|Saturday, April 19th, 2008|
8:27a - D&D Miniatures
I've been playing some variation of D&D for over 24 years and myself and everyone in my regular gaming group is looking forward to picking up the new 4th edition when it comes out. We've tried to integrate miniatures into our games on a number of occasions but have found our selection quite limited. The only person in our group who has the resources to spend money on the miniatures game is myself, and I can't justify spending $100 to $400 attempting to acquire "rare" figures just so they can be used in our games.
I understand that WOTC needs to make money (because you know, they don't have any /sarcasm), and the collecting that is required to make a game financially successful is what drives that portion of the industry, but I find it difficult to believe that older (and now out of print) sets can't see anniversary collection releases or that Wizards can't just offer more Icon sets that include a variety of different monsters.
I have a homebrewed campaign world that I use when I DM, and it includes societies of samurai kobolds, philanthropist undead, xenophobic halflings, totalitarian mind flayers and sagely giants. Now over the last few years I've looked at the sets of D&D miniatures that have been released and I've often toyed with purchasing boosters. In a few cases I have purchased boosters, never managing to get all of the miniatures I want, but still attaining a sizable collection. However, its difficult to justify purchasing boosters for a set where I might only want a handful of miniatures. And I'm looking at pictures of the most recent release, Dungeon of Dread, on the wizards website and thinking, "Wow, I would really like a dozen of those mind flayers. But I really don't want to have to pay $150 just for the CHANCE to get one or two of them."
I'm guessing that my style of play, where I design an adventure and then I look for the resources to make that adventure work at the gaming table, has gone out of fashion. I've discussed this problem with other gamers at conventions and at my local game store, and I've noticed that people don't really plan adventures anymore, they take the stuff that they have and create something from that, sometimes repeating themes and monsters if they haven't managed to broaden their collection of miniatures or can't afford to collect the next set.
I think fondly back to when I was younger and I would see the blister packs for metal miniatures that needed to be hand-painted and I wonder if I'll ever be able to go into a gaming store again and say "I need twelve mind flayer miniatures for a game I'm planning." and be able to find them or, at the very least, order them. (I know there's always eBay, but paying $10 to 20 dollars for a single figure that has been labelled as a 'rare' is absurdly ridiculous to me.)
So here is my suggestion: The D&D Miniatures game has been in production for about 5 years now. Many of the past sets are now out of print. So why doesn't Wizards re-release the collections as Icon sets? Or call them Vanguard to distinguish the reprints from the Icon series? Something where a person could pay a flat amount of money and receive one of every miniature from those sets?
Or why not re-release some of the staples of those collections in Icon boxes? Small collections of figures that represent the whole collection, just from looking at the Harbinger set I could see a Cleric box that includes one of every out-of-print cleric figure, or perhaps an Elemental box that includes one of every medium-sized elemental?
Or they could re-release older sets, or release new sets, with the rare figure visible and the uncommon and common figures hidden behind cardboard packaging? It would certainly change the way boosters are purchased. (In fact, if the new set of Dungeons of Dread were released like that I would be guaranteed to purchase at least 16 boosters because, as I mentioned, I use a lot of mind flayers in my game.)
As a friend of mine likes to say "They'll never do that because that actually makes sense."
I'm guessing he's right, they'll never release these figures in single blister packs, or with any kind of visibility as to whats inside, because there are some figures that probably just wouldn't sell (Ettin Jack-of-Irons sticks out), but there's always the idea of re-releasing the older sets in Anniversary boxes.
With the release of this new set I am toying with the idea of investing some money into it, but I also feel like it could be a waste of time and money because there are only a handful of rares that I am interested in. So for now I spend my time scouring ebay for the miniatures I want, which are usually older metal miniatures - and this does Wizards no good.
What are your thoughts?
(33 comments |comment on this)
12:49p - D&D 3.5 Question: Shooting into Melee.
I feel kind of guilty asking this here because I usually prefer to talk about broader gaming concepts, but this issue more or less started a fight between some people last night and I want to know the real answer:
Example 1: Imagine if you will a corridor 5 feet wide so the players must walk single file. In the corridor there is a monster. The party's druid turns into a bear and rushes the monster. The party has a warlock who wants to assist his comrade. Here's a motley visual representation of the field:
[Warlock] [Empty] [Empty] [Druid in Bear Form] [Bad guy]
Expecting to fire into melee on a regular basis, the Warlock took the feats Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot, eliminating the -4 penalty for firing into melee. Given the linear fashion of the map, does the Warlock experience any penalties?
Example 2: Okay, so let's try this again, only this time the party is in a 10 foot corridor so they can stand two-by-two. This time there's a large (10x10 foot) enemy at the end of the corridor. This time two bears (bear-druid and his animal companion) rush it. I assume "shooting in-between" the bears is not an option then?
[Warlock]-[Empty]-[Empty]-[Bear 1]-[Bad guy 1]
[Empty]---[Empty]-[Empty]-[Bear 2]-[Bad guy 1]
One last question so I don't have to make a new post: If the warlock decides to take the chance anyway, is there a chance of him hitting the bear(s), with or without precise shot?
(13 comments |comment on this)