Thanks FF games --

After your customer service staff denied that you would reprint the raven-cycle block to me in several emails I proceded to waste many dollars on ebay purchasing SoS and WoW packs. Thanks ass-hats.

Morgra said:

Caveat emptor.

Geez, no wonder you didn't have any friends to borrow them from.

While I don't agree with the language, you can't deny that being lied to repeatedly is frustrating. If he asked a direct question and they flatly denied a reprint, then subsequently reprinted, that is lying. I have no idea what the contents of the conversation was, but if it went like that - I feel bad for him.

Lying implies that the customer service reps he spoke to knew that the sets were going to be reprinted. Calling it lying is a huge stretch.

Well, I can understand the frustration. In any case, FFG communicated poorly (whether between deciders and customer service or between customer service and OP)… or they changed their mind about the reprint…

ScottieATF said:

You too the words right out of my mouth.

As someone who works in gaming retail, there have been numerous occasions where I have given a customer unknowingly incorrect information.

Now, the fact is that the customer-service reps in question were given their information by someone. Perhaps one might infer that those people knew the set was being reprinted, but that's not a given either.

In any company, large or small, there are going to be gaps is communication between departments, and even more to the point, management always has the opportunity to… change it's mind!

I can't count how many times I've encountered it: One day the boss says you're doing one thing, and the next day he says you're doing another. That's not lying, it's managements decision.

If you'd rather they never ever change their minds, I'm afraid you're going to be very disappointed in life.

While it's unfortunate that the reprint inconveniences you, and perhaps some others, I think it likely that it will benefit far more.

It's also possible that what he was told was in fact true at the time. This could have been a decision made after that e-mail. Of course if these reprints are released in only a few weeks, that could indicate it's been in the plans for months.

Bomb said:

Exactly, what sucks is that when that email was written by who-knows-who in customer service, the packs were already sitting in customs on a boat or even in their warehouse. That's not customer service, when someone can't do simple fact checking, and so provides incorrect information. The fact is that plans to reprint had been in place for a long time if the packs are 3 weeks out. The only thing that could be worse is that someone in management deliberately told customer service to provide that information, or it was their policy to not inform or to mislead its consumers about the reprint. I don't care how large your company is, or how good your product, that is simply bad customer service.

AGoT DC Meta said:

Or the corporate mandate was silence.

Still caveat emptor.

I have a completely different view on this. I am quite sure that they lied, and I have zero problem with it. Let's say I run companyX and sell widgetZ. Furthermore, let's say I have a new version of widgetZ coming out soon, but have some of the original version of widgetZ sitting in my wearhouse with sales slowly trickling in. If I announce the new version of widgetZ, all my current stock is now gunna sit there indefinitely as people wait for the new version instead of buying the current one.

Could FFG have come right out and said "Yes we are reprinting but not until all original stock is sold out."? Sure, but they certainly weren't obligated too. It might be a bit of PR blunder (maybe just be more forthcoming and give away the few remaining old packs as a contest or gesture of good will next time), but it is far from deserving this kind of vitriol imo. Apple does the exact same thing with iPhones and no one gives them this hate.

Professor Nomos said:

~I can do this too: caveat venditor.

@Nomos - I don't think what you're saying is completely pertinent technically because we're not talking about real estate law. Regardless,I'm talking about customer service, not faulty products.

@dcdennis - I don't necessarily disagree with you from a business standpoint, but a factor in any business is developing a relationship of trust with your consumers. I'm not saying they are obligated to do anything, merely that it sucks that they don't take more care with their PR, as you suggested. However, they tend to do this stuff all the time, so it's not really unexpected, unfortunately.

AGoT DC Meta said:

~professionals arguing law on a gaming forum shows how cool we really are.

True but FFG never forced, coerced or encouraged anyone to pay a premium. Grey markets are grey.

Property extends beyond the real. The essence of caveat emptor is the implied value of the goods is not warranted by the seller. FFG was not a party to the

This is a shame that FFG still makes these decisions.

FFG did some total BS just like this when they switched from CCG to LCG.

They lied to many of us and said boxes would still be legal. Then after some of us spent hundreds upon hundreds of dollars the C-levels at FFG decided to just ban all the 5KE and ITE cards.

It was a definitely a "rational self-interest" business decision but it really only worked because:

1. The Game of Thrones community is full of really cool players (the only reason I keep playing the game actually)

2. The HBO show saved the LCG format for GoT.

Had Game of Thrones not had such an awesome group of players that kept the game alive through that poorly thought out transition the LCG would have folded by now due to this poor business decision.

@professor nomos

Ever heard the saying "Penny wise but dollar stupid" ?

LaughingTree said:

Somehow, I doubt that.

Ratatoskr said:

Indeed. The LCG switch occurred in late 2007. Game of Thrones wasn't even ordered by HBO until March 2010, and began airing a year later. That leaves three-and-a-half years of LCG-not-folding unaccounted for.

Anyway, we're doing a disservice to this forum by continuing this thread, thereby justifying the OP's attitude. I recommend we let it drop.

MarthWMaster said:

Did you miss my #1 point? Out here in Cali there were a few amazing people that kept the game barely alive for 3 years UNTIL the show started.

Maybe this was very different in Europe but from 2007-2009 in California the LCG meta was all but non-existent.

If it wasn't for the efforts of 3-4 players from 2007-2010 California's meta might only be a few isolated small casual groups at this point instead of the 60+ tournament players we had at regionals. In 2007 after FFG decision, A LOT of California's older players quit for years. The only reason many of us came back was because of the community being so great.

LaughingTree said:

I do have to agree to some extent. Prior to the show, we had like 5 members in Sacramento. We broke a record last week with 12 (and 2-3 people weren't there). Show has definitely helped out.

Yeah the west coast and some parts of the east coast and midwest too, were revitalized do to the show. However, from a business stand point the LCG was a huge success before the show. Pretty much since the beginning of the LCG it was a huge financial success. The show just translated that success into a larger and more active community.

Staton said:

If its such a financial success, why was worlds prize support so bad?

Worlds prize support has ALWAYS been bad. FFG just doesn't give away very much. Compare the regional kits the past couple of years to the regional kits during the CCG. Find some other people who are connected to FFG if you don't trust me, but the game was a huge financial success before the show. I'm sure the show increased profits though.

Staton said:

If you are correct about it being a huge financial success, I would have to guess that Europe and Asia are a very huge part of that. My take was based simply on what the West Coast of the US metas were like in the 2-3 years following the LCG switch. For 2 years after the LCG the California meta was dead.

Due entirely to the efforts of players like Deathjester and Bronson in San Diego for instance the San Diego meta grew from 2 people to 30 around 2010-2011.

I don't dispute your claim about the huge financial success if you have access to inside information (which I do not) but it certainly seemed dead out here on the West Coast for years after the LCG switch.

Oh it wasn't just the West Coast, although you guys were hit the hardest, the numbers (competitively anyway) were way down across the board. Europe did see quite a huge jump in numbers, and China was a pretty big surprise success. I think it had a lot to do with the LCG saw a renewed effort from FFG to coordinate with local producers to get the game rolling in multiple languages again. They had tried to do the same thing with the CCG but saw mixed results.

@Morgra: Do you still have the email text from the FFG customer service reps? If so, any chance you can post some of this. (It isn't that I don't believe you, I'm just curious the exact language they used. Generally speaking, I think transparency is a good thing, and more information would help in this regard.)

Although Morgra's post is written a bit like a flame, I think his post gets at a potential area of concern that some of us have. FFG's customer service frequently performs below expectations when key decisions about new products are made.

OK, let's say we give FFG the benefit of the doubt (the customer service reps didn't lie)

The problem is that FFG has a pretty poor track record of transparent decision making. Of course, FFG isn't required to consult the wider player base, but this is a *community* devoted to the express purpose of helping the company succeed. For people who play competitively and buy products regularly, their purchases are driven probably 5% by FFG's marketing team and 95% by recommendations from fellow players. In short, if FFG wants to sell a chapter pack to the same customer every month, it is essential to ensure that customer is happy with the game. Customer service is one of the key ingredients.

It's important to acknowledge that our Game of Thrones community may not always know what's best when it comes to design or distribution. In fact, I think the community as a whole frequently gets it wrong. But this is irrelevant to whether or not FFG should be more transparent. If anything, transparency is critically important in cases where the community is "getting it wrong," because a simple explanation for *why* a business decision was made can go a long way to avert a customer service crisis. Consider the decision to restrict the Laughing Storm and errata the Heir to the Iron Throne agenda before it was even released. That resulted in huge pushback from the community, and most of the Delaware players stopped playing completely because of these changes (at least, that's my understanding for why they stopped…they were extremely frustrated with that move). The point is that transparency isn't about turning over control, but about making sure everyone understands and that at least most people are on-board with the decision.

If this were the first time FFG had performed poorly in this regard, Morgra and others wouldn't be talking about it. As Laughing Tree noted though, FFG has made decisions in the past that proved incredibly harmful for the community. Sure the business picked up and overall the net revenue is higher now, but it would have been *much* higher had FFG managed its relationship with its customers better. Certainly, the game experience would have been more enjoyable had we all felt like we weren't completely overlooked in 2007.

Now, let's assume that Morgra is right, and customer service reps simply lied (knowingly or unknowingly)

When it comes to FFG's customer service, my natural tendency at this point is to be cynical. Fair or unfair, I suspect the customer service reps probably did provide false information, though I suspect they themselves may not have known. But the lack of knowledge of a low-level employee really isn't a good excuse. If you don't know an answer, then don't pretend to. If you know the answer, then don't provide false information. Lying to customers is the fastest way for them to lose trust in the company. Frankly, if I knew for certain FFG had lied, that would bother me. If it happened several times, I may consider looking for alternative games. I'm just not interested in a company that treats me disrespectfully. (This is coming from someone who has played the game for 7+ years.)

Assuming the decision to not reprint was made, then that decision changed later, FFG should have taken the time to clarify the shift in thinking through better communications with its customers. All the company needed to do is post a note that says "we didn't plan on reprinting, but given significant demand and frustration among some customers that the product is unavailable, we are making a special exception to accommodate those customers who are very important to us." In short, FFG could have reversed their decision, but done so in a way that ultimately built greater trust (by explaining this decision as the win-win for the customers that it actually is) rather than mismanaging expectations through a black-box approach of no information.

I have a few emails from FFG about the issue. Both times they said "We have no plans at this time to reprint these (Clash of Arms and Ravens) chapter pack cycles." Both of these emails were within two weeks of the announcement.