17 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

This should have been caught by even a cursory QA spot check

As a former QA it's entirely possible that the standards given might have been wrong. We know that they produce the models in China and the requirements would've been translated to Chinese which could've caused the issue. "Large" and "Huge" likely translate to the same thing so some other way to quantify the bases, probably a number, would have to be used. That further adds room for error during an initial batch. It's still quite a mess up, but I've seen it happen before.

6 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

No one said "Every kit is flawed," just that the occurrence rate of mispacks, miscasts, etc. in this hobby is greater than your personal experience. Asking for numbers which are not provided from the one source that has the complete numbers (Asmodee) and will not publically provide their QA procedure (how many from each lot are checked) seems to be an empty gesture, unless you honestly didn't know there wasn't a publicly available source for this information. The anecdotal evidence I have provided is intended to show that the failure rate is not zero, and is more common than your personal experience.

Many generalizations have been made in this thread. I was asking for those purporting that sky was falling because of the new policy to back up their claims.

8 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Given that the entire initial production of a given product (the Dewback) was mispacked with the wrong base within the last year, which was publicly admitted by FFG, it seems flawed to claim there are next to no issues with the product. This should have been caught by even a cursory QA spot check.

Except those who got the Pre-Release at Adepticon 2019 had the right bases. This is one of those generalizations I referenced above. Yes, they absolutely dropped the ball, but hyperbole isn't needed.

10 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Let me turn it around on you: What are the numbers of product that has absolutely no issues? What is the current chance that a given box in a store will be complete and have absolutely no issues with parts? Responses should be based on a statistically significant portion of all product, as that seems to be the sort of answer you were hoping for with your initial question.

My personal experience has been that the rate of error is greater than GW's (I've bought more GW product so far, but had more issues with Legion boxes missing parts).

How can you buy a replacement card (JUST the card)? Unless the card you happen to be missing is released as an alternate art tournament reward people don't tend to have "spare" cards to sell since they also need the card to field the model. Borrowing can help, but shouldn't be necessary from a new box. The listings I find on eBay are all of promo cards, or miniatures with cards. I suppose that this policy change may increase the secondary market, which is good for people who only want the miniatures for RPGs, but that shouldn't excuse a bad policy.

Turn it around on me, I don't believe the sky is falling because of the new policy. Would I prefer it weren't implemented? Sure. Do I believe people are going to get screwed because of it? Yes. Will I be mad if it happens to me? Probably, but I don't think this is going to affect me the same way others think it will affect them. If I get a bad box, I feel pretty confident my FLGS owner will get it sorted through Alliance and FFG. If not, the world will keep spinning and I will figure out how to deal with it. I'm not going to stop supporting my FLGS or stop playing Legion as it is the BEST miniature game I have personally played or seen.

15 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

If the QA continues as it has, and the number of questions on the forums/Facebook about how to handle a missing part don't decrease with new production, people who are considering getting into the game might be turned off of starting the game, not to mention the potential for some people quitting once they get burned on one of the expensive vehicle kits.

This is absolutely fair and true. They need to improve their QA process. I think by virtue of moving everything to hard plastic on sprues, it is going to get better. The current iteration of someone cutting and bagging unit pieces is ripe for failure, but that shouldn't be the case with sprues. Time will tell on that though.

2 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Because such practices are part of most major tournaments for hobby games? Miniature companies requiring you to use specifically their models is a similar restriction, as is Magic the Gathering requiring you to own copies of any individual card you want to include in your deck, despite each having "universally known information." I've also seen tournaments requiring you to bring a legally purchased copy of your army book. You have to have the information on hand pertaining to your army, and the only "official" source is the card itself. Privateer Press has a similar restriction for their tournaments, but I will admit that last I checked they do offer errata'd cards on their webpage and have an official app.

My local tournaments only enforce the letter of the Tournament rules when there is either a fair amount of money on the line, or a world's qualifier. Casual tournaments have some minor proxy restrictions just to avoid confusion.

I'm pretty sure I was careful to specifically mention upgrade cards. I apologize if I was unclear. These are two different things. Bring whichever models are required.

Magic the Gathering is a completely different entity. A Magic card does not equal an upgrade card or unit card in a minis game. The increased variety of MtG cards across all formats significantly reduces if not nullifies the notion that their card text is universally known information. No comparison. However, altered/proxy cards are used frequently in MTG tournaments, though typically lower tier events.

Privateer Press does indeed offer free versions of their warmahordes cards, errata'd or otherwise. The key here is no purchase is required and any store with a printer is probably cool enough to print out a card for you, if needed. There's also a difference here since the record keeping is done on the cards.

I was careful to note that expecting everyone to have official cards for higher tier events(regionals/nationals/worlds) is completely reasonable. FFG OP is, and has always been lackluster. DQ'ing a player for bringing a photocopy of an extra Frag Grenade or whatever when you're playing for an alt art card or some tokens is anti-consumer and anti-player. It's not as bad as it was. FFG has gotten better at not forcing cross faction or additional purchases just to get the extra card you might need for your list. I don't know if you were around for X-Wing 1E or 40 card GoT 1E LCG packs, but those were bad times if you needed extra copies of a card.

So I just got up the other large LFGS this afternoon. They hadn't heard about the policy change previously and are livid.

He predicted this change won't last because, in his words, "It can't." He knows how poor the Asmodee QA standards are, and said that he how wrong it is that the local stores will be required to pay for more staff just to do Asmodee's customer service for them.

He also used a few more choice words that aren't repeatable in a family-friendly forum.

31 minutes ago, thepopemobile100 said:

As a former QA it's entirely possible that the standards given might have been wrong. We know that they produce the models in China and the requirements would've been translated to Chinese which could've caused the issue. "Large" and "Huge" likely translate to the same thing so some other way to quantify the bases, probably a number, would have to be used. That further adds room for error during an initial batch. It's still quite a mess up, but I've seen it happen before.

This is a fair point, but often companies have their own representative at the factories doing QA spot checks, at least for initial runs. I know this isn't always the case, especially for relatively "smaller" companies. I would have assumed the bases for QA would have been identified by measurement or part number, not a word. Which is still possible to mess up of course.

30 minutes ago, Mokoshkana said:

Many generalizations have been made in this thread. I was asking for those purporting that sky was falling because of the new policy to back up their claims.

Except those who got the Pre-Release at Adepticon 2019 had the right bases. This is one of those generalizations I referenced above. Yes, they absolutely dropped the ball, but hyperbole isn't needed.

Turn it around on me, I don't believe the sky is falling because of the new policy. Would I prefer it weren't implemented? Sure. Do I believe people are going to get screwed because of it? Yes. Will I be mad if it happens to me? Probably, but I don't think this is going to affect me the same way others think it will affect them. If I get a bad box, I feel pretty confident my FLGS owner will get it sorted through Alliance and FFG. If not, the world will keep spinning and I will figure out how to deal with it. I'm not going to stop supporting my FLGS or stop playing Legion as it is the BEST miniature game I have personally played or seen.

This is absolutely fair and true. They need to improve their QA process. I think by virtue of moving everything to hard plastic on sprues, it is going to get better. The current iteration of someone cutting and bagging unit pieces is ripe for failure, but that shouldn't be the case with sprues. Time will tell on that though.

Actually, the pre-release ones had the wrong bases as well. That's how the issue was caught, people posted pictures of their built Dewbacks on the Facebook/Discord and the designers of Legion caught the issue there. Citation:

This wasn't hyperbole, it is literally what happened. The reason for the delay was FFG had to open each box, replace the base inside, and reseal. My other examples were to highlight that FFG seems to have a higher rate of issues than similar companies.

Unlike the doomsayers who are claiming FFG is on the verge of losing the Star Wars license (which I'll believe when I see it) I am not trying to indicate this will definitely be the end of Legion, just that this is a bad policy that only benefits Asmodee in the short term, and can lead to harm to the brand unless QA increases. I may have misunderstood some of your previous statements as defending the policy or as claims that the customers will be entirely unaffected, and if so, I apologize.

@qwertyuiop Sorry for the misunderstanding, I thought your comment about "models" was just the plastic pieces representing the unit card, not including the unit cards themselves. The Magic the Gathering analogy was predicated on my misunderstanding that you meant the unit cards were not necessary, as opposed to just the upgrade cards.

I do actually remember the "dark time" of X-Wing V1 and early Armada when you would have to buy a model out of faction and/or multiples of a specific ship to get enough of an upgrade that was only in that pack. The only alternative was to pay massively inflated prices on eBay... I'm actually in agreement with you on the upgrades, while Legion has been better about allowing you to buy in faction (and the card pack was a step in the right direction), if they are going to require the physical upgrade cards, then an annual card pack or other, low to no-cost alternate means of showing you have the upgrade would be appreciated.

3 hours ago, CyberClaw said:

It's up to you. Want to participate in those tournaments, you must abide by the rules.

If you want to house-rule an tournament in your kitchen, go for it, say everyone only needs toilet paper proxies, no one cares.

But if you are doing it with any backing (either by Asmodee, FFG, or even a local store), it's obvious the "original stuff" rule will be in place, because that's how Asmodee, FFG and the stores make their money.

You're right. But if I was a player who called out other players for a card or two being proxied, my pool of willing opponents could easily decrease.
If I'm house ruling a tournament in my kitchen, we use 1/5 scale 3d printed models and professionally printed high gloss foil versions of everything in 5x7. I have a large kitchen. Come on. Comparing TP proxies to a single missing card component is silly.
Asmodee, FFG, and a store TO lose more from not allowing the one off use of a single card here or there than they do from strictly enforcing the rule.

Again, this is only for the occasional use of a card or two. Don't show up to an event with a majority of proxied cards.

7 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Actually, the pre-release ones had the wrong bases as well. That's how the issue was caught, people posted pictures of the build Dewbacks on the Facebook/Discord and the designers of Legion caught the issue there. Citation:

This wasn't hyperbole, it is literally what happened. The reason for the delay was FFG had to open each box, replace the base inside, and reseal. My other examples were to highlight that FFG seems to have a higher rate of issues than similar companies.

Apologies, I stand corrected. I incorrectly remembered one of my FLGS players getting it from Adepticon getting it with the right size. I just confirmed it was the incorrect size.

@Caimheul1313 It's all good!

I'm shuddering from memories of trying to have enough Engine Upgrades in X-Wing 1E
40 card LCG packs gave you 10 cards with a full play set and 10 cards with a single copy to "simulate rarity"

With games like Warmachine and Age of Sigmar offering free, printable unit info, I'm surprised that FFG allows themselves to stay behind the times. Obviously if you've got the minis, you've got the cards or reasonable access to them. Why not commission (I forget the name) whoever keeps up TableTop Admiral to come up with a printer friendly list generator to make this a non-issue for events?

@qwertyuiop I think that in part it comes from the mindset of being a "board game company" and not a "miniatures game company." So it's not super surprising FFG is not adopting the latest and greatest policies. I will point out the the AoS rules do not include points values or army special rules, so you still have to either pay for the official book, or use unofficial and arguably copyright infringing army builders (I'm not sure if GW has become more lax in shutting down sites that have point values). Having to buy more than one set of cards for an LCG to get the "maximum" is a big part of the reason I never bought into those games. Keyforge has been interesting with the "disposable, cheap" premade deck concept though.

The license with Disney/Lucas Film Group might make working without someone outside FFG/Asmodee difficult.

1 hour ago, qwertyuiop said:

But if I was a player who called out other players for a card or two being proxied, my pool of willing opponents could easily decrease.

Asmodee, FFG, and a store TO lose more from not allowing the one off use of a single card here or there than they do from strictly enforcing the rule.

Again, this is only for the occasional use of a card or two. Don't show up to an event with a majority of proxied cards.

I dont even grab my cards when I play. Our space is limited so we just show our lists on our cellphones. I'm all for casual play cutting corners and trying new stuff.

But that said, in tournaments, if they allowed a guy or 2 to show up with a single proxy, then everyone else would think, why are they buying extras? Why would they buy 3 boxes of scouts when just 1 box, and a few replacements could also do the job?

And then a guy with 3 proxies show up. And then 5. And eventually when the judge says "no we can't allow that", the person will say that, 1st they allowed other people so they are discriminating them, and 2nd where on the rules does it say that it can be just a couple of proxies but no more?

It's a slippery slide.

On all the very small 10 to 20ish persons X-Wing tournaments I attended, everyone has to have all the stuff. If a player doesn't have something, they just need to ask in advance, and someone will loan it gladly. Allowing proxies could easily devolve into not buying the official stuff.

I don't know if any sponsered tournament in any similar game (MTG for example) where the proxy rule is not similarly enforced. Even if the sponsor is a small local store.

1 hour ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@qwertyuiop I think that in part it comes from the mindset of being a "board game company" and not a "miniatures game company." So it's not super surprising FFG is not adopting the latest and greatest policies. I will point out the the AoS rules do not include points values or army special rules, so you still have to either pay for the official book, or use unofficial and arguably copyright infringing army builders (I'm not sure if GW has become more lax in shutting down sites that have point values). Having to buy more than one set of cards for an LCG to get the "maximum" is a big part of the reason I never bought into those games. Keyforge has been interesting with the "disposable, cheap" premade deck concept though.

The license with Disney/Lucas Film Group might make working without someone outside FFG/Asmodee difficult.

GW has just about given everything out for free in AoS. Here is their list builder with points included:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/warscroll-builder/

The only thing one can't get for free at the moment is army rules. All the individual unit rules are in their free app.

As for the cards, they are all freely available on TabletopAdmiral, so why should the proxy of such a card be an issue for them. If they wanted to shut down that potential they'd kill that site. The miniatures can't be spoofed without some expensive resin casts.

46 minutes ago, CyberClaw said:

I dont even grab my cards when I play. Our space is limited so we just show our lists on our cellphones. I'm all for casual play cutting corners and trying new stuff.

But that said, in tournaments, if they allowed a guy or 2 to show up with a single proxy, then everyone else would think, why are they buying extras? Why would they buy 3 boxes of scouts when just 1 box, and a few replacements could also do the job?

And then a guy with 3 proxies show up. And then 5. And eventually when the judge says "no we can't allow that", the person will say that, 1st they allowed other people so they are discriminating them, and 2nd where on the rules does it say that it can be just a couple of proxies but no more?

It's a slippery slide.

On all the very small 10 to 20ish persons X-Wing tournaments I attended, everyone has to have all the stuff. If a player doesn't have something, they just need to ask in advance, and someone will loan it gladly. Allowing proxies could easily devolve into not buying the official stuff.

I don't know if any sponsered tournament in any similar game (MTG for example) where the proxy rule is not similarly enforced. Even if the sponsor is a small local store.

Proxy the cards all you want, they don't mean much without the models. If they keep a tight reign on those, what's the problem?

8 minutes ago, Mokoshkana said:

Proxy the cards all you want, they don't mean much without the models. If they keep a tight reign on those, what's the problem?

Note this policy went into effect for all of Asmodee, including their board game brands.

I doubt sprues will be the salvation there.

2 hours ago, CyberClaw said:

I dont even grab my cards when I play. Our space is limited so we just show our lists on our cellphones. I'm all for casual play cutting corners and trying new stuff.

But that said, in tournaments, if they allowed a guy or 2 to show up with a single proxy, then everyone else would think, why are they buying extras? Why would they buy 3 boxes of scouts when just 1 box, and a few replacements could also do the job?

And then a guy with 3 proxies show up. And then 5. And eventually when the judge says "no we can't allow that", the person will say that, 1st they allowed other people so they are discriminating them, and 2nd where on the rules does it say that it can be just a couple of proxies but no more?

It's a slippery slide.

On all the very small 10 to 20ish persons X-Wing tournaments I attended, everyone has to have all the stuff. If a player doesn't have something, they just need to ask in advance, and someone will loan it gladly. Allowing proxies could easily devolve into not buying the official stuff.

I don't know if any sponsered tournament in any similar game (MTG for example) where the proxy rule is not similarly enforced. Even if the sponsor is a small local store.

Why should anyone buy extras now that they know the customer support isn't there? The Magic comparison has already been put to bed. Your scenario is dubious, but since we're dealing with sketchy logic,

@ScummyRebel
"But the LGS is on the hook then for Asmodee’s mistakes when Asmodee won’t make it right with the LGS for shipping them a bad product. Same argument you just made, up a level of the supply chain.

Asmodee is the problem here, not the LGS that’s caught in the middle."

I think there might be some misunderstanding here about who is on the hook to whom.

When Asmodee sells to customers directly, Asmodee is responsible.
If it's bought indirectly, that middle-man is responsible to return it.

If you buy direct, you return direct. If you buy indirect, you return via the indirect route.
That's the change, you can't buy indirect and replace direct.

Is it convenient for customers? Heck no, but that doesn't mean it's not both workable and intelligible.
I don't like the change, but I get it.

@Caimheul1313
"Holding a store accountable for the mistakes of the manufacturer is a bit flawed. Should the store open every product to check that everything is inside and okay before selling it? Or is it the responsibility of the manufacturer to make sure everything is fine? The store is the customer of the distributor, and the distributor is the customer of Asmodee, so all of them should get their money back by your reasoning. But that isn't how it works in practice, and often there isn't a choice in distributor owing to exclusivity contracts. Not all distributors will accept returns, sticking the store with the defective, unsaleable product and the loss. FLGSs don't have a huge profit margin, and can't afford to eat a loss on manufacturer defects. I've seen similar policies at other kinds of hobby stores (trains, etc) and art supply stores. Lots of places require the return to be in "new, unused, unopened" condition to avoid dishonest people from taking advantage.

Not to mention, there are plenty of online places that don't take returns for any reason on open product. Amazon isn't the actual seller for a bunch of their listed products, they just let people pay them money to list the product and use their warehouses. many of these sellers have return policies different from Amazon's. Add in that Amazon sometimes requires the buyer to pay for return shipping and it isn't any better, since shipping sometimes costs almost as much as the item being returned (yes I've had this happen AS A PRIME MEMBER on defective or deficient merchandise). I'd be better off converting the miniature to make up for the missing part, or buying a 3D printed replacement rather than be out money.

For miniatures games, it's much harder for the store to tell if the product is actually defective, or if the buyer removed part of the product, and is now trying to make a return by lying. Was the smoke grenade card never in the box, or did the buyer remove it and is now lying? Same goes for the parts, especially stuff like strike team snipers or alien heads from the Rebel Upgrade pack."

If the store purchased the product (they did) and then sold it, yes, they're the appropriate venue for returning the product.

Imagine you bought a refrigerator, and it wouldn't turn on when plugged in. Just because you bought it from a retailer, rather than the manufacturer doesn't make a difference in who you return it to. You return it to the retailer, they're the proper channel, and that's true in essentially all industries.

The previous practice of offering replacement parts was stellar, I agree, but it was also NOT normal. Normally you'd return an entire defective product, and then wait for a whole new one.

In the case of someone lying about missing parts to nick one (which is weird), I see little difference between that and a customer who reports a package being stolen/undelivered. If it happens routinely for a particular customer, they'll probably get iced out for that fraud.

Either way, there are laws governing these things, and nobody gets a free pass because it's inconvenient for them. https://consumer.findlaw.com/consumer-transactions/what-is-an-implied-warranty-.html

@SoonerTed

If it’s defective, it’s not really the choice of the store. They’re required by law to accept the return of defective goods.

33 minutes ago, Derrault said:

@ScummyRebel
"But the LGS is on the hook then for Asmodee’s mistakes when Asmodee won’t make it right with the LGS for shipping them a bad product. Same argument you just made, up a level of the supply chain.

Asmodee is the problem here, not the LGS that’s caught in the middle."

I think there might be some misunderstanding here about who is on the hook to whom.

When Asmodee sells to customers directly, Asmodee is responsible.
If it's bought indirectly, that middle-man is responsible to return it.

If you buy direct, you return direct. If you buy indirect, you return via the indirect route.
That's the change, you can't buy indirect and replace direct.

Is it convenient for customers? Heck no, but that doesn't mean it's not both workable and intelligible.
I don't like the change, but I get it.

@Caimheul1313
"Holding a store accountable for the mistakes of the manufacturer is a bit flawed. Should the store open every product to check that everything is inside and okay before selling it? Or is it the responsibility of the manufacturer to make sure everything is fine? The store is the customer of the distributor, and the distributor is the customer of Asmodee, so all of them should get their money back by your reasoning. But that isn't how it works in practice, and often there isn't a choice in distributor owing to exclusivity contracts. Not all distributors will accept returns, sticking the store with the defective, unsaleable product and the loss. FLGSs don't have a huge profit margin, and can't afford to eat a loss on manufacturer defects. I've seen similar policies at other kinds of hobby stores (trains, etc) and art supply stores. Lots of places require the return to be in "new, unused, unopened" condition to avoid dishonest people from taking advantage.

Not to mention, there are plenty of online places that don't take returns for any reason on open product. Amazon isn't the actual seller for a bunch of their listed products, they just let people pay them money to list the product and use their warehouses. many of these sellers have return policies different from Amazon's. Add in that Amazon sometimes requires the buyer to pay for return shipping and it isn't any better, since shipping sometimes costs almost as much as the item being returned (yes I've had this happen AS A PRIME MEMBER on defective or deficient merchandise). I'd be better off converting the miniature to make up for the missing part, or buying a 3D printed replacement rather than be out money.

For miniatures games, it's much harder for the store to tell if the product is actually defective, or if the buyer removed part of the product, and is now trying to make a return by lying. Was the smoke grenade card never in the box, or did the buyer remove it and is now lying? Same goes for the parts, especially stuff like strike team snipers or alien heads from the Rebel Upgrade pack."

If the store purchased the product (they did) and then sold it, yes, they're the appropriate venue for returning the product.

Imagine you bought a refrigerator, and it wouldn't turn on when plugged in. Just because you bought it from a retailer, rather than the manufacturer doesn't make a difference in who you return it to. You return it to the retailer, they're the proper channel, and that's true in essentially all industries.

The previous practice of offering replacement parts was stellar, I agree, but it was also NOT normal. Normally you'd return an entire defective product, and then wait for a whole new one.

In the case of someone lying about missing parts to nick one (which is weird), I see little difference between that and a customer who reports a package being stolen/undelivered. If it happens routinely for a particular customer, they'll probably get iced out for that fraud.

Either way, there are laws governing these things, and nobody gets a free pass because it's inconvenient for them. https://consumer.findlaw.com/consumer-transactions/what-is-an-implied-warranty-.html

@SoonerTed

If it’s defective, it’s not really the choice of the store. They’re required by law to accept the return of defective goods.

It's always clear when people who have never taken any kind of legal class or even business classes on contracts claim to know what the law is.

The store isn't required to take anything defective back outside its return policy. Any warranty coverage is going to be the responsibility of the manufacturer at that point. (The only exception that might exist is if it ran afoul of local laws. But this is by far NOT the norm.)

In your refrigerator example (false analogy, by the way), if you don't take the refrigerator out of the box and turn it on inside the retailer's return policy window, you must go through the manufacturer.

It is strange that you would think it's normal for a manufacturer to shift the financial burden to the retailer retroactively .

I was told by my FLGS that if the distributor was out of stock, there was nothing that could be done. That lines up with what Asmodee has in the new policy as well.

56 minutes ago, SoonerTed said:

It's always clear when people who have never taken any kind of legal class or even business classes on contracts claim to know what the law is.

The store isn't required to take anything defective back outside its return policy. Any warranty coverage is going to be the responsibility of the manufacturer at that point. (The only exception that might exist is if it ran afoul of local laws. But this is by far NOT the norm.)

In your refrigerator example (false analogy, by the way), if you don't take the refrigerator out of the box and turn it on inside the retailer's return policy window, you must go through the manufacturer.

It is strange that you would think it's normal for a manufacturer to shift the financial burden to the retailer retroactively . I was told by my FLGS that if the distributor was out of stock, there was nothing that could be done. That lines up with what Asmodee has in the new policy as well.

No, see, that’s where you’re entirely wrong.

Customer Returns and Refunds Under Federal Law

Many retailers, as part of their business models, allow returns if customers change their minds or receive unwanted items as gifts. While many retailers have decided this makes for the best business practice, they aren't legally required to accept returns. Rather, retailers are required to accept returns only if the sold good is defective or if they otherwise break the sales contract.

In addition to retailers being required to accept the return of defective items, federal law provides a "Cooling-Off Rule " giving buyers three days to cancel purchases of $25 or more. Under this rule, the right to cancel for a full refund extends until midnight of the third business day after the sale. The rule applies to sales at the buyer's home or workplace, at facilities rented by the seller on a temporary basis, or at locations otherwise away from the seller's normal retail location.

@Derrault

The legal definition in the USA that I can find of defective products says nothing about missing pieces: "De fective Product is an imperfection in a product that has a manufacturing or design defect, or is faulty because of inadequate instructions or warnings. A product is in a defective condition if it is unreasonably dangerous to the user or to consumer who purchases the product and causes physical harm. A defective condition is a legal cause of damage if it directly or in the natural sequence contributes substantially to the injury."

A fridge that doesn't work is defective due to a manufacturing defect, a product missing pieces is not, as it is deficient due to an issue in packaging, not manufacturing. Federal laws regarding returns are minimal, and many states don't force stores to accept returns so long as their policy is clearly marked. A miniature missing an arm still works for it's intended purpose, the arm isn't necessary for it's operation, so it's hard to term that legally as "defective."

In specific, an unscrupulous individual could claim the sniper rifle from a box used to make strike teams was missing, and then use promo cards to field an additional strike team through conversion at a tournament. Or in X-Wing V1 that a particularly sought after upgrade card was missing. In some miniature games, the components are worth more than the whole. This could be a specific model from the box, an upgrade card, or a particularly rare part sought after for conversions. I agree that such practice can be caught by repeated returns, but a store can also lose a significant amount by multiple people pulling the same scam on different products.

The old policy was in line with many other miniature/model companies. In general, they'd rather send a single part than replace an entire box. If they send an entire box, then they end up with boxes missing pieces that have to be disposed of. If instead they send a single part, then a single open box at their facility can potentially provide missing parts for multiple requests. Privateer press, Games Workshop, Warlord games, and Airfix are all known to me to provide individual replacement parts rather than require a complete exchange.

13 minutes ago, Derrault said:

No, see, that’s where you’re entirely wrong.

Customer Returns and Refunds Under Federal Law

Many retailers, as part of their business models, allow returns if customers change their minds or receive unwanted items as gifts. While many retailers have decided this makes for the best business practice, they aren't legally required to accept returns. Rather, retailers are required to accept returns only if the sold good is defective or if they otherwise break the sales contract.

In addition to retailers being required to accept the return of defective items, federal law provides a "Cooling-Off Rule " giving buyers three days to cancel purchases of $25 or more. Under this rule, the right to cancel for a full refund extends until midnight of the third business day after the sale. The rule applies to sales at the buyer's home or workplace, at facilities rented by the seller on a temporary basis, or at locations otherwise away from the seller's normal retail location.

That's a lovely nonsequitor you have there.

Note that the law you cite has nothing to do with purchases made months outside any "cooling off period". Warranty replacement beyond a period of time defaults to the manufacturer.

And yes, we did cover this in one of my business classes (taught by a law professor.). I'm not going to attempt to persuade on this any further.

9 hours ago, Mokoshkana said:

If this is such a systemic problem, it will hurt Asmodee's bottom line and they will stop making the game as they won't be able to afford the license to keep it. Seriously, what percentage of products are missing pieces? I get that this has the potential to be really inconvenient. If that potential is high enough to make you worry about it, then perhaps pick a different game. This policy does not bother me in the slightest. Adapt and overcome.

100% of original core sets from release... That's how many

13 minutes ago, SoonerTed said:

That's a lovely nonsequitor you have there.

Note that the law you cite has nothing to do with purchases made months outside any "cooling off period". Warranty replacement beyond a period of time defaults to the manufacturer.

And yes, we did cover this in one of my business classes (taught by a law professor.). I'm not going to attempt to persuade on this any further.

If you’re stockpiling these things instead of playing with them, that’s on you, obviously. And the cooling off period is buyers remorse, it doesn’t have anything to do with the product being faulty.

Indeed, it requires no reason at all beyond changing ones mind about the purchase.

@Caimheul1313

It’s part of the implied warranty:

Implied warranties promise that the item you purchased will do what it is supposed to do.

A product is covered under implied warranty laws in your state, unless it was marked "as is" when you purchased it. If it doesn’t work as it is assumed to, the seller must make good on that by repairing it, replacing it, or refunding the purchase price.

So, yes, that FLGS is on the hook to make good if they don’t mark items “as is”. Similarly, so is the distributor that sells to them, and the maker that sells to the distributor.

1 minute ago, Derrault said:

@Caimheul1313

It’s part of the implied warranty:

Implied warranties promise that the item you purchased will do what it is supposed to do.

A product is covered under implied warranty laws in your state, unless it was marked "as is" when you purchased it. If it doesn’t work as it is assumed to, the seller must make good on that by repairing it, replacing it, or refunding the purchase price.

So, yes, that FLGS is on the hook to make good if they don’t mark items “as is”. Similarly, so is the distributor that sells to them, and the maker that sells to the distributor.

What is the product suppose to do? Be a figure on a table. How does missing an arm prevent it from doing just that?

Regardless, the part of law you are citing is only relevant when the user comes to some harm, not because a toy is missing a non-safety critical piece: From https://www.stimmel-law.com/en/articles/basics-warranties

Quote

Implied Warranty of Merchantability

To impose liability for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, it is ordinarily necessary to show that there was a defect in the product and that this defect made the product not fit for its normal use and that this caused the plaintiff’s harm.

These laws you are citing are relevant in injury lawsuits , so if missing a piece from you miniatures causes you bodily harm, you are protected by the implied warranty.

6 hours ago, Mokoshkana said:

GW has just about given everything out for free in AoS. Here is their list builder with points included:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/warscroll-builder/

The only thing one can't get for free at the moment is army rules. All the individual unit rules are in their free app.

As for the cards, they are all freely available on TabletopAdmiral, so why should the proxy of such a card be an issue for them. If they wanted to shut down that potential they'd kill that site. The miniatures can't be spoofed without some expensive resin casts.

Huh, didn't know GW had gone that far. Of course, without the army rules, it's only so helpful, but is an improvement on their old ways.

Firstly, shutting down a single site doesn't prevent information from being available, the right string of words into Google allows one to find all of the GW rulebooks freely available online, but that doesn't make it legal. A proxy of an upgrade card from a unit box you aren't including in your army represents a lost sale to FFG, which is the main reason for them to care. The rise in 3D printing means that "spoofing" miniatures is easier and cheaper than ever. All I need is the proper STL files either from the internet or my own 3D scanner, and I can print my own miniatures and conversion parts for much cheaper in time and material than the old resin cast method.

5 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

What is the product suppose to do? Be a figure on a table. How does missing an arm prevent it from doing just that?

Regardless, the part of law you are citing is only relevant when the user comes to some harm, not because a toy is missing a non-safety critical piece: From https://www.stimmel-law.com/en/articles/basics-warranties

These laws you are citing are relevant in injury lawsuits , so if missing a piece from you miniatures causes you bodily harm, you are protected by the implied warranty.

Huh, didn't know GW had gone that far. Of course, without the army rules, it's only so helpful, but is an improvement on their old ways.

Firstly, shutting down a single site doesn't prevent information from being available, the right string of words into Google allows one to find all of the GW rulebooks freely available online, but that doesn't make it legal. A proxy of an upgrade card from a unit box you aren't including in your army represents a lost sale to FFG, which is the main reason for them to care. The rise in 3D printing means that "spoofing" miniatures is easier and cheaper than ever. All I need is the proper STL files either from the internet or my own 3D scanner, and I can print my own miniatures and conversion parts for much cheaper in time and material than the old resin cast method.

No, it doesn’t only apply to harm. In the case of a model, missing parts, it’s literally the lack of the parts that are supposed to be there, per the box packaging.

Warranties

Warranties are express or implied representations of fact that the law enforces. A representation is a statement made by the seller to the buyer, before or at the time of sale, regarding some fact or circumstace related to the product, which is influential in bringing about the buyer's agreement to purchase the product. There are three types of warranties regarding a product's quality or fitness for use: express warranty, implied warranty of merchantability, and implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

Express Warranties

An express warranty can be created in one of three ways:

Through a representation of fact relating to the product made by the seller of the product to the purchaser

Through a description of the product

Through a model or sample

An express warranty can be words spoken during a negotiation for purchase, statements made in a sales contract, an earlier purchase of the same kind of product, claims made in tags attached to the product, or claims made in marketing campaigns. If the product fails to meet the level of quality and reliability represented in the express warranty, the manufacturer will fix or replace the product for no additional charge. If the product was purchased from an authorized dealer, the retailer may service the warranty.

If a manufacturer, or someone else who is obligated under the warranty, fails to remedy a defect after a reasonable number of repair attempts, generally the manufacturer must either refund the purchase price or replace the product.

Implied Warranties

An implied warranty is imposed by state law and accompanies the sale of the goods. The implied warranty of merchantability requires that the product meet certain standards of quality, specifically that the product is fit for the ordinary use for which the product is sold. For example, the implied warranty of merchantability requires that a sold coffee maker, in its normal use, make coffee, be properly labeled, and be of a minimum quality that it wouldn't be objected to by other coffee maker sellers selling similar products.

The implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, on the other hand, imposes a similar requirement in cases in which the seller knows or has reason to know of a particular purpose for which the product is required and in which the buyer is relying on the seller to select a suitable product. For example, if a buyer tells a seller that she needs a sleeping bag for sub-zero conditions, and the seller selects a particular sleeping bag, there may be an implied warranty that the sleeping bag in question is fit for use in sub-zero conditions.

Generally, an implied warranty means the product will work as intended. If it doesn't, the seller must make good on that promise by repairing or replacing the product or by providing a refund of the purchase price.

@Derrault

The product not matching the box is a breach, by your own posting without citation, of the expressed warranty, which means by your posted text, the MANUFACTURER (ie Asmodee/FFG) is liable, and a retailer "MAY" service the warranty (note it does not say MUST). So according to you, Asmodee is ultimately liable for missing parts, not the retailer.

1 hour ago, Tirion said:

100% of original core sets from release... That's how many

I bought two original core sets and didnt have any missing parts.

In fact, Ive actually never had any missing or defective parts from any Star Wars Legion products.

Sounds like Im one of the lucky ones though.