Help support TMP

"Mixing flats and 3d: just an aesthetic question" Topic

11 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please don't make fun of others' membernames.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Fantasy Discussion Message Board

Back to the Flats Message Board

Areas of Interest


Featured Hobby News Article

Featured Link

Featured Ruleset

Featured Profile Article

Mighty Armies: I Hate Losing!

Editor Julia loses her first game of Mighty Armies.

Featured Book Review

Featured Movie Review

591 hits since 25 Sep 2021
©1994-2022 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Gorgrat26 Sep 2021 8:51 p.m. PST

I don't believe there is such a thing as right or wrong in aesthetics (as long as we're not talking prurient stuff) but I think there are things that work and things that don't.

That said, I'm curious what other think about Litko's flat, unpainted plastic mounts for 3d painted miniatures from an aesthetic perspective.

I'll keep my thoughts to myself for the moment.


robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP27 Sep 2021 1:43 a.m. PST

Title does not match with text.
Answer to title is "no." Pure 2D you can work with, but the first 3D ruins the effect.
Answer to text is that I'd have been very tempted by them, especially for 28mm skirmish, had matching castings been available. But for me, they came out 30 years too late. At the height of the slottabase era, or today with 3D printing, maybe.

Gorgrat27 Sep 2021 1:56 a.m. PST

Don't understand what doesn't match?

JimDuncanUK27 Sep 2021 2:57 a.m. PST

Do you have a picture of 'Litko's flat, unpainted plastic mount'?

FusilierDan Supporting Member of TMP27 Sep 2021 3:09 a.m. PST

For those who don't know what these are. link

Neat idea, functional for a small fantasy game maybe but not really my thing.

Short answer, no.

JimDuncanUK27 Sep 2021 3:47 a.m. PST

Definitely no

GildasFacit Sponsoring Member of TMP27 Sep 2021 4:39 a.m. PST

Definitely not – paint up a mounted & dismounted version.

79thPA Supporting Member of TMP27 Sep 2021 7:28 a.m. PST

Looks odd to me. A friend of mine just put a poker chip under a figure to designate that it was mounted.

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP27 Sep 2021 10:04 a.m. PST

Gorgrat, both flats and bases are 2D. To "mix flats and 3D" you have to introduce something three-dimensional to the mix.

Personal logo Sgt Slag Supporting Member of TMP27 Sep 2021 10:22 a.m. PST

I bought some, glued them together (poorly). They did not work out for me, so I no longer use them. For aesthetics, I could not care less. If they had not fallen apart on me, I would use them as they are functional, for my RPG sessions. Function wins out, in my RPG sessions.

I will clarify that I would only use them for my RPG sessions. I would never use them in my 2e BattleSystem games. For the 2e BS games, I would only use a proper mount and rider figure combo. YMMV. Cheers!

CeruLucifus04 Oct 2021 9:54 p.m. PST

Clearly the market needs this concept. Ages ago I painted perhaps a dozen D&D adventurers in both foot and mounted versions, and we used them all the time, as well as the single mounted models.

More recently I wanted something easier to transport and I made this exact sort of thing: cutting up a plastic toy horse with a dowel section in the middle for a figure to stand on. Mine worked fine but in play were too fiddly – I made them in front and back halves so another figure could be inserted in the middle to ride tandem. A feature needed so rarely it can be proxied when needed. Need to revisit the concept using single bases.

Having made such that look better, I especially balk at the Litko prices. If they were $20 USD for a pack of 10, I might pick up at the hobby store just to have them, but not at $5 USD per single.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.