Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2012 22:37:37 GMT -9
Hi! According to your gaming experience - how tall/big should be monster figures versus standing human figure (30mm scale)? Or should I rather ask - which one (height-wise) from attached preview you would prefer? Well, it's possible to make the same figure with different heights/sizes, but again, based on yours best experiences, which size would be considered as optimal or so called "basic" one? The Tree-Monster figure (biggest one obviously), when double-sided and with bottom tabs attached is filling almost all free (height) space on A4 sheet. So it not only would need some additional cardboard placed and glued between front and back to reinforce, but might be not convenient for playing and storage (although in my opinion such a big figure on game-table, fighting with your paper heroes might have quite strong immersion factor! :) Just to made comparison easier - black archer figure is extracted (together with outline) from my Elven Forest Ambush project (which still needs some polishing but should be available soon...:) Last but not least - would be this kind of monster MEGA-PACK interesting for you (or there is already so many different dragons / lizards etc. monsters on market, that you wouldn't even care) ? Looking for your feedback ("Parduzing" is welcomed as well :) Cheers
|
|
|
Post by cobra on Jan 9, 2012 0:28:33 GMT -9
Monsters could be any size you want. But in my opinion, the larger the monster (or any other paper mini), the more dimensions should be used. You A and B sizes could be decently done with the usual 2D mini approach, but C and D should be created in 2½D or even 3D to look good. A very large flat cardboard cutout could look really impressive when viewed directly from the front or the rear, but would suck otherwise. By adding extra pieces, e.g. separate wings on a dragon it would look much more impressive at all angels. There is a link to onemonks old dragon somewhere i think - perfect example of a great looking 2½d model. There are other examples aound on this forum but the old dragon (hope anyone can provide the link to it, if it still exists) shows what can be done in 2½D.
/Cobra
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Jan 9, 2012 2:51:43 GMT -9
I agree totally with "Cobra" Only small and medium monsters could look well in 2D. For more is better, imho, 2½D ( I don't like very much real 3D for figures, only for buildings, vehicles and accessories ). A question: do you measure your figures from foot to head? I don't know how rpg-gamers do this, but in my old historical wagames we measure from foot to eyes ( so we maintain proportion of the human body with different historical hats. Think about difference in height between a service cap and a shako )
|
|
|
Post by old squirmydad on Jan 9, 2012 8:13:54 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by pblade on Jan 9, 2012 14:21:15 GMT -9
I prefer the monsters be correctly scaled. And once you get into the larger sizes, adding to them really makes a difference. Wings, multiple heads, etc. on truly large monsters really make an impact, and don't add a great amount of difficulty to the builds.
For example, your largest monster would benefit greatly from having inserts in its feet & actual arms glued to its body. Both could increase the figure's stability while adding visual interest.
I would love a true 30mm model of a 400' long ancient wyrm, but I realize that even coiled up it would take an immense amount of space. So, I would go for a balance between the monster's "actual" size, the figure's footprint, visual impact, and the complexity of building the figure.
- Pb
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2012 14:45:08 GMT -9
Good points - thank you all! I forgot about "third dimension" although I got some experience with 2,5D models (even started with EASY!3D series - made "Trojan horse", "siege Tower", some other siege equipment like balista, Roman Scorpio etc... plus few "dragons"), but... abandoned the whole idea cause they didn't match very well to 60mm scale... (too small if on 1 or max 2 sheets or needs at least 4 sheets when scaled adequately for 60mm). Some examples: www.kartonowefigurki.pl/sub-galf23.htmlBut now, for 30mm adding some "extra" dimension might be perfect solution, so perhaps it is worth to get back to these "oldies" and ideas? =>>Rhannon ------------------ I am not such a perfect designer :) In fact what matters for me is realistic look of figures when they are compared standing together on one table. People are very "similar but different" (this saying is derived from "same, same but little different..." which was said by some Rent-a-Car guy who instead ordered 2 Jeep Wrangler's prepared one Jeep and one Suzuki Jimny and tried with poker-face to convince tourists that what's the fuss - there is no difference at all :)) For example - average Imperial Rome legionnaire in III-IVC. was 1,60m tall (there are archaeological findings proofing this) while barbaric warriors from north (Wizygots, Franks etc.) was ca. 180m and quite often even up to 2m tall plus were well build (ie torso, muscles) - so they really looks like giants compared to Roman infantryman. Now take the any modern army soldiers standing in line (well, obviously excluding some elites, guardsmen or representative units which are especially picked/chosen) you will find them very varying in postures and tall - and even if they all are in unified helmets. So I think that in general overall proportions and feeling of realism is more crucial than up to 1mm precise. But that's just me :)
|
|
|
Post by Vermin King on Jan 11, 2012 15:47:55 GMT -9
The general rule-of-thumb is 'Does it look right on the table?'
I've noticed that vehicles are usually designed to be slightly smaller than scale for two reasons: smaller footprint and it 'looks' right.
Buildings also generally aren't 'scale'. Generally smaller overall, but with adjustments to door and window height. smaller footprint and looks better.
Scale is a guide. You want to be close, but you don't have to be exact
|
|
|
Post by stevelortz on Jan 11, 2012 16:19:57 GMT -9
When I was in the Navy 40 years ago, the Chief would have us line up in order of height with the tallest man at one end, and the shortest on the other. That gave the illusion that we were all the same height. ;D
Have fun! Steve
|
|
|
Post by kiladecus on Jan 13, 2012 14:43:54 GMT -9
I would say that on monsters, any size works well, but IF I HAD to choose, I would say "B" works the best for me.
If you are talking about vehicles (which I know you aren't, but my opinion is this), vehicles should be 3D (anything outside of something small like a motorcycle).
There are creatures that are as big as the ones you pointed out (like dragons, and giants), but for the run-of-the-mill creature, I have to say I like "B" the best.
But that is just me, and I am nobody.
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Jan 13, 2012 15:04:26 GMT -9
Odysseus kiladecus. ;D Sounds good.
|
|
|
Post by hackbarth on Jan 13, 2012 16:17:47 GMT -9
The biggest I printed something was Reijav's Tiamat, instead of printing is in an A4 Sheet, I separated front and back from the figures and printed then in two A4 sheets: Yes, it is BIG. Very effective in routing character groups, I think.
|
|
|
Post by Reivaj on Jan 13, 2012 19:27:19 GMT -9
Good to see my Tiamat builded ! Hackbarth: Where is that elf from??
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Jan 13, 2012 22:50:47 GMT -9
Good to see my Tiamat builded ! Hackbarth: Where is that elf from?? Jabbro.
|
|
|
Post by Reivaj on Jan 14, 2012 4:12:20 GMT -9
Thanks Rhannon
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Jan 14, 2012 4:52:44 GMT -9
Thanks Rhannon Nothing. But I don't remember if this figure is in a monthly figure hoard, in his personal pages on this forum or in his smg.photobucket.com/profile/Jabbro. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by pblade on Jan 14, 2012 7:19:04 GMT -9
LOVE that Tiamat figure. She definitely deserves the gargantuan print.
Now, where will I find the figure?
- Pb
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Jan 14, 2012 7:44:30 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by pblade on Jan 14, 2012 22:49:23 GMT -9
Thanks! Don't know how I managed to miss her.
- Pb
|
|
|
Post by hackbarth on Jan 16, 2012 16:41:31 GMT -9
The only other figure that I gave the same treatment was Jabbro's Red Dragon: But since Jabbro's Dragon is slimmer and the wings are spread, the Tiamat figure seems much more massive in comparison.
|
|
|
Post by tonsha on Jan 9, 2013 0:35:48 GMT -9
Hi Hackbarth
In the Tiamat phot - what dungeon tiles are you using? They look like Shaungamer's...
DaveA
|
|
|
Post by hackbarth on Jan 9, 2013 8:45:03 GMT -9
To take the photo I propped up Tiamat between two Dungeon Plungin' Tiles from Oversoul Games. They have very nice minis too, all made in a cartoonesque style.
|
|
|
Post by tonsha on Jan 10, 2013 1:45:16 GMT -9
I wondered where I'd seen them before. (And I was right - they were Shaun's).
Time to have a look for them on my hard drive...
DaveA
|
|