|
5 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 2:27AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jul 12, 2009
|
hm...
Sorry if there's already an answer to my question, but I couldn't find it via forum search.
Are the miniatures in the diverse products by WotC the right scale to use them on 4e battle grids?
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 2:43AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
yes.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 3:05AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jul 12, 2009
|
hm...
Many thanks!
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 3:19AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jul 31, 2007
|
The minis in Conquest of Nerath, obviously, are not. They are at a smaller scale so as to better represent mass warfare.
The minis from the D&D miniatures lines, the Adventure system games (Castle Ravenloft, Wrath of Ashardalon, Legend of Drizzt), the Beholder and Dragon collector's sets, Dungeon Command and so on are all sized properly for a 1" grid. I just wish WotC were a bit more ... consistent with base sizes. I have some Large creatures that don't have 2" bases. More like 1.5" or so.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 5:13AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2003
|
I actually like the undersized bases, makes it easier to move the critter when it's surrounded by smaller figs. Always seems to be horns or wings or weapons or something catching on the full-size large bases and causing chaos when I lift it. Then again, that could just be my 8 DEX catching up with me. =)
INSIDE SCOOP GAMERS: In the new version of D&D, it will no longer be "Edition Wars." It will be "Edition Lair Assault." - dungeonbastard
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 1:32PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
I have some Large creatures that don't have 2" bases. More like 1.5" or so.
The WotC DDM line initially used 1.5" for large bases (since their Chainmail figures used these, and thus were compatible with bases from popular miniature wargames like Warhammer, and poker chip sizes).
WotC later switched to 2" bases to fix an issue where two 1.5" bases could fit in a 3"x3" area (creating inadvertent overlap).
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 1:35PM
#7
|
|
|
To be completely honest I prefer Tokens, and Paizo's Cut out miniatures. I feel that they are more accurate to the monster. It shows what they really look like.
Come to 4ENCLAVE for a fan based 4th Edition Community. “The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear.” - H. P. Lovecraft Games I Play: - D&D 4e - D&D 3.0 (Not 3.5) - AD&D 2e - Call of Cthulhu
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 10:05PM
#8
|
|
|
To be completely honest I prefer Tokens, and Paizo's Cut out miniatures. I feel that they are more accurate to the monster. It shows what they really look like.
Maybe it's my weak vision, but I find tokens too east to confuse with each other. Now the stand-up 2-D figures ought to be superior to miniatures for both space and cost, but somehow I have never got into them.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 26, 2013 - 10:37AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Dec 10, 2008
|
To be completely honest I prefer Tokens, and Paizo's Cut out miniatures. I feel that they are more accurate to the monster. It shows what they really look like.
I see what you did there.
OD&D, 1E and 2E challenged the player.
3E challenged the character, not the player.
Now 4E takes it a step further by challenging a GROUP OF PLAYERS to work together as a TEAM.
That's why I love 4E.
"Your ability to summon a horde of celestial superbeings at will is making my ... BMX skills look a bit redundant."
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 28, 2013 - 10:48AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
To be completely honest I prefer Tokens, and Paizo's Cut out miniatures. I feel that they are more accurate to the monster. It shows what they really look like.
I see what you did there.
Is he talking about using inappropriate miniatures as proxies for other creatures?
If so, I feel bad for you then. I have 99 hundred minis, but a proxy is not one.
|
|
|
