Look, I get the whole Xwing thing.. I get having to buy all the ships if you want all the cards and want to compete tournament level.

Runewars is going to have AT LEAST 4 factions that we know of.. and trying to buy 4 armies worth of box sets just for some 0.10 card has me VERY VERY wary of putting any real commitment behind this game. Nevermind the money, I just dont have the time or the shelf space to store that much stuff Im literally NEVER going to use.

However, this pretty much seems to be FFG's stock and trade is making people buy a model they already own 50 times just to get a tiny card out of the package. (How many Tie Fighters have they released now?) I get people dog the Workshop of Games on their prices.. but for a game like Runewars.. those prices are going to get REAL similar REAL quick when you gotta buy 3+ armies worth of boxes multiple times to play the ONE army you want.

If someone could officially put this one to bed, I'd be eternally grateful

I can't give a source but theres been plenty of posts on this forum stating that FFG supposedly made clear that you would only ever have to collect one army to get all the cards you can use. You will most definitely have to buy every expansion for your selected army of course, but you won't have to delve into the other factions as every neutral card will be available through your selected factions expansions, one or the other.

This is only what I've read others post here so don't take my word for it.

If that's true, then woohoo! I cant wait to start collecting!

21 minutes ago, Trafficman said:

If that's true, then woohoo! I cant wait to start collecting!

Its what I've heard!

Considering the amount of expansions people will want to buy to get a solid army for even one faction, if FFG would start spreading essential upgrades over 4 different factions people would probably start abandoning the game quick fast and in a hurry. I, for one, would be done thats for sure. And thats not to say miniature gamers aren't crazy collectors, most Warhammer (and similar) players have a good few armies, but its by choice not forced.

That said, we can probably expect some epic sized models being released with that one card the faction really needs

This would coincide with everything we know (that has been revealed) so far in the expansions. It appears at least for the time being that if you buy say reanimates, the card inside can only be used by that army/unit. There do appear to be some connections within an army, for example you might have open slot for a card not included in that expansion (but released in a future expansion for that army) but so far I haven't seen anything that suggest that there are X cards from faction A that could be used in Faction B. I can't say that I have been particularly thorough in my research, I sort of enjoy getting an expansion and discovering what is inside in the moment.

With that said though I think this approach of "I must have everything possible", really hasn't been that big of a deal in games like Armada. There are lots of cards for example as a Rebel player I don't have and never will have that only come in Imperial expansions. The impact of that is minimal and doesn't really impact competitive play as the meta lists really don't exist where that sort of cross-over takes place. Most cards that do cross-over, re-appear in Rebel expansions so while you could get them from Imperial expansions (earlier) in some cases, usually the cards that come with expansion have the ship included in mind for it and they generally don't work particularly well anywhere else anyway.

I can see that kind of happening in Runewars and not being a particularly a big deal. For example while "Close Quarter Targeting" comes with the Skeleton Archers, a card that I think might be great for the Deepwood Archers perhaps. I don't see that card in the Elves expansion (based on currently released content). It might be in there, or they might never get it, but its also feasible depending on what is in the Elves expansion that this card is not needed, or that it will be appear later in the Deepwood Archers expansion pack.

So there may be timing based things like this, but from what I have seen, like In Armada, it might not matter, there may simply not be any logical reason to ever have that card on the Deepwood Archers.

It remains to be seen how things play out, but FFG is usually good to their word, so if they say they aren't going to do that sort of thing, I would give them the benefit of the doubt, I don't see any reason why they would make that statement and then go back on their word. Things like this exist in X-Wing and Armada, but FFG never claimed they wouldn't do that.

Go through the expansion previews.

Shield wall for example is in the waiqar infantry command box as well as the oathsworn cavalry box.

Fire rune comes with Daqan infantry command and the carrion lancers.

Dispatch runner comes with the reanimates and oatsworn boxes.

There's also a video around somewhere from Gencon where during an interview they specifically said you could collect only one faction and have access to all the available upgrade cards for it.

Frank said in an interview easily viewed on YouTube that the upgrades will be available to each faction in their own expansions.

Xwing is cheap enough to get away with that. Armada is arguably cheap enough to get away with that. RWM will be far, far too expensive to get away with that.

Its 25USD for 2 trays of infantry/calv and 35USD for 2 large guys. While not 40k prices, thats still quite a bit more expensive considering you will need multiples of every single box in most cases.

I think this game would fail if they included a generic upgrade only in one specific box. No one is going to buy a unit of reanimates just to get an upgrade for their Daqan spearmen.

Nor will they need to.

I posted the video a while ago when another person asked about it, and I shared it in the RMG facebook group around then also...it took a lot of scrolling but here it is...

Ah, it wasn't Gencon but that's the video I was referring to.

Hey, all this means is less money spent for us players. Im thrilled tbh.

19 minutes ago, Trafficman said:

Hey, all this means is less money spent for us players. Im thrilled tbh.

Rather, the same amount of money, but I can focus on buying figures I'll actually play with instead of figures that will never leave the cabinet.

I would have loved to fly 5 Scyks in X-Wing, but after chasing upgrades for Imperials and Rebels, I couldn't afford it, especially with new stuff coming out all the time.

By putting all of my faction's upgrades in my faction's boxes, I can spend more money on building my faction's ranks than on chasing cardboard.

Assuming they ever release my faction.

It can be annoying playing more than one of the games, purchased Ardus for Descent, now probably likely to end up with a different Ardus for RWM, this is not too bad for miniatures in a core set of a game but could become annoying for expansion packs, hey, new character A is now available as an expansion for Descent, they're also available now for RWM, but to play them in either game you'll have to buy both packs, oh and you can buy this third figure to play them in that other game. It does seem an odd logic, surely making one figure that fits all the applicable games when it's a new figure would make sense, collectors are more likely to commit to multiple games then, maybe making it possible just to get the cards etc.

I know some people then say 'oh it's the wrong size' or 'a different quality' but this is an overstated problem for me, games have different scales such as a giant being slightly less giant or a dragon slightly less huge, or the map being to a different scale to the figures... I guess where there are already different standards for the figures the logic would best be to release both versions of the figure but with a means to make them interchangeable for the games so a player could buy the figure of preference but use it in more than one game.

A one-figure-fits-all approach wouldn't work for everything in every game but it would be nice and wise to go that route when it does, maybe for future games they'll standardise some elements? Obviously there would be exceptions such as where a game needing to fit figures on a board had to have smaller pieces (and of course where it would be cost-prohibitive to use the larger figures.

Think about it- by just having on physical figure rather than repeating that across different games you could more easily offer a wider range for the games, reduce costs and more easily encourage players to play lots of different games in the same game universe. You could even quite cheaply port the figure to a brand new game. All you'd need to do is decide on a standard for figures that would be used in the different games.

Probably some reasons to overcome why such a strategy might not work, but I'm sure done smartly it could be good for upping player loyalty and the buy-in value of fandom (for want of a better word) for a game 'universe'...

A lot of pros and cons I guess but it could certainly work for a pairing of games similar to Descent and RWM in future, not so well for those games now I know, but food for thought.

16 minutes ago, Martinslair said:

It can be annoying playing more than one of the games, purchased Ardus for Descent, now probably likely to end up with a different Ardus for RWM, this is not too bad for miniatures in a core set of a game but could become annoying for expansion packs, hey, new character A is now available as an expansion for Descent, they're also available now for RWM, but to play them in either game you'll have to buy both packs, oh and you can buy this third figure to play them in that other game. It does seem an odd logic, surely making one figure that fits all the applicable games when it's a new figure would make sense, collectors are more likely to commit to multiple games then, maybe making it possible just to get the cards etc.

I know some people then say 'oh it's the wrong size' or 'a different quality' but this is an overstated problem for me, games have different scales such as a giant being slightly less giant or a dragon slightly less huge, or the map being to a different scale to the figures... I guess where there are already different standards for the figures the logic would best be to release both versions of the figure but with a means to make them interchangeable for the games so a player could buy the figure of preference but use it in more than one game.

A one-figure-fits-all approach wouldn't work for everything in every game but it would be nice and wise to go that route when it does, maybe for future games they'll standardise some elements? Obviously there would be exceptions such as where a game needing to fit figures on a board had to have smaller pieces (and of course where it would be cost-prohibitive to use the larger figures.

Think about it- by just having on physical figure rather than repeating that across different games you could more easily offer a wider range for the games, reduce costs and more easily encourage players to play lots of different games in the same game universe. You could even quite cheaply port the figure to a brand new game. All you'd need to do is decide on a standard for figures that would be used in the different games.

Probably some reasons to overcome why such a strategy might not work, but I'm sure done smartly it could be good for upping player loyalty and the buy-in value of fandom (for want of a better word) for a game 'universe'...

A lot of pros and cons I guess but it could certainly work for a pairing of games similar to Descent and RWM in future, not so well for those games now I know, but food for thought.

hehe... its really not that hard to understand, there is less money to be made using your method and more money to be made using the FFG method. They are a business, they are in the business of making money and you, me and the tree's know you and everyone else will buy these miniatures one way or the other. Its best to just accept your fate, mail your credit card to FFG like everyone else and call it a day.

Just now, BigKahuna said:

hehe... its really not that hard to understand, there is less money to be made using your method and more money to be made using the FFG method. They are a business, they are in the business of making money and you, me and the tree's know you and everyone else will buy these miniatures one way or the other. Its best to just accept your faith, mail your credit card to FFG like everyone else and call it a day.

I do think there's an opportunity for a games company to use the figures as the in-road, then a few years down the line "erm, how did I end up buying into seven different games", maybe we should hope no games company reads my suggestion, I think we could end up mailing them our bank cards. "Lovely figures, and so many games to play them in." Maybe the current model is actually 'safer' for us

18 minutes ago, Martinslair said:

I do think there's an opportunity for a games company to use the figures as the in-road, then a few years down the line "erm, how did I end up buying into seven different games", maybe we should hope no games company reads my suggestion, I think we could end up mailing them our bank cards. "Lovely figures, and so many games to play them in." Maybe the current model is actually 'safer' for us

I mean, that is exactly what GW is doing at the moment. All their 40k boardgames come with miniatures you can use in the others, and in 40k itself. + everythings the same scale as Sigmar and Bloodbowl.