• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

GF9 to produce official D&D stuff

These look OK to me. I can also see someone not liking them.

I don't get all the fretting though. Shame on WOTC? The designers have obviously not played D&D? This doesn't meet the definition of around? What's with the exaggerations and overreactions? They're just some friggen condition markers!
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

My point (obviously missed by a few folks) with my "shame on WoTC" comment is that they of all people should know how their game plays out and how a product like this will interact with that mode of play.

It is pretty obvious that these tokens, no matter how nifty they look and they do look nifty, will be more hindrance than help in a crowded/active combat.

The people at WoTC giving such an OK should know better than to just let anything pass muster, especially since they not only make the game, but most of their employees play it regularly and would know.

There are three negative aspects to this: A> taking licensing money that might not be easily recouped on a product when they could have helped the people paying the money make it back by giving good advice; B> allowing your brand logo be stamped on something that could easily flop because you failed to give that same advice; and C> as a licensee I wouldn't want to work with a company that doesn't take the time to point out a design flaw in something, instead just saying sure, ok, and ignoring it after getting my company's money.

That's my whole point. Read the rest of my original post for some positive comments that haven't been quoted. (Unless of course you prefer to argue rather than discuss topics).
 

It is pretty obvious that these tokens, no matter how nifty they look and they do look nifty, will be more hindrance than help in a crowded/active combat.

That's your opinion, of course. It's not objective fact. My own opinion is that tokens like this (similar to those used in Warhammer FRP 3e) are pretty handy. They've also been used for ages in wargames without issue (and wargames are, of course, far more mini-intensive than D&D 4e is). FWIW, I've formed my opinion based on the experience of using tokens like this in RPGs and wargames.
 
Last edited:

Wow... someone rolled a one.

The execution of these "status" chits makes me think that GF9 ended up being either the lowest bid and/or they ended up being constrained by some WoTC suit's decisions. Personally, I think doing something that is alittle like hero clicks would have been better, however that would mean WoTC would need a use a license or pay off royalties.
 
Last edited:

It looks interesting enough that I will take a closer look when they reach my FLGS. The markers could work for most situations, our battles aren't that often all minis completely surrounded by other minis, so there's often space somewhere to put a marker.

Sure some defender might be in the thick of it, which could be a bit problematic. But then I could see me placing the markers by a proxy token, for easy reference. Sort of like "this token is Regdar, he is stunned, uncounscious and bloodied".

It'll work for us.

/M
 

Slightly un-related, and it's gonna sound a bit... picky of me perhaps... but, if this were me and I was putting out my first D&D product... I would make sure not to use a font that is associated (at least immediately by me) with Warhammer...

dnd_vs_warhammer.jpg


...just saying ...don't use the exact same font :p
 
Last edited:

These look OK to me. I can also see someone not liking them.

I don't get all the fretting though. Shame on WOTC? The designers have obviously not played D&D? This doesn't meet the definition of around? What's with the exaggerations and overreactions? They're just some friggen condition markers!

I'm with you on that. I can understand why some folks might not care for the product, but the overreactions on this thread are a bit odd. Or maybe not, this is the internet. Now we've added a font analysis? Sheesh!

My point (obviously missed by a few folks) with my "shame on WoTC" comment is that they of all people should know how their game plays out and how a product like this will interact with that mode of play.

Yes, obviously we've missed your brilliant point. If only I'd seen it earlier, I wouldn't have been tricked into thinking these markers are pretty cool. Thanks for the help!
 

Now we've added a font analysis? Sheesh!!

I tend to notice these things, and comment when I do - but thanks for labeling my post as part of the "over-reacting" crowd.

You have been very defensive (and I am not entirely sure why), so I understand the hasty reaction and desire to point out something like this to help make your case, but unfortunately I am not speaking to the value of the product in any way.

Anyway, I'm just clarifying that I am not attempting to come down on the product, as you are implying. I had not even read the entire thread when I made that post - after all, I was not referring to the product itself.

I can not comment either way on their potential value at my game table as I don't have them in my hand. With that said, I don't imagine I would use them as I have already created my own tool for this aspect of the game.

It sounds like you are really into them and that's awesome! I hope they work out well for you (and everyone else who ends up getting them). And for everyone else, well, they don't have to buy them so it's a win-win right! ...right?!

;)
 

Yes, obviously we've missed your brilliant point. If only I'd seen it earlier, I wouldn't have been tricked into thinking these markers are pretty cool. Thanks for the help!

Sadly you think it's appropriate to take this into the realm of the personal with sarcastic comments like that instead of maintaining a mature discussion. No discussion of the positives and other options from my original post, only negativity? This isn't a discussion at this point unfortunately.
 

Nitpick, and wrong.

If you are going to go around the corner, will you be circling something?
You're half right, it is a nitpick.

But the phrase under discussion is "wrap around". If one were to "hang around", that does not imply encirclement either.

Hope that clears things up for you, -- N
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top