Post by gloriousbattle on Nov 8, 2018 18:17:24 GMT -9
Okay, this topic is not, I repeat NOT here to jerk anybody's chain. I am simply offering my thoughts about what I think is and is not important where paper figures are concerned. It is meant to spark discussion, not open war. If the mods think it is too controversial, please chuck it to the dustbin of internet history, but I really would enjoy a friendly discussion of this subject.
To begin with, please have a look at these fine fellows
Stalwart heroes of the Empire one and all. However, what they are not is realistic. Why is fairly obvious: they don't need to be. These are gaming pieces, pure and simple. Their job is to stand at attention, and move around on the battlefield in a game of "Floor War" or Playing H.G. Wells' rules, or something similar, and eventually get shot down by that villainous salt petre… uh... rubber band cannon in front of them. For this they were intended, and I'm sure that, fifty to a hundred years ago when they were made, they did the job eminently well, and with great courage and panache.
So what is different about our paper men today? I would VERY RESPECTFULLY submit, absolutely nothing.
In fact, I think we all tacitly agree to this. Thus, the popular style for our paper figures is a fairly cartoonish one. This from Patrick Crusiau's various fantasy, sci-fi and historical figures, to the One Monk Pieces, to the hoards contributed by so many site members. In fact, I would submit that the figures that seem the most popular today are actually considerably less realistic than the valiant heroes I have pictured above.
And yet, there seem to be some conventions that are demanded on this forum in the name of realism that really don't end up making the resulting figures any more realistic. My example would be the requirement for fronts and backs on each piece. I'm curious where this got its start.
I would only be pointing out a truism if I say that, since it is impossible to see both sides of a two dimensional figure at the same time, then as long as the figure has an obvious front and rear, why be concerned about whether it has an actual front and back?
Admittedly, I can see some reasons why this might be preferable. For example, a knight with a shield might seem a bit disappointing if we only had mirror images of him from right and left, and, if the image only showed a partial view of the inside of the shield, we could never see his heraldry. For similar reasons, if we want to see such details as canteens hanging from the belt, or scrolls busting out of the wizard's backpack, or the rest of said wizard's familiar, who's head is peeking out from behind his leg, only a true front and back makes this possible. And, of course, a true mirror image does not work if there is writing on the figure anywhere, as with a Roman aquilifer carrying a standard, lettered "SPQR".
However, the false left and right (mirror image) school also has its advantages. An obvious one is that it is easier to manipulate the figures in a drawing program. However, what really gets it or me is that, since, again, we are talking about true two dimensional pieces, it is impossible to see two opposing figures actually fighting/facing each other unless the drawing is done left and right. While true left and right can certainly be done, still, the rule here seem to be that all figures must have a front and back, which leaves me never seeing my figures facing their enemies. At least, never face to face.
Curious as to why?
Last Edit: Nov 8, 2018 18:41:40 GMT -9 by gloriousbattle
Fronts and backs. End of story. It's important in some games for facing, backstab rules, all kinds of reasons, but it also looks better. The approach was to emulate regular metal or plastic minis and make cardstock minis as "respectable" products, not just proxies, but honest to goodness miniature options that can be used for wargaming and roleplaying at a low cost and ease of storage.
I would say that I personally feel the added back side art is important for immersion and could even be useful for game mechanics.
It's not very immersive to turn around a figure on the table and be looking at their front again. If anything I print a copy of them facing left, and one facing right so I can even swap those for "fuller immersion". Plus even though I can't see the goblins back when it's facing me, my friend sitting across from me at the table can see it's back. And he can't see the rogues back, but I can. That's just how sides work... What you are suggesting when extrapolated to a whole group of mirrored figures would be looking at a crowd of people facing you, even though you are standing behind them.
And as far as mechanics by printing the back on all the figures, then the rogue knows at a glance that they ARE behind the goblin and thus they can reliably gauge whether they could or could not get a sneak attack... Plus vision is essentially a cone in front of a persons facing direction, so it would be hard to see at a glance what sight lines are if the figures were mirrored.
By all means you could print your own figures any way you want, but I will only use figures that have front and back art because its what I like.... And it seems that the majority of this forum may agree based on the "conventions that are demanded" as you put it.
That said I've seen plenty of creators out there in the world who make, and plenty of players who use mirrored figures. There may even be a forum somewhere just for single sided figures. They just won't ever earn a place at my game table, but you do you.
Post by oldschooldm on Nov 8, 2018 21:05:53 GMT -9
Where is there a post arguing for *realism* at all?
I don't think I've ever seen a single one. That's a straw-man argument.
And certainly the market for various levels of detail, abstraction, and rendering styles has been amply displayed here by so many diverse creators. So much ranting for the sole detail of many here preferring a fully rendered back side, gloriousbattle?
If you don't care, great! You have more options! Go nuts.
But if people are asked their opinions (which has happened several times) it's completely reasonable to accept that many folks prefer fully rendered backs. No reason to judge them for having that preference.
For me, I've always clearly and succinctly stated "If it doesn't have a fully rendered reverse side, I won't buy it, and I won't build it - which means I won't use it, and it won't get photographed in my games, and won't get cross promoted on the internet." I've never tried to tell others what they should prefer.
The rest is up to designers evaluating their own utility of the work they do - which often means deciding who they wish to share with/market to...
Last Edit: Nov 8, 2018 21:07:05 GMT -9 by oldschooldm
Post by mproteau (Paper Realms) on Nov 9, 2018 3:45:24 GMT -9
C'mon, gloriousbattle. What was the point of this post, beyond "More people seem to like fun that is different than my fun. Let me try to convince you my fun is right!"
Artists are free to create whatever they want, and people are allowed to enjoy 3d models, standees, trifolds, tokens, colored stones, gummy bears, whatever. Some folks love 3d rendered minis. Some folks love cartoony styles. Some folks love hand-drawn styles. Some folks care deeply and only use one type. Some folks simply love it all, and will use whatever works best.
I hate coming down on someone, but posts with ALL CAPS TITLES, that start with disclaimers about possibly needing moderation and that seem to simply pit personal preferences against each other may be what makes me start moderating.
Has your curiosity been answered by the previous posts? If not, can you be a little more concise about what it is you think needs discussion?
Three pages of results is rather small here. I like hackbarth's response to something 'It isn't so much about realism as representation'. Or something like that.
There are no strangers in this world,only people I haven't embarrassed ... yet!
IMHO, "realism" vs. "representation" is rather a moot point. We play games to escape reality for a little while. If you want to use mirrored minis, go right ahead. I don't really demand much detail for most things (as always, there are a few minor exceptions), and sometimes the mechanics can be a little more difficult when using mirrored images. Go with what makes you happy and what makes your game more enjoyable for you. If you are playing against someone who prefers a different style than you do, with their minis, then sit back and enjoy the difference that your opponent has.
Each person has their own preferences that they will gravitate towards and, if needed, pay for. Each artist has their own style of drawing that makes each set unique and wonderful.
Vive la difference!
There's no such thing as sanity, and that's the sanest fact.
gloriousbattle > I would only be pointing out a truism if I say that, since it is impossible to see both sides of a two dimensional figure at the same time ...
Not a "truism" at all. You're making some assumption(s) there that you don't state clearly.
In most of the games we play (including the one example you give) There are two players, often seated across from each other. In those cases, the fronts and backs of minis are simultaneously visible. Add more players, so are the 'sides'.
An obvious example of the value of fronts/backs in Wargames - but yes, out of context.
I build paper terrain (buildings, caves, etc.) - even if we ignore facing "rules" there's the narrative power of facing.
A mini going into the bar/cave/horizon communicates something quite different from them coming OUT of those locations.
I guess with no backs, everyone is cool because they are always leaving the threat behind...
I wonder - if one-sided minis are so great, why don't we have lots of backside-only minis? What would they be? I can only think of one...
Brave Sir Robin
Oh, to finally put a nail in the "realism" straw man I re-present:
A critical part of my 3rd place entry in Papercuts 2015 - nothing realistic about these, but you should be able to see how much better that narrative is because the figures have backs.
It's funny that you start with "Little wars" and those ancient toy figures. Great game, a hundred years ago. Wargames, boardgames, role-playing games have all evolved in complexity and quality since then. Look at the plastic figures (once a reviled medium) on the market today and how amazing many of them are. The gaming public has demanded great increases of quality in every feature of the market over the decades. There are still markets for lower quality, cartoon-esque, single-sided paper figures, but interest in them is greatly diminished.
Post by Punkrabbitt on Nov 9, 2018 19:06:34 GMT -9
Realism is not important to me. I came into this papercraft hobby from miniatures wargaming, and I got into that from scale modelling. Ever look at 28mm wargaming miniatures? The proportions are horrible. But "realistic" proportions would mean that a lot of small detail is lost. So it is exaggerated to make it noticeable. Not so much in scale modelling. Vermin King and I have collaborated on some WWII vehicles here, and we try to get the length, width, and height as close as we can, but the body designs take a lot of liberties for ease of building. But they look great on the table and my friends are jealous of my fleet of trucks.
No one cares that they're not perfect.
Hi! I'm Harry, formerly "Coyotepunc" here on the forum. I am a hobby addict; I prefer papercraft scenery to use alongside my 28mm metal and plastic miniatures, and am not afraid to mix and match my hobby media. I game sci-fi, fantasy, and historical (including Ancients, Dark Ages, Renaissance, and World War II Italy & Sahara.)
What you are suggesting when extrapolated to a whole group of mirrored figures would be looking at a crowd of people facing you, even though you are standing behind them.
Doesn't quite work like that. This guy, for example;
A gnoll by our own Antohammer, certainly has a definite front and back; he simply accomplishes this by facing to the side of the paper. This works perfectly well, gaming-wise. You definitely know when another piece is in a position to backstab him or pick his pocket, and he does not end up facing two directions simultaneously. He hasone definitive front.
Again, I am not trying to start a rebellion. By all means, do what works for you on the tabletop! But the fact that I have printed him as a mirror image doesn't mean somebody else couldn't draw him an actual right side.
Last Edit: Sept 23, 2019 21:10:19 GMT -9 by squirmydad
C'mon, gloriousbattle . What was the point of this post, beyond "More people seem to like fun that is different than my fun. Let me try to convince you my fun is right!"
You can certainly take it that way if you like, but I really don't see the harm in asking "Why did this convention develop the way it did?" Again, I AM NOT TRYING TO START A REBELLION! (nor one involving the use of all-caps, that's just the way I tend to do titles ). If you are having fun, as you certainly appear to be, well, once more into the breach!
And, as I said in the OP, if this looks like trolling, or even if it just looks like an innocent but blundering topic that is going to start a fight, by all means, start moderating, as you say. I'm really not here to cause trouble. But it seems like an honest question to me.
Realism is not important to me. I came into this papercraft hobby from miniatures wargaming, and I got into that from scale modelling. Ever look at 28mm wargaming miniatures? The proportions are horrible...
No one cares that they're not perfect.
Kind of a tangent, but it makes good point. Are the proportions on 28s really horrible? I don't think so, its simply a question of what you are trying to accomplish.
For example, its often pointed out that 28mm (or whatever scale they have crept into by now) GW figures are badly proportioned because the wrists and ankles are so thick.
However, I once had a very nice collection of 25s that were proportioned just about perfectly, and were constant casualties, with broken lances, bayonets, wrists and ankles running to almost a third of my collection. Incidentally, one of the chief attractions I have for paper minis (other than the nostalgia factor, which is the main one) is the fact that these guys are virtually invulnerable to anything other than a lighted match. Since I print mine on polyester mailing labels even water won't hurt them... but I digress.
Realism is not important to me. I came into this papercraft hobby from miniatures wargaming, and I got into that from scale modelling. Ever look at 28mm wargaming miniatures? The proportions are horrible...
No one cares that they're not perfect.
Kind of a tangent, but it makes good point. Are the proportions on 28s really horrible? I don't think so, its simply a question of what you are trying to accomplish.
For example, its often pointed out that 28mm (or whatever scale they have crept into by now) GW figures are badly proportioned because the wrists and ankles are so thick.
However, I once had a very nice collection of 25s that were proportioned just about perfectly, and were constant casualties, with broken lances, bayonets, wrists and ankles running to almost a third of my collection. Incidentally, one of the chief attractions I have for paper minis (other than the nostalgia factor, which is the main one) is the fact that these guys are virtually invulnerable to anything other than a lighted match. Since I print mine on polyester mailing labels even water won't hurt them... but I digress.
Been there. That's also the case with the minis I have done, which are few. Other than the Japanese Tatebanko minis, about all I've done are Hollywood characters and animals. I take a photo image, make a copy which I enhance and cartoonize, then paste it over the original adjusting the opacity until the image looks like digital art, not cartoon or photo. These always look spindly, and in the 'art' portion of getting them where I want them, I always have to make the images wider to make them look 'right', whatever that is. I also adjust legs to avoid having one foot higher than the other, and change arm angles to keep them closer to the body. And yes, I know that if you make the body wider on someone holding his arm straight out, you have to shrink the arm length back.
Sometimes 'real' doesn't look 'real'.
There are no strangers in this world,only people I haven't embarrassed ... yet!
Kind of a tangent, but it makes good point. Are the proportions on 28s really horrible? I don't think so, its simply a question of what you are trying to accomplish.
For example, its often pointed out that 28mm (or whatever scale they have crept into by now) GW figures are badly proportioned because the wrists and ankles are so thick.
However, I once had a very nice collection of 25s that were proportioned just about perfectly, and were constant casualties, with broken lances, bayonets, wrists and ankles running to almost a third of my collection. Incidentally, one of the chief attractions I have for paper minis (other than the nostalgia factor, which is the main one) is the fact that these guys are virtually invulnerable to anything other than a lighted match. Since I print mine on polyester mailing labels even water won't hurt them... but I digress.
Sometimes 'real' doesn't look 'real'.
Which proves that only paper modelers are the true philosophers.
Vermin King: Happy birthday, lightning. Hope it was a good one
Mar 21, 2024 16:37:15 GMT -9
Vermin King: Thank you, sir
Mar 9, 2024 5:59:22 GMT -9
alloydog: You can copy/paste the images into the forum and this shout box - 😁 but there isn't the Thumb Up... 🤔
Mar 8, 2024 23:39:35 GMT -9
alloydog: OK, update! Goto the Wikipedia page for the List of emoticons link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_emoticons
Mar 8, 2024 23:36:50 GMT -9
alloydog: You can even copy/paste it to Notepad (or any other text editor, I guess - I use Gedit)
Mar 8, 2024 21:47:44 GMT -9
alloydog: From the post I linked to below, if you select it, then right-click on it, you will even get an option to search for the Thumb Up character, so I think it is part of the standard ASCII character set: https://i.p
Mar 8, 2024 21:46:33 GMT -9
alloydog: If you look at script of the post, it looks like this:
Mar 8, 2024 21:41:05 GMT -9
alloydog: Actually, I can't remember where it came from, might be from Proboards emoticon own library. It is literally a character that can be copy/pasted. If you go to my post cardboard-warriors.proboards.com/post/100330/ you can copy the thumbs up there.
Mar 8, 2024 21:40:22 GMT -9
Vermin King: alloydog, did you do it by inserting with PostImage? I did not see it in the smileys
Mar 8, 2024 12:25:10 GMT -9
okumarts: Sometimes I don't know what I'm doing until everyone is sitting down at the table.
Mar 1, 2024 16:43:01 GMT -9
Vermin King: How far in advance do you decide what to play? Prep time has to be factored in
Feb 28, 2024 5:52:54 GMT -9
okumarts: We ended up playing Cepheus Engine Supers (I modded some stuff from Cepheus Modern and Zaibatsu).
Feb 27, 2024 18:28:58 GMT -9
Vermin King: I really wish the Shoutbox had a thumbs up button.
Feb 26, 2024 5:14:00 GMT -9
okumarts: I think we might play some Mork Borg Star Wars this week... we'll see.
Feb 25, 2024 14:51:43 GMT -9
okumarts: We wrapped it up last Monday and we will take one of the characters and flesh them out into first level characters.
Feb 25, 2024 14:51:26 GMT -9
Vermin King: okumarts, when do you get together again?
Feb 24, 2024 5:57:15 GMT -9
okumarts: It was a real mob of adventurers in the dungeon.
Feb 13, 2024 14:01:06 GMT -9