"Great Looking Stand-ins" Topic

I'm assuming everybody on this site knows what a minis gamer means by a "stand-in". For those who might not, this is some object that is used to replace a miniature or miniatures that the gamer does not possess in fighting a battle. It might be another, similar mini (such as using Boers to represent Confederates), a dissimilar miniature (such as using the Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders to represent Confederates) or something wholly unrelated, like chess or checkers pieces, coins, scraps of paper, etc.

Anyway, suppose -and just go with me for a moment on this, and give me the benefit of my argument- that it was possible to have nearly universal stand-ins that looked almost as good as the figures they were replacing.

Obviously, I'm working on something that is -or at least I think is- just such a thing. Would anyone be interested in something like that, again, assuming it were possible?

Uh… yeah.

Sounds interesting but my one track, small gauge mind is having difficulty understanding how you could do this.

Maybe I can't, but I've got what I think is a cool and simple idea. Now I've just gotta engineer it.

like a "shadow" force.

You need a severe lack of asthetic sense in order to put up with stand-ins. I can, for instance, use Norman knights as later medieval period "sergeants"; but I cannot use Imperial Roman Auxila for that role. I would not use Mamluks for mounted Vikings either. But I have no trouble at all using Mamluks as Mongols. I have this great divide in my mind between East and West. And other filters are similarly broken.

Knight Templar "You need a severe lack of asthetic sense in order to put up with stand-ins."

Obviously, what I am talking about would be abstract, but so what? What is a chess set other than a set of abstracted toy soldiers, yet some chess sets are elegant indeed.

In any case, I'm not talking about using chess pieces. Still, my question stands, IF this could be done, who would be interested?

Okay, my most "experienced" period, medievals: I already said "Normans" as generic sergeants later. Like kyote says, spearmen are spearmen; just about any guy with a spear in a tunic with a round shield is going to be good to go from c. 500 AD to 1500 AD. Archers, same deal: a nondescript tunic, no head covering beyond a round cap, a longish bow and quiver at the hip, is going to work for the same time frame. Crossbowmen, same civies, but with a crossbow instead: good for 1000 to 1500 AD. Cavalry: any spear-armed horseman with a shield and a simple cap helm is going to work for Scots to Italians, same period. Where you get into a period "look" is in the armor and helmets of the knights and later men-at-arms. Those bits really do pin down a period of development. But the saving grace is that even then many knights preferred a simple helmet and or wore armor of a less than complete style. If you have barded horses and a fairly nondescript mailed horseman, this is a good stand-in for any man-at-arms from 1100 to 1500 (barding overlapped a long time with actual plate horse armor).

Ancients: a helmet with cheek pieces and a horsehair crest will cover early Greeks through Macedonians, or even Republican Romans. Shield would be round for the Macedonians and oval for the Romans, I don't know if that would bother you or not for stand-ins. Cavalry could be ubiquitous with just a javelin throwing guy carrying a small round shield. Horsearchers could use a Phrygian cap and baggy trousers and tunic and call it good. This guy would also work right through the middle ages anytime you need more Turks, Mongols or Turcopoles. A horseman with a "turban" and a spear and shield is good for the Middle East from ancient to 20th century AD, and drop the shield for a long gun, same figure, for later "towelheads".

Later periods: a shako is a shako is a shako. Button-up tunic, epaulets, long gun; cavalry is the same on a horsey, or with a sword waving about. Wouldn't this cover just about any stand-in needs from c. 1600 to mid 19th century? Order your colors now: red, blue, grey, yellow or white.

Modern: khaki with a gun and helmet and packs; grey ditto; blue-grey ditto; olive-drab ditto.

If you churned those out cheap, I mean really down in cost from actual period minis with accurate period details, and offered them in a decent colored appearance (very uniform of course), and sold them as "stand-ins" like I think I understand you here, I bet you would have a market.

An interesting idea. I'd come up with some ideas for 'generic' figures, myself. Useful for 'bulking up' an army for larger battles. You'd have your first row be the 'regular' units, with black 'shadows' behind them.

I think I'd rather go with paper minis than anything "abstract." Abstract to my mind means "counter" and in that case I'd rather just play a boardgame.

To me the look of the game is the single most important factor in being involved in this hobby. I'll happily substitute anything close, so Boers for Confederates, early war WW2 Germans for late war, heck even WW2 Soviets for Brits might pass muster. But as soon as you lay down a masking tape road, a felt cut out forest or counters I have no interest in the game. Likewise any game in which every unit needs to be marked with an order chit, a pipecleaner, and two markers for morale etc.

<Mark "Extra Crispy" Severin
Owner, Scale Creep Miniatures
scalecreep.com

Check out the new rules directory at
DeepFriedHappyMice.com

So who makes Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader figures? Is that in both 28mm and 15mm. I need some Confederates.
STT

I played a crimean game where are all the turks inf except for a few commands stands were ACW zoaves. and most the british and russians were veterans of the Nap wars. it was not too bad.

Extra Crispy

"To me the look of the game is the single most important factor in being involved in this hobby."

Same here.

"But as soon as you lay down a masking tape road, a felt cut out forest or counters I have no interest in the game. Likewise any game in which every unit needs to be marked with an order chit, a pipecleaner, and two markers for morale etc."

Here is where we part company. I think what you are saying is that because something is abstract, it automatically has to be cheesey as well.

Well, I'll have to ask you to stretch your brain a bit. What is it was possible to make something both abstract and elegant?

Swoppets by Wm Britains Ltd.

Everyone knows roads are best made using *duct* tape, not masking tape.

I would be interested in seeing it.
I would be opposed to paper. Paper is the same thing as chits, and I'm not keen on that.

I do not think the previous posters grasp the idea of a Stand In. A Stand in is a figure I'm using because I don't have the actual figure. If you have a "stand In" figure designed for a figure, then it is the figure.

Well, this project has begun, in conjunction with the help of a local cabinet maker. I will let you know as things progress, and, hopefully, will be able to provide some photos.