# Dear Hasbro: about those minis



## molonel (Jan 11, 2007)

I'm sure I'm not the first person to say this. I love the prepainted minis from WotC. Yes, I know there are finer quality minis out there, but I hate painting minis.

But I guess what I wanted to say to Hasbro was this:

I know Magic: The Gathering made you a metric butt ton of money. I sympathize. Really.

But we stop with the whole "random packages of minis so that you're never going to know what you're buying" thing?

I just got done buying a lot of minis on eBay today, and they were arranged in thematic sets. I got a big set of undead minis like skeletons and ghasts and wights. I also got a nature-themed package with bears and wolves.

It would be so cool if I could just BUY them like this straight from WotC instead of hunting them down and getting bid sniped on eBay.


----------



## dargoth3 (Jan 11, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> I'm sure I'm not the first person to say this. I love the prepainted minis from WotC. Yes, I know there are finer quality minis out there, but I hate painting minis.
> 
> But I guess what I wanted to say to Hasbro was this:
> 
> ...





I suggest you check out Merrics law of minis


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 11, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> I'm sure I'm not the first person to say this. I love the prepainted minis from WotC. Yes, I know there are finer quality minis out there, but I hate painting minis.
> 
> But I guess what I wanted to say to Hasbro was this:
> 
> ...



*Hear hear!*

I've said the same thing a gazillion times. But then all the collectible freaks pop out of the woodwork, tell me to use eBay, and basically to STFU! 

I just wish that I could buy official D&D minis in non-randomized sets to use with my pen and paper D&D game, without having to go through a reseller.

In the sakes of not causing the collectible buyers to throw a hissy fit, they can be sold without the stat cards, and can be firmly stamped on the base as not being part of a collectible set.

...sadly, I just don't think it's ever going to happen...


----------



## Nap (Jan 11, 2007)

I feel the same way, but it hasn't been a big problem for me.  I've gotten all my plastic minis from EBay sellers, and I now have over 500 miniatures for my campaign.  It actually works out to be cheaper for me, because I'm more interested in the mundane, common sort of figures than the rare demonic sorcerers and dragonspawn fiends, etc.  

WoTC knows that they will make a ton more money selling them randomly, for the same reason Paizo sells the Item Pack cards randomly, because people will buy a pack hoping for a "rare" new card or figure, and that gleeful joy of opening a package and not knowing what you'll get (which I'll admit is fun, but pricey).


----------



## molonel (Jan 11, 2007)

I know, I know. And it probably works out to be cheaper for me in the short run, too. But it's still just kind of annoying.


----------



## smootrk (Jan 11, 2007)

I wish the same.  Certainly would be nice to pick up the Bag 'O Goblins, or a Sack of Orcs, or even like-color-scheme soldiers of various types.

Doubt I will get it, but maybe one day another company will do it.  When WotC sees the successful sales of such, they may do the same.  Currently they don't see profit in it, but if someone else does it (profitably) WotC will follow.


----------



## T. Foster (Jan 11, 2007)

If I could get 1) non-random packaging and 2) minis that looked like the pictures in the AD&D1 books (both characters and _especially_ monsters) I would probably buy a metric ton of them, against my better judgment. So in that regard I'm actually kind of glad they don't, because with the current setup (random packaging and figures that don't look like I'd want them to) I'm not tempted to buy them at all


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 11, 2007)

dargoth3 said:
			
		

> I suggest you check out Merrics law of minis




I know what you refer to, but it seems to me that Heroscape kind of puts the lie to the law. They are sold in packs where you know what you are getting. They seem reasonably priced, and don't appear to be significantly different in quality from the WotC miniatures. So why is it impossible for WotC to do something similar?


----------



## BryonD (Jan 11, 2007)

You just picked two.


----------



## Kunimatyu (Jan 11, 2007)

The big problem is that if WotC did that, packs with bears, wolves, orcs, etc. become the only things that will sell, because things like grell and whatnot don't have the mainstream appeal to exist as a standalone product(despite the fact that many DMs would use them if they had minis for them).

Now, some people run games with only orcs, goblins, wolves, bears, and the occasional demon, but I'm the type of DM who uses achaierai, grell, gibbering mouthers, and boneclaws. I like having the variety available, even if I don't feel the need to collect full sets.

Now, all this being said, I do think that Wizards should release a fairly pricey set of basic monsters to serve as a 'DM starter set', and reprint it every so often. But sending everything nonrandom reduces us to a small subset of the monsters available in the MM alone, and that's a sacrifice I'm not interested in making.


----------



## Darrell (Jan 11, 2007)

I understand the advantages to the collectors of the random packing, but I still think it would be cool to be able to buy common minis in a multi-pack, say, a ten-pack with 5 Orc Maulers and 5 Howling Orcs, or 5 Free League Rangers and 5 Doomguards, or something of that nature, just as a side product available at the LGS instead of online.

Then I could fill out my orc armies for D&D, and the uncommon and rare figures are still available in the standard random pack.  All that sort of thing would do is make 'common' minis _more_ common, and help the RPGers get more of the 'cannon-fodder' minis they need a bunch of.

Frankly, I'd be far more likely to pick up a pack like that as an impulse buy at the LGS than the newest splatbook or some crap like 'Three Dragon Ante.'

Regards,
Darrell


----------



## Allensh (Jan 11, 2007)

A small point of clarification: the "buttload of money" made by Magic the Gathering was largely made before Wizards was bought by Hasbro. Its still profitable, of course.

Allen


----------



## Agent Oracle (Jan 11, 2007)

Actually, Wizkids (makers of hero clix, Mage Knight, Etc.)  has the most experience with selling "organized packages"

Four of their games sold "clear packages" so you could see what you were buying.  

Those were 

-"Crimson Skies", which Fumbled from the outset (despite having nifty rules).  Largely, I blame the fact that EVERY plane was a Unique, and there were only a few small flights that you could buy.  if they had produced a wider array of non-unique planes (like other games) there might have been better sales.

-"Shadowrun: Duels" (Which couldn't come out with a second set fast enough to keep players interested, and probably would have done better if they had printed a book for adapting other action figures to the game)  The main problem that they had was that the Players figured out the rules for point-buying weapons after only studying the opening set, and there was a very strong homebrew community...

-"MLB Sportsclix" (Because so many minis gamers are fans of baseball, problem was, they didn't sell individual teams, they sold semi-random assortments of players in a clear box)

-"Creepy Freaks" Which was marketed as Mini gaming for little kids... problem was, little kids could play Heroclicks and Mage Knight just fine, and didn't need to be patronized.


----------



## MerricB (Jan 11, 2007)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I know what you refer to, but it seems to me that Heroscape kind of puts the lie to the law. They are sold in packs where you know what you are getting. They seem reasonably priced, and don't appear to be significantly different in quality from the WotC miniatures. So why is it impossible for WotC to do something similar?




*Merric's Law of Miniatures:* _Non-Random Packaging, Cheap Prices, and a Large Range of Figures: Choose two._

What Heroscape lacks is a large range of figures.

In 2005, they produced 55 figures, compared to 180 D&D Mini figures.
In 2006, they produced 88 figures, compared to 182 D&D Mini figures.

I think the price is also more expensive per mini than DDM.

Cheers!


----------



## MerricB (Jan 11, 2007)

Darrell said:
			
		

> I understand the advantages to the collectors of the random packing, but I still think it would be cool to be able to buy common minis in a multi-pack, say, a ten-pack with 5 Orc Maulers and 5 Howling Orcs, or 5 Free League Rangers and 5 Doomguards, or something of that nature, just as a side product available at the LGS instead of online.




One of the big problems is actually with the LGS - stocking such products is a real pain.

Cheers!


----------



## Seeten (Jan 11, 2007)

The secondary market fixes everything. Smart entrepreneurs know what you want, because they ARE you, or people like you. Thus, the packs do exist, just not from WotC proper.

I have all the superhero minis I could ever need for my M&M campaign, all just from buying singles at the flea market, for dirt cheap. If I DM'd D&D, I'd definitely buy all the monsters for D&D at the flea market also, I had all the ralpartha orcs and undead back when I GM'd Rolemaster.


----------



## BroccoliRage (Jan 11, 2007)

I'm in total agreement. I hate painting miniatures, too, and I have a huge collection of HeroScape, D&D, and various toy miniatures. I would buy D&D mini's more often, but I'm tired of getting some ridiculous monster I'll never use (I can't be the only person sick of getting "White Spawn Sneakling" and "Kobold Monk"). 

If WOTC were to create a Sack of orcs, buttload of humans,  bag o' goblins, or Glob of Gnolls, I would be singing thier praises from the mountains!

As it is, I'm more partial to picking up Mage Knight overstock and Horror Clicks, as well as the new HeroScape armies as they come out.


----------



## Varianor Abroad (Jan 11, 2007)

Hell, just a bag o'kobolds and a bag o'goblins would make me happy at the rate things are going with random minis....


----------



## Chairman7w (Jan 11, 2007)

I just don't get the whole complaining mentality.  They are what they are.  Why spend time whining about it?

Do you go to the supermarket and complain about the packing of the party trays?  

The minis WOTC produces come in random packs.  That's it.  Buy them or don't buy them.


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 11, 2007)

Darrell said:
			
		

> Frankly, I'd be far more likely to pick up a pack like that as an impulse buy at the LGS than the newest splatbook or some crap like 'Three Dragon Ante.'



*QFT!!!*


----------



## hexgrid (Jan 11, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> *Merric's Law of Miniatures:* _Non-Random Packaging, Cheap Prices, and a Large Range of Figures: Choose two._




This law doesn't work well for me at all- I choose Cheap Prices and a Large Range of Figures, but the beholder is still $50!


----------



## blargney the second (Jan 11, 2007)

I know stores can sell singles, but is it legal to repackage bundles for resale?  If it is legal, is it smart?


----------



## hexgrid (Jan 11, 2007)

Chairman7w said:
			
		

> Do you go to the supermarket and complain about the packing of the party trays?




That depends, are the party trays are randomly packed?


----------



## Bert the Ogre (Jan 11, 2007)

*Hasbro vs. Milton Bradley...*

Right now, Milton Bradley is actually doing something about this, on a smaller scale. The "HeroScape" game sells minis just the right size for D&D, and sells them in sets, and in clear blister packs. You know what you're getting, and what you're NOT getting. 

WoTC is trying to use the "Magic: The Gathering" sales model to sell minis, artificially "valuable" mini's mixed in with everything else, so you have to take your chances... 

But what's not being considered is some other company getting into the minis game. Not the high dollar pewter minis from Ral Partha, et al, but a cheap but still good looking set/series of minis from someone else. Sets of 10-12 minis, prepainted and maybe even with SRD stats and a copy of the OGL in the box. 

A known quantity for a known price. I KOW I'd buy them! What about the rest of you? A 10 pack of prepainted dwarves for $!0 bucks? A 20 pack of kobolds, a 20 pack of skeletons and zombies? A ten pack of (fill in your own blank?).


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 11, 2007)

Bert the Ogre said:
			
		

> Right now, Milton Bradley is actually doing something about this, on a smaller scale.




Just FYI, because it sounds like you may not realize this...Milton Bradley is another Hasbro subsidiary.


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 11, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> I know stores can sell singles, but is it legal to repackage bundles for resale?  If it is legal, is it smart?




I don't know why it wouldn't be legal, if you made it clear that you weren't passing yourself off as WotC.  I've seen a vendor at local conventions who sold bundles like that; he seemed to do good business.


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 11, 2007)

Bert the Ogre said:
			
		

> A known quantity for a known price. I KOW I'd buy them! What about the rest of you? A 10 pack of prepainted dwarves for $!0 bucks? A 20 pack of kobolds, a 20 pack of skeletons and zombies? A ten pack of (fill in your own blank?).




Dwarven Forge (the guys who make Master Maze) did this, at least at one point.  They were pewter, not plastic, and, IIRC, they were considerably more expensive than you suggest.  I have no idea how many they sold, or if they still do.


----------



## Agamon (Jan 11, 2007)

I don't understand what's wrong with using the secondary market for this.  I can go to my FLGS (quicker) or eBay (better selection) and get what everybody's asking for.  All this, and those of us that don't mind buying the random packs can get those, too.  What exactly is the complaint here?


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 11, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> *Merric's Law of Miniatures:* _Non-Random Packaging, Cheap Prices, and a Large Range of Figures: Choose two._
> 
> What Heroscape lacks is a large range of figures.
> 
> ...




Do you really think that 143 different figures in two years is not a large range? Sure, it is smaller than the D&D mini figures, but it is still not a small range. 

Each heroscape booster pack has 5-7 figures, each pack costs something like $13. A Deathknell booster pack (if I remember correctly) had eight figures and cost $15. I'm not seeing a big difference in price here.


----------



## Agamon (Jan 11, 2007)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Do you really think that 143 different figures in two years is not a large range? Sure, it is smaller than the D&D mini figures, but it is still not a small range.
> 
> Each heroscape booster pack has 5-7 figures, each pack costs something like $13. A Deathknell booster pack (if I remember correctly) had eight figures and cost $15. I'm not seeing a big difference in price here.




The HeroScape minis aren't all fantasy though, are they?  That would make the number lower.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 11, 2007)

Chairman7w said:
			
		

> I just don't get the whole complaining mentality.  They are what they are.  Why spend time whining about it?




Because we don't want that product, and would rather have one on the market that we would buy. The argument that you can't have affordable non-random miniatures with a good range of figures is trotted out, but heroscape kind of makes those arguments ring hollow.



> _Do you go to the supermarket and complain about the packing of the party trays? _




I wouldn't buy it if it meant that I had to purchase the thing sight unseen and would get a random combination of a range of fifty or sixty different items.



> _The minis WOTC produces come in random packs.  That's it.  Buy them or don't buy them._




Most of us don't. We are saying what we _would_ buy.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 11, 2007)

Agamon said:
			
		

> The HeroScape minis aren't all fantasy though, are they?  That would make the number lower.




Well, for use for D&D purposes, sure. But the range of figures is still 143 miniatures. The claim is often made that you must pick two of three options: (1) affordable minatures, (b) non-random miniatures, or (3) a wide range of figures.

And the point is that somehow with Heroscape someone has managed to make a reasonably wide range of non-random minatures and sell them for a reasonable price. That's not supposed to be possible. But it seems from the fact that they are on the market that it is. And I'm wondering why someone couldn't do that for D&D miniatures.


----------



## MerricB (Jan 11, 2007)

Bert the Ogre said:
			
		

> Right now, Milton Bradley is actually doing something about this, on a smaller scale. The "HeroScape" game sells minis just the right size for D&D, and sells them in sets, .




Err, no. They're too big for D&D. Base size is 1.5" rather than 1", and the scale is larger as well.

Cheers!


----------



## molonel (Jan 11, 2007)

Chairman7w said:
			
		

> I just don't get the whole complaining mentality.  They are what they are. Why spend time whining about it? Do you go to the supermarket and complain about the packing of the party trays? The minis WOTC produces come in random packs. That's it. Buy them or don't buy them.




That depends. If I went to the grocery store, and bought a plain brown box which might contain eggs, or ice cream, or toilet paper, or cigarettes, or Diet Dr. Pepper depending on which booster pack I bought, yes, I probably would complain if that's all they sold.


----------



## havoclad (Jan 11, 2007)

hexgrid said:
			
		

> This law doesn't work well for me at all- I choose Cheap Prices and a Large Range of Figures, but the beholder is still $50!




Lol, if you choose "Cheap Prices" and "Large range of figures", by Merric's law, you do not get to chose "Non-Random Packaging."  IE, if you want a specific figure, you have to deal with a secondary market.  Or you can buy the (relatively) cheap packs and take yer chances.

As another example of Merric's law, consider Warhammer.  They have a metric buttload of figures that you can buy individually (or in theme packs).  They are not cheap, however.

I ran a game store for several years.  Just trying to keep a full range of warhammer figures stocked was a mind-dulling full time job.  That's a rant for another day though.


----------



## Agamon (Jan 11, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> That depends. If I went to the grocery store, and bought a plain brown box which might contain eggs, or ice cream, or toilet paper, or cigarettes, or Diet Dr. Pepper depending on which booster pack I bought, yes, I probably would complain if that's all they sold.




That's kinda apples and elephants.  You don't go to the LGS and get a grab bag of a board game, a comic, a novel, a mini and die.  You get a random assortment of D&D minis from a pre-described set.  Big difference.


----------



## MerricB (Jan 11, 2007)

Buying DDM in bulk is also nice. It presumes that you want most of the minis (which I normally do), and you get a very nice spread.

Cheers!


----------



## Agamon (Jan 11, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> Buying DDM in bulk is also nice. It presumes that you want most of the minis (which I normally do), and you get a very nice spread.




Exactly.  If you play D&D, most of the monsters are useful.


----------



## Echohawk (Jan 11, 2007)

Darrell said:
			
		

> Frankly, I'd be far more likely to pick up a pack like that as an impulse buy at the LGS than the newest splatbook or some crap like 'Three Dragon Ante.'



See now, you don't need to be rude about 'Three Dragon Ante' to make your point. It's actually a fun card game and worth picking up.


----------



## thedungeondelver (Jan 11, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Dwarven Forge (the guys who make Master Maze) did this, at least at one point.  They were pewter, not plastic, and, IIRC, they were considerably more expensive than you suggest.  I have no idea how many they sold, or if they still do.





Nope, they were the same plaster that the dungeons are made out of (I own quite a lot of both  ).  

They didn't sell enough of them to keep them in production: they were terribly expensive.  Beautiful minis, that's for sure.  But just damned expensive.

I for one am glad they're focusing on terrain.

(Oh and as someone who likes to paint minis and has a boatload of just what I need in the critters department, let me be the first to say: ha-ha!   )


----------



## Darrell (Jan 11, 2007)

Agamon said:
			
		

> Exactly.  If you play D&D, most of the monsters are useful.




Depends.  The games I run, I use _tons_ of orcs and goblins and skeletons and zombies and such.  Animals (wolves, bears, hyenas, spiders, etc.), about the same.  Tons of humans, dwarves, elves, halflings, etc., too.  More exotic critters, not so much.  Demons, devils, elemental critters, drow, githyan-zer-kai, and all that rot; almost never.  Colorspawn Slashcritterz?  No.

My games aren't terribly 'high' fantasy.  The locals are far too busy worrying about orc warbands roaming the fringes of the settled lands, looting, raping, and killing folk in every village on the western border...or about some fool necromancer raising an army of skeletons to press his claim on the barony...to think about plane-hopping or dragon-crossbreeding.

The type of pack I suggested earlier (basically, a pack o' commons) would be of immense value to someone like me (and I don't think I'm the only one who runs games like that), and wouldn't affect the collector/rarity issue at all, since the pack would be composed of common minis, and uncommons and rares would still be in the random packs.

See, my LGS doesn't sell single minis, even as a secondary market thing.  The flea markets around here carry standard redneck crap (bootleg Larry the Cable Guy DVDs, NASCAR logo fish-scalers, 'Made-in-Outer-Slobovia' hunting knives, and such), not D&D minis.  I don't use eBay, because you pretty well _have_ to have a Paypal account, and I won't..._ever_.  I buy things with cash only.   

So, I'm reduced to trading; meaning I have to locate the people online who have what I want, and want what I have.  Not a bad deal, since there is usually a collector or two willing to trade me a butt-load of the commons I want for a few rares that I have; but I'd much rather be able to simply buy those commons outright.

I realize it's probably never going to happen, but it'd be nice.   :\ 

Regards,
Darrell


----------



## Darrell (Jan 11, 2007)

Echohawk said:
			
		

> See now, you don't need to be rude about 'Three Dragon Ante' to make your point. It's actually a fun card game and worth picking up.




Sorry, man, but I disagree.  I was given a set as an 'end-of-the-run' gift on the closing night of a play I was doing.  I played it twice, and gave it to my nephew.  I can't understand how it got the green light, other than Hasbro/Wizards trying to find a use for all the extra card-printing machines left over from Magic's heyday.

Regards,
Darrell


----------



## Allensh (Jan 11, 2007)

Bert the Ogre said:
			
		

> Right now, Milton Bradley is actually doing something about this, on a smaller scale. The "HeroScape" game sells minis just the right size for D&D, and sells them in sets, and in clear blister packs. You know what you're getting, and what you're NOT getting.
> 
> WoTC is trying to use the "Magic: The Gathering" sales model to sell minis, artificially "valuable" mini's mixed in with everything else, so you have to take your chances...
> 
> ...




I'd buy it in a heartbeat, and I don't really mind the D&D minis or the way they are sold!

Allen


----------



## MerricB (Jan 11, 2007)

There have been companies that have investigated making such miniature packs... but the price is phenomenal. Making plastic minis has a far, far higher start-up cost than making metal minis, and you really need to make them in bulk.

Cheers!


----------



## molonel (Jan 11, 2007)

Agamon said:
			
		

> That's kinda apples and elephants. You don't go to the LGS and get a grab bag of a board game, a comic, a novel, a mini and die. You get a random assortment of D&D minis from a pre-described set. Big difference.




Excuse me, but since I am the customer here, I know what I want. You don't. I'm frustrated, and so are a lot of other people, because I'd like to be able to buy non-randomized miniatures. If you like never knowing exactly what you're getting, that's just peachy and you must enjoy asking strangers to order your meal for you in a restaurant, or giving $1,000 to the person at the ticket counter at the airport, and saying, "Just send me any old place! I don't care!"


----------



## BroccoliRage (Jan 11, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> Err, no. They're too big for D&D. Base size is 1.5" rather than 1", and the scale is larger as well.
> 
> Cheers!





That depends on hw in-depth you get about your mini size. I tend to use one inch hexes  and minis of relatively similiar size, many folks  who are playing D&D don't care about .5".

I'm sure if I wanted to dissect the rules that would make some difference, but I don't: I've been using a variety of mini's for years with no problem.


----------



## Li Shenron (Jan 11, 2007)

The randomness is simply what made me not buy a single pack of minis ever.

Not only I would certainly get something I don't like or need, but also the distribution criteria is very bad for me: at least if you got things like "8 random undead" or "12 random demons including 2 large" it would be way more acceptable. 

Instead, the sets are too much random themselves: namely they have a theme, but in practice the theme is only in a minority of  the figures... If you buy an "aberration" pack, how many actual aberrations do you get? How many PC minis are scattered into each set?

These things for me mean that maybe half or more of what I would get from a pack will be useless (especially tons of PC minis), and the minis I will actually use would effectively not be that cheap after all. Same with secondary market, it eliminates randomness but increases the average price, adds postal costs, and requires more time.

I would probably buy their minis only if WotC started selling them "on demand", which technically should be a piece of cake from the web (like you buy music for IPod), but it's obviously not so lucrative so it's not going to happen.


----------



## molonel (Jan 11, 2007)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> Instead, the sets are too much random themselves: namely they have a theme, but in practice the theme is only in a minority of  the figures... If you buy an "aberration" pack, how many actual aberrations do you get? How many PC minis are scattered into each set? These things for me mean that maybe half or more of what I would get from a pack will be useless (especially tons of PC minis), and the minis I will actually use would effectively not be that cheap after all. Same with secondary market, it eliminates randomness but increases the average price, adds postal costs, and requires more time. I would probably buy their minis only if WotC started selling them "on demand", which technically should be a piece of cake from the web (like you buy music for IPod), but it's obviously not so lucrative so it's not going to happen.




Bingo.


----------



## Frostmarrow (Jan 11, 2007)

Might I suggest WoTC release random themed sets. You know you get a themed set; orcs, bandits, undead; but you don't know which one. Works for me!


----------



## Aus_Snow (Jan 11, 2007)

Chairman7w said:
			
		

> I just don't get the whole *discussion* mentality.  They are what they are.  Why spend time *discussing* it [--on a discussion forum--]*?
> 
> (. . .)
> 
> The minis WOTC produces come in random packs.  That's it.  *Discuss* them or don't *discuss* them.



 FIFY.

* A little additional context, for further clarity.


----------



## Hussar (Jan 11, 2007)

I've never been a big minis collector, so it's never been an issue with me.  Do you really care if the mini you use actually matches the monster?  I have to admit that my wyvern mini has been used as pretty much any large winged lizard.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 11, 2007)

Ah, ye olde lament.

sorry to burst your bubbles, guys (and gals), but I doubt it will happen - there might be some special cases, but they'll stick to their current strategy.

Why? Because it sells. People are buying those, a lot. In order to convince them to switch to non-random, they'd have to make more profit that way. Not as much. More. If they made the same, the change wouldn't be worthwhile.

How would it go? They'd go from very few products to very many products. Right now, they are handling something like 3 sets at a time. That's 3 products to sell/distribut/track. 

If you changed to single minis and/or themed packs, you'd have dozens of products. They would have to sell them separately, stores would have to order them separately, and would have to provide a lot more shelf space for the stuff.

Someone in this very thread commented about how bothersome warhammer minis are.



The next thing is the price. Don't think that it would stay the same per figure, or would be the same for all figures. Right now, they have some leeway in the design: They can design some more impressive pieces if they have something a little simpler in return. It works out because of the random distribution. They're going to sell X of figure 1 and X of figure 2.

But with individual figures, each has to pull its own weight, each is sold separately, and you'll sell Y of figure 1 and Z of figure 2. They will be priced accordingly. 

And even beyond that, they know what the figures sell for. I'm sure they monitor the secondary markets to see how much the Beholder goes for right now or what people are paying for Drizzt.

Right now, you could say something like: A booster costs $15 (officially), that's, say, 6.5 for the rare, 1.5 for each uncommon and 1 for each common.

But that won't mean that every figure that would formerly have been made rare would be for 6.5, not even that they would all go for, say, 7 (the mark-up is because they're now sold separately). You'd have some for 6 quid, others for 8, some for 10 and more. Right now, they don't mind because those figures sell boosters - people buy more boosters to pull that monster, and resellers buy more cases to have more of those monsters in stock.



The next problem is that not all figures would sell equally well. Right now, they can do more obscure stuff, because everything sells equally (it's part of random sets). 

But if they switched, some figures would sell quite well (beholders, dragons, packs of orcs), but others would not sell so well, and some would hardly ever be bought. 

That would mean that many shops would probably not even bother getting the less popular stuff, or they'd buy some once, never sell them and eventually put them on the grab table. They wouldn't re-order them, or anything similar. 

Sooner or later, Wizards would stop making those. Those of you who like more exotic stuff would be left in the rain - the consumer has spoken, and it turns out he doesn't care about what you want. 



Finally, there's the fact that now everyone can buy exactly what they want. Instead of getting 12 boosters got have a good chance on the Balor, as well as some other NPCs, low-level critters and several tougher monsters, you'd buy one balor, a dragon, a couple other beasties, 10 skeletons, 10 zombies, and 10 orcs. (About a third of those figures you'd otherwise have bought. Okay, that's a bit exaggerated, but the fact is that you would only buy exactly those figures you needed).

I think everyone can see at once that Wizards doesn't want to have less money after the switch. If people buy less figures, there's only one other way to keep total amount of money flowing intot heir coffers even...



Sure, you say, with those singles and theme packs, they'd get new customers, but the question is whether those who'd buy now (and who didn't buy before - and remember: those guys who buy from eBay sellers ultimately pay Wizards some money, because the eBay sellers get boosters from Wizards and open them to sell what's inside) would make up for all the trouble that arises: now exta sales because of random packing, no "distribution of weight" effect of minis within a set", administrative overhead, differing popularity...


So I guess DDM is going to stay, and going to stay as it is now. It seems it isn't the worst thing to happen, and with the secondary market, you can actually buy what you want and ignore the rest.

Sure, some things have high prices, but at least the "pack of orcs" issue is taken care of this way: Commons and Uncommons tend to be quite cheap on eBay, you can get your dozen orcs for a decent price:

I just looked for like 20 seconds on ebay and found a buy it now auction where you could get 12 orc savages for $9.73, including shipping - 81 cent per orc. 

Or here: 12 howling orcs for $8.18 - 68 cent per orc. In the same auction, you could get 50 of these for 23 quid - 0.46 per figure!

I doubt that Wizards could/would offer those kinds of deal.



Another suggestion I keep hearing: "Why not make theme packs without stats? They wouldn't be useful for collectors or DDM skirmish players!"

I doubt it would happen. They won't split up their customer base. Right now, they have one product that can be sold to three groups: Roleplayers, Skirmishers and Collectors - Though there is a lot of overlap between those groups (especially collectors, I doubt that there are many who buy those just to have them, never to play with them), and I strongly suspect that roleplayers are the majority.

If they now introduced stuff for roleplayers only, most of the roleplayers who'd buy those packs wouldn't buy boosters. That means that instead of selling 100 boosters with 800 minis (just a number, nothing near reality), they'd sell like 40 boosters with 320 minis plus 40 ten-packs with orcs, kobolds, undead... for a total of 720 minis, spread over two products.

That new product would not only steal customers from their own product - because you know what you get, you'd buy less to boot. 





			
				Darrell said:
			
		

> Sorry, man, but I disagree.  I was given a set as an 'end-of-the-run' gift on the closing night of a play I was doing.  I played it twice, and gave it to my nephew.  I can't understand how it got the green light, other than Hasbro/Wizards trying to find a use for all the extra card-printing machines left over from Magic's heyday.




Did you ever consider that other people don't share your opinion? I know for a fact that I like the game. And so do most (almost all) other players in my gaming circle (the only guy who doesn't like it got bored because he never won). And I'm sure there's lots of other people who like the game. 



			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Do you really think that 143 different figures in two years is not a large range? Sure, it is smaller than the D&D mini figures, but it is still not a small range.




A lot smaller than what DDM has, that's for sure.



> Each heroscape booster pack has 5-7 figures, each pack costs something like $13. A Deathknell booster pack (if I remember correctly) had eight figures and cost $15. I'm not seeing a big difference in price here.




Deathknell never cost 15 quid. The official price was $13, I think - and you hardly ever pay that: Usually, the shops sell individual boosters for several dollars less, and if you buy by the case (12 boosters), it gets even cheaper.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 11, 2007)

Hussar said:
			
		

> I've never been a big minis collector, so it's never been an issue with me.  Do you really care if the mini you use actually matches the monster?  I have to admit that my wyvern mini has been used as pretty much any large winged lizard.




It sure is nice to put a figure on the table and say "this attacks you (don't pick up the figure and look at the name or I'll apply the paragon template to it)"   

Of course, we don't hesitate to approximate should we use a monster that hasn't been done yet, or if no NPC with that selection of race, weapon(s) and armour isn't available (which is no big problem if the NPC in question is a dwarf. There are so many dwarves with axe/hammer and shield that you can pay regard to details like cloak colour and beard length   )


----------



## CharlesRyan (Jan 11, 2007)

Guys, Merric's Law is dead-on. No matter how much you may want something different, the economics of the game business simply won't allow another model to succeed at D&D's level. (And by "succeed," I don't just mean "make money for WotC." I also mean "get minis into the hands of gamers who want them.")

Merric is right to point out that the development cost for prepainted plastic minis is very high, and it's prohibitive to make a mini that won't sell in quantity--or that _might not_ sell in quantity.

But the real barrier isn't even production: it's distribution. Were minis non-randomized--or even released in tightly-themed sets--WotC would have to make guesses about which minis or sets would be popular, and which wouldn't. Then the distributors would have to make the same guesses when they place their orders. Then the retailers would have to do the same. Unless everyone guessed exactly right every time, the channel would become choked with slow-moving product. At best, the industry would have to factor the cost of that dead product into the price of the minis, increasing already-higher prices by 50%+. At worse, the system would grind to a halt, like it did after the CCG glut and the d20 glut and the 2nd-edition D&D glut, and people would go out of business and the minis would cease to be a viable product line.

And then there's the issue of what stores are prepared to carry. With WotC's randomized scheme, the D&D minis line consist of just 3 to 5 individual products per year. Easy on everyone. Compare that to Heroscape (35 or 40 products in 2 years) or Games Workshop (zillions of products). Any store can manage 3 to 5 products per year for a given line. But the more products you add, the less likely it is that a store will carry them all--or even enough of them to make the line viable. Someone pointed out that the 143 figures that Heroscape has released might be enough for D&D. Fine, but have you ever seen a store that carried all 143--or even most of them?

Randomization gets miniatures into our hands reliably and inexpensively. It may be inconvenient to go to the secondary market if you don't want to buy randomly--but it's a hell of a lot less inconvenient than the alternatives.


----------



## Felnar (Jan 11, 2007)

what if D&D books we sold in the same manner...
*tears book out of package*
"damn, another DMG"
*throws it in the pile with the others*

would coming out with an orc pack (or skeleton pack, goblin pack, etc) *in addition* to the current random packs hurt WotC's business?  (I call them "Mook Packs")

As long as they dont sell the rare/cool/one-in-one-hundred-DMs-use-it figures individually, the booster pack business stays the same.  Possibly even gain "casual-er" gamers as customers, which probably leads to buying a booster or two, when they wouldve never bought a booster otherwise.  This sort of goes back to the D&D book analogy, where core books are sold at near cost and expansion products make the profit.
(that all said, i really dont know much about DDM, what exactly is the difference between a starter and booster pack?)


----------



## Philotomy Jurament (Jan 11, 2007)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> The randomness is simply what made me not buy a single pack of minis ever...[and as for the] secondary market, it eliminates randomness but increases the average price, adds postal costs, and requires more time.



100% agreement.  I'd be interested if I could pick what I get.  As it is, though, I'm simply not a customer for DDM.


----------



## Keoki (Jan 11, 2007)

The way I understand it, retailers get to use much less shelf space selling randomized minis. And you can buy nonrandomized minis from WotC at Paizo.com. Just be prepared to shell out for them. In the end, it is usually cheaper to go through eBay.


----------



## MerricB (Jan 11, 2007)

Nice to hear from you again, Charles. I trust life is treating you well?

I'll note further that the DDM team does and is considering other forms of packaging the minis - either less random, or in "adventure" sets, or in warband sets... but they haven't been able to come up with a economical way of doing so yet. 

Cheers!


----------



## humble minion (Jan 11, 2007)

I've always assumed its the game shop shelf space issue that's driven random mini packaging myself.  Walk into a game shop that stocks Warhammer, for instance, and you'll see an entire wall of blister packs and box sets reaching to the ceiling.  And D&D has a much larger variety of monsters/PC types than Warhammer/WH40K has troop types. 

I don't like it, but there it is.

Oh, and I've always been a bit sceptical about Merric's Laws (nothing personal, Merric!)  If I want to collect X minis of various varieties to use for roleplaying, because of the random packaging, I'll have to end up paying for X+Y minis, of which Y are duplicates, silly monsters that I don't like, or things like Warforged and Dragonspawn that will never see the light of day in my games.  Merric's Laws state I can choose two of cheap prices, non-random selection, and a wide range.  WotC minis assume (claim?) to give low price and a wide range.  But WotCs sales model makes me buy almost as many minis that I don't want (on average) as those that I do.  Maybe I'm getting a cheap price per mini on sheer dumb numbers, but the price per mini-that-I'll-actually-use is a LOT higher.  Cheap price on paper, maybe, but when that cheap price comes with the proviso that I'll also have to spend a lot of money on stuff I'll never use, the argument loses a lot of weight...


----------



## delericho (Jan 11, 2007)

humble minion said:
			
		

> Maybe I'm getting a cheap price per mini on sheer dumb numbers, but the price per mini-that-I'll-actually-use is a LOT higher.  Cheap price on paper, maybe, but when that cheap price comes with the proviso that I'll also have to spend a lot of money on stuff I'll never use, the argument loses a lot of weight...




Of course, you can then resell those unwanted minis on the secondary market. This has the dual benefit of recouping some of the money you've spent, and also making those minis available to the people who won't buy the random packs, or didn't get the minis they wanted.


----------



## MerricB (Jan 11, 2007)

humble minion said:
			
		

> Oh, and I've always been a bit sceptical about Merric's Laws (nothing personal, Merric!)  If I want to collect X minis of various varieties to use for roleplaying, because of the random packaging, I'll have to end up paying for X+Y minis, of which Y are duplicates, silly monsters that I don't like, or things like Warforged and Dragonspawn that will never see the light of day in my games.  Merric's Laws state I can choose two of cheap prices, non-random selection, and a wide range.  WotC minis assume (claim?) to give low price and a wide range.  But WotCs sales model makes me buy almost as many minis that I don't want (on average) as those that I do.  Maybe I'm getting a cheap price per mini on sheer dumb numbers, but the price per mini-that-I'll-actually-use is a LOT higher.  Cheap price on paper, maybe, but when that cheap price comes with the proviso that I'll also have to spend a lot of money on stuff I'll never use, the argument loses a lot of weight...




That's part of the tradeoff that makes the Law work.

Look, mini companies have two choices with mini packaging. Say you make 8 miniatures, and you need $8 profit. 

If you sell them randomly, you sell them in one booster, and charge $8 for it. The booster is sold, you get $8. The purchaser might not want all the minis, but that isn't your problem. If you sell them non-randomly, and the purchaser only wants 4 of them, you have to sell them for $2 each. You end up with four unsold minis, but you get the $8 profit.

The problem with the non-random solution is in what happens to those 4 unsold minis, because storing them costs! (Either you, or the retailer, or the distributor).

Here's an interesting comparison: the minis you don't want are like the monsters you don't want in a Monster Manual...

Cheers!


----------



## Ghendar (Jan 11, 2007)

Darrell said:
			
		

> Frankly, I'd be far more likely to pick up a pack like that as an impulse buy at the LGS than the newest splatbook or some crap like 'Three Dragon Ante.'
> 
> Regards,
> Darrell





Not to get off track here but Three Dragon Ante is a pretty fun game although I understand it's not everybody's cup of tea.

And oh yeah, I'd also like to see creature theme packs. Ain't gonna happen tho.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Jan 11, 2007)

Heck, I LIKE painting minis, but I just don't have time for it these days (two small kids and a demanding job), so the D&D minis are fine for me. But it all comes down to how to get what I want. I have very specific wants for figures, so random packaging doesnn't really do it for me, but I've been willing to pay (too much) money for indivdual figures from online retailers. In fact, the one I use will sell you 10 goblins for$ 8.99, which seems reasonable given the cost per package of a random set.

But again, it all depends on what you want. I wasn't impressed with the quality of the D&D minis at first, but they've gotten better and better.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Jan 11, 2007)

Another thought. I liked the minis for the Chainmail skirmish game, and was sorry to see it go (still got a lot unpainted), but it serves as a proof for Merric's law. It was a bust because people weren't willing to pay the necessary cost per mini to keep it operational, but when they moved to (relatively) cheep, plastic, and prepainted random minis, the concept exploded. Personally, if I had time, I love to have beautiful metal minis that I could paint individually as need be, but in the circumstance, I'm happy to have what I can get.

Even moreso for starwars, 'cause you just can't find a good jedi or wookie mini apart from what WOTC sells, because of licensing.


----------



## solkan_uk (Jan 11, 2007)

Personally I could live with random packs if they were more tightly themed.

Say if "Deathknell" were actually just undead of various types, so I could buy 6 packs and be reasonably confident I'd get at least 6 skeleton-type things (I don't care whether they are skeleton swordsmen, axemen or whatever).

Or a "Hordes of the Orcs", with Orcs, Goblin Slaves and various allied humanoids, for D&D purposes an Orc Bezerker, Orc Guardian, Orc Mauler or Orc Battlerager isn't too big a distinction.


----------



## humble minion (Jan 11, 2007)

delericho said:
			
		

> Of course, you can then resell those unwanted minis on the secondary market. This has the dual benefit of recouping some of the money you've spent, and also making those minis available to the people who won't buy the random packs, or didn't get the minis they wanted.




This would be true, but the vast majority of minis have next to no resale value.  EVERYONE who's bought any significant number of minis has already got a zillion dwarves, for instance, and very few people will be in the market for an army of Soulknives.  The amount you stand to make back from selling most commons and uncommons is relatively miniscule - and the ones that do retain value (stirge!) tend the be the ones that are useful for roleplaying, and that you therefore won't be selling anyway...


----------



## Pramas (Jan 11, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> The problem with the non-random solution is in what happens to those 4 unsold minis, because storing them costs! (Either you, or the retailer, or the distributor).




Of course, one of the advantages of the traditional minis model is that you can cast to order. If you need 12 more blisters of orc archers to sell, you cast them and ship them out. If you cast too many, you dump the extras back into the pot and use the metal for something else. Getting pre-painted minis done in China does not work this way. Companies have to commit to big runs to make them economical.


----------



## Pramas (Jan 11, 2007)

Remus Lupin said:
			
		

> Another thought. I liked the minis for the Chainmail skirmish game, and was sorry to see it go (still got a lot unpainted), but it serves as a proof for Merric's law.




No, it really doesn't. Chainmail was hopelessly compromised by the internal politics of WotC so I would not draw too many conclusions based on its fate. As we were trying to launch the game and facing endless roadblocks, territorial disputes, and corporate shenanigans, we used to joke that we were being shackled at the ankles, shot in both knees, and then told to run.


----------



## humble minion (Jan 11, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> That's part of the tradeoff that makes the Law work.
> 
> Look, mini companies have two choices with mini packaging. Say you make 8 miniatures, and you need $8 profit.
> 
> ...





This is all true, as far as it goes.  But in your example, when minis are packaged nonrandomly, the manufacturer can probably increase the number of minis sold to 6 or so out of 8, through market research and targeting the mini subjects to what customers actually want.  This would be a welcome change to the current rather farcical situation (though to be fair, Blood War was a _great_ improvement on this front) in which classic, MM1 monsters are carefully rationed out between sets, in order to string roleplayers along and coax them into buying as much superfluous rubbish as possible in their increasingly cranky quest to get hold of a solid set of playing pieces.  It's possible i'm imagining things here, but I even seem to recall a WotC rep on Maxminis a while back pretty much admitting that was their marketing strategy, correct me if i'm wrong.  

Seriously, a large percentage of minis are padding.  Some will become popular because they're powerful in the skirmish game, but in the final analysis, most skirmishers don't care what the mini looks like as long as the numbers on the card are big enough.  Most minis of any set get relegated instantly to the spares bin, sadly enough.  

If this manufacturer of yours needs to make $8 from his 8 minis, he has two options.  He can use random distribution and coax the purchaser into paying $1 each for a bunch of minis that (if he's lucky!) he'll use a fraction of, or he can raise his prices to, say, $2 per mini, but do his damndest to only make minis that people actually want.  Blind Freddie would have known that everyone was going to hate the Bluespawn Godslayer, for instance, or the Frost Dwarf, or the Kobold Monk when we already have piles of other kobolds.  We didn't need them.  We only need so many iterations of 'dwarf with axe' or 'elf with bow'.  Yes, this cuts down the total size of the mini range, but only a small fraction of the range ever sees any use anyway, and a large percentage of the _theoretical_ range is out of print and therefore inaccessable to most casual purchasers.  Non-random packaging, higher prices, a bit of bloody attention paid to what subjects people actually want, and a smaller range of minis that do not go permanently out of print at the end of their manufacturing runs (therefore not requiring displacer beast-esque reprints) would be my preference.

But of course that's all from my perspective, and I'm a roleplayer.  I have a sneaking suspicion the DDM range is run by and for skirmish gamers these days.  I'd have assumed that there was more customer base on the RPG side of things, personally, but I suppose WotC has done more market research than I have...


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jan 11, 2007)

Kae'Yoss said:
			
		

> Deathknell never cost 15 quid. The official price was $13, I think - and you hardly ever pay that: Usually, the shops sell individual boosters for several dollars less, and if you buy by the case (12 boosters), it gets even cheaper.




Usually several dollars less per booster?  I've never seen them for less than retail around the St. Louis area, and if I buy them online I have to pay shipping.

Oh well.  I just buy reaper figs and know where my money goes, not to mention get much better looking figs after I slap some paint on them.  WOTC is probably making the most money this way and I doubt they are going to change.


----------



## Dragon Vindaloo (Jan 11, 2007)

You can just go into the store, march up to the DDM section and simply open the box, check out the contents and then decide to either buy it or look in another one and see if thats any better...

Some places don't even object to this either, they fail to understand its random collectable nature and if a sales person does look at you weirdly just say, "I'm just checking to see if I have this one already, the packaging all looks the same to me."


----------



## JPL (Jan 11, 2007)

I'd like to see some non-randomized sets, just to test the waters.  Something everyone could use, like an orc war party or some drow / driders / big spiders.


----------



## Dragon Vindaloo (Jan 11, 2007)

Or how about putting a mini on the cover of Dragon or Dungeon every month or so?  Maybe when they release things like Vault of the Drow they can put out a complementary Vault of the Drow boxed set too and if you buy both as a bundle its a couple of quid cheaper.  Or maybe put a discount voucher in the back of every WotC book for a % off the price of DDM boosters or what have you?


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 11, 2007)

Felnar said:
			
		

> (that all said, i really dont know much about DDM, what exactly is the difference between a starter and booster pack?)




A starter has more figures than a booster (4 more commons), A d20, some counters (hardly ever used them, to be honest), the rulebook, templates for the 4 areas of effect (radius 2, radius 4, and 2x cone - one straight and one 45°) and two doublesided maps.



			
				humble minion said:
			
		

> This is all true, as far as it goes.  But in your example, when minis are packaged nonrandomly, the manufacturer can probably increase the number of minis sold to 6 or so out of 8, through market research and targeting the mini subjects to what customers actually want.




That would mean that you'd only get standard critters that will sell in numbers large enough to be viable. 

Figures with less demand would be produced in smaller quantities, but the fixed costs would stay the same, so they'd have to sell them at a higher price, which would lower the demand further.



> Seriously, a large percentage of minis are padding.




Don't think that I can sign that.



> Some will become popular because they're powerful in the skirmish game, but in the final analysis, most skirmishers don't care what the mini looks like as long as the numbers on the card are big enough.




I still think that skirmishers are a minority. So ugly figure X is really good in skirmish, and every skirmisher wants 5, that still could mean that there would be less demand for it than for a figure that sucks in skirmish but is very pretty, and useful for skirmishers, and every roleplayer wants only one.

Also, skirmishers do want pretty minis. Go look at the Wizards DDM boards after the preview of an ugly figure (see several Wardrums figures, and Bloodwar's Marilith!)

If you look at the most expensive figures, you see a lot of stuff that is less than useful in skirmish: Drizzt pretty much sucks in skirmish, but people are selling their firstborn, various limbs and internal organs to get one. The Beholder is useful, but by far not the most useful LE critter, but one of the most expensive ones. And some of the oldest figures are quite expensive, too, but few of the oldest figures are of any use in Skirmish games.



> do his damndest to only make minis that people actually want.




Insert "most" before "people" and you have a sentence there. So your newest character is a dwarven crossbow specialist? Tough luck, few people would buy such a figure, so the "Dwarf Sniper" wasn't made. Like 'loths? Sorry, but they're no core fiends, most people will rather use devils or demons, so no dice. Got a crazy idea: To escape cookie-cutterism by using an orc wizard? Well, that's just too crazy for most people, I guess your orc wizard will look decidedly human, or decidedly barbarianlike.




> Blind Freddie would have known that everyone was going to hate the Bluespawn Godslayer




I like the Godslayer.



> Kobold Monk when we already have piles of other kobolds.




The kobold thing is curious. We get an awful lot of them. I think it's because there's a disproportionate number of raving kobold fan-boys out there. Seriously, kobolds seem to be quite popular despite their laughable traits.

So chances are that we'd be drowned in kobolds even with non-random packaging.



> We only need so many iterations of 'dwarf with axe'




Ah, the good old dwarf with axe situation. I agree with you. I totally agree. But that's not necessarily a random-distribution problem. It's more a problem of sculpt selection.



> Non-random packaging, higher prices, a bit of bloody attention paid to what subjects people actually want, and a smaller range of minis that do not go permanently out of print at the end of their manufacturing runs (therefore not requiring displacer beast-esque reprints) would be my preference.




Well, how much are you willing to pay?

As much as you've got to pay on eBay, or more? Not that eBay is the only source for DDM figures where you can order just what you want.

What's so bad about ordering in an online shop, or at eBay? If it's an issue of trust, stick to big eBay shops with lots of positive feedback. Get advice about those here or over at Wizards, or at Maxminis, or at Hordelings.

You can get your orc pack there, probably for less than you'd have paid for an official Wizards orc pack. Some critters aren't cheap, but you already said that you accept higher prices.

That way, everyone gets what he wants: You get your minis-on-demand, and others get their random, but quite cheap minis with a huge selection and exotic models.

That wouldn't be possible the other way around: Noone would buy blister packs of minis, put them randomly in a bag, and sell those as "boosters" half off (at least not until they'd have gathered dust for months in the shelves, and that is less likely since they're only doing figures that are highly in demand), noone would do those exotic figures.



> But of course that's all from my perspective, and I'm a roleplayer.  I have a sneaking suspicion the DDM range is run by and for skirmish gamers these days.




I still think that Roleplayers are the majority here. Many picked up the skirmish game, too, but they're still Roleplayers first and foremost.

That doesn't mean that they'll only cater to roleplayers, though.

And I doubt that they do the current scheme with random figures because we have more skirmishers - they like to get specific pieces as much as us roleplayers.

In fact, skirmishers are much more likely to shop solely for singles: not all DDM figures are that good in skirmish. there's always several that just don't cut it, that are inferior to other pieces both recent and old. And even if a figure is useful, you don't need that many of them. More than a couple of each mini is seldomly used, as you need to build your warband with the proper synergies, you need commanders, maybe tech, screeners, fodder, beaters/titans. 

In fact, it's often that warbands built around one type of figure being used in duplicate, triplicate, or even quadruplicate are built with rare figures x2 - x4. And you hardly ever succeed getting the rare you need 4 times by buying boosters/cases.

So those skirmishers buy the rares they need (simetimes more than one), get one or two of those uncommons that are good (sometimes more, maybe), and some commons.

Remember/know that a warband contains no more than 8 figures, unless you use figures that can summon other figures, or maybe have minions. 

Plus, it's much more likely for a skirmisher to concentrate on one faction than a roleplayer to concentrate on one alignment.


So let's see: 
From a set of 60, say only 20-30 will be useful for skirmishers (a lot less if we're talking about someone who limits himself to one faction) getting them in quantities of 1-4 based solely on skirmish values, totalling often 60 or less figures from a set.

The roleplayer doesn't care about skirmish stats, can often find use for most figures in the course of his campaign (or his friends'), will often have use of weak figures in large quantities, and needs all alignments - good ones for PCs, NPCs, allies, and the rest for enemies and villains. That means he can get a case (12 boosters) and find use for most of it in a campaign (what with using the occasional proxy). He'll see what he can get and add choice pieces from the secondary market.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 11, 2007)

Dragon Vindaloo said:
			
		

> Or maybe put a discount voucher in the back of every WotC book for a % off the price of DDM boosters or what have you?




Yeah, so peapel just have to rip off the voucher off a book standing in the shelf and get their minis cheaper? Instead of paying 16 quid, they now only pay 15. 

Note that 15 quid is the official price right now. Of course you wouldn't pay less with the voucher - you'd pay more without.   



			
				Dragon Vindaloo said:
			
		

> You can just go into the store, march up to the DDM section and simply open the box, check out the contents and then decide to either buy it or look in another one and see if thats any better...
> 
> Some places don't even object to this either, they fail to understand its random collectable nature and if a sales person does look at you weirdly just say, "I'm just checking to see if I have this one already, the packaging all looks the same to me."




Yeah, and the security in those smaller stores is often quite lax, so you can steal candy bars, and never have to pay for them, either....   



			
				Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> Usually several dollars less per booster?  I've never seen them for less than retail around the St. Louis area, and if I buy them online I have to pay shipping.




I can't tell you about the situation in your local shops, but I think I've heard about shops selling them for less than the MSRP, right off the shelf. I haven't exactly seen it here, but that's mainly because everything's a little more expensive here, what with the need to get the stuff over the ocean first.

But thewarstore sells war drums boosters for $10.49. Okay, you have $3.95 shipping extra, but that's still only around 14.50 for one booster. And that 3.95 is a flat rate, so if you buy 5 packs, you only pay about 56,50 (instead of 75).

Plus, if you buy in bulk - usually by the case, which is 12 boosters, which has the added benefit of getting less duplicates as the "seeding" within a case is only semi-random - you'll usually be able to nogotiate a discount from your store - and online stores sell them by the case, for better prices, anyway - like 112,5 at thewarstore (less than 9.5 per booster and only about 9.7 per booster including shipping with one case)



> not to mention get much better looking figs after I slap some paint on them.




Not everyone has the talent - or time - to paint those figures. I like painting, but I wouldn't paint scores or even hundreds of minis.



> WOTC is probably making the most money this way and I doubt they are going to change.




I agree. It's unlikely that WotC will turn into a charity any time soon.


----------



## RFisher (Jan 11, 2007)

Seeten said:
			
		

> The secondary market fixes everything.




It doesn't fix the fact that many people are uncomfortable with the secondary market.

I'm sure someone could manage to explain the economics of this (why the secondary market can sell them individually but Hasbro can't) to me. I'm sure the marketers have plenty of data to support their choice.

But I have to wonder how many people who aren't buying WotC minis _at all_ now would buy them if they could get clear or non-randomized packs from WotC. I have to think that a company with the resources that Hasbro has could figure out how to make it work if they really wanted to.

(A month ago I might have told you that developing something with all the features of the iPhone & selling it for $499 was impossible. But--no matter what bad things they may say about Steve Jobs--he's got the ability to have a vision & somehow inspire people to make it a reality.)

(&, yeah, I know WotC still operates pretty independantly from Hasbro. But as a customer that's an internal detail of operations that means nothing to me.)


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jan 11, 2007)

Kae'Yoss said:
			
		

> That would mean that you'd only get standard critters that will sell in numbers large enough to be viable.
> 
> Figures with less demand would be produced in smaller quantities, but the fixed costs would stay the same, so they'd have to sell them at a higher price, which would lower the demand further.





There was a minis business long before WotC existed, and they were sold by the figure type or boxes of specific types.  I very much doubt that the market would implode simply because WotC did the same.

What happens right now, though, is that Gamer X needs 4 particular minis, for which he buys 2-3 packages of random minis to get, so that the _perceived need_ of the consumer generates more revenue for WotC than $1/mini.  In effect, if you must buy 20 minis you don't particularly need in order to gain the 4 they want.  If they go to a retailer who has opened the boxes, the retailer pays this cost and passes it on by marking up the desired minis.  In effect, WotC can make $24 on every sale that would otherwise be $4 per consumer.  That's good for business as long as the market will accept it, and you can do things like design a requirement for minis into your combat system to help keep that acceptance level up.

(The 4 out of 24 is simply a made-up number.  I don't know what the actual stats would be.)

The net effect of this is that having a certain percentage of less-desirable minis isn't bad business sense.  It actually drives sales.


RC


----------



## KB9JMQ (Jan 11, 2007)

I have no problem with how WoTC does DDM now. I actually like it.
I buy by the case. My wife and I sit down with our young boys and open each booster one at a time and have a great time doing so.
I am a completionist, I normally buy 2 cases of each set then either trade/sell via here or ebay to finish out the rares I need.
I buy for roleplaying only. I used to skirmish with them but we like Heroscape better for that.

My only change would be to make Stirges common


----------



## 3d6 (Jan 11, 2007)

Honestly, I think the secondary market for common miniatures like orcs or skeletons works fine. If you go over to ebay, you'll see that complete common sets (1 of each common from a set) generally go for about $6, including shipping. That's about 30 to 50 cents a miniature, which is a pretty good price.

I think that the bigger problem is the iconic D&D monsters that are rare. If I want a beholder (and every D&D game needs a beholder) I'm probably going to pay $30 or more for it. I'd pay about the same price for a illithid. That is pretty prohibitive, and I expect most games use those monsters.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jan 11, 2007)

3d6 said:
			
		

> Honestly, I think the secondary market for common miniatures like orcs or skeletons works fine. If you go over to ebay, you'll see that complete common sets (1 of each common from a set) generally go for about $6, including shipping. That's about 30 to 50 cents a miniature, which is a pretty good price.
> 
> I think that the bigger problem is the iconic D&D monsters that are rare. If I want a beholder (and every D&D game needs a beholder) I'm probably going to pay $30 or more for it. I'd pay about the same price for a illithid. That is pretty prohibitive, and I expect most games use those monsters.





It's a corrolary to my previous post that the retailer who opens boxes will buy in bulk to minimize his costs, mark up the rares to maximize his profit, and sell the commons cheap to minimize his losses.

If the minis every wanted (the D&D iconics) were not rare, then WotC would be back to selling those 4 minis instead of 24.


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 11, 2007)

thedungeondelver said:
			
		

> Nope, they were the same plaster that the dungeons are made out of (I own quite a lot of both  ).




Ah, my apologies.  I've only seen them in packaging, have never opened them up.  All I knew was that they weren't plastic.


----------



## TerraDave (Jan 11, 2007)

http://www.hasbrotoyshop.com/ProductsByBrand.htm?BR=746&PG=1


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 11, 2007)

Several attempts have been made at pre-painted plastic minis. I can't remember the companies, but they were tried in the last 3-4 years. The packs contained 4-6 orcs, and were $10-15 each - way more than the current model.

btw, all of those product lines were ceased, and I've seen many of them sitting in close out boxes at the LGS here in Minneapolis. 

LGS have very, very, very tiny profit margins. Every time they have to buy minis that sit on their walls and don't sell, they have tied up their tiny amount of working capital. LGS are waaaaay better off with the random minis, and so are we. 

For those of you that don't know, Charles Ryan, who posted earlier, used to be THE MAN for D&D. He would know the business model as well or better than anyone. I've chatted with the designers of DDM in person and on-line. They are constantly looking for other models, but none of them appear to work, based on their analysis and on the examples of other companies that have tried this and failed.

I'm not sure why anyone would be uncomfortable with the secondary market. There are many e-bay stores/sellers that have been in business a long time that sell these things non-randomly.


----------



## ehren37 (Jan 11, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> It would be so cool if I could just BUY them like this straight from WotC instead of hunting them down and getting bid sniped on eBay.




You could, if you were willing to pay 5 times as much and see the line dead in a year.


----------



## ehren37 (Jan 11, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> One of the big problems is actually with the LGS - stocking such products is a real pain.
> 
> Cheers!




Indeed. Go into a game store. How many reaper minis are on the shelf from 3 years ago. How many DDM packs are on the shelves from 3 years ago?


----------



## ehren37 (Jan 11, 2007)

humble minion said:
			
		

> Blind Freddie would have known that everyone was going to hate the Bluespawn Godslayer







> We only need so many iterations of 'dwarf with axe' or 'elf with bow'.




You realize that the alternative to what you have, is stuff you dont have, right? That means that since you have enough of the common monsters, all thats left is the niche stuff? Like godslayers?

And more importantly, the emphasis is on YOU. Not new customers. In order to keep the product moving, each set needs to include some of the basics (since they fall out of production). The guy who gets into the game next year is going to need orcs with clubs, dwarves with axes,  and elves with bows. If he cant get the stuff because all thats being made is celestial dire flumphs, he's not going to buy. Not that you will either, because while you dont want the same old stuff you already have, you'll likely gripe about anything "too out there". Sorry, after a while of making minis, you're going to get "out there" in some of the choices.

I dont know if anyone collected Star Wars figures a while back, but for a bit, pretty much every wave of figures had the basic heroes, and a few oddball aliens/driods. Fans pitched a hissy fit that they didnt need any more lukes, leias, etc. Hasbro, for whatdever reason, listened to the greasy unwashed masses, and cranked out a few waves of obscure guys. Guess what? No one wanted Jek Porkins, Cantina Alien #47, and Skiff Guard #2. They rotted on the shelves (peg warmers), Wal-Mart and Toys R Us stopped ordering more until they could sell off what they had (which was impossible). Hasbro had to buy them back in order for the line to continue. People want the basics, and the classics are always going to be in demand. So since then, pretty much every release has seen some major characters thrown in, even if its retreading covered territory. I'd wager they learned a little something about the rantings of a few dorks on message boards from this - that they arent representative of the market. Why the hell they listened in the first place is mind boggling.

I'd prefer cheap, nonrandom minis. Hell, I'd prefer free nonrandom minis that came with piles of free money and a new car. But I'm realistic, and have a tiny grasp of business. Random minis work much like the lottery/gambling, where a mass of suckers support the few lucky winners. Except theres a really easy way to circumvent it in this case, and get the payoff for less. Those theme packs? Its called ebay folks. Use auggies, get your minis much cheaper than WOTC could package and sell them to you for, and stop whining about not being able to go into a store and pay more money for less. Individualized packaging costs money, distribution of specific figures takes resources, peg warmers take up space which lowers future sales etc. The situation as it stands works INCREDIBLY well.


----------



## AntiStateQuixote (Jan 11, 2007)

Bert the Ogre said:
			
		

> But what's not being considered is some other company getting into the minis game. Not the high dollar pewter minis from Ral Partha, et al, but a cheap but still good looking set/series of minis from someone else. Sets of 10-12 minis, prepainted and maybe even with SRD stats and a copy of the OGL in the box.
> 
> A known quantity for a known price. I KOW I'd buy them! What about the rest of you? A 10 pack of prepainted dwarves for $!0 bucks? A 20 pack of kobolds, a 20 pack of skeletons and zombies? A ten pack of (fill in your own blank?).



The SRD and d20 License specifically forbid licensees to put the logo (and therefore the SRD or stats) on miniatures products.  I've looked into a couple of "miniature-like" products and that was one of the hangups.


----------



## delericho (Jan 11, 2007)

Brent_Nall said:
			
		

> The SRD and d20 License specifically forbid licensees to put the logo (and therefore the SRD or stats) on miniatures products.  I've looked into a couple of "miniature-like" products and that was one of the hangups.




I know the d20 license was modified to specifically forbid that, but I was under the impression that the OGL has no such clause (since it wasn't considered in revision 1.0, and one of the clauses of the license is that you can publish under any version, they couldn't then retcon it in).

Or am I mistaken?


----------



## ehren37 (Jan 11, 2007)

delericho said:
			
		

> I know the d20 license was modified to specifically forbid that, but I was under the impression that the OGL has no such clause (since it wasn't considered in revision 1.0, and one of the clauses of the license is that you can publish under any version, they couldn't then retcon it in).
> 
> Or am I mistaken?




Theres a reason reaper minis that are obviously creatures in the SRD dont use the official names (dragon lion instead of dragonne). Not to mention you wouldnt get non-SRD monsters, including many iconic D&D critters (beholders, displacer beasts, etc).


----------



## molonel (Jan 11, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> And more importantly, the emphasis is on YOU. Not new customers.




You're complaining about the thread, aren't you? I love it when someone takes the time to whine about someone else's whining. It's so self-defeating.

Of course the emphasis is on me. It's my post, my thread and my thoughts on the matter. And those thoughts are shared by many.

If you order a steak in a restaurant, and it comes out burned into charcoal, do you immediately pen a thank you note to the cook expressing your hopes that whatever caused this little accident has been taken care of, and include a tip?



			
				ehren37 said:
			
		

> I'd prefer cheap, nonrandom minis. Hell, I'd prefer free nonrandom minis that came with piles of free money and a new car. But I'm realistic, and have a tiny grasp of business. Random minis work much like the lottery/gambling, where a mass of suckers support the few lucky winners. Except theres a really easy way to circumvent it in this case, and get the payoff for less. Those theme packs? Its called ebay folks. Use auggies, get your minis much cheaper than WOTC could package and sell them to you for, and stop whining about not being able to go into a store and pay more money for less. Individualized packaging costs money, distribution of specific figures takes resources, peg warmers take up space which lowers future sales etc.




I don't know if you're capable of grasping this oh-so-subtle point, but I'll try.

Everyone who expresses a thought that you disagree with is not whining.

I don't like watching eBay auctions. It's fun, once in a while, but the fact is, after the fourth or fifth time you've had your auction sniped out from under you with 8 seconds left, you're ready to scream.

I want a bucketful of orcs. I want a bucketful of elves. I want a bucketful of dwarves. And then I'd like to get some out-there minis for a cheap price. I'm kind of tired of staring at raw metal, but I don't need a work of art on my table, either. 

I'm not asking for Pamela Anderson to give me a foot massage while I play D&D, though certainly that would be nice.

And I refuse to believe that simply packaging "A bucketful of random orcs" is going to send Hasbro spinning into financial ruin, or hurt randomized mini sales.



			
				ehren37 said:
			
		

> The situation as it stands works INCREDIBLY well.




The situation as it stands sucks. It doesn't suck quite as hard as back in the day when you're only option was to use Pente pieces, or M&Ms, or little six-siders. But it could still be a lot better than it is.


----------



## delericho (Jan 11, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> Theres a reason reaper minis that are obviously creatures in the SRD dont use the official names (dragon lion instead of dragonne).




Yep, but I'm not sure it's _that_ reason.

In fact, Paizo's Compleat Encounters range are published under the OGL, so it clearly is possible.



> Not to mention you wouldnt get non-SRD monsters, including many iconic D&D critters (beholders, displacer beasts, etc).




Indeed.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 11, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> I don't like watching eBay auctions.
> 
> ...
> 
> I want a bucketful of orcs. I want a bucketful of elves. I want a bucketful of dwarves. And then I'd like to get some out-there minis for a cheap price. I'm kind of tired of staring at raw metal, but I don't need a work of art on my table, either.




Might I then recommend ...

Auggie's Large List of Large Lots of D&D Minis (at least x10 each)?

Specifically, 10 dwarfs with crossbows for $0.25 each, 10 spearwielding orcs for $0.45 each, 10 halflings with slings for $0.23 each, 10 dwarves with staves for $0.45 each, 10 elves with swords for $0.25 each, 10 armored half-orcs for $0.55 each, and a look through his individual mini prices?

They aren't auctions; they're for sale.  Auggie's large lots are generally between $0.25 and $1.00 per mini.


----------



## CaptainChaos (Jan 11, 2007)

Zaukrie said:
			
		

> LGS have very, very, very tiny profit margins. Every time they have to buy minis that sit on their walls and don't sell, they have tied up their tiny amount of working capital. LGS are waaaaay better off with the random minis, and so are we.




Couldn't you say the exact same thing about RPG books? What if WotC started doing "boosters" of random D&D supplements? You could get any 1 of 12 books! That would be less money in sunk inventory and less SKUs for everyone, right?


----------



## thedungeondelver (Jan 11, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Ah, my apologies.  I've only seen them in packaging, have never opened them up.  All I knew was that they weren't plastic.





I'll let it go.

_This_ time.


----------



## thedungeondelver (Jan 11, 2007)

You know.  I should be kicked in the pants.  I can't believe I forgot the extensive review of prepainted miniatures I did for *WARGAMES@NORDALIA*.

For some alternatives to "miniature roulette", please direct your web-type browser here:

http://wargames.nordalia.com/index.php?page=viewarticle&id=23


----------



## diaglo (Jan 11, 2007)

as the biggest fanboi of D&D in the world. i gotta say this is one of my biggest complaints. if not the biggest.

i'm just sad about it.       

i love minis. but these minis are


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jan 11, 2007)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Might I then recommend ...
> 
> Auggie's Large List of Large Lots of D&D Minis (at least x10 each)?




Cool. Thanks for the site recommendation!  I'd been using a guy here in Missouri, but he sells so much on ebay and works by himself that it takes over a week to even ship, sometimes 2.


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 11, 2007)

Rule books and minis have signficantly different production costs and profit margins. You can't compare them at all. Well, you can, but you'd be making a comparison that yields very little in terms of information about why minis should be random.


----------



## Imaro (Jan 11, 2007)

Hey everybody this is a quick hello and my first post on enworld.  I play D&D 3.x irregularly, but mostly castles and  crusades.  Anyway was wondering if any of you had tried the monster tiles from ocho games.  They kind of have an old school flavor and arent really minis per se, but for monsters I was thinking they would work pretty well as a non-random alternative.  Was  actually thinking of picking up a few myself for C&C.


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 11, 2007)

Auggies is the place to buy, btw. Great, great seller with great prices.


----------



## thedungeondelver (Jan 11, 2007)

"Miniatures should be random" heh...I hope Reaper never takes that tack!  An opaque blister on a $7.99 card that just reads "MINIATURE"

(I know, I know, it's not what the OP meant, but it IS a funny visual...)


----------



## werk (Jan 11, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> I'm sure I'm not the first person to say this. I love the prepainted minis from WotC. Yes, I know there are finer quality minis out there, but I hate painting minis.




I agree 100%.  They could make more money for hasbro selling non-rares in blister packs or even selling all mini's as individuals, but collectables are where the money is...I guess...go pokemon!

And someone need to tell Thurbane to STFU


----------



## molonel (Jan 11, 2007)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Might I then recommend ...
> 
> Auggie's Large List of Large Lots of D&D Minis (at least x10 each)?
> 
> ...




Starting this thread was useful if for no other reason than to learn of this link. Thank you.


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 11, 2007)

Agamon said:
			
		

> Exactly.  If you play D&D, most of the monsters are useful.



Well, actually, I've not found that to be the case, especially since we run a core-only game.

Warforged Samurai Berserker Lieutenants really don't pop up that often in our adventures...


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 11, 2007)

hexgrid said:
			
		

> This law doesn't work well for me at all- I choose Cheap Prices and a Large Range of Figures, but the beholder is still $50!




Nope.  If you took the random-packaging option (you specifically didn't choose non-random packaging) then it only originally cost between $1-$2 if it was in your booster. Even if you paid for a booster at today's prices (around $30-$50, IIRC) then you still are only paying about $5 for it.

However, as others have said, you choose the non-random option.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 11, 2007)

Remus Lupin said:
			
		

> Another thought. I liked the minis for the Chainmail skirmish game, and was sorry to see it go (still got a lot unpainted), but it serves as a proof for Merric's law. It was a bust because people weren't willing to pay the necessary cost per mini to keep it operational, but when they moved to (relatively) cheep, plastic, and prepainted random minis, the concept exploded.




I'll also note that as large as the market segment that doesn't want to paint miniatures(or just isn't willing/able to), the segment that wants to _assemble_ miniatures is even larger.

While Chris Prama has touched on reasons why Chainmail "failed," I doubt it would have been anywhere near as successful as DDM is now (unless it somehow managed to draw away a large portion of the Games Workshop crowd).


----------



## rgard (Jan 11, 2007)

Dragon Vindaloo said:
			
		

> You can just go into the store, march up to the DDM section and simply open the box, check out the contents and then decide to either buy it or look in another one and see if thats any better...
> 
> Some places don't even object to this either, they fail to understand its random collectable nature and if a sales person does look at you weirdly just say, "I'm just checking to see if I have this one already, the packaging all looks the same to me."




Oh that's evil!  First good laugh I've had today.  Thanks!!!


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 11, 2007)

delericho said:
			
		

> In fact, Paizo's Compleat Encounters range are published under the OGL, so it clearly is possible.




However, they come with a short adventure.  I suspect the fine line is that the adventure is published under the OGL and it's packaged with some miniatures (and tiles).


----------



## BroccoliRage (Jan 11, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> I'm complaining about people who dont grasp business, economics of scale, distribution etc whining when the most advantageous situation to us all is the current one (aside from WOTC becomming a charity). Your "brilliant" ideas would royally hose cheap, nonrandom minis, which are available through the secondary market. So yeah, you dont know what you're talking about, and I'm going to tell you why its a dumb idea, and why you dont want what you think you want (because its going to bite you on the ass). Dont want anyone disagreeing with you? Dont post. Dont want people showing others you have no idea what you're talking about? Definately dont post.
> 
> A better analogy would be where you walk into a resturaunt, order a steak. The waiter tells you they dont serve steak, but theres a steak house right next store, and offers you a coupon. You then pitch a fit because you WANT steak, and "cant" get it.
> 
> ...




Will you be my friend? Bestest?


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 11, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> Starting this thread was useful if for no other reason than to learn of this link. Thank you.




Glad I could help!  

I've bought, well, a couple hundred dollars worth of assorted (D&D, SW, and SSB) minis from Auggie in the couple of years I've been buying them.  Generally speaking, I buy most of my minis from him as singles rather than from WotC as boosters.

I've had all of one issue in that entire time (he ran out of a large lot of a particular mini I'd ordered; he refunded my money and gave me free shipping on my next order).  Auggie's a stand-up guy.

I'm glad I could shuffle some more business his way!


----------



## molonel (Jan 11, 2007)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Glad I could help!
> 
> I've bought, well, a couple hundred dollars worth of assorted (D&D, SW, and SSB) minis from Auggie in the couple of years I've been buying them.  Generally speaking, I buy most of my minis from him as singles rather than from WotC as boosters.
> 
> ...




Yeah, you definitely have.

Again, thank you.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 11, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> I don't know if you're capable of grasping this oh-so-subtle point, but I'll try.




I don't know if I'm doing this right, but I thought I tried it once, just to see:

*PLONK*

No, doesn't do it for me.



> I don't like watching eBay auctions.




Then don't. Go for "buy-it-now". You see the price, you click on the button, it's yours. No sniping, no bidding, nothing. Just buy the thing.

Wait, it's a bit more complicated: You sometimes have to state how many you'd like. And you have to confirm the purchase.

But I think most people will manage.



> I want a bucketful of orcs. I want a bucketful of elves. I want a bucketful of dwarves.




We don't have to repeat all those addresses and links, do we?



> And then I'd like to get some out-there minis for a cheap price.




And I'd like to have my very characters made into minis. Won't happen, either. 

As some people have explained above:

For those figures to be profitable, you have to do large numbers of them. Out-there minis probably won't sell in large numbers.



> And I refuse to believe that simply packaging "A bucketful of random orcs" is going to send Hasbro spinning into financial ruin, or hurt randomized mini sales.




Won't make it any more wrong or right, though



> The situation as it stands sucks. It doesn't suck quite as hard as back in the day when you're only option was to use Pente pieces, or M&Ms, or little six-siders. But it could still be a lot better than it is.




It could, but that stupid reality gets in the way.



			
				3d6 said:
			
		

> That is pretty prohibitive, and I expect most games use those monsters.




I'd be not so sure. Beholders are huge wildcards: If you know you're going to fact them, they're a joke for their CR. If they get the jump on you, chances are great that someone will die. If they weren't so frail, they would make great CoC critters.



			
				Raven Crowking said:
			
		

> There was a minis business long before WotC existed, and they were sold by the figure type or boxes of specific types.  I very much doubt that the market would implode simply because WotC did the same.




Are you referring to pre-painted plastic minis? If so, could you point me to an online shop that sells them.



> What happens right now, though, is that Gamer X needs 4 particular minis, for which he buys 2-3 packages of random minis to get, so that the _perceived need_ of the consumer generates more revenue for WotC than $1/mini.  In effect, if you must buy 20 minis you don't particularly need in order to gain the 4 they want.




(or you go to the secondary market)



> That's good for business as long as the market will accept it, and you can do things like design a requirement for minis into your combat system to help keep that acceptance level up.




If you refer to skirmish stats, I already said that those are pretty much the minority. The number of minis that are desired because their stats are good are nearly non-existant. The minis whose stats suck big time but are quite in demand because of how they look is quite high, though.

And again, the market will have to accept it, because, as a lot of people, including many who are supposed to know what they're talking about (and I don't mean myself, I mean people like, let's pick a name out at random, Charles Ryan), are quite convinced that it can't be changed.



			
				RFisher said:
			
		

> It doesn't fix the fact that many people are uncomfortable with the secondary market.




So everyone has to pay twice what they're paying now because some people are scared of eBay? 

I'm not buying that. Go get councelling or something. Just actually look at the thing.

What's so scary about that? Go to eBay, look for the minis you want (search only for buy-it-now auctions), or, better yet, get a list of reputable eBay sellers (Auggie's, Hubb's, others) and look there. Have bought lots of minis that way and never been ripped off. In fact, I think those guys are terrified of negative feedback, and if you pay via credit card (which is possible even via PayPal), you could retract the payment if there was any trouble.

Auggie's, for example, has one negative feedback this month (and 3883 positive ones), and that apparently was some idiot who got the wrong button (it still says "Once again, another great transaction. A+")



> I'm sure someone could manage to explain the economics of this (why the secondary market can sell them individually but Hasbro can't) to me. I'm sure the marketers have plenty of data to support their choice.




I guess it's because Wizards still makes and sells those figures bulk. Because they're made in bulk, they can sell them for the usual price, and they still can "distribute the weight" (make more elaborate minis by making others simple). 

The seller gets the figures by the case, sells the rares, making some profit with that (many will sell for more than the booster cost) And then they can practically give away the commons and uncommons and still get some money out of it.



> I have to think that a company with the resources that Hasbro has could figure out how to make it work if they really wanted to.




Well, Bayer (the guys who make the original Aspirin) probably swim in money, too, and sell tons of perscription drugs and medicine, but still they can't market the immortality serum for an affordable price. Some things just don't work.


----------



## Rel (Jan 11, 2007)

ehren37 and molonel will not be replying to each other's posts in this thread anymore.  And they won't be replying to anybody about anything for the next 48 hours.

If that's a problem for anybody, you know where to find me.


----------



## pogre (Jan 11, 2007)

Imaro said:
			
		

> Hey everybody this is a quick hello and my first post on enworld.  I play D&D 3.x irregularly, but mostly castles and  crusades.  Anyway was wondering if any of you had tried the monster tiles from ocho games.  They kind of have an old school flavor and arent really minis per se, but for monsters I was thinking they would work pretty well as a non-random alternative.  Was  actually thinking of picking up a few myself for C&C.




Welcome to ENWorld  

You're inquiry is a bit off-topic so you might want to consider starting a new thread. Most of the conversation here is fairly friendly (even if this thread got a bit snippy). (edit: and as I typed this a couple folks got bonked for a while

Sadly, I have no knowledge of the product you mentioned.


----------



## Imaro (Jan 11, 2007)

Yeah I guess I was a little off since this is specifically talking about D&D minis.  I was just trying to offer an alternative to random minis but I digress it was off topic.  Sorry.  I think I might take up your suggestion for another thread though, thanks.


----------



## havoclad (Jan 11, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> Couldn't you say the exact same thing about RPG books? What if WotC started doing "boosters" of random D&D supplements? You could get any 1 of 12 books! That would be less money in sunk inventory and less SKUs for everyone, right?




Do you use each and every item in all D&D books that you buy?

If you think of the book as your booster pack, the similarity is closer.

In each D&D booster book you get (numbers are completely faked!)
10 Prestige Classes
50 Feats
3   Races
40 Magic Items
2  Mini Adventures
1  Short story

All of the above items are roughly themed together (some better than others).

I could just as easily complain about the $30+ price of a booster book.  Heck, I only need 2 specific prestige classes, 5 feats, and 1 race.  Why can't I buy just the stuff I need??   

If Hasbro could figure out a way to get you the specific miniatures that you want directly from them *without* impacting their business in an overall negative fashion, don't you think they would?  As a publicly traded company, they are pretty much obligated to do so.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jan 12, 2007)

Auggie's looks fantastic.

It's a shame he doesn't ship to Australia.

Oh, well. If I ever get an uncontrollable urge to own a large number of D&D miniatures, I'll ship them to my fiancee's brother - he works for FedEx in California. 

. . . unless someone can recommend a good Australian source? Merric?


----------



## Kunimatyu (Jan 12, 2007)

I just started a buddy of mine on D&D, and got him a great selection of standard figures for about $25 on Auggies. Some were proxies, sure (dread warriors for ghouls/wights/zombies), but the fact is, I got my basic humanoids for around 30 cents each, some PC/NPC types for 50 cents to a dollar, some large uncommon monsters(wolverine, elementals, beetle) for about $1 each, and then a rare giant for $5.

I seriously doubt that the minis would be that cheap if I bought them in a blisterpack from WotC, but as long as they continue putting a nice range of basic figures in their common slots, it should always be possible for new players to purchase a nice range of generally useful stuff on Ebay. I'm certainly not going to complain.


----------



## brehobit (Jan 12, 2007)

mhacdebhandia said:
			
		

> Auggie's looks fantastic.
> 
> It's a shame he doesn't ship to Australia.
> 
> ...




Hubb's Wholesale does international shipping, and I find Hubb's and Auggie's to be pretty similar in price and service.  (I've ordered 3 times from Auggie's and once from Hubb's.  Both were fast and cheap.)  Hubb charges more for shipping but tends to have slightly lower prices.

Obviously, international shipping is more, but it isn't horrible ($6.00+ $.20 per non-huge mini), which is a bit less than twice US shipping.  He doesn't like shipping to South America.

Mark


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jan 12, 2007)

There are some people -- like me -- who post on some websites -- like this very one -- offering to sell their spare Commons and uncommons _very_ cheaply.

So you don't even have to go to eBay.


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 12, 2007)

I'm sorry, but why can't some people grasp the fact that *some people don't want to or cannot use eBay*.

I love the concept of eBay, I really do. Heck, I used it extensively for a while, mainly to build my CD and DVD collection. But that doesn't mean that eBay should is the be all and end all of "where to buy stuff". Lemme rattle off a couple of factors (which I'm sure will get shot down, but anyway):

1. Unless it's changed since I last used it, you need a Paypal account. A Paypal account involves giving out sensitive financial and personal information over the internet. A lot of people are just not comfortable with that, and in many cases (spyware, identity theft etc) rightly so.

2. Geographic location: depending where you live (and yes, though it may shock you, many of us D&Ders live OUTSIDE of the USA), the shipping logicstics push the price way up, or make delivery not possible at all.

Can someone please explain to me why WotC cannot or should not do some reissues of current and old minis in theme packs, alongside their collectibles? Assuming, as I said earlier, that they are stamped differently on the base so as not to impinge on the collectibles series, and even not sold with cards. I am sure that somewhere out there the dies or casts or assembly lines that put them together still exist. If I am barking mad about this, please explain to me where my misunderstanding is...

=====

All that aside, if a 3rd party started producing non-randomized , prepainted plastic SRD miniatures on a par in quality with the WotC lines, I would be MORE than happy to shell out a bit more per miniature in order to be able to buy them over the counter, prepackaged, from my LFGS.

Unfortunately, the only minis my FLGS carries besides WotC random packs are metal minis. While some of these are beatiful, I just don't have the time to paint them as they deserve, and they cost a LOT more per mini that any plastic minis.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 12, 2007)

I'd love it if they came out a few packs of standard creatures, like orcs, skeletons, etc., twenty in each or, perhaps, two, three or four poses.


----------



## Oryan77 (Jan 12, 2007)

mhacdebhandia said:
			
		

> . . . unless someone can recommend a good Australian source? Merric?



Whenever minis are mentioned, Auggies name pops up multiple times. Us other guys get left out of the loop   

I've been selling minis for over a year outside of Ebay. I ship internationally and have shipped several times to Australia. I'm in the process of stocking up on newer sets, but check out what I have. I have plenty of out-of-production minis at the moment. You can find my Enworld ad in my sig


----------



## BroccoliRage (Jan 12, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> 2. Geographic location: depending where you live (and yes, though it may shock you, many of us D&Ders live OUTSIDE of the USA), the shipping logicstics push the price way up, or make delivery not possible at all.




You lie!


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> 1. Unless it's changed since I last used it, you need a Paypal account.




That's entirely up to the individual seller.  Many of the "big" sellers are actual retailers, and they often accept credit cards, but a lot of the sellers are just normal people, without the ability to accept credit-card payments.

A few years ago, before the prevalence of PayPal, those sellers usually accepted money orders, but, now, PayPal does usually wind up as the default.

So, you don't *need* a PayPal account just to use eBay, but if you don't have one, yes, it does limit which auctions you can bid on.

(And, many smaller sellers -- and some not-so-small ones -- won't ship internationally, true.)
[/QUOTE]


----------



## Seeten (Jan 12, 2007)

RFisher said:
			
		

> It doesn't fix the fact that many people are uncomfortable with the secondary market.
> 
> I'm sure someone could manage to explain the economics of this (why the secondary market can sell them individually but Hasbro can't) to me. I'm sure the marketers have plenty of data to support their choice.
> 
> ...




Life is not always perfect, and every single person cannot always have it his way, WOTC isnt Burger King, after all.

Many, Many people have explained in detail why you cant have unlimited selection AND non random packaging.

I am that reason. Me. I will not buy your foolish, foppish Mialee in drag mini. I wont buy your Mialee in Hell mini. Mialee with lightsabre. Dog with hat mini. I wont buy any of it. They will stay on the shelf, and you'll be broke. You stop making those minis, because you are losing your shirt, but then, all 6 people who like Mialee dressed up in every new PrC's clothes are out their Mialee figs. 

However, I gave the solution. I played M:tG without ever buying a pack. I bought 4 sets of commons, 4 sets of uncommons, and any and every rare I needed to make decks. Its cheaper, and I have what I want. I do the same with DDM. Further, I get a much broader selection, AND I spend less, simply by buying individually getting what I want. Whats the diff if I pay $2 for commons, if I only need 10 of them? Thats $20 I spent, and if you buy 19 packs for your rare at 15$ each, you do the math. I never had a problem with a $50 rare, because I'm not spending money on packs also. 

Its simple. If nobody in your area is selling them, I recommend venturing into the 90's and doing some e-commerce. Really.


----------



## Agamon (Jan 12, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> Excuse me, but since I am the customer here, I know what I want. You don't. I'm frustrated, and so are a lot of other people, because I'd like to be able to buy non-randomized miniatures. If you like never knowing exactly what you're getting, that's just peachy and you must enjoy asking strangers to order your meal for you in a restaurant, or giving $1,000 to the person at the ticket counter at the airport, and saying, "Just send me any old place! I don't care!"




I never said your viewpoint was wrong, just your example.  Sorry I didn't point that out more specifically.  Your other examples there are also flawed in the same manner.

That said, no one really responded to my original response in this thread.  What is wrong with using the secondary market (other than 'I don't like it')?  I buy a case of each set (and, by the way, I _know_ I'll get 4 of each common, at least 1 and maybe 2, of each uncommon.  It's the rares, the minis that most poeple that would like their goblin and orc sets don't want anyway, that I'm unsure of).  But, I started the AoW AP recently and knew I needed a bunch of lizardfolk for the 3rd adventure.  Somehow, I managed to get them, even though there isn't a devoted manufactorer that creates packs of lizardfolk!  (and I live in Canada, which might as well be Siberia for many US companies)  Go figure.


----------



## Darrell (Jan 12, 2007)

Agamon said:
			
		

> That said, no one really responded to my original response in this thread.




OK, I'll respond.    



			
				Agamon said:
			
		

> What's wrong with using the secondary market?




For many people, nothing.  For people like me, a great deal.  

In the first place, the secondary market is difficult to reach in a first-hand manner, at least in my area.  The closest place I've found that sells individual minis is in Myrtle Beach, SC...some five hours away from me.  I stop in when I'm on tour (I work as an actor and as a close-up magician), but that isn't all that often.  In order to reach the secondary market, I'm forced to use the internet...bringing up the next problem.

Internet secondary market sources usually want online payment via credit card, Paypal, etc.

I deal in cash/money order only.  I do not (and will not) use a credit card.  I have an ATM card, but will only use it in physical point-of-sale purchases, never online.  I do not (and will not) have a Paypal account.  I, meanwhile, insist on being paid in physical, paper checks--never a direct deposit situation.  E-commerce can, as far as I am concerned, burn in...well...that hot place.

I am, therefore, reduced to trading with online traders, which costs me only the price of postage but means I have to work out deals for what I want vs. what they have that I want vs. what I have that they want--not an ideal situation; or just buying booster after booster, racking up more and more minis that I have no interest in.

That, in a nutshell, is what I find wrong with using the secondary market.  Remember...you asked.    

Regards,
DK


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

Darrell said:
			
		

> I deal in cash/money order only.  I do not (and will not) use a credit card.  I have an ATM card, but will only use it in physical point-of-sale purchases, never online.  I do not (and will not) have a Paypal account.  I, meanwhile, insist on being paid in physical, paper checks--never a direct deposit situation.  E-commerce can, as far as I am concerned, burn in...well...that hot place.




Then, that's not really "can't" so much as "won't".  Please note, I'm not criticizing here, I'm just noting that you've made a conscious choice to not do business in a certain (very common) way.  I fear that, with the direction that commerce in general is going, you're going to find it increasingly more difficult to operate that way.


----------



## BryonD (Jan 12, 2007)

Darrell said:
			
		

> For many people, nothing.  For people like me, a great deal.
> <snip>



Ok, I understand, you only answered because asked.  So that is fine.

BUT

You have self imposed these restrictions.  WotC has a good thing going and they are making money.  The idea that they should change that over someone's self created limits is pretty much nonsense.


----------



## Agamon (Jan 12, 2007)

Thank you.  I understand your predicament.  Your LGCs are kinda dumb, for starters, you should let them know that (just not in so many words, maybe ).  There is a market for this, why they wouldn't supply it is beyond me.

And if they can't because they sell out the boxes...well, it's kind of hard to argue against that the currrent method of distribution, isn't it?

As for your choice of transaction methods, well, that's your choice.  And it's a reasonable one, but it's beginning to get less and less so.  And it's certainly a minority issue and not one to base a business model on, I don't think.

I still feel your pain, but you should slap your FLGSs, really.  Maybe ask them why they don't like making money or something...


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

Darrell said:
			
		

> OK, I'll respond.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I'm working putting my excess minis on Ebay.  You can pay via postal money order.  I don't require paypal or cc.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jan 12, 2007)

Darrell said:
			
		

> I deal in cash/money order only.  I do not (and will not) use a credit card.  I have an ATM card, but will only use it in physical point-of-sale purchases, never online.  I do not (and will not) have a Paypal account.  I, meanwhile, insist on being paid in physical, paper checks--never a direct deposit situation.  E-commerce can, as far as I am concerned, burn in...well...that hot place.



Sure . . . but no-one is obligated to make allowances for people, like you, who deliberately restrict their options, you know?

Wizards of the Coast isn't obligated to ruin their very successful D&D miniatures product line because you find it difficult to buy individual figures due to self-imposed restrictions.


----------



## Rel (Jan 12, 2007)

Darrell said:
			
		

> In the first place, the secondary market is difficult to reach in a first-hand manner, at least in my area.  The closest place I've found that sells individual minis is in Myrtle Beach, SC...some five hours away from me.  I stop in when I'm on tour (I work as an actor and as a close-up magician), but that isn't all that often.




I dunno what part of the state you live in but I believe All Fun & Games in Cary sells individual minis.  As a bonus that's where we'll be next weekend for the January NC Game Day.

Just sayin.


----------



## Darrell (Jan 12, 2007)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Ok, I understand, you only answered because asked.  So that is fine.
> 
> BUT
> 
> You have self imposed these restrictions.  WotC has a good thing going and they are making money.  The idea that they should change that over someone's self created limits is pretty much nonsense.





I'm not really asking them to change their business plan, _per se_.  I'm simply saying that it would be nice to be able to buy commons _en masse_, rather than trading or buying a squintillion booster packs.     Note, however, that I'm only advocating theme-packs of commons--the ones that there are _supposed_ to be a bajillion of.  Uncommons and Rares, going by what I suggest, would still be left to the random boosters.

I realize full well that WotC is making a butt-load of money doing it the way they're doing it, and they won't be changing any time soon.    

Regards,
Darrell


----------



## Darrell (Jan 12, 2007)

Agamon said:
			
		

> Thank you.  I understand your predicament.  Your LGCs are kinda dumb, for starters, you should let them know that (just not in so many words, maybe ).  There is a market for this, why they wouldn't supply it is beyond me.




I _have_ told him that.  He maintains that it's 'too much for him to keep track of;' and then he'll have box on box of used '80s toys (Transformers, GI Joe, He-Man, etc.) all over the store.



			
				Agamon said:
			
		

> And if they can't because they sell out the boxes...well, it's kind of hard to argue against that the currrent method of distribution, isn't it?




That's just it.  He's _not_ selling out.  I buy dust-covered boxes of minis there every other week.



			
				Agamon said:
			
		

> As for your choice of transaction methods, well, that's your choice.  And it's a reasonable one, but it's beginning to get less and less so.  And it's certainly a minority issue and not one to base a business model on, I don't think.




The world can leave me behind on that one.      I won't miss it.  And, as I said above, I don't expect (or even ask) that they change their business model to accomodate me.  I'm just making a suggestion that I think would stand to make them _more_ money.



			
				Agamon said:
			
		

> I still feel your pain, but you should slap your FLGSs, really.  Maybe ask them why they don't like making money or something...




I can only beat a dead horse for so long.    

Regards,
Darrell


----------



## Darrell (Jan 12, 2007)

Rel said:
			
		

> I dunno what part of the state you live in but I believe All Fun & Games in Cary sells individual minis.  As a bonus that's where we'll be next weekend for the January NC Game Day.
> 
> Just sayin.




Around the Gaston County area.  My usual touring path doesn't take me to Raleigh/Cary/etc. very often.  I'll look in when I'm up that way.  Thanks!    

Regards,
Darrell


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 12, 2007)

As I said already: If you don't want to brave the world of e-business, it's fine. But don't expect that others will suddenly pay a multiple of what they're paying now because you won't go get an eBay account. You're the one who chooses not to use options, you're the one who has to accept the consequences.



			
				Darrell said:
			
		

> I do not (and will not) have a Paypal account.




Why not?



			
				Thurbane said:
			
		

> 1. Unless it's changed since I last used it, you need a Paypal account. A Paypal account involves giving out sensitive financial and personal information over the internet. A lot of people are just not comfortable with that, and in many cases (spyware, identity theft etc) rightly so.




Never had a problem with this. You can usually spot faked emails, given some common sense.

I don't know if it's available for you, but I use what Paypal.de calls "Giro-Pay". It's like doing a cash transfer online: You need your PIN and a TAN from your bank, and you actually do a cash transfer to paypal's bank accounts, but the Paypal payment will be made instantaneously.

Since those TANs are only good for one transaction, the method should be fairly secure.



> 2. Geographic location: depending where you live (and yes, though it may shock you, many of us D&Ders live OUTSIDE of the USA), the shipping logicstics push the price way up, or make delivery not possible at all.




I'm from Germany. I'd say that if you have a decent eBay store, the cost is bearable. I ordered from Hubb's several times now, and it's much better than going to eBay.de (where there is a much smaller minis market): I get to use buy-it-now (no waiting for auctions to run out, no sniping), pay instantly via eBay, and get the stuff shipped to me. It's usually cheaper than buying those minis on eBay.de (including shipping), and Air Mail was on occasion faster than the local postal service.



> Can someone please explain to me why WotC cannot or should not do some reissues of current and old minis in theme packs, alongside their collectibles?




They'd have to produce them again (old minis) or more of them (current ones). That might interfere with their regular schedule.

Plus, given the demand for this, I'm sure they'd have done it by now, if it were feasible.



> Assuming, as I said earlier, that they are stamped differently on the base so as not to impinge on the collectibles series, and even not sold with cards.




Then they would exclude skirmishers completely from this. Not really fair to them.



> I am sure that somewhere out there the dies or casts or assembly lines that put them together still exist.




I guess so. But it's not as if they bought a new factory for each new set, meaning that the machines that were used to create those minis (as well as the people who were working on them) are now busy doing the latest set...



> All that aside, if a 3rd party started producing non-randomized , prepainted plastic SRD miniatures on a par in quality with the WotC lines, I would be MORE than happy to shell out a bit more per miniature in order to be able to buy them over the counter, prepackaged, from my LFGS.




I doubt that anyone will want to compete with WotC/Hasbro on this. Very high investment, going against an established product, going against a company with considerable power in the segment. And while you may be willing to pay more (and make no mistake, it would not just be "a bit more per miniature") for those, others might not. This could very well destroy whoever tries it. I guess that's why noone will try it.

As has been said: You'll have to spend quite a bit of money to get into the prepainted plastic minis business, it's not something for niche markets within niche markets.


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 12, 2007)

I give up. I guess the collectable/eBay roxxorz crowd and the "I just wanna buy non-random minis over the counter" crowd will just have to agree to disagree. The differences seem irreconcilable. 

...oh, BTW, for those on my side of the debate, I will be collecting signatures for an online petition to email to WotC soon - if we show them that there really IS a consumer base out there for non-randomized and/or theme packs, they MAY just listen...


----------



## Darrell (Jan 12, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> ...oh, BTW, for those on my side of the debate, I will be collecting signatures for an online petition to email to WotC soon - if we show them that there really IS a consumer base out there for non-randomized and/or theme packs, they MAY just listen...




Let me know when you get this going.  I know WotC isn't going to stop random-packing; they make too much money.  Separately-sold themed packs of common minis, however, would be a different story.  They would allow for a small degree of non-randomization, but wouldn't affect the collectibility of the random-packed minis.

Oh, and with regard to the existence of the dies that cast the plastic minis.  I'm sure they're out there in one form or another, but may not be in good shape.  If they use the same method as the casting for plastic action figures (and I see no reason why they shouldn't), many of those dies deteriorate over time.  Look at the difference between an action figure when a line first debuts, and another of the same figure (though possibly repainted) made from the same die some time later.  The change is often _very_ noticable.  Early minis, say from the Harbinger or Dragoneye sets, may need to be resculpted entirely...which may or may not be cost-prohibitive.

Regards,
Darrell


----------



## Renfield (Jan 12, 2007)

Greetings,

Sadly I lack the desire to read through the entire thread so I hope I'm not repeating anything here. My local hobby store did something interesting with the D&D Mini's. They would purchase the packages sent to them by hasbro and open them and then make thematic packs of them or sell individual 'rare' or 'uncommon' minis in clear packages so you knew what you were getting. They were priced per price guides and included the cards. 

Considering Hasbro likely won't bend (because face it, it's all about the buck in this case, not so much about the customers, unless you manage to get a large boycott on the items you're not going to get anywhere with them) in such a situation perhaps you might petition your local hobby store to make such packs as well. I know it might be a stretch but if you want it enough it might be a worthwhile stretch. Just my two cents.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 12, 2007)

Renfield said:
			
		

> Considering Hasbro likely won't bend (because face it, it's all about the buck in this case, not so much about the customers,




We know. Hasbro is a company. They are supposed to pay all their bills, pay all their employees, and still have some money left.

I must say that Wizards do listen to the customer. After all, you make the most money if you make those products most people will buy.

It's probably not a question of whether Hasbro/WotC will "bend", it's a question of whether they could sell those and make a profit (which is not an evil act. These guys do this for a living, they need that money). If they don't (and indeed, make losses selling those), you can do what you want, they won't bend.



> unless you manage to get a large boycott on the items you're not going to get anywhere with them)




Not going to happen. A lot of people are happy with the current situation, and they'll keep on buying, no matter how many people who don't want to buy at eBay will pout.


----------



## diaglo (Jan 12, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> ...oh, BTW, for those on my side of the debate, I will be collecting signatures for an online petition to email to WotC soon - if we show them that there really IS a consumer base out there for non-randomized and/or theme packs, they MAY just listen...




you have my signature and support


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 12, 2007)

Kae'Yoss said:
			
		

> A lot smaller than what DDM has, that's for sure.




However it is still a large range of figures.



> _Deathknell never cost 15 quid. The official price was $13, I think - and you hardly ever pay that: Usually, the shops sell individual boosters for several dollars less, and if you buy by the case (12 boosters), it gets even cheaper._




Nope. I looked it up. Deathknell booster packs MSRP in the U.S. was $14.99 per pack. And saying "if you buy 12 booster packs it's cheaper per pack" isn't really a selling point to me.


----------



## Henry (Jan 12, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> Err, no. They're too big for D&D. Base size is 1.5" rather than 1", and the scale is larger as well.
> 
> Cheers!




A neat thing about heroscape minis: They're small enough to mostly fit in a 1" square, and big enough to double as a Large mini when you shift the base over on the map a bit.  One of our players used a heroscape mini, and when he was under an Enlarge spell, he just shifted the mini so it took up 4 squares instead of 1.  Doesn't work so well with a D&D mini, because you've got a LARGE amount of space around the 4 squares.


----------



## Henry (Jan 12, 2007)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> However it is still a large range of figures.




I think we're finding out that "large range of figures" is a very subjective term. Take a look at the heroscape minis -- how many of those would you likely use in a D&D game? Are you going to use the stormtrooper-like figures with guns, or the WW2 figures with howitzers and katanas, or the chicks in the 1970's sci-fi-disco-looking attire? "Foxy Brown, Interstellar Agent" in a D&D game? This cuts the available D&D-esque figures available to maybe 60 or 70 out of that 130 or so over two years. So "wide range of figures" is limited by what genre you're doing.

And this feeds into what one thing Heroscape does excel at: Historical minis! You don't easily find pre-painted roman legionaires, cowboys, samurai, ninjas, ww2 figures, scots highlanders, secret agent and spec ops figures, except in Heroscape. That's mainly why I've bought the heroscape stuff that I have.


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

Henry said:
			
		

> A neat thing about heroscape minis: They're small enough to mostly fit in a 1" square, and big enough to double as a Large mini when you shift the base over on the map a bit.  One of our players used a heroscape mini, and when he was under an Enlarge spell, he just shifted the mini so it took up 4 squares instead of 1.  Doesn't work so well with a D&D mini, because you've got a LARGE amount of space around the 4 squares.




And it's easy enough to whack the Heroscape mini off the base and glue it to 25mm gw minis base if you find the larger base annoying.


----------



## Jedi_Solo (Jan 12, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> I will be collecting signatures for an online petition to email to WotC soon




Sign me up.

I'm won't ask WotC to stop their randomized mini line.  If they are raking in the dough - I say "Congrats!  Make the money!  Stay in business!"  I don't wnat them to stop the old - only add in a new.  I would want the Box 'O Orcs, Box 'o Skeletons and the like.  As far as the rule that was discussed above I choose Limited Variety as the draw back.  I'm only interested a few items.  If I want some odd ball mini then I go out and buy through eBay or something like that - but why have one or two minis of odd ball critters if I don't have the masses of skeletons and the like.

That's only part of my reason for not using eBay.  I've been burned a couple of times through there so I have developed a slight aversion to buying things sight unseen from non-businesses or companies I don't know very well (Yes, I can see what Orc #X looks like on line, but I have no guarentee about what that exact orc I'm bidding on/purchasing looks like and that is assuming that I even get it).

To add another voice here I have a friend who won't order anything on-line for security reasons.  Even he makes fun of his paranoia but he still won't order at all over the internet.

The reason my LGS doesn't sell singles - I don't know.  They used to but have since stopped.  Maybe it's from a lack of space they have.  Maybe it didn't bring in as much as they hoped that it would.  Whatever the reason I don't have a gaming store within an hours drive that sells singles.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 12, 2007)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Nope. I looked it up. Deathknell booster packs MSRP in the U.S. was $14.99 per pack.




That's a recent change. Shortly before Bloodwar was released, the MSRP was increased to 14.99, apparently retroactively for all sets.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 12, 2007)

Jedi_Solo said:
			
		

> That's only part of my reason for not using eBay.  I've been burned a couple of times through there so I have developed a slight aversion to buying things sight unseen from non-businesses or companies I don't know very well (Yes, I can see what Orc #X looks like on line, but I have no guarentee about what that exact orc I'm bidding on/purchasing looks like and that is assuming that I even get it).




There's a difference between bidding on an auction from a new account named wellripyouoff2007(0) and buying from the big shops with a score in the thousands and nearly 100% positive feedback. 



> To add another voice here I have a friend who won't order anything on-line for security reasons.  Even he makes fun of his paranoia but he still won't order at all over the internet.




His loss. My advice: Take his Enemy of the State DVD   



> The reason my LGS doesn't sell singles - I don't know.  They used to but have since stopped.  Maybe it's from a lack of space they have.  Maybe it didn't bring in as much as they hoped that it would.




Which does bode quite well for an "official" single minis line, don't you think?   

Maybe he had over-inflated prices? If so, he may have invertandly charged what he'd have to charge for Wizards single minis.


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

Kae'Yoss said:
			
		

> That's a recent change. Shortly before Bloodwar was released, the MSRP was increased to 14.99, apparently retroactively for all sets.




Just to clear this all up about the price.   Deathknell was $12.99 when it was released and available.  When they changed the booster price to $14.99, my distributor upped their price to me for previous sets to the same as Bloodwar.  I don't know if Wizards starts the retroactive repricing of sets or whether the distributor does it.

It's somewhat of a moot point as Deathknell was sold out long before Bloodwar was released.


----------



## Echohawk (Jan 12, 2007)

Jedi_Solo said:
			
		

> I'm won't ask WotC to stop their randomized mini line.  If they are raking in the dough - I say "Congrats!  Make the money!  Stay in business!"  I don't wnat them to stop the old - only add in a new.



But what if introducing a new product line results in the death of the old, successful line? There has been a fair amount of evidence (or at least persuasive argument) presented in this thread that the introduction of non-random sets could or would threaten the current line.

If WotC's market research (which is probably more extensive than any information any of us have) indicates that this would indeed be the case, do you still expect them to do as you are asking?


----------



## Templetroll (Jan 12, 2007)

We need a flumph mini.  Well, _I_  need a flumph mini.


----------



## diaglo (Jan 12, 2007)

Templetroll said:
			
		

> We need a flumph mini.  Well, _I_  need a flumph mini.



and a gnome female in full plate


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

diaglo said:
			
		

> and a gnome female in full plate




I think they already did that one.


----------



## Jedi_Solo (Jan 12, 2007)

Echohawk said:
			
		

> There has been a fair amount of evidence (or at least persuasive argument) presented in this thread that the introduction of non-random sets could or would threaten the current line.




I read through the entire thread and I didn't see much.  Most of what I saw seemed to be that we were asking the boxed sets to REPLACE the random line.  That isn't what we are asking (or at least what I am asking - a few people did come across that way and I'm not sure if they intended to or not). WotC is making waaaay too much money from that to just up and quit making them.  I also understand the issue of boxes taking up shelf space and the risk of them not selling however I'm not asking for 50 different poses for Spawn of Tiamat or that ever elusive Celestial Flumph.  I want orcs.

The target - and I believe the major audience - for the Boxed Sets would be those who aren't buying the regular minis.  I'm not buying the regular minis.  If you already have way too many orcs you won't be buying the new mini releases anyway so those won't be lost sales.  They may lose a handful of purchasers that were buying the randomised minis for the hopes of getting the commons but then I also think (with no real evidence to back this up) that portion of the market is fairly small.


----------



## Jedi_Solo (Jan 12, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> I think they already did that one.




But what about the Fiendish Dire Flumph in Spiked Full Plate I need for next week's session?


----------



## diaglo (Jan 12, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> I think they already did that one.



the gnome fighter is a male


----------



## Echohawk (Jan 12, 2007)

Jedi_Solo said:
			
		

> The target - and I believe the major audience - for the Boxed Sets would be those who aren't buying the regular minis.  I'm not buying the regular minis.  If you already have way too many orcs you won't be buying the new mini releases anyway so those won't be lost sales.  They may lose a handful of purchasers that were buying the randomised minis for the hopes of getting the commons but then I also think (with no real evidence to back this up) that portion of the market is fairly small.



Fair enough, that's a reasonable line of thought. The fact is that none of us have access to WotC's market research, so we're all making educated guesses here.

I think the WotC DDM team does keep a very close eye on the market though, and if there is a way they can profitably introduce some non-random sets without damaging the existing line, they probably will. After all, why wouldn't they?

If they don't ever introduce non-random sets, then the chances are that their research indicates that there just isn't an effective way to do so, no matter how much some customers would like to see that happen.


----------



## Echohawk (Jan 12, 2007)

diaglo said:
			
		

> the gnome fighter is a male



No, check again. The gnome fighter is female .


----------



## Lilaxe (Jan 12, 2007)

Approach it from a companies point of view. They need to see the possibility of making more money off old costs.

i.e. they could start picking 10 minis from the first set of minis (Harbinger I think) and press up just those commons. Then everytime they release a new set, they open another older set to 10 more common minis in mass sale.

Any common figure 10 sets old isnt being used for skirmishing as it has been superceded by another, better common.

Those molds are sitting unused, not making any money.

C'mon WOTC! You want D&D gamers to use minis - thats a perfect way to increase the minis available for RPGers...


----------



## Echohawk (Jan 12, 2007)

Lilaxe said:
			
		

> i.e. they could start picking 10 minis from the first set of minis (Harbinger I think) and press up just those commons. Then everytime they release a new set, they open another older set to 10 more common minis in mass sale.



Ick, no. The quality of the minis line has improved a *lot* since the Harbinger days. It's not that the Harbinger figures were awful, just that the more recent sets are much better. If they do produce non-random sets, I'd prefer them to be the same quality as the more recent releases.

(And I'd probably buy them, even though I already have all of the minis from the current line   )


----------



## Lockridge (Jan 12, 2007)

Just adding my two cents:
I have not and will not purchase WOTC's pre-painted plastic minis due to the fact that they are randomized.  I would buy them if they were theme packs (I would have bought many of them already).  The explanation is simply the fact that I don't want to pay money to have tons of extra ones that I don't want.

Would I consider the secondary market?  Maybe, but it would irk me that this would support WOTC's use of randomization.

For those who think that WOTC is only answering the consumer's wants by doing randomization then I think that you've never sat through a Board-level marketing meeting.  Consumer want is only half of the agenda.  The other half is exploitation of that need under the guise of "maximizing revenue."  WOTC has analyzed its consumer base and has determined that fans have a "collection" mentality.  "Collection" mentality is another word for saying "addict".  They know that many of us will go crazy over the idea of getting that rare mini and will shell out many dollars to do this.  One of my group has bought dozens of boxes of WOTC minis because they are addictive.  He keeps buying in hopes of getting something rare.  He admits to spending too much money and has tons of minis he will never use and would never have otherwise purchased.  Don't get me wrong - he's not sorry for buying.

This is the type of consumer that WOTC knows it has.  Most other industries would simply sell theme packs and keep updating them rather than sell minis.  Can you imagine a randomized restaurant menu?

To add to this, over the last couple of years I've taken my nephew (11 years old) to my local gaming store.  Over and over again this kid will shell out his allowance (all the money he has) on HeroClix, Yu-gi-oh cards and the like.  Here's the rub, after spending all of his money he immediately opens the packs in the car and then I hear the sound of disappointment as he realizes that he didn't get a rare item - OR disappointment that he simply didn't get a new item.  There he is - his money gone and disappointment in his eyes - the new items get thrown into a box never to be seen again -BUT when the next allowance day comes along there he is asking me to take him to the store again to start this cycle all over again.  Adults disguise this better but its basically the same.

Don't ever think that businesses stay in business by giving the consumer what they want.  No offence to anyone but thats just naive.


----------



## diaglo (Jan 12, 2007)

Echohawk said:
			
		

> No, check again. The gnome fighter is female .




see the minis are so bad i can't tell.


----------



## RFisher (Jan 12, 2007)

I missed Charles Ryan's post the first time.



			
				CharlesRyan said:
			
		

> But the real barrier isn't even production: it's distribution.




There you go. You've identified the problems. Now Hasbro could get to work on solving them.

Incidentally, I was suspecting distribution was indeed one of the areas that might need significant change.



			
				CharlesRyan said:
			
		

> And then there's the issue of what stores are prepared to carry.




Well, recent online writings by another industry luminary have predicted that my local hobby game store is a dying breed & likely won't be around much longer anyway. Heck, didn't he also predict the demise of one of the big distributors?

And as for businesses going out of their way to reach potential customers who by chance or choice they don't currently reach: It's called "growing the business". Companies are working hard to do it everyday.


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

diaglo said:
			
		

> see the minis are so bad i can't tell.




Gnome boobies.


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

Something I haven't seen mentioned here...maybe MerricB or someone remembers this in greater detail.

Several years ago, early on in the DDM saga, WotC announced they were going to do exactly what many of you are asking for: it was going to be a non-random pack of 10 or so orcs (multiples of several different sculpts, IIRC).  For whatever reason, it was pulled from the release schedule after being announced.


----------



## diaglo (Jan 12, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Something I haven't seen mentioned here...maybe MerricB or someone remembers this in greater detail.
> 
> Several years ago, early on in the DDM saga, WotC announced they were going to do exactly what many of you are asking for: it was going to be a non-random pack of 10 or so orcs (multiples of several different sculpts, IIRC).  For whatever reason, it was pulled from the release schedule after being announced.



yeah, the warbands for the miniatures game


----------



## Shadowslayer (Jan 12, 2007)

Lockridge said:
			
		

> To add to this, over the last couple of years I've taken my nephew (11 years old) to my local gaming store.  Over and over again this kid will shell out his allowance (all the money he has) on HeroClix, Yu-gi-oh cards and the like.  Here's the rub, after spending all of his money he immediately opens the packs in the car and then I hear the sound of disappointment as he realizes that he didn't get a rare item - OR disappointment that he simply didn't get a new item.  There he is - his money gone and disappointment in his eyes - the new items get thrown into a box never to be seen again -BUT when the next allowance day comes along there he is asking me to take him to the store again to start this cycle all over again.  Adults disguise this better but its basically the same.




I can't agree more with your sentiment. I used to drive a school bus and saw many kids caught up in the Pokemon/Yu gi oh collecting fenzy. I abhor the idea of marketing this way for kid stuff. It sends all the wrong messages. Not that there's anything wrong with collecting...that's been going on for ages. (I collected Wacky Packages stickers.) Its the whole rare, uncommon, common thing I have a problem with.

I bent, for a while, when DDM came out...mainly because it wasn't being marketed to little kids. Eventually I got tired of it and decided that, instead of dropping the bread to buy one on Ebay, I'd just paint my own Mind Flayer. (sorry...Bathalian.   ) . In a heartbeat, I went from buying into the collectible aspect, to thinking the whole thing was kind of silly.

Anyway, I've always hated the idea for kids...but I often wonder if many adults actually bankrupt themselves on this type of stuff. 

I bet its happened.


----------



## delericho (Jan 12, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Something I haven't seen mentioned here...maybe MerricB or someone remembers this in greater detail.
> 
> Several years ago, early on in the DDM saga, WotC announced they were going to do exactly what many of you are asking for: it was going to be a non-random pack of 10 or so orcs (multiples of several different sculpts, IIRC).  For whatever reason, it was pulled from the release schedule after being announced.




Yeah, that was initially part of the DDM plan. However, as you said, it was pulled. The reason given (IIRC) was that the randomised packs were so popular!


----------



## MerricB (Jan 12, 2007)

delericho said:
			
		

> Yeah, that was initially part of the DDM plan. However, as you said, it was pulled. The reason given (IIRC) was that the randomised packs were so popular!




It wasn't ordered in sufficient quantity by distributors, as I recall.

Cheers!


----------



## werk (Jan 12, 2007)

So why don't we get some mini modelers, and contact that plastic factory in China and start churning out minis?

We won't need to make stat cards or none of that, just a bunch of cheap plastic (pre-painted) minis.  We could even maybe make a deal with metal mini mfg's and use existing minis to make the molds...even cheaper!

Who's with me!?!


----------



## BroccoliRage (Jan 12, 2007)

Someone mentioned something about the Dwarf Sniper not being released, yet I'm looking at one right here in my hand. It's got to be one of the ugliest mini's I've ever seen, as well as something what probably won't see use in my games. 

I have the Bluespawn Godslayer, as well. The name is stupid, but as a beastie for D&D I think it's one of the coolest mini's I have. It has a really slick look to it.


----------



## diaglo (Jan 12, 2007)

BroccoliRage said:
			
		

> I have the Bluespawn Godslayer, as well. The name is stupid, but as a beastie for D&D I think it's one of the coolest mini's I have. It has a really slick look to it.



i've got two of them thanks to the random nature of distribution. as an EPic it won't see use in my current campaign for at least 10 years real time


edit: in other words, i never would have bought it. EVAR.


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

werk said:
			
		

> So why don't we get some mini modelers, and contact that plastic factory in China and start churning out minis?
> 
> We won't need to make stat cards or none of that, just a bunch of cheap plastic (pre-painted) minis.  We could even maybe make a deal with metal mini mfg's and use existing minis to make the molds...even cheaper!
> 
> Who's with me!?!




Assuming you're not just being silly...

Cheap is relative.  The start-up costs for an operation like this are pretty substantial.  Unless someone's got tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars burning a hole in their pocket, this is a pipe dream.


----------



## werk (Jan 12, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Assuming you're not just being silly...
> 
> Cheap is relative.  The start-up costs for an operation like this are pretty substantial.  Unless someone's got tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars burning a hole in their pocket, this is a pipe dream.




You got something against pipes?  ...I mean dreams?

I'm just saying, it seems like there is a market.  Online marketing/distribution.  Doesn't seem too bad to me, but maybe that's because I work at GE and push big numbers around all day.

Anyone know someone I should call to get started with this?

EDIT: I do know people with that much money burning a hole in their pocket looking for investments


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 12, 2007)

For the record, WotC *has* released a pre-painted plastic mini, nonrandom, "scenario-focused" pack.

It's called Attack on Endor.

It includes one of the single most-desired minis, and AT-ST (a Huge Rare that was seemingly rarer than most).  You'll note that, contrary to just about every other non-current set, it has not yet sold out at the distributor level.

As a market experiment, it does not seem to have succeeded quite like WotC would have hoped.


----------



## CharlesRyan (Jan 12, 2007)

So most people on this thread seem to agree that in a nonrandom model, WotC probably wouldn't make very many obscure minis. And I'm not seeing many calls for WotC to individually package the valuable rares.

Many people do, however, seem to think WotC can and should create theme packs based around common minis, like orcs or skeletons. Although it's counter-intuitive, this is just as problematic as releasing rare minis individually.

A common such as an orc or skeleton, on its own, isn't particuarly valuable, as compared to a rare (say, a beholder). (And by "valuable," I mean both "worth more money" and "perceived as being a cool, desirable, boss-monster type at the gaming table.")

But a group of commons, together, really are comparable--as is evidenced by how many people here claim to want such groups. Take away the desire to collect a bunch of orcs, and you undermine the value of a randomized booster just as much as if you take away the desire to collect a single beholder.

And again, the problems that I outlined in my earlier post remain just as valid. How many of these common packs should WotC introduce? A pack of orcs? Skeletons? Adventurers? How about goblins? Kobolds?

Follow this path and WotC either has to: A) produce just one or two products, which would make a couple people on this thread happy but simply further piss off those guys who want nonrandom commons but didn't get the ones they want, or B) produce a handful--or a bunch--of products, and run into all the distribution problems I talked about before.

If WotC produced, say, ten different common assortments over the next year, how many would your local store carry? If they ordered the wrong amount (or their distributor did, or WotC did), how much dead product would be introduced into the channel, to increase prices or run the risk of a glut? How much demand would there be here on the ENworld boards for WotC to make it 15 sets next year?

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what your non-random products are. Even collections of commons have the capacity to screw up a system that currently delivers minis to us gamers very, very efficiently.


----------



## Renfield (Jan 12, 2007)

My apologies. No, trying to make a buck isn't evil, but that whole randomizing idea was darnit! This is D&D not Magic: The Gathering, I quit M:tG because I wanted to avoid the nuances of random packs and the drain they make on my wallet   If you take this comment to seriously you need to slap yourself with a silly stick.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 12, 2007)

diaglo said:
			
		

> see the minis are so bad i can't tell.




It's not the minis, it's your eyes. That gnome has boobs and long hair, for Garl's sake!



			
				kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Several years ago, early on in the DDM saga, WotC announced they were going to do exactly what many of you are asking for: it was going to be a non-random pack of 10 or so orcs (multiples of several different sculpts, IIRC).  For whatever reason, it was pulled from the release schedule after being announced.




I think you can even see that one on Amazon.



			
				diaglo said:
			
		

> as an EPic it won't see use in my current campaign for at least 10 years real time




They're epic in the DDM sense of the word, not like D&D defines it. Their CR is 11. They should be possible to defeat starting at level 8 or something like that.

You really should try higher levels, they aren't that bad   

But tell me something: If you have no use for high-level critters, why did you buy not one but apparently several WotDQ boosters? Each of them has a huge mini, and most of them have a higher CR than the Bluespawn (unless I missed one, only two of them have a lower CR, that's two CR7 critters)


----------



## CaptainChaos (Jan 12, 2007)

CharlesRyan said:
			
		

> Even collections of commons have the capacity to screw up a system that currently delivers minis to us gamers very, very efficiently.




It may be efficient for WotC and it may be efficient for retailers, but it's not efficient for a lot of gamers. Let's say I pick up Dungeon magazine, the official source for D&D adventures, and I choose an adventure to run and I want to use miniatures with it. Unless I have been obsessively collecting full sets of D&D minis as they've been released, odds are I will not have the minis on hand to run this adventure. Nor will I easily be able to get them. Chances are some of what I need are in older sets that are OOP. That means I have to go hunting on Ebay trying to track down exactly the mins I might need, which may or may not be available and whose prices may or may not be affordable. That is not efficient.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 12, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> It may be efficient for WotC and it may be efficient for retailers, but it's not efficient for a lot of gamers. Let's say I pick up Dungeon magazine, the official source for D&D adventures, and I choose an adventure to run and I want to use miniatures with it. Unless I have been obsessively collecting full sets of D&D minis as they've been released, odds are I will not have the minis on hand to run this adventure. Nor will I easily be able to get them. Chances are some of what I need are in older sets that are OOP. That means I have to go hunting on Ebay trying to track down exactly the mins I might need, which may or may not be available and whose prices may or may not be affordable. That is not efficient.




But it certainly beats not being able to get those figures at all. 

Which, if Charles isn't lying to us (and I don't think so), would happen if they switched. You'd either jam the distribution channels, drowning suppliers and stores and whatnot with a plethora of products, many of which don't sell well, or you'd just get the basics. 

Chances are that if you got the occasional booster since DDM started - a couple of boosters from each set - you'll already have your dozen orcs. If you want that sixpack of wererats you need for that one encounter - sorry, no wererats.


----------



## crazy_cat (Jan 12, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> It may be efficient for WotC and it may be efficient for retailers, but it's not efficient for a lot of gamers. Let's say I pick up Dungeon magazine, the official source for D&D adventures, and I choose an adventure to run and I want to use miniatures with it. Unless I have been obsessively collecting full sets of D&D minis as they've been released, odds are I will not have the minis on hand to run this adventure. Nor will I easily be able to get them. Chances are some of what I need are in older sets that are OOP. That means I have to go hunting on Ebay trying to track down exactly the mins I might need, which may or may not be available and whose prices may or may not be affordable. That is not efficient.



But if WOTC didn't make these minis, who would?

Most D&D iconic monsters are copyrighted by WOTC - if they don't make them, then nobody does. The choice isn't WOTC's evil random packaging or else great minis from somebody else at low prices - it's WOTC random packaging, or no D&D specific minis.

Me, I choose WOTC random packaging, sell the dross on eBay and trade for or buy the rares I didn't get my cases.

YMMV


----------



## CaptainChaos (Jan 12, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> But if WOTC didn't make these minis, who would?
> 
> Most D&D iconic monsters are copyrighted by WOTC - if they don't make them, then nobody does. The choice isn't WOTC's evil random packaging or else great minis from somebody else at low prices - it's WOTC random packaging, or no D&D specific minis.




That's not true. I suggest you go Reaper's site and check out their minis. They clearly went through the 3E MM and made minis to match. They don't call their beholders by that name, but they make the minis for them. Ditto for many D&D creatures.


----------



## BryonD (Jan 12, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> It may be efficient for WotC and it may be efficient for retailers, but it's not efficient for a lot of gamers.



It doesn't need to be efficient for "a lot of gamers".  It needs to be efficient for the marketplace.  Clearly, it is.  Whatever "a lot" is, the group of gamers that like the current system is even more.

"Fixing" a good thing to satisfy a small portion of the audience would be a good way to end the run for everyone.  (And that is if you assume that people would actualy accept the changes made.  Typically 50+% of the people you try to change to support just turn around and say "I wanted you to change, but you did it all wrong so I'm still not buying.")


----------



## DaveMage (Jan 12, 2007)

If it wasn't for Auggie's (and similar places), I would be very annoyed at the current method.

However, since Auggie's allows me to get what I want at (what I think is) a reasonable price, I think it's all good.  

The secondary market meets my needs when the primary one fails.

And since I want WotC to continue to have a wide range of figures, I don't want to see anything changed.

However, what is quite evident from reading this thread, is that there is an opportunity for someone with the inclination to cater to those who want "themed sets".  Paizo was doing some of this for a time, though I'm not sure if they still are.

There you go, Oryan77 - make the people in this thread happy - put together some themed sets!


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 12, 2007)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> However, what is quite evident from reading this thread, is that there is an opportunity for someone with the inclination to cater to those who want "themed sets".  Paizo was doing some of this for a time, though I'm not sure if they still are.




Actually, someone is still doing this - but, again, for the Star Wars side of things.

Gary Sarli (AKA WizO_the_Hutt, AKA "Designer of Saga Edition SW") has a gamestore where he does exactly this.  You can see an example here.

So, who's going to do this for D&D minis?


----------



## crazy_cat (Jan 12, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> That's not true. I suggest you go Reaper's site and check out their minis. They clearly went through the 3E MM and made minis to match. They don't call their beholders by that name, but they make the minis for them. Ditto for many D&D creatures.



I'm aware of Reaper Miniatures.

I prefer WOTC minis since they are:
A) pre-painted
B) cheaper
C) Specific to D&D
D) Plastic and less prone to breaking

To give a reasonable example - I can buy a Reaper Minis Raindancer the Pegasus for £6.05 plus P&P from a reputable UK games store - this will come unpainted, and for all I know unassembled as  well.

I pay about that per booster for D&D minis via my regular supplier when I buy a case or more, and even if I buy from Amazon.co.uk I pay £6.97 presently per booster for the newest set. For this I get 8 minis - pre-painted and if the Rare isn't the Pegasus I wanted (which it wont be since the Pegasus was in a previous set  ) I can sell what I got or trade it, and then buy the pre-painted, pre-assembled Pegasus via the secondary market.

On the secondary market I can buy a WOTC Pegaus for $12.99 inc shipping from the US on eBay and have the exact mini I want shipped to my door - for the same £ price as the Reaper unpainted mini.

You may not like this random distribution model with a hugely important secondary market, but many of us do since it gets us the minis we want, and WOTC clearly do since it makes them alot of money.


----------



## Seeten (Jan 12, 2007)

I purchased a gorgeous mini of a female paladin in plate from Reaper for my current character, and painted it. I got a barbarian from Games Workshop for my old Barbarian, etc. There are lots of minis out there. I dont get the complaints. WotC cant make money doing what you suggest, and I'd rather they didnt go the way of T$R and mess up their business and have Hasbro start making their business decisions, and so would you all.


----------



## brehobit (Jan 12, 2007)

Here's my business plan.

Sell, for about $50.00 a collection of about 80 commons and uncommons (with potentially serious replication) and a theme.  Throw in 1, _maybe_ 2 uniques-to-this-collection that DDM players might want, but NOT a rare (hurts the secondary market too much).  Sell mainly via mail-order (don't expect too many game stores to stock this).  

Some collections:
Humanoid baddies (say 10 of 1 orc, 10 of 1 goblin, 10 of 1 kobold, some groups of 5, and a few singles, the unique might be just a "cool" orc or perhaps something a bit more "special")

Adventurers collection (80 with few/no duplicates)

Etc.  Larges maybe count as 2 figures, huges as 5 or something.

The cost to make should be small (just remaking those you already have made plus the one or two uniques).  The market size will be somewhat small, but I'll bet a fair % of the DMs of the world not using DDM already would buy quickly.  The uniques might attract % of the serious DDM players.   Also, the toy market might be interested.  Turn out a new set every 2-3 months.  

Mark


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

You'll see this kind of issue with pretty much *any* business model, not just minis, and not just gaming.

There are always going to be consumers who aren't happy with how the seller has chosen to do business.  They complain, they boggle at how *stupid* the seller must be, to be leaving their money on the table (and, surely, if *I* want to do business differently, then there must be a *lot* of people like me out there!)

Even when the seller says, "look, we understand what you're saying, but we've run the numbers, and it doesn't make economic sense for us to do it your way", they don't want to believe them, or assume they're lying or lazy.

Welcome to capitalism.


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> Paizo was doing some of this for a time, though I'm not sure if they still are.




They still are, though they don't have a large number of such theme sets:
http://paizo.com/store/games/miniatures/tradableMiniaturesGames/dnd/critterPacks


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 12, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> *Merric's Law of Miniatures:* _Non-Random Packaging, Cheap Prices, and a Large Range of Figures: Choose two._
> 
> What Heroscape lacks is a large range of figures.
> 
> ...



Funny how Ebay provides all three.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jan 12, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> It may be efficient for WotC and it may be efficient for retailers, but it's not efficient for a lot of gamers. Let's say I pick up Dungeon magazine, the official source for D&D adventures, and I choose an adventure to run and I want to use miniatures with it. Unless I have been obsessively collecting full sets of D&D minis as they've been released, odds are I will not have the minis on hand to run this adventure. Nor will I easily be able to get them. Chances are some of what I need are in older sets that are OOP. That means I have to go hunting on Ebay trying to track down exactly the mins I might need, which may or may not be available and whose prices may or may not be affordable. That is not efficient.




True.  But you don't need exact minis to have a thrilling game session.


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

Dr. Awkward said:
			
		

> Funny how Ebay provides all three.




eBay, and eBay sellers, don't *make* the figures.  I think Merric's Law only applies to the manufacturer of the product.

(Incidentally, there's a very similar law to Merric's in the market research industry.  You can have your data (a) fast, (b) cheap, or (c) accurate -- pick two out of the three.)


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> True.  But you don't need exact minis to have a thrilling game session.




Some folks do.  Some folks really want the minis to exactly represent the PCs or NPCs involved.  Some folks are less concerned about that (and so, "This orc is actually a tiefling").


----------



## BryonD (Jan 12, 2007)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> True.  But you don't need exact minis to have a thrilling game session.



I most ABSOLUTELY agree with this.

I love minis, but I'll still use pennies from time to time when that simpel solution is best.  So any time I've got something that is "good enough" it is all gravy.  And with the great variety of stuff I've aquired in recents years (DDM + Counter Collections) on top of a fairly decent traditional mini collection, close enough works out most of the time.


----------



## BryonD (Jan 12, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> eBay, and eBay sellers, don't *make* the figures.  I think Merric's Law only applies to the manufacturer of the product.



Very true.

But even beyond that, it is pretty hard to match the per-unit items cost of WotC retail on E-Bay.
Yeah, you can get cheap commons, but that isn't a straight comparison.


----------



## CaptainChaos (Jan 12, 2007)

BryonD said:
			
		

> It doesn't need to be efficient for "a lot of gamers".  It needs to be efficient for the marketplace.  Clearly, it is.  Whatever "a lot" is, the group of gamers that like the current system is even more.




According to who, your crystal ball? Look, I'll freely admit that the current model seems to be doing OK for Wizards, but you have no way of knowing whether WotC could be even more successful with a different business model. WotC embraced the collectible mentality for minis because the company was built on collectibility.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jan 12, 2007)

BryonD said:
			
		

> I most ABSOLUTELY agree with this.
> 
> I love minis, but I'll still use pennies from time to time when that simpel solution is best.  So any time I've got something that is "good enough" it is all gravy.  And with the great variety of stuff I've aquired in recents years (DDM + Counter Collections) on top of a fairly decent traditional mini collection, close enough works out most of the time.




I never let lack of a mini get in the way of using a cool monster.


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> According to who, your crystal ball? Look, I'll freely admit that the current model seems to be doing OK for Wizards, but you have no way of knowing whether WotC could be even more successful with a different business model. WotC embraced the collectible mentality for minis because the company was built on collectibility.




Which brings to mind:

If it ain't broken, don't fix it.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 12, 2007)

Jedi_Solo said:
			
		

> I read through the entire thread and I didn't see much.  Most of what I saw seemed to be that we were asking the boxed sets to REPLACE the random line.  That isn't what we are asking (or at least what I am asking - a few people did come across that way and I'm not sure if they intended to or not). WotC is making waaaay too much money from that to just up and quit making them.  I also understand the issue of boxes taking up shelf space and the risk of them not selling however I'm not asking for 50 different poses for Spawn of Tiamat or that ever elusive Celestial Flumph.  I want orcs.
> 
> The target - and I believe the major audience - for the Boxed Sets would be those who aren't buying the regular minis.  I'm not buying the regular minis.  If you already have way too many orcs you won't be buying the new mini releases anyway so those won't be lost sales.  They may lose a handful of purchasers that were buying the randomised minis for the hopes of getting the commons but then I also think (with no real evidence to back this up) that portion of the market is fairly small.




I'll note that shortly after Harbinger was released WotC did have some non-random sets in their catalog (Orc War Party was one, IIRC).  It was cancelled.  Word was that it was a combination of the great sales of Harbinger and poor orders from stores.


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> I'll note that shortly after Harbinger was released WotC did have some non-random sets in their catalog (Orc War Party was one, IIRC).  It was cancelled.  Word was that it was a combination of the great sales of Harbinger and poor orders from stores.




Poor pre-orders will kill a production run before it starts.

Also, the current basic game has a fixed set of minis in the box.  That set didn't exactly fly off the shelf in my store.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 12, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> Also, the current basic game has a fixed set of minis in the box.  That set didn't exactly fly off the shelf in my store.




In fairness, they aren't selling a "fixed set of minis in a box."  They are selling an introduction to D&D that includes a fixed set if minis.


----------



## delericho (Jan 12, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> (Incidentally, there's a very similar law to Merric's in the market research industry.  You can have your data (a) fast, (b) cheap, or (c) accurate -- pick two out of the three.)




And to software. It can be good, fast (as in delivered soon) or cheap. Any two.


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> WotC embraced the collectible mentality for minis because the company was built on collectibility.




And because their prior attempts at entering the minis market with traditional non-randomized packaging failed.


----------



## humble minion (Jan 12, 2007)

You have to wonder how much Mage Knight is responsible for the random nature of D&D minis.  That was a successful product line before DDM even existed, and they used the random distribution method.  But Mage Knight was a skirmish product line to itself - there was nothing like the additional RPGers market that there is for D&D minis.  I wonder if WotC looked hard at Mage Knight, saw that it was going ok, and decided to replicate their business model rather than risk going out on a limb with non-random distribution.  It'd be an understandable way of going about things - the whole minis line must have been a pretty big financial gamble for WotC in the first place...


----------



## crazy_cat (Jan 12, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> And because their prior attempts at entering the minis market with traditional non-randomized packaging failed.



QFT - But hey, like anybody who disagrees is actually going to take this into consideration...


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> In fairness, they aren't selling a "fixed set of minis in a box."  They are selling an introduction to D&D that includes a fixed set if minis.




Hi Glyfair, too fine a hair to split in imho, but point taken.


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 12, 2007)

humble minion said:
			
		

> You have to wonder how much Mage Knight is responsible for the random nature of D&D minis.




Wouldn't surprise me.  WizKids couldn't make MK figures fast enough for a while there, and I'm sure WotC saw all that money and decided they wanted in.

(A friend of mine worked at WizKids when DDM came out, and, as I remember it, they felt more than a little threatened by it.)


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

humble minion said:
			
		

> You have to wonder how much Mage Knight is responsible for the random nature of D&D minis.  That was a successful product line before DDM even existed, and they used the random distribution method.  But Mage Knight was a skirmish product line to itself - there was nothing like the additional RPGers market that there is for D&D minis.  I wonder if WotC looked hard at Mage Knight, saw that it was going ok, and decided to replicate their business model rather than risk going out on a limb with non-random distribution.  It'd be an understandable way of going about things - the whole minis line must have been a pretty big financial gamble for WotC in the first place...




I think they actually improved on the Mage Knight business model:

1.  Iconic D&D figures (WotC IP) that D&D players will want and others supposedly aren't to produce.
2.  Combat for the minis game is a streamlined version of D&D's combat system so folks familiar with 3.x can play the skirmish game with little learning curve.'  This is also an improvement on Chainmail with it's non D&D combat system.
3.  Stat cards with D&D RPG stats on the reverse side...can't overstate the convenience this brings for me as a DM.
4.  You get a fixed ratio of rarity in each box; 1 rare, 3 commons and 4 uncommons.  Better than Mage Knight's potential 4 rookies in a box potential.  This of course is borrowed from MtG.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 12, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> I think they actually improved on the Mage Knight business model:




I think you could have summarized 1-3 into "tied it into the huge existing D&D RPG market."  I agree that's the huge strength of DDM.  They sold (and sell) very well at my local FLGSs and the tournament scene barely exists.  RPG players are doing the bulk of the buying.


----------



## rgard (Jan 12, 2007)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> I think you could have summarized 1-3 into "tied it into the huge existing D&D RPG market."  I agree that's the huge strength of DDM.  They sold (and sell) very well at my local FLGSs and the tournament scene barely exists.  RPG players are doing the bulk of the buying.




Here you go:

1.  Tied it into the huge existing D&D RPG market: 

 - Iconic D&D figures (WotC IP) that D&D players will want and others supposedly aren't to produce.
 - Combat for the minis game is a streamlined version of D&D's combat system so folks familiar with 3.x can play the skirmish game with little learning curve.' This is also an improvement on Chainmail with it's non D&D combat system.
 - Stat cards with D&D RPG stats on the reverse side...can't overstate the convenience this brings for me as a DM.

2. You get a fixed ratio of rarity in each box; 1 rare, 3 commons and 4 uncommons. Better than Mage Knight's potential 4 rookies in a box potential. This of course is borrowed from MtG.


----------



## blargney the second (Jan 12, 2007)

Dungeon magazine is essentially a random assortment of adventures.  I subscribe to it because I know that eventually most of them stand a chance of being used in my game, either because a given adventure fits the story that I want to run or because it inspires me to do something I wasn't planning on doing.

Same for random DDM figures.
-blarg


----------



## Vanuslux (Jan 12, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> According to who, your crystal ball? Look, I'll freely admit that the current model seems to be doing OK for Wizards, but you have no way of knowing whether WotC could be even more successful with a different business model. WotC embraced the collectible mentality for minis because the company was built on collectibility.




Many people have already given a fair amount of explanation of why the business model that the anti-random folks are trying to present will not work, complete with supporting facts about how similar non-random business models have fared unfavorably in comparison to the random business model.   You work against your own argument by pointing out that WotC was built on collectible cards.  You didn't see non-collectible card game makers blowing up the marketplace, just like you don't see non-collectible mini's going toe to toe in profitability with WotC's random collectibles.  The profitability of collectibility has been proven over and over and over again in all kinds of markets. 

 It's not crystal ball gazing, it's the reality of business.  Right now WotC has a business model in which people are buying cases of their product hoping for a few specific minis or to sell on the secondary market.  If they start selling specific minis or even sets where people can see what they're getting then the case buyers and secondary sellers go bye-bye.  The amount of people who are absolutely unwilling to work with the secondary market to get specific minis they want are not going to make up the difference when their current customer base stops buying boosters by the dozens.


----------



## MerricB (Jan 13, 2007)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Very true.
> 
> But even beyond that, it is pretty hard to match the per-unit items cost of WotC retail on E-Bay.
> Yeah, you can get cheap commons, but that isn't a straight comparison.




It's very interesting to see what happens: 

* Rare figures go _up_ in price, and you lose randomness. Law preserved.
* Common figures go _down_ in price, but there aren't as many common figures. (12 per set instead of 60). Law preserved.

Cheers!


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 13, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> QFT - But hey, like anybody who disagrees is actually going to take this into consideration...



The comparison between a pewter, unpainted set that included models like gnomes with mohawks and guns, and whose casts were known for fitting together poorly, requiring repairs by the painter, and a plastic set which comes pre-painted and which is almost entirely comprised of models that are useful for both skirmish battles and the D&D roleplaying game...is spurious.


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 13, 2007)

The online petition is up:

http://www.petitiononline.com/WOTC1301/petition.html

...I humbly ask that people read it, and if you agree with the setiment, sign the petition.

I also ask that people please not spam or fill it with negative comments -  in all likelihood, it will be rejected by WotC anyway, so if you disagree with the request, no need to sign.


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 13, 2007)

Jedi_Solo said:
			
		

> I read through the entire thread and I didn't see much.  Most of what I saw seemed to be that we were asking the boxed sets to REPLACE the random line.  That isn't what we are asking (or at least what I am asking - a few people did come across that way and I'm not sure if they intended to or not). WotC is making waaaay too much money from that to just up and quit making them.  I also understand the issue of boxes taking up shelf space and the risk of them not selling however I'm not asking for 50 different poses for Spawn of Tiamat or that ever elusive Celestial Flumph.  I want orcs.
> 
> The target - and I believe the major audience - for the Boxed Sets would be those who aren't buying the regular minis.  I'm not buying the regular minis.  If you already have way too many orcs you won't be buying the new mini releases anyway so those won't be lost sales.  They may lose a handful of purchasers that were buying the randomised minis for the hopes of getting the commons but then I also think (with no real evidence to back this up) that portion of the market is fairly small.



Exactly - well said.


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 13, 2007)

diaglo said:
			
		

> i've got two of them thanks to the random nature of distribution. as an EPic it won't see use in my current campaign for at least 10 years real time
> 
> 
> edit: in other words, i never would have bought it. EVAR.



Don't get me started on "how random is random" - myself and two friends bought 8 Giants of Legend packs. The reult of our huge minis? 1x Red Dragon (cool!), 2x Formorian (not bad), 5x Nightwalker... five of the ******* things. Not only an ugly mini, something that, if we were ever to use in a game, would only be ONE of!


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 13, 2007)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> In fairness, they aren't selling a "fixed set of minis in a box."  They are selling an introduction to D&D that includes a fixed set if minis.



...and the funny thing is, even though I don't need the rulebooks, dice or basically anything else in that box, I went and bought it just to get some non-randomized minis! 

[edit]Urgh! Sorry for so many posts in a row, I just get a bit passionate on this particular subject...[/edit]


----------



## CaptainChaos (Jan 13, 2007)

Vanuslux said:
			
		

> Many people have already given a fair amount of explanation of why the business model that the anti-random folks are trying to present will not work, complete with supporting facts about how similar non-random business models have fared unfavorably in comparison to the random business model.




Only two people with actual experience in this area of business have posted in this thread, Charles Ryan and Chris Pramas, and it doesn’t seem that they are in agreement. 



> You didn't see non-collectible card game makers blowing up the marketplace, just like you don't see non-collectible mini's going toe to toe in profitability with WotC's random collectibles.  The profitability of collectibility has been proven over and over and over again in all kinds of markets.




Let me introduce you to a little company called Games Workshop. They are the biggest and most profitable miniatures company in existence. Nothing WotC has done has with DDM has changed that. The existence of companies like GW, Privateer, and Reaper proves that the non-random distribution is absolutely possible. 



> It's not crystal ball gazing, it's the reality of business.




So why does GW continue to eat WotC for breakfast in the minis market?


----------



## MerricB (Jan 13, 2007)

Pramas said:
			
		

> No, it really doesn't. Chainmail was hopelessly compromised by the internal politics of WotC so I would not draw too many conclusions based on its fate. As we were trying to launch the game and facing endless roadblocks, territorial disputes, and corporate shenanigans, we used to joke that we were being shackled at the ankles, shot in both knees, and then told to run.




Quite true. The cancellation of _Chainmail_ had nothing to do with my "Law".

I seem to see parallels between _Chainmail_ and _D&D Master Tools_, the computer program that eventually was shot and resurrected as _E-tools_.

Cheers!


----------



## MerricB (Jan 13, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> Let me introduce you to a little company called Games Workshop. They are the biggest and most profitable miniatures company in existence. Nothing WotC has done has with DDM has changed that. The existence of companies like GW, Privateer, and Reaper proves that the non-random distribution is absolutely possible.




Certainly it is. 

However, non-random distribution of D&D Minis at a similar pricepoint to the current minis? Not so certain. Heroscape is the only thing that gets close, and it is (a) more expensive and (b) has fewer figures.

It's worth noting that when the DDM fixed sets were announced, the orc warparty _probably_ would have done ok. However, the bandit warparty was in trouble... because you could buy all the figures in it on the secondary market for less!

Cheers!


----------



## Shadowslayer (Jan 13, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> So why does GW continue to eat WotC for breakfast in the minis market?




Minis aren't simply accessories in their games. They ARE the game. 

In D&D, the minis are really only integral to the DDM players. The rest of us use them because we want to, not because we have to. You can still use Gummy Bears for orcs if you want.

You think people have their snot in a knot over randomness...imagine the outcry if D&D (the RPG) became a game where your effectiveness was determined by which minis you buy?

And of course, GW is not for the gotta-have-it-now gamers. It's for guys who enjoy painting and that have the patience to learn how to do it. 

I don't think you can compare the two companies really.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jan 13, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> Don't get me started on "how random is random" - myself and two friends bought 8 Giants of Legend packs. The reult of our huge minis? 1x Red Dragon (cool!), 2x Formorian (not bad), 5x Nightwalker... five of the ******* things. Not only an ugly mini, something that, if we were ever to use in a game, would only be ONE of!



What you've just described is actually evidence of randomness ... rather than the opposite, which I'm sure you believe.

Streaks happen in any random generation.  If there are no streaks like the unfortunate one described above, then you can be nearly positive that the sample is not random.

That said, DDM minis are only strictly random if bought at the booster level ... cases, OTOH, are seeded pseudo-randomly.


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 13, 2007)

Jeff Wilder said:
			
		

> What you've just described is actually evidence of randomness ... rather than the opposite, which I'm sure you believe.
> 
> Streaks happen in any random generation.  If there are no streaks like the unfortunate one described above, then you can be nearly positive that the sample is not random.
> 
> That said, DDM minis are only strictly random if bought at the booster level ... cases, OTOH, are seeded pseudo-randomly.



All mathematical causality and probability discussions aside, as fascinating as they are, it still sucked serious ass.


----------



## blargney the second (Jan 13, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> All mathematical causality and probability discussions aside, as fascinating as they are, it still sucked serious ass.



Fair enough!  *sympathy*


----------



## Oryan77 (Jan 13, 2007)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> There you go, Oryan77 - make the people in this thread happy - put together some themed sets!





			
				Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> So, who's going to do this for D&D minis?



I would be more than happy to put together themed sets if someone were to ask me for one. The thing is, the market for themed sets seems so small that a seller may lose out on selling a mini if it's in the themed set rather than in his "singles" category. Themed sets may sit in your inventory for a long time & some of those minis probably would've sold if it wasn't in the set. 

From what I've noticed on Ebay in the past, themed Ebay auctions don't get many bids (if any at all). And if they do get a bid, those minis sell for much less than if you just sold them individually...low enough that the seller is lucky to be making a profit.

But if people think themed sets would work (or if you want to buy a themed set), feel free to email me your suggestions at oryan1977 at yahoo.com 

I could always give it a shot and see what happens.


----------



## RFisher (Jan 13, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> QFT - But hey, like anybody who disagrees is actually going to take this into consideration...




I take it into consideration. It means they know what the obstacles are, which is the first step to overcoming them.

& for the record, I don't mean to accuse WotC/Hasbro of lying or laziness. Simply lack of vision.


----------



## CharlesRyan (Jan 13, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> Only two people with actual experience in this area of business have posted in this thread, Charles Ryan and Chris Pramas, and it doesn’t seem that they are in agreement.




Um, unless I'm misunderstanding someone here, I am in complete agreement. Similar non-random business models have fared unfavorably in comparison to the random business model. I absolutely agree with that statement.



> Let me introduce you to a little company called Games Workshop. They are the biggest and most profitable miniatures company in existence. Nothing WotC has done has with DDM has changed that. The existence of companies like GW, Privateer, and Reaper proves that the non-random distribution is absolutely possible.
> 
> So why does GW continue to eat WotC for breakfast in the minis market?




Games Workshop is an interesting example, but be careful not to confuse two different business phenomena at work here. GW is a market leader and innovator, in the same way that D&D is the RPG market leader and innovator. By that I mean that they both pioneered and grabbed an early, massive lead in their respective categories. (I don't mean that they're necessarily innovative today or throughout their lives.)

It's a truism of business--all business, not just games--that a market leader of this sort is virtually impossible to knock off, unless they blunder horribly or the marketplace changes dramatically and they don't react. Despite enormous ups and downs over the past 30 years, D&D remains the undisputed king of RPGs, in terms of sales, players, and brand recognition. No competitor has any real chance of changing that unless there's a massive shift in the marketplace that WotC ignores, or WotC otherwise completely screws up D&D (screws it up even worse than TSR did, because even that didn't topple D&D).

GW is in the same position with minis.

GW's market and brand position is such that it would take an enormous effort, and 10s of millions of dollars, for any company even to sidle up toward a close second place to them. Which, in turn, means that the marketplace really doesn't have room for another miniatures line based on the same nonrandom model.

This plays itself out in the LGS pretty obviously: retailers that devote enough shelf space to carry a full line of GW don't generally have enough resources to support a second large line of nonrandom minis.

So GW actually becomes a counter-argument: There's a powerful market leader that already dominates the non-random minis business. It would be suicidal for WotC to try to beat GW at their own game; they're much better off (and so are any gamers who want to have D&D miniatures) doing something very different and growing the market in a different direction.

[As an aside, it's arguable whether DDM has not affected GW, or that GW continues "to eat WotC for breakfast." Yes, GW is huge in the minis market--much bigger than WotC--but you might want to check their recent shareholders reports before citing them so vehemently. And comparing Privateer and Reaper to DDM is a little like comparing Spycraft to D&D.]


----------



## Vanuslux (Jan 13, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> Only two people with actual experience in this area of business have posted in this thread, Charles Ryan and Chris Pramas, and it doesn’t seem that they are in agreement.
> 
> Let me introduce you to a little company called Games Workshop. They are the biggest and most profitable miniatures company in existence. Nothing WotC has done has with DDM has changed that. The existence of companies like GW, Privateer, and Reaper proves that the non-random distribution is absolutely possible.
> 
> So why does GW continue to eat WotC for breakfast in the minis market?




GW has the position they do by riding on a massive market share that they had before the idea of random minis and I'll eat chicken livers if their market share is as strong now as it was before DDM came out.  That is assuming that GW actually does out-profit WotC in the minis business, which I'd like to see some actual numbers on.  DDM is far more widely known and distributed.  I didn't see a bunch of DDM boosters being marked 75% off at Barnes and Noble to get rid of the things, but that's what happened to GW's stuff after it was brought in and collected dust for some months.

If nothing else, Chainmail proved that D&D minis couldn't beat GW at its own game.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 13, 2007)

CharlesRyan said:
			
		

> Um, unless I'm misunderstanding someone here, I am in complete agreement. Similar non-random business models have fared unfavorably in comparison to the random business model. I absolutely agree with that statement.




Chris' position pretty much seems to be that Chainmail was a great line that was doomed because of internal politics.  While he doesn't outright say it would have been more successful than the random miniature model, he does say it was canceled because of "facing endless roadblocks, territorial disputes, and corporate shenanigans."  In effect he's saying it might have been more successful than DDM is now.


----------



## smootrk (Jan 13, 2007)

I don't dismiss any of the insider views, all being quite insightful, however, I, myself, as an individual (and not as a market demographic) would very much be interesting in a bag of gnolls, orcs, goblins, drow, etc. (in plastic, all with the same detail/paint/etc) and if such a product was produced, you can all be assured that I would purchase each basic bag.  Alas, these companies are not interested in each gamer/dm purchasing one of each of these products... they want repeated sales of the same packaging, in multiples, cases and the like.  

Heck, make these from existing molds, with different paint schemes, to stretch your buck for setup costs, and to differentiate from your random mini dispersement.  I understand that the runs would be much smaller, and probably of more limited distribution, but have you considered trying a bag of goblins through Target or Walmart or the like.  Somehow, I bet even non-gamer 6 year olds would like these better than some of the little army men sets I see, or similar offerings I see in those outlets.  Somehow, $6 Star Wars figures still seem to be selling after twenty something years... and I would bet that the D&D brand is nearly as well known as the SW brand.


----------



## ajanders (Jan 13, 2007)

*Another line of thought...*

Does anyone have statistics or anecdotes about sales for Paizo's Compleat Encounters products?
That concept seems like a possible way to sell D&D mini's in non-random fashion, but with less record keeping.

Taken to its ultimate level, perhaps, would anyone be interested in purchasing all the miniatures necessary to run, say, Forge of Fury in a package?
WOTC could release a fixed set of minis like that for every adventure they created: given the number of adventures they've released, it hardly seems like much of an administrative burden.
Or they could provide a set of strange magical monsters for their Arcane Corridors mapset.

Obviously, WOTC could make arrangements with other companies as well, but keeping it all in the family makes the negotiations simpler.

Does anyone have any thoughts about the workablility of this?


----------



## BryonD (Jan 13, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> According to who, your crystal ball? Look, I'll freely admit that the current model seems to be doing OK for Wizards, but you have no way of knowing whether WotC could be even more successful with a different business model. WotC embraced the collectible mentality for minis because the company was built on collectibility.



What?  With the completely baseless crystal ball statements you have made you're turning around and doubting my fairly obvious statement????  I think you are greatly confusing your personal preference for market reality.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 13, 2007)

ajanders said:
			
		

> Does anyone have statistics or anecdotes about sales for Paizo's Compleat Encounters products?




Anecdotal only.  I have two FLGS in my area, as smaller one (book store/comic book store/gaming store/new age store) and a larger one.  I asked the smaller one to get me a one or two and they ordered an additional one.  They sold one before I got there, the others sat there for lengths of time (the ninja one is still there) but gradually sold.  However, they only have a small non-GW miniatures section.

The larger store, as far as I know, have never ordered them.  If they did, they sold them and didn't order them again.  They have a large GW section, but also a large Reaper selection and small section with other companies miniatures.


----------



## crazy_cat (Jan 13, 2007)

ajanders said:
			
		

> Taken to its ultimate level, perhaps, would anyone be interested in purchasing all the miniatures necessary to run, say, Forge of Fury in a package?
> ....
> WOTC could release a fixed set of minis like that for every adventure they created: given the number of adventures they've released, it hardly seems like much of an administrative burden.
> ...
> Does anyone have any thoughts about the workablility of this?



I personally like the idea and I'd buy them if they existed (assuming the modules and minis were of reasonable quality) - but I don't think it would be financially viable or sustainable in any way.

Didn't WOTC stop making adventures for a good while and leave it to 3rd parties as they weren't sufficiently profitable? 

Have modules suddenly become profitable? Or are WOTC producing them becasue they must, as without them its hard to grow the brand if new players have no adventures to actually play once they've picked up a PHB, DMG and MM?

Being realistic, I can't see them taking a profitable thing (DDM) and combining it with a possibly profitable, or possibly loss leading necessity for the D&D brand (modules) unless some very detailed market research tells them its what is ofificially known as a very good (ie profitable) idea.

Telling people that to properly run the newest module they need to a) buy the module and then b) buy the relevant minis as a set from WOTC is IMHO a guaranteed way to both upset the old guard by forcing the link to WOTC branded minis, and to alienate the new player by raising the entry level costs.


----------



## BryonD (Jan 13, 2007)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> Chris' position pretty much seems to be that Chainmail was a great line that was doomed because of internal politics.  While he doesn't outright say it would have been more successful than the random miniature model, he does say it was canceled because of "facing endless roadblocks, territorial disputes, and corporate shenanigans."  In effect he's saying it might have been more successful than DDM is now.




I'm curious what would have been significantly different.  

The actual product that hit the shelves died because of what that product was.

To claim that an undefined product would have been "more successful" than a clear success seems more than a stretch.  And I understand that these are your words and not Chris'.  
But seriously, what objective statements can be made to support this claim?

Chainmail didn't fail because of internal politics.  Chainmail failed because Chainmail was unpopular.  The approach failed in the marketplace.  Now, clearly the point is that SOME other approach was intended and politics caused that other approach to die and be replaced with an inferior one.  Fine, that certainly sounds highly plausible.  But that doesn't change the market reality around the actual product.  And none of that establishes that some other never released "Chaimail Design Alpha" product would have been the biggest hit ever or an even worse flop.

(And yes, I understand that some people liked Chainmail.  Just as some people DON'T like DDM.  Exceptions, no matter how deeply commited, don't define the market.  Not ENOUGH people liked it to keep the blisters from collecting dust in clearance bins at the game stores around me.)

Bottom line: Nonrandom was tried and it failed.  The best you can do is say that those results should be ignored.  That in no way is evidence that it would work better than DDM.  And though there may be very good reason to discount the results of Chainmail in an assessement, to completely ignore it as meaningless seems an intentional injection of bias.


----------



## Agent Oracle (Jan 13, 2007)

Actually, the thought of Supplementing the Minis game with pre-built Army-packs is nothing new.  If I'm not mistaken, Wizkids did something similar with 200 point pre-built faction packs...  let me see if i can find one...

Found them!



			
				Mage Knight Retailer said:
			
		

> Mage Knight Constructed Army Sets
> 
> Mage Knight Atlantis Guild Army by WizKids
> 
> ...




These were released shortly after the original set, Rebellion, and have not really gone up in price...  Perhaps WotC could make four 200 point pre-built armies centered around a theme?


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 13, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> Have modules suddenly become profitable? Or are WOTC producing them becasue they must, as without them its hard to grow the brand if new players have no adventures to actually play once they've picked up a PHB, DMG and MM?




I think that's it.  The number of 3rd-party publishers who are making adventures has shrunk dramatically from the early 3E period (though, IMO, those that are left are generally putting out better-quality products).

And, WotC also appears to be using at least some of the modules (the Fantastic Locations ones) as a way to cross-sell the miniatures line, since those modules contain battle maps and suggested minis.


----------



## ssampier (Jan 13, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> QFT - But hey, like anybody who disagrees is actually going to take this into consideration...




_Chainmail_ we hardly knew you.

Does anyone know if Battlesystem was successful?


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 13, 2007)

ssampier said:
			
		

> Does anyone know if Battlesystem was successful?




I don't think it was particularly so, though I could be wrong.  Recall that the second edition of that game was fundamentally just rules; TSR didn't make specific minis for it.


----------



## Shadowslayer (Jan 13, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> And, WotC also appears to be using at least some of the modules (the Fantastic Locations ones) as a way to cross-sell the miniatures line, since those modules contain battle maps and suggested minis.




Agreed. But for what it's worth, the latest one, Frostfell Rift, doesn't have the "suggested mini" entry for any of its encounters. I dunno if you can read anything into that or not. The battle maps (3 of the 4) are still DDM-legal though.

A lot of the encounter statblocks in this one have NPC/monsters with classes from the Completes and the environment books.



> Have modules suddenly become profitable? Or are WOTC producing them becasue they must, as without them its hard to grow the brand if new players have no adventures to actually play once they've picked up a PHB, DMG and MM?




I think its a combination of a) nurturing newer players, and b) they just hit on something that works and is being explored. 

Many of the products they've come out with are made with an eye for the guy who wants to play right out of the box with little prep time. OK I haven't really taken a look at Exp to Ravenloft, but I did buy Scourge of the Howling Horde. Whether you like the Delve format or not, you have to admit that it facilitates gameplay much faster. (for those gamers that don't already have preconcieved ideas of what they need from a published adventure) 

After a quick skim of Scourge, I realized I could play it with little to no prep. My 10 year old nephew could run it. I think they'll be leaning toward more of this. Same, I'm afraid, with the MM4 format. Maybe you don't like that they took up space with MM1 monsters with character classes that you could have done yourself, but I'd guarantee you that someone new to D&D will be using them. I don't know that older do-it-yourselfers are their primary market. Not from what I can see. 

I'd expect them to go further down this path yet. Delve adventures, Fantastic Locations, Tiles, and ready to run monsters...and DDM minis for those who don't have issues with the way they're sold.

While I'm here, here's a question for minis guys: Are there listings somewhere of the RPG stats of the various minis? Not necessarily full stats, but someplace where you can see that the "Orc Elfsmasher" is a 7th lvl Orc Barbarian?


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 14, 2007)

C'mon people, for all those of you who feel as I do in this thread, please consider signing the petition! 

http://www.petitiononline.com/WOTC1301/petition.html

- Thurbane


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 14, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> I personally like the idea and I'd buy them if they existed (assuming the modules and minis were of reasonable quality) - but I don't think it would be financially viable or sustainable in any way.




IIRC, WotC was going to release a miniature pack for an adventure (was it "Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil"?) but bever dud release it. 

Paizo had a page in their store with suggested miniatures for "The Whispering Cairn" and were going to do the rest of the _Age of Worms_ AP, but stopped after the first or second adventure.  I would think that would be a superior method.  A fixed set will likely contain many miniatures I already have and don't need.



> Have modules suddenly become profitable? Or are WOTC producing them becasue they must, as without them its hard to grow the brand if new players have no adventures to actually play once they've picked up a PHB, DMG and MM?




3rd parties discovered the same thing that WotC knew, that adventures aren't that profitable.  The theory was that the smaller publishers could afford the smaller profit margins on adventures.  However, most 3rd party publishers saw they could make more money on supplements so eventually avoided adventures. 



			
				BryonD said:
			
		

> Chainmail didn't fail because of internal politics.  Chainmail failed because Chainmail was unpopular.  The approach failed in the marketplace.  Now, clearly the point is that SOME other approach was intended and politics caused that other approach to die and be replaced with an inferior one.  Fine, that certainly sounds highly plausible.




One thing I remember Chris having said before is that originally the skirmish game was supposed to be the lead in to a mass battle game.  Someone with a search function might be able to find the earlier post(s) where he lists the problems he faced.  One thing I remember is that random "suits" would happen to be walking by a production meeting, decide to sit in and then make changes to the line on the spot.



			
				Agent Oracle said:
			
		

> Actually, the thought of Supplementing the Minis game with pre-built Army-packs is nothing new.  If I'm not mistaken, Wizkids did something similar with 200 point pre-built faction packs...  let me see if i can find one...




Yup.  They failed.  They failed *horribly*!  Of course, part of the problem is that they were all figures from the base set, after a couple of expansions had been released.  The experienced players had their fill of those figures.  The new players typically went with the _Rebellion_ starters/boosters rather than these sets (as it was still available), since there was a better chance at the chase figures (these sets only had one random figure).



			
				Shadowslayer said:
			
		

> Agreed. But for what it's worth, the latest one, Frostfell Rift, doesn't have the "suggested mini" entry for any of its encounters. I dunno if you can read anything into that or not.




Ari has addressed this here.  Specifically:


			
				Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> In fact, I was specifically told _not_ to require too many rare minis, or to make the scenarios _too_ dependent on the new minis sets (though I was supposed to incorporate them to an extent). I think the entire point was to make the Fantastic Locations series more universally useful.


----------



## Shadowslayer (Jan 14, 2007)

> Of course, part of the problem is that they were all figures from the base set, after a couple of expansions had been released. The experienced players had their fill of those figures.




That's interesting. So the question for WOTC is "How many Bag O Orcs/Kobolds/Whatever can we realistically sell?" 

If they did do it, I bet they'd be expensive.  

Thanks for the link to Mousefeatu's post. I'd forgotten he said that. I haven't done any real comparisons, but the Frostfell Rift varied from the other FL products in a couple ways. Firstly there were two encounters per map instead of one. So, double your use, if you're using it as intended. That's a plus. And also, I think this one seemed to hold together better as an adventure than the previous ones. Hope they do more of these.

Also, when you consider that the Tiles are being pretty well recieved, it's only a matter of time before each set of tiles comes as a complete dungeon with a map and an encounter key. That'd be cool too.


----------



## megamania (Jan 14, 2007)

The Tiles already come with some "suggested" dungeon layouts.  I'm not sure WoTC would want to limit the theme too narrowly.

Set One: Basic
Set Two: Arcane Theme   Still very basic
Set Three:  Dungeon  Still very basic
Set Four: Wilderness   Basic
Set Five:  Crypts   Basic



Once we get sets entitled "Dregoth's Caverns of New Guistenal" I figure it will chase away too many players.   However I do wonder how many more Tile Sets they can do.   I still hope for a ship (six 7x8 tiles that show three levels of two types of ships) or something like that.


----------



## megamania (Jan 14, 2007)

'course a set entitled "Drow Caverns" would sell.


----------



## Lilaxe (Jan 14, 2007)

maybe Games Workshop can fill a hole in the marketplace by creating a new "wargame" that uses pre-painted plastic minis sold in "regiments" and "squads" which will replace the old metal-and-needs-painting Warhammer line that according to Ryan Dyancy is losing sales? If they were the right size, there would be no reason these units could not be used for multiple RPGing applications...

just an idea...


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 14, 2007)

Lilaxe said:
			
		

> maybe Games Workshop can fill a hole in the marketplace by creating a new "wargame" that uses pre-painted plastic minis sold in "regiments" and "squads" which will replace the old metal-and-needs-painting Warhammer line that according to Ryan Dyancy is losing sales?




Given the highway-robbery prices GW charges for their unpainted minis, I shudder to think what they'd charge for the honor of having someone paint them for you...


----------



## Shadowslayer (Jan 14, 2007)

megamania said:
			
		

> The Tiles already come with some "suggested" dungeon layouts.  I'm not sure WoTC would want to limit the theme too narrowly.
> <snip>
> Once we get sets entitled "Dregoth's Caverns of New Guistenal" I figure it will chase away too many players.   However I do wonder how many more Tile Sets they can do.   I still hope for a ship (six 7x8 tiles that show three levels of two types of ships) or something like that.




I hear you. All I mean really by packaging it as a complete dungeon is to do what thy're already doing, except add a booklet with some encounters and a map...pretty much like they do already with the Fantastic Locations. Heck, the fantastic locations booklets are so thin they need to put carboard in them to stiffen out the package. A sample dungeon with traps/baddies shouldn't be too tough.

Besides, they'll have to keep coming up with new themes if they want to keep selling tiles after the basic ones are covered.

BTW, I didn't realize they were doing a wilderness one. Thats pretty cool, as regular wilderness isn't well represented yet. (I was hoping they'd do those in poster size, but I can live with tiles.)

Also BTW, a ship woud rock! We could do S S of Saltmarsh again with minis.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 14, 2007)

Someone mentioned Mass Battles:

There are Mass Battle rules in the Miniatures Handbook. As far as I have heard, they aren't too popular (the usual comment is that those rules aren't that good).

People are requesting new rules here and there (and I think there was a lengthy post over at Wizards about it, with one of the big DDM people posting lots of stuff about it).


I recently had an idea of a new Minis Handbook Boxed Set, which would contain a new Minis Handbook (with all minis content, no D&D stuff in it) and some gimmicks, like 4 d20 (one for each faction, in the faction colour), Dungeon Tile quailty counters for all the scenarios therein, some maps, and so on.

The book would have new mass battle rules (as well as rules for aquatic fights, Minis campaigns, Single-player scenarios, a HeroQuest style Dungeon Crawl, Multi-Player fights with maps for those, and others.

All I know is that a lot of regulars liked the Idea quite a lot. I don't know if Wizards will pick the idea up, but that may bring new Mass Battle Rules.




			
				brehobit said:
			
		

> Here's my business plan.
> 
> Sell, for about $50.00 a collection of about 80 commons and uncommons




That's a metric ton of minis for a huge sum of money. I think if you want to sell those for those who don't want to blow too much money on minis, you'll have to make them a lot smaller and cheaper!

Plus, the larger the packs, the higher the chance that each individual will find that too many figures are not to its liking and avoid buying it.



> Sell mainly via mail-order (don't expect too many game stores to stock this).




As far as I know, Wizards is very protective of Brick and Mortar Stores. Very, very protective. I doubt they'd do anything like this.



> Some collections:
> Humanoid baddies (say 10 of 1 orc, 10 of 1 goblin, 10 of 1 kobold, some groups of 5, and a few singles, the unique might be just a "cool" orc or perhaps something a bit more "special")




"Yeah, well, but I don't care for kobolds - they suck, even if you have a thousand - but I'd need 30 orcs for that one mass battle. Does that mean I'll have to blow 150 on three of these packs?" 

And that's beyond the general problems these packs would have, as said above by Charles.


----------



## brehobit (Jan 14, 2007)

Kae'Yoss said:
			
		

> That's a metric ton of minis for a huge sum of money. I think if you want to sell those for those who don't want to blow too much money on minis, you'll have to make them a lot smaller and cheaper!



Not really.  I think small packs will not price out nicely.  I've blown well over $50.00 a pop on minis and I only use them for D&D (I've played DDM once...)


> "Yeah, well, but I don't care for kobolds - they suck, even if you have a thousand - but I'd need 30 orcs for that one mass battle. Does that mean I'll have to blow 150 on three of these packs?"



I'm thinking in terms of what a D&D game would need.  I *rarely* have more than 10 of a single type of baddy out.  I don't think I've ever done it come to think of it. 



> And that's beyond the general problems these packs would have, as said above by Charles.



Yeah, and your comments about FLGS and Wizards is also fair.  Around here FLGS are gone all gone (well one is still around, but a 20 minute drive away and not near anything else I go to, down from 3 within 10 minutes).  So my personal (self-centered) perspective is that they are pretty much gone or going.


----------



## Agamon (Jan 14, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> _Here's my business plan.
> 
> Sell, for about $50.00 a collection of about 80 commons and uncommons_




I hope no one actually expects that minis sold this way by Wizards would be inexpensive.  Commons are cheaper than uncommons are cheaper than rares in the secondary market because of availability and demand.  For Wizards, though, a common orc costs the same to make as a rare warforged.  You wouldn't get them at less than $1 a mini, and in fact, it'd probably be more expensive than the almost $2 a mini retail that it costs to buy a booster pack, regardless of 'rarity'.  They wouldn't sell at such a high price, so I expect the quality of them would make the War Drums minis look great...


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 14, 2007)

Agamon said:
			
		

> For Wizards, though, a common orc costs the same to make as a rare warforged.




Not necessarily.  They have (roughly) the same amount of plastic, but rares tend to have more complex paint jobs, so there's a higher labor cost for them.


----------



## rgard (Jan 14, 2007)

Agamon said:
			
		

> I hope no one actually expects that minis sold this way by Wizards would be inexpensive.  Commons are cheaper than uncommons are cheaper than rares in the secondary market because of availability and demand.  For Wizards, though, a common orc costs the same to make as a rare warforged.  You wouldn't get them at less than $1 a mini, and in fact, it'd probably be more expensive than the almost $2 a mini retail that it costs to buy a booster pack, regardless of 'rarity'.  They wouldn't sell at such a high price, so I expect the quality of them would make the War Drums minis look great...




I was wondering about the prices for these and came to a similar conclusion.  I'd be willing to bet the pack of 8 orcs would cost $14.99; and this is due (as you said) to the fact that the production costs for 8 random minis is the same as 8 non-random minis.  So i'm wondering why I or anybody else would buy 8 non-random minis for $14.99 when I could probably get the same ones from the secondary market for $8 to $10, shipping included.

Also, how WotC prices the current sets is based in part on how many they project to sell.  You can accept a slightly smaller per unit margin if you plan to sell boatloads of them.  I don't see that you'll have the same demand for old non-random as you do new random figs.  

Some may want to pipe in that some of the upfront costs (sculpting and steel mold manufacture) could be avoided with re-issues and we already discussed this in another thread last year.  After we debated it, it became clear the benefits we're as great as we previously assumed:

1.  Specific race figures (i.e. 8 orc poses from 3 sets) could be spread out over many molds.  Unless there is a separate mold for each fig (and plugged into a multi-mold frame for injection), you'd have really onerous production requirements requiring many molds for each set being loaded separately for the run.  Don't worry, who ever is manufacturing the figs will pass the cost on to WotC and that will roll down hill to the consumer.

2.  You'd still need to change the bases of the figs as they did for the two D&D Basic Games.  I don't know if that is a separate piece in the mold and only the new base would need sculpted but that is still an upfront cost.

My gut feel is that non-random packs of previously issued D&D figs won't ever make it past the business case stage in the process.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## rgard (Jan 14, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Not necessarily.  They have (roughly) the same amount of plastic, but rares tend to have more complex paint jobs, so there's a higher labor cost for them.




I suspect this won't be significant given the labor costs in that part of the world.


----------



## morbiczer (Jan 14, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> I suspect this won't be significant given the labor costs in that part of the world.




Actually I have read several times before, that the decision of what becomes a common, an uncommon, or a rare is at leass partially decided by the paint job of the figures. The more complicated it becomes (the more paint steps it has), the more likely it is to be an uncommon, or even a rare.

Regardless of how cheap labor in China is or not, if painting a figure takes four times longer than for an other figure, than you have to pay four times as much, because you need four times as many workers to do it in the same time.


----------



## Wraith-Hunter (Jan 14, 2007)

I was in my LGS this weekend and looked at prices of the GW minis for a pack of mooks vs the WotC and the GW were WAY more expensive and not painted. If WotC sold packs of mooks I'm sure they could not do it at the current prices, $2 per painted mini is a great deal if you ask me. I could care less if the mini was plastic or metal, and I have zero interest in painting. 

If they did the mook packs I think you would see prices more on par with GW than what they are selling them for now. Random means lower cost, zero painting time. 

And really I can understand fustrations with certain secondary market choices but really it is NOT that bad and there are a bunch of choices and ways to participate in the secondary market. I agree that it is more of a pain to use the 2nd-ary market than being able to go in to a store and get what you want.

Online if I want a pack of mooks I can get them for less than the retail price of $15/8 minis that my LGS charges, and I get what I want.

*Here is also something I noticed. My LGS only had Bloodwar and War Drums. None of the older sets. I was able to find some Underdark and WotSQ at some book stores, but the LGS onlyhad the recent ones. The GW and Reaper singles all had lots of dust on manyof them. They have a good selection of many minis but most of them have been sitting there for some time. The WotC sell very well from what the owner told me. So as much as you all belly ache about mook packs I doubt it will ever happen. Even if WotC WANTS to do it to keep the players happy from a business standpoint it just wouldn't work. IT would raise costs significantly and stifle sales.*

Personally I want half way decent mini's that are prepainted at a compeditive price. I don't want to pay 30 bucks for 8-12 orcs that I have to paint and glue. 2nd-ary market is a pain I know but at least it is THERE.


----------



## MerricB (Jan 14, 2007)

A couple of notes:
* the DDM figures are painted by machine, and 
* the number of paint steps really does impact on the price.

Rare figures are more expensive to make than common figures, but the difference in price probably isn't the same as the differential between them on the secondary market. Not every rare is expensive, either, but the cheaper rares allow the production of the more expensive rares.

Another note:
* The molding is very stressful on the molds. After a production run, the molds are no longer usable.

The result of this is that any new runs require the construction of new molds.

Cheers!


----------



## smootrk (Jan 14, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> Another note:
> * The molding is very stressful on the molds. After a production run, the molds are no longer usable.
> 
> The result of this is that any new runs require the construction of new molds.
> ...



Production Molds are made from Master Molds, which are not put under the stresses of a production run.  When new production molds are needed, they can always get more, albeit over a very long period even these Masters would deteriorate slightly.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 15, 2007)

morbiczer said:
			
		

> Regardless of how cheap labor in China is or not, if painting a figure takes four times longer than for an other figure, than you have to pay four times as much, because you need four times as many workers to do it in the same time.




And don't forget that as the economy of China grows, the more expensive the labor becomes (in fact, China is deliberately trying to slow down their economic growth because of this).  Expect anything that's made in China today to have significant price increases in the next few years, unless the economic trends change.

Another thing to consider about costs is that when a miniature set is produced, WotC gets the factory set up (which costs a large percentage of their costs), runs out a huge amount of the set, and then shuts down.  It's not cost efficient for them to start up the factory to create a handful of miniatures with a much smaller amount sold.  They'd probably have to tie it into another production, and that has its own issues (such as siphoning off that productions resources and possibly sales).



			
				MerricB said:
			
		

> Another note:
> * The molding is very stressful on the molds. After a production run, the molds are no longer usable.
> 
> The result of this is that any new runs require the construction of new molds.




In fact, some reports I've heard say they sometimes have several sets of molds they go through.  Given that the molds are hugely expensive (tens of thousands of dollars each, at least in the 80s), that's the biggest barrier.


----------



## brehobit (Jan 15, 2007)

Agamon said:
			
		

> I hope no one actually expects that minis sold this way by Wizards would be inexpensive.  Commons are cheaper than uncommons are cheaper than rares in the secondary market because of availability and demand.  For Wizards, though, a common orc costs the same to make as a rare warforged.  You wouldn't get them at less than $1 a mini, and in fact, it'd probably be more expensive than the almost $2 a mini retail that it costs to buy a booster pack, regardless of 'rarity'.  They wouldn't sell at such a high price, so I expect the quality of them would make the War Drums minis look great...




My suspicion is that if they could sell these without cannibalizing their existing market they could easily hit this price point and make money.  I strongly suspect that the original art and master-mold costs are where a fair fraction of their costs lie.  Once that's past, I'd be shocked if the cost/mini were greater than 10 cents, and I'd guess below 5 (for basic paint-jobs, medium-sized).  Being able to reuse the master-mold and art would allow them to produce at a very low cost.  Of course they take their profit, the distributor takes their and the stores take theirs, plus packaging, marketing, and related costs.  But I still think this price-point would be quite achievable.  

The only real question is if A) it would sell and B) if it would hurt the base sales of DDM.  I think the answer to A) is "yes, but not overly well" and B) is probably not.  But the risk of B likely outweighs the gain of A.

"Just an Engineer, what do I know"


----------



## MerricB (Jan 15, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> The only real question is if A) it would sell and B) if it would hurt the base sales of DDM.  I think the answer to A) is "yes, but not overly well" and B) is probably not.  But the risk of B likely outweighs the gain of A.




I don't think B is a big consideration, but A is. Even more, the problems it causes for distributors/retailers in stocking and warehousing increase the price more than the cost of making the minis.

Cheers!


----------



## brehobit (Jan 15, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I don't think B is a big consideration, but A is. Even more, the problems it causes for distributors/retailers in stocking and warehousing increase the price more than the cost of making the minis.Cheers!




Any idea if my price guesses are in the right place?

I think putting out a new set every 4 months (and dropping a set after 1-1.5 years) would make it work fairly well...  Again, I think this would be mostly mail-order and a few bigger stores.

Mark


----------



## MerricB (Jan 15, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> Again, I think this would be mostly mail-order and a few bigger stores.




That implies a small production run, which is uneconomical.

Cheers!


----------



## brehobit (Jan 15, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> That implies a small production run, which is uneconomical.
> 
> Cheers!



Is it if the only change is packaging?  So if the cost to re-do a figure was low (and here I have no clue) then I think the small run (say a few thousand units) would make money.  But I've no idea what scale DDM sells at.


----------



## ssampier (Jan 15, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> I don't think it was particularly so, though I could be wrong.  Recall that the second edition of that game was fundamentally just rules; TSR didn't make specific minis for it.




True. I imagine the official Ral Partha AD&D minatures did not sell well either.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 15, 2007)

ssampier said:
			
		

> True. I imagine the official Ral Partha AD&D minatures did not sell well either.




I know I was still running into them in stores just before 3.5 was released.  Admittedly, it was the fringe monsters I was running into.


----------



## Echohawk (Jan 15, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> Is it if the only change is packaging?  So if the cost to re-do a figure was low (and here I have no clue) then I think the small run (say a few thousand units) would make money.  But I've no idea what scale DDM sells at.



A lot, lot more than a few thousand. According to this press release, more than a *million* miniatures were sold in the first month they were released. That's roughly 125,000 Harbinger boosters in one month, and all indications are that subsequent sets have sold better.

So based on this, my guess would be that the market would need to support sales of at least 100,000 units of any non-randomised set for it to be even vaguely worthwhile for WotC to make, not taking into account the potentially higher distribution/retail costs for a wider product range. I suppose that it is possible that smaller quantities might somehow still be profitable, but I'm skeptical.


----------



## Pramas (Jan 15, 2007)

humble minion said:
			
		

> You have to wonder how much Mage Knight is responsible for the random nature of D&D minis.  That was a successful product line before DDM even existed, and they used the random distribution method.




I'd say Mage Knight is entirely responsible for it. Mage Knight created the collectible minis market and I doubt DDM would exist today if it hadn't. Its existence also undermined everything we were trying to do with Chainmail.

As for my "position" on DDM and Chainmail, I haven't really put one forth. All I said in this thread is that it's foolish to read too much in to Chainmail's failure because of the circumstances of its creation. I've considered writing up Chainmail's story for my blog sometime, but the last time I did something like that (The True Story of True20) it took me seven installments and nearly a month to finish it and I don't have that kind of time to commit right now.


----------



## Templetroll (Jan 15, 2007)

Jedi_Solo said:
			
		

> But what about the Fiendish Dire Flumph in Spiked Full Plate I need for next week's session?




They need a fig with add-ons for templates!


----------



## Shadowslayer (Jan 15, 2007)

Templetroll said:
			
		

> They need a fig with add-ons for templates!




Need me that uber-rare Mr Potato Head Mini!   

(ok, I'll shut up now)


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jan 15, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I don't think B is a big consideration, but A is. Even more, the problems it causes for distributors/retailers in stocking and warehousing increase the price more than the cost of making the minis.
> 
> Cheers!





Wheras, I think A is a minimal consideration, but B is a huge one.  If you look at the WotC market research prior to launching 3.0 (or, at least, what is still available), the amount of money you make per customer skyrockets when minis are involved.  If you need 2, and I can convince you to buy 6, I've tripled my profit.


RC


----------



## Echohawk (Jan 15, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> The only real question is if A) it would sell and B) if it would hurt the base sales of DDM.



And then...



			
				Raven Crowking said:
			
		

> Wheras, I think A is a minimal consideration, but B is a huge one.



Say what? Do you really think that whether a product would sell is a minimal consideration when deciding whether or not to make it???


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jan 15, 2007)

Echohawk said:
			
		

> And then...
> 
> Say what? Do you really think that whether a product would sell is a minimal consideration when deciding whether or not to make it???




No, sorry.  I don't think there is any doubt that it would sell; based on the marketing research WotC published, this seems to be something WotC can be fairly certain of.  Therefore, I don't think "Will it sell?" is the major question facing WotC.  They know (as much as possible) the answer.

OTOH, they are currently selling minis to both the collectable and the gaming market, and there is indication in their research that there is a large divergence between those consumer groups.  They could market minis for a collectable market, and they could market minis for gamers, seperately.  

However, their market research also indicates that gamers will pay a heck of a lot more for minis than they would for books (weird, but true).  Which does not, in and of itself, mean that they will pay for minis they wouldn't normally use if there was an economical alternative.  So, by packaging the minis as they are doing they manage to get gamers to buy more than they would if they were packaged otherwise.

The result is that packaging minis in a non-random factor would mean that WotC would lose sales.  The other would sell; random packaging sells _more_.


RC


----------



## Echohawk (Jan 15, 2007)

Raven Crowking said:
			
		

> No, sorry.  I don't think there is any doubt that it would sell; based on the marketing research WotC published, this seems to be something WotC can be fairly certain of.  Therefore, I don't think "Will it sell?" is the major question facing WotC.  They know (as much as possible) the answer.



Okay, I sort of see what you mean. But based on these comments further up the thread:



			
				kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Several years ago, early on in the DDM saga, WotC announced they were going to do exactly what many of you are asking for: it was going to be a non-random pack of 10 or so orcs (multiples of several different sculpts, IIRC). For whatever reason, it was pulled from the release schedule after being announced.





			
				MerricB said:
			
		

> It wasn't ordered in sufficient quantity by distributors, as I recall.



It seems that the only actual evidence we do have (little though it is) is that non-randomise packs *won't* sell. That's gotta be a pretty significant factor in deciding whether such a product will work in the future, don'tcha think?


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jan 15, 2007)

Echohawk said:
			
		

> Okay, I sort of see what you mean. But based on these comments further up the thread:
> 
> It seems that the only actual evidence we do have (little though it is) is that non-randomise packs *won't* sell. That's gotta be a pretty significant factor in deciding whether such a product will work in the future, don'tcha think?





When was this, and what evidence is there that the product was pulled due to insufficient orders?

(EDIT:  I ask because I co-own a comic book store, and I don't recall _*any*_ actual solicitations for such a product.)

RC


----------



## ehren37 (Jan 15, 2007)

Lilaxe said:
			
		

> maybe Games Workshop can fill a hole in the marketplace by creating a new "wargame" that uses pre-painted plastic minis sold in "regiments" and "squads" which will replace the old metal-and-needs-painting Warhammer line that according to Ryan Dyancy is losing sales? If they were the right size, there would be no reason these units could not be used for multiple RPGing applications...
> 
> just an idea...




Rackham is trying this out now. 

http://www.rackham-store.com/boutiq...HEL02&code_lg=lg_us&pag=1&num=48&tri=0&marq=0

You'll note the price tag isnt cheap.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jan 15, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Not necessarily.  They have (roughly) the same amount of plastic, but rares tend to have more complex paint jobs, so there's a higher labor cost for them.




Plus, the sculpts are usually more elaborate.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 15, 2007)

morbiczer said:
			
		

> Actually I have read several times before, that the decision of what becomes a common, an uncommon, or a rare is at leass partially decided by the paint job of the figures. The more complicated it becomes (the more paint steps it has), the more likely it is to be an uncommon, or even a rare.




... additionally, the sculpt complexity figures in, as well.

For instance (pulling from the SW lines, since I'm more familiar with them), the AT-ST in Universe was going to be an Uncommon Huge, but sculpt complexity necessitated more construction steps.  More construction steps = less availability.

Similarly, in the new Starship Battles line, the ARC-170 fighter (a relatively average-power piece) is a Rare because of sculpt complexity.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 15, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> You'll note the price tag isnt cheap.




Oy - the starter set is 80 Euro, and that's for 19 minis (2 larges) and some boxes / gunposts.

A "booster" of marines is 25 Euro for 6 minis.

In real money (  ), that's $103 and $32, respectively.


----------



## molonel (Jan 15, 2007)

Anyway, after a weekend breather where I spent a lot of time thumbing through eBay, I have to say that even if this is the best of all possible worlds, it still blows big time. I've read through all of the reasons, and they still don't explain why companies like GW and the producers of Heroclix can make non-randomized minis and do well, but WotC can't.

I think the more likely explanation is that WotC knows how to make the randomized model work, so THAT is why they are going with it. Not that any other model simply could NOT work.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 15, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> I think the more likely explanation is that WotC knows how to make the randomized model work, so THAT is why they are going with it. Not that any other model simply could NOT work.



Then write up your business plan, get some financing, and seize the day.


----------



## molonel (Jan 15, 2007)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> Then write up your business plan, get some financing, and seize the day.




Yes, because of course the only people who have a right to criticize a bad film they watched are people who've made movies, themselves. And only cooks can have opinions about food in a restaurant. And people sitting in front of the TV watching football remain completely silent about their opinions unless THEY can run a five-minute mile, or intercept a pass.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 15, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> Yes, because of course the only people who have a right to criticize a bad film they watched are people who've made movies, themselves. And only cooks can have opinions about food in a restaurant. And people sitting in front of the TV watching football remain completely silent about their opinions unless THEY can run a five-minute mile, or intercept a pass.



If you have an idea for a money-making business, you can...make money at it.  That's quite a bit different from most Monday-morning quarterbacking scenarios.


----------



## rgard (Jan 15, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> Anyway, after a weekend breather where I spent a lot of time thumbing through eBay, I have to say that even if this is the best of all possible worlds, it still blows big time. I've read through all of the reasons, and they still don't explain why companies like GW and the producers of Heroclix can make non-randomized minis and do well, but WotC can't.
> 
> I think the more likely explanation is that WotC knows how to make the randomized model work, so THAT is why they are going with it. Not that any other model simply could NOT work.




Not sure you have this right.

GW: True these are non-random, but the minis need to be assembled and painted.

WK: Other than starter sets and a run of MK non-randoms a few years ago, these are still random.

Neither GW or Wizkids is doing what you ask for:  non-random, pre-painted minis.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 15, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> WK: Other than starter sets and a run of MK non-randoms a few years ago, these are still random.




They have a limited number of non-random sets.  Assuming he is talking about the current lines:

Starters are usually non-random (Heroclix, Horrorclix & Mechwarrior)
Battleforce sets (up to now, promotionals sets that can be order through their website)
Large figures (the equivalent of the DDM Icon line)


----------



## molonel (Jan 15, 2007)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> If you have an idea for a money-making business, you can...make money at it.  That's quite a bit different from most Monday-morning quarterbacking scenarios.




If you have a few million sitting around doing nothing, I will be happy to risk it on my ideas. I'll be doing well to pay the rent next month, and lacking manufacturers, distributors and connections for shipping, WotC need have no fear of me threatening their market share any time soon.



			
				rgard said:
			
		

> Not sure you have this right.
> 
> GW: True these are non-random, but the minis need to be assembled and painted.
> 
> ...




Sure I have the right. Opinions are free, and since none of the naysayers who disagree with me has ever done what they insist I must do in order to have an opinion, I feel myself under no burden to do any differently.

There is a market for people to buy what they want. The fact that WotC prefers to go with what they know can hardly be faulted them, but I refuse to pave the way with sunshine and roses.

And the fact is, there most certainly IS a market for non-randomized minis. I've bought the colossal red, the gargantuan black and plan to buy the gargantuan blue from Wizards of the Coast. All in boxes with clear fronts.


----------



## rgard (Jan 15, 2007)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> They have a limited number of non-random sets.  Assuming he is talking about the current lines:
> 
> Starters are usually non-random (Heroclix, Horrorclix & Mechwarrior)
> Battleforce sets (up to now, promotionals sets that can be order through their website)
> Large figures (the equivalent of the DDM Icon line)




Hi Clyfair, thanks for the clarification.  That said, I would still disagree that what Wizkids does with the starters, promotional battleforces and the large figs resembles what folks seem to be asking for here in this thread.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## rgard (Jan 15, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> If you have a few million sitting around doing nothing, I will be happy to risk it on my ideas. I'll be doing well to pay the rent next month, and lacking manufacturers, distributors and connections for shipping, WotC need have no fear of me threatening their market share any time soon.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




'This right' as in 'this correct.'  Not whether you are allowed to ask for something.  If you read the rest of the post the context is clear.

Again...

You claimed that GW and Wizkids are doing what you ask for and in actuality they are not.


----------



## molonel (Jan 15, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> 'This right' as in 'this correct.'  Not whether you are allowed to ask for something.  If you read the rest of the post the context is clear.
> 
> Again...
> 
> You claimed that GW and Wizkids are doing what you ask for and in actuality they are not.




If you wish for me to read your posts with great precision and interest, then kindly return the favor. I never said that they were doing exactly what I want. I said that they proved you could sell non-randomized minis and make a profit. 

Which they do.


----------



## rgard (Jan 16, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> If you wish for me to read your posts with great precision and interest, then kindly return the favor. I never said that they were doing exactly what I want. I said that they proved you could sell non-randomized minis and make a profit.
> 
> Which they do.




Nah, I got it right.  Your examples do not prove the case.

I think we can agree to disagree at this point.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 16, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> Hi Clyfair, thanks for the clarification.  That said, I would still disagree that what Wizkids does with the starters, promotional battleforces and the large figs resembles what folks seem to be asking for here in this thread.




I do agree (and that's as someone that's been intimately familiar with WizKids).  

They have dabbled in non-random games, with poor results (unless you count their great board games).  Crimson Skies flopped and at least part of the blame has been laid on the non-random sets.  Shadowrun also flopped, but that was probably because it was far too different from what people expected.

They are going to the well again this year with Mechwarrior.  They are planning a number of non-random sets this year in their revamp of the line.  We'll see how it does (I admit, I'm not optimistic about this part of the plan).


----------



## rgard (Jan 16, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> Nah, I got it right.  Your examples do not prove the case.
> 
> I think we can agree to disagree at this point.




This could help...

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=185358


----------



## molonel (Jan 16, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> Nah, I got it right. Your examples do not prove the case.
> 
> I think we can agree to disagree at this point.




I wasn't trying to prove "the case." I simply said that companies sell non-randomized minis, and do so profitably. There are non-randomized Heroclix packs, and GW sells minis thare substantially more expensive than anything I've ever purchased from WotC.

I agree to disagree with you, anyway, though.


----------



## rgard (Jan 16, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> I wasn't trying to prove "the case." I simply said that companies sell non-randomized minis, and do so profitably. There are non-randomized Heroclix packs, and GW sells minis thare substantially more expensive than anything I've ever purchased from WotC.
> 
> I agree to disagree with you, anyway, though.




Ok, we're cool.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## D.Shaffer (Jan 16, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> Rackham is trying this out now.
> You'll note the price tag isnt cheap.



Mongoose is also trying something similar. (Battlefield Evolution)

Again, note the prices.
$30 for 9 US marines. ($3.33 each)
$30 for 10 PLA Infantry ($3.00 each)
$30 for 8 British infantry ($3.75 each)


----------



## McBard (Jan 16, 2007)

Does anyone know how well WoTC did with their Attack On Endor scenario pack for the Star Wars minis game? I bring it up as an interesting anomaly with regards to much of this thread's discussion: the non-random pack consisted of an already released random "desirable" mini (the AT-ST), a handful of commons, and a double-sided map. I believe the cost was about $20.

This pack strikes me as an in-between compared to the rest of WoTC's minis line (neither a $12 purely random box, nor a $50 single "iconic" like the Colossal Red Dragon).

Why did they release the Attack On Endor scenario pack thusly? Did it sell well? If so, could it be repeated for DDM? How does the scenario pack approach fit into Merric's Law?


----------



## Desdichado (Jan 16, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> I just got done buying a lot of minis on eBay today, and they were arranged in thematic sets. I got a big set of undead minis like skeletons and ghasts and wights. I also got a nature-themed package with bears and wolves.
> 
> It would be so cool if I could just BUY them like this straight from WotC instead of hunting them down and getting bid sniped on eBay.



Well, eBay works fairly well.  Most game stores I know also have opened and sell individually (with market-based, or least market-estimated pricing) the minis, I don't see what the big deal is.  Would I like it if WotC sold their minis that way?  Sure.  However, since I can still buy minis that way without them selling them that way, I don't see what the big deal is.


----------



## molonel (Jan 16, 2007)

J-Dawg said:
			
		

> Well, eBay works fairly well.  Most game stores I know also have opened and sell individually (with market-based, or least market-estimated pricing) the minis, I don't see what the big deal is.  Would I like it if WotC sold their minis that way?  Sure.  However, since I can still buy minis that way without them selling them that way, I don't see what the big deal is.




I wasn't comparing the purchase of WotC minis to cancer, or nuclear war or even stubbing my toe.

It's just really annoying.

The benefit of this discussion is that a lot of different avenues of obtaining minis were revealed and linked, including a lot of good folks on eBay who sell at good prices and you don't have to bid. I've already added three sellers to my eBay account because of that. I don't like auctions. I don't like following them. I'll pay more NOT to do them.

The system is substantially less than perfect, and I'd rather just buy what I want.

But I, personally, am glad this discussion took place. I appreciated the input of people who know more about the business than I do - even if I don't entirely agree with some things - and I *definitely* appreciated the links.


----------



## blargney the second (Jan 16, 2007)

I thought that the partially random nature of the War Drums starter pack was an interesting foray.  I wonder if they'll be doing more like that in future?

Molonel, I agree that the Buy It Now sellers on eBay are much less harrowing than the auctions.  I started with the auctions a couple of years ago, and found it very intense and frustrating.  One of my favourite sellers is Lee's.  He has free shipping if you buy 10+ auctions, and it applies to both US and Canada!

-blarg


----------



## nerfherder (Jan 16, 2007)

CharlesRyan said:
			
		

> ...



Charles, sorry to hijack the thread for a moment, but I wonder if I could direct you to this thread in "Off Topic" about whether it was you on BBC Radio Newcastle over the holidays? http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=183822

Thanks,
Liam


----------



## MerricB (Jan 16, 2007)

McBard said:
			
		

> Does anyone know how well WoTC did with their Attack On Endor scenario pack for the Star Wars minis game? I bring it up as an interesting anomaly with regards to much of this thread's discussion: the non-random pack consisted of an already released random "desirable" mini (the AT-ST), a handful of commons, and a double-sided map. I believe the cost was about $20.
> 
> This pack strikes me as an in-between compared to the rest of WoTC's minis line (neither a $12 purely random box, nor a $50 single "iconic" like the Colossal Red Dragon).
> 
> Why did they release the Attack On Endor scenario pack thusly? Did it sell well? If so, could it be repeated for DDM? How does the scenario pack approach fit into Merric's Law?




Here it goes: It doesn't have a "large range of figures.", so you can get a cheaper price and the fixed figures. 

Not sure about sales, though. 

Cheers!


----------



## CharlesRyan (Jan 16, 2007)

nerfherder said:
			
		

> Charles, sorry to hijack the thread for a moment, but I wonder if I could direct you to this thread in "Off Topic" about whether it was you on BBC Radio Newcastle over the holidays? http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=183822




Thanks for the link, Liam. It was in fact me, as I've posted over on the other thread!


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 16, 2007)

Mark CMG said:
			
		

> I'd love it if they came out a few packs of standard creatures, like orcs, skeletons, etc., twenty in each or, perhaps, two, three or four poses.





I should be clear that I do not mean to suggest using older molds or poses but, rather, to have, perhaps, four new poses (maybe two different types of spear poses and two different types of bow poses) for each new twenty pack, five of each figure and complete with as many cards. I do not believe such a model has been tried.  I believe they would sell both to DDM completists and to D&D DMs who want ranks of typical fodder creatures (orcs, skeletons, etc.)  They could even sell them with a battlemat and special DDM and/or D&D scenario/adventure.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 17, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> If you have a few million sitting around doing nothing, I will be happy to risk it on my ideas. I'll be doing well to pay the rent next month, and lacking manufacturers, distributors and connections for shipping, WotC need have no fear of me threatening their market share any time soon.




No no... YOU have to risk YOUR money.

Then you're in exactly the same boat as WOTC.

Funny how things look differently the nanosecond it becomes YOUR rent money on the line and not a company's huh.


----------



## RFisher (Jan 17, 2007)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> No no... YOU have to risk YOUR money.
> 
> Then you're in exactly the same boat as WOTC.
> 
> Funny how things look differently the nanosecond it becomes YOUR rent money on the line and not a company's huh.




Some of us _do_ have our mortgage money on the line. Just because we've choosen products other than minis doesn't mean we don't know anything about business & risk. My most successful business ventures have been about ignoring my industry's conventional wisdom & changing the rules of the game. I've found it much more risky to do otherwise. What people tell you is impossible is often not only possible, but the key to success. Of course, it isn't easy, but that's only to be expected.


----------



## smootrk (Jan 17, 2007)

I was going to add something similar.  Merrick's law is a convenient explanation.... until someone figures out a way to defy the so called 'law' profitably.

Happens all the time in business.  How many mp3 players were there, then iPod came out.  There is always innovation.  Who knows.. some intrepid person in China may figure out a better way to cast these things (enough Engineers there to work on it) and then look out... then all these folks will sound as absurd as the ones who told Mr. Ford that the assembly line was a waste of time.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 17, 2007)

RFisher said:
			
		

> Some of us _do_ have our mortgage money on the line. Just because we've choosen products other than minis doesn't mean we don't know anything about business & risk. My most successful business ventures have been about ignoring my industry's conventional wisdom & changing the rules of the game. I've found it much more risky to do otherwise. What people tell you is impossible is often not only possible, but the key to success. Of course, it isn't easy, but that's only to be expected.




Right, but this isnt about WOTC slavishly adhering to conventional wisdom.

They have tried non-randomized minis before and they've failed every time. Most recently, the Orc packs people mentioned, that were cancelled before release because of a lack of orders.

You act like they never tried or don't have market data. 

And it isn't about having your mortgage on the line. What I was responding to was his willingness to spend SOMEONE ELSE's money. He wants WOTC to spend *their* money, or at least risk it, by moving away from a business model that they know works towards one that might work.

Or barring that, if a poster is willing to give him 2 million of THEIR money he is willing to risk that.

In short, he expressed a desire to risk everyone's money but his own. 

That makes one short on credibility in my book.


----------



## BryonD (Jan 17, 2007)

smootrk said:
			
		

> I was going to add something similar.  Merrick's law is a convenient explanation.... until someone figures out a way to defy the so called 'law' profitably.
> 
> Happens all the time in business.  How many mp3 players were there, then iPod came out.  There is always innovation.  Who knows.. some intrepid person in China may figure out a better way to cast these things (enough Engineers there to work on it) and then look out... then all these folks will sound as absurd as the ones who told Mr. Ford that the assembly line was a waste of time.



Well, the understanding that the "law" describes current market reality is pretty obviously inferred.  There is a difference between being wrong and being right until the boundary conditions change.


----------



## janax (Jan 17, 2007)

the FLGS here has about 10 of the Endor packs gathering dust on his shelf.  The same FLGS that has gone through 20+ cases of each DDM release since Archfiends.    Not to say 20 cases is a lot, I know people who buy almost hat many on their own, but he only sells them as boosters.  
He can't give away Dreamblade, but DDM and SWM (to a lesser extent) fly off the shelves.  Why would he want to mess with a good thing?  All the non-random games are collecting dust and taking up room on his shelves.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 17, 2007)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> No no... YOU have to risk YOUR money.
> 
> Then you're in exactly the same boat as WOTC.




Well, not exactly. The guys making the decisions at WotC aren't risking their own money. They are risking the stockholder's money, and for the most part, they have little or no stock relative to the total amount of stock out there.

Give me a couple million to finance a start-up company and I'll try the marketing plan. With stockholder money. Just like the decision makers at WotC.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 17, 2007)

janax said:
			
		

> the FLGS here has about 10 of the Endor packs gathering dust on his shelf.  The same FLGS that has gone through 20+ cases of each DDM release since Archfiends.    Not to say 20 cases is a lot, I know people who buy almost hat many on their own, but he only sells them as boosters.
> He can't give away Dreamblade, but DDM and SWM (to a lesser extent) fly off the shelves.  Why would he want to mess with a good thing?  All the non-random games are collecting dust and taking up room on his shelves.





Could his store survive selling nothing but DDM (and SWM)?


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 17, 2007)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Well, not exactly. The guys making the decisions at WotC aren't risking their own money. They are risking the stockholder's money, and for the most part, they have little or no stock relative to the total amount of stock out there.
> 
> Give me a couple million to finance a start-up company and I'll try the marketing plan. With stockholder money. Just like the decision makers at WotC.




Well, it's "their money" from the standpoint of the fact that it's their responsibility, and if their decisions are poor ones, and lose money, they'll be out of a job.

Even if it isn't technically "their money", they still have a lot riding on making a smart decision...and that includes, ultimately, their mortgages.


----------



## molonel (Jan 17, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> Molonel, I agree that the Buy It Now sellers on eBay are much less harrowing than the auctions. I started with the auctions a couple of years ago, and found it very intense and frustrating. One of my favourite sellers is Lee's. He has free shipping if you buy 10+ auctions, and it applies to both US and Canada!




Well, that makes four new dealers that I've added to my favorites because of this discussion. Thank you.

If anyone else wants to suggest distributors, there are people watching for link like this.



			
				Vigilance said:
			
		

> No no... YOU have to risk YOUR money. Then you're in exactly the same boat as WOTC. Funny how things look differently the nanosecond it becomes YOUR rent money on the line and not a company's huh.




It doesn't look particularly different to me. I just don't have several million sitting around doing nothing. I don't even have several thousand sitting around doing nothing. 

Do you?

I think this is a business opportunity for someone, but I'm a buyer of miniatures. I have no particular ambitions to sell them. In a similar manner, though I can tell you the difference between a good beer and a bad beer, I have no particular ambitions to set up a home brewing operation, nor do I feel that I must in order to have opinions about beer.

Thank you for your glorious non-point. Now, unless you are a stock holder in WotC, would you mind NOT taking comments about their business practices so personally?



			
				Vigilance said:
			
		

> Right, but this isnt about WOTC slavishly adhering to conventional wisdom. They have tried non-randomized minis before and they've failed every time. Most recently, the Orc packs people mentioned, that were cancelled before release because of a lack of orders. You act like they never tried or don't have market data. And it isn't about having your mortgage on the line. What I was responding to was his willingness to spend SOMEONE ELSE's money. He wants WOTC to spend *their* money, or at least risk it, by moving away from a business model that they know works towards one that might work. Or barring that, if a poster is willing to give him 2 million of THEIR money he is willing to risk that. In short, he expressed a desire to risk everyone's money but his own. That makes one short on credibility in my book.




Nearly everyone in this discussion, including you, lacks credibility in that regard, so unfortunately, that sword cuts your knees out from under you with the same masterful stroke that it severs mine, my friend.

Storm Raven has also answered this point adequately, as well.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 17, 2007)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Well, the understanding that the "law" describes current market reality is pretty obviously inferred.





I'm not sure that is true.  I get the feeling that some who put that forth do so as if the model is untouchable rather than simply the most successful currently.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 17, 2007)

kenobi65 said:
			
		

> Well, it's "their money" from the standpoint of the fact that it's their responsibility, and if their decisions are poor ones, and lose money, they'll be out of a job.




Yes, but all they risk is the possibility that they will have to look elsewhere for employment. Given the state of the gaming industry, many people at WotC could probably find better paying jobs elsewhere, so the financial risk isn't that much of an issue.


----------



## rgard (Jan 17, 2007)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Well, not exactly. The guys making the decisions at WotC aren't risking their own money. They are risking the stockholder's money, and for the most part, they have little or no stock relative to the total amount of stock out there.
> 
> Give me a couple million to finance a start-up company and I'll try the marketing plan. With stockholder money. Just like the decision makers at WotC.




Nope.

Maybe not their own money invested in the project, but if they spend the company's money on a project that fails, then they have just risked their jobs.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## rgard (Jan 17, 2007)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Yes, but all they risk is the possibility that they will have to look elsewhere for employment. Given the state of the gaming industry, many people at WotC could probably find better paying jobs elsewhere, so the financial risk isn't that much of an issue.




Wow.


----------



## molonel (Jan 17, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> Nope.
> 
> Maybe not their own money invested in the project, but if they spend the company's money on a project that fails, then they have just risked their jobs.




Ah. So I should have to risk millions of my own money, unlike the people at WotC making these decisions, in order to have or express an opinion on the subject, unlike the people who disagree with me?

Okay. That's clear as mud. Thanks for clarifying that.


----------



## rgard (Jan 17, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> Ah. So I should have to risk millions of my own money, unlike the people at WotC making these decisions, in order to have or express an opinion on the subject, unlike the people who disagree with me?
> 
> Okay. That's clear as mud. Thanks for clarifying that.




It's a little different.  Given what I know and what others have posted here, I wouldn't go the non-random route if I was a decision maker at WotC.   To me it sounds not worth the risk.

That's just my view on this.  I understand and accept that others here have different positions/views on the subject.  None of us needs cash to back up our opinions.

With respect to the  post I responded to, I pointed out that there was indeed risk to the decision makers at WotC if they get this wrong.  

And as far as I'm concerned we're still cool.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## kenobi65 (Jan 17, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> Ah. So I should have to risk millions of my own money, unlike the people at WotC making these decisions, in order to have or express an opinion on the subject, unlike the people who disagree with me?
> 
> Okay. That's clear as mud. Thanks for clarifying that.




I think the point is that it's easy to be a Monday-morning quarterback when you have nothing at risk in doing so.

The WotC folks, even if it's not their own personal investments at stake, still have a vested interest (i.e., keeping their jobs and salaries) invested in making the right decisions.


----------



## Rel (Jan 17, 2007)

I don't see a lot of productive discourse taking place at this point.  I still see people taking snarky pot shots at one another.  Thread closed.


----------

