Public question to Eric J.

[Forar]

Hm.. What is so bad about M2E that people are going through all this? Is 1.5 that much better? I am really asking, not trying anything else. I am a new player, only play'd with beta rules, never with 1.5 but everyone in my gaming group actually preferred the beta rules vs 1.5

You know, you can reverse the editions in our post and the question is just as valid.

Assuming 1.5 and 2.0 are both enjoyable to play, one has costs associated with it (book(s), cards), the other does not.

Cost alone might keep some people from updating, at least for a while.

Hell, one of the things that got me into Malifaux was that it was an order of magnitude cheaper than a lot of miniatures games, but there is a difference between "a new book with new models is out, I think I'll wait on those" and "a new edition is out, You Must Pay $X To Continue With Official Support (tournament play, errata, etc)".

Now, we don't know how much the decks will be (it's probably pretty safe to assume the book will be priced like most of the others), but there is a difference between a yearly update that can be attended to piecemeal over months or years, and an update that hits the core rules and affects every model at once.

Note: I'm not trying to rain on the parade of M2E, merely pointing out that being incredulous about why people might not want to change editions is, at this point, something that has been hashed out, rehashed, thrown back in the oven and hashed some more. For some, it's pragmatic reasons like the above note, for others it's based on model or game mechanics changes, and for others it's simply a dislike of having to re-learn all the little intricacies and interactions they spent years working out. Even with a simplified/straightforward system, there will always be things to work out, and this time loaded down with trying to not get caught up mixing the two editions. I guarantee at least a few games will hit a stopping point because "Oh, wait, you mean ______ don't do that anymore?!?"

[PierceSternum]

And would you say the customers are worse off for pathfinder?

In this case wyrd is being offered opportunity to support AND BE SUPPORTED BYthe classic community.

[HalcyonSeraph]

Funny Wizards said the same thing about pathfinder.

I don't believe they did. I am pretty sure when WotC wrote the OGL and released 3rd under it, they knew that it could be used to make offshoot copycat games. That was sort of the point.

[Forar]

Is it competition to Wyrd? No. They get money either way if their models are supported in both versions.

I guess in part that depends on how much revenue they expect/rely upon from the purchase of the rules books (mini, full, whatever).

If it's a side note that people may or may not have, that'd be one thing. But I assume it's a sizable commitment of resources for both Wyrd and stores to produce and stock dozens of books for purchase. If all that money and space is wasted because people buy the models but don't buy the books, that could be seen as a measure of competition, if not with the entire line, then just with one product within it.

Also, the WOTC/Pathfinder issue is very different. There was the OGL that allowed people to basically make their own 3E stuff, basically as long as they weren't just cut and pasting fluff and other stuff aside from the listed rules/mechanics/spells/etc.

Seems they learned from their mistake with that, the 4E license is, by my understanding, significantly less permissive.

[Mister Shine]

Me & This Thread

[HalcyonSeraph]

Seems they learned from their mistake with that, the 4E license is, by my understanding, significantly less permissive.

This is a tangent, but my understanding was that scrapping the OGL was more to prevent stuff like the Book of Erotic Fantasy, ie things they didn't want associated with their name in terms of content, than to stop things like Pathfinder. Pathfinder wasn't the first OGL-compliant copycat game, there were dozens.

---------- Post added at 12:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:50 PM ----------

Me & This Thread

I would have gone with homer_walks_backwards_into_hedge.gif myself.

[Duck21]

Funny Wizards said the same thing about pathfinder.

Pathfinder was RPG which competed with wizard's own books.

Malifaux classic would stop a lot of Wyrd's existing customers quitting, increasing the sales of their miniatures.

What could hurt Wyrd thou, if people start damping their collections on E-bay. And a lot of people who embrace M2E prefer old metals, I know this because I've been a big advocate of Wyrd's new plastics.

[EricJ]

I've posted my answer to the original question, as well as to the discussions here in a separate thread.

[hypoking]

Again, we're talking about fan fiction here. Yeah, its generally poorly done and in poorer taste but it doesn't hurt anyone. I don't see a way in which allowing a community of wargamers to play with their toy-soldiers is going to hurt the company that manufactures those toy-soldier's bottom line. If anything it's going to give that small niche of fans a reason to keep buying toys and keep apace of new models as they come out. I've got no interest in playing 1.5 myself but I don't see how letting this go ends poorly for Wyrd.

[Justin]

Discussion continued here:

http://www.wyrd-games.net/showthread.php?45615-Public-Response-to-the-Malifaux-Community