New Miniatures... Info?

[JohnnyQuest]

Don't expect everyone to blindly follow WotC's lead.

Thanks for the advice. If I may offer some to you, if you're going to make assumptions about someone's motivation, attribute the best motive possible. I don't expect anyone, including myself, to blindly follow WotC's lead. I do think that WotC's new prices are in the ballpark compared to Reaper pre-paints, and I'm hoping for better quality. If I don't get it, I won't be buying.

I agree that the random boosters were cheaper. That makes sense to me.

 

[JohnnyQuest]

Well, each to their own, though I think 'amazing' is stretching it by anyone's imagination. For me, it's a very poor sculpt (the face is very poorly defined, for example) and the painting is just plain poor.

Sure, to each their own; I can agree to disagree on this point. I will say that the Goblin's picture prompted several people at the seminar and online to declare it the best looking common ever produced, so at least I'm not alone in my insanity -- or is that blindness? Sometimes I can't tell

 

[Keith Robinson]

Thanks for the advice. If I may offer some to you, if you're going to make assumptions about someone's motivation, attribute the best motive possible.

Sorry, Johhny, the 'blind' comment wasn't aimed at you - it was just a general term for people who have been stuffed by wotc. Since I quoted you, however, I can see why it would come across that way, but it wasn't my intention.

 

[JohnnyQuest]

No problem -- thanks very much for explaining

 

[Dire Bare]

Wow... the greed is evident. They are really trying to grab hold of the aftermarket pricing...

No, the greed is not evident. Unless you consider the simple desire of a company to turn a profit greed.

The original sales model for D&D Miniatures, completely random packaging, worked well for years . . . but its time had come. Not only were production costs rising, but interest in the skirmish game was dying and sales of the minatures was going down with each new set.

There are still fans of the skirmish game of course, and many fans (skirmishers, collecters, and RPG fans) were perfectly happy with the completely random model. The completely random model helped keep prices down and SKU counts down to make the product more attractive to retail.

But there was/is a vocal (and perhaps even significant) group of fans who absolutely hated the completely random packaging. While I personally bought into the miniatures early, I too have grown tired of the completely random and blind packaging . . . . I hated spending $15 and maybe getting a handfull of minis that I wanted.

So WotC decided that rather than continue with a model that was no longer working or simply canceling the product line, they would try and reinvigorate the line to appeal to today's market.

I'm excited for the new packaging, for my PC mini needs I can see and buy exactly what I want! For my monster needs, I'll get at least one large mini that I want (the visible one) for my $15. I'm happy with the increased paint quality (assuming that it does actually increase) and I'm not happy with the increased cost . . . but I understand why the cost had to go up.

It's not greed, it's reality.

 

[avin]

Goblin's gonna probably look better in hand but, geez, it has no face... I like it anyway.

The increased paintsteps, sorry, that doesn't look true so far, at least for commons and uncommons.

Masterwork Goliath as sample was misleading and unfair. Wotc should never use a masterwork as example of things to come.

I understand that prices would go up someday, the wrong part is to taunt us with something we will never see.

Full Plate Tank was right.

 

[Aristotle]

Paint quality and sculpt interest were sketchy when the minis line first started, but the portability and cost was enough to get me buying... then the quality rose (pretty sharply imho) and I was more than happy to pay increased prices for the quality... The past couple sets have felt, with a few exceptions, like a huge step back and this next round is more of the same as far as I've seen so far.

I don't expect them all to look as nice as the paint masters... but a resemblance would be cool.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I agree on the resemblance part.

I mean, even if the goliath didn't look as good as the 'master', why did they change the color combo? The new one looks bad.

 

[CharlesRyan]

Wow... the greed is evident.

It's not greed; it's Merric's law. Plain and simple.

Randomization reduces cost. Period. Remove randomization and cost goes up. Period.

 

[JoeGKushner]

It's not greed; it's Merric's law. Plain and simple.

Randomization reduces cost. Period. Remove randomization and cost goes up. Period.

So they need to make things more random! Hell, when you go in the store, the game owner should roll a d8 and that's how many figures you get. It's all suprises up in WoTC house!

 

[Pbartender]

Look at the pictures... I'll wait to see with my own eyes before I'm totally convinced, but really... $3.00+ a minis is steep... it is a piece of plastic

You don't buy many toys for kids, do you?



Compare to Scheich plastic figurines... They are a much larger scale (about 1:20) than D&D and are "hand-painted", and so they can have much more detailed sculpts and paint jobs. They are also not random. However, a single mounted knight costs $15.00, and a pack of three generic foot soldiers costs about $18.00. A single animal, such as a dog, a horse or a tiger, costs about $6.00.

And of course, as with D&D minis, the ones displayed on the website are the best of the bunch. The actual models you find in the store suffer from all the same weapon-bending, and misaligned details in the paint that D&D minis suffer from.

 

[Jhaelen]

Masterwork Goliath as sample was misleading and unfair. Wotc should never use a masterwork as example of things to come.

Yup, that was a bad move. Maybe all they had available at the time were the masters.

Full Plate Tank was right.

No, just no.
FPT is the epitome of everything that is wrong in this world.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

It's not greed; it's Merric's law. Plain and simple.

Randomization reduces cost. Period. Remove randomization and cost goes up. Period.

So they can also reduce the costs on the rulebooks by randomizing which ones you buy. Sign me up.

 

[catsclaw227]

Full Plate Tank was right.

No, just no.
FPT is the epitome of everything that is wrong in this world.

I don't get this. Who or what is Full Plate Tank?

 

[Drkfathr1]

I'm more than willing to pay higher prices for higher quality...

But what we're seeing so far is not higher quality.

 

[avin]

I don't get this. Who or what is Full Plate Tank?

Full Plate Tank was a guy at Wotc that constantly pissed moderators. He complained all the time and took forever until he got the ban hammer.

He always said that the promised "increased paint steps" won't make difference, miniatures would stay the same. If I record well he said we would never see that Goliath, but I may be wrong here.

From what we can see so far, on Common and Uncommon minis, unfortunately he was right.

 

[Vocenoctum]

No, the greed is not evident. Unless you consider the simple desire of a company to turn a profit greed.

The original sales model for D&D Miniatures, completely random packaging, worked well for years . . . but its time had come. Not only were production costs rising, but interest in the skirmish game was dying and sales of the minatures was going down with each new set.

While sales may have been decreasing, just focusing on the random aspect was a bit odd for me. WotC sort of ignored:
1) the drop in quality
2) the change to DDM2
3) the switch to D&D4e

There were a lot of changes around the same time, and they used sliding sales to justify killing the line while it was still profitable and move to a new model.

 

[catsclaw227]

Full Plate Tank was a guy at Wotc that constantly pissed moderators. He complained all the time and took forever until he got the ban hammer.

He always said that the promised "increased paint steps" won't make difference, miniatures would stay the same. If I record well he said we would never see that Goliath, but I may be wrong here.

From what we can see so far, on Common and Uncommon minis, unfortunately he was right.

Thanks. I didn't get the reference.

 

[CharlesRyan]

So they can also reduce the costs on the rulebooks by randomizing which ones you buy. Sign me up.

If the rulebook product model was similar to that of miniatures (scores of individual items; average consumer buys many individual items), then, yes, randomization could reduce costs.

People think product cost = materials + labour + R&D/overhead. Yes, that's correct, but there's one other big factor: sales efficiency. If you only sell 80% of what you make, that remaining 20% that you landfill is part of the cost of the 80% that did get sold.

Randomization increases sales efficiency. When you only produce 3 booster releases a year, you only have to get the numbers right 3 times. (And product similarity makes it pretty easy to get the numbers right every time.)

When you produce, say, 42 separate miniatures SKUs in a year, you have to get the numbers right 42 times. (And since the products are distinctly different, getting them right is a real challenge. Guessing which of the Heroes SKUs is going to be insanely popular and which is going to languish in the shelf is virtually impossible on a regular basis.) Every item that doesn't sell through 100% is a tax on those that do sell.

It may be counterintuitive, but it's not greed. Reduced randomization = higher cost.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Well... quality would also increase sales efficiency.

Good miniature selection would also increase sales efficiency. (We've got this new core race but you know, let's forget about actually making a few commons of it. We need those slots for dwarves and elves because they're core races...)

Keeping the figures in scale to each other would also increase sales efficiency (halflings, dwarves, hobgoblins, bugbears, ogres, etc... I'm looking at you.)