Scratchbuilding game markers

[TacticalPainter]

It seems I'm on a never ending quest to improve my game markers, or more to the point, make them serve their purpose and be a lot less conspicuous on the table as game markers. So, here I go again. Time will be the true test, but I think I have some workable ideas here. A longish post about the journey and the results for a set of new markers for Chain of Command here on the blog: http://thetacticalpainter.blogspot.com/2025/07/game-markers-for-chain-of-command.html

Here's a couple of examples of ideas for overwatch markers:

[fred]

They certainly look much better.

I do like how the tank commander ones work on the turrets of the tanks - surprisingly effective.

There is very much a conflict between playability and photography - whilst playing markers can be quite innocuous to the players as they are focused on what is happening, but in a photograph the same markers can really jump out as the viewer if only looking at the static image.

I do wonder if the Tactical markers will work in practice, or they will become confused with bits of terrain?

[TacticalPainter]

They certainly look much better.

I do like how the tank commander ones work on the turrets of the tanks - surprisingly effective.

There is very much a conflict between playability and photography - whilst playing markers can be quite innocuous to the players as they are focused on what is happening, but in a photograph the same markers can really jump out as the viewer if only looking at the static image.

I do wonder if the Tactical markers will work in practice, or they will become confused with bits of terrain?

So true. If I didn’t take so many photos for the game reports on the blog this may not have even been an issue for me, but as you say, a photograph highlights the markers.

Time will be the true test on this but I think the tactical markers will be okay. We tend to remember which units are tactical anyway, but the markers are different sizes to most of my other terrain pieces so hopefully that is enough to differentiate them.

[jon_1066]

The classic form vs function.  Make them blend in too much and they get lost, stand out too much and they ruin your visuals.  The dice holders is definitely a good idea with the different coloured dice. 

For tactical why not have a complete second platoon with figures lying down? (joking btw)  Maybe add a figure that is lying behind the bit of terrain if you have lots spare?  You could then swap it for a rifle man when they are tactical so you wouldn't get confused between the terrain and figures.

[mikedemana]

I'm 100% in agreement with your sentiments on markers in this post. I try to make mine as subtle and scenic as possible. I have even used those Gamers Grass preflocked bases to mark which figures have moved in post-apocalytpic skirmish. Typically, though, it is a bit of terrain. Rocks on a small circular bases, larger tufts on their own base -- those kind of things.

Now that you mention it, I am absolutely stumped what to use for Overwatch markers in our Star Wars games using Space Weirdos rules.. 

I have to count myself as against the tiny dice on a base crowd, though. Unless those dice a camouflaged to blend in with the base... 

Mike Demana

[TacticalPainter]

For tactical why not have a complete second platoon with figures lying down? (joking btw) 

Haha, don't tempt me!

[TacticalPainter]

I have to count myself as against the tiny dice on a base crowd, though. Unless those dice a camouflaged to blend in with the base... 

To be honest, I'm not a fan either, but I've yet to find a better way. Shock in Chain of Command can be as high as twelve and is constantly increasing/decreasing as units take more fire or their leaders try to rally them. It needs something that can be changed quickly and is easy to read. While rocks or other markers look better, keeping a count of them is a headache in comparison. Dials can work quite well, but tend to fit best with larger scale figures, I have some for my 28mm games in earlier periods but still find them quite big, they'd be out of proportion with 20mm.

[snitcythedog]

Firstly, I really dig your markers. 

Dials can work quite well, but tend to fit best with larger scale figures, I have some for my 28mm games in earlier periods but still find them quite big, they'd be out of proportion with 20mm.

Why not make the tops of the dials small scenic elements.  They can be textured, flocked and painted.  Maybe sand bags, supply boxes, fuel or even wood piles should work.    It would look much less intrusive to have a small pile of wood or a couple of sheep following the unit around the board instead of dice. 

[FifteensAway]

for midedemana - for the overwatch perhaps some sort of bird? 

[mikedemana]

While rocks or other markers look better, keeping a count of them is a headache in comparison.

For both my noise markers for zombie games and my wound markers in Mean Streets gang warfare ones, I arrange the scenic items on the base replicating the pattern of pips on a standard d6. So, three noise are in a diagonal row, six is two columns of three.

Maybe for Chain of Command you could find tufts that look like tiny explosions and arrange them 1-6 in that way? Just thinking out loud here. And if you can go up to 12, you have two bases of them next to your unit.

Birds for Overwatch, Fifteens? Hmm...I should probably just create some small technological looking doohickey and let every one, "This is the Overwatch token...!" 

Mike Demana

[FifteensAway]

Probably too expensive but:



From megatronic games.  I'm guessing there are more mechanical birds out there.

And if not birds, drones?  Either Khurasan or Alternative Armies have some which would be comparatively cheaper in 15 mm but still useable as 'chits' in 28 mm.

[TacticalPainter]

Firstly, I really dig your markers.  Why not make the tops of the dials small scenic elements.  They can be textured, flocked and painted.  Maybe sand bags, supply boxes, fuel or even wood piles should work.    It would look much less intrusive to have a small pile of wood or a couple of sheep following the unit around the board instead of dice.

You have a point and it inspired me to make some comparisons between the dial and the dice frames. First, we have 20mm figures on 20mm round bases next to one of my dice frame markers and one of my dials.





Quite a difference in size, in particular the dial's large footprint. Now look at the height of the dial. It's made up of three 2mm thick MDF rounds. After I've added texture and flock it measures over 8mm in height - almost half the height of a 20mm figure.



The dice frame footprint is much smaller.



If all my games were in open terrain, this might not matter, but playing Second World War means there will be buildings and I'm not sure there is room for figures and game markers this large in those tighter confines. There is the issue of form following function to consider.



I also wonder if the number on the dial is any less intrusive or out of place than the mini-dice? Both occupy the same amount of space.





To be honest, I'm not sure it makes a difference even with a larger scale, in this case some 28mm Saxons.





I think the dice frame is more discrete than the dial, but at the end of the day this is all about personal preference, not who is right or wrong. Interesting to run the comparison nonetheless.

[fred]

Very handy comparison photos.

I've always found the dials really quite cumbersome on the table. And I'd not realised that the number space on the dial and mini dice are pretty much the same size.

I've nearly always used mini dice - and I think am so used to seeing them on the table, I barely notice them. But a friend didn't like brightly coloured ones and bought lots of black and dark green mini dice, which are then less obtrusive than bright red and blue ones.

[anevilgiraffe]

the bottom layer on the dial is completely unnecessary though, you only need the top two and even then the upper one can be made from much thinner and equally robust material and you wouldn't need the handle to rotate two pieces.