Title says it all. What's your preference? Got a main reason or is just what you prefer?

Both, preferably in a system where the group is comfortable switching back and forth as needed, occasionally even mid-combat.  Some fights work better on a grid, and some do not.  That is, the grid is sometimes a very useful tool, but I don't want to be tied to it.

I enjoyed the grid (with tokens because they were cheaper) when I played Fourth Edition D&D from 2008 to 2012.  With 13th Age I just use dice and/or tokens to represent range bands. Other than that, though, I opt for theatre of the mind.

I been using  props, grids, dry erase board, and minis since 1980 when I obtained my first Grenadier boxed set miniatures regardless of the system I am using. However there are numerous times when I go theater of the mind  as well. It not a binary choice.

Generally theater of the mind; but if pressed I'll do minis with free movement. Break out the tape measures and Warhammer Whippy Sticks! I despise grid movement.

I prefer miniatures but I don't always use them.

For D&D (and similar), I go all-out with scratch-built terrain, Dwarven Forge, the works.

For Cthulhu, I opted for "amorphous monster is scarier in your mind than a 2" mini on the tabletop". (But I use lots of props - documents, vials, artifacts, etc - in that campaign.)

As much as I love miniatures and wargames there's no way stuff on the table is going to come close to what I can imagine.
I've played in groups that had big collections of Dwarven Forge scenics and they were, IMO, limiting on the game. Fun for a skirmish wargame, but too constricting for what I want in an RPG.
Same thing for virtual tabletops with all the bells and whistles turned on... felt like a boardgame and slowed things down.
At most, what I favor, if some visual aide is necessary, is a quick sketch on a whiteboard with some abstact tokens.
I don't really want all the props and handouts in a CoC game, but I'll do it because people expect it.

I played in a few D&D5 games recently that didn't use miniatures of any kind, after almost two decades of Post-3e grid-and-minis/tokens/counters play. I may lose some old-school cred for saying this, but it was sorta frustrating. Lots of confusion as to where characters were, how many enemies were involved, etc.

Both, switching back and forth as required.

Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;984245I may lose some old-school cred for saying this, but it was sorta frustrating. Lots of confusion as to where characters were, how many enemies were involved, etc.

Is it inherently old school to go withought minis? My first few groups all used them, though generally unpainted and minus fancy terrain. Sometimes we'd melt them over a candle when a character died.

I prefer not to use minis. Part of it is practical--the cost and trouble of acquiring, prepping, and storing the stuff.

Part is esthetic--I feel the game's more vivid and more "first person" when visualized than when hovering over a bunch of figures and moving them around. As GM, I'd rather track things on my own sheet and describe events from the POV of each character. But as a player, I've seen this be more confusing than could be justified by "heat of battle". So I don't know if some GMs are better at description of spatial relationships, or if some players are worse at visualizing them, but I'd rather meet people where they feel comfortable.

The Fantasy Trip is a game that I like which works very well with a hex map and figures (which can be paper minis or counters). There are some details of positioning that would be hard to adjudicate without those elements, and I like the game so I'd be inclined to use them to that. Maybe I could do the map stuff behind a screen and interpret the player's plans, if I really wanted to.

D&D3e/4e don't hold much attraction for me so the maps there are a negative.

I have the good fortune of being the least talented painter of miniatures in a wargame and roleplaying club which has members (plural) that can do this routinely.  (Those aren't mine--they come from the most talented member of the club.)

So lots of miniatures of all sorts available and I try to find lots of excuses to use them.  I will do theater of the mind if I find something unexpected breaking out, or if I don't want to spend a lot of time on a particular combat.

Oh, yeah, I actually think enjoyed using minis quite a bit for a game of Mythic, which isn't the sort of game you'd normally expect to need them. On that occasion, the visual element and the constraints of having to play with the particular toys at hand were a creative stimulus that worked well with the rules and our imaginations.

As far as I can tell all of these are usually necessary for a well-rounded RPG experience. Some systems lend themselves more to one than the other. Some systems might exclude one or the other. I have a personal preference for theatre of the mind. But - you do whatever best serves the system to create the best results for players.

//Panjumanju

I lean more towards theater of the mind, but I do both. I prefer theater of the mind in general because it allows for more flexibility in the direction the game goes. There are fights where having minis on the table can really add to the experience though.

When I do use minis, I prefer the rules for them to be as simple as possible. When a game layers on complex positioning rule involving minis, like in D&D 3E/Pathfinder and 4E, I find it wrecks the pacing of the game. Individual combats take up too much of the session. Players can also obsess too much over moving their "piece" around the board. When each player is spending their turn carefully counting squares on the grid for optimal positioning, the roleplaying is dead. Players only think of performing actions that are within the structure of the mini game they are playing, and their character is that piece on the table, not them.

If I use minis, I want them to be there to give a sense of where everything is. That is all. I'll generally reserve them for when there is a larger battle. That way the "wargamey" feel of using them becomes an asset.

I'm not a fan of using virtual mini setups in online play. When I am at a tabletop, I can use mat with dry erase pens and quickly scribble down a location. In a pinch, I can use gaming beads as minis. With virtual tabletops, it is a lot harder to just scribble a place down. They are meant to use prepared maps and having stats entered into the system.

When I run a game online in video chat, I stick entirely to theater of the mind, and I don't even use dice rollers. Everyone rolls their dice and calls out the numbers. Just like at the table.

Quote from: Simlasa;984252Is it inherently old school to go withought minis? My first few groups all used them, though generally unpainted and minus fancy terrain. Sometimes we'd melt them over a candle when a character died.

From what I understand, Arneson used big elaborate mini setups, and Gygax hid behind a file cabinet and did theater of the mind. Whatever side you pick, you get old school cred.