Thommy H:
Nah, Chapterhouse are scum.
Baggronor:
And lets not forget that GW is only where it is today by riding the bandwagon of the dungeons and dragons succes, talking about being creativeWell, its not really the same is it? GW made their own system and worlds, admittedly over time, but Chapter House are literally profiting off GW's work without adding anything new of their own, as well as using GW's troop type names, etc. If GW did that to someone else, we'd be jumping on them with both feet. Yes, they borrow A LOT from Moorcock, Tolkien, Giger (Tyranids), even manga (Tau) but they always put their own stamp on it too.
and most of these companies make miniatures of a quality GW can only dream ofReally? GW do make some stinkers, but they also make some truly awesome minis too. The Khorne Lord on Juggernaut, Screaming Bell, Isle of Blood set to name but a few.
After seeing your illustration of a night goblin in the WoH, I'm thinking a that's pretty much the most awesome portrait of a 'goblohob underdweller' I've ever seen!Thank you ;) You may like the figures I'm designing at the moment then...
Grimstonefire:
GW have to be assessed as a whole I think and in terms of their output their quality level is superb really. Some companies have much better models, but they release a lot fewer.
It’s hard to tell sometimes what scale all their models are, but I think Privateer Press do some very nice models. Hordes stuff in particular.
Coming back round to the original topic, Forge World (and Warhammer Forge) really do have high quality models for their output level. I think people would be hard pressed to find anything that is not good in design and quality actually.
zobo1942:
@Baggronor: Might I suggest a ‘heads and boots’ sprue, and a ‘torso and arms sprue’? That might solve the problem of trying to create large units of hobgoblins… er, I mean ‘goblohob underdwellers’’. What kind of weapons are you sculpting? Poniard and Barbed Hooks for cave-fighting? Can’t wait to see them!!!
Baggronor:
Might I suggest a 'heads and boots' sprue, and a 'torso and arms sprue'? That might solve the problem of trying to create large units of hobgoblins... er, I mean 'goblohob underdwellers''. What kind of weapons are you sculpting? Poniard and Barbed Hooks for cave-fighting? Can't wait to see them!!!Seeing as they are metal, I'd rather steer clear of making them really multi-part as its asking for trouble. Also, there is limited space in a 9" mould, and separate limbs and so forth eat up space fast I feel, space which could just as easily house more Goblins. Lastly, as they are metal, I'm not expecting to sell vast amounts, so I'll probably just do 6-8 troopers and a Goblin King (not David Bowie ;) appealing as it may be).
Weapons-wise, two long knives will be the standard equipment, with maybe 2 or 3 armed with spears/hooks.
And I shouldn't hijack Grim's thread any further ;P
Grimstonefire:
I don’t mind. It all sounds quite interesting. 
Bassman:
Baggronor
a Goblin King (not David Bowie ;)I want it! Labirith was one of my childhood's favourite movies. :D
Ok, hijacked Grim's thread with my stupidity, now it's time to run away as fast as I can.... :o
Sjoerdo:
Get your facts straight; Back in the seventies Dungeons and Dragons was a very popular role playing game, people used little miniatures to represent their characters and such in the game. GW started making miniatures for this game, whilst Dungeons and Dragons had their own miniatures, GW was using their names and al. What later became GW couldn't have happend without GW first profiting form an other succes.And lets not forget that GW is only where it is today by riding the bandwagon of the dungeons and dragons succes, talking about being creativeWell, its not really the same is it? GW made their own system and worlds, admittedly over time, but Chapter House are literally profiting off GW's work without adding anything new of their own, as well as using GW's troop type names, etc.
Baggronor
Fixed that for you :)and most of these companies make miniatures of a quality GW can only dream of
Really? GW do stinkers,
Baggronor
Zuh-Khinie:
Talk aboUt getting facts mixed up…
Gw had a license to sculpt and sell D&D miniatures, because TSR wasn’t able to make their own.
When WotC took over in the late eighties, early nineties, only then did D&D get an ‘in-house’ line of miniatures.
GW had already started with WH and RT, and didn’t really need the license anymore.
GRNDL:
Well, if you want to get picky, Citadel was a miniature company and GW was mostly a mail order company to begin with… GW provided the funding to found Citadel but it was a separate company. So…
Baggronor:
Get your facts straight; Back in the seventies Dungeons and Dragons was a very popular role playing game, people used little miniatures to represent their characters and such in the game. GW started making miniatures for this game, whilst Dungeons and Dragons had their own miniatures, GW was using their names and al. What later became GW couldn't have happend without GW first profiting form an other succes.Eh? I didn't say that that didn't happen, just that what early GW did and what Chapter House do now are not the same thing.
I want it! Labirith was one of my childhood's favourite movies.We'll see. He might have to be special edition lol
Sjoerdo:
Talk aboUt getting facts mixed up...As far as I know: The predecessor of White Dwarf, then called Owl and Weasel was running Articels and selling miniatures for D&D (postorder) as early as 1976, the official licence was obtained no earlier then 1978.
Gw had a license to sculpt and sell D&D miniatures, because TSR wasn't able to make their own.
When WotC took over in the late eighties, early nineties, only then did D&D get an 'in-house' line of miniatures.
GW had already started with WH and RT, and didn't really need the license anymore.
Zuh-Khinie
Thommy H:
They were personally sent a copy of D&D by Gary Gygax in order to review and, later, promote it. I’m not sure how that can be equated to IP-theft: remember that the gaming industry was in its absolute infancy at the time, and the very idea of copyright infringment of someone else’s ideas in the context of RPGs would have been unimaginable. Also, it’s a roleplaying game which is inherently open source (because gaming groups take what they want and change stuff in the course of using the products).
Seeing as they are metal, I’d rather steer clear of making them really multi-part as its asking for trouble.Yes, plase God no multi-part metals. The vagaries of the moulding process mean that they almost never fit together cleanly in my experience. I literally had a breakdown assembling a unit of Heresy ghouls the other week. Amazing figures, but trying to stick them together made me want to die.
Baggronor
zobo1942:
Hmm…
‘Also, it’s a roleplaying game which is inherently open source (because gaming groups take what they want and change stuff in the course of using the products)’.
Sounds a lot like ANY game. House rules & fan lists, anyone?
We used to play ‘Risk’ with a rule that rolling a triple six nuked the country being invaded and would result in half casualties for the occupying army for three turns after the ‘strike’.
Thommy H:
Yes, but you can play Risk (and, indeed, Warhammer) without needing to do anything but blindly follow the rules. With an RPG, the game is inherently “incomplete” - it is neccesary for the GM to design the scenario, and the players to design their characters. You can use pre-written modules, but it’s assumed that the game is supposed to be tinkered with. What I’m saying is, publishing a D&D module, or rules for new monsters or whatever, is difficult to construe as IP infringment. Yes, proftting from it (in those pre-OGL days) could be construed as shady, but GW were actually licensed to distribute D&D in the UK, and publish new content for it. It was all done with TSR’s blessing. Indeed, Owl and Weasel and White Dwarf were originally “D&D magazines”.
It’s really not the same thing. And, even if it was, two wrongs don’t make a right anyway. GW borrowing liberally from other sources doesn’t make it okay for someone to make money off their backs in turn.
zobo1942:
There are examples of 8th edition Warhammer games (in the BRB, I believe) having a ‘GM’ now as well, which I think that speaks to the ‘inherently incomplete’ nature of ANY game that requires the use of imagination while participating. The new focus on scenarios (much like D&D ‘modules’) reinforces this. After all, if the playing surface and the rules for the pieces weren’t open to interpretation, we’d all be playing chess. Also, as an aside, I think a GW-endorsed ‘Warhammer Gaming License’ for scenario creation could be a great thing for Warhammer.
Regarding Chapterhouse Studios, I still think using GW terminology to describe their products is cheap - but does producing compatible parts make them ‘scum’?
Meh. One doesn’t have to like it, but as long as the parts aren’t duplicates of parts produced by GW, my thought is it falls under the heading ‘after market car parts’. After all, to some people a miniature IS just a ‘utilitarian machine’ to play WFB or 40K or D&D or Chainmail or whatever miniature game they want. I’ve seen all kinds of miniatures based on the illustrations from classic D&D rulebooks which were so similar that you could hold the miniature up beside a picture in the rulebook and they look nearly identical. If these were created without a license, are these people ‘scum’? If I decided to make duplicates of a neat looking part I built for a miniature (or scratch-build a whole miniature which could take the part of a GW miniature in a game) and sell them, would that make me ‘scum’ as well? I wouldn’t think so.
Of course, it’s always preferable to come up with something brilliant, new and original. It just doesn’t happen much - anywhere.
As an afterthought, what if miniatures of beings and ‘props’ from the 40K role playing game were the ones being produced, as opposed to supplementary parts and props for the tabletop game? Would you still feel the same way? Just curious.
Thommy H:
I still think using GW terminology to describe their products is cheap - but does producing compatible parts make them 'scum'?It does if they're completely unapologetic about what they do and then smugly thumb their nose at GW's attempts to protect their IP. It's akin to the fans of a TV show thinking they have some kind of ownership over it and getting annoyed when the producers make changes they don't like.
How can you give enough a damn about the universes that GW have created to devote so much effort to making models for it, while at the same time having nothing but contempt for the very people that did all the work on those universes in the first place? Yes, it's convenient to draw a distinction between the guys in the GW studio and the "suits" who make all the legal decisions but, actually, I'm guessing Jes Godwin, John Blanche, Jervis Johnson, etc. wouldn't be too impressed about having their ideas ripped off for someone else's financial gain.
"Compatible" is a very different beast from "blatantly using the same iconography to make a buck".
As an afterthought, what if miniatures of beings and 'props' from the 40K role playing game were the ones being produced, as opposed to supplementary parts and props for the tabletop game? Would you still feel the same way? Just curious.It's apples and oranges. As I said, the RPG industry was in its infancy when GW were publishing D&D modules and making D&D miniatures. Never mind that most D&D monsters are pretty generic anyway (can't copyright Orcs...), but if there was a period when they didn't in fact have the license, you're talking about gaming companies giving each other the leg up in a time when the whole industry was just getting off the ground. That's a lot different from what Chapterhouse are doing. And, yes, if someone were to make Rogue Trader figures without a license, that would be a clear case of copyright violation. At least, it would if they made "Dark Angel Space Marines" with a winged sword on their shoulder pad, instead of, say, "cyberpunk investigator" who just looks like he could be a 40K-universe PC.
It's about how you do it. There's plenty of "40K compatible" stuff out there, and that's just fine. It's when you blatantly cash in on something someone else did and don't even pretend you're not and then just laugh at those who say you might get in trouble that you go from, "fair enough" to "scum".
snowblizz:
and then just laugh at those who say you might get in trouble that you go from, "fair enough" to "scum".You keep saying that, but as far as I understood what was posted about it earlier then GW has tried to challenge it only to have it fail. So apparently that 1000 buck lawyer knew what he was about or huge corporation has pretty tame lawyers. Also I remember seeing mentioned in discussions that everything GW claims about IP doesn't quite seem to hold water. After all, if GW is in the right with this then surely they should be in court by now? Considering how hard they tend to jump on suhc things.
Thommy H
Pragmatic as I am I have to say if GW chooses not to provide the models then don't complain when someone else does. After all GW could easily have made awesome bonesword/lash-whip conversion packs to go with the Tyranid release.
Thommy H:
Yes because, as we know, the law always perfectly reflects right and wrong.
snowblizz:
Yes because, as we know, the law always perfectly reflects right and wrong.Ah, so it is a moral issue. Or is that ethics, I've long forgotten what the difference was. The law might not be perfect, and justice is supposed to be blind..., but I can't really blame people for being within the law.
Thommy H
So what is your opinion on Warplockmonkey's models for Maelstrom? I was gonna post a pic of another Ghorgon rip-off but the thread has disappeared it seems.