Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

-

1. You don't need minis, but my group finds them helpful. For 5e, we only pull the battlement out for 'big' fights, and use 'Theater of the Mind' for smaller ones. Still useful to have a token to represent party order and such. Most of us buy from Reaper, but there's an inevitable mix of GW and other vendors. I like some of the stuff from Dark Sword.

2. You could, but there's not much need. See above. My DM often uses a larger than standard scale if it makes things easier, I.E. sketching out a map at 20 feet per inch and using minis for relative positioning. We don't worry with rulers, though.

3. You could look at some less traditional lines. I think there's some Deadlands minis that probably have some Native American Shaman types you might find useful despite being a 'wild west' game. Should be in 'about 28mm' scale.

1. Warhammer and other heroic 28mm miniatures for you, for reasons of compatibility. If you have fantasy armies, or have access to them you have a wider range of basic mooks for adventurers to slay than if you chose a specific miniatures manufacturer. It is best to continue your collection on those lines not so much for quality but scale. A lot of 28mm designers make authentic scale, this looks very odd when placed against GW miniatures. Other manufaxcturers make miniatures intended to be directly compatible with Warhammer. Use those whenever possible.
Where Reaper and other manufacturers shine is with adding monsters.

TLDR= get your orcs and undead and bassic baddies, plus your adventurers from Games Workshop and Mantic. Get your monsters from Reaper Bones.

2. Its recommended to dispense with the grid when outside a dungeon or urban fight.

3. Loof for a 28mm native american, from a wild west range, then add Wood Elf bits to druid him up. I dont know if anyone does 28mm plastic Indians, so you might have to buy metal for your co0nversion stock figure.

 Bottle wrote:
Hello everyone, I'm looking to get started with D&D 5E and get some discussion on here going. As there doesn't seem to be a current general discussion thread I thought this could be it!

I bought the Player's Handbook and I am looking to make a Druid character.

Anyways, here are my questions:

1. What are the best miniature companies to use? If they scale to Warhammer models even better! So far I have been looking at Reaper, Meirce and Red Box Games.

2. Have you ever played D&D without a grid, but with miniatures? I.e. A tape measure where 5ft = 1 inch? Seems it could work great in theory to me!

3. Back to miniatures, I'm looking for a Druid miniature, but one that is - Male, Human and Primordal/Feral looking, perhaps one with Native American qualities rather than being an old hermit with a big bushy beard. Anyone have any recommendations?

Looking forward to chatting with other Dakkaites about D&D!

<--- Owns hundreds of dollars of painted and unpainted reaper miniatures that gets used in D&D and Pathfinder. Really nice people, great products, and I've been to their Denton, TX HQ twice.

2. No, we always used a grid. You don't have to, but I think a tape measure might get old for some people. We also break out the Dwarven Forge terrain, so tape measures would be redundant at that point.

3. Google image search, I guess.

I like Reaper Bones, just because of how cheap they are. They have a mini finder here-
https://www.reapermini.com/FigureFinder

Still haven't bothered playing 5e yet, although I have to say I haven't played much of any RPGs lately at all. Would be interesting to see more reviews since the dust has settled.

-

If you really want to do miniatures-based RPGing you might look into D&D 4E (or even 3.5/Pathfinder). Fifth is more suited to traditional roleplaying.

-

 Bottle wrote:
Care to explain why 5th is more suited to theatre of mind than miniatures?

First, let's ditch the phrase "theatre of the mind." The term you are looking for is roleplaying. Roleplaying is something that does not happen on a grid. A tactical skirmish miniatures game happens on a grid. Fifth Edition is not a very good miniatures game. It is principally designed to provide a streamlined guideline for roleplaying -- getting into a character and interacting with other characters from that perspective. By contrast, Fourth Edition is primarily a tactical skirmish miniatures game that you can, if you want, season with some roleplaying.

-

I would disagree with Manchu there. I run all my combats on the battlemat, and have done for the majority of the last 18 months. The game works just fine for it; there is some odd questions about movement and LoS, but frankly those are resolved by me simply adjudicating. Theatre of the Mind vs Battlemat is, really, a matter of preference; I like having the visual element, and it makes combat a lot quicker in many ways (you don't need to keep describing how far away the three Orcs are, which one is wounded, etc). But other people don't like the visual element, or don't care for it perhaps; a few make snooty comments about 'it makes it a boardgame' or some such. I find that my decisions to use gridded combats or not depends more on whether I can be arsed carrying the damn thing to the game. Theatre of the Mind works fine, obviously - I've run lots of games using it - but I find that D&D gives me the opportunity to use a battlemat and my Warhammer collection, which suits me fine.

D&D has a much higher ratio of combat - or at least more frequent and shorter combats - than other games. In something like Vampire I'd never use a mat. But for D&D's fantasy theme, its frequent and brutal fights, and its generic aesthetic, miniatures work very well. I also feel like I am tapping into a tradition when I use models in D&D.

I used chopped up floppy sticks from GW starter boxes a while back, when I was running Lost Mines of Phandelver; I was cutting out the rooms in paper and the party was putting themselves on the rooms, so it made sense to use measuring sticks. In general gridded combat is a lot easier to run, and you get less odd moments like twelve Orcs crowding into a ten-foot square.

As for that druid, your picture reminds me of some recent Kickstarters. Try also the Bushido wargame; its Japanese-horror vibe might yield something.

-

 Bottle wrote:
Some great miniatures there! I was wanting my Druid to Shapeshift into a fox and they have a fox miniature I think I'll get. Is there any guide to kickstarters, or is it just browsing till you stumble on something you like?

I appreciate all the help. Buying non GW miniatures is daunting!

I would say liberating, not daunting. There is a place in the UK, Otherworld Miniatures, http://otherworldminiatures.co.uk/ that makes D&D minis, mostly based on AD&D 1e artwork. Have a look at them. Sometimes Wizard miniatures or Cleric miniatures can be used as Druids too. Just depends upon the mini.

In 5e, miniatures are useful reminders rather than a necessity. They help to show spacial relationships and serve as playing aids. But 5e is not a skirmish game masquerading as an RPG.

 Bottle wrote:
But not why 5th is better with no miniatures than with.

I didn't realize that is what I was supposed to prove. I mean, your question was

 Bottle wrote:
Care to explain why 5th is more suited to theatre of mind than miniatures?

and my answer was, because 5E prioritizes roleplaying over miniatures gaming. Keep in mind that my original point was, if you want to use miniatures then 4E is more suited than 5E. But honestly, I am really suspicious of using miniatures in RPGs, which brings us to

 Bottle wrote:
Not sure why you don't like the phrase "theatre-of-the-mind".

Because it implies that there are two styles of roleplaying: one with miniatures and one without. This is false. Roleplaying does not involve miniatures. The invention of D&D literally happened when its creators realized they could play a game without miniatures. But businessmen have been trying to put miniatures back into the game ever since so they can have more product to sell us. This culminated with late 3.5 and especially 4E. It has waned dramatically (but not totally) with 5E, thanks in large part to Hasbro's disinterest with the property as anything but a licensing platform. So what's the harm in trying to devolve D&D into a miniatures game? It leads to this sort of unfortunate sentiment:

 Charles Rampant wrote:
D&D has a much higher ratio of combat - or at least more frequent and shorter combats - than other games.

In fact, D&D can have as much or as little combat as the group desires. I have DMed campaigns where there was no more combat than an occasional formal duel between aristocrats. Even in campaigns with plenty of brawling, including even sieges of towns, I have seen many sessions where the PCs do not fight: they chat with NPCs, solve mysteries, engage in businesses, etc. The other thing about using miniatures is it tends to "flatten out" combat: the players start envisioning things in two-dimensional terms. Whenever I have played without using miniatures, I find players (including myself) thinking about the space in a more dramatic, three-dimensional way: dropping down from rafters, scrambling up ledges, that sort of thing.

That may be true for your games of D&D, but the norm for D&D - as expressed by pre-written adventures and what I've seen of other people's campaigns - is that combat happens fairly frequently. It is also a game that is much better at getting through combats and making them fun than most other RPGs; playing shootouts in Dark Heresy was total agony, and took forever.

I commonly see D&D use models, though not always. I see most people on Enworld and other D&D centric sites being happy to use the term 'Theatre of the Mind'. So from what I can tell, your positions here are not the norm for the D&D fanbase, and I simply wanted the OP to know that.

What is the "norm" sort of depends on the era. We are coming out of an era (roughly 2000-2014) dominated by miniatures. Many people currently playing have never known otherwise. But in fact, D&D is in its essence, in its literal history, a game that liberated itself from game pieces. That's what I wanted OP to know.

As to DH ... it's a mess. Did you notice the stats are carried over from the miniatures game? I have always suspected the thinking was, people who already have our miniatures will love using them in this game. I first played DH over a skype type program with people who had never played 40k. It would have been better, I think, if they had written the game expecting a broader audience. But I guess, how could they have known? IIRC, the HH series was at that time just really starting to take off (for example).

Dark Heresy combat suffered from the problems of the Warhammer RPG line - constant whiffing, especially - and then added freakish complexity on top. I kind of loved running it, but I absolutely never felt like I actually understood the rules, in a nine-month campaign. A perfect example of the theme being strong enough to carry the engine.

Right, very good point -- that I think is what GW or BL or whoever really underestimated about DH. The thing is, the themes and aesthetics of their IP have a broader appeal than miniatures gamers. It just doesn't make sense to burden that audience with the tropes of the miniatures game in such venues as, for example, RPGs.

I can't imagine playing Pathfinder without miniatures. However, there have been a number of encounters in 5E so far where they weren't needed. See also: Star Wars Edge of the Empire. We've had shootout with only a rough description of the area and lots of Pew Pew noises. Also, also: a Shadow Run demo a few weeks ago.

 kronk wrote:
I can't imagine playing Pathfinder without miniatures.

Man, neither can I. I know people swear they do it but it sure sounds like a mess to me.

I honestly don't find the 3.P/5e combat engines to be remarkably different from a procedural standpoint. I've done both systems without miniatures and it feels about the same. About the only thing I find 5e makes much easier is disengage rules. I think it's more the general attitude of the systems that people get hung up on.

3.P likes having a rule for every little thing it's all about granularity and precision. So when it comes time to make a ranged attack and somebody asks how far it is and I say "Oh, about 80 feet or so give or take a few" they want more precise positional information on everything so they can try and set up an ideal tactical situation. Nothing about the engine really demands this more than 5e, but the mindset is different.

In contrast when I go "Oh about 80 feet give or take", "If I move up a bit closer so I'm in my normal range.. I still be 30ft from my ally?" "Sure why not" works sufficiently and I'm not asked to give a rigorous picture of all the positions. Again nothing I think about the engine itself allows me to much more loose with position it's just the overall system mindset makes it more readily accepted.

If a player was casting fireball in 3.5 they'd want to know the positions of everything, and how far apart they were to capture the maximum In 5e they're just content to ask "What's the biggest group I can catch", "You can catch 5 without hitting any allies or 7 if you're OK with hitting bob" and it's just accepted. Even though the fireball mechanics between the two editions are fairly identical.


I have used miniatures 3.P but not in 5e. I think there is some messiness around engagement and opportunity attacks you'd want to clean up if using miniatures with 5e, but nothing major.

You make a great point but you also seem to dismiss it as just a matter of being "hung up."

I don't know if anyone has suggested it already, but Circle Orboros minis from Warmahordes might have one to tickle your fancy on the Druid front.

 Manchu wrote:
You make a great point but you also seem to dismiss it as just a matter of being "hung up."

Honestly? I think it is. I have played both systems miniature-less rather extensively and the biggest issues with 3.P in doing so really seems psychological to me. Both engine measure ranges in feet and have well-defined shapes for AoEs, both engines break things down in ranges with creatures occupying space and having reach.

The only place in the engines that really feel like it supports one way better than the other is in the engagement and attack of opportunity rules. Where the 3.5 style supports miniatures better, and 5e supports miniature-less ones better. I mean if there's some mechanical procedure in 3.P you think is particularly tied to miniatures where 5e isn't feel free to bring it up and I'll try to contrast what my experience was in the two systems.

EDIT (From the OP):

2. Have you ever played D&D without a grid, but with miniatures? I.e. A tape measure where 5ft = 1 inch? Seems it could work great in theory to me!

Yes. It's perfectly functional and you get a bit more flexibility and precision. However there is a huge trade off in terms of speed of play. Without miniatures a big combat might take 20 minutes. With miniatures an hour, with tape measure distance measuring 1.5-2. There is a lot more overhead than you'd think in terms of pulling out the measure, getting the right length, then moving things along it. A grid eliminates a lot of that overhead.

-

 Chongara wrote:
really seems psychological to me

But this is like saying, life is just biological. Er yeah but why the dismissive tone? Life is pretty amazing after all. D&D, when played from a certain "psychological" perspective, is also pretty amazing and it is a huge accomplishment to have resurrected that perspective in 5E considering how deeply entrenched the previous perspective had become. Although the OSR crowd had already done a ton of the heavy lifting.

 Manchu wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
really seems psychological to me

But this is like saying, life is just biological. Er yeah but why the dismissive tone? Life is pretty amazing after all. D&D, when played from a certain "psychological" perspective, is also pretty amazing and it is a huge accomplishment to have resurrected that perspective in 5E considering how deeply entrenched the previous perspective had become. Although the OSR crowd had already done a ton of the heavy lifting.

I guess my point is just there's a distinction to be made between from hindrances that stem from mechanical realities in a game engine or other procedures, and ones that stem mostly or entirely from attitude.

 Manchu wrote:

 kronk wrote:
I can't imagine playing Pathfinder without miniatures.

Man, neither can I. I know people swear they do it but it sure sounds like a mess to me.

Ultimately I can imagine it because I've done it and it wasn't a mess once people got beyond forcing it to be one. Other parts of 3.P are certainly a mess in ways that 5e aren't, just I don't think those things are in the space that distinguish miniature play from miniature less play.

 Chongara wrote:
I guess my point is just there's a distinction to be made between from hindrances that stem from mechanical realities in a game engine or other procedures, and ones that stem mostly or entirely from attitude.

Maybe it seems like a chicken-or-egg scenario from a certain POV but I think these attitudes flow from the mechanics and their presentation.

In lieu of a tape measure a simple ruler will work much better. Remember that RPGs have a Dungeonmaster/Gamemaster.

More miniatures:
http://www.ralpartha.com/
http://www.thunderboltmountain.com/
http://www.darkswordminiatures.com/

The latter has miniatures based on artwork by iconic D&D artists. No idea about UK availability.

These will be quite distinct from the Games Workshop minis. Especially the scale-- it is not as wildly distorted as the Games Workshop products. There are things you can do with pewter that just are not possible with plastic-- and possibly vice versa. You will understand how some of us are baffled that people say Games Workshop minis are the best.

I've played pretty much every edition of D&D with and without miniatures.

IMHO miniatures make keeping track of where people are in combat easier, for the players, but are by no means neccesary, for any edition.

5th edition, which has reduced the combat mechanics crunch, is just easier to run combats with than 3E/Pathfinder, miniatures or not.

The Advantage/Disadvantage Mechanic, and simplified AC and Sneak Attack/Back Stab rules alone make it a joy to use.