You Guys, You Guys!!!

I think having both female and male miniatures of the various races is great, it really helps to more accurately represent what is in your game on the table.

I think it is of key importance to keep the period / setting in mind with the miniature design and distribution though.

Yes, women can and do take up arms in real life as well as in fantasy settings and there should be miniatures to represent them. Even modern, armies from 'enlightened' nations don't have 50% female soldiers, so it'd be unrealistic to have half of the pikemen featuring klockenbooty,...

The thing is, though, these figures aren't being created in a vacuum. Before Pathfinder there were hundreds and hundreds of D&D Miniatures, and before that we had first-wave prepainted figures like Mage Knight, some of which are still good enough to be worth using.

Add to that 40 years of metal miniatures, as a lot of gamers no-doubt mix prepainted and unpainted or personally painted figures.

With all of those other figures in the mix, there are still some really weird gaps. Characters with instruments. Female halflings. Basically females of any other race than human, half-elf, or elf, or females who aren't sexualized or wearing full plate armor. So sometimes we do try to fill those gaps.

Building these sets is not always about finding a "perfect" balance of genders or creatures, or whatever. It's in large part about providing the _right_ miniature for a given role. So you might not need 11 female warrior types, but the variety is good for people hunting for a figure for their own character, or for a given NPC at exactly the right moment, or whatever.

Sometimes "providing the right miniature" is dictated by the source material. If the Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path says an important villain is a woman, she's going to be in the set no matter how many other female figures we've done in the past.

That's a big part of the disparity. As we move away from Adventure Path themes (for the time being), we're going to see more picks based on awesome art, or based on filling gender/race/class roles we haven't done yet than on fulfilling a specific NPC quota.

So, there are a lot of factors that go into it. "Women prolly wouldn't have been warriors so foten IRL" doesn't even enter into it.

I think we have a dress/skirt wearer coming up. Can't remember. The Shifty Noble kind of fits the mold you're looking for, but it's not one of my personal favorites.

I know I'm very free with my wishlist, but fwiw, I think you and your company do a stand-up job choosing your range of minis for each set. There certainly are always some I wish you'd get around to sooner, but your picks (almost) always make sense to me. You're certainly doing a better job than the managers of the old DDM line did, especially toward the end of the run (though Lords of Madness was a nice surprise, for me, anyway. Too soon to tell where the new ones are concerned.) I feel like we're in very good hands with you and Paizo -- true gamer's hands, at that.
Now bring us a Shocker Lizard and Froghemoth =7

If you don't mind me asking has there been any thought toward adding sexual dimorphism to non-humanoid miniatures? Currently I'm using the generally bulkier WotC dragon miniatures as hoard guarding females and the smaller spindlier paizo ones as male hunter dragons.

If paizo had a european warehouse i would order a brick or case from these series but as it is it´s too expensive and complicated...

I completely agree with that.

The one time I purchased a PFB case I had to pay an overcost of nearly 40% due to customs. So far I haven't had issues with bricks, but I no longer dare orderin these either.

I am now limited to buying singles from ebay :(

…..Building these sets is not always about finding a "perfect" balance of genders or creatures, or whatever. It's in large part about providing the _right_ miniature for a given role. So you might not need 11 female warrior types, but the variety is good for people hunting for a figure for their own character, or for a given NPC at exactly the right moment, or whatever…..

…..That's a big part of the disparity. As we move away from Adventure Path themes (for the time being), we're going to see more picks based on awesome art, or based on filling gender/race/class roles we haven't done yet than on fulfilling a specific NPC quota…..

That's good to hear. I do appreciate the progress that has been made and look forward to you'll be coming out with in the future.

My biggest problem however isn't even filling my NPC or highly specific PC needs. It's when a PC wants to play a female, half-orc, arcane caster. What am I supposed to use on the board? A male mini that's only wearing furs instead of armor? A female mini in plate mail? When there's nothing anywhere even near what's possible in game... It's like we're being told that isn't a valid player character option for women. That women are only ever supposed to look this certain (elven) way.

To meet the absolute minimum for PC combinations it would only require a total of 40 minis. Basic class groupings (4) x basic race groupings (5) x basic sexes (2). Forget about monster and NPCs for a moment. That there's such fundamental gaps even for player characters, when it would require less then two dozen minis to cover, is….. discouraging.

Basic Class Groupings
Heavy Armor Type (Mini that can stand in as a Fighter, Paladin, Cavalier, etc.)
Medium Armor Type (Mini that can stand in as a Cleric, Oracle, Inquisitor, etc.)
Light Armor Type (Mini that can stand in as a Rogue, Ranger, Bard, etc.)
No Armor Type (Mini that can stand in as a Wizard, Sorcerer, Witch, etc.)

Basic Race Groupings
Human
Dwarf
Elf/Half-Elf
Halfling/Gnome
Orc/Half-Orc

Basic Sexes (In case you didn't know. :p )
Male
Female

Sorry I don't mean to rant. It's just frustrating.

I sure would like a male frost giant that looked half as awesome as the one on the cover of Giants Revisited… especially since I plan to run Giantslayer.

Arikiel brings up a good point, but in my opinion, there is another variable. Weapons! Players particularly want a miniature that represents not only Armor Type, Basic Race, and Sex; but the right weapon being carried.

Dagger or small hand held weapon type
Club, Mace or Hammer type
Morning Star or Flail type
Axe type
One Handed Sword type, with or without Shield
Two Handed Sword type
Polearm type
Bow, Crossbow or Sling type

And this is a very basic group of eight that doesn't even touch on the more exotic weapons available. The base 40 grows quickly to a huge number when varieties of weapons are considered.

From reading Erik's post from the beginning of the PFB line, it is obvious he is a miniatures collector like most of us. He knows as well as anybody what is still needed, and more so what is needed within the Pathfinder Universe; and in light of what has already been made from other lines.

I truly look forward to the holes and gaps being filled piece by piece as each new set is revealed.

Also for tribal races like orcs and goblins wherein the whole tribe could be required to fight to defend their relatively small population it would seem best to include 50/50.

I agree in principle. I suspect in a regular hack and slash game, players may have a problem slaughtering the tribes women and children (for some reason). Then again, that may be exactly the reason to add more female and child orcs and goblins to the mix!

It's like we're being told that isn't a valid player character option for women. That women are only ever supposed to look this certain (elven) way.

I do not feel that Erik is saying "you might want to play a half-orc female wizard, but if you do, then you are simply WRONG, no miniature for you, you gender-bending miscreant" by not putting such a miniature in a set. Erik isn't saying that, and nobody at Paizo is either. Nor anyone at WizKids, or Wizards of the Coast or Games Workshop or any miniature producer, for example. I just don't see anyone telling players what is or is not a valid PC option.

Looking at myself, I play primarily attractive female elven characters, because that is the type of character I -want- to play. And I think that the majority of both male and female players who roleplay female character prefer this certain (elven) look.

I believe a dwarven barbarian with some hair on her chin, or a green skinned half-orc wizardess with large fangs, or a female paladin with muscles the size of cantaloupes, are all valid character choices, and I've never seen anything to suggest any miniature producer, roleplay company or in fact any roleplayer out there, believes these would be an invalid character choice.

Just because over a large population of gamers, these types of characters are rare choices (and just because -I- don't personally want to play such a character) doesn't mean that the choice is invalid. Just that it is a rare choice. And if a certain type of character is rare, it makes less sense to produce a miniature for them, because fewer people will buy it. If anything, the rarity suggests that your character is more unique, and I think thats often a good thing!

Erik fairly raises the point of filling in the gaps in the ecosystem and I approve of that, and the various other reasons he mentioned (a lot!). I think Paizo in general has done an amazing job in their gender balancing and if anyone doesn't believe me, just look at the first three Iconic Heroes pack and the miniatures with all sorts of armour groups, genders and races in there.

Much more so than D&D Miniatures, Pathfinder battles has given us the miniatures we want, in the rarities we want them. If they don't include a female arcanist half-orc, then the logical conclusion to me is that there is not a lot of demand for that type of miniature, not that Paizo is telling us we should not play such a character.

To be clear, I do believe that missing miniatures (male and female) deserve to be added, and I love having more miniature options available to me. I just feel that reading a lack of certain types of miniatures as a value judgement places a sinister motive on the people who bring us these wonderful miniatures. I don't feel that they deserve that.

I agree in principle. I suspect in a regular hack and slash game, players may have a problem slaughtering the tribes women and children (for some reason). Then again, that may be exactly the reason to add more female and child orcs and goblins to the mix!

I've personally never had problems with PCs refusing to commit violence against women actively engaging them in combat. They're hesitant to kill unarmed men and women, but that's not want I want out of female minis for tribal humanoids. I want warrior women if only for variety and represent life like tribal warfare.

Much more so than D&D Miniatures, Pathfinder battles has given us the miniatures we want, in the rarities we want them. If they don't include a female arcanist half-orc, then the logical conclusion to me is that there is not a lot of demand for that type of miniature, not that Paizo is telling us we should not play such a character.

I usually read it more as "Erik hasn't got around to asking for them yet". Not anything sinister, the enormous amount of quality lady minis is proof enough of that, but just lower on his to do list.

Berk the Black wrote:

I'm happier that it is gnolls right now. That sculpt is marvelous.

I noticed the latest AP is giants. Does this mean we can expect to see more in this and the upcoming sets? Just because this and possibly the next few sets aren't AP based doesn't mean Paizo won't be producing minis that support these adventures, right?

I would not expect a lot of giants in the next two sets.

So far every set but Wrath of the Righteous included giants.

What i expect in this set is:

-female Hill Giant (on the cover of Giantslayer 2)
-female Fire Giant (Giantslayer 5)
-female Ettin (Giantslayer Players Guide)
-male Cave Giant (on the cover of Giantslayer 1)
-Giant Skeleton (on the cover of Giantslayer 1)
-Ash Giant (maybe)
-Undead Frost Giant (Giantslayer 4 description)

Am i right with one of these Eric? ;-)

What i expect in this set is:

-female Hill Giant (on the cover of Giantslayer 2)
-female Fire Giant (Giantslayer 5)
-female Ettin (Giantslayer Players Guide)
-male Cave Giant (on the cover of Giantslayer 1)
-Giant Skeleton (on the cover of Giantslayer 1)
-Ash Giant (maybe)
-Undead Frost Giant (Giantslayer 4 description)

Am i right with one of these Eric? ;-)

If you guess that many, you're bound to be right with at least one or two!

Marco Massoudi wrote:

What i expect in this set is:

-female Hill Giant (on the cover of Giantslayer 2)
-female Fire Giant (Giantslayer 5)
-female Ettin (Giantslayer Players Guide)
-male Cave Giant (on the cover of Giantslayer 1)
-Giant Skeleton (on the cover of Giantslayer 1)
-Ash Giant (maybe)
-Undead Frost Giant (Giantslayer 4 description)

Am i right with one of these Eric? ;-)

If you guess that many, you're bound to be right with at least one or two!

** spoiler omitted **

Adam Daigle already wrote me from "the office of expectation management" which i didn´t expect. ;-)

I wonder if they know about the spanish inquisition...

I think I just spotted a few more minis from this set....

I think I just spotted a few more minis from this set....

These were "revealed" about 2 weeks ago. I try to keep this site update with the latest known images: www.pathfinderminis.com

I try to keep this site update with the latest known images: www.pathfinderminis.com

and Lost Coast needs an update

Kor - Orc Scrollkeeper wrote:

I try to keep this site update with the latest known images: www.pathfinderminis.com

and Lost Coast needs an update

Thanks. All fixed now :)

Great miniatures. Too bad the dungeon dressings will be so rare though.... Hopefully some of them will be affordable online.....

I like all of the miniatures shown so far (which is rare) but cases are simply too expensive for the EU with shipping and imports.........

Maybe the TTIP free trade agreement will change that.

If the customs charge would vanish only the shipping and handling fee would remain.

That is still some money but it would be a beginning.

Of course paizo could make a lot of money if they just had a warehouse in the European Union.

The USA has roughly 319 million inhabitants, the EU has about 507 million.

Guess who would buy more miniatures... ;-)

Maybe the TTIP free trade agreement will change that.

If the customs charge would vanish only the shipping and handling fee would remain.

That is still some money but it would be a beginning.

Of course paizo could make a lot of money if they just had a warehouse in the European Union.

The USA has roughly 319 million inhabitants, the EU has about 507 million.

Guess who would buy more miniatures... ;-)

Americans, because wargaming and p'n'p gaming is far more popular (in terms of population percentage) than in the EU. Currently, 70-80% of the global RPG market is US+Canada.

Also sorry to say but that 20%-30% of Europeans and Asians interested in traditional games are way more interested in historical wargames and board games than any other sort.

You are probably right Gorbacz and Alex Smith 908 but still there is a lot of untapped buyer and collector potential in the EU.

Games Workshop is UK based and sold probably the largest amount of metal miniatures for fantasy purposes worldwide.

Historical wargaming is not paizo´s market.

The Spielemesse in Nürnberg, Germany is the largest toy-fair in the world.

But yeah - boardgames, cardgames and such are more popular than rpg everywhere in the world...

I would be very interested in statistics of global rpg popularity but my money is on the USA too. ;-)

Games Workshop has also been losing market share every year for the past 15 years. Rackham was a French based company that produced the highest quality metal and prepainted plastic miniatures of the time and they went belly up with the petrol price hikes and poor return on investment for certain lines.

Ultimately the problem is both the smallish market share and the EU's really over the top taxes/fees. That's the general reason that although Asia has a smaller market share than Europe, but receives product easier and cheaper on the whole.

Edit: None of this is to say that you can't be frustrated or that your interest is somehow less important. I was just trying to lay out the situation as it is. I'd say if possible get a PO box in the US or Canada that forwards to your European address if you're planning on large shipments.

I think the language barrier is an issue for EU as well. Not that this affects miniatures much directly, but it does affect the game systems that use them, which means in certain area's miniatures aren't as available.

Another factor is that because the EU is a recent thing - and because the environment for corporations is better in the US - many of the big companies are located in the US. As a result there is a better ecosystem there with more competition. Here you're either Games Workshop, or an obscure German company T_T

That's just my view though, I'm by no means an expert