GF9 to produce official D&D stuff

[Morrus]

Could you clarify what you are implying? I looked at the page, and the text says that the condition markers wrap around the minis, but the picture shows them laying around the base of the mini, taking up a lot of space (IMO).

Both statements are correct. They wrap around the minis by laying around the mini's base.

By "wrap around" they mean the curved edge of the tokens wrap around the edge of the mini base. The picture shows two tokens "wrapping around" the base of a mini. In this way, 6 or so tokens can "wrap around" the base. However, as you correctly point out, in doing so they take up a lot of space.

 

[darjr]

The mini's for game days and other events were also proving difficult to impossible to ship to other countries.

I want things I can hand to players to put in front of them to remind them and me that their character has 'issues' in the current combat. I'd also like a set that I can plunk down in front of me with room to note which monster it is affecting.

I really love 4e combat, but I'm not a huge fan of all the tokens or magnets or bottle caps or little glass beads that end up on the mat.

As for large battle mats, if you need something bigger than the crystal caste 36" x 48" or the chessex 34.5" x 48", chessex is supposed to release a [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]102” x 54” mat. I just noticed that large mat announcement, btw, so I don't know how long 'soon' is.
[/FONT]

 

[Tortoise]

While I like the way these look, I do not like the way they function. They take up too much play space and would be a chore to move with the miniatures.

I use Alea Tools tokens and find that the ferrous strips you attach to the bottom of the mini base allows the magnets in the tokens to adhere fine and they move with the mini.

I also use a number of other types of markers/indicators to help, and none of them get in the way like these GF9 tokens will.

Too bad. I like a lot of their other stuff.

Shame on WoTC for giving the ok on this design since it seems obvious this will not go over well in actual use. They should have had the respect for their licensing partner to point it out and suggest GF9 rethink the design instead of taking the money and ignoring the obvious drawbacks. The whole "we got ours, so screw you" mentality is bad business in the long term.

Having said this I must admit I'm anxious to see what else GF9 has in the pipeline and look forward to some potentially cool accessories.

 

[Holy Bovine]

Shame on WoTC for giving the ok on this design since it seems obvious this will not go over well in actual use. They should have had the respect for their licensing partner to point it out and suggest GF9 rethink the design instead of taking the money and ignoring the obvious drawbacks. The whole "we got ours, so screw you" mentality is bad business in the long term.

Uh, what?

I don't think you really know how businesses really function.

And, uh, what?

 

[samursus]

I think its pretty safe to say either:

a) No one at GF9 has any experience with 4e combat using miniatures (or any fantasy miniatures gaming, one could argue) or,

b) Those persons who do were not involved in this project.

I mean, this looks they have a prototype made and everything. I hope they haven't gone into production yet, and maybe have had a chance to read this thread.

The only thing I can think of, is that they are only thinking of Axis & Allies-type stuff? Modern warfare, where there isn't a lot of hand-to-hand (base-to-base) combat? Even Warhammer has lots of base to base fighting (I think, no exp here).

 

[Treebore]

I'll just stick with Fiery Dragon's tokens. I have been happy with them for over 5 years now.

 

[Nifft]

Both statements are correct. They wrap around the minis by laying around the mini's base.

By "wrap around" they mean the curved edge of the tokens wrap around the edge of the mini base. The picture shows two tokens "wrapping around" the base of a mini. In this way, 6 or so tokens can "wrap around" the base. However, as you correctly point out, in doing so they take up a lot of space.

If that's true, then IMHO they're misusing the term. "Around" implies encirclement, rather than mere adjacency.

Example of "around": (o)

Example of "adjacent": (o

If they wanted to use an anarchic term -- which is good practice in fantasy products -- they could say the markers "cleave to" the mini's base.

- - -

Anyway, tags look fairly useless.

The best condition markers are little balls of brightly colored modeling clay that are just tacky enough to stick to a mini (or its base).

Cheers, -- N

 

[Dire Bare]

Shame on WoTC for giving the ok on this design since it seems obvious this will not go over well in actual use. They should have had the respect for their licensing partner to point it out and suggest GF9 rethink the design instead of taking the money and ignoring the obvious drawbacks. The whole "we got ours, so screw you" mentality is bad business in the long term.

I'll echo the Holy Bovine here, ah, what?

It's cool if you don't care for the design, there are a number of posters in this thread who'd agree with you. But "shame"? Your attack on WotC is nonsensical.

 

[Dire Bare]

If that's true, then IMHO they're misusing the term. "Around" implies encirclement, rather than mere adjacency.

Nitpick, and wrong.

If you are going to go around the corner, will you be circling something?

 

[Dire Bare]

I think its pretty safe to say either:

a) No one at GF9 has any experience with 4e combat using miniatures (or any fantasy miniatures gaming, one could argue) or,

b) Those persons who do were not involved in this project.

I mean, this looks they have a prototype made and everything. I hope they haven't gone into production yet, and maybe have had a chance to read this thread.

The only thing I can think of, is that they are only thinking of Axis & Allies-type stuff? Modern warfare, where there isn't a lot of hand-to-hand (base-to-base) combat? Even Warhammer has lots of base to base fighting (I think, no exp here).

GF9 definitely has experience with wargames rather then roleplaying games, but I don't think your assumptions are "safe" at all. Kind of insulting to GF9, a good company with a good track record.

In a miniatures wargame, your miniatures often move about, and any associated counters would then need to move with them. Some wargamers don't like this, and don't use tokens, or only use tokens during a pitched battle when the minis aren't moving around much.

Not too much different in a D&D game using miniatures. The minis will be moving around a lot, and the use of tokens would be found annoying by some. But, there are those who it would not bother, and who enjoy the use of tokens and markers along with their minis. I'm one of them.

Will these D&D tokens sell well or find their way quickly to FLGS bargain bins? We'll see this summer, I think they'll do okay. I'm excited!