|
Thundercloud posted:At that point all the problems at Wargames Factory stopped. To the point where they are now a go to contractor for other mini companies and will take concept art and turn it into minis, as they have done with some of the Malifaux plastics. There's seriously a world of difference between the kits they put out today and their earliest lines. Is there a timeline for when the changeover happened? I'm curious to see how it overlaps with their production values.
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2014 12:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:32 |
|
|
...
Nostalgia4ColdWar fucked around with this message at 04:19 on Mar 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
Personally I like the Pathfinder setting (Golarion) but would never play Pathfinder. (I'm basically done with all 3.x stuff.) You might find value in creating adventures in your own setting which could be used with Pathfinder, 13th Age, Labyrinth Lord, Dungeon World, and even FATE.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
...
Nostalgia4ColdWar fucked around with this message at 04:19 on Mar 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
Cross-posting from the Mantic thread:moths posted:I've also noticed that the plastic sprues they (Mantic) do produce tend to be relatively system-agnostic, which is really great plan. You're not limiting your customers to a narrow band of Kings of War players with a particular army. Plastic zombies and astro-zombies are useful in almost about any fantasy, sci-fi, or horror wargame or RPG. Mantic's gotten some additional mileage out of their plastic kits by issuing some metal upgrade / conversion bits - but these can sometimes be a bear to work with. I'm no insider, but this seems like a pretty obvious point that some companies are missing: Your super-specialized plastic kits are killing you. The success stories in plastic miniatures are kits with broad appeal, flexibility, and high perceived value. Historical stuff works in plastic. Generic fantasy and sci-fi works. So how is Wyrd making this work and not GW? Are they making it work?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
Low likely volume of sale is exactly why GW converted a lot of its figures to finecast instead of plastic. The sorts of models that only someone playing that faction will want, sometimes, and when they do, they only want one or maybe at most two. That said, GW is the market leader as far as tabletop wargames go, so making their figures be appealing for other people's games probably strikes them as counterproductive. Yeah, they'd make marginally more sales, but in doing so they're helping to support a competing game system's market share. On the other hand, market newcomers don't really need to worry too much that their figures are helping GW compete with them: Mantic can sell plenty of zombie minis to people who play Vampire Counts in Warhammer, but it's not likely that by doing so, they're discouraging anyone from playing their own tabletop system. I think there are parallels to the historic incompatibility of mac vs. PC systems. Nowadays mac hardware is i86-based, but back in the day, there was no cross-compatibility at all (and if you wanted to buy something that worked with your Mac, third-party hardware was hard to come by and typically more expensive than third-party PC hardware). Apple's approach wasn't necessarily wrong; then again, IBM's approach (allowing PC-compatible hardware to exist in the first place) wasn't necessarily wrong either, for the time and given what they were trying to do with their products. All that said: low-selling plastic kits might be a problem for GW, and given how poorly Finecast has done, I'm interested in seeing what they decide to do about that. One option is to simply stop selling so many specialized, named character models - players can use a generic warleader model to represent Lord Farthington already, if they want (which is another reason Lord Farthington, as a $40 finecast kit, sells so poorly). But kits like the Tomb Kings Ushabti Warriors? Tomb Kings is one of the poorest-selling armies for Warhammer, but within that army, Ushabti are pretty useful. A plastic kit that actually let you choose how to equip them might sell reasonably well: by rule, they can take either a great weapon, a great bow, or two hand weapons: by kit, you have to buy them with great bows or with great weapons, as finecast models, for $52 for three. The old metal models (which only come with great weapons) are available enough on eBay, and for less money, that I'm sure the finecast ones have sold really poorly. Add in the fact that you can't get them armed with two hand weapons at all, unless you do some tricky conversion work, and you can see why that'd be the case, even though as a unit in the game, they're pretty good. So that's an example of a borderline case: a plastic Ushabti kit would appeal to Tomb Kings players... but Tomb Kings aren't very popular (even though they have an 8th edition army book, they're considered underpowered against other 8th edition armies) and they have no cross-army appeal (you're not likely to buy the kits in order to convert them into something for another army, even if they're plastic and cheaper). GW's going to have to face the issue eventually, but I don't think it's likely they'll do so by reworking their whole line to make their miniatures more appealing to people who play Hordes or Mantic's game or Reaper's game or whatever. And I'm not sure that's necessarily a mistake, if they can find a way to just make Warhammer more appealing than it is right now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
It may well be worth noting on that score that GW *don't seem to be releasing anywhere near as many new named characters these days* - they're doing a LOT more (particularly for the Fantasy range) multi-part plastic generic characters, which are cool and great kits, but a touch overpriced for me. I'll probably pick up a couple of the dorfs though because I love the aesthetic of GW dorfs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
50 Foot Ant posted:Where does that leave the mage in the group? Or have you some how addressed this (mainly the last one)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Thanks to Ron Edwards, the story games movement now has its very own FATAL.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
demota posted:Thanks to Ron Edwards, the story games movement now has its very own FATAL. That's unfair, there's no mention of rape or whores.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:That's unfair, there's no mention of rape or whores. Look again. (Playtest doc is out.) At some point this industry will have to realize how making, actively supporting and even encouraging this stuff makes the hobby look. Ron Edwards in particular, who wanted to make high-concept, high-visibility games, should understand the knockback effect this can have on the hobby.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:That's unfair, there's no mention of rape or whores. The playtest PDF posted:The gentry fight one another, and if you lose, you can expect to be hung from your feet and eviscerated, so you can look at your guts while you die. Or if male, castrated and kept naked on a leash in your enemy's hall; if female, given no food and raped daily until you starve. Just one of the many citations about just how super-duper rape-happy everyone is in the darkest of dark ages. You're spot on about the whores, though, but probably only because there's no form of currency with which to pay them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
There's, uh, plenty of mention of rape in the playtest document. Whole paragraphs of it. Can't remember any whores; I bet it's because no-one's invented money in Edwards's 10th-century equivalent Dark Age setting. E:f;b, and how!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
Ah. I hadn't read the playtest doc! Greeeeeeeat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
For everyone eager to participate in discussion about rape as an intrinsic setting component, Ron Edwards has set up a conciliatory but not quite understanding thread here: http://indie-rpgs.com/adept/index.php?topic=303.0 For example, he doesn't seem to have twigged that the veiling of rape isn't the eradication of sexuality, as rape is foremost, before ALL other things, about power.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
demota posted:Thanks to Ron Edwards, the story games movement now has its very own FATAL. Well, we already had Poison'd, which Vincent Baker doubled down on and insisted that if you don't include rape in your sessions, you are Doing It Wrong. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
fez_machine posted:For everyone eager to participate in discussion about rape as an intrinsic setting component, Ron Edwards has set up a conciliatory but not quite understanding thread here: With respect, I think you're misreading him here. I think he's giving a list of ways of veiling rape, two of which involve pretending that nothing involving genitals ever happens in the game. I admit the text could be more clear, but his movie/TV examples make no sense in he's saying that rape is an expression of sexuality. If anything, I think he's coming close to saying that veiling rape is eradicating violence, at least in terms of the violent media he's talking about-Shiro's disguising in The Seven Samurai is presented as a perfectly reasonable thing to do when inviting hardened killers into your village. If I'm reading him right, it's certainly entirely consistent with your point about rape as power. Still, we're both just reading a not-perfectly-clear text. His willingness to engage on the subject is laudable. Perhaps asking him might be a thing to do?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
The part where I roll my eyes so hard that the flip into my head is the fact that whenever someone mentions human misery it always makes rape intrinsic. Sure I can understand making a game about human misery but you have such a large pool to draw from that you could do just fine without including rape.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
And there's also the "rape only happens to women" implication, just to pile awful on top of awful...
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Anna Kreider posted an email conversation with Ron about the game. I am not totally convinced because Ron likes to talk about how well he handles this stuff and I've read Sex and Sorcery, so I can compare his self-perception to reality. Still and all it was a good conversation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
Jamey Stegmaier wants me to ask people what questions they would like him to answer about crowdfunded publishing (or making TG publishing in general?). Any questions he answers will show up (likely in video form) on his website. I'm going through multiple channels to get these questions but I figured you guys probably are my best bet for good questions. He has told me he's more interested and well-versed in publishing than game design, in case you were going to ask. If anyone is interested please PM me or shoot an email to signoise@gmail.com . In any case if you ever had a question for the guy to answer in a video here's a chance. Alternatively, since I have him so interested I'm going to see if I can get some other companies involved in a presenter capacity, like CMON since they're local, so if you have any general topics you think would be cool to discuss, I'll take those too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
2 things: Saw this on a Facebook group post about a job opening at FFG: http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Fantasy-Flight-Games-Reviews-E107648.htm In other news, I recorded a panel on indie boardgame crowdfunding at PAX East this weekend http://slangdesign.com/rppr/2014/04/panel-discussion/indie-boardgames-design-and-crowdfunding-panel-at-pax-east-2014/
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
Every female model in fantasy and sci-fi wargaming primarily exists to titillate men. Discuss.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
Let's not. Better topic: How international postage costs (+customs) suck for international kickstartees. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/941796898/cat-6-multi-plex-28mm-miniature-tabletop-terrain?ref=discovery Lovely pre-painted wargames-terrain kickstarter, except for $100-dollar tier, I'd have to pay +50 postage and about +40 more of VAT+customs charge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:Every female model in fantasy and sci-fi wargaming primarily exists to titillate men. Discuss. I'm going to say no as well. Not because it doesn't need to be discussed, but because that pretty much only happens in kickstarter. For example, I don't see any naked Adepta Sororitas figures in my cursory glance over GW's website.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
No, I think discussing how the traditional games industry has failed to grow up is kind of important. Of course, it's not solely a minis gaming trend, but there's a lot of bad to be had there, probably because of how visual it is compared to board games or RPGs. Even stuff that tries to buck trends like Warmachine still has that kind of garbage permeating it. The question is, is there anything that can be done to stop it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
That's a bigger question. That's a much bigger question. The only thing I can think of is a giant purge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:2 things: Man this is really depressing, and it's going to make it hard to pimp their poo poo at work, and to buy it myself. I'd like to lie and say I'm not going to buy FFG stuff from now on, but I got an LCG monkey on my back and he wants some goddamn packs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Serious question, is there any reasonably sized game company that's just awesome to work for, even for the guys down in the trenches? When you see reports from something like Wizards that make it seem like an awesome zany company to work for, it's usually still just a dozen or so folks near the top of the company who have made it to the point where Mark Rosewater gushes about them in his column and I have to assume that a majority of the folks in the org chart never see anything like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:Every female model in fantasy and sci-fi wargaming primarily exists to titillate men. Discuss. The spider demon is basically Andariel from Diablo 2. http://imgur.com/zNO1XOe Just unimaginative I guess
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
signalnoise posted:The spider demon is basically Andariel from Diablo 2. http://imgur.com/zNO1XOe I actually thought Visara the Dreadful from MTG first, but I can see where you're coming from. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
adhuin posted:Let's not. No, please, lets. This is becoming something of an issue with the hobby in general. (To the point where a lot of these are  , while being meant to be used in games.)Of course we can freely accept that there's exceptions and outliers, but that's what they are and that's a problem. Basically, the industry as a whole (and not just kickstarter, we're talking Infinity and Soda Pop and others making direct-to-retail stuff too) isn't just stuck but actively sliding towards this. Do we want to change it? If we do, the wrong approach is to go "let's not talk about it" or to just roll eyes and move on. And if someone doesn't want it any different, can the same person step up and explain why titillating their penis is essential to the wargame experience? I still remember a period in my life where the only local wargaming club had an overt "no girls" rule and every game was punctuated with rape jokes, and I don't find that a desirable state of affairs. JerryLee posted:Serious question, is there any reasonably sized game company that's just awesome to work for, even for the guys down in the trenches? Well, I wouldn't hold your breath; here's the reports from Fantasy Flight Games. (I guess we can try inputting other elfgame companies on this, if we want to be depressed.) e: I can't find Palladium on this, but then again that one got so bad it became public. Rulebook Heavily fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Man this is really depressing, and it's going to make it hard to pimp their poo poo at work, and to buy it myself. I'd like to lie and say I'm not going to buy FFG stuff from now on, but I got an LCG monkey on my back and he wants some goddamn packs. I've done a little freelance contracting for FFG, and everyone I've met or worked with was kind, clear, and professional. I have had no interaction with the upper tiers, but I am happy to support the work of those I have interacted with, and want to support the continued production of high-quality products in the hobby. I would be willing to pay more for my hobby if it meant everyone made a living wage, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
I got a bunch of anonymous hate and abuse for selling a 64-page full art supplement with a color cover, internal hyperlinking table of contents and index, a share-alike creative commons license with no watermarking in the pdf and an upcoming PoD version for 7.50$. Most wanted it cheaper. A few said I was a terrible person for not simply giving it away to everyone for free and asking for any money at all. You can see it has an award for being a bestseller on its site, and it still hasn't made its cost back in sales. A post made by Fred Hicks even inspired me to speak out about it. (And all credit due to Hicks for taking a stance.) If everyone could be convinced that the hobby shouldn't be on a constant hunger-and-shoestring budget, I'd be the first to fully embrace working in it. But open gaming licenses and PWYW models have created new expectations, and those expectations are that people will do work for them for free or else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
We can all agree that nerds buying sexual anime figurines is shameful and toxic to the hobby, literally no one in this forum will say otherwise expect maybe one person who sees nothing wrong with it. So there is no productive discussion to be had. I guess you are going to have to go out and do something about it yourself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
Of course we can have productive discussion about it. Or we can say "everyone agrees", pretend the problem is solved and tell people to go do something about it while conveniently omitting any mention of personal action, that can happen too. If we want to discuss the state of things, how they can be improved, what actions people have taken and so on, that's perfectly fine. I'm not personally familiar with any companies taking an active stance on it, unfortunately, but if someone knows some I'll be happy to learn. e: Yeah, see? Point being made for me right there about wargamers. e: Actually, I'll expand on what I've tried to do. I shopped around for sculptors for a wargame skirmish project about a year ago, and I made a list of criteria which included guidelines for female models. Most of the portfolios I got utterly failed that; one was literally nothing but pictures of nude women sculpts. No one matched the criteria. When I sent followups, some artists got angry or threatening, and one said they'd "blacklist" me for future projects or recommend others to stay away, so I quietly dropped the project for a while. I still want to do it, but that's the state of things as they are: sculptors are used to autonomy and are not used to criticism, oversight or strict guidelines, which is a problem in a production process where you can't just send a sculpt back to tweak it and the metal is boiling. It's a problem where everyone at every level of production has to know exactly the problem that's being addressed and agree on it, and that's hard to do. Rulebook Heavily fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
Kwyndig posted:I'm going to say no as well. Not because it doesn't need to be discussed, but because that pretty much only happens in kickstarter. For example, I don't see any naked Adepta Sororitas figures in my cursory glance over GW's website.  Sisters Repentia are official GW figures that basically boil down to "what if we made a Sisters of Battle unit that was dressed in some sort of leather fetish gear with their tits nearly spilling out, wouldn't that be rad?" I'm largely convinced that the main reason that GW doesn't really seem to go for the cheesecake angle as much as they do huge hulking muscle-men in power armor is because they've never made any bones about the fact that their primary source of cashflow comes from young boys who see a Space Marines display in the window of a GW store and get mom and dad to shell out $200 for space army men and accessories, and as their customers get older GW gives progressively less of a poo poo about them. If for some reason GW decided that they wanted to actively court their older, groggy fanbase I have no doubt in my mind that the number of female characters displaying conspicuous amounts of cleavage would start to sharply rise if the guys in Marketing thought it would earn them a bigger payday.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
Congratulations on the kickass redtext man! I have yet to spend a cent on making tradgame content myself. Mostly because I've never released anything ever 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Yeah the thing is the issue goes a lot beyond sexual anime figurines -- frankly even that claim is wildly disingenuous; the fact is even in Warmachine/Hordes, which does have some very good female models, for every Makeda you've got a Deneghra-- it's still a situation where you're listing off the 'good' models by name instead of saying 'well, a few are bad'. And it gets very very old to see even dynamic female poses erring far more towards the sexy than the powerful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:32 |
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:I got a bunch of anonymous hate and abuse for selling a 64-page full art supplement with a color cover, internal hyperlinking table of contents and index, a share-alike creative commons license with no watermarking in the pdf and an upcoming PoD version for 7.50$. Most wanted it cheaper. A few said I was a terrible person for not simply giving it away to everyone for free and asking for any money at all. You can see it has an award for being a bestseller on its site, and it still hasn't made its cost back in sales. A post made by Fred Hicks even inspired me to speak out about it. (And all credit due to Hicks for taking a stance.) Do you think this has the same etiology as FFG not paying their employees a living wage for reasonable hours though? I mean, they (or Wizards, or GW, or) are the ones selling the $30-50 and up rulebooks, and there isn't the sort of expectation that there is with tiny indie stuff that it be given away for free or PWYWed--plenty of people will bitch endlessly about the rising price of Magic or 40K (  ) but they generally don't literally feel entitled to have it given to them for free, or if they do, they're the far lunatic fringe.I'm not trying to say that your situation and ones like it aren't legit unto themselves, I'm just trying to figure out if it's actually related to a discussion about toxic employment practices at the large(r) companies, which seems to me as though it's more closely connected to capitalist corporate culture than it is to gamers expecting things for free. e: to put it another way, if I want to support someone writing a PDF or casting minis in their garage, it's as simple as buying from them, but supporting the fine folks who actually make larger games is a much iffier proposition because when I buy some $40 space marines or a $50 rulebook I have no way of knowing whether they actually get more than pennies on the dollar, if that. JerryLee fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:43
|
|