Jump to content

PC types Vs Monster types


Reaperbryan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Unfortunately, the things people say they want when you survey them correlate poorly with the things they buy after you make them.

 

After a few months of Bones sales, Reaper will have a reasonably decent database of what's selling at retail, though unpacking that data into categories that allow an art director to say, "I want more with this and less with that" while specifying in some useful way what characteristics are the important ones for "this" and "that" might be really difficult.

 

I'll second that... I'm guilty of this very thing in the last KS. While the KS was running I was pretty vocal about wanting to pledge for multiples of the "Free Vampire add-ons" like the Dungeon Attack. In the beginning, I wanted to really bulk up on my horde ranks. But as the KS developed, the funds that I had earmarked for extra DA or extra Fire It Up started to get moved over to other add-ons because of the cool factor and an educated guess that the bigger add-ons would be a better value.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 186
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I guess is something with the "long tail" issue. You could have some very popular options that sell the most and a lot of more obscure. Maybe some variations of classic and well sold archetypes. And some obscures options. How much obscure? Well, check the least sold fig, and compare the new one with that. Could be more popular? If yes, go on, if not, choose another one.

 

Another point of view. Work with types and subtipes of creatures instead of individuals. Don´t make deonynchus, make simply dinosaurs. One small, one medium, one large. And so on.

 

 

I guess that what sell most are pc characters. For example, I´m painting pc´s for my players, but I´m ok using non-painted figures or simply markers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another point of view. Work with types and subtipes of creatures instead of individuals. Don´t make deonynchus, make simply dinosaurs. One small, one medium, one large. And so on.

 

To be fair, that "simplifying" approach only works to a point. I mean, you can't really use a deinonychus as a pteranodon, much less use one as a tyrannosaurus rex. ::P:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Another point of view. Work with types and subtipes of creatures instead of individuals. Don´t make deonynchus, make simply dinosaurs. One small, one medium, one large. And so on.

 

To be fair, that "simplifying" approach only works to a point. I mean, you can't really use a deinonychus as a pteranodon, much less use one as a tyrannosaurus rex. ::P:

 

Sure! THat´s why it´s a simplification :P But is easier to proxy a dinosaur with another dinousar (same example) than wih an elf :P

 

And remember that I´m saying to make different sizes for each subtype ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually thought the Goroloth was an Aboleth. Just a very creative take on it. Although I remain astonished to learn that, yes, evidently the Aboleth is a rarely-used critter. Y'all need to change that. They're underutilized and need more love. They are most excellent top-shelf villains.

 

Reaper's minis are the coolest minis I know. They are so awesome, in fact, that I not only use them - I adjust the game to accomodate them. I have some old partha displacer beasts if I want to be humdrum - but I have a clowder of Reaper Phase Cats for when I want to spice up supper.

 

Because 4 tentacle attacks are better than 2. I've been giving out Casket Works to players, and recently one asked why I do this if I know it's unlikely they'll ever buy miniatures from it.

 

And I said: "think of it as the new Monster Manual".

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I guess that what sell most are pc characters. For example, I´m painting pc´s for my players, but I´m ok using non-painted figures or simply markers.

in what context? for reaper, at the moment? sure. what about for the company which shall not be named? i really, really doubt it. their whole business model is based around selling entire armies of non human critters.

 

i suspect that as bones become more popular and having large numbers of "ready to play" monsters becomes more affordable and accessible sales will begin to shift in favor of the beasts. as a skirmish gamer PC types consist of a relatively small fraction of my collection, as i'd rather have a whole new warband than redundant numbers.

 

here is what i would do:

make the groups of stretch goal minis groups of unique warlord faction models.

e.g. a leader, a ranged attacker, a minion, a close combat specialist, and a wizard.

this variety would provide plenty of options for building an entire warband/army with and every stretch goal could effectively add a whole warlord faction. spice with big monsters and warlords and - bam, you have a KS.

 

this would keep most everyone happy, as PC/NPC types would be well represented amongst the factions (crusaders, overlords, mercenaries, elves and on and on) and a wide variety of monster *factions* and single beasts as well.

that would be my ideal vision of a bones 2 KS, anyhow.

Edited by vulture
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I guess that what sell most are pc characters. For example, I´m painting pc´s for my players, but I´m ok using non-painted figures or simply markers.

in what context? for reaper, at the moment? sure. what about for the company which shall not be named? i really, really doubt it. their whole business model is based around selling entire armies of non human critters.

 

i suspect that as bones become more popular and having large numbers of "ready to play" monsters becomes more affordable and accessible sales will begin to shift in favor of the beasts. as a skirmish gamer PC types consist of a relatively small fraction of my collection, as i'd rather have a whole new warband than redundant numbers.

 

here is what i would do:

make the groups of stretch goal minis groups of unique warlord faction models.

e.g. a leader, a ranged attacker, a minion, a close combat specialist, and a wizard.

this variety would provide plenty of options for building an entire warband/army with and every stretch goal could effectively add a whole warlord faction. spice with big monsters and warlords and - bam, you have a KS.

 

this would keep most everyone happy, as PC/NPC types would be well represented amongst the factions (crusaders, overlords, mercenaries, elves and on and on) and a wide variety of monster *factions* and single beasts as well.

that would be my ideal vision of a bones 2 KS, anyhow.

 

Sure, maybe I was a little rolecentric. But if we are talking about armies? yeah sure.

 

Another option? Make a poll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When considering how many of what type you want/need, dont forget that the price point of Bones also kicks the door down on an entirely new (well, not entirely new...but one which has been secondary for Reaper) batch of customers...the Wargamer.

 

How many different orcs does an RPG gamer need? 9 is probably sufficient. However, if a wargamer is looking to put together an army of orcs for use with a set of rules like Battlesystem (old school TSR rules), they might need 100 total figures. That will mean at a minimum you will have 11 duplicates of all the figures and 12 of one. 9 orcs really is not that many in that market. Even more so when you put the 3 old ones next to the 6 new ones and see how well they dont match up. Having 4 or 5 of each broad category of figure (guys with swords, guys with bows, guys with spears and shields, mounted guys...) all in the same general faction (elves, dwarves, orcs, goblins, good guys, evil guys, undead...) makes the prospect of a Bones army much more attractive. This is even more true when you consider that while an RPG player might buy 100 miniatures in their whole gaming life time, a wargamer will often buy 100 miniatures for a single army, and they might build a new army every 6 months to a year (probably more often with the lower price points when compared to more expensive materials and manufacturers).

 

I end up doing both, so for my own selfish interests, I would love to see more of the same (in different poses and small changes in equipment and other gear). Many of the Warlord sets are already mostly there, and I would guess the higher cost of metal is a lagging factor for sales on them, but if they were to go through and do some of the core grunt sets (things like the Vale Swordsmen 9 pack, dwarven miners 9 pack, battle nuns...) for $25 or so and sets of 4 or 5 cavalry that are stylistic matches, filling in with more expensive metals becomes much more palatable.

 

The past sales data though is harder to lock in on that though. As Reaper has said, their core business has been RPG gamers and collectors. Most of those will only need two or three cavalry figures ever. I wargamer though might have two or three units of 10 cavalry in a single army (and have a half dozen armies). Hopefully though, these are things that Reaper has been considering on their napkins and post-it notes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ral Partha 3 Stage figures.

 

Another take on the same concept can be seen from Harwood Hobbies

 

http://www.harwoodhobbies.com/

 

Instead of a progression over levels you have a progression through the Apocalypse. The first figure might be a normal civilian on her way to work. The second is a bit frazzled wielding a weapon of some form. The third being a zombie. They also do some which have a Lovecraftian bent, so the final one is a crazy person.

 

Of course, when considering series figures, you can not forget mounted and on foot of the same figure. Partha did a lot of those back in the day (I dont recall if they had a specific name for them though).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought about the mounted and on foot. Well, specifically for, say, a paladin who gets their special mount, as part of the series.

 

And example for a fighter would be:

#1 - fighter type in ring mail, with long sword and wooden shield,

#2 - fighter in chain mail, metal shield, long sword, secondary sword on side

#3 - fighter in plate top, two handed sword

#4 - fighter in full plate, two swords, one flaming

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding mounted minis: I have been thinking about it and the only thing different is from the waist down. They could cast them in top and bottom parts and people could glue them how they want. Or I was thinking of using magnets for mounted/dismounted poses.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ral Partha 3 Stage figures.

 

Another take on the same concept can be seen from Harwood Hobbies

 

http://www.harwoodhobbies.com/

 

Instead of a progression over levels you have a progression through the Apocalypse. The first figure might be a normal civilian on her way to work. The second is a bit frazzled wielding a weapon of some form. The third being a zombie. They also do some which have a Lovecraftian bent, so the final one is a crazy person.

 

Of course, when considering series figures, you can not forget mounted and on foot of the same figure. Partha did a lot of those back in the day (I dont recall if they had a specific name for them though).

 

There's a couple in Reaper's DHL - Vanessa Redstorm and Mia Hartstorm have nearly-identical mounted and foot versions. Although this actually escaped me until recently, despite owning both versions for ages. The Anhurian could count, too.

 

I need to go look and see if DHL 02001 has a suitable on-foot counterpart. I have plans for him.

 

 

3-stage Zombie figures is a concept cool enough to actually make me want to play a zombie game. And I hate zombie apocalypse stuff of all kinds. Almost as much as I hate vampires.

Edited by buglips*the*goblin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pirate Ship

 

Kraken

 

28mm CAV (any type, lol)

 

Furnature/Props (tables, chairs, etc)

 

Herd Animals

 

the entire Nefsokar line! :D :D :D :D :D

 

all of the Chronoscope zombies! we need mass amounts modern era zombies up in this piece!

Edited by Girot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of this talk of other stuff made me miss the original question, what is a PC versus what is a mob...

 

For me, the PCs figures are things that a player might play as there character...pretty simple, huh? But that is a huge range of different things. In a straight D&D style game, it would be mostly humanoid (or centoid), mostly human sized - a little bigger or a little smaller, mostly intelligent and mostly free willed. This knocks out big things, animals, most the undead, summoned or created things and furniture. However, we have played campaigns using the Giantcraft rules for giants, Council of Wyrms for dragons and even used the rules for intelligent undead (forget the name of the supplement).

 

You also have somewhat crooked D&D style campaigns, rule sets like Rifts that allow dragon, giants and all manner of other things to be played right along side regular human types. For those rules, about the only thing that wouldn't qualify as a possible PC would be the furniture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...