Recent News:
- More posts by Peter Lee
- Peter Lee on visible mini quality
- Peter Lee on previews
- Peter Lee on issues facing D&D Miniatures
- More official responses to the change
- Stephen Schubert saying farewell
- Dave Christ on the final sanctioned tournaments
- Another post on the change...
- Official posts and explanations
- The end of the Skirmish Game
Strategy Articles:
Sites to visit:
Games I've been playing:
Thursday, October 30, 2008
More posts by Peter Lee
not to sound like the eternal optimist (I certainly don't consider myself as such), but on a positive angle, consider the fact that they may improve their abilities with the CAD as well. they did say they just started with it.As much as I hate saying, "Quoted for Truth", it's certainly true here. The CAD process had a few growing pains, and when combined with poor dragonborn miniature concept art -- the reason there are none in Dungeons of Dread despite trying -- a few miniatures were produced in DoD2 that I consider to be pretty poor. (The Orc Raider is on the Hall of Shame that I inherited when I got here -- I think it's the worst figure in the history of the line.)
Those figures are definitely not the norm. Demonweb is getting closer to the quality that I like, but it's not quite there. I like how 2009 is shaping up -- we have some pretty awesome figures coming.Put Gnoll Marauder on that list too... and I can't even describe Magma Brute...The Gnoll Marauder is a fantastic sculpt, actually -- but it has other problems. You've put your finger on another issue that I've been working on solving. The Gnoll Marauder was commissioned as an uncommon, but was changed to an common when some of the common sculpts did not turn out. The Gnoll is also a three piece miniature. While that sounds like potentially a good thing, it makes it more difficult for the paint steps to be under budget -- it takes more paint steps to paint a multipiece miniature than it does to paint a single piece miniature.
I'm paying a lot of attention to the structure of the common miniatures to ensure things like this don't happen again.Any chance of seeing a Rogue Modron?Physically, there would be some problems casting extremely thin limbs.
I'll say this -- if there is an official 4th ed place for modrons, I'll make one. I don't think this will happen any time soon.Life would be so much better if I could just choose the minis I want.(0 comments)I'd like that too, but that White Dragon would not cost just $15. It would end up being closer to that $30 price point due to the complexity of the sculpt and paint job.Some rares cost more to make than others. The random model allows us to make these dragons that can be packaged in units that sell for $15.Let's say, for example, that I have $1 budgeted to use to make a rare miniature. (number is chosen as an example; has nothing to do with reality.) Over the rares in a set, I'd have to have those figures average at $1 a figure -- this means some rare miniatures will cost $0.50 a figure, while others will cost $1.50 in manufacturing costs.Those dragons and beholders are exactly the models that cost more money to create, so they'd need to cost more if not sold in a non-random model.Never mind the costs for additional packaging, shelf space for the FLGS, etc.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Peter Lee on maxminis.comThe visible figures have an uncommon rarity assigned for collectability purposes, but the average number of the paint steps for those figure exceeds the current rare paint step allocation. Effectively, the visible figure has double the paint steps that an average uncommon had in the old system.(0 comments)
In response to a post on Wizards.com forums:I'm certainly not ready to show miniatures from a set that won't release for nearly half a year, but I'll take your desire to see the paint master next to a production figure under consideration when it is time for me to write the previews for the set. (0 comments)
Saturday, October 25, 2008
WoTC's ability to cordinate the miniature releases with the adventurers released at a similiar time continues to be less than impressive.Yup, you're right. I'm working on it. Here's the problem:
The miniature path is close to 18 months to go from concept to your FLGS's shelf. The path for getting a module from concept to your FLGS's shelf is a lot shorter. Skalmad was put into the pipeline before the module was written -- all that existed was a name for the module.
This is the biggest issue that the miniatures have as an RPG supplement. Take Dragonborn, for example -- to have miniatures coincide with the release of 4th edition, they needed to start down the miniature pipeline months before the concept art was even finished! We had three proto-draconborn slated for Dungeons of Dread that ended getting cut because it didn't match the concept art for the race.
We're trying to reduce the time to go from concept to market with these miniatures, but for now it's a very difficult problem.Quite frankly that is what that troll looks like. We need a green monster so mold the body from green plastic, the weapon from brown plastic, etc and assemble.
That isn't pre-painted, but colored plastic.While using colored plastic would potentially save a lot of potential deco, the problem is there are multiple figures in a single mold. This is the ultimate reason why I can't do transparent commons -- all the commons need to fit in one mold, so if I were to have transparent commons, all of them would result in being transparent. If I filled a mold with green plastic, I wouldn't have just one green monster in the set, I would end up having closer to 8 parts that would be that color.
The end result is a much more monochromatic set.Peter Lee has also posted in his livejournal about the changes.(0 comments)
Scott Rouse
Was the 8-mini for $15 model not profitable? Why the change to a 5-mini for $15 model. What exactly does WOTC see as the value-add here?
I tried to explain this in my post but I have to be careful on the level of detail I provided (publicly traded and all).
Costs were (are) climbing so to maintain the business at its current level something has to give to offset that. More times than not it was the quality of the minis in the packs (deco for example).
In the new model we are able to actually increase the quality of the minis. Some of this is driven by a higher price and some of it is driven by a reduction in costs (no skirmish development, less tooling with smaller set sizes etc).
All the minis will see an increase in quality. Highlights are:
PC packs - 3 very high quality visible non-random PC minis (similar or greater than our current rare)
MM packs - 1 high quality (similar or greater than our current rare) large monster mini and 1 high quality mini below (sometimes another large).
MM Huge packs. 1 high quality (similar or greater than our current rare) visible huge plus you get a rare below, sometimes a med and sometimes a large. You will always get a large in the huge pack.
Scott Rouse
What about the Starter Set Minis & Maps?
The starter is canceled and if appropriate those minis will go into other products.
The maps for the new starter were never created. As for the old maps we have been giving them away when we could (like on the checklist posters). I am sure we'll continue to look for ways to get maps out there but nothing has been decided yet.
Peter Lee
Ultimately, the increased price covers increased costs for manufacturing and to give a better quality product.
Every time there is a common miniature that sells on the secondary market for a 25 cents, we have a problem. I don't want consumers buying things that they perceive as disposable -- how many of you open boosters and only care about the rare miniature? That's a problem. When someone opens a case or two of miniatures, I want them to care about every single miniature that they get, not just a rare.
For the model going forward, we've increased the average paint steps per figure by 50%. Many of those paint steps are going on the visible uncommon miniature, making it look better than the average rare figure that we have now. All the rest of the figures are getting increases as well; the two commons will be closer to uncommon in quality, and the other uncommon will be closer to rare in quality.
I don't want to go into much more right now -- I'll need something to talk about in a couple of months, after all.
I'm still happy with how the paint looks on Demonweb; it is a considerable improvement over the past two sets.
I am also sad that the miniature skirmish game is ending. I've been involved with the community for a long time, and it is through that community that ultimately brought me to where I am today. I've met a ton of wonderful people over the last 5 years through a passion for the game. The RPG group that I was in back in Madison came together through the miniature game, and they ended up being very good friends of mine. I wish that I had had more opportunities to design for the game, but at least I will have my involvement with the freelancers doing the restats.
Scott Rouse
Scott, that sounds like a whole lot of clamshell packaging -- likely taking up more surface area than the other four minis in the box. It also implies that the Huges themselves will be constrained by the packaging -- no rampant Dragons with outstretched wings, but multiple Giants or whatnot in non-dynamic poses.
Sure, you probably wont see something like the white dragon from AoG but so far what I have seen looks pretty freakin good. There is a dragon that is one of the best minis poses I have ever seen and the hive mother beholder is super bad (in a good way)
Also, as long as I've got your attention...what happens to Eddie Jr.'s Championship mini (Elf Ranger w/Falcon)? And will Guillaume (now the last-ever sanctioned DDM Constructed Champion) still get to design his mini?
The Ranger will be in a martial pack and looks great.
I am not sure about Guillaume. Maybe Pete or Shoe can answer.
Scott Rouse
I am not sure we are announcing the rarity scheme at this point. There are 8 visible mini per MM set.
The sets will have monsters in them. If it is in the MM then that would be a good rule of thumb for being in the sets. Humanoid type NPCs will be of the drow, orc, duragar, goblinoid persuasion.
As for farmers and drunks I am not sure. Could be a future product like a village or town set if this proves to have potential. (0 comments)
Friday, October 24, 2008
A few years back, I decided I wanted to use minis on my table, to help illustrate my game. I picked up some assorted metal, learned to paint, all that sort of stuff. Picked up Chainmail. Then Chainmail was canceled - in its place was to be a new, randomized, pre-painted minis game.
I hadn't bought into clix because they didn't look enough like D&D to me, and I didn't like the random model. But pre-painted was definitely a draw. Wasn't sold on the randomized until I bought a few Harbinger starters and boosters at 75% off one day when a local WotC store was going under. Within a week I was placing an order from Gameoutfitter, and within a month I'd found maxminis. I only got a dozen or so trades done there before I had to stop, as my on-the-side freelancing had turned itself into a full-time gig, working on D&D.
Over the last 4 years the DDM game has been part of what I did. While I came on after the game's inception, shortly after I was hired I began to spend time on the minis development team. I started working with Rob Heinsoo and Mike Donais, and stuck with the team and the many other contributors that stayed on for a set or for a block of sets. With Rob, I rewrote the rules twice - once with Wardrums, and once with DoD2. I learned about not only the game, but also about organized play, plastics production, art direction, marketing and brand direction, and fan interaction -- all because of the DDM game.
I also got to know many of the members of the DDM community. This community is special - I really mean that. It's amazing to have a group of players that not only can understand and play the game at a high level, but that are also welcoming and encouraging to new players. The community drafts at WF/XP and GenCon were the best times I've had playing games - and the prize pools always showed how much that community cares about the game and each other.
The recent announcement, and the decision that led to the announcement, does make me sad. I'm glad to have been part of the product that was able to entertain so many of you for a few years... I just wish it could have been a few years more. (0 comments)
Posted on Hordelings.com:
So I've gotten a few emails so far (figure the post goes up the second I logoff a computer).
DDXP will have DDM tourneys. From my understanding the last sanctioned ones.
We will have a limited championship using Demonweb. We will have the standard $5,000 prize pool for the winners. Win some cash and be the last champion standing. There are no qualifiers and is open to all. It will start Friday at 5pm and run 3 rounds that night, 6 rounds on Saturday, and final 8 on Sunday. Multiple rebuilds during those rounds.
It will end early enough on Saturday to allow a community draft if the community wants it. I will make sure everything is there to make it happen out of my personal show budget as long as somebody can run it.
We will have other events spread around the championship and I will be working with my DDM staff on a schedule over the next week.
(0 comments)
Peter Lee
The decision to not have skirmish cards in the boosters was made a few months ago. There were other discussions going on about other methods to support the game, and that decision was made relatively recently. It wasn't decided until a day or two ago that there would be no skirmish stats going forward in an alternate distribution method.(from Hordelings.com)(0 comments)
From the Wizards messageboard (click on names for links to posts):
Scott Rouse (Questioner in italics)
Ok, for real now: what about buying on Amazon? How this will be random for people who live far from FLGS? How can we know what is the "visible" figure?
Each pack will have it's own SKU # so you'll know you are buying the troll vs the giant.
Scott Rouse
And how very lame by WotC not to announce it by themselfs, but just after somebody posted it earlier.
This was copy and pasted from my article before it went live and was never meant to be a customer service response.
Scott Rouse
Is buying by the case still an option? Also, how many different "visible" creatures will there be per set?
Yes. There will be assortment cases with even dist of visbles and bricks cases with all the same visible so stores can restock.
8 visibles per set.
Andy Collins
So 4th edition killed DDM skirmish
Actually, as Scott mentions in his post, we've been seeing drops in skirmish play since 2006--more than a year before 4E and the new D&D Miniatures ruleset were even announced, much less published.
Whether or not the change to a new ruleset hastened or slowed the decline is impossible to know, but I believe that we'd have been in exactly the same situation regardless of that change, whether a few months ago or a few months from now.
Nobody here is happy about having to end skirmish support. We'd far prefer it if the skirmish game were a thriving, growing entity, allowing us to continue to support it with a profitable line of game accessories and events.
But since that's not the reality we're living in, we're just trying to make the best possible decisions from a list of imperfect options.
Andy Collins
I appreciate your frustration.
I've been on the other side of these kinds of announcements before--favorite TV shows or comics cancelled, anticipated game products shelved, etc.--and it sucks. In no way do I mean to minimize the anger and disappointment you're feeling.
That said, I feel it necessary to provide further explanation regarding some of the points you've raised.
First of all, please understand that all the anecdotal evidence that you've seen about people "warming up" to the game simply has not translated into more players in sanctioned events or more sales--the only two metrics that we can reliably track.
By the time Demonweb comes out in November, we'll have been publishing and strongly supporting the new game for nearly a full year (remember, the new rules were posted in January), including three expansions and a number of restatted sets plus a raft of online articles supporting the game, all the while watching play and sales numbers continue to dwindle rather than grow.
There were some voices who pushed for us to keep on with business as usual, but we had too many reasons to believe that that choice would simply delay the inevitable rather than result in a miraculous revival.
Ultimately, we believed that the decision came down to "do something different now, or do something different later when the business is in even worse shape than it is now." Given those options, I feel we made the best call from a number of imperfect options.
WOTC- explain why customers should have faith in your entity in anyway after these actions. Specifically, why should us as customers buy and get involved with this new product line in 2009 after having taken this action with a product (2.0) you just released in 2007?
Y'know, I've seen this argument come up a lot over the years, and I just don't buy it. Exactly what are you supposed to "have faith" in?
That we'll produce great-looking minis you can use in your RPG, as we've announced?
Or that we'll continue to produce minis in this manner forever and ever, regardless of changing economic realities of the business model?
We took the best swing at the skirmish game that we knew how to take. By all means, be frustrated that the game only lasted 5+ years instead of 10 or 20. We're frustrated too. But we also know that we can't keep pushing the rock uphill.
Nothing is forever. Any expectation that the debut of a new game (or TV show, or comic series, or brand of dog food) also includes an implicit promise that it'll be supported ad infinitum is simply unreasonable.
All we can keep doing is making games & accessories that we believe are worth you, the customer, paying for. Enough folks told us (by their absence) that the current model of D&D Miniatures didn't meet that criteria that we had to make a change.
Something else I am curious about as well....
How difficult would it be for WOTC to stat these minis for 2.0 Skirmish and just post the PDFs for them? Not print actual cards? Was this option ever on the table at all as a means to retain this demographic of players that play Skrimish exclusively?
Yes, it was absolutely discussed. Many times. By many people, myself included.
While the numbers aren't trivial, it's not about how many hours or dollars it costs to produce the online stats. Ultimately, this is a simple zero-sum equation.
Every minute that a designer, developer, editor, typesetter, graphic designer, or web specialist spends getting a set of stats to the website is a minute they're not spending on another product.
If those minis stats are going to make the company more money than that other product, it might well be a good idea.
But if I can use those folks on a different, more profitable project--say, a D&D sourcebook, or an RPG-focused minis product--I'm obligated as a responsible member of WotC management to support their reassignment.
Yup, that's cold and heartless. But any other decision leads to me AND those folks looking for new jobs when the company's bad business practices leads to layoffs or bankruptcy. I'm not particularly interested in exploring that eventuality.
I realize there's going to be a lot of venting on this topic over the coming days, weeks, and months. I'm not trying to stop people from being frustrated. I'm just trying to provide a little more illumination behind the extremely difficult decisions we've made about this line over the past few months, and I hope that's helpful. (1 comments)
Scott Rouse, Brand Manager of D&D, has confirmed what many people had feared after recent announcements to a change in packaging for D&D Miniatures: the Skirmish game is being discontinued. After Demonweb, there will be no further Skirmish stats included in DDM sets.Six Hero packs, each containing three non-random miniatures of player character types , will debut in Spring 2008. Further sets of miniatures will appear in 2009 and 2010.Dungeon Masters will be able to purchase new 5-minature boosters containing one large miniature (which will be viewable before purchase) and four normal-sized miniatures which will be distributed randomly. All of these minis will be monsters. The first set of the new scheme, Monster Manual: Dangerous Delves is due out in Spring 2009. 40 miniatures, in four levels of rarity: rare, uncommon, common and visible.As one could expect, there has been a lot of uproar over this decision at the major D&D Miniatures sites: www.hordelings.com and on the Wizards boards.Scott Rouse, posting on the Wizards thread, has revealed that each pack of Dangerous Delves will have its own SKU #, "so you'll know you are buying the troll vs the giant."Andy Collins notes that they'd been seeing a drop in skirmish levels since 2006, more than a year before D&D 4E and the new skirmish game were even announced. "Nobody here is happy about having to end skirmish support. We'd far prefer it if the skirmish game were a thriving, growing entity, allowing us to continue to support it with a profitable line of game accessories and events."(0 comments)
Friday, March 28, 2008
It's been quite a while (read: months) since I've been updating my D&D Miniatures News Site, but it's time to make official what you've all known for some time: I'm no longer in the DDM news game. Indeed, I haven't bought any new D&D Miniatures for over a year. No longer having a FLGS does that, along with having enough minis for most of my purposes.
I've given Blackguard (the current host of the site) permission to do what he wants with the site, so you may find it still evolving into some form or other over the coming months. I wish him the very best of luck with it.
I'd also like to give a special thank you to Jim Goings, the one-time webmaster of 3rdedition.org, who provided hosting for the site during its glory days.
It was a wonderful time. That Mike Donais and Rob Heinsoo spent so much time on the Wizards boards before DDM was released allowed me to gain enthusiasm about the game and provided the spur to creating a site for hosting their comments, and eventually to what became the site to go for D&D Miniatures News.
In later years, the official Wizards site and other websites run by people even more dedicated than me have taken over the load, for which I'm grateful; I don't feel that there's going to be that much of a hole.
To all of you who have contributed or used my site: thank you. It was a hell of a ride.
Cheers,
Merric Blackman (1 comments)
Friday, October 12, 2007
The big news from Wizards today is exceptional: All D&D Miniatures will have new stats in the new version of the game. It may take some time (so don't expect to all DDM figures to be converted from Day 1 of the new game), but Wizards have now committed to providing updated stats to all old miniatures.
You can find out more in this announcement.
(0 comments)
