1 hour ago, Tvayumat said:

I think you'll find the contention here is that the outrage is *not*, in fact, legitimate, or at least not justified.

It's really not.

This game is objectively cheaper than many others it is in direct competition with.

Absolutely, but from what I've realized people don't want to go with the hard math available, they want to go with their gut emotional response.
Now you could make the argument the miniature games are too expensive of a hobby,(because they are certainly an expensive hobby and the first luxury to go when income subsides.), but Runewars is definitely among the lowest priced of them and brings along the AAA quality they we have come to love and respect from FFG.

I think it's also important to remember that we are paying not only for minis and rules, but also for the organised play and all the communication around the game. This is what makes gamers come to the game and it's extremely important to get opponents and nice well populated local competitions

Ensuring the perennity of the game has a high cost, that I (for one) am happy to see transferred in the cost of the minis. I have played enough dead end games to like the fact that communication and organised play will keep the game around for a long time, if we mobilise and make it a commercial success

5 hours ago, Tvayumat said:

I think you'll find the contention here is that the outrage is *not*, in fact, legitimate, or at least not justified.

It's really not.

This game is objectively cheaper than many others it is in direct competition with.

And objectively more expensive than others, like By Fire and Sword, which is also a very good rank-and-file game, albeit not fantasy.

BTW. "still not as expensive as others" does not mean it isn't expensive.

1 hour ago, Corto said:

I think it's also important to remember that we are paying not only for minis and rules, but also for the organised play and all the communication around the game. This is what makes gamers come to the game and it's extremely important to get opponents and nice well populated local competitions

Ensuring the perennity of the game has a high cost, that I (for one) am happy to see transferred in the cost of the minis. I have played enough dead end games to like the fact that communication and organised play will keep the game around for a long time, if we mobilise and make it a commercial success

Organized Play pays for itself, because all the tournament kits are not free.

1 hour ago, costi said:

And objectively more expensive than others, like By Fire and Sword, which is also a very good rank-and-file game, albeit not fantasy.

BTW. "still not as expensive as others" does not mean it isn't expensive.

You have to talk about it in a relativistic sense. Miniature games tend to be expensive. This is comparatively on the cheap end for such a hobby. I do believe that is a fair statement. Now if you are a typical non mini gamer and you see the prices, I can understand the shock. Price per model and game scale is relatively low to just about any other major company outside of Mantic. However, Mantic models look like **** and I would rather play with cards or discs then play with them.

2 hours ago, costi said:

And objectively more expensive than others, like By Fire and Sword, which is also a very good rank-and-file game, albeit not fantasy.

BTW. "still not as expensive as others" does not mean it isn't expensive.

I'd argue against BFaS being cheaper. You could do a skirmish game out of their version of a skirmish box but you have to get much more for divisional play. This is coming from someone who plays Western style lists for flexibility.

21 minutes ago, Kubernes said:

I'd argue against BFaS being cheaper. You could do a skirmish game out of their version of a skirmish box but you have to get much more for divisional play. This is coming from someone who plays Western style lists for flexibility.

Sure, but Skirmish is the "standard" game mode there, like 100/6 dogfight is in X-Wing.

Epic play in X-Wing also turns out to be pricey, but it's not what you usually play.

9 hours ago, Tvayumat said:

I think you'll find the contention here is that the outrage is *not*, in fact, legitimate, or at least not justified.

It's really not.

This game is objectively cheaper than many others it is in direct competition with.

If just look at the price it is certainly cheaper than AoS but more expensive than KoW, but you should look at the whole package which is price and quality of miniatures and the rules, I'm not saying the will be bad cause we do not have enough information yet, sure we can say being FFG and using things that already work pretty good in X-Wing and Armada we can predict the rules will probably be good but we still don't know enough of how it really plays, and to judge the quality of the miniatures I want to have them in my hands. And of course things like the world, the factions and the lore are also important for some gamers, the price is not everything.

4 hours ago, costi said:

And objectively more expensive than others, like By Fire and Sword, which is also a very good rank-and-file game, albeit not fantasy.

BTW. "still not as expensive as others" does not mean it isn't expensive.

I looked at BF&S's website, and don't you have to but the rule book and army book for that game? Because those things were very pricey at $75/$40. Also the starter boxes I saw were sitting around $100 maybe it is that I don't know about the game enough and that is definitely true but if you do need to get the books, then that easily knocks this out of the realm of cheaper than Runewars making it AT LEAST as costly.

In regards to the second "not as expensive" comment, that is the more valid comparison because whether something is expensive is an opinion, as expensive as others is verifiable and can be compared. As a whole a starter set being around $100 is standard and comparatively inexpensive by comparison when you look at everything that are including, templates, tokens, models, rules, etc. The kits of upgrades sitting around $25, ($20-22 at most stores possible less online) is a good price point, for a 28mm scale miniature game. If you don't like the materials and don't want to work with them for the hobby aspect then don't. If you don't like that scale because it doesn't feel big but then argue in favor or a smaller scale game where each miniature REPRESENTS 10 or 20 guys in a battle while the miniature count on the table itself is similar to the game you are arguing against I am just confused to the point of frustration. If you are so against the various aspects of this game that make it a unique entity then don't play it.

If you're used to getting 37 BattleLore minatures (13 units) for $40, then $30 or $25 for 4-8 figures seems ridiculous. Sure, Runewars might have better sculpts, but I want to pay for a game, not decorations. BattleLore quality was fine for me. You can compare it to other miniatures games all day, but I'll stil be looking back at BattleLore, and when I compare those NUMBERS, it tells me this game didn't need to be so expensive.

By that argument you should be against Descent, Imperial Assault, Mansions of Madness, and any other major board game to come out since then, but those are board games and this is a miniature game, they are different types of games complete with different army building/squad building mechanics. If you look at this and compare its cost to a board game then sure I can accept that argument, but in the end it is not a board game so that comparison is flawed. But once again I am not talking about the people who look at this price compared to board games, purely from a miniature game standpoint my argument this is not as expensive as MOST miniature games especially those of 28mm scale.

15 hours ago, Usaretama said:

Huh. I was looking at the product page for the expansions again and they're showing the price as $24.95. Think it's an error, or was the earlier price an error?

A similar thing happened with the latest Mansions of Madness expansion. I believe it went from $40 down to $30 before it was released.

15 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

If you're used to getting 37 BattleLore minatures (13 units) for $40, then $30 or $25 for 4-8 figures seems ridiculous. Sure, Runewars might have better sculpts, but I want to pay for a game, not decorations. BattleLore quality was fine for me. You can compare it to other miniatures games all day, but I'll stil be looking back at BattleLore, and when I compare those NUMBERS, it tells me this game didn't need to be so expensive.

As much as I love Battlelore the minis are a LOT smaller and aren't great quality, in fact after painting the Rune Golems I decided not to bother painting the rest of the game due to the miniatures size. However, just think of the fun you could have playing a large hex tile game of Battlelore using the Runewars miniatures!

Just to be clear, the purpose behind my response above was not for the purpose of arguing over whether this game is expensive or not. Rather, I'm disappointed in posts like the one below that are attacking other posters for not being logical. I'm demonstrating that we don't have to be knowledgeable about other miniatures games we have absolutely no interest in to participate in this conversation and to have an opinion on relative cost of the game. We can still use numbers to justify our positions even if we're clueless about other games. I just don't like seeing concealed jabs like this in our community.

8 hours ago, Obscene said:

Absolutely, but from what I've realized people don't want to go with the hard math available, they want to go with their gut emotional response.
Now you could make the argument the miniature games are too expensive of a hobby,(because they are certainly an expensive hobby and the first luxury to go when income subsides.), but Runewars is definitely among the lowest priced of them and brings along the AAA quality they we have come to love and respect from FFG.

22 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

If you're used to getting 37 BattleLore minatures (13 units) for $40, then $30 or $25 for 4-8 figures seems ridiculous. Sure, Runewars might have better sculpts, but I want to pay for a game, not decorations. BattleLore quality was fine for me. You can compare it to other miniatures games all day, but I'll stil be looking back at BattleLore, and when I compare those NUMBERS, it tells me this game didn't need to be so expensive.

If you prioritize quantity over quality, I'm not sure why you're even interested in Battlelore. My local dollar store has a great game for $1. It comes with 32 miniatures, a game board and has been popular for roughly 1,500 years... so you can be sure that you're paying for one of the most consistently successful games of all time. At 32 miniatures for $1, you're only paying a hair over 3 cents per model. Sure, there are only six different sculpts, but there are a lot of them.

Snark aside, most people don't make purchasing decisions on straight quantity versus dollar. If they did, everyone would play chess using dollar store boards. Component quality is a big draw. Rule set is a big draw. Community is a big draw. You may think Battlelore has a great rule set, but the miniatures are of lower quality/detail and the community is negligible for many people. After Runewars releases, I know that there will be a small community of players at my local gaming store. We're all excited for the release and like what we've seen so far. I doubt I'll ever roll into a game store and see people playing Battlelore.

Different strokes for different folks. Comparing Battlelore and Runewars is comparing apples and oranges.

EDIT - But I see what you were saying. I think most people make purchasing decisions using a variety of 'inputs', including gut feelings.

6 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

Just to be clear, the purpose behind my response above was not for the purpose of arguing over whether this game is expensive or not. Rather, I'm disappointed in posts like the one below that are attacking other posters for not being logical. I'm demonstrating that we don't have to be knowledgeable about other miniatures games we have absolutely no interest in to participate in this conversation and to have an opinion on relative cost of the game. We can still use numbers to justify our positions even if we're clueless about other games. I just don't like seeing concealed jabs like this in our community.

And on that note I want to be clear that I'm not trying to attack anyone with what I have been saying I am just trying to make a logical argument for Runewars and the decisions in its creation and pricing vs the current options in Wargaming. So if any of my posts upset anyone I'm sorry for that it is not my intention, just a side effect of an increased frustration at some of the arguments against this game. I understand that from a board game stand point this is more expensive in the long run.

7 minutes ago, KrisWall said:

If you prioritize quantity over quality, I'm not sure why you're even interested in Battlelore. My local dollar store has a great game for $1. It comes with 32 miniatures, a game board and has been popular for roughly 1,500 years... so you can be sure that you're paying for one of the most consistently successful games of all time. At 32 miniatures for $1, you're only paying a hair over 3 cents per model. Sure, there are only six different sculpts, but there are a lot of them.

Snark aside, most people don't make purchasing decisions on straight quantity versus dollar. If they did, everyone would play chess using dollar store boards. Component quality is a big draw. Rule set is a big draw. Community is a big draw. You may think Battlelore has a great rule set, but the miniatures are of lower quality/detail and the community is negligible for many people. After Runewars releases, I know that there will be a small community of players at my local gaming store. We're all excited for the release and like what we've seen so far. I doubt I'll ever roll into a game store and see people playing Battlelore.

Different strokes for different folks. Comparing Battlelore and Runewars is comparing apples and oranges.

EDIT - But I see what you were saying. I think most people make purchasing decisions using a variety of 'inputs', including gut feelings.

You're right about people having different priorities. My priority is one thing: lore. I'm super into the Terrinoth setting. I don't understand why, I just am. So whether it's a skirmish board game, a deck-building game, an empire-building game, or a miniatures game, I'm gonna be a sucker for it. For me, the change from $30 expansions to $25 was significant enough that I'm not upset about prices. I'm really excited about this game. And I'm excited to finally try out a traditional miniatures game after eyeing GW's games on and off for several years. But if it weren't for Terrinoth, I don't think I'd make the plunge into this game, no matter the game mechanics, sculpts, or anything else.

19 minutes ago, jek said:

So if any of my posts upset anyone I'm sorry for that it is not my intention, just a side effect of an increased frustration at some of the arguments against this game. I understand that from a board game stand point this is more expensive in the long run.

You didn't upset me if it was necessary to underline ! Nevertheless, I'm not upset about any single post, everyone deserves his own opinion to be expressed and is free of speech. That said, if the peoples complaining about me and others alike to decide to be hyped by a game with our feelings and heart instead of deciding carefully by doing tons of (interesting) comparisons, could please be more easygoing with us. I, for example, am not looking for a game where all the minis are masterpieces full of details and made from the best plastic ever. I have already said it : this the game as a whole that I've become to like a lot. The minis must be nice to see and, so far, I'm not unsatisfied with FFG. Descent, IA, X-Wings and even the old AH or I don't know what, not a single game I own from FFg that include some minis has never disappointed me.

Complaining about the same models being taken from Descent and others and reused to craft Runewars minis...well I could agree but not that much. We are gonna play a runebound game, guys, Ardux Ix Erebus, Zachareth, the Farrow Family and the others (oh I own all the descents boxes but can't remember all the names) won't change their face or class of fight or everything that the lore tells us about them just for the sake of "renewing". Descent II edition has beautiful minis, even wonderful for me and I own Warammer minis so... Maybe it's me that is not exigent or I don't know... playing a game of Descent with the minis they offer to us is exciting and always a success around the table, do we discuss the quality of the minis ? Once in a while maybe.

So let's keep cool and relaxed as we are now and let's have fun before the messiah comes upon us

Now that they have lowed the prices a bit, I feel more confortable with what is asked for what is offered.

In this post I'm not against doing the math or very accurate comparisons between mini games and this one, I'm just thinking that it could still be done in respect for the game we're talking about, otherwise, there are other places to bash it no ?

13 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

You're right about people having different priorities. My priority is one thing: lore. I'm super into the Terrinoth setting. I don't understand why, I just am. So whether it's a skirmish board game, a deck-building game, an empire-building game, or a miniatures game, I'm gonna be a sucker for it. For me, the change from $30 expansions to $25 was significant enough that I'm not upset about prices. I'm really excited about this game. And I'm excited to finally try out a traditional miniatures game after eyeing GW's games on and off for several years. But if it weren't for Terrinoth, I don't think I'd make the plunge into this game, no matter the game mechanics, sculpts, or anything else.

I get that and totally respect it. I'm a sucker for the Warhammer 40k lore. It's a shame the game is in such a bad place right now. I have a group that plays a fan modified 'kill teams' version of the game, but we generally consider the default rules to be almost unplayable right now.

For me, the main draw of Runewars is that FFG has designed the rule set. I love playing Descent, but have never played any other Terrinoth games. Descent is nice, but if you mainly play the app controlled version, as I do, you get very little actual lore. It feels very 'generic fantasy setting'.

9 hours ago, costi said:

And objectively more expensive than others, like By Fire and Sword, which is also a very good rank-and-file game, albeit not fantasy.

BTW. "still not as expensive as others" does not mean it isn't expensive.

You're correct.

However, it also absolutely *does* mean that it is not "outrageously" expensive.

4 hours ago, KrisWall said:

I get that and totally respect it. I'm a sucker for the Warhammer 40k lore. It's a shame the game is in such a bad place right now. I have a group that plays a fan modified 'kill teams' version of the game, but we generally consider the default rules to be almost unplayable right now.

For me, the main draw of Runewars is that FFG has designed the rule set. I love playing Descent, but have never played any other Terrinoth games. Descent is nice, but if you mainly play the app controlled version, as I do, you get very little actual lore. It feels very 'generic fantasy setting'.

I don't trust most game companies. Some I am particularly hard on, and won't trust until the quality of something is 100% verified through trusted sources.

FFG, though? These guys don't seem like they can help themselves. Saying FFG made a quality game is like saying it comes in a box.

FFG could send me a letter asking me to mail them $100, promising "some game, at some point in the next year" and I'd strongly consider just mailing it off, simply because empirical evidence says it'll be quality in both components and rule mechanics.

2 minutes ago, Tvayumat said:

I don't trust most game companies. Some I am particularly hard on, and won't trust until the quality of something is 100% verified through trusted sources.

FFG, though? These guys don't seem like they can help themselves. Saying FFG made a quality game is like saying it comes in a box.

FFG could send me a letter asking me to mail them $100, promising "some game, at some point in the next year" and I'd strongly consider just mailing it off, simply because empirical evidence says it'll be quality in both components and rule mechanics.

I agree. I would probably send them the $100 also.

$30 was too much for me, and I'm a minis gamer. $25 is acceptable.

My issue is (was) that this is a new game -- in theory FFG wants people to try it out and buy a few expansions to see where it will go. During that honeymoon period, it is hoped that a significant number of the gamers will stick around. What they have going for them is a (very) large boardgaming community that has already been brought part of the way with Star Wars and X-Wing. There is also a (presumably) significant contingent of disgruntled WFB players out there who may be searching for a new minis game to try. It will be difficult to satisfy both of these communities: one prefers simpler rules, shorter playing times, and a higher playing/modeling ratio. The other is nearly the opposite.

My issues with the price are borne from a couple of areas dealing with this game, and depending on how the game progresses, I will continue or stop participating.

Price Issue 1. The Universe.

The RuneWars/RuneBound universe is not a fleshed out, popular universe by any stretch of the imagination -- there is no pool of popular RW fans to draw from, no real "general public" recognition of the brand, and so it "feels" pretty generic. I don't say this to be mean, or harsh, but just to state the fact. I have played lots of games in that universe (BL2E, RuneWars, for example), and never really felt connected to that universe -- mentally, I just think of it as "Undead" "Humans" "Orcs/Demons", etc. Because the IP is not sufficiently developed, I don't think FFG should get to charge a premium for access to it.

As a counter-point within the FFG umbrella, X-Wing and Armada costs you to pay a premium both for the universe/IP access and for other things, such as the well-done pre-painted nature of the models (and the gameplay, of course, is excellent).

WHAT I HOPE FFG DOES: Flesh out the universe in a real way. (1) Publish a trilogy of novels by someone who can actually write. Preferably this trilogy will star the characters from the core miniatures game or at least introduce upcoming characters. Taking a page from Privateer Press in this regard would be a great idea. This should ideally include "pro-level" short stories released on a semi-regular basis as well as a fan fic forum. Fluff stories (only 4-5 pages, small print) should be included in the expansion boxes including a short vignette of the units and how they fit into the thematic sense of the RW universe. A forum area for fan fic should be opened up, and if it is good enough, should be "selectively" e-pubbed via PDF and e-book readers to encourage fans to get into the universe and write about it. FFG should also release a universe book -- which could apply across all their games -- chock full of art, background material, and stories that make the universe come alive. Privateer Press -- not to belabour the point -- sold me for years on just the fiction and the universe. Even when I didn't play the game anymore, I would buy their supplements and books because I loved the universe so much. I have read a primer that a BGG user made on the RW/RB universe and it seems there should be plenty there to draw from. But world needs motivations, plot arcs, characters with a real story, and all these things *are* important, because the player has to be emotionally connected his plastic pieces -- mini gaming is a much more time-intensive process and is about more than best-moves.

Price Issue 2. How Model Prices Are Viewed.

When it comes to prices, I care about *per model* pricing as it compares to (1) the quality of the sculpt, (2) kitting options to make my babies look different (not necessarily different in-game), and (3) what the model adds to my collection within the game. I know that I am not all gamers, just one datapoint. Others will have different criteria.

I care more about the price when I am buying "generic" models that are there to just "fill out" the ranks. This is true in any miniatures game from Privateer Press's Long Gunners to GW's Space Marines.

I say all this because I'm not talking about the "total" cost of a full army. I don't think about the cost of a "full army" -- the cost of a full army will be whatever it is. It varies across game platforms and goes into factoring whether I would be interested in the game system in the first place.

In the instant case, on a per model basis, I didn't even have to try hard to find better sculpted models, cheaper, with a higher quantity per package. They also came with kitting options. I with Issue 1, above, am not saying this to be a troll about it. But I *know* that the quality of the sculpt, well . . . FFG is not releasing GW-quality or PP-quality models with this game. At least not from the outset. I could end up being surprised, but these models look very nice and very acceptable. Just not worth GW prices. I expect that these models are going to be 1-3 pieces, maybe preassembled, with zero or very few customization options. I expect 2-3 different poses per unit type. All this is fine, it makes things simpler . . . but then I also expect the price to reflect that. From that perspective is where I find the models are too expensive at $30 for 4.

What the model adds to the game can be a significant factor in to how much I (and other gamers) are willing to pay for them -- but for this to be true, we have to be vested emtionally and psychologically in the game. Once I've got a beautiful Daquan army built and I'm having fun playing, and I'm immersed in the universe waiting for the next story on how Y'thththththth Dark-T'roll is going to try and kill Lord Tewsbury -- and there's a character released that adds to the narrative and looks awesome . . . well, it's much easier to justify paying $15+ for that special model. Others might hem and haw about power creep and striking a good balance is hard. But minis gamers also understand that for businesses to keep supporting the miniatures games, they typically have to keep making money -- and you only need so many undead archers and pikemen.

WHAT I HOPE FFG DOES: Keep prices low for the short term. Get some fiction released, some stories released, get a narrative rolling, release your base-game armies (elves, uthuk, and dwarves, if you can), and *then* start raising prices once the game takes off.

The Current Offerings.

$30 was too much for me -- particularly the Command boxes. Having now lowered the price to $25/box (about $3.12 per 8-model box, possibly $2.50 at online stores), this is acceptable enough for me to buy some boxes and try out the game for real. Similarly, the command boxes and cavalry boxes seem to be within an acceptable range at $6.00 per 4-model box, possibly $5.00 at online stores). I can accept this. And these will give me a chance to see how the game plays. If they hit a winner here, and with a little universe support, I'll be in for the near-term haul to see where this game system goes.

One thing fans don't have to worry about is FFG's ability to support this game. They just have to choose to do so. Having abruptly (apparently) dropped BL2E and re-releasing/updating games from the past, doesn't provide a great track record that the models I buy this year are going to be any use in 2 or 3 years -- whether that is because the release "Runewars The Miniatures Game, 2.0" or because they dropped the game all together. FFG's past history with this make me a bit nervous. They have the *money* to keep this game going for a while, but will they actually do it?

Only time will tell. For now, I'm in. Especially since they seem to have listened to the community on the price points.

5 hours ago, Budgernaut said:

Just to be clear, the purpose behind my response above was not for the purpose of arguing over whether this game is expensive or not. Rather, I'm disappointed in posts like the one below that are attacking other posters for not being logical. I'm demonstrating that we don't have to be knowledgeable about other miniatures games we have absolutely no interest in to participate in this conversation and to have an opinion on relative cost of the game. We can still use numbers to justify our positions even if we're clueless about other games. I just don't like seeing concealed jabs like this in our community.

It's not a jab. When they released the price point for the package, I thought wow that seems a bit high. Instead of complaining about it, I went and looked up equivalent models quality compared their price, compared the amount of dollar required to actually be invested enough in the game at a reasonably competitive level and with those numbers it was apparent that the prices were reasonable. To be fair, I also have a spread sheet with all the units stats comparing their average damage per point, health per point, and all their available actions and the speeds that they can make them. So, ya know, numbers.

11 minutes ago, Chris Montgomery said:

$30 was too much for me, and I'm a minis gamer. $25 is acceptable.

My issue is (was) that this is a new game --...

good post well thought out and I can't really find anything to say in the negative... My biggest thing to point out is that FFG has stated there plan is to make the minis more pose-able in the future...and I feel that they are possibly coming close to the detail that is in the sculpts of warmahordes...I'm interested to do a comparison once i get my hands on the game.