Pathfinder Battles Preview: The End of Winter

I love all three of these. The Centaur looks nice and full, as far as miniatures are concerned.

I'm always down for different looking vampires, and I'm excited about the sunken eyes. From the pic it looks like it can really offset the otherwise dark and somewhat simple sculpt.

I'll never turn down more fey, and I always appreciate strange looking creatures. I feel like one reason that Fey can be touch to do is:

--Many of the Fey creatures tend to look very human. That's good, but one can only make so many.

--Some of the more traditional Fey out there are Tiny or smaller. I think companies in the past have decided it's best not to try them at that size, so they don't do them at all.

You asked our opinion about how to go about doing Tiny and smaller creatures. My suggestion is just to make them Small or TIny size, depending on the creature and difficulty of actual representation. There are plenty of things that around the house that a DM can use to represent such creatures in more accurate size on his board. But one of the main reasons for having miniatures in the first place is to have an accurate looking piece that can be admired and appreciated by the gaming group. With that in mind, I'd rather just have a Small-sized Atomie as beautiful as the one in the Bestiary 3 than a poorly painted or sculpted attempt at a Diminutive one.

Glad you had fun on vacation.

These all look great! Waiting another week for the announcement is going to kill me!

I do have a question about the Case Subscription.

In the last Battles preview, you clarified that the 30% off was not the MSRP, but off the Paizo listed price of $499.99. I noticed you did some updates to the site already, but I've got the subscription and Reign of Winter option sitting in my cart. As of now, it is still registering at $368.00 (including the incentive piece). Are we still waiting on an official update to this aspect of purchase, or does the new 30% off refer to the MSRP price after all?

Sorry to be so picky, but I'm hesitate to sign up until things get worked out.

For realy small fay you could make them like the Will O'Wisp, inside a transparent plastic globe of light, with transparant plastic pixi dust like Mesmalatu the demi lich mini to keep them in the air. Seem doable and would save there delicate sculpt from breacage.

Fairy companion is realy popular among my player, second only to wolf and horse. Popularity must be from character like Link from legend of Zelda, one of the 3 most iconic elfs every noob player base there charater. (the 2 other are dark elf Drizzt and high elf Legolas)So we have hores, dog, wolf, panter mini, we need the little medical fairy for companion for saving those lonely ranger character that get ther healing spell so late. Need fairy because. Its dangerous to go alone.

While I support the idea of putting the small creatures into the air (via a stand) or another method, I wouldn't want it trapped in anything. As I mentioned, if you're going to make the smaller ones--and I hope you do--a big reason to get them and put them on the board is to appreciate the quality of them. Encasing them in anything, regardless of how clear the plastic is, would only obscure the attractiveness of them. I guess I look at it like "what's the point of making the miniature in the first place if you aren't going to leave it open for appreciation?"

The Will-O-Wisps worked really well, but part of the reason is because they looked exactly like their illustration. The distinct face inside the transparent globe of light was actually part of the creature itself, as far as I could tell.

Alpluachra, Atomies, Brownies, Gremlins, Grigs, Pookas, Sprites, Tooth Fairies, and Twigjacks all deserve miniatures at some point. Most of the artwork for these creatures are fantastic, and I would love to put them on my gaming table for everyone to admire. I worry that encasing them in plastic, clear or otherwise, would take away from their appeal.

How many people would tolerate Tiny fey about the size of the demonic familiar or dero from Shattered Star?

*crosses fingers for next announcement* Come on, Kingmaker!

*crosses fingers for next announcement* Come on, Kingmaker!

I'm pretty sure Erik has said that the next set is non ap related

Shhh. I can dream... ;-)

How many people would tolerate Tiny fey about the size of the demonic familiar or dero from Shattered Star?

I would tolarate,if its the only way to give them jusice, better a little bit bigger and nice detailed fey then small faceless fairy.

At miniature scall the weapon are often oversize so I can totally understand for thing smaller then small size being bigger then suppose to.

The right size I think, should be for the body to be no taller then Lyrie Akenja cat mini.

We know wizkid can make great figure,you just have to push them a bit and make sure they dont use lazy solution ;)

Fantastic Uncommon Centaur. Several of him could be useful.

The Nosferatu Brother being Uncommon is cool too. I could see multiples needed if used as Cultist, or as they are, a coven of Vampires.

The Zorka is the prize though. The paint job looks good. I like unique looking creatures, and being Fey adds to that.

I do hope that a Sprite, or a Sylph, or a Nymph, or a Brownie, or a Pixie is in my PPM future. They are badly needed.

So if the next set isn't AP based would an Emerald Spire set be possible?

I'd be just fine with that Erik. I just want faeries and brownies. Don't care what is needed to make it viable :)

Tiny Fey the size of the Demonic Familiar? That would be cool, I could get behind that.

How many people would tolerate Tiny fey about the size of the demonic familiar or dero from Shattered Star?

This would be great! There are a few fey minis in the DDM line (Twig Blight and Thorn come to mind), but it gets really old using these for every fey encounter.

More fey, please!!

How many people would tolerate Tiny fey about the size of the demonic familiar or dero from Shattered Star?

*Any* way of getting more tiny creatures is better than having none of them. My preferred solution is embedding them in a spell effect or the like (doesn't have to be fully encased, just strengthened enough to keep it from breaking easily.) But I also would be content with them looking like the quasit or the derro; a little size shenanigans is no big deal, especially at the small end. (Maybe sculpt them with a giant magnifying glass over them? Joke!!!)

OMG!!!! Even the Mini lines have a Kikimora! And Pathfinder Bestiaries still haven't :-(

:-p

Awesome mini too!

How many people would tolerate Tiny fey about the size of the demonic familiar or dero from Shattered Star?

Tiny Fey at that size would be just fine in my opinion. You can test the waters with 1-2 miniatures in future sets and see how that plays.

I am also eagerly awaiting on the next set preview and the possible reveal of that set's gargantuan miniature.

How many people would tolerate Tiny fey about the size of the demonic familiar or dero from Shattered Star?

Works for me. As long as they are smaller than an average mediun they fit the bill. As others have said test the waters and see how they do, I think they'll do alright.

How many people would tolerate Tiny fey about the size of the demonic familiar or dero from Shattered Star?

That's the ideal solution to the problem. I think that the majority of players will get behind this idea.

Starting to sound like it. Hmmm. There are some _really_ core creatures at this size, so this would open a lot of possibilities.

The Bloodbug was a decent solution. It was at the perfect height to seem menacing to a medium creature, while still looking like a tiny. I wish tiny bases would work, as packing them in tighter together would have been great, but I can live with the small base. The detail on the Bloodbug was excellent, but I can see at that size how the paint scheme had to be a lot simpler. I don't know what the answer would be for a more intricate tiny, such as a non-monochromatic fairy dragon. The Demon Familiar wasn't too bad in sizing, but that was because the bulk of his extra height was due to wings. Grimcrak was starting to exceed tiny size limitations (but was an excellent concept for a familiar). Looking at DDM, most of their tinies have fairly simple paint schemes, yet if the sculpt is recognizable, less color doesn't seem to negatively impact things.

Bottom line? This is a very underrepresented area (both tiny minis and Fey), and I welcome more pieces for it.

How many people would tolerate Tiny fey about the size of the demonic familiar or dero from Shattered Star?

+1 for sure

Although i imagine the collectors will be happy with broadening the scope, there might be grumbling from those who buy blind singles. I realise that's just a problem rather than a solution, but I have seen an instore tantrum from a guy who felt quite annoyed to get one of the simpler minis (maybe a Gary ooze?). That could be repeated if they line up their tiny figure next to an identically priced medium.

I think I own about 6 WotC tiny minis, and they rarely get used because they are so fragile, easy to lose, and hard to keep upright on tiles when in use. I'd rather they were on small bases as that solves all the above problems! The only issue is the idea that multiple tiny minis can occupy one space but I can live without that.

On a separate note: Erik, did you ever hear anything from Wizkids as to why the recent sets have taken so long to reach the uk? If RoW follows the same 6 week delay as WotR, it'll be mid July before we get them over here.

I think I own about 6 WotC tiny minis, and they rarely get used because they are so fragile, easy to lose, and hard to keep upright on tiles when in use. I'd rather they were on small bases as that solves all the above problems! The only issue is the idea that multiple tiny minis can occupy one space but I can live without that.

On a separate note: Erik, did you ever hear anything from Wizkids as to why the recent sets have taken so long to reach the uk? If RoW follows the same 6 week delay as WotR, it'll be mid July before we get them over here.

Allow multiples to occupy the space, but represent them with only 1 mini

I think I own about 6 WotC tiny minis, and they rarely get used because they are so fragile, easy to lose, and hard to keep upright on tiles when in use. I'd rather they were on small bases as that solves all the above problems! The only issue is the idea that multiple tiny minis can occupy one space but I can live without that.

On a separate note: Erik, did you ever hear anything from Wizkids as to why the recent sets have taken so long to reach the uk? If RoW follows the same 6 week delay as WotR, it'll be mid July before we get them over here.

Jimibones' idea works well in most situations.

As a DM, I've only ever had one situation where it was important to create space between Tiny-sized miniatures sharing the same square. In that situation, I cut a small, one inch square piece of cork. I stuck in pins with different sized pinheads to represent each individual Tiny/Diminutive creature. If you need to represent different types of creatures, you can use different color pinheads, etc. I'm not sure how familiar you are with pins, but there are some with pretty big pinheads.

Although i imagine the collectors will be happy with broadening the scope, there might be grumbling from those who buy blind singles. I realise that's just a problem rather than a solution, but I have seen an instore tantrum from a guy who felt quite annoyed to get one of the simpler minis (maybe a Gary ooze?). That could be repeated if they line up their tiny figure next to an identically priced medium.

In fairness to the person throwing the tantrum, I might throw one myself if I opened a package and found, umm, ooze from Gary. Just sayin'...

Although i imagine the collectors will be happy with broadening the scope, there might be grumbling from those who buy blind singles. I realise that's just a problem rather than a solution, but I have seen an instore tantrum from a guy who felt quite annoyed to get one of the simpler minis (maybe a Gary ooze?). That could be repeated if they line up their tiny figure next to an identically priced medium.

In all seriousness, this sounds like the issue was squarely on the consumer. I mean, isn't that part of the deal with blind singles? Their fun to buy, but it's pretty much a luck of the draw issue. Some miniatures are just better looking than others, it's a fact of life.

While I realize the Grey Ooze miniature (which was a medium) might not set off fireworks of excitement, it's functional and I'm glad it was made. I've used them in every campaign since I first got my hands on them.

In my opinion, the reason to make a Small-sized miniature that represents a Tiny or Diminutive creature is solely to make sure it has every opportunity to look as beautiful as it can. I'm an advocate of these size-changed miniatures to be among the Rare rarity in a set, if that is the best way to insure a quality paint job on them.

I look at those Bloodbugs that have been mentioned and I agree that the paint job was simple. But that's fine, because that's what worked for the miniature. As somebody mentioned, all the DDM Tiny-sized creatures are pretty simple in sculpt and paint job. The choices are limited in that capacity, and the company obviously wasn't sure what to do about the more popular and visually appealing creatures of that size.

Think back to the Brownie or Atomie in the Bestiaries, or the Winter-Touched Fey of Tiny or Diminutive size in Reign of Winter. It's some of the best artwork in each set of books, respectively. At least in my opinion, the challenge/goal of creating a miniature of one of these creatures is to bring as much of that beauty to the tabletop. Again, because I've never witnessed the actual miniature-making process myself, only read about it from Erik's answers, that's all I have to go on. But it sounds reasonable to me that a Brownie, sitting on a mushroom and missing a tooth is the type of miniature that wold need a slightly bigger sculpt and more advanced paint job than the Bloodbug in order to do the illustration justice.

I'd easily pay $10.00 for a very well done small sculpt of a Brownie, Sprite or Gremlin. Again, it's all about the quality of the sculpt and paint job. Nothing would be less appealing than bigger-than-scale versions of such great art turned into horrible or shoddy looking miniatures because certain steps were bypassed in an effort to make the said miniature a common or uncommon rarity.

Good is good.

If the tiny miniatures are good, I'd buy them. For my $, it depends on how well production can be at that size and how useful I imagine them to be for gaming.

Steve Geddes wrote:

Although i imagine the collectors will be happy with broadening the scope, there might be grumbling from those who buy blind singles. I realise that's just a problem rather than a solution, but I have seen an instore tantrum from a guy who felt quite annoyed to get one of the simpler minis (maybe a Gary ooze?). That could be repeated if they line up their tiny figure next to an identically priced medium.

In fairness to the person throwing the tantrum, I might throw one myself if I opened a package and found, umm, ooze from Gary. Just sayin'...

You know, I wondered why my Ipad capitalised gray. :p

In all seriousness, this sounds like the issue was squarely on the consumer. I mean, isn't that part of the deal with blind singles? Their fun to buy, but it's pretty much a luck of the draw issue. Some miniatures are just better looking than others, it's a fact of life.

While I realize the Grey Ooze miniature (which was a medium) might not set off fireworks of excitement, it's functional and I'm glad it was made. I've used them in every campaign since I first got my hands on them.

Yeah me too (although I'm presuming you're a collector as well).

My point was not that these complaints are reasonable but that they exist. Reasonable or not, a publisher has to deal with the customers' expectations and I think those of us who haunt these forums giving our opinions about what kinds of minis we want are probably largely from the collector-crowd.

I have no idea what proportion of sales are due to collectors and what proportion are due to more casual buyers, but I think the distinction is important.

I do have a question about the Case Subscription.

In the last Battles preview, you clarified that the 30% off was not the MSRP, but off the Paizo listed price of $499.99. I noticed you did some updates to the site already, but I've got the subscription and Reign of Winter option sitting in my cart. As of now, it is still registering at $368.00 (including the incentive piece). Are we still waiting on an official update to this aspect of purchase, or does the new 30% off refer to the MSRP price after all?

Sorry to be so picky, but I'm hesitate to sign up until things get worked out.

I'm trusting that should be resolved tomorrow or Friday when our webstore gninja is back in the office.

How many people would tolerate Tiny fey about the size of the demonic familiar or dero from Shattered Star?

What? We're making Tina Fey minis? <turns up hearing aid>

I know I'm late to the party in discussing fey, but I wanted my voice to be heard as someone that supports the idea greatly. We definitely need more fey creatures. They have been severely under represented in minis. This may be impossible to do, but putting 4 tiny minis on one small base would be ideal! However, with that being not probable I would prefer the tiny mini to be on a small base for stability. However, I do like my tiny minis on tiny bases as well (just looks and feels right). Dealing with one or two tiny mini on a game surface is not a big deal, but if you were using multiple then it could become a pain with their stability issue. A slightly, and I stress, slightly oversized tiny mini would be fine. I do want much more fey and have been requesting this forever. Brownies and atomies would be awesome.