Ok, so here at the store we have been having this discussion. What is better cardboard/wooden tokens or actual minis like in Risk? Some people say who cares as long as the game is good. Some say it has to be minis to give it a more real feel. Some think tokens are easier to keep from getting broke and the mini people say they have never broken a risk mini. I assume that cardboard punch-out tokens are way cheaper than injection molding but I am not sure on that. What do you people here think about this. And does anyone have any experience with either that they would like to share.
Minis vs Tokens which is better
Sat, 05/05/2012 - 12:23
Tue, 05/15/2012 - 13:43
#1
I think the minis are better
I think the minis are better if they look good, but more often that not, won't be cost feasible. How strategic a game is also plays a factor. The more strategic a game is, the less it "needs" the coolness of minis.
It also depends on the type of game being made. For some reason, I can't imagine a good war themed game with cardboard tokens.
Tue, 05/15/2012 - 15:09
#2
pros and cons
I have played many games using cardboard counters, and designed a few. I also have games using wooden blocks or cheap plastic minis, as well as a growing collection of proper minis that I am just starting to base and paint. I think there are pros and cons with both types of tokens.
- Amount of information needed. If you need a lot of information for each unit, and there are many units, you have no option but cardboard. This is why 99 % of all board wargames use cardboard counters. If one unit is 32nd battalion, with 3 attack value, 5 defense value, 4 movement, and the other is 51st battalion with 4 attack value, 6 defense value, 4 movement, and then there are 400 other equally unique units in the game, you can't really do that with minis. (Not even going to comment on "can't imagine a good war themed game with cardboard tokens" :) )
- Real feel. Hm. I don't think minis do a great job here. The static pose, sort of sliding across the game board. You see them not moving, frozen. It makes it difficult for me to imagine they are. Simple cardboard graphics makes it easier for my imagination to fill in the blanks and make it feel real. Simple neutral poses of the minis is better, but some are just too silly (but work well if you see them in a photo not moving).
- ... but I still like the look of a table of well-painted (or well-painted enough) miniatures. That's a big reason to have them.
- ... but unpainted single color cheap plastic minis, like in Risk? No, I can't think of a reason to have those other than as toy games. But saying that only last night I was seriously considering ordering a big bag of 500 plastic army men to use as playing pieces. I can see the fun in playing with toys. But for a somewhat more serious game I would not do that.
- Collecting. Again, with real painted minis, you have the added fun of collecting and sorting all the minis. Again this does not apply to plastic minis included in a boardgame.
- Counters can be flipped over to show information on the other side (typically to show the unit having taken losses, but sometimes to indicate some other kind of temporary state, or for hidden information).
- Counters can stack. Unfortunately you need this in many games, since you can't have boards of unlimited size. Also counters can stack to show that one unit is onboard a transport unit etc, that is typically not easy to do with minis.
- Also markers easily stack with information markers. You can put them on or below the unit (hidden from the opponent). This is easy to combine with stacking many units.
OK, I think for boardgames, I think everything is in favor for cardboard tokens, except to make them more like toys (primarily to attract younger players, eg teenage boys, although as noted this also works for me sometimes and I am a lot older than that). My idea of minis also having some pros mostly applies to the kinds of minis you collect and paint to play miniatures games.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 00:37
#3
Tokens
I'd vote in favor of tokens for most board games, though it does depend on the type of game and the number of tokens/minis involved. For games where each player controls a single character I'd normally go with a pawn or mini, but for games where each player controls multiple characters I'd be more likely to go with tokens.
- The token can have a pretty picture, which is just as good as a cheap plastic mini for visualising the character.
- The token can have extra info such as unit statistics.
- The token can be flipped over to have 2 states such as a "hidden" state and a "revealed" state.
However, if you are aiming at a collectible tabletop game or a "hobby game" where players collect and paint the minis, then obviously minis is the way to go. Serious historical wargames generally use cardboard tokens and hex-maps.
That said, I think there is a place for stylized minis for certain types of games and target audiences. For example, a farm-themed game aimed at the family audience which had little wooden sheep is likely to elicit "Oh, how cute! They're little sheep!", more so than flat tokens with a picture of a sheep. Unless, of course, the tokens had a cute picture of a sheep...
Regards,
kos
all very valid points. I have decided to go with counters in my game due to cost and useability. I need a took of tokens with a few different looks so minis would be way to complicated and cumbersome.