UncleArkie said:

You stated earlier in the thread that you were opposed to the hardcover books, but that you'd try to make the best of them since they were inevitable. As for hypothetical percentile WFRP, perhaps by "cannibalize" you meant that some current v3 players might decide they prefer the new percentile mechanics and switch back? In that case, I don't see how this is any different from DH players switching over to Deathwatch - the money still goes to the same company.

I did yes, and I still won't be buying them, I already paid for the material in them so I don't see a reason to do it twice and I am not in opposition to you having the option of playing the game only using a core set of rules with no bit. However I think that its a very thin line that FFG are walking, also what you suggested was a re-release of 2nd edition for those players who wanted that, sorta a pathfinder like option, that is what I think is a silly and counter productive idea.

Now I could go into a giant lecture on marketing strategy, but lets face it most people will TL:DR it, instead I suggest that you spend a few weeks reading up on the material and we can go into demographic focus, product spread, market targets and so on, its really complicated stuff and I'v been doing it for years on the community side of things and I am still a beginner so its not to dismiss your thoughts, they are valid, but from a professional point of view its a horrible idea.

The gamer in me however salutes it, options are good and hopefully they will pay off and not piss off the core advocates of the franchise at the same time thus creating a long term negative effect.

Also what I stated earlier is that I hope that we won't towards the end of each year see a collected book or books with all the material published for the hardback crowd, that won't just cannibalize sales from the bits box sets it will eliminate them for most parts. As someone said earlier, this seems to be a fairly successful line or they wouldn't be putting this much money and support into it so 6 or so box's a year and 2 adventures are not that far fetched thats a good 300 quid all in all, or 90 - 100 if I buy the books thus generating much less revenue for the company publishing the game per unit sold, true the money goes to the same company. The smaller revenue numbers mean less money to pour into development meaning the degradation of content quality this creating a downwards spiral.

The for the books counter argument is that gamers are now here kind of people that generally don't like to wait for a product any longer than they have to and there for will buy the box sets to get the rules in them even if they are playing using the corebook version and then a minority will pick up only the collected books where as most will get them books and the box's, if thats how it works out then the hardbacks are free money for material thats already been published, sold and bagged, but we will have to see. Its a bold move.

UncleArkie said:

I suggested a new edition of the v2 rules, not a re-release. Call it the Warhammer Horror RPG, and make it a game about scribes and agitators battling their own inner demons while struggling against Chaos. Immediately it appeals to a different crowd from v3, and some people might even play both games to scratch different itches, just like some people play both RT and DH.

UncleArkie said:

I did work in market research for 6 years before getting into the TV business, so I'm not completely ignorant of these matters...

I get what your trying to say, but to put it very simply. Its like the same company selling a shampoo in two different bottles, same shampoo twice the marketing cost, all thats different is the logo and the bottle, they sit on the same shelves next to each other and the consumer gets less product recognition.All that would be different is the rules (the bottle) the content, the game itself is the world, rules are just catalysts for stories, we then use the rules we like to tell the stories and discard the rest.

But lets move on and agree to disagree, I do see your point and would love to debate this with you, but I'm sure that we would bore the **** out of everyone else .

And take it back to what the thread was about, namely what we would like to see fixed in the hardbacks. Now I love the game, but for christsake rewrite the core rules, I would buy that book again if I knew that the new one had the rules actually explained, or had an equipment list that wasn't 3 pages tagged on the back of the book. Its just horribly layouted anbd badly written, rules themselves are beautiful and well developed, but I can understand why most people didn't understand half of what was going on, baaaaad packaging bad shoo bad, back in your box.

UncleArkie said:

You got it "Junge".

Maybe you two guys meet for a beer and discuss this... and then forget about the reason of the discussion

UncleArkie said:

WFRP's situation is unique, in that the v2 game would still have instant brand recognition for many years to come. If Pepsi was bought out by Coca-Cola, Coke would continue making Pepsi because the loyal Pepsi drinkers won't just disappear overnight or switch to Coke.

AArrgh I have to answer that,

But don't get the feeling that v3 surfs a little on the brand recognition from 2e which then again surfs on WFB/GW's bran?. To some extend the new game gets a free ride of instant advocacy which is now a year later also a little bit of its problem. Now that it has to stand on its own legs its time to test the foundation before branching out and seeking other markets, it its current state too much diversity could be hurting the brand more than helping it along due to a in quality and product conversion as the core of 2e players who converted would switch back already having money invested in the game that then leads to the game loosing advocates. Or am I on crack again?

UncleArkie said:

This one's for you Uncle.

Well... It's been interesting to follow the discussion!

One way to do both the components game with yearly (or even less frequent) hardback 'replication' is to have the hardbacks only replicate the 'crunchy stuff'.

It would be very useful to have all of the rules, simply laid out, with all of the options (talents, actions etc) in once concise package. And then a supplementary book a year later to cover everything that had been published in boxes since the first book.

But if that was all the hardback contained, it would still be worth many people paying for the boxes if the boxes also included all of the setting information. Not stuff you want or find useful to look up in a table, or have to refer to in the middle of a scene, but all of the background and setting material. eg. The hardback book could have a list of all of the spells released that year. The box could contain all of that information as components, but also contain a big book detailing who uses the different spells, how they were developed, where they were used, an adventure in which you encounter / try out the spells etc. This wouldn't work if it was just a few pages of 'fluff' though, it would have to be a properly developed, weighty work.

shinma said:

Umm happiness and cyanide.

UncleArkie said:

XKCD actually

(also I hope you take it as a friendly joke, which is the spirit it was intended in)

shinma said:

XKCD yer sorry I got my ecomics mixed up there, and aye I love it

Angelic Despot said:

This is exactly my point, in a round about way. The way to keep both systems viable is to publish them as one product at all times. You get all the chits-cards-tables and charts all in one universal box set. Some will never use the charts, some will never use the cards, otherwise the two products will compete. A rules compendium at the end of the each year seems to me somewhat redundant with the same information being provided in the box set.

@ Peacekeeper:

I do get your comparison between box dnd and standard dnd. Except, they did not really advocate two modes of play, the systems were generally analogous between groups and individual players (both used Thaco, both used a relatively similar character sheet, both utilized wound boxes, etc) and the most important factor, the cost of the box DND game and the books were comparable. Hardback play, by the current model FFG is pursuing, is roughly 1/2 the cost of box play for the same, equivalent information and basically the same game.

Just to be clear, I do think the player's guide is great and the player's vault is great as it is a way for players, not GM's to have "take home" resources. However, I really don't see, even in a chit-game, many players picking up the player vault.

commoner said:

Perhaps the powers that be at FFG have decided to try to see if the game would do better as cheaper books then boxes and with not bits over bits?

Peacekeeper_b said:

The small, but vicious seminar commented on that the future supplements would be box sets, which is why I speculated that there might be "harvest" books at the end of each year gathering up the material that was published during the cycle.

This might generate more revenue as they basically just get to repackage and recycle the material already published and sell it again, however my fear was that people would wait for the books because they would be cheaper thus killing the chits game and making FFG less money.

Also not that it shows in marketing that being exclusive might be good for the image, but selling a lot of cheaper units will in most cases make you more money than selling a few expensive ones. So from a purely financial standpoint it might be a good idea.

UncleArkie said:

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but perhaps that's for the best. I think FFG could stand to profit handsomely from having both "camps" competing to prove that their preferred version of the rules is more popular.

Herr Arnulfe said:

Sorry about that Rum was involved.