34 minutes ago, Bucho said:

Sure Frosthaven's $100 but if you notice they also list the MSRP as $160. Likewise FFG puts Descent 2e at 79.95 but you probably end up paying $50 for it. I would think this is the same way. They'll ask for the moon, because they don't tend to be great at reasonable price points. Then it'll actually sell for $125.

I definitely get the mark it up to mark it down strategy, and it's a good point. But like I said you don't see many non-KS products with an MSRP as high as $160, and KS games just operate by completely different rules, they rarely have much market after crowdfunding and doubly so at FLGS where the severe discounts aren't as common. Not to mention with MAP, pre-order sales, and all that, it's risking disaster tempting the majority of your audience to NOT buy your product until Amazon can mark it down at a steep discount months, or even over a year later. But I'm just speculating of course, thanks for the input!

5 hours ago, frankelee said:

Not to mention with MAP, pre-order sales, and all that, it's risking disaster tempting the majority of your audience to NOT buy your product until Amazon can mark it down at a steep discount months, or even over a year later.

Yeah that's why Runebound and Runewars failed.

4 minutes ago, Bucho said:

Yeah that's why Runebound and Runewars failed.

I don't think this is the reason of their failure. At least the sole reason. Runebound recieved mixed reviews and was quite different game for the older fans with the 2nd edition (which caused the unnecessary hatred towards the game) and Runewars (if you're about "Runewars the miniatures game") was simply killed by the FFG with the lack of constant pipeline of expansions and the importance to clear the market for their SW Legion. And I'm not even mentioning the weak marketing for these products.
Its a shame, really. They were the great games which I deeply loved. Especially the Runebound.

33 minutes ago, Oak tree said:

I don't think this is the reason of their failure. At least the sole reason.

FFG alway does that stuff, to the point that a bunch of the comments on their live twitch were people flat out heckling them. But at the end of the day both products sold like hot cakes once the prices came down.

41 minutes ago, Oak tree said:

I don't think this is the reason of their failure. At least the sole reason. Runebound recieved mixed reviews and was quite different game for the older fans with the 2nd edition (which caused the unnecessary hatred towards the game) and Runewars (if you're about "Runewars the miniatures game") was simply killed by the FFG with the lack of constant pipeline of expansions and the importance to clear the market for their SW Legion. And I'm not even mentioning the weak marketing for these products.
Its a shame, really. They were the great games which I deeply loved. Especially the Runebound.

Runebound is great. I never liked runewars miniatures for many reasons

1 hour ago, Bucho said:

FFG alway does that stuff, to the point that a bunch of the comments on their live twitch were people flat out heckling them. But at the end of the day both products sold like hot cakes once the prices came down.

There are always people who want to buy something as cheap as possible. And FFG's products were never a cheap thing - I'm not surprised to hear there are some. And there will always be. But that's not the point.

The point is - the production costs of the product. I may see how 60$ Runebound would cost 50$, but I can't see the price lesser than that. Not with its components - lots of cards (there are 200+ in the box, as far as I remember) + plastic minis (and the price is higher in China, comparing to the times of 2ed) + custom dice. For this product to sell successfully you need the lesser number of components (or the lesser quality). Or the bigger number of copies in production. Which is super-risky. And I'm not mentioning the logistics and taxes. Board game production economy is not an easy thing.

Regarding the Runewars's 100$ price tag - as a customer I agree that its pretty costly. But with its production quality - I definitely see why the price is like this.
From the other hand - the Runewars was the start of the big wargame line and the price might be more friendly, with the entire goal to make a good start for the community and compete with other popular wargames (which are also pricy).

I think FFG should've used its previous ideas of crossovers between its products - in my opinion people would definitely buy units from Runewars as a Descent expansions and vise-versa.

I really hope the FFG learned from their mistakes and we have a bright future for Terrinoth games ahead of us.

I'm afraid that looking how the game universe is going with so much kickstarter things ahead and the evolution of the games and adding Asmodee over the games are going to be a race to survive facing the marketing evolution and that games Will be expensive and app oriented and the golden age is already behind us ...

1 hour ago, rugal said:

I'm afraid that looking how the game universe is going with so much kickstarter things ahead and the evolution of the games and adding Asmodee over the games are going to be a race to survive facing the marketing evolution and that games Will be expensive and app oriented and the golden age is already behind us ...

Sadly that’s pretty much what is waiting us.

I view kickstarter games as a cat in the sack - sometimes it can help to release something magnificent (like Gloomhaven, the 7th Continent and KD:M) and most of the times it’s something mediocre at best. I was glad to hear from the previous owners of FFG (in TI4 documentary) that the company is strongly avoiding the kickstarter model.
But, at the same time FFG are the pioneers of app-oriented games. If they will not find the middle ground - I'm afraid this is for the worst. I hope the Legends in the Dark will feature both app and non-app gameplay (with the most famoust feature - the overlord). Or else it will divide its audience right in half.

We are assuming the box is the box that was shown and not just another tease to keep us interested. I will wait until we have some more real information.

And while they didn't officially tease it (it was like a surprise for us) I guess We'll have not-scheduled information by the end of the event on August 3 or maybe later this month ?

Maybe. But more likely we'll have to wait until SPIEL in October, I'd wager.

not too far to wait ;-)

On 8/1/2020 at 1:11 AM, Elrad said:

not too far to wait 😉

A few months maybe. I suppose I can hold out.

Watched this just before going to bed, saw comment end was all I needed, jumped to end thinking it's gonna be Descent it's Descent and o m uthuk gee it was! Nicely done too.

The sketch hero is pretty much a dead cert for Prince Faolan: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2018/9/25/return-of-the-exile/

Now how in all the realms am I gonna get to bed- 'Legends of the Dark'- am I still right about 'Lost Legends' being a teaser/lead in? Still reckon Shadar's in it- like I said it was an odd choice for the LL cover art unless she was going to be in something and she has a fiery elemental magic link....

They said previously re the big deep dive Terrinoth project it's not a Descent third edition per se- could it work with the game somehow? Or be something new? Act 1 on the box which in itself is a tease (hoping this is parts rather than going 'legacy', 'legacy' could be awesome for the series but for me would need to be its own thing in a way that added to options rather than being the game and making its use limited., act is a normal 'chapter' terminology in the series though.) Of course there are other ways a legacy aspect could work for me- what if you 'encountered' certain characters/locations/other for the first time with the excitement of unboxing/unpacking/revealing them- but it doesn't make the game throwaway like some one-shot legacy games? Could be something neat like that with maybe an element of surprise.

With the promise of the deepest ever dive into the lore from earlier future project reveals there are so many possibilities and I can certainly see D2e somehow linking in to it.

Love the cover art- who or what? Could it be the overlord itself? Which is already planned for an appearance in my mega project so I already like the idea of THE actual overlord itself making an appearance at some point, if they've done this then yay...... That Descent font update is a thing of beauty too.

And Descent's jumped to #4 on bgg's the hotness- the hype train is back in Mennara, 4 ahead of Gloomhaven so it might be getting more bgg views/discussion. Descent is back on the games radar.

Best comment on bgg has to be this one: "I totally forgot to add the cost of the new book series! Well, if I’m going to go bankrupt, at least I can live in this box." (there's novels coming too)

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2475062/huge-new-descent-box-teased-right-end-ffg-flight-u

On 7/30/2020 at 5:11 AM, Zaltyre said:

"Game design by Kara Centell-Dunk and Nathan Hajek"

That's enough to pique my interest, as they've designed a lot of great content for D2e. I'm looking forward to seeing exactly what this game has to offer.

My fave 2e expansion is Manor of Ravens. I think I'm going to like this too.

On 7/31/2020 at 7:50 AM, Oak tree said:

The point is - the production costs of the product. I may see how 60$ Runebound would cost 50$, but I can't see the price lesser than that. Not with its components - lots of cards (there are 200+ in the box, as far as I remember) + plastic minis (and the price is higher in China, comparing to the times of 2ed) + custom dice.

Runebound was mostly an empty box. My board won't sit flat and doesn't seem that durable. The mini's are mostly recycled from 2e, the cards are quite bland and I'm not really sure how the sticker dice escaped from the 80's. 🤷‍♂️

7 minutes ago, Bucho said:

Runebound was mostly an empty box. My board won't sit flat and doesn't seem that durable. The mini's are mostly recycled from 2e, the cards are quite bland and I'm not really sure how the sticker dice escaped from the 80's. 🤷‍♂️

You are hard : OK for the dice but all of the game was good. Too bad there was no more expansions and scenarios

3 hours ago, Bucho said:

Runebound was mostly an empty box. My board won't sit flat and doesn't seem that durable. The mini's are mostly recycled from 2e, the cards are quite bland and I'm not really sure how the sticker dice escaped from the 80's. 🤷‍♂️

I love my empty box 😭

6 minutes ago, AwesomeTree_in_the_Dark said:

I love my empty box 😭

How much money do you have in expansions in there?

And I don't have an issue with leaving room in the core box for expansions, that's a good thing.

My issue; ok there are actually a bunch including that inserts ought to be useful, but on this point; my issue is that almost all of what I bought turns out to be insert. There was some real empty box shock.

Compare this to something like Gloomhaven Jaws of the Lion where $49.95 buys so much content that there are tutorials on how to get the content back in the box because people can't manage to get it to all fit on their own.

"Inserts", such as the one shown by @Bucho above have been a staple for FFG games for years. They are completely worthless. They become the very first thing that I throw out (if I even keep the original box at all) !

58 minutes ago, any2cards said:

They are completely worthless.

They reduce the amount of pieces, cards, etc. getting dented or broken when shifting around during shipping. If you have a box big enough for a decent game board, smaller components (sealed deck of cards, minis, bag of dice) would slide and fall a much further distance causing more damage to each other in a box that big. By using the inserts, you can keep the pieces separated and reduce the amount of travel they have, reducing the range of shifting to their smaller sections.

3 hours ago, kris40k said:

They reduce the amount of pieces, cards, etc. getting dented or broken when shifting around during shipping. If you have a box big enough for a decent game board, smaller components (sealed deck of cards, minis, bag of dice) would slide and fall a much further distance causing more damage to each other in a box that big. By using the inserts, you can keep the pieces separated and reduce the amount of travel they have, reducing the range of shifting to their smaller sections.

You can achieve all of the above, and MUCH MUCH MORE, by developing a truly USEFUL insert ... one that is useful even after shipping and unboxing is complete. These are MOST DEFINITELY NOT that !

1 hour ago, any2cards said:

You can achieve all of the above, and MUCH MUCH MORE, by developing a truly USEFUL insert ... one that is useful even after shipping and unboxing is complete. These are MOST DEFINITELY NOT that !

Other board game manufacturers have figured out how to do exactly that, it's not hard.

Still it's a minor frustration to me that if they just printed on the other side of the insert or made it easier to reverse the folds, a lot of the time I'd have a nice looking divider, at least unless/until I filled the box with expansions.

My major point is the box is not that big, it's the size of an expansion box and most of it is empty space.

2 hours ago, any2cards said:

You can achieve all of the above, and MUCH MUCH MORE, by developing a truly USEFUL insert ... one that is useful even after shipping and unboxing is complete. These are MOST DEFINITELY NOT that !

Yes, custom molded inserts are a very nice item, more common these days, and more costly than a simple fold-cardstock-into-three-sections type of deal. Today, you can get them for sometimes with standard editions, but often its in the collector's edition of a game that they do those.

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the new Descent game does go that route. They seem to be lifting it up a bit as the "most ambitious project" I doubt they would spare the expense (and price tag). Still, the old cardboard inserts were fine for doing exactly what was written on the tin, which was "don't let the stuff get dinged up in shipping."