Quote from: flyingmiceI never got into minis games, because a counter is just as good as a mini for me, and a lot less expensive

I did AH and SPI stuff but never had the time or money to feel like fiddling with minis.  I've also been more into strategic level games where minis don't show up much.  
 
Even with rpg miniatures, I have only 20-30 and only 2-3 are painted.

D&D has sort of come full circle. It came from minis gaming, it has returned to minis gaming. The thrust of D&D through the late seventies eighties was to move away from miniatures and accurate maps of the field of combat, rulesets even had things like 'general melee'. Worked easily, worked a treat. The same thing really went on with AD&D, game books had sections in them telling players that there isn't a board for this game. Grognards, when first applied to gaming, were the people who rejected this whole fantasy roleplaying thing and stuck with board gaming and war gaming.

I myself find that reliance on miniatures and tactical maps changes the focus of the game rather, its a needless constraint. I have found the whole return to boardgaming rather tiresome; I can't be bothered finding the miniatures, I can't be doing with marking everything out or plotting to the inch where everyone is. Its just... dull. I'd rather focus on the roleplaying and action.

Quote from: NicephorusI did AH and SPI stuff but never had the time or money to feel like fiddling with minis.  I've also been more into strategic level games where minis don't show up much.  
 
Even with rpg miniatures, I have only 20-30 and only 2-3 are painted.

Hehe! I used to buy my own blank counters and mod and kitbash and make my own games. I've been making my own games since I can remember. I still have all of them, along with my stock AH and SPI and whatever games in my game closet.

-clash

Quote from: CabGrognards, when first applied to gaming, were the people who rejected this whole fantasy roleplaying thing and stuck with board gaming and war gaming.

I'm a grognard, and I refuse to endorse this message.

-clash

Quote from: James J SkachYou know, I went back and read that first line again.  I have to tell you - that's damn close to Forge-speak.  "Can they really be having fun?"  And then you follow up with the rules-heavy versus normal-fun...man...do you need a link to The Forge?

I wish you'd been a little more helpful, and told him how he can express his opinion with approved, non-Forge language.

Quote from: SweeneyI wish you'd been a little more helpful, and told him how he can express his opinion with approved, non-Forge language.

GoOrange is a gentleman, and did fine on his own. James was a bit paranoid there, methinks.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceOh! I should note that I'm an old grognard, who was a wargame maven long before RPGs were invented. I never got into minis games, because a counter is just as good as a mini for me, and a lot less expensive, but they are essentially wargames. Just because one likes wargames/minis games doesn't mean one wants them in one's RPG.

-clash

Excellent point. I understand the appeal of agonizing over the tactical options on a map to come up with the optimal plan of attack. That's what I do when I play wargames. However, I look for an entirely different experience from RPGs.

Here's a random observation; maybe if hex-and-counter wargames had retained their popularity, a lot of the folks today who love the tactical analysis aspect of D&D would be wargamers. My sense is the real rupture with wargames came as much over the ascendency of fantasy themes over historical themes. I see a lot of similarity in the personality types and approach to gaming between the 50-year-old historical wargamers I know and the 30-year-old hardcore tactical D&D players.

I'm one who enjoys the hardcore tactical play in my RPGs. Can't stand most wargames. Mainly because the endeavor doesn't fire my imagination.

Minis are a shortcut, that way the tactical stuff takes care of itself and I can concentrate on the fluffy descriptions.

I found D&D 3e to be a total breath of fresh air, in that I finally found a game that felt fun as a game in itself, independent of the roleplaying element.

Quote from: GoOrangeIs it actually fun for people to play D&D and GURPS using all the tactical rules and options, played out on a battlemat with squares and hexes, using minatures, having to get out templates for blast radius and rulers for line of sight?

My brother certainly thinks so as those are his two favorite systems for that reason but at least he's a Steelers fan.  It's an odd division in preference that can casually blend very well together.  While I was agonizing where my character was going in life my brother, as a GM, was agonizing how to challenge him in combat without feeling like he was cheating me.  We both took away very different experiences from the same roleplaying sessions.  When I started to realize I needed very little out of mechanics to get what I needed from roleplaying, my brother needed a more focused ruleset to get what he needed.  My brother uses system mechanics to attribute details to the game.  I used details to enhance the mechanics of the game.  They're really not polar opposites because I never noticed it until our most recent conversations.  

What I learned is that we were using to different methods to achieve the same thing in our imaginations.  My brother used mechanics to describe what he couldn't narrate and I used narration to describe what I could never achieve mechanically (I'm a horrible die roller BTW).  It's always amazing to me to see a GM balance those preferences.  It requires knowledge and a sensitivity to what players want.  GMs are the best and worst part of RPGs.  Too bad it's an education only learned through good times and hard knocks.

It's not just the crunchiness of the system.  It can also be a function of the GM and players.  I've seen miniatures games, which are almost entirely tactical, be as rich and immersive as a tabletop rpg done all in the head.  It's because the guys running the show were adding colour and adding description to every move.

Now I lean away from the tactical these days, but more due to lack of speed.  I hate having to wait my turn, so as a GM I try to minimize endless tactics and rules comparisons.

I love minis because they speed things up for me as a GM - everyone knows where they are and where everyone else is.  It's also just another aid to create heroic decisions and also enable creativity.  Your buddy's in trouble?  There's a hole in the bridge between you and your buddy?  Well, we all know the stakes here....

Quote from: GoOrangeYeah, you're right and deep inside I knew that, but I just needed a reminder. I hadn't thought of this ahead of time, but since there really are so many "styles of play" it probably should be discussed beforehand to get some inkling of what to expect.

I certainly endorse discussing things beforehand. However, that's not perfect, because sometimes people have certain ideas about their play that aren't entirely accurate. When you ask them how they like to play, they express their ideal, then when they sit down to play, we have their play in practice. One very common one is that many gamers say they like a game with lots of roleplaying and not so much combat, but then when they sit down to play, out comes the sword...

Sometimes you just have to sit down and play with them to see what they're like.

Quote from: HaffrungHere's a random observation; maybe if hex-and-counter wargames had retained their popularity, a lot of the folks today who love the tactical analysis aspect of D&D would be wargamers. My sense is the real rupture with wargames came as much over the ascendency of fantasy themes over historical themes. I see a lot of similarity in the personality types and approach to gaming between the 50-year-old historical wargamers I know and the 30-year-old hardcore tactical D&D players.

Yes, no, maybe... It is an interesting question.

Personally, I think the joy of RPGs to the 30 year old hardcore tactical players is that they are wargames with which the players identify. I remember Brian Gleichman posting once that he wants his RPG to provide context and meaning to his battles. That makes perfect sense. RPGs win over wargames because they give us a reason to give a crap.

Quote from: SweeneyI wish you'd been a little more helpful, and told him how he can express his opinion with approved, non-Forge language.

I did. I told him not to say shit like "Is it actually fun for people to play D&D and GURPS using all the tactical rules and options," and, "I played in a session of rules-heavy D&D (as compared to normal, fun D&D) last night."

The first is something right out of GNS - a variation on the "I find that most gamers I meet are unhappy."  Ya know, the idea that you just can't understand how people could be having fun playing D&D.

The second is one of those lovely little false dichotomies that make discussion so much fun. "I played in this shitty rules heavy group, as compared to the normal, fun, group I played in before." Clearly rules heavy is inherently inferior; not normal.

While I disagree with Clash that I was being paranoid (perhaps I should have included the proper smiley) mostly due to the fact that I don't think GO is some kind of stealth marketer, I do think he was unwise in his choice of phrases - something with which he seems to have agreed.

Some people don't like it when these kinds of poor choices in phrasings are challenged.  I find it's better to point them out to show how things can be insulting, even when written with the most harmless of intentions. That way it can be cleared up quickly - as it was here, without your little forgery defense - or left as it was what was really meant, like in Brain Damage.

If you don't like that, you know where the ignore list is, right?