... now with 35% more arrogance!

Sunday, November 18, 2012


On his blog, James Maliszewski talks about his returning love for miniatures, and makes this side comment: "it's fashionable in the larger roleplaying world, including in many parts of the old school community, to deprecate miniature figures".

Is it fashionable?

Not to pick on him, because I figure this is more of a rhetorical flourish than an actual attempt to describe what's really going on in the hobby. But, speaking as someone who doesn't like miniatures, I don't think I'm doing it to be fashionable... and I don't recall ever reading someone making negative statements about miniatures with any implication other than "I, personally, don't like them, although I understand other people do." I certainly haven't seen anyone trash miniatures in an attempt to bolster their own status, or to avoid getting kicked out of some clique.

Now, as I said, I figure this is more of a rhetorical flourish. But I could, if I were less sane, interpret his statement as a claim of fact, and possibly even a slur. Maybe I should defend my anti-miniature viewpoint! But then, maybe most of the RPG wars are about people misinterpreting rhetorical flourishes as defensible, fact-based statements. So maybe it's better if I don't add another insane overreaction.


  1. It's a rhetorical flourish, sure enough. It just happens to be the kind of rhetorical flourish almost exactly calculated to provoke.

  2. Maybe not a fashion, and maybe not directed directly against miniatures per se; but I several tmes fall across commentaries directed against "new-school" ├ęditions (especially 4E) wich basically boil down to "it's merely a board game" or "it's merely a minis tactical game!.
    Wich is ironic when you consider the fact that OD&D subtitle was Rules for fantastic medieval wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper & Pencil & Miniature Figures

  3. @porphyre77: But what I'm getting at is: isn't "it's merely a board game" also a rhetorical flourish?

    @taichara: And isns't "calculated to provoke" a rhetorical flourish?