A Haughty Horse and Some Funky Furniture

This looks like a great set and I'm looking forward to it.

Having said that, I feel that some of the dungeon dressings should be at a much higher rate than "ultra rare" or 1 per case (which isn't even guaranteed).

Dungeon dressing like beds, tables, chairs, and in this case, cages, people want more than one, they want several. Should be uncommon. There is no 3rd party market for these minis, everyone wants what they have.

Candles, crates, or barrels should be rare.

Items like gates, wagons, carts can remain as ultra rare. imo.

Here are the horse-like things I can see us doing, not including actual monsters like nightmares and pegasi and stuff, which is obvious and which we'll get to eventually.

Horse with saddle
Armored warhorse
Donkey laden with gear

That might be it. Am I missing anything?

How about a mule that is unloaded but has a cart/wagon yoke on it as a common? Limited use I know, but every so often you need to run into a dwarven mining caravan with 4 or 6 mule teams pulling carts of ore or tailings, or an 8 mule team pulling a slave wagon (or a caravan of them )

Yes to riding horse with saddle.

Yes to armored warhorse.
Yes to pack mule or donkey.
Yes to pony or donkey with saddle for small characters.

Yes to multiples of common dumgeon dressing (candelabra, barrels, crates, tables, statues, small fires, bedrolls, etc)

Even though I've been collecting since forever, still don't have enough of these commonly needed items.

No to unicorns, dragons, manticores, chimeras, and other 'prestige' critters that are rarely encountered but have been produced in plastic many times.

Dissenting voice. I for one am a fan of "prestige" monsters - Unicorns (only 2 or 3 different ones in PPM and this one is the best I've seen yet), Dragons (As long as they are different than those we currently have), Manticores (only a couple have been produced in PPM and most aren't very good), Chimerae (As long as they are different), Hydrae, Gryphons, Hippogryffs, etc. Whether they get used often or not, these are "Tent pole" pieces which bring in new collectors and keep PPM lines viable.

I've been collecting PPM since the Alpha release of MageKnight and have watched quality improve by leaps and bounds. However, the only thing that keeps these sets viable is the continual infusion of new blood into the consumer base as older collectors drop off either because they "have more mini's than they can use / have room for," or just don't have the money for them, or they decide to try their hand at painting their own, and new collectors frequently want these prestige monsters, as well as common beasties like orcs, goblins, ghouls, zombies, and various other tribal types that people have complained "We Have enough of these already." Mr. Mona has to walk a delicate tightrope with the set list from each set to make sure he includes enough "prestige monsters," dungeon dressing, unique critters that he wants, PC types, and grunts to keep the vast majority of players happy and he still gets complaints about one or two pieces in every set.

Pony good, camel better.
Froghemoth best.

Having said that, I feel that some of the dungeon dressings should be at a much higher rate than "ultra rare" or 1 per case (which isn't even guaranteed).

Dungeon dressing like beds, tables, chairs, and in this case, cages, people want more than one, they want several. Should be uncommon. There is no 3rd party market for these minis, everyone wants what they have.

Candles, crates, or barrels should be rare.

Items like gates, wagons, carts can remain as ultra rare. imo.

At one per case all of the dungeon dressing are the same rarity and the usual rare mini. All of the rares are 1/case as well.

i have no issue with them replacing a common or uncommon mini but then I like the dressing. Not sure how many others would be happy with a 45 mini set with only 40 creatures and 5 dressing pieces - 2 common, 2 uncommon, 1 rare.

I know very little about how this works but I can imagine it may be possible to make a set of the size we have now how. 50 minis, 13 rare medium, 4 rare large, 8 uncommon large, 11 uncommon medium, 14 commons. 2 commons, 2 uncommons, 2 rares are dressing. This would land you enough of most without throwing out the distribution too much, you would get on average around 6-7 less common creatures, 6 less uncommons. The question is which 2 commons and uncommons would you remove from this set, for example, for the dressings?

How would this then tie in with the possibility of huge minis? I wouldn't just want my Huges coming from D&D, the quality is not as good ( I hope battles quality keeps up)

Jason S wrote:

Having said that, I feel that some of the dungeon dressings should be at a much higher rate than "ultra rare" or 1 per case (which isn't even guaranteed).

Dungeon dressing like beds, tables, chairs, and in this case, cages, people want more than one, they want several. Should be uncommon. There is no 3rd party market for these minis, everyone wants what they have.

Candles, crates, or barrels should be rare.

Items like gates, wagons, carts can remain as ultra rare. imo.

At one per case all of the dungeon dressing are the same rarity and the usual rare mini. All of the rares are 1/case as well.

i have no issue with them replacing a common or uncommon mini but then I like the dressing. Not sure how many others would be happy with a 45 mini set with only 40 creatures and 5 dressing pieces - 2 common, 2 uncommon, 1 rare.

I know very little about how this works but I can imagine it may be possible to make a set of the size we have now how. 50 minis, 13 rare medium, 4 rare large, 8 uncommon large, 11 uncommon medium, 14 commons. 2 commons, 2 uncommons, 2 rares are dressing. This would land you enough of most without throwing out the distribution too much, you would get on average around 6-7 less common creatures, 6 less uncommons. The question is which 2 commons and uncommons would you remove from this set, for example, for the dressings?

How would this then tie in with the possibility of huge minis?

Losing even more slots would be bad for me. Truth is, I'd probably buy a case or two anyway, but there's no question the inclusion of dungeon dressing makes these sets noticeably worse value for me (I essentially take eight minis and put them in a box, never to be used again - they could have been monsters, as far as I'm concerned). If the incidence of dungeon dressing was increased, the cost/mini for me increases significantly, since these are just a waste of space.

I'm really, really hoping these can be split off into a separate line - mingling the products like this (terrain and monsters) can't help but be disappointing to both markets (albeit being perfect for the market of people who want both in exactly this proportion). Anecdotally, it seems like there's sufficient support to justify it. I'm hoping Wizkids are willing to take the risk soon and that the fans who like dressing support the hypothetical new product line.

I wouldn't just want my Huges coming from D&D, the quality is not as good ( I hope battles quality keeps up)

With regard to the D&D quality, I'm not looking to argue, but have you looked at their most recent sets? I think the difference in quality between the two lines still exists at the non-rare medium and small figure level, but the large and huge D&D minis are generally done quite well. As are the rare mediums. It's all subjective, of course, but I wouldn't base your opinion of Icons of the Realms set 5 on how you found Icons of the Realms set 2. The set prior to this had some figures that were definite improvements on the PFB equivalents in my view (largely due to being at different rarities and also coming from some of the early PFB sets) - the manticore and yeti being two examples.

I've ordered quiet a few of the latest sets. I agree at the large end (and Rares) the quality is fine, still suffer from wizkids overall inability to do faces, but it's certainly improved. I just think the battles line has the edge, or at least at the moment, I'm awaiting this set to really judge.

I take the dressings as they are because I know people feel like youdo. More monsters is always good.

I take the dressings as they are because I know people feel like you do. More monsters is always good.

Cheers. The opportunity cost is something often neglected, in my view.

Having said that, I should have made clear that I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority. Posting "I don't like this" sometimes feels like a demand for change (which it isn't really). I'd resolved to be less negative in Erik's threads this year, dammit!

Turn those pesky poeces of furniture into something more to your liking! I'm game if anyone wants to unload their unwanted dungeon dressings!

If you're at Paizocon next year, I plan on bringing my dungeon dressing stuff to the Monday night mini-swapmeet.

Cat-thulhu wrote:

I take the dressings as they are because I know people feel like you do. More monsters is always good.

Cheers. The opportunity cost is something often neglected, in my view.

Having said that, I should have made clear that I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority. Posting "I don't like this" sometimes feels like a demand for change (which it isn't really). I'd resolved to be less negative in Erik's threads this year, dammit!

For the record, I never saw "I don't like/need X" as a demand for change. It's just a data point. (That's just me, though; others may feel differently.)

Berk the Black wrote:

Turn those pesky poeces of furniture into something more to your liking! I'm game if anyone wants to unload their unwanted dungeon dressings!

If you're at Paizocon next year, I plan on bringing my dungeon dressing stuff to the Monday night mini-swapmeet.

I might have to get in on this. If there's anything specific you're looking for, you know how to get in touch. ^_^

Steve Geddes wrote:

Cat-thulhu wrote:

I take the dressings as they are because I know people feel like you do. More monsters is always good.

Cheers. The opportunity cost is something often neglected, in my view.

Having said that, I should have made clear that I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority. Posting "I don't like this" sometimes feels like a demand for change (which it isn't really). I'd resolved to be less negative in Erik's threads this year, dammit!

For the record, I never saw "I don't like/need X" as a demand for change. It's just a data point. (That's just me, though; others may feel differently.)

Some people definitely do. Plus I do go on about it, so it is kinda nagging. :p

Steve Geddes wrote:

Berk the Black wrote:

Turn those pesky poeces of furniture into something more to your liking! I'm game if anyone wants to unload their unwanted dungeon dressings!

If you're at Paizocon next year, I plan on bringing my dungeon dressing stuff to the Monday night mini-swapmeet.

I might have to get in on this. If there's anything specific you're looking for, you know how to get in touch. ^_^

Will do. :)

Basically older minis of monsters are great - I was late to the party as a minis collector.

Basically older minis of monsters are great - I was late to the party as a minis collector.

I go back to Harbinger* (and to Alpha Mage Knight before that). I'm sure I can find stuff for you.

*This, by the way, is why I rarely complain about certain things. I have two of the Archfiends Unicorn and one of the later 4e DDM ones. But I know that not everyone goes back that far, and it's nice for the newer folks to have these things. ^_^

Yeah, I've got at least one of every mini going all the way back to Harbinger, so when I'm thinking about what minis I would and wouldn't like to see, I often have to remind myself that most people buying minis don't even know the earlier sets exist, let alone have many minis from them.
Honestly, I still prefer the plastic and manufacture of those earlier sets, too; those little suckers are durable, and very few of them had breakage issues. Can't say that about most minis Wizkids makes....

About the same. Been collecting since harbinger and have one of almost everything, I thinned out my collection quite a bit a while ago but I still have a vast collection. I'll take whatever comes out, I'm just glad to have prepaints.

I'd love to trade for the dressing pieces, alas I'm not going to paizocon.

I've generally had pretty good luck with the battles cases (except one really) and find the amount of extras I give away is less each time. I'm happy to buy individual dressing pieces but I find I need to be really quick.

I'd love to trade for the dressing pieces, alas I'm not going to paizocon.

You're in Australia, right? Send me a pm of what you're looking for. I have a reasonably complete list. I even have two RDI bars. Though they're all muddled together with some repaints ....

I hope it goes without saying that I will also be at the PaizoCon miniatures trading afterparty that I founded and host. :)

See you guys there! :)

Sigh, the west coast is half a country away from me... I'd love to put faces with the names of the people who post here. Trades for me are generally relegated to mail. At least shipping within the U.S. is managable. I feel for those of you that have to deal with international shipping.

If we're discussing mounts, what about mounts for small characters? A saddled riding dog or wolf would be most useful.

And maybe a spectral horse for the mount spell or for undead bad guys.

We haven't had a mounted halfling-on-war-dog since Dragoneye, for the record. ^_^

Also, I'd love a unicorn-riding mage or priestess, in the vein of Mage Knight's Emerald Glade Mystery. ^_^

If we're discussing mounts, what about mounts for small characters? A saddled riding dog or wolf would be most useful.

And maybe a spectral horse for the mount spell or for undead bad guys.

It seems you missed this:

http://paizo.com/products/btpy9isj?Pathfinder-Battles-Rusty-Dragon-Inn-Ridi ng-Dog

;-)

The most wanted "riding animals" from what people wrote:

Donkey: 7 pro/0 against
Warhorse: 5 pro/0 against
Pony: 5 pro/0 against
Riding Horse: 5 pro/5 against
Mounted horse: 4 pro
Camel: 3 pro

So i guess it´s

1: Donkey (laden with stuff)
2: Armored Warhorse
3: Pony for (medium characters)

Thanks for asking, Erik! :-)

I'd throw in a pro for the camel. Have not got one ever.

The most wanted "riding animals" from what people wrote:

Donkey: 7 pro/0 against
Warhorse: 5 pro/0 against
Pony: 5 pro/0 against
Riding Horse: 5 pro/5 against
Mounted horse: 4 pro
Camel: 3 pro

So i guess it´s

1: Donkey (laden with stuff)
2: Armored Warhorse
3: Pony for (medium characters)

Thanks for asking, Erik! :-)

How do you get no against? At least several people including myself said no to all of those.

Marco Massoudi wrote:

The most wanted "riding animals" from what people wrote:

Donkey: 7 pro/0 against
Warhorse: 5 pro/0 against
Pony: 5 pro/0 against
Riding Horse: 5 pro/5 against
Mounted horse: 4 pro
Camel: 3 pro

So i guess it´s

1: Donkey (laden with stuff)
2: Armored Warhorse
3: Pony for (medium characters)

Thanks for asking, Erik! :-)

How do you get no against? At least several people including myself said no to all of those.

I just read every post in this blog (again) and come to the same conclusions as i posted above.

Speaking purely for myself, I'd rather not have any more pack-animal/horse minis. If I had to have anything, it would be a non-Large one, such as a laden mule. I'd simply rather have more exotic creatures, especially those unique to Pathfinder.

That's just me, though. ^_^

And me. While I could take a camel or a laden mule I would much prefer more unique pathfinder creatures or pathfinder takes on creatures. Especially given some of the phenomenal art that's been appearing in the APs. Then again I would be happy with more Giants despite the large number we already have - give me the amazing art from the giantslayer AP, a Grenseldek, the fire Giants, the ash Giants. The artwork for the

Sorry I was not very clear. Not that interested in horse, mounts, or creatures that are not useful in direct combat. Meaning pretty much monsters is what I need and want especially Pathfinder specific monsters. Why the above unicorn is nice I doubt I would get use of out if it as very unlikely for my PCs to ever be in combat with one. For commoners I would just like a very simple plain mini in large number (20+) because unique looking minis should be for the good guys and bad guys not the commoners standing around in the town. IMHO.

For mounts I use poker chips actually. Poker chips are almost exactly a 2 inch circle which is the size of a large horse and most people have these already or are VERY cheap to get. What I like is that to display that a PC is on a horse you simply put the PC mini on the pocker chip. =). This seems to also give a nice visual view to the players for what squares they can attack into when mounted. When not mounted you take the mini off the pocker chip. ;)

Later a player printed images that we stuck to the chips to give us different types of horses. But before then we went by color. White = Light Riding, Blue = Light Warhorse, and Red = Heavy Warhose. Just thought I would share an idea that works for my group for mounts.

Players focus is on there own characters and the monsters they are fighting. I have never seen a player care about a "mount" or Donkey or farm animal and cared that it needed a fully painted mini. Any simple representation for these is all that is needed. This is why I keep mentioning cheap toys to show them on the game table. Players see the cheap toys and it gives a visual queue that the important things in the encounter are the high quality miniatures (Monsters and NPCs).

Thats the long explanation to make things more clear. If anyone cares. =)

But like those that dont like the dungeon dressing I expect to get more "animals" in the future. As long as its kept to way less than the monsters that is a fair compromise to keep the Pathfinder mini line alive. I wonder if next to a specific dungeon dressing line if a "Commoner" and non-combat animals could be in the same line. That could give a good selling point allowing DM's to buy the specific set or sets they want.

Re: Mounts, I've been running a Kingmaker campaign where more often than not the party is out in the open and their mounts are either in use or tied up by their camp. And again, more often than not monsters (often of animal intelligence) have gone after the horses. Protecting the horses has at times been a big deal, and it's become a running joke that one of the characters seems to lose about a horse a week. For us, poker chips would be unsatisfying. But I think it's great that your group found an easy solution like that that works for you!

For the record, I'm glad we got horses in a previous set. Two types, even! But I don't need any more, even if there are subtle variations of gear.

7 weeks till release in the US!

T-minus 49 and counting...

and counting...

With deepest appropriate respect, please, please don't.

Marco Massoudi wrote:

and counting...

With deepest appropriate respect, please, please don't.

I'm not gonna post a new number here every day, don't worry. ;-)

Races/groups that need to be in PFB set 12:

-Drow (Second Darkness cover art)
-Merfolk (for "Ruins of Azlant" AP)
-Morlocks (Serpents Skull part 5 art)
-Vegepygmys (Serpents Skull part 3 & Iron Gods part 1 have great art)

Serpent's Skull part 1 has vegepygmies too.

Erik, if you're still looking for suggestions and ideas, Ymery would make a great rare and being large make it realist. I had assumed she was huge, but her stat block in Plane of Power proved me wrong.

On the same note, I'd very much like to have other demi-god as more and more of them now have (or soon will B6) art and stats.

Always fun to have the real mini for your end game boss and not some replacement mini.

Pazuzu,Deskari, Baphomet and Lamasthu(I know sh'is not a Demi-god)are among my favorite PB minis and I hope you can expand the rank...

Thanks

Dany

Some suggestions for dressing pieces in set 12 or 13:

-a well
-a throne
-a gallows
-a boat
-an anvil
-a working doorway

I´m very curious for the final 4 minis renders reveal later tonight and hope we see some box art and actual minis soon. :-)