Getting Priced Out

[Greybeard86]

17 minutes ago, Saxon said:

Its not explicitly political. It wasnt until about 5 years ago I realised the imperium was satire.

It was political from the beginning. But you didn't realize because it no longer is treated as such. Little by little the old satirical foundation is replaced with the "cleaner" version; except that it is "cleaning" a fascist regime, so good luck with that

7 minutes ago, Mcthew said:

Agree. AoS is less problematic, but recently the lore has attempted to show more grey than good vs evil. Chaos, for example, are no longer championed by inhuman monsters, but wayward heroes that buckled under the weight of pure horror. FEC are a tragedy really, as are most mortals in this Greek-God play that is AoS. Which is why there is so much narrative scope in this universe. And fewer problems.

Right. I am curious to see how that shapes up. It does look a bit more like "greek mythology" than the true representation of a "real" setting. Which, by the way, it is a huge change from warhammer fantasy.

7 minutes ago, Mcthew said:

WH40k faces the same problems as 2000AD did with Judge Dredd. The main character is a facist. Its a police state and good people are the ones who die, often horribly.  To sugar-coat that is to lie to your readership because you're afraid they won't get the satire. GW have got cold feet in the way 2000AD did not. Now the message is too mixed.

Pretty much. They are sugar coating something that cannot be sugar coated sensibly. But I do not know if most people in the hobby care much; there are some subreddits about marxist theory in 40k or what not where this is hotly debated, but I would say it is a minority talking there.

Personally, I have stuck with the old paradigm and mostly ignore the new things.

[Greybeard86]

5 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

+++ MOD HAT +++

It appears my screen didn't refresh properly before I posted.  Please can we avoid any political discussions on TGA.  We've done very well over the past 15 pages, but currently teetering on that slippery slope.

We could argue that the "political element" has always been part of GW games / universe, as it was in its foundation a sattire of certain political elements of the 80s 

But I do understand why you have that rule, and also appreciate how there's been no censoring of opinions in the thread, so I will bow to the wisdom of the mod hat.

[Greybeard86]

32 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Going to have to agree with @Sleboda here.  GW is a miniatures company as it's primary industry and it's never made any secret about it.  The miniatures come first and the rules are written second.  We as hobbyists decide how we wish to use those rules, what version, customisations etc.  You could feasibly use citadel miniatures on a chess board - it wouldn't change how much we paid for that miniature.  This is also backed up by random one off characters that have no special rules being priced the same as other characters (looking at you Bladeghest birthday miniature and Catachan lady).

What I do think is worth saying though that this does highlight that our own approach to our hobby will determine our personal view of what's value for money and what isn't.  If you're primarily a player/gamer, then the rules are going to play a key role in determining what miniatures you wish to pick up.  If you're not then the rules play less of a role and you're more likely to buy something that might not be cost effective from a gaming perspective.

I do not think any of us are disagreeing, I simply suspect that @RuneBrush and @Sleboda , like myself, place more weight on the "hobby" than the gaming. As all of us have admitted, some people do care quite a bit about the "gaming". To them, the rules are very important and so they are very affected by the meta swings. Then, naturally, the rules are part of what GW uses to "create value" for their range and is part of the pricing decisions.

[Saxon]

3 minutes ago, Greybeard86 said:

I do not think any of us are disagreeing, I simply suspect that @RuneBrush and @Sleboda , like myself, place more weight on the "hobby" than the gaming. As all of us have admitted, some people do care quite a bit about the "gaming". To them, the rules are very important and so they are very affected by the meta swings. Then, naturally, the rules are part of what GW uses to "create value" for their range and is part of the pricing decisions.

100% correct. Some of us aren't the best painters so have to rely on our tabletop skills (or lack thereof in my case).

Recent releases ( Slaanesh and Bonereapers top the list) concern me on the basis that the rules are strong to push models. I say this because there is the inevitable nerf after they've made bank. Both slaanesh summoning and petrifex elite have been hit with a stick. 

I dont know if that is a good business model personally. People who buy models for rules tend to get upset when those rules get changed. 

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

29 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Going to have to agree with @Sleboda here.  GW is a miniatures company as it's primary industry and it's never made any secret about it.  The miniatures come first and the rules are written second.  We as hobbyists decide how we wish to use those rules, what version, customisations etc.  You could feasibly use citadel miniatures on a chess board - it wouldn't change how much we paid for that miniature.  This is also backed up by random one off characters that have no special rules being priced the same as other characters (looking at you Bladeghest birthday miniature and Catachan lady).

What I do think is worth saying though that this does highlight that our own approach to our hobby will determine our personal view of what's value for money and what isn't.  If you're primarily a player/gamer, then the rules are going to play a key role in determining what miniatures you wish to pick up.  If you're not then the rules play less of a role and you're more likely to buy something that might not be cost effective from a gaming perspective.

I don't think you can really ignore the added value from rules, community and store spaces provided by GW. Sure, the model itself is a big draw, but there are lots of model companies out there that make good models I don't buy because they lack the added value of a the game that comes with them. And I say that as someone who has definitely bought several models in the past just to paint them.

Even if it's true that there is inherent value in a model that can be divorced from any instrumental use (which I don't think there is, because if you buy a model "to paint" or even "to collect", that makes it still instrumentally valuable), instrumental use for the model (mainly playing GW games in the case of GW) adds a completely different dimension. GW would never sell nearly as many models if there were no games attached to them, that's just a fact. And they would sell a lot fewer models if the games were not fun, widely played and well supported (through updates, store spaces...). I'd never even think about buying a box of Freeguild Handgunners if there was no game of AoS or if they were not good in that game, that's for sure. If anything, the game makes me want to buy them in spite of their sculpt. The context in which the models are placed definitely increases their value to me. And I don't even think it should be controversial that such context can add or detract from the value of a thing, regardless of the thing's more intrinsic attributes.

[Sleboda]

6 hours ago, Greybeard86 said:

I do not think any of us are disagreeing, I simply suspect that @RuneBrush and @Sleboda , like myself, place more weight on the "hobby" than the gaming. As all of us have admitted, some people do care quite a bit about the "gaming". To them, the rules are very important and so they are very affected by the meta swings. Then, naturally, the rules are part of what GW uses to "create value" for their range and is part of the pricing decisions.

Just to be clear, I absolutely understand that the rules for a model are a factor in purchasing decisions for some players. I'm not disputing that at all. I'm also not ignoring that a model may be less interesting or useful to some players as time goes by and the rules change (sort of like the floppy disk point raised by another poster - though I will say that the disk still does not physically change when new tech comes along (btw, I still buy 99% of my music on CD, not digital, and listen on a 22 year old boom box)).

All I'm saying (and it's weird to have to hammer this home) is that a model --- the actual physical model --- does not change when its rules do. You may be upset with the rules changes, but it still remains physically the same and (!!!) you can still use it in exactly the same ways you did before the rules changed if you like. Changing the letters printed on a page does not erase the letters in your old book, nor does it somehow transform the plastic or metal of the model.

[JackStreicher]

10 hours ago, Beastmaster said:

Or it could end up like that World of Warcraft movie that even the hardcore fans didn’t see or want or need.

I really loved it

[Overread]

22 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

I really loved it

I enjoyed it too! It was a bit messy in some areas and it was odd that they did the whole thing in CGI and then had human actors (I'd have just done it all in CGI at that point). But it was a nice telling of the very start of the original story - at least before WoW got underway and messed everything up.

[Nos]

On 10/23/2020 at 7:03 PM, Sleboda said:

Just to be clear, I absolutely understand that the rules for a model are a factor in purchasing decisions for some players. I'm not disputing that at all. I'm also not ignoring that a model may be less interesting or useful to some players as time goes by and the rules change (sort of like the floppy disk point raised by another poster - though I will say that the disk still does not physically change when new tech comes along (btw, I still buy 99% of my music on CD, not digital, and listen on a 22 year old boom box)).

All I'm saying (and it's weird to have to hammer this home) is that a model --- the actual physical model --- does not change when its rules do. You may be upset with the rules changes, but it still remains physically the same and (!!!) you can still use it in exactly the same ways you did before the rules changed if you like. Changing the letters printed on a page does not erase the letters in your old book, nor does it somehow transform the plastic or metal of the model.

Absolutley. You buy what's in the box, which is a model, that's it. You dont buy a model that is guaranteed to perform well on the tabletop consistently or at all, or that will even be guaranteed to be legal on the tabletop in 3 years, or even within a rule set or system that will continue to be supported. 

[Icarion]

On 10/25/2020 at 6:22 AM, Nos said:

Absolutley. You buy what's in the box, which is a model, that's it. You dont buy a model that is guaranteed to perform well on the tabletop consistently or at all, or that will even be guaranteed to be legal on the tabletop in 3 years, or even within a rule set or system that will continue to be supported. 

This is why I have no sympathy nor patience whatsoever for the tournament crowd who buy up spamlists with each new codex/battltomes and then whine about selling it all on ebay after the first update. 

[zilberfrid]

On 10/25/2020 at 12:22 PM, Nos said:

Absolutley. You buy what's in the box, which is a model, that's it. You dont buy a model that is guaranteed to perform well on the tabletop consistently or at all, or that will even be guaranteed to be legal on the tabletop in 3 years, or even within a rule set or system that will continue to be supported. 

To which the reply is that GW adds value by giving the rulesets and places to play. Without those, the model loses a lot of value.

[Nos]

38 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

To which the reply is that GW adds value by giving the rulesets and places to play. Without those, the model loses a lot of value.

People pay for what's in the box. If those added value aspects you mention  are removed or changed, the consumer is not entitled to a refund or to say what they bought has changed. Because what they bought is the same. It was never offered as part of the product. 

Now I will grant that many people might deem that the price they pay is as you say because of that attendant value of other aspects of the hobby and that such inflates the price. But it's not an explicit part of the product. What you actually buy is what's in the box. And the box explicitly states what is in the box  which is a plastic model(s) instructions to put it together and a war scroll as part of that . No more, no less. 

As with anything, people will pay what they think is fair, or they won't, that's all relative.

But what people are buying is not. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by Nos

[EccentricCircle]

I'm no fan of increased prices, and its a shame the new warcry set proved to be so expensive. However, I've seen a few people comment things along the lines of:
"I've enjoyed playing warcry so far, but will have to stop now because I can't afford Catacombs" Or "I was planning to get into Warcry, but this new set being too expensive means I can't".

Not wanting to buy the set is fair enough, but you can play warcry perfectly well without it? As far as I can see its just a way to get the new warbands a little early, and with a nominal discount. It has what looks like a cool optional campaign, but I don't see it really as an introductory product at this point. If you already have the rulebook and cards, then you can keep playing just fine, and if you want to start, buying the books and a warband is still one of the less ludicrously expensive options. I'm not quite sure why anyone thinks they need catacombs, besides it being the new hotness?

[Kramer]

8 hours ago, EccentricCircle said:

I'm no fan of increased prices, and its a shame the new warcry set proved to be so expensive. However, I've seen a few people comment things along the lines of:
"I've enjoyed playing warcry so far, but will have to stop now because I can't afford Catacombs" Or "I was planning to get into Warcry, but this new set being too expensive means I can't".

Not wanting to buy the set is fair enough, but you can play warcry perfectly well without it? As far as I can see its just a way to get the new warbands a little early, and with a nominal discount. It has what looks like a cool optional campaign, but I don't see it really as an introductory product at this point. If you already have the rulebook and cards, then you can keep playing just fine, and if you want to start, buying the books and a warband is still one of the less ludicrously expensive options. I'm not quite sure why anyone thinks they need catacombs, besides it being the new hotness?

As I’m one of the people who was excited about it but because of the price won’t be getting it (might convince myself in time though) 

Its not just because it’s the new hotness. It’s because it’s presented or at least viewed as a one stop and complete starting point. 
i can start the game without it. Although I wouldn’t be able to get the markers. perhaps not the full terrain set as not all parts from the previous one never got sold. (although I’m probably the only person excited about the doors. ) 

on top of that it’s already incomplete if you consider chaotic beasts as part of the core game. So it gets more expensive. 

but the alternative is getting all the bits and pieces separately. Which between two books, terrain, two warbands is even more expensive. 

so I’m stuck between taking the gamble of jumping on board with a set I feel is a bit overpriced. Especially compared to the previous box I missed out on. 
or getting all the parts separately with no guarantees it will become available, and spending more money. Just so I don’t have the massive expense in one go. 

the only advantage that does give is it allows me to pick and choose. But having not played Warcry, that’s also not the best situation. 

at least the above is what makes it a dealbreaker for me. 

(edit; just to clarify, the gamble is investing in a game I might not play it enough. Due to friends not liking it, me not liking it, not getting through painting the terrain etc.) 

Edited October 27, 2020 by Kramer

[EccentricCircle]

9 hours ago, Kramer said:

As I’m one of the people who was excited about it but because of the price won’t be getting it (might convince myself in time though) 

Its not just because it’s the new hotness. It’s because it’s presented or at least viewed as a one stop and complete starting point. 
i can start the game without it. Although I wouldn’t be able to get the markers. perhaps not the full terrain set as not all parts from the previous one never got sold. (although I’m probably the only person excited about the doors. ) 

on top of that it’s already incomplete if you consider chaotic beasts as part of the core game. So it gets more expensive. 

but the alternative is getting all the bits and pieces separately. Which between two books, terrain, two warbands is even more expensive. 

so I’m stuck between taking the gamble of jumping on board with a set I feel is a bit overpriced. Especially compared to the previous box I missed out on. 
or getting all the parts separately with no guarantees it will become available, and spending more money. Just so I don’t have the massive expense in one go. 

the only advantage that does give is it allows me to pick and choose. But having not played Warcry, that’s also not the best situation. 

at least the above is what makes it a dealbreaker for me. 

(edit; just to clarify, the gamble is investing in a game I might not play it enough. Due to friends not liking it, me not liking it, not getting through painting the terrain etc.) 

Interesting. Thanks for explaining.

I was in a similar boat, in that there was no way I could afford the original set. However our group soon discovered that we could get on fine without it. We already had warbands from our AoS armies, the stand alone rulebook wasn't too bad by GW standards, and it didn't take long to get our card packs and start playing. We haven't once missed not having the cards, tokens etc, and while I have picked up quite a bit of the terrain separately, we always make our own arrangements anyway, so didn't need that.

This time around I was keen on catacombs, in spite of its price, since as a D&D player, the doors and dungeon terrain will actually be quite useful. Its a shame its overpriced, but not being sure whether to get the Shadowstalkers won't stop my existing DoK warband from continuing to slice and dice their way through our ongoing warcry campaign.

[Mcthew]

So... Another resurrection of this thread, but this time looking at the non-model side of the hobby.

With Broken Realms due for pre-order, what is the expectation of price for the 160ish page book? 

Wrath of the Everchosen was a paltry 100ish pages at £30, and a step increase on the narrative books, and low value compared to battletomes that would have more use. I didn't buy WotE until I found it somewhere with a significant discount (got in finally for £23).

Even £30 for 160 pages for Broken Realms would feel like poor value: the Realmgate Wars books were, on average, 300 pages of AoS goodness, so £45 was, I'd say, not bad. 160 pages for the same price shows massive hobby-inflation that cannot be justified and will steer me away from the hobby, alas (the new models and prices had already started this trend).

I'd bite at £25. I'd consider it at £30. Anything more would be alienating.

Edited November 3, 2020 by Mcthew

[plavski]

It's £25

And €32.50 for all us cool Euros

Edited November 3, 2020 by plavski

[Mcthew]

19 minutes ago, plavski said:

It's £25

And €32.50 for all us cool Euros

🥳

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

I really wish they would follow the DnD model and give you just the rules for free without having to buy books. I appreciate the art and lore the books provide, but I still find something like Broken Realms a hard sell if all I am interested in from that book is like one page of rules from a new battalion.

[stratigo]

I want to note, you can't really talk corporate pricing, value for cost, or what exactly your dollar (pound/euro/whathave you) should buy without being political.

 

These are all political topics. The idea that your purchase should include some guarantor of rules or if you are only buying the tangible plastics is a political discussion.

[Mcthew]

9 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I really wish they would follow the DnD model and give you just the rules for free without having to buy books. I appreciate the art and lore the books provide, but I still find something like Broken Realms a hard sell if all I am interested in from that book is like one page of rules from a new battalion.

They are unlikely to be essential changes to the rules. Just stuff that enhances the play of certain factions. Wrath of the Everchosen, for example, is fun, adds a little in terms of allegiance abilities but doesn't fix or add anything important. Just different tweaks to playing them.

Forbidden Power was different - this added new endless spells and 2 playable allegiances that are quite popular now (and a godsend for Nighthaunt players). Again, an expensive set but you got models with those. But again, far from essential for most players. You're not missing out really if you only want the rules.

Leave that for AoS 3.0 in a year or two.

[Kramer]

2 hours ago, Mcthew said:

So... Another resurrection of this thread, but this time looking at the non-model side of the hobby.

With Broken Realms due for pre-order, what is the expectation of price for the 160ish page book? 

Wrath of the Everchosen was a paltry 100ish pages at £30, and a step increase on the narrative books, and low value compared to battletomes that would have more use. I didn't buy WotE until I found it somewhere with a significant discount (got in finally for £23).

Even £30 for 160 pages for Broken Realms would feel like poor value: the Realmgate Wars books were, on average, 300 pages of AoS goodness, so £45 was, I'd say, not bad. 160 pages for the same price shows massive hobby-inflation that cannot be justified and will steer me away from the hobby, alas (the new models and prices had already started this trend).

I'd bite at £25. I'd consider it at £30. Anything more would be alienating.

With 32,5 euro it’s just above what I would be willing to pay. So I’ll probably cave and get them all digitally or I’ll cave and go for the warcry box. 

but while debating this I weirdly also became concerned with the amount t of books 😅

It shouldn’t matter. But if it’s a book a month there is no way I’m keeping up. I don’t play regularly in normal times. Let alone now. I’m starting to lose excitement because I can’t keep up anymore. Basically the same thing what happened when I went to uni. 

not much point to this post. Except that it was a realisation why I’m, for the first time, starting to lose my GW fanboy membership. The hype trains go by to fast for me to jump on. 

[Mcthew]

Just now, Kramer said:

not much point to this post

Couldn't disagree with you more!! 😛 The point you've just made on volumes of books is a biggie. Most people wouldn't subscribe to a monthly publication of £30. So why should GW expect us to?

Realmgate Wars had 4 books in total, so I'm expecting this to have at least 4 volumes. I could stretch to one every quarter, but one a month?!! I'd also wonder at the quality of the books if they became so regular.

You're right that there is an issue of overload here - if this is going to lead to big AoS lore/rules changes, I'd hope for a breather between books rather than this GW AoS arms race of needing to keep up with... er... themselves, really.

The bar can only be set so high before people stop reaching for it, or even seeing where it is.

[stratigo]

Ha, 4 books. Oh the optimism.

 

Check how many books they forced on psychic awakening. Some people only had a book for like 3 months before it was entirely invalidated. In the middle of a pandemic where they couldn't really use it anyways.

 

GW's rules writing is pretty exploitative to its customers.

[Kramer]

21 minutes ago, stratigo said:GW's rules writing is pretty exploitative to its customers.

 

34 minutes ago, Mcthew said:

this to have at least 4 volumes. I could stretch to one every quarter, but one a month?!! I'd also wonder at the quality of the books if they became so regular.

I Don’t play 40k. But from the outside it looked like quite a good idea. Get everything updated before the new edition. 

Kinda what I expect from this series as well. 5 factions in this book. 25 factions total. Add a few more because of multiple cities etc. So 6 books would be my guess. 

But exploitative is too strong a word imo. As that implies some intent. And I’m still on the more Good natured but naïf nerd gw, rather than more clever en conniving than I expect GW