GamesWorkshop came make it work
Work how? By charging 12€ for a single unpainted mini? Yeah, that would be striking out option two, aka foregoing cheap prices

I don't mind it being random.  That's kind of fun if you want to go to the game store and play a minis tournament.

 

If you really want to control what you get, there will be plenty of sellers on ebay.

I'd trade it all for a little more! Grognard? Is that French for awesome?

Right now, 5e has rules for movement and range using in-game feet.  It just barely has a rule or two for positioning.  Choose a scale and you have (cursory) rules to use miniatures.  With traditional 25-30mm figures, the same 1"=5' as 3.x used is workable, but you could use classic D&D's 1"=10' indoors / 10yds outdoors if you wanted to.   As little support for minis as that may seem to be, it's still more than 5e gives TotM, since it has no particular  rules to fascilitate that mode of play.  In any case, its enough support that there's no need for WotC to rush out a tactical expansion to help sell WizKids' products.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

Getting rid of the grid is the best thing about 5e. I would never buy random mini's either, if that's what they're planning, that will fail hard. I dont mind using mini's though for rough position, that is quite useful in some fights. If you're mostly using mini's for your own PCs however, might as well buy good ones and paint them up, than buy prepainted plastic crap.

 

On the other hand... I would love to be able to buy say 30 orks prepainted, and use them in a orc based module. Or 20 gnolls. And so on. Random "money the gathering" style mini's however = forget it.

to be honest with 3d printing's current price point if I was serious about minis I'd buy one of them and make my own.

Psikerlord wrote:
if that's what they're planning, that will fail hard
Absolutely. I mean it's not something that has proven itself to work extremely well before and is still doing so for rival companies. Erm, wait there was something ...

Put it differently: it'll fail hard for D&D. Maybe it'll do well for some kind of collectable mini game and collectors in general, but D&D requires a bit of planning and the ability to put out materials knowing well ahead of time what it is coming into play. Buying packs of random minis without being able to see which random minis they are just isn't very useful for D&D most of the time.

 

Sure, random packs you buy blind might do just fine in a game where you don't really plan ahead or you're expected to amass several packs before you can play a game, but most of the time D&D isn't one of those games.

 

All they have to do is put their random packs in clear packaging so folks can see what it is they're buying.

It's going to be a collectable minis war game. They're trying to cash in on the "gotta buy a bunch of them so I get that ultra-rare Mox Diamond" mentality of MtG.

 

Which is sad, because that's a terrible way to run a minis wargame, and it worked out extremely poorly for them last time. You'd figure they'll learn.

 

As far as a 5e tactical module, I expect to see one, I just don't expect it to be any good. The best thing we've heard about it is "it'll be tactical because facing". Dear lord that's terrible.

Supporting an edition you like does not make you an edition warrior. Demanding that everybody else support your edition makes you an edition warrior.

Why do I like 13th Age? Because I like D&D: http://magbonch.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/first-impressions-13th-age/

AzoriusGuildmage- "I think that you simply spent so long playing it, especially in your formative years with the hobby, that you've long since rationalized or houseruled away its oddities, and set it in your mind as the standard for what is and isn't reasonable in an rpg."

kadim wrote:
Put it differently: it'll fail hard for D&D.
Again, it has proven to do very well for D&D and is currently doing very well for Pathfinder which is basically D&D. People just buy enough boxes to get a broad enough collections of minis.

kadim wrote:
Which is sad, because that's a terrible way to run a minis wargame, and it worked out extremely poorly for them last time.
Actually it worked very well for the early sets. It only started to fail when they revised the rules for the mini game and people disliked the new rules.

 

Paizo doesn't even have any miniature game, they just sell the random minis purely for the RPG and are doing very well

 
<span>&quot;Psikerlord&quot; wrote:
Getting rid of the grid is the best thing about 5e.
That's faint praise.  It's a pretty nearly meaningless omission.  5e still uses in-game 'feet' for movement and range/area (and still all in 5' increments), so positioning is as critical as ever, and it provides no particular rules to fascilitate 'TotM.'  So you can use a play surface (grid or otherwise) or keep it all 'in your head' same as you could before.  

 

If 5e were serious about TotM, it'd have rules along the lines of Wrecan's SARN-FU designed specifically to fascilitate that mode of play - the way 13th Age does, for instance.

 

I would never buy random mini's either, if that's what they're planning, that will fail hard. If you're mostly using mini's for your own PCs however, might as well buy good ones and paint them up, than buy prepainted plastic crap.

 

On the other hand... I would love to be able to buy say 30 orks prepainted, and use them in a orc based module. Or 20 gnolls. And so on. Random "money the gathering" style mini's however = forget it.

While my prefferences mirror your own in this case, it's hard to argue that the distribution model will fail, considering that it does have a record of success.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

Imsolost wrote:

When will people realize that miniatures and a grid do not make a system tactical. 

 

To make 5e a tactical game you would need to give all classes a variety of meaningful choices to make each and every round. That would require a complete redesign of all the current non spellcasting classes. 

 

Adding miniatures isnt isn't going to do anything for making 5e a "tactical" game. 

Yes I am probably having an imagination failure but I dont see how pasting a tactical patch is going to work...  (even beyond what you said - making the game functionally tactical almost has to include rewrite and re-level every bloody spell) 

  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Tony_Vargas wrote:
 
<span>&quot;Psikerlord&quot; wrote:
Getting rid of the grid is the best thing about 5e.
That's faint praise.  It's a pretty nearly meaningless omission.  5e still uses in-game 'feet' for movement and range/area (and still all in 5' increments), so positioning is as critical as ever, and it provides no particular rules to fascilitate 'TotM.'  So you can use a play surface (grid or otherwise) or keep it all 'in your head' same as you could before.  

 

If 5e were serious about TotM, it'd have rules along the lines of Wrecan's SARN-FU designed specifically to fascilitate that mode of play - the way 13th Age does, for instance. 

It does seem like 13th Age actually took the TotM thinking in a fairly reasonable direction. (rather than just paying lip service to it)

  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Garthanos wrote:

 

Tony_Vargas wrote:
If 5e were serious about TotM, it'd have rules along the lines of Wrecan's SARN-FU designed specifically to fascilitate that mode of play - the way 13th Age does, for instance. 

 

It does seem like 13th Age actually took the TotM thinking in a fairly reasonable direction. (rather than just paying lip service to it)

13A seems to have set many of the same goals as 5e, but, unlike the playtest, neatly delivered on some of them.  

Probably it's telling that one of the 5e goals 13A didn't take up was the 'all things to all D&Ders' mandate.  ;)

 

 

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

Garthanos wrote:

 

Tony_Vargas wrote:
 
<span>&quot;Psikerlord&quot; wrote:
Getting rid of the grid is the best thing about 5e.
That's faint praise.  It's a pretty nearly meaningless omission.  5e still uses in-game 'feet' for movement and range/area (and still all in 5' increments), so positioning is as critical as ever, and it provides no particular rules to fascilitate 'TotM.'  So you can use a play surface (grid or otherwise) or keep it all 'in your head' same as you could before.  

 

If 5e were serious about TotM, it'd have rules along the lines of Wrecan's SARN-FU designed specifically to fascilitate that mode of play - the way 13th Age does, for instance. 

 

It does seem like 13th Age actually took the TotM thinking in a fairly reasonable direction. (rather than just paying lip service to it)

Ironically, the designers still use minis so the use of abstract positioning wasn't about facilitating TotM but just part of the overall streamlining of the system. So others could come up with a much better system for TotM play purely accident.

Tony_Vargas wrote:

 

Garthanos wrote:

 

Tony_Vargas wrote:
If 5e were serious about TotM, it'd have rules along the lines of Wrecan's SARN-FU designed specifically to fascilitate that mode of play - the way 13th Age does, for instance. 

 

It does seem like 13th Age actually took the TotM thinking in a fairly reasonable direction. (rather than just paying lip service to it)

 

13A seems to have set many of the same goals as 5e, but, unlike the playtest, neatly delivered on some of them.  

Probably it's telling that one of the 5e goals 13A didn't take up was the 'all things to all D&Ders' mandate.  ;)

 

 

13th Age has caused me to be more soured on Next, and not simply because I see 13A as better. On the contrary, it taught me to have a more open mind because so much of what I like about it is not at all what I would have thought of if I had been asked to make a wish list of what I'd want in D&D. So rather than making a bunch of demands about what had to be included in Next for me to buy it, I was willing to sit back and see what cool, new, innovative stuff the designers came up with. But that cool, new stuff never materialized. And that's what is dissapointing to me, there just isn't anything that grabs my attention and makes me want to play Next.

Spykes wrote:

With the announcement of the new miniatures line, that tells me that they already have the tactical combat modual splat offering and will most likely realease it along with the core rules or very soon after. Alons with the mini release would be my guess.

 

Splatbook? I don't know. I would think that it would be an option that's included in the core books. After all, there are a lot of people that are wanting that sort of thing (it's not my bag, but to each their own), and I would think that it may be fairly easy to include with the core books.

HoboJustice wrote:

 

Garthanos wrote:

 

Tony_Vargas wrote:
 
<span>&quot;Psikerlord&quot; wrote:
Getting rid of the grid is the best thing about 5e.
That's faint praise.  It's a pretty nearly meaningless omission.  5e still uses in-game 'feet' for movement and range/area (and still all in 5' increments), so positioning is as critical as ever, and it provides no particular rules to fascilitate 'TotM.'  So you can use a play surface (grid or otherwise) or keep it all 'in your head' same as you could before.  

 

If 5e were serious about TotM, it'd have rules along the lines of Wrecan's SARN-FU designed specifically to fascilitate that mode of play - the way 13th Age does, for instance. 

 

It does seem like 13th Age actually took the TotM thinking in a fairly reasonable direction. (rather than just paying lip service to it)

 

Ironically, the designers still use minis so the use of abstract positioning wasn't about facilitating TotM but just part of the overall streamlining of the system. So others could come up with a much better system for TotM play purely accident.

Miniatures back in the day were as much for aiding the personification (hence the hobby around painting them) and something teachers have learned - physical objects for some styles of learners are effective tools of focus - ie I think they create a focal point which puts the user into the place that the map represents almost like having a totem.

 

Its a kind of magic.

  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

HoboJustice wrote:

 

Tony_Vargas wrote:

 

Garthanos wrote:

 

Tony_Vargas wrote:
If 5e were serious about TotM, it'd have rules along the lines of Wrecan's SARN-FU designed specifically to fascilitate that mode of play - the way 13th Age does, for instance. 

 

It does seem like 13th Age actually took the TotM thinking in a fairly reasonable direction. (rather than just paying lip service to it)

 

13A seems to have set many of the same goals as 5e, but, unlike the playtest, neatly delivered on some of them.  

Probably it's telling that one of the 5e goals 13A didn't take up was the 'all things to all D&Ders' mandate.  ;)

 

 

 

13th Age has caused me to be more soured on Next, and not simply because I see 13A as better. On the contrary, it taught me to have a more open mind because so much of what I like about it is not at all what I would have thought of if I had been asked to make a wish list of what I'd want in D&D. So rather than making a bunch of demands about what had to be included in Next for me to buy it, I was willing to sit back and see what cool, new, innovative stuff the designers came up with. But that cool, new stuff never materialized. And that's what is dissapointing to me, there just isn't anything that grabs my attention and makes me want to play Next.

There are what I see as a few possibilities (if they were fully developed) and places where they are taking a different step than expected (bounded accuracy - which I am worried they aren't following through on - as it has implications)

 

  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Psikerlord wrote:

Getting rid of the grid is the best thing about 5e. I would never buy random mini's either, if that's what they're planning, that will fail hard. I dont mind using mini's though for rough position, that is quite useful in some fights. If you're mostly using mini's for your own PCs however, might as well buy good ones and paint them up, than buy prepainted plastic crap.

 

On the other hand... I would love to be able to buy say 30 orks prepainted, and use them in a orc based module. Or 20 gnolls. And so on. Random "money the gathering" style mini's however = forget it.

Well, you can all ready buy most standard monsters from previous D&D sets like this. You go to a site like Troll&Toad, Miniature Market, EBAY etc. You type in (orc). You pick the ones that fit the price your OK with & select how.many you want. This won't change any when WK starts cranking out D&D minis.....
Sign In to post comments