WOTC Business Strategy and miniatures

[rushlight]

Re: Re: Re: WOTC Business Strategy and miniatures

But under WOTC's strategy they are NOT selling to this subset. You and I may love to paint minis, but WOTC recognizes most gamers do not.

Then who do you think buys minis? Why are gamestores the only places to BUY minis? Who do you think Reaper minis get sold to? The gamer market. I would say that it's the RPG gamer market that keeps Reaper in business. That's alot of people for a group that you claim don't buy minis.

 

[Buttercup]

I think there is a market for a pdf or small book on running 3.5 without miniatures from the reaction against WOTC I have seen on the boards as of late.

I think this is a great idea.

I have no interest in buying miniatures. I don't want to spend the money, and I really don't want to paint them, and most important of all, I don't want to have to lug any more crap around to run a game outside of my own home. Minis just look to me like a hole in reality into which you endlessly throw money.

I do think that using *something* makes combat easier, so I use the Fiery Dragon counters. They don't weigh much, and take up hardly any space at all. Plus, I don't have to paint them!

But I'd welcome a rule book that would tell me how to run a game without any minis, counters or doo-hickeys at all.

 

[Dragonblade]

I think a positive note for minis is that it allows WotC to give D&D more of a boardgame feel.

To be brutally honest, pretending you are a fantasy person in a fantasy world and speaking in character, etc. does not appeal to most people. They find it childish or strange.

Having minis, grids, etc. allows WotC to emphasize the war game and tactical aspects of D&D and thus possibly appeal to a more diverse group of people.

If you walk into a room and see people sitting their with pencils, paper and dice and just talking in strange voices will seem strange.

But if you see them sitting their with pencils, paper, dice, and a big square grid with minis and people moving minis around and shouting actions to each other etc. It seems much more like an elaborate boardgame. With visible playing pieces, D&D feels more like a game and less like some strange form of acting. Better to appeal to the masses that way.

And they probably have visions of tapping into the MageKnight market, although I doubt they will be able to do that.

But for me personally, I don't like minis. They turn combat into too much of a fancy chess match and it reduces too many variables that shouldn't be reduced.

Players like minis because they know exactly how many squares away a certain bad guy is, they know exactly where to place their spell for maximum effect and combat becomes an exercise in mini placement and die rolling.

To put it bluntly, that sucks and is not realistic.

Combat shouldn't be a chess match. It should be people screaming and smoke everywhere. Orcs charging you to the left and dueling your allies to the right. You have that fireball ready but with all smoke and explosions you just have to guess on the best place to center it. Realistic, scary combat where there are no absolutes and you don't know exactly how many squares away the bad guys are standing.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Re: Re: Re: Re: WOTC Business Strategy and miniatures

Then who do you think buys minis? Why are gamestores the only places to BUY minis? Who do you think Reaper minis get sold to? The gamer market. I would say that it's the RPG gamer market that keeps Reaper in business. That's alot of people for a group that you claim don't buy minis.

What I believe he means is:
Wizards is not trying to sell miniatures to the people currently buying the miniatures and painting such.
They're aiming for the gamers that will buy a mini in replacement of a token, but not to the extent of buying and painting and such.

One other factor:
D&D is an expensive hobby as things go. Wizards most likely figures that people will buy stuff they don't need "just because".

Myself, I play in several (and run a couple) online games. We don't use miniatures and haven't had a problem...

 

[Vocenoctum]

But for me personally, I don't like minis. They turn combat into too much of a fancy chess match and it reduces too many variables that shouldn't be reduced.

Players like minis because they know exactly how many squares away a certain bad guy is, they know exactly where to place their spell for maximum effect and combat becomes an exercise in mini placement and die rolling.

To put it bluntly, that sucks and is not realistic.

Combat shouldn't be a chess match. It should be people screaming and smoke everywhere. Orcs charging you to the left and dueling your allies to the right. You have that fireball ready but with all smoke and explosions you just have to guess on the best place to center it. Realistic, scary combat where there are no absolutes and you don't know exactly how many squares away the bad guys are standing.

While I agree on a general scale, I think that's more about the time it takes to calculate such.

Miniatures/ grids help in such things as flanking, and cleave. Without a solid idea of where your characters are, sometimes game slowing "wait, I wasn't there?" moments can occur.

In general in my online games, you tend to generalize more. You say "I want to move to flank X" or "I want to move to catch Y in a cleave if possible".
And of course, we generally are content with "I'll toss my fireball to catch as many as possible." and take what we get.

 

[Henry]

On this page, as you know, are four sample pages regarding 3.5e and movement and combat. I'm still not seeing the part where it makes abstract combat any more difficult than 3E. If anyone wishes to point to a particularly objectionable part, I would be grateful, as it would help me see what they are getting at.

3E has made miniatures combat as ingrained a part of D&D as it has ever been since the old Chainmail game from the 1970's; from what I've seen, it is no more or less than it has been since the year 2000. Measures are still given in feet; in any instance where squares are mentioned, a clear conversion of 1 square to 5 feet is given, which is the standard since 3e. Therefore, I'm still not comprehending the part where miniatures MUST be used, any more than 3e already does.

 

[pogre]

On this page, as you know, are four sample pages regarding 3.5e and movement and combat. I'm still not seeing the part where it makes abstract combat any more difficult than 3E. If anyone wishes to point to a particularly objectionable part, I would be grateful, as it would help me see what they are getting at.

After reading those pages, I have to agree: 3.5 does not seem more miniatures dependent than 3E. Where are Monte and others coming from stating 3.5 is more miniatures reliant? I made the assumption based on some criticisms I saw on the board.

........

Buttercup - I completely understand your view. I think miniatures without the roleplaying aspect got dull for me (even if I delve into a game of Tactica or Warhammer Ancients from time-to-time). I like roleplaying first, but I do enjoy adding the minis. If it came down to choosing one I would definitely go roleplaying these days. Opposite of many of my older friends who abandoned RPGs for historical minis.

 

[Kevin O'Reilly]

My 2c

The main problem with the WoTC stargetgy is that it is late. The pre-painted min line should have released with 3.0 back in 2000. Now while some of the bright sparks outthere may point out that MK was only just starting up, WoTC had the opportunity to respond to the explosive growth in this game in their own backyard about 3 mile away.

The collectable pre-painted mini game is a phenom, and one hasbro would have dearly loved to ride. Given that Topps just shelled out a small fortune for Wizkids,LLC., I'm sure that they would have loved to recoup some of their $300million invested in WoTC.

Now, the pre-painted game, coupled with the kids intro, coupled with new mini-heavy rules creates a realitively seemless age progression for D+D. And why not! The target market for GW is 10-14 year old boys, and GW has revenues that D+D sales can only dream about.

Overall, as a marketing strategy the mini-focus this time around can lead to a significant increase in sales and reach into new market demographics. At to be honest, its agood honest strategy, that will benefit the game by creating a sustainable game. Again, its main issue is its about 2 years late. Any who know me, know I've been ranting on about this for nearly three years!

I wish the team at Wizards great success with this; a success that rivals that of MtG and opens up the door for a new whole round of Montes, Seans, Skips and Andies. As I said, a success for WoTC is a success for the gaming community, one again which creates and supports brillance like Ryan's OGL.

I look forward to a cupboard full of plastic ogres and orc and beholders and elves and dwarves and armies of skeletons and drow to unleash upon the folls at my gaming table.

Like I said, just my 2c

 

[Creamsteak]

I want Minis.
I want Plastic.
I want one solid color.

I'd like it if my skeletons were white, my orcs green, my drow black, and my stone golems gray. Make my dragons gold, silver, red, green, and blue. Make my elementals brown, skyblue, orange, and teal...

I'll take them painted, I didn't ask for that...

But there is something about random packs that is whack.

 

[pogre]

Creamsteak - check out Fortress FIgures. You can paint them if you want, but they come in one solid color of resin 10 to a pack.