Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Eego" data-source="post: 3026979" data-attributes="member: 6916">1, 2 and 5 are pretty much the same thing in my book.  Either a miniature is quality or it isn't.  You could separate them out, but only if you want to get in to judging casting quality vs. sculpting quality and since none of the judges run a casting company or are proffesional or even amature sculptors (that I know of), stick to the overall appearance of the mini.  3 is way too subjective.  If you have a single 35mm piece of a knight and he takes you an hour to assemble and requires power tools and plumbers epoxy, then there is definitly an engineering problem.  However, a spider by its very nature is hard to assemble, but could be the greatest figure ever.  Again, if you are going to judge based on this, make sure the judges are experienced modelers and know the difference between complex pieces and poor engineering.  6 is an interesting idea and could be a good standard if all DMs and players played the same adventures and used the same characters.  Since we play a game that allows for such varied options and this is a group that prides itself on supporting these options, how can you judge overall utility?  Now there are some obvious things that would get more use than others: fighters in plate armor with swords, kobolds with spears, wizards with pointy hats.  However, I don't see many occasions where figures based on such "high utility" ideas are worthy of much fanfare.4. is right out ridiculous.  First, how does pricing affect whether something is worthy of recognition or not.  Second and more importantly, how does one determine whether pricing is fair or arbitrary; correct or indulgent?  I'm not going to get in to the economics of it because that would take far too much space here.  The bottom line is companies charge what they charge.  If they are scuccessful, then it means that the consumers like their product enough to pay the asking price.  Subjectivly deciding if you would pay for something (that you received for free) is not a good basis for judging.Finaly Joe, calling out a company by name in this particular thread shows a bias on your part.  It's nothing personal.  I just highly disagree with your approach to judging in this case.</blockquote>

Verification