Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dire Bare" data-source="post: 5282242" data-attributes="member: 18182">Am I being oversensitive?&nbsp; Probably.&nbsp; But my post was in response to both you and Verdande, and now both of you have used charged words like &quot;crappy&quot; and &quot;silly&quot; rather than simply, &quot;I don't care for how WotC bases 'long' creatures&quot;.Did ya miss the part about &quot;long&quot; creatures in my post?&nbsp; I focused on cavalry, but snakeys and crocs certainly fit the bill.&nbsp; And to bemoan their &quot;squareness&quot; is simply wrong.&nbsp; The WotC D&amp;D minis line certainly does place these types of creatures on round bases (that fit within perfect squares), but if you don't care for the base you can remove it and replace it with a rectangular cavalry base.&nbsp; The creatures themselves are not &quot;square&quot; their bases are.&nbsp; And bases are easy to change.&nbsp; And again, don't forget the WotC Heroscape line, which actually does use cavalry bases for larger creatures, both humanoids and &quot;long&quot; dragons and such.Of course, WotC and other companies offer &quot;long&quot; creatures posed in a &quot;square&quot; way (like a coiled up snake or a rearing dragon), but they don't do this with all (or even most) &quot;long&quot; creatures by any means.&nbsp; And the monsters that could be posed either &quot;square&quot; or &quot;rectangular&quot; are legit either way, and if you have a preference for one or the other, that's fine too.&nbsp; But it's not silly nor crappy if a company poses creatures in a way you personally don't care for.Nobody said it was.Read the sentence again.&nbsp; &quot;Everybody's favorite company to take potshots at . . .&quot;&nbsp; not &quot;Everybody's favorite company&quot;.&nbsp; And with how the &quot;squareness&quot; complaints are put forth, that's how I see the relevant posts, as taking unfair potshots.However, I do think we're both wrong on how &quot;most&quot; companies do things.&nbsp; Companies that make miniatures for rpg and wargaming play are in a rather small, niche industry.&nbsp; Outside of WotC, Games Workshop, and perhaps Reaper . . . who are &quot;most&quot; companies?&nbsp; Niche companies within a niche business that don't produce miniatures on the same scale as WotC and GW.&nbsp; After some thought, I disagree that most companies put their &quot;long&quot; creatures on &quot;long&quot; bases . . . but I also disagree that most companies put their &quot;long&quot; creatures on &quot;square&quot; bases.&nbsp; Some do it one way, some do it another.&nbsp; Pick your preference and don't waste time slamming companies who make legitimate decisions that you simply don't agree with.And always remember bases are easy to change, even molded bases on plastic, resin, or metal sculpts.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dire Bare, post: 5282242, member: 18182"] Am I being oversensitive? Probably. But my post was in response to both you and Verdande, and now both of you have used charged words like "[I]crappy[/I]" and "[I]silly[/I]" rather than simply, "[I]I don't care for how WotC bases 'long' creatures[/I]". Did ya miss the part about "long" creatures in my post? I focused on cavalry, but snakeys and crocs certainly fit the bill. And to bemoan their "squareness" is simply wrong. The WotC D&D minis line certainly does place these types of creatures on round bases (that fit within perfect squares), but if you don't care for the base you can remove it and replace it with a rectangular cavalry base. The creatures themselves are not "square" their bases are. And bases are easy to change. And again, don't forget the WotC Heroscape line, which actually does use cavalry bases for larger creatures, both humanoids and "long" dragons and such. Of course, WotC and other companies offer "long" creatures posed in a "square" way (like a coiled up snake or a rearing dragon), but they don't do this with [B]all[/B] (or even most) "long" creatures by any means. And the monsters that could be posed either "square" or "rectangular" are legit either way, and if you have a preference for one or the other, that's fine too. But it's not [B]silly[/B] nor [B]crappy[/B] if a company poses creatures in a way you personally don't care for. Nobody said it was. Read the sentence again. "[I]Everybody's favorite company to take potshots at . . .[/I]" not "[I]Everybody's favorite company[/I]". And with how the "squareness" complaints are put forth, that's how I see the relevant posts, as taking unfair potshots. However, I do think we're both wrong on how "[B]most[/B]" companies do things. Companies that make miniatures for rpg and wargaming play are in a rather small, niche industry. Outside of WotC, Games Workshop, and perhaps Reaper . . . who are "most" companies? Niche companies within a niche business that don't produce miniatures on the same scale as WotC and GW. After some thought, I disagree that [B]most[/B] companies put their "long" creatures on "long" bases . . . but I also disagree that [B]most[/B] companies put their "long" creatures on "square" bases. [B]Some[/B] do it one way, [B]some[/B] do it another. Pick your preference and don't waste time slamming companies who make legitimate decisions that you simply don't agree with. And always remember bases are easy to change, even molded bases on plastic, resin, or metal sculpts. [/QUOTE]

Verification