I generally dig the monster figures in the official D&D Minis line, at least the ones that appear in the Monster Manual. But between the figures for critters appearing in books I don't own and some of the more outre personality minis, I'm not 100% satisfied with the line. So I supplement my figures with some Heroscape sets and paper figures (most notably S. John Ross's Sparks and Steve Jackson's Cardboard Heroes).
In terms of design my tastes align less with the dungeonpunk of modern D&D and more with things like Reaper's Dark Heaven line. Admittedly, the Reaper figures evoke more Elmore and Warhammer than I generally prefer, but since no one is rushing to produce an Erol Otus inspired miniatures line where else can I turn? Still, the question posed in the title of this post remains: Do I like Reaper's minis because they're good, or because I cling to a outmoded vision of D&D? I think the answer is a little from column A and a little from column B.
Friday, January 27, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
%202.png)
.JPG)
.png)
.gif)
Posts
I know that I shouldn't encourage you, but I do know a miniature sculptor who could likely be convinced to do some Erol Otus inspired work if she ever gets the time...
ReplyDeleteI'm not a fan of the rarity/collectable element. It's cool that I can go through an old module, make a shopping list of the monsters I need to get minatures for and then go out and get them and since they are prepainted, I am go to go. Paying $50.00 for a beholder mini...not so good.
ReplyDeleteThe collectable aspect was the biggest turn-off for me. Since I'm going to primarily use them for roleplaying, I don't want to have to buy pack after pack of them in the hopes that I'll get the monster I want.
ReplyDeleteThat and the fact that the Minis game just wasn't fun enough for me to really be worth it.
I like playing with other peoples' sets of minis, though.
I do wish they had more generic race/class combinations.