A very good read - Warhammer and Rick Priestley

[Swordmaster of Hoeth]

Greetings!

I got the link from our own Milliardo and I think it is really good read:

http://unpluggedgames.co.uk/features/bl ... eneration/

[SpellArcher]

Thanks SM (and Milliardo!) and I agree.

So much interesting stuff. The Space Race for example. They got to the moon when I was a baby and growing up, it was huge, everything was moon rockets, everyone assumed we'd be building moon bases and going to mars. I read through the whole of the rocketry (Tsiolkovski, Goddard, Von Braun etc) and Space Race stuff on Wikipedia. What these guys achieved with glorified flying tractors and slide rules was unbelievable. It literally blew my mind.

Rick Priestley's stuff about historical wargaming was also fascinating. I started in 1978 with a book by Don Featherstone, who Rick cites. It's impossible to overestimate that guy's influence on wargaming. He died two years ago in his 90's, still writing his books! Then of course came the roleplaying boom and the rise of figure makers like Citadel. I still have those 1st edition books somewhere.

I remember well the impact of their move to Nottingham. There was an angry editorial from the outgoing editor of White Dwarf at the time. They lost some of their best sculptors around that time too. Paradise Lost is bloody everywhere isn't it? I really should read it, it's all over Age of Sigmar and works like His Dark Materials for example. My favourite was this bit though...

The current attitude in Games Workshop is that they’re not a games company, it’s that they’re a model company selling collectibles. That’s something I find wholly self-deceiving and couldn’t possibly agree with.”

/of argument.

[Swordmaster of Hoeth]

Hi SA,

What I also found fascinating about the article is that when I first encountered Warhammer in 1994 it was kind of established already. I had no idea about what was going on prior to that. What is more, growing up on the other side of the curtain meant I only read Tolkien but all these things Rick Priestley talks about and that influenced him and the design studio is totally unknown territory to me.

It looks like the time when Warhammer and wargaming was growing in my area it was already on the road to the End Times according to Rick. Because it was the time when the sales people were taking over design studio and Mr. Kirkby took over the company. Isn't it ironic that back then they decided to kill off Specialist Games as they were so afraid of not making enough profit and they want to go back to it now?

It's unbelievable that they let go so many creative people over the years. I wonder what the new crew for Specialist Games is going to look like and what are they really going to do with it. It still does not look like they want to change that "vision" of being company that produces models. How would new Specialist Games fit into that approach?

The funny thing is that I am not really excited about it, if they succeed, good. If they don't, that's ok. It's just does not bother me anymore.

But maybe I should reach back to some of the books Rick mentioned. For me, this article posed more general question. While back then RPG was something everybody played and that is why mass-fantasy battle system could grow on, what is the equivalent now? We have unconquerable variety of everything, spoiled for choice really. I must say very interesting time and that is what excites me, to see what is going to grow up from it in the near future.

[Aerendar Valandil]

The paradox is that one may not even have been wargaming of GW wouldn't have made the commercial choice. When I started - i was about 11 in the early eighties, Dutch miniature wargaming was very, very small (I thnk not moe than one, dark, well hidden shop annex club in The Hague, although ther was one club in Delft as well and perhaps a few more). When I quit a few years later, it was stll very small; there were a few games stores, but they carried perhaps a few fantasy RPG mini's, but not historical miniatures; this was pre-internet.

GW slowly broke that ground with the game-in-a-box fourth edition and further. Fantasy and 40K made it much more accessible because it was easily picked up by RPG and SciFi kids, but when in the mid-nineties Foundry-miniatures and WH Ancients were introduced through the regular games shop in Amsterdam, it was quite short-lived. GW boroke ground in both marketing and for example in plastics. If GW had not existed, miniature wargaming may have been small as it were earlier, at least here. And plastics may not have been started even in Britain.

The paradox is that exactly that for which GW gets a lot of flak, also made it succesful and is perhaps the reason that wargaming gaine thraction outside the UK.

[John Rainbow]

This was really interesting. Thanks for posting. Was good to hear Priestley's take on things. Seems like GW and the management is in a weird place right now.

[Prince of Spires]

It is a very interesting read. It's great to read how GW evolved and how they arrived to become the biggest miniatures company of today.

It's also quite interesting to see how Rick Priestley voices concerns similar to what a lot of players are voicing. More and more focus on sales, less so on delivering a great game. The idea that they're a miniatures company and not a games company. Less and less room for creativity and experimenting with new things.

Of course, this is only one side of the story. And that by a disgruntled (possibly) ex-employee. Not the most unbiased perspective of course. From a management / company perspective closing specialist games could very well have been a very good decision. If you've tried something multiple times. And each time it results in losses. Then at one point you simply have to say enough is enough. There is a reason why the four most dangerous words in investing are " it’s different this time"...

That said, GW is displaying all the characteristics of a monopolist in a mature (or even shrinking) market. And one in a changing market that it doesn't recognize as changing. Random price increases (without any added benefit), disregard for customers, focus on sales, driving down cost, ignoring a changing landscape and an 'we make it so they'll buy it' attitude. Doesn't very often end well if the barrier of entry isn't very steep...

Rod

[SpellArcher]

I only read Tolkien but all these things Rick Priestley talks about and that influenced him and the design studio is totally unknown territory to me.

Moorcock was really influential. Dragon Princes and White Lions for example are both Moorcock.

I must say very interesting time and that is what excites me, to see what is going to grow up from it in the near future.

I agree with this. I am full of optimism!

PS I've posted a picture for you in my HE blog SM!

If GW had not existed, miniature wargaming may have been small as it were earlier, at least here. And plastics may not have been started even in Britain.

Two good points. I grew up with the historical scene in Britain and in particular WRG Ancients. There was a solid tournament circuit for many years. In the early 90's I realised that Warhammer would eclipse this. On the one hand I wasn't happy with the impact GW was having on independents. But their financial clout and expansion into the world was obviously going to take things to a new level and that, combined with the internet, led to the global community we know today. If GW hadn't risen to that dominant.position I still think we would have seen something big emerge from the Roleplaying and Wargaming communities. Exactly what I'm not sure. But it could have been done differently and perhaps, more effectively.

Plastics are interesting because when I started playing the old Airfix 20mm figures were used alongside 25mm metals. They made Romans and Ancient Britons, Napoleonics and WW2. A lot got converted and used for other periods. To my knowledge GW began making plastics in the early-mid 80's with Psychostyrene Dwarfs and Drastik Plastik Orcs. Then they had a boxed set with 10 basic models for each of six different races. Then we got things like the big Skeleton boxed set with cavalry and a chariot. It just sort of took off from there, making the first 40K release a big box of plastic Space Marines was very influential.

[Swordmaster of Hoeth]

@ Aerendar Valandil

I thought about your post, very good points indeed. I came to the conclusion that the disappointment with GW I have is related to the fact that they did great in the past and opened so many doors. But they killed so many fantastic opportunities all by themselves. Every time I see a new trailer from Warhammer: Total War and Battlefleet Gothic I can't help but think how much hype it would generate for the players of these games if they were still around. These computer games and table top originals are not mutually exclusive, I really think they would boost the sales of each other.

@ SpellArcher

Going to check your blog right now!

[Prince of Spires]

These computer games and table top originals are not mutually exclusive, I really think they would boost the sales of each other.

I completely agree here. While not suited for everyone of course, players of computer games like games. Which is one of the requirements for a WH player. It generates hype and awareness that there is such a thing as warhammer (or rather, was). The reverse as well. Every WH player I tell about the Warhammer: Total War game loves the idea and wants to go out and get it.

If only they had more strategic sense I suppose...

Rod

[SpellArcher]

I'd wager the vast majority of Ulthuan posters play computer games and have more than a passing interest in Warhammer-related stuff.

[Knight of the Raven]

I took them down in size and had single-piece models.

And this is why the Lord of the Rings models are my favorite.

Looks like I owe Rick Priestley a beer.

[Swordmaster of Hoeth]

There was a time when I considered collecting entire army of LotR Elves for Warhammer. Unfortunately, I could not afford it. I liked them a lot because they seemed to have better proportions. And yes, I didn't appreciate it back then but the fact the models don't have too many parts is an advantage.

First time I encountered a problem with multi-part kits was when I helped to assemble plastic clan rats. I am talking about the box from 6th edition (I think). It was a huge problem because they didn't rank up.

Then I must say that despite the fact I quite like plastic White Lions and was trying to make Sisters of Avelorn look good, painting these kits is annoying. You can't assemble model fully because you cannot paint certain areas comfortably. And then painting separate parts such as quivers is also annoying.

While the quality of the plastic increased I do agree the models are getting bigger and bigger (have you seen new Chaos Knights that are bigger than Skullcrushers? ) and maybe with too many details than necessary.

[Prince of Spires]

I think the ranking up issues is not just due to the kits becoming multi-part (though it doesn't help of course). Multi-part kits have the effect that it's the person assembling the kit who needs to think about how to rank up models and not the designer. So there is definitely that. But at least as big an issue is the models getting bigger while the bases remain the same. Which leads to more stuff sticking over the edge and thus more difficulty ranking them up.

Also, models have become more dynamic. Lovely as they are, the old metal kits basically had a unit standing straight, holding up their weapon all at the same angle. Nothing much can go wrong there. Newer kits emulate a lot more motion in the models. Which again leads to more stuff sticking over the edge of the base and also to stuff that is sticking out getting in each others way.

While the quality of the plastic increased I do agree the models are getting bigger ... and maybe with too many details than necessary.

Just maybe? With the new HE models I always feel like I'm playing 'hunt the gem'. Every time I think I've finished a model some fiddly detail shows up...

Rod

[Galharen]

While the quality of the plastic increased I do agree the models are getting bigger ... and maybe with too many details than necessary.

Just maybe? With the new HE models I always feel like I'm playing 'hunt the gem'. Every time I think I've finished a model some fiddly detail shows up...

Rod

Everybody hates painting gems

[Prince of Spires]

And that's coming from someone who actually knows how to paint them... (care to give us a tutorial on gems... )

Rod

[Galharen]

And that's coming from someone who actually knows how to paint them... (care to give us a tutorial on gems... )

Rod

I can, no problem, but the fact that I can do it doesn't mean I like it
Very frustrating however they bring a lot to our elves in the end.

[SpellArcher]

Also, models have become more dynamic. Lovely as they are, the old metal kits basically had a unit standing straight, holding up their weapon all at the same angle. Nothing much can go wrong there. Newer kits emulate a lot more motion in the models. Which again leads to more stuff sticking over the edge of the base and also to stuff that is sticking out getting in each others way.

This is a double-edged sword IMHO, quite apart from rank-up issues. Dynamic poses can add something but you risk losing form. There can be a power and a definition to squatter, more static models. Think of those votive statues we see in museums. My Eternal Guard have slight variation in poses but it's basically the same and the unit looks better for it. Whenever I put a unit together I'm extremely conscious of the balance between all of the figures in it, where bits stick out, how close each model is to it's neighbour. This is very important to the overall effect IMHO. I'm seen ingenious conversions by better modellers than me that ruin other good work and top-class painting in the unit. Getting the basics right first is more important I believe.

Just maybe? With the new HE models I always feel like I'm playing 'hunt the gem'. Every time I think I've finished a model some fiddly detail shows up...

I blame Jes Goodwin! Ever since the 80's his elves have been festooned with gems and other intricate details.

[Swordmaster of Hoeth]

I absolutely love the gems! HE are nothing, I started to play 40k with 2nd Edition and I still have the models designed by Jes Goodwin (mentioned already!). He created amazing miniatures but it did look like dressing a Christmas Tree

I totally agree that multi-part kits are not a problem in themselves. But it was really tough to assemble them so they rank up. And as I said, when you have a regiment of 10 models that you cannot paint after assembling then that becomes a hassle, not a pleasure. I don't want to think what problem people with bigger units had.

As always there should be a balance. But in any case it is not an issue for them since they moved to skirmishing system now. And it is easy to explain why new models are not in scale with old ones.

The important piece of information for me was that they went that "we are company that produces models" road when Mr. Kirkby took over and the downfall begun earlier than I expected.

[Aicanor]

Also, models have become more dynamic

I would say they became pseudo-dynamic. The old elf character models (4th ed.? ) were dynamic. It makes me wonder how those sculpts would look with new technologies. With classic sculpting, the pose of the model is something that is decided from the start and it comes naturally. New ones have dynamic poses but the mass of the model is not dynamic. The result is they are hanging in the air in various strange ways, muscles are not working, anatomy is skewed, everything is standing on its tails, cloaks are cutting into stone. I believe the pose is an afterthought these days. And we are talking about multipart, but practically monopose models here.

And I agree with Priestly about the scale creep. I don't even have space at home for all those large kits, not even talking about carrying them around and playing games with them.

And you know, I like painting gems.

[Prince of Spires]

regarding scale-creep, I prefer the old scale for HE models. I have some old metal HE archers. And they are much better then the bulky current model range.

It's actually interesting that while some of the newer HE plastics are multi-part, they are not multi-pose. The WL and PG fit together in a single way. And if you mess it up then getting the models assembled will be tough. It's a step back in the development of models. The advantage of multi-part models should be that they allow greater freedom and kit-bashing opportunities. These new kits simply don't have that.

And yes, GW has gone overboard on the balancing on whatever weird tail, cloak, tassel or whatever the model has. It's using a technique simply to be using the technique, not because it actually makes for a great model. And, it lost its originality after the first few kits to show it.

I don't mind all of the big kits. There is some lovely ones in there (and some hideous ones...). And as long as it's one or two per army it's great. But they shouldn't go overboard.

The important piece of information for me was that they went that "we are company that produces models" road when Mr. Kirkby took over and the downfall begun earlier than I expected.

I agree that this is the problem. And that apparently it started very early already. As mentioned, the problem with this as well is the monopolist attitude of 'just throw something out there and they will buy it because WE made it'. That's the feeling I get from age of sigmar and the 'we're a modelling company' attitude. I just hope they'll realize they're wrong in time. Cause the table top gaming community does owe quite a lot to GW I think.

And you know, I like painting gems.

Care to give me (us...) a tutorial? I could use one at least.

Rod