Search results

Let me verify i can answer that.

Not the parts I've lived in. At least, not that I remember.

These are not mutually exclusive concepts.

Yeah, it has. To the point that when people ask about it it is "the book that shall not be named" but recent inquiries on the weekly streams have shown progress; it is in layout at this point with art having been ordered. Now how long between that and paper getting wet is another story...

I poked Troy to check on this, but I believe the book isn't "in" yet so ordering it direct from GR will get it from their new warehouse.

They've got a few things in various stages, but much of the M&M effort in the last few months has been tied up in the Valiant license. There's also a Vigilantes-oriented book in late production and a couple of other goodies I'm forgetting.

I might teared up a little at the credits.

And the accents were weird.

At least publishers are better about asking for it than they used to be. Back in the GPA days, the fights about raising the prices past other publishers' prices was insane. Thank you, John Nephew.

Typically far pricier than useful. Yes. You typically have a very large retainer - that's what that first target number they had was for. Timetables being what they are, this is the most expedient solution to ensure they can secure (and share) representation on this issue in the 10 calendar...

I am inclined to think it makes all flags red...

You can let people like things and ALSO recognize that MIGHT be a red flag.

There are two problems at play here. The big one - deadline. The date to get responses to this plan is REALLY close. The day before SDCC and then GenCon. There isn't time to set up a bundle/promissory campaign ( We'll finally release X!!!), etc. There just isn't. There's barely time to...

And there have been arguments that the "proper paperwork" doesn't apply here in just as many. Dunno. That is why you hire licensed SMEs.

Ayup.

I'm fairly certain that was the intent of the question, even if it wasn't the phrasing.

3. Judiciously reuse existing minis in the set as these are new customers who won't be so bothered by recycling

That was very different management. The kind of management that sold back or released IP back to creators. We're in Hedgefund land now.

They have done it with "lesser" properties. I can see no reason to preclude them from considering licensing out one of the settings, though I sincerely doubt there would be enough money in it for them to look at it seriously.

NOW THEY TELL ME.