[A random idea I'm x-posting from SG.]

So there was this cool thing I read in "Understanding Comics": McCloud pointed out that using less detailed or specific images for people allows the reader to empathize more / project more onto those characters. (There was a really jarring panel where his avatar went from normal sketchy mode to highly detailed mode, and the change felt very real.)

MMO's like World of Warcraft clearly have stuff down of using highly detailed stuff to draw you in; but the alternate route is having abstract images or a lack of any images to get you to project and empathize with your character. So how about D&D minis then? If you have very specific-looking minis, will that help you get more or less into caring about what's going on in the game?

And then there's the trailers of D&D 4th ed. The gameboard, correctly, isn't a whole game in itself - it's just the pieces you move around to represent yourself in play. It's less detailed than an MMO, but that might not be a problem. It could get the virtue of being less detaile (allowing for those benefits of generic-type images), but perhaps it's still too detailed?

Let me add, in case it's unclear: when I'm talking about "empathizing with your character", I'm just talking about seeing your Cleric as a piece of fiction - so you'll say "that, Detar the Priest of Creos, is my guy" - and not merely as a pawn or a statblock.

That's a very interesting idea, Dev. I seldom have used minis, but when I have, I've seen no gaining of empathy at the least over my more usual abstract marker. Actually, I seldom use even markers.

-clash

Added: BTW - The Scott McCloud book is very cool. One of my old group is a friend of his, from the same school (Lexington High) and same year, and also a comic artist.

I absolutely know what you're talking about. I'm inclined to non-humans or humans with helmets, because It's kinda wierd to see "myself" as a Caucasian miniature with the pink skin and the big round eyes etc... Whereas me as an Orc or visored knight? That's cartoony enough to be easy to imagine.

Ever since I read McCloud's books, I've been fasinated by asking other people to pick miniatures for me to see what they come up with. For the most part, my Asian-ness trumps build, age and gender. (By which I mean, if there are a couple of minis, they'll reccomend the teenaged female Asian waif for me, presumably because Asian is more important to them than those other attributes.)

I think there's a lot to be said for this idea.

If I'm running an 'open' or generic setting then I tend toward more abstract (or even cartoonish) illustrations when selecting art for handouts. If I'm playing in a meticulously detailed setting (say the universe of Warhammer 40K) then the stylised, hyper-detailed artwork that accompanies the game world is de rigeur. It's a largely a matter of expectations and how far you're prepared to go to meet the designers expectations of how a fictional universe is perceived.

Regarding miniatures, I often find myself being guided by the models. Rather than selecting undetailed examples in the hope that they'll serve as blank slates for player projection, I pick minis that appeal to me and then say "this is how orcs look, at least in this encounter."