| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
Count Dooku
Commander
4637 Posts
    
New York
 | | 10/30/2006 1:11 PM |
| Posted By qillan_dvra on 10/30/2006 1:02 PM
Yes.
Snig, Worg Rider is a ridiculous example.
Worgs in Harbinger are a bit bigger than a wolf but still medium and then Snig turns up on a Worg the size of a horse and he is suddenly the size of a human.
What's up with that........ The Worg that Snig rides is a special case..Hes an Advanced Worg. As per the Monster Manual if you advance the Worg and give it more hit-dice it will move up a size catagory.
Snig's size on the other hand is a fine example of size issues.Â
| |
Champion of the Skulk
Vindicated Champion of the Twig Blight | |
|
pbarclay
Skirmisher
14 Posts
| | 10/30/2006 1:24 PM |
|
Is there a good list of the miniatures you guys feel are too big/small, and ones where you feel the size doesn't matter nearly as much (like, it could be 10% smaller or 10% bigger and not really affect anything? I can't promise any results, but if I know what the scope of the issue is and what does/doesn't matter, it's a lot easier to talk to people about it, and see what the real solution might be.
Thanks, | |
Paul Barclay
Miniatures & New Business Operations Manager
Wizards of the Coast
www.wizards.com/transformers | |
|
Count Dooku
Commander
4637 Posts
New York
| | 10/30/2006 1:31 PM |
| Ill look at some minis to give examples...
But for those who dont get what we are saying..
We know that not everyone is the same height and weight....Its when the size difference looks unnatural is when eyebrows are raised.
For example there are no humans with heads as small as cantalopes and others with heads the size of basketballs.
A good example off the top of my head would be the Goliath Barbarian compared to the Goliath Cleric.
Another good example is Shuluth Archvillan compared to the Mindflayer and Mindflayer Telepath...Shuluth's head is gigantic!!!
Bugbear, Bugbear Footpad and Bugbear Champion of Erythnul are all very different in terms of scale within the same race. | |
Champion of the Skulk
Vindicated Champion of the Twig Blight | |
| 
Fun Guy from Yuggoth
Cthulhufnord
Warlord
11114 Posts
Umass Amherst Baby!
| | 10/30/2006 1:32 PM |
| | yes | |
Pathetic Earthlings. Hurling your bodies out into the void - without the slightest inkling of who or what is out here. If you had known anything about the true nature of the universe - anything at all - you would have hidden from it in terror. | |
|
oyvind
Warrior
238 Posts
| | 10/30/2006 1:37 PM |
| Yes,
though I have to include a couple of comments:
I think that WotC are always trying to improve their product, because that, in the end, will increase their income. Therefore I cannot understand those who think it's silly to bring up that which bothers them the most about this line. That it will come at the expense of other things if introduced now is understandable, but probably not if they introduce new features the way they have done (e.a. they waited a bit before they included large uncommons, it took quite some time for them to include see-through plastic and so on). By introducing these elements at this rather slow rate, the added cost has more or less disappeared because in most cases these things are expensive because they need getting used to.
I think scaling in the DDM line should be better than it has been. The biggest problem is the way they have presented their size categories in the MMs. For each size category you add, the AVERAGE body length should double. This means that in order to make these miniatures closely match their body length entries in the MMs, creatures of different sizes should have these bases (using medium sized with 1-inch bases the norm):
Large 2"x2"
Huge 4"x4"
Gargantuan 8"x8"
Colossal 16"x16"
I understand that this will be ridiculous to enforce, as it's virtually impossible to use "miniatures" in the game this way. In the same table, they include how much space creatures should take up on the battle grid, which is the basis for most miniatures in the DDM line (there are a couple of differences, though). So if they are going to produce miniatures to match their MM entries while at the same time use the MM base size categories, almost all creatures from sizes huge and up SHOULD extend over their bases (1" in the game is supposed to equal 5' in "real" life).
I like variation in size among creatures. But to use EXTREME differences among humans as proof none of the bugbears are out of scale (or look at the two Snigs; they ARE supposed to be "clones", though the size difference of that goblin in his two appearances is extremely disturbing, in my opinion, not to mention his mount). But there are a couple of other things people need to consider as well. Saying the flesh golem is really out of proportion BECAUSE he's barely taller than one particular medium creature is rather misunderstood, I think. I haven't measured the miniature and compared it to the entry in the MM, but if it's out of scale, it's not because it's supposed to be a large creature. They have to draw the line somewhere, and to suggest that the fantasy realms of the D&D worlds shouldn't include creatures of nearly all sizes, and I mean all sizes, is pretty limiting, I think. What I mean is that a creature is 8'1" tall, it's supposed to be large. If it's 7'11" tall it's supposed to be medium. They will look almost identical in size if reproduced exactly as noted, but one of them will, naturally, have a medium base and the other will have a large base.
I think (only taking a casual look at the miniatures; I've never measured any of them to see whether or not they fit their MM entries) the biggest discrepancies in size is for animals such as hyenas, horses and the like. They constantly look oversized, and I honestly wonder why. That is as puzzling to me as the way they brag about their oversized larges in the previews. Few hyenas, wolfs, dogs (of course, there are exceptions) will reach the stomach of a 6'-tall man, few horses' shoulders should measure around most grown mens' ears (how on earth could we mount them?), and so on.
I have to say that I'm extremely happy with almost every single piece they've made so far, but that doesn't mean that I don't think it's a place for improvements. They are a lot better than any other way I could proxy D&D creatures for my games, so I'm happy. If they'd put a bit more effort into scaling, I would be even happier! | |
Champion of the Tarrasque
Knight of Kraken | |
|
Harneloot
Sergeant
575 Posts
| | 10/30/2006 1:37 PM |
| | YES | |
"What is to give light must endure burning" -Viktor Frankl
Champion of the Large Myconid
Deacon of the ANY aligned Raistlin. | |
|
I Tyrant
Warrior
178 Posts
| |
shazam01
Warrior
230 Posts
| | 10/30/2006 2:30 PM |
| | Put me in the maybe, it is not in my personal high priority list, but if they can devote some resources to it without taking away from other aspects of mini production, sculpt/paint/concepts etc., then I am fine with it. | |
Champion of Minsc & Boo
| |
|
Sirohk
Commander
3939 Posts
USA
| | 10/30/2006 2:37 PM |
| Yes. More attention to detail please.Â
| |
Sirohk, the Bard of Heartstone
Knight of the Rahshasa's
And Crusader of the Zakya, Ak'chazar, Naztharune, and Naityan Rakshasa's | |
|
Username
Warlord
5692 Posts
| | 10/30/2006 2:45 PM |
| | People come in all shapes and sizes, so why not everything else? | |
Originally posted by Schooly_D
Username - he deals in minis
Champion of Lhesh Haruuc Shaarat'kor | |
| 
Bert the Troll
Commander
3964 Posts
Adelaide
| | 10/30/2006 2:57 PM |
| Posted By jgsugden on 10/30/2006 7:51 AM This petition will serve no purpose.Â
Give them a break.
It serves purpose as people like to express what is on thier minds, concerns and what not. It serves to see if it is just one looney (no offence Corim  ) or if others share the same dislike.
Its part of being a community. Listening to gripes as well as praise.
Like people who keep after chainmail equi's get their chance to complain about delays. 
And I think Corim's intro was very well written, gave his point without demonising WoTC, so perhaps give people a break and let them post a gripe without negative/retaliatory comment. I feel WoTC probably prefer to know the complaints than have people push them under carpet.
Posted By Sulaco on 10/30/2006 8:37 AM
Put me down for "maybe."
In other words I would like a consistent scale but good-quality, decent-looking figures are far more important.
This would be my vote. I am fairly indifferent to sizing issues (though haven't seen forge priest & fire giant next to each other yet. Though some of the grosser examples are galring and annoying.. I would be more conerned if there were more Snig, Worg Rider size differences.
Posted By Corim Danex on 10/30/2006 9:19 AM
This may or may not make a difference, but the issue is important enough to me to speak about. Even if my voice is tiny.
And as you are voicing it politely, I see no reason why tiny voices shouldn't speak imho.
Posted By Soup13 on 10/30/2006 10:08 AM lets assume the Wotc try’s to get scaling right when possible, however scaling is one of many constraints faced in making the mini's (paint steps, amount of paint, number of colors, amount of plastic, complexity of the mold, ect)
when faced with numerous constraints in production there are trade off whenever all allocated resources are used up. That is assuming they use the entire production budget on production, unless they add more resources (meaning higher prices for us), more accurate scaling means less of something else.
One can take it on faith the Wotc is doing their best to enhance the quality and value associated with one of their most profitable
As a skeptic, I'ld add though, that I think taking WoTC by faith that they 'doing their best to enhance the quality and value associated ' is ignoring other limaitions like including pressure for a bottomline being profitable, sellable and the like as more important than quailty & value. Though Q&V are both major factirs in achieving that bottom line.
And I dont see anything wrong with the bottomline being important as it means minis for longer.
Posted By IanB on 10/30/2006 11:45 AM
What I actually think causes the problem is that it is expensive to make sculptors resculpt a figure when it comes back too big. I guess that's just an economic reality type issue, but maybe the sculptors just need a little more direction or oversight.
And it might be that simple 
Posted By pbarclay on 10/30/2006 1:24 PM
Is there a good list of the miniatures you guys feel are too big/small, and ones where you feel the size doesn't matter nearly as much (like, it could be 10% smaller or 10% bigger and not really affect anything? I can't promise any results, but if I know what the scope of the issue is and what does/doesn't matter, it's a lot easier to talk to people about it, and see what the real solution might be.
Thanks,
I will look if others dont. Thanks for your responce though 
~
| |
"Mutton yesterday, mutton today, and blimey, if it don't look like mutton again tomorrer." Bert the Troll - The Hobbit
Semi-Secret sig business: "In the age of the internet attaching a famous name to your personal opinion to give more weight to it is a very valid strategy." - Benjamin Franklin
Champion of Epic Lolth, Orcus, & Demogorgon and bring us Asmodeus! | |
| Thoth, Gatherer of Knowledge
MerricB
Underboss
2353 Posts
Australia
| | 10/30/2006 3:46 PM |
| Shoe posted on scaling issues last week. See the entry for Wed Oct 25.
http://www.blackguard.ca/merric/cdp/
"Scale is something we definitely consider as we go through the process of making miniatures - but it is surprisingly a fairly inexact science. The actual size of a mini changes at a couple stages between the initial sculpt and the final product, because of the nature of the molding and production process. While we can estimate the amount of reduction, it is sometimes more and sometimes less. So there will always be some variance, despite our best efforts to get the measurements right." - Shoe
So, it's a limitation on the production side that causes variance in scale.
Of course people want the figures in scale. What are you prepared to give up, however?
Would you be happy for boosters to double in price if the scale was made more accurate?
Cheers! | |
Merric Blackman
| |
|
Harneloot
Sergeant
575 Posts
| | 10/30/2006 3:52 PM |
| Was that a Yes or No Merric?
;-) | |
"What is to give light must endure burning" -Viktor Frankl
Champion of the Large Myconid
Deacon of the ANY aligned Raistlin. | |
| Thoth, Gatherer of Knowledge
MerricB
Underboss
2353 Posts
Australia
| | 10/30/2006 4:12 PM |
| It's a "I'm not voting". Good scale would be great, but without knowing what we have to sacrifice, I'm wary of the implications.
Cheers! | |
Merric Blackman
| |
|
Sir Bozak The Damned
Commander
2854 Posts
Québec
| | 10/30/2006 7:15 PM |
| | Yes, but I see I am too late... | |
Please donate BLOOD at http://www.monstersgame.co.uk/ac=vid&vid=11018554
Champion Of Kaz the Minotaur Knight of ALL Draconians. Squire Of ALL Constructs
The number ONE fanatic Of Dread Guards ! I own 66 !!! And the GMR1 !!!
119 completed trades so far...NB called shot: Medusa | |
|
dmumper
Skirmisher
32 Posts
| | 10/30/2006 7:38 PM |
| NO.
I see no problem with having different-sized creatures, just like we humans come in different sizes. This is the least of my priorities, far behind cool sculpts and great paint jobs. | |
Champion of Bigby and all his hands. | |
|
Red Ranger
Sergeant
708 Posts
| | 10/30/2006 8:13 PM |
| | Yes | |
Champion of the Yeti
(large uncommon please!)
Assistant to the Regional Manager | |
|
Dordledum
Commander
3463 Posts
Netherlands
| | 10/31/2006 2:07 AM |
| | yes | |
Member of the Bearded Devils
Champion of the Huge Spider (WotDQ 46/60), A New Umber Hulk (DoDe 57/60), and the Orog Fighter! | |
|
PaSquall
Underboss
1399 Posts
| | 10/31/2006 2:31 AM |
| Posted By pbarclay on 10/30/2006 1:24 PM
Is there a good list of the miniatures you guys feel are too big/small, and ones where you feel the size doesn't matter nearly as much (like, it could be 10% smaller or 10% bigger and not really affect anything? I can't promise any results, but if I know what the scope of the issue is and what does/doesn't matter, it's a lot easier to talk to people about it, and see what the real solution might be.
Thanks,
Dragoneye
Large red dragon a bit too small (for a red)
Archfiends
human dragonslayer too small.
GoL
Basilisk a bit too large
Lidda far too large (almost doubled in size since harbinger)
Dire rat too large (I know it's dire, but it still doesn't fit)
Deathknell
Timber wolf too large (too tall)
Angelfire
Paladin on horse and pegasus too large.
War drums
Cougar far too large
Hill giant barbarian far too large (makes the archfiends one pretty ridiculous)
Derro a bit too tall
WotDQ
Hyena far too large
Dire rat again (same as the GoL one)
BW
Still don't have the minis (and as I'm in Europe it looks like I won't get them before December   ) but if the fire giant forgepriest is taller than Snurre, there's a problem.Â
And on a general note, ogres are too tall.
| |
Vindicated Champion of the PSEUDODRAGON
(Unhappy) vindicated champion of the DRYAD
Against the giants called shot : huge cloud giant female
Demonweb called shot : ghost | |
|
orcdoubleax
Sergeant
694 Posts
| | 10/31/2006 4:18 AM |
| Posted By Count Dooku on 10/30/2006 1:31 PM
Ill look at some minis to give examples...
But for those who dont get what we are saying..
We know that not everyone is the same height and weight....Its when the size difference looks unnatural is when eyebrows are raised.
For example there are no humans with heads as small as cantalopes and others with heads the size of basketballs.
A good example off the top of my head would be the Goliath Barbarian compared to the Goliath Cleric.
Another good example is Shuluth Archvillan compared to the Mindflayer and Mindflayer Telepath...Shuluth's head is gigantic!!!
Bugbear, Bugbear Footpad and Bugbear Champion of Erythnul are all very different in terms of scale within the same race.
The Golitha Barbarian is in the golitha rage (races of stone) it increases his size 30-40%. The only mistake on that figure is that he should have reach that he gains from the rage also. | |
Yes I am Gelatinous.
www.gelatinousdudes.com
| |
|
Custom Title
WakeXX
Warlord
10152 Posts
Edinboro PA
| | 10/31/2006 4:51 AM |
| | Yes...who wouldn't want figs to be to scale? | | | |
|
calvar
Warrior
226 Posts
| | 10/31/2006 5:33 AM |
| So, it's a limitation on the production side that causes variance in scale.
Of course people want the figures in scale. What are you prepared to give up, however?
If they told us what has to be given up and why, then we could make an informed desision. | |
| |
|
Arandae
Sergeant
713 Posts
UK
| | 10/31/2006 6:16 AM |
| A resounding "Yes" from me - and thanks for posting the thread, Corim.
Miniature scale is actually one of the most important issues for me, actually. Of course I'd like great sculpts and nicely painted minis, but when I put a mini down on the mat it's much more important to me that it's the right size and looks like the creature intended. (I don't want to end up with lots of arguments about what is and isn't physically possible to happen, with me endlessly saying "I know it looks as though it's 18 feet tall, but actually it's only 12!".)
Frankly, I'm finding all of the comments about scale being a trade-off with other issues a bit on the ridiculous side. These seem like 'straw man' arguments to me.
When someone says "I want a G-Cube", we don't suddenly get a whole load of comments along the lines of "Sure, you can have a G-Cube, but are you prepared to sacrifice a decent set list for it? Will you accept a 2000% price hike for it? Will you be prepared to be set on fire and have your bowels removed for it?".
This thread was a polite request from Corim for more consideration of scale - an issue that many of us seem to consider important. It shouldn't be necessary for any of us to try to balance WotC's complex economic considerations before we're entitled to politely point out what is important to us. | |
Champion of the Bodak.Knight of the Aboleth.Squire of Gnomes. Friend of (Non-Ugly) Fey.
Anti-Champion of the Fozzie Bugbear Strangler (Demonweb 32/60).
Called Shots- Blood War: Green Slaad (53/60), Night Below: Kuo-Toa Whip (55/60),
Demonweb: Aboleth, Feywild: Fire Beetle,
Next Icon: Gargantuan Jotunheim Frost Giant | |
|
evilMoose
49 Posts
Broken Hill, Australia
| | 10/31/2006 6:17 AM |
| | Yes. | |
'nuff said,
AC | |
|
rokeca
Sneak
137 Posts
| |
arbados
Underboss
1450 Posts
New York, USA
| | 10/31/2006 7:04 AM |
| | Simply YES! | |
Give me more MIND FLAYERS! | |
|
Benimoto
Underboss
1125 Posts
| | 10/31/2006 7:46 AM |
| It's not all that important to me. Of the answers so far, I most agree with Sulaco's.
| |
Champion of the Rakshasa. Check out my Mini Terrain Maker, or my new Dungeon Map Maker (under development). | |
|
Soup13
Sneak
51 Posts
NL Canada
| | 10/31/2006 8:42 AM |
|
Quote: Arande
"Frankly, I'm finding all of
the comments about scale being a trade-off with other issues a bit on the
ridiculous side. These seem like 'straw man' arguments to me.
When someone says "I want a G-Cube", we don't suddenly get a whole
load of comments along the lines of "Sure, you can have a G-Cube, but are
you prepared to sacrifice a decent set list for it? Will you accept a
2000% price hike for it? Will you be prepared to be set on fire and have your
bowels removed for it?".
This thread was a polite
request from Corim for more consideration of scale - an issue that many of us
seem to consider important. It shouldn't be necessary for any of us to try to
balance WotC's complex economic considerations before we're entitled to
politely point out what is important to us."
I politely have to disagree
with you here, as this was more of a poll not a petition, as titled in the
thread. Those of us that are more in the no/maybe camp have for the most part
elaborated on our votes and why we feel this way, and again, for the most part
have used production economics as our justification.
My argument doesn’t disavow yours, or state that you opinion is less than
mine, it is just my opinion. I can understand how and why this is a very
important topic to many people, as can be seen in the number of responses. All I’m
attempting to do is offer my input on how to make this a better product overall
(at least from my point of view).
My vote against is because we (and I include myself in this) the screaming
masses of the msg boards will ask for everything to be a top priority in the development
of DDM (just look at the champions list, for example), and if everything
is a top priority then nothing is. I believe that a balanced approach
should be taken, and that if trade offs have to be made with scaling on occasion
to make better looking figures overall, then I’m OK with that.  CheersÂ
| |
Champion of Mirt the Money Lender
Please make an Epic Obould | |
|
calvar
Warrior
226 Posts
| | 10/31/2006 8:59 AM |
| I politely have to disagree with you here, as this was more of a poll not a petition, as titled in the thread. Those of us that are more in the no/maybe camp have for the most part elaborated on our votes and why we feel this way, and again, for the most part have used production economics as our justification.
You know about the production economics in DDM?? then I would be thankful if you could tell us about it, and maybe help us to comprehend better the problem | |
| |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 10/31/2006 9:18 AM |
| I believe that WotC makes efforts to properly scale minis, even if it doesn't come out right 100% of the time.
If some customers have an issue with scale, i guess it's fine to verbalize it.
I personally have not had any issue with scale up to now. Does that mean that i do not find it important for minis to be of a same general scale? Of course not. Scale is important to me. But from what i have seen up to now, mini scale was quite acceptable. This was my opinion from the start.
As an aside, i've just read Shoe's comment on scaling that Merric pointed to, and i like the following :
"That said, how many of your players are going to look at [the forgepriest fire giant] and say
"that mini is 5mm too tall" - instead of saying "That fire giant is
swinging an anvil!". Either way - they'll still recognize it as a fire
giant."
That's exactly my case. I've never had a player comment on the allegedly improper scale of a mini. My players all like the minis, although all prefer some minis to others of course, as do i. But it has nothing to do with the relative size of them.
Will i vote on this? No i wont. Again, not that i do not find scale important. I think WotC does find it important too. It's a non-issue to vote for it, as EVERYONE finds scale important. The question should probably rather be:
"Do you find that there exists a bothersome scaling issue among the existing miniatures?"
This being said, the purpose of the thread is still well served with the question as it is being asked, to some extent.
Sky
| |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
ransom
Sneak
94 Posts
| | 10/31/2006 9:23 AM |
| | No, the miniatures need to have a good presentation more than an exact scale. We need a large selection of good looking low priced miniatures. What we do not need are true to scale miniatures that drive the per miniature price up to the point that boosters will get too expensive. | |
| |
|
Most Edumacated
zenthrus
Warlord
5132 Posts
SLC, UT
| | 10/31/2006 9:23 AM |
| Posted By Skyscraper on 10/31/2006 9:18 AM
"That said, how many of your players are going to look at him and say
"that mini is 5mm too tall" - instead of saying "That fire giant is
swinging an anvil!". Either way - they'll still recognize it as a fire
giant."
Obviously, you've never gamed with Engineering and Math majors. Can't add the result of one twenty-sided die roll to a static modifier, but they can figure out the exact inexactness of scale in minis. 
As to the topic at hand: Maybe
As long as a large is large, mediums are medium, and smalls are small, I'm basically happy. As a case for when scale is a major problem see Snig (medium-sized goblin), (large) Worg Rider. Wrackspawn?
| |
Knight Warlord a.k.a. Commander (#32) in only 6 months. Where's my pie?
Champion of Dwarven Thunderlashers
Knight of the Large Dire Chicken
Have/Want List
Trade References | |
|
Soup13
Sneak
51 Posts
NL Canada
| | 10/31/2006 9:26 AM |
|
I politely have to disagree with you here, as this was more of a poll
not a petition, as titled in the thread. Those of us that are more in
the no/maybe camp have for the most part elaborated on our votes and
why we feel this way, and again, for the most part have used production
economics as our justification.
You know about the
production economics in DDM?? then I would be thankful if you could
tell us about it, and maybe help us to comprehend better the problem 
---- No i just know production economics
| |
Champion of Mirt the Money Lender
Please make an Epic Obould | |
| The Great
Choco Monster
Ghendar
Warlord
13113 Posts
Mud Lick, Kentucky
| | 10/31/2006 9:27 AM |
| Posted By ransom on 10/31/2006 9:23 AM
No, the miniatures need to have a good presentation more than an exact scale. We need a large selection of good looking low priced miniatures. What we do not need are true to scale miniatures that drive the per miniature price up to the point that boosters will get too expensive.
Do you still feel the same way after putting an Archfiends Hill Giant next to a Hill Giant Barbarian. That's one extreme example of scaling problems.
By the way, who says proper scaling will drive up prices?
| |
WotC - making me wish more and more every day for a return to the TSR days. :(
I fought the snark and the snark won. I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!
Some of my favorite Maxminis quotes
I actually love to be swallowed. - Posted By gss_000 on 09/04/2007 2:32 PM
Could somebody explain Snatch to me? I understand the basics, but not how to enter/use it. - Posted by orcmonk220
G's the man. - Posted By greyhaze on 11/11/2008 8:58 AM
I dont mind butting heads every once in a while. It makes thing interesting. Thats why I'd be heartbroken if Ghendar ever left - Posted By Count Dooku on 04/03/2006 11:58 AM
| |
|
shoesan
Warrior
263 Posts
Beaufort, SC
| | 10/31/2006 9:28 AM |
| I whole-heartedly vote yes.  I find it amusing that the minis are actually out of scale to the maps. I noticed this when I received the latest issue of Dungeon magazine. There is a scale map of a ship, and on the ship map there are several beds, drawn pretty close to 6 feet in scale. If you take any human or elf mini and "lay them on the bed", you can certainly see for a long night of uncomfortable sleep! Any elf mini should comfortably fit on those beds, but the reality is...
Maps aside, I am all for scale between the minis themselves. Perhaps human minis can have wider ranges, since there are alot of humans represented, but minis that we only have say 1-5 different versions of, should be pretty close to the MM description.  Naturally a unique mini like King Snurre could be made bigger than the average fire giant, since he IS bigger than the average fire giant, but other fire giants (at least til we get like 5 non-uniques or so) should be at 12 feet tall. The forge priest working the forge argument would be valid if he were simply "buffer" than the other giants, but he shouldn't be taller... and definitely not taller than King Snurre.
Shoe (the other one)
| |
Shoe (the other one) | |
| The Great
Choco Monster
Ghendar
Warlord
13113 Posts
Mud Lick, Kentucky
| | 10/31/2006 9:32 AM |
| Posted By gss_000 on 10/30/2006 10:53 AM Posted By Sulaco on 10/30/2006 8:37 AM
Put me down for "maybe."
In other words I would like a consistent scale but good-quality, decent-looking figures are far more important.
This is why I said no. Since quality is most important to me, I don't want them to sacrifice that to have perfect scaling when already there have been scaling issues. If the entire collection isn't perfect, in my opinion it's not worth them to put more time into making the rest more so than it is already.
Why does proper scaling have to negatively impact quality. Shouldn't proper scaling be included in quality? One leads to another imo. | |
WotC - making me wish more and more every day for a return to the TSR days. :(
I fought the snark and the snark won. I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!
Some of my favorite Maxminis quotes
I actually love to be swallowed. - Posted By gss_000 on 09/04/2007 2:32 PM
Could somebody explain Snatch to me? I understand the basics, but not how to enter/use it. - Posted by orcmonk220
G's the man. - Posted By greyhaze on 11/11/2008 8:58 AM
I dont mind butting heads every once in a while. It makes thing interesting. Thats why I'd be heartbroken if Ghendar ever left - Posted By Count Dooku on 04/03/2006 11:58 AM
| |
|
Soup13
Sneak
51 Posts
NL Canada
| | 10/31/2006 9:48 AM |
|
By the way, who says proper scaling will drive up prices?
It may or may not, but adding additional complexity to the
mold and/or additional paint steps sure does. If proper scaling requires
a more complex mold and therefore higher production costs for that mini, then
those costs will either be recouped by making other minis "less cool"
or by raising the price (or less profits by Wotc, but that’s another debate).
Cheers,
| |
Champion of Mirt the Money Lender
Please make an Epic Obould | |
|
calvar
Warrior
226 Posts
| | 10/31/2006 10:03 AM |
| It may or may not, but adding additional complexity to the mold and/or additional paint steps sure does.
you said it, it may or may not, and as scale is not clearly related to complexity there is no apriori reason to think that prices should increase, or that WotC are making their maximun effort (they dont have competition in DDM). Maybe is just something like a thing that someone said: The people who make the models are not given enough specifications. | |
| |
|
Galinar
Sneak
122 Posts
| | 10/31/2006 10:19 AM |
| | yes | |
Vindicated Champion of the Hill(Tordek) Dwarf Champion
Champion of Strongheart
Completed Trades: 31 johnny_gaijin, Blackened_Webs, lantern314, niolo, BigFON,Toxic_Rat, spikegif, scallamander, rhane, madda, Halofurry, Bragi, Aesnath, Sir Bozak The Damned, arbados, devasque, topdecker, callidusx3, lantern314, DrX, lur77, Cyrus_Vlan, Ironfist Boulderbender, Crisisman, Trilistria, roonechr, Kat_Dawg33, ckissee, arksorn, realmaster, rokeca
| |
|
Star
Sergeant
978 Posts
New Britain, CT
| | 10/31/2006 10:23 AM |
| As far as I know (and I could be totally wrong here) there aren't that many mini's that the scale is significantly off on - like maybe 10 or 20?
There have been 692 mini's made. If there are 20 that aren't to scale then that means that 672 are to scale. That means that over 97% of the time they're doing a good job on scaling.
I understand the importance of scaling, I just don't think that it's as big a problem as we're making it out to be. | |
Champion of Gromph Baenre | |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |