Why the D&D Miniature Line Failed...

[ShinHakkaider]

Failed?!

Haven't you heard of the new WotC minis line? They call it...



D&D 4e.

I'm sorry, I know that youre kidding but I really do think that 4E has a lot more in common with the actual D&D Miniatures Game Rules than 3E or 3.5 ever did. For some people (the simplicity, the encapsulated abilities, etc) that's actually a good thing.

Also isnt there an option in the DM's guide for playing 4E without a DM? That alone sounds like a miniatures game option (or Dungeon Boardgame option) to me.

 

[Echohawk]

AFAIK, a big reason they went with collectable minis was that it allowed them to produce a wide range of miniatures and only having them take up a small number of product slots (SKUs).

No. I say no because at one point, after they started, they were going to do some 'themed' packs that would also be in one SKU. [...] They didn't do it because they feared it would cut into people buying the random ones.

I seem to recall that the first themed pack (which I think was orc-themed) was canceled partly because of poor pre-orders for that set from distributors, at least compared to the Harbinger randomized boosters. So I think both of these reasons are probably correct -- distributors wanted fewer SKUs and WotC saw that the themed packs might cut into sales of the random boosters. I doubt the decision was based on a single reason.

 

[Glyfair]

Also isnt there an option in the DM's guide for playing 4E without a DM? That alone sounds like a miniatures game option (or Dungeon Boardgame option) to me.

Interestingly enough, there is an option in the AD&D DMG for exploring a dungeon in AD&D without a DM.

 

[Glyfair]

They didn't do it because they feared it would cut into people buying the random ones.

Actually, the stated reason from WotC at the time was that retailers pre-orders for the sets were abysmal (there was an orc set solicited to retailers as well).

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I think you might be the exception that proves the rule. You're easily the largest collector of DDM minis that I know of online

I obviously can't dispute what you know or don't, but if you asked, you'd find dozens of EN Worlders with more than my 2000 or so DDM figures.

That said, although I don't doubt I'm on the tail of the bell curve when it comes to number of minis, IME -- having met scores of players of the skirmish game, from literally all over the world -- my pattern of buying for RPG first and then concurrently (and then just for RPG again) is very, very common.

CMG minis are distributed in specific sets with limited production numbers being built in to the product line (i.e., X number of minis are produced for set Y and then, once those minis have been sold, no further minis are produced for set Y). It's a notable difference between how CMG minis and minis for full-blown wargames are marketed.

Just FYI, this is not how DDM worked. DDM had sets actually come back into print, due to unexpected demand. And as far as I'm aware, WotC has always deliberately and openly left open the possibility of reissuing old minis.

I'm not sharing this info to dispute your overall point with regard to differences between CMGs and wargames, but I am saying that if the above is your definition of a CMG, then DDM somehow was not one.

 

[Dire Bare]

Without going into the . . .

Hmmm, 17 sets of fully randomized miniatures over a five-and-a-half year period with over 1,000 unique miniatures . . .

Yeah, huge failure right there!

That actually sounds pretty darn successful to me. All good things come to an end. Seinfield is no longer produced, there are only three Star Wars movies (okay, maybe six to nine if you count the Ewok movies), Battlestar Galactica is in its last season . . .

Really what we have here are grumpy gamers who need to see "failure" in a product they do not personally care for. If you didn't like the D&D Miniatures line for any reason, well that's fine. But it doesn't make it a failure by any stretch. WotC has had more success with randomized prepainted plastic than any nonpainted metal line of minis.

Aaaaannnnd . . . they're not done with the model yet anyway. The skirmish game is going away (other than fan support), there will be non-random PC packs . . . but the monster packs will still be mostly random.

The older model didn't fail at all, it just ran its course and now WotC is changing gears slightly. It kinda blows my mind how this is "proof" to the disenfranchised that D&D minis was any kind of failure!

 

[jdrakeh]

Just FYI, this is not how DDM worked. DDM had sets actually come back into print, due to unexpected demand.

Really? I didn't know that. Which DDM sets were re-issued after their initial release?

 

[D'karr]

Really? I didn't know that. Which DDM sets were re-issued after their initial release?

Underdark for one. They announced that set specifically at DDXP 2 years ago.

 

[jdrakeh]

Underdark for one. They announced that set specifically at DDXP 2 years ago.

So, it was initially released at DDXP 2 and then again, as "Underdark" more recently?

 

[pawsplay]

Failed?!

Haven't you heard of the new WotC minis line? They call it...



D&D 4e.

Very true. Take a look at the Miniatures Handbook... low to mid level creatures to fill important tiers, a ton of feats and class abilities that involved situational bonuses or moving figures around on the board, the Marshal (aka Warlord) class, Warmages (aka blaster Wizards), all sorts of bursting/splashing/twinning/humming modifications to weapons, Aspects.

It was an interesting design experiment, and although it kind of slipped under the waters pretty early, some of the things that came out of it were clearly present in DDM, later 3.5 development, and ultimately 4e.