|
Post by reverendsin on Jan 9, 2014 13:07:17 GMT
Hello everyone, Im new to d&d, i like modeling and board games and havent ever played any war games. ive been watching Dm Scottys videos and reading and all that jazz, ill upload my scenario i wrote once its completely written out, but heres the terrain ive been working on. you can be brutal in you critiques if you want, but have something nice to say or a tip to offer please. im trying to learn whatever i can! cheers. s245.photobucket.com/user/dustinprewitt/library/dnd
|
|
dmj
Paint Manipulator
Posts: 245
|
Post by dmj on Jan 9, 2014 13:18:54 GMT
Not bad at all man. Me personally the best tip I prime almost everything black. Even bones miniatures the idea is that if you miss a recessed area it just looks like deep shadow. Now magical glowing items prime in white. Any missed recesses look like magic aura.
|
|
|
Post by reverendsin on Jan 9, 2014 13:31:38 GMT
i primed in black spray paint for the paper mache pieces and black acrylic paint for the foam pieces. although i kind of like the effect you get from spray painting the foam, i think it could work well for ruins later on.
|
|
|
Post by miltonmurphy on Jan 9, 2014 14:03:32 GMT
I think the lava pieces look great! Looking forward to seeing more.
|
|
|
Post by sgtslag on Jan 9, 2014 15:16:11 GMT
Look up, "The Dip", and, "Magic Wash", with regards to painting mini's -- simple block painting first, then the wash technique of choice, matte coat, done! Looks great from arm's length. Fastest painting techniques out there. I can produce GEtGW (Good Enough to Game With) quality figures with less than 10 minutes of actual painting time, per figure (assembly line painting style/techniques for maximum speed). The washes will pool in the recesses of the piece, which gives similar results to priming black, followed by dry-brushing colors on (much more work, IMO, than block painting + The Dip/Magic Wash). YMMV.
For a 'newb', your terrain painting is quite nice. By the way, The Dip/Magic Wash techniques work very well on terrain pieces, as well. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by monkeywithtacos on Jan 9, 2014 16:49:46 GMT
I think the lava pieces look great! Looking forward to seeing more. I definitely agree! Very solid technique on the lava pieces! Well done!
|
|
|
Post by Muze on Jan 9, 2014 17:21:40 GMT
your lava looks great ...practice makes perfect
|
|
|
Post by Sleepy Hollow Mike on Jan 9, 2014 18:26:39 GMT
Look up, "The Dip", and, "Magic Wash", with regards to painting mini's -- simple block painting first, then the wash technique of choice, matte coat, done! Looks great from arm's length. Fastest painting techniques out there. I can produce GEtGW (Good Enough to Game With) quality figures with less than 10 minutes of actual painting time, per figure (assembly line painting style/techniques for maximum speed). The washes will pool in the recesses of the piece, which gives similar results to priming black, followed by dry-brushing colors on (much more work, IMO, than block painting + The Dip/Magic Wash). YMMV. For a 'newb', your terrain painting is quite nice. By the way, The Dip/Magic Wash techniques work very well on terrain pieces, as well. Cheers! I agree with the Sarge on the "Dip" method for minis! I have used it on my Hirst arts stuff and while they came out nice I found I had to be judicious with what I used the method on. Stonework good Metal good but I really seem to have a problem when I use it on wood! BTW LOVE the lava! The fire really jumps out at you!
|
|
|
Post by reverendsin on Jan 9, 2014 21:11:23 GMT
wow thank you guys, the lava was a huge pain in the ass. im looking forward to trying out those new techniques today. thank you all for the kind words and advice.
|
|
|
Post by bloodchoke on Jan 9, 2014 21:52:09 GMT
Nice man, really like the craters/lava pits. The wall looks really cool also, dark and formidable. Can't wait to see more!
|
|
|
Post by reverendsin on Jan 10, 2014 0:30:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by reverendsin on Jan 10, 2014 3:26:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thedmg on Jan 10, 2014 4:59:57 GMT
The only advise I can give is to say that you must consider playability when crafting (as you are just starting out you will begin to understand why as you play more). Playability in this sense is: can the miniatures be placed easily (will they stand up)? Can the players get to the minis to move them and will the piece be visible when seated around a table?
Everything looks great.
|
|
|
Post by onethatwas on Jan 10, 2014 20:35:42 GMT
The only advise I can give is to say that you must consider playability when crafting (as you are just starting out you will begin to understand why as you play more). Playability in this sense is: can the miniatures be placed easily (will they stand up)? Can the players get to the minis to move them and will the piece be visible when seated around a table? Everything looks great. When I first started crafting (Before I found DM Scotty's methods), one of my friends said the same thing. Back then I was making terrain for tabletop wargames, and that advice is really important when crafting, but also implied is FUNCTIONALITY. What importance does the piece have? In wargaming, things like cover, line of sight, vantage points, etc have an effect on what sort of pieces you should build. I rarely ever designed anything that didn't have any function in changing the gameplay on the table. I also *really* liked (Rather: was amused greatly) how everyone liked to craft buildings to put snipers on. Yeah, it's a good idea, but not when your opponent has a penchant for just blowing up obstacles that block line of sight. If I could kill a few snipers in the process, even better. Anyway, back to the subject. In RPG terrain pieces, I've found that functionality has alot more flexibility in what a tile can be used for. Standard tiles are functional in their average use, but when you start tossing out lava pits, water effects, pit falls, depth, consider the effect it has on gameplay. I like the DM Scotty videos that implement something outside the norm. Arcane summoning circles, tiles made specifically for puzzles, bridges, ladders, etc. They provide insight into unique approaches to changing the norm at the gaming table. It allows players to think outside the box and make use of their environment in different ways. Or restrict them in others, such as a lava pit barrier. You can hardly just walk on the lava unless you have special abilities to do so. But as for painting, even painting techniques can be good indicators for making a terrain piece functional. If you paint on some loose gravel in a corridor, you can make the area a zone where balance checks become necessary, or else they slide into a pike barricade at the bottom of the slope. If you paint those vines a color unusual compared to the norm, they could indicate a zone where a plant based monster can attack. Even painting on stone tiles on each gaming tile (Tedious as that process is) can allow you to make something significant out of it. As I was painting my tiles, I found myself considering which stones could be loosened to uncover a secret passage down, or a cache of secret treasure. Whether a cracked stone could be a trap zone, where the floor collapses due to excessive (But hidden) floor damage. Paint features can be really useful if you keep in mind function for a tile. So I hope that helps.
|
|
|
Post by skunkape on Jan 13, 2014 15:13:18 GMT
Great looking pieces! Lava does look good!
I agree with thedmg, always consider playability when crafting, the best looking terrain is wasted space if your figures won't stand up or fit in the area!
|
|
|
Post by thedmg on Jan 13, 2014 22:12:38 GMT
This is why 3d trees are a big problem for a forest location. Dense collections of trees make the area unplayable. DMScotty's upside down solution is a great example of how to rethink terrain for playability. 3d trees look incredible, but make playing difficult and cumbersome. This is true for large columns as well (hence I only did low height ones). I added the lip to my wooden doors as they kept falling over otherwise. Same with the book cases. I always try a prototype first and then see how it can be improved and what issues arise with playability.
|
|
|
Post by sgtslag on Jan 13, 2014 22:32:18 GMT
For mass battles games (any genre: ancients, Napoleonics, even WW II land battles), we use a piece of cloth, or yarn, to demark the limits of a forested area, then we place a few 3-D trees in the area, to make it look like a forest. When we move figures into the forested region, we simply move the trees aside, to allow passage of the figures -- the forest does slow down their movement, so instead of moving 15", for example, they may only move 8", in the forest. It's all about compromises: which compromise are you comfortable with; which looks good, but is still playable?
For my RPG, I've gone to 2.5-D, using printable floor tiles for dungeons, with some 3-D elements thrown in, to jazz it up a bit, but playability is king, for me, regardless of whether it is an RPG, or a mini's game. Cheers!
|
|