Willmark:
Methinks you need to read it again this time without guessing my motivations.
"Point I’m making is the plan already exists to topple GW in what Pathfinder did to D&D; i.e just make compatible with everyone’s existing minis and you have a good starting point."
No where does it say I am running out this second to ruin your gaming fun. Nor am I stopping anyone from spending their $ on anyone’s hobby. Because in reality the likelihood I’d have such time is close to zero.
(self edited: zen-like state back in balance).
Naagruz:
GW produces rules to sell minis, that's where they make their money.
Willmark
I'd argue it is the other way around. Sure, both minis & rules are complimentary, but it's REALLY all about the toy soldiers.
Next consider the IP police and what GW thinks they can copyright. Again really?
Willmark
GW has spent years developing the Warhammer Universe. Frankly they deserve more credit than they get. Given that gob-stoppingly massive companies like Disney can't even defend their IP, why worry on this point?
Once you make some of these leaps of logic the question that really stands out is why is GW needed at all?
To which I answer: they aren't.
Willmark
Yup, they aren't needed; they are desired. They make products people want, so they are still in business. In fact, they have been SO successful at making things people want that they have inspired a multitude of other manufacturers.
Regarding pricing, how many publicly traded companies don't raise their prices year after year? The fact that you can get minis from discounted online retailers & 2nd hand from eBay really dilutes any GW pricing increases.
Thommy H:
Are you suggesting that nothing in your original post suggests any sort of hostility towards GW, Willmark? I’m not going to post quotes or anything, but even if I’m completely misrepresenting your opinions, you can surely see that some of the language you used implies a certain motivation. Maybe you didn’t intend that.
Anyway, I don’t want an argument. You asked for opinions - it sounded to me like you wanted to replace GW with something else. I think there are already a few guys trying to do that.
Grimstonefire:
I am confused here Willmark.
What specifically are you suggesting we do?
Edit
@Naagruz
I suspect somehow that 2nd hand and discount prices creep up with the price rises. 
Willmark:
Some interesting points Naagruz.
A loooonnng time ago I questioned the going public route of GW on this site. It proved to be a tough provoker as they are clearly the dominant player (people can quibble about the usage of the word monopoly) but there is clear rely them and a huge gulf to thd second and third place companies in this space.
In fact if I can find them I’ll dredge up my old posts on the topic. I seem to recall I’d like other companies to gain even more traction to put pressure on GW.
Also lest anyone thinks that if GW went under it would be the end of warhammer. Some one would snatch up the IP.
As far as costs I don’t know but for a non-essential industry they seem to have gone from high priced to “are you freaking kidding me prices?”
Willmark:
Alright let’s see if I can clear this up.
My thoughts are if someone wanted to create a replacement for Warhammer could it be done?
My thoughts are yes it could but I dont think the current group of second line companies are going about it the right way.
To which I offered go the Pathfinder route, because even if I dislike the game their plan even if it was unintentional worked beyond all their dreams I’m willing to bet.
As I pointed out if somewhere were to go this route thd biz plan is largely laid out as to how to do it, ie use kickstarter, how to publish rules, etc.
Thommy- not to the degree you think. GW largely produces nothing I want (and certainly nothing I NEED) at a price I’m willing to pay.
Grimstonefire:
I am still confused I’m afraid. You’ll have to say how this pathfinder route worked.
Are you basically suggesting that we put together rules that enabled people to play wargames with whatever models they had?
How would that work in practice for theming and balance?
Unlike WW2 armies for example (which I imagine are all largely the same regardless of the manufacturer), the warhammer armies are so very different it would be extremely difficult and time consuming to rewrite the whole rulebook.
Edit.
Sculptors don’t seem to come into this at all, it’s all about writing rules isn’t it?
Thommy H:
Okay, no worries. I think what you’re suggesting is exactly what Mantic are doing though - even down to using Kickstarter.
Willmark:
Grim- yep as a thought id say rules as a start worry about mins later. I’ll post it out fully later on Pathfinder later (tough to do too long of posts on a phone).
As a quick aside for another reason as why I wouldnt want to get into the gaming industry in any big way, anyone know who Frank Mentzer? Stalwart of the RPG industry from back in the day and a great quote: “you know how you make a million dollars in the RPG industry? Start with two million”. Probably paraphrasing from elsewhere but spot on.
khedyarl:
Willmark’s solid on that one. Trying to earn liveable money in the gaming industry is like fist-fighting sharks for the opportunity to fight more sharks.
I may have misunderstood your initial post, Will. I had assumed you meant to effectively rewrite the GW rules to allow people to play Warhammer without GW. When I read the later posts, it seems you’re actually suggesting a kind of midground ruleset that could use warhammer minis, as well as other companies minis in order to play. There’s some companies that already do a system similar to that (The guys from No Limits do a fantasy game now, I believe), in addition to obvious ones like Mantic, etc. I guess the point is; what do you want from the rules system? Are you looking to play Warhammer Fantasy, or just use the miniatures that you already have?
In regards to Paizo’s Pathfinder: Again, I remind everyone that Paizo was the second largest tabletop gaming company out there when they used OGL to release Pathfinder. This wasn’t a backyard job by any stretch of the imagination. Paizo had money, a monthly magazine, and a huge fanbase already. In this case, Paizo was to WoC as Privateer Press is to Games Workshop. All of that said, none of this is comparable. Paizo had OGL to work with, where any company wanting to remake Warhammer Fantasy has to deal with IP issues.
Here’s the skeletal information about the Paizo-WOC-fiasco. For those of you that were involved in the 4th edition licensing agreements, you know what happened. Initially a company wanted to stay with the 3.5 OGL, they were legally allowed to by WOC. If they wanted to move to 4th edition, they were no longer allowed to sell 3.5 ogl material, and were (in addition) legally obligated to destroy any material held in storage. We decided, eventually, to go 4th edition because we thought it was an interesting challenge, and hoped that 4th edition would bring in some new players, and income. That said, we were no longer allowed to sell Amethyst 3.0 or 3.5, and effectively released our rights to actively created any material using the 3.5 OGL. I’m skipping past all of the horrendous licencing stuff in the 4th ed GL, like the inability for a publisher to change the definitions of creatures in the monstrous manual or players handbooks (which means you can’t put your own spin on Elves, or Dwarves, etc, and can’t fiddle with already-created monster descriptions, etc). There’s a massive list of 4th edition system creation slaps to the face and hurdles we had to jump through in order to put out Amethyst. Wasn’t easy at all.
Paizo, along with roughly three quarters of the tabletop industry that dealt in OGL, absolutely exploded at these ludicrous restrictions. They put their efforts into creating a DND “3.75” if you would, which is basically a modified version of WoC DND 3.5.
What does this have to do with anything? Well, really, I guess the point is that the stuff that happened in the 4th ed Paizo debacle was very, very singular. It happened because of the 3.5 OGL and 4th ed OGL clashes. It didn’t happen because the companies/fans didn’t want a new edition (not to say some didn’t, many people wanted to keep 3.5. But then again, just as many people wanted to keep ADnD, gaming conservatism never goes out of style). It happened because of WoC restrictions and unwillingness to back down from the OGL. Keep in mind that Paizo was one of the first companies signed on to the 4th edition OGL when it was initially released.
Thommy H:
I remember when I first read about the OGL. The first thing I thought was, “hey, that’s a pretty good idea.” The second thing I thought was, “one day…someone’s going to get really screwed over because of this.”
brotsorrow:
This was an interesting thread. Can someone shed light on some of the acronyms here so i can research what you guys are referring to? OGL for one… I am not familiar with any other miniatures/games 
This has been eerily familiar to when i played WOW (please no comments - i blame a bad marriage 
). Many people were sick of blizzard’s product and wish they had something else. There were many attempts like Conan and Warhammer to name a few but in the end, nothing was as refined nor thorough as Blizzard’s product. I think the same will (almost) always be with GW. They have been at this for a long time and really paid their dues when im sure there were many “dark times” in the miniature business.
In no way am i justifying GW’s price increases - they are ridiculous. Like WoW, many new comers may take a bit of the market share, but in the end, they have MADE themselves into the giants of their industry through hard work and determination.
Marduk:
Exactly! What is OGL?
And back to the main topic, let’s talk about concrete actions and voting with the wallet.
Would anybody recommend ONE system to play fantasy wargames?
If I were to start playing wargames with a group of people that have never played these games, what game system would you recommend?
zobo1942:
OGL is the ‘Open Gaming License’. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Game_License
I would recommend something small - a skirmish-style game - which has a smaller ‘buy in’ and less effort required to get playing.
If that was a big hit, you could make it more and more complex, and add more and more models.
Marduk:
I would recommend something small - a skirmish-style game - which has a smaller 'buy in' and less effort required to get playing.
If that was a big hit, you could make it more and more complex, and add more and more models.
zobo1942
Thank you. That's good advice. Now, what game system? And I mean, without getting off-topic, a non-GW system.
Rickie:
I would recommend something small - a skirmish-style game - which has a smaller 'buy in' and less effort required to get playing.
If that was a big hit, you could make it more and more complex, and add more and more models.
zobo1942
Thank you. That's good advice. Now, what game system? And I mean, without getting off-topic, a non-GW system.
Marduk
Mantic seems to have gotten it quite right. Have never tried it, but a simple systeam that should work well on most siezes. All the rules are free aswell.
Like it that they have actually playtested the rules outside off their office as well.
Willmark:
The second thing I thought was, "one day...someone's going to get really screwed over because of this."
Thommy H
^ This.
There are bad ideas then there are BAD ideas. Open GL falls to the later. At the time it was released (around 2000-2001) my first thought was why the hell would any sane company do that?
khedyarl:
I think the OGL was brilliant. It managed to consolidate a hugely varied amount of gaming under one wing (White Wolf, Steve Jackson Games et all aside), remained accessible, and generated massive, massive amounts of revenue for WoC. For every game like Arcana Unearthed that was completely self-contained, you had two dozen games like Midnight that used OGL, but still required the player to have a PHB, Monster manual, DMG, etc. Keep in mind that given anyone can use OGL, there are still print restrictions/pricing. Nobody wants to reprint a players handbook rule set and have a 500 page rulebook, when they know that they can just print a setting book, a bunch of fun, neat rules, and shoot it out the door for players to use with already existing sold by a company with a big name (WoC). That is inspired.
What I found insane was the change of business plan. Changing the OGL to be massively restrictive (we were informed it was to allow them to better protect their IP) cost them. Big. I’m not going to say that Pathfinder outsold WoC, because I’ve yet to see any solid info on it one way or another, but either way that is revenue lost that they could have shared in, had they kept the same business model from ten years ago.
Willmark:
Sure you liked it, so rid the casual gamer. Problem is from a business standpoint it directly enabled a competitor to steal your customers.
khedyarl:
Well, no. That’s not what it did from a business standpoint. There were a grand total of three games that had fully enclosed gaming systems using the OGL. Arcana Unearthed, Arcana Evolved, and I can’t for the life of me remember the name of the third. All other games still used Wizards of the Coast players handbook, Monster Manual, DMG, advanced monster manuals, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
The people that bought these products were already buying Wizards products in order to play the third party items. What this allowed Wizards to do was to actually make money off of competitors that they wouldn’t have normally gained. Put it this way: I have a choice between buying Call of Cthulhu d100, and supplements, or ADND and supplements, two completely different systems with different supplements, different rules, all of which are completely impossible to engineer together (assuming you wanted to play some kind of fantasy call of cthulhu). With OGL d20, you can do both. And many, many people did. There’s a reason that 3.0 and 3.5 dominated the market so heavily after having ADND nearly die. The OGL gave a base system for which a lot of third party players could invest, and in doing so, brought more people to the hobby, and brought more people into Wizards pocket.
I mean, the numbers are right there. WoC wrote and put out as many book as they possibly could - the third party setting books weren’t taking money from their pockets, they were putting money INTO them. If twenty third party producers write twenty setting books, all of which require a DMG and Players handbook to play, Wizards is then making money.
Just realised what the third was - the Game of Thrones RPG. Which actually bankrupted the company, because it was a 500 page book with completely self-contained ruleset. The only reason Arcana unearthed/evolved did well is because it had Montey Cooks name attached to it (the guy that wrote 3.0/3.5/Pathfinder).
EDIT: Saying that OGl lost Wizards money because they were having sales stolen is effectively like saying that Capcom and other software companies are losing Sony money because they also make Playstation games. The PHB/DMG/MM/everything else Wizards pumped into d20 were the console, you played other parties settings on them.
