Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2016/08/07 02:04:06
Subject: Re:FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
Comparison to X-Wing: Yes, any person familiar with X-Wing or Armada will instantly recognize this as the fantasy war version of these precursors. There are dials, movement templates and dice with even the same hit graphics on them. But to call this game "Rune-Wing" would be a disservice since it isn't just the fantasy version of the same game. Similar to how Armada feels different from X-Wing, RW feels even more distinct in game play than either of these two and not just because the theme is different. The things I love about X-Wing are maintained--predetermined and hidden actions, simplified movement and combat, etc. But this is definitely a WAR game, not a skirmish. On the back of each unit's card, there are possible configurations of the units and how many movement templates can be tied together and the squads can get HUGE. It looks like you can buy four of the base sets and you still wouldn't field the largest configuration. But for those that might be scared off by this, don't be--you definitely have a very playable game with just the base set, even more so than with the base starter set for X-Wing. (We asked about tournament standards and the demo folks didn't know.)
I really like how the initiative is hidden based on which action you choose, unlike in X-Wing where the initiative of each unit is fixed and public. This makes for very interesting decisions to make because you aren't sure which units will go first, therefore your planned charge might fail because they managed to move further away before you go. Also, in RW, you don't do all your move actions and then attack--each squad or unit will move and activate on its initiative turn. Also, there is a corresponding modifier that goes with your action but you are restricted to choosing the modifier with the same color as your action (or grey that can be used with any action). ...
Comparison to other war games: This has many features of most other wargames where you have buffs and banes, charge rules, moral checks, unit special abilities, and randomness from dice rolls that can ruin the best laid strategic plans. It also looks like you can configure all kinds of army lists since points are listed on the back of the unit's card for different sizes as well as corresponding power cards that you can choose for them. If I remember correctly, there aren't any defense rolls but units have some special abilities that might make them block some of your hits. But overall, combat is resolved fairly simply and quickly so you aren't getting bogged down.
The other thing that has to be noted is the MINIS ARE UNPAINTED! Everyone at the demo was asking about this since X-Wing and Armada has pretty sweet pre-paint jobs. But for those that have never painted minis, you are going to have to learn to do it yourself (I have a tutorial video for how to do this quickly HERE) or *GASP* play with unpainted minis.surprise I can't imagine FFG would insist on painted minis for tournament play.
After the demo (which admittedly was limited to three rounds) I found RW to hit my sweet spot, similar to Deadzone (first iteration). Deadzone has simplified movement and combat but in-depth strategy. But RW is fantasy and the minis are very high quality, as to be expected for FFG. For a gamer like me, this is the war game that I have been waiting for a long time--simple mechanics but deep strategy. Also, I've found it incredibly impressive that FFG has done a relatively good job keeping wave 1 ships still relevant so hopefully this will remain true for RW where power creep kills of older units.
One other thing to note is that RW seems to be able to support multiplayer, which is a huge bonus for me since I rarely play 1v1. In fact, I demoed with a friend and due to dual dials, it was more fun for both of us to be controlling two units and coordinating together than our opponent who had to make all the decisions himself. And this was with the base set--you can imagine with larger point battles that having multiple generals or even factions could work (although the game isn't necessarily designed for it).
If you don't like proprietary dice, you're not going to like the dials...!
Spoiler:
Or, dice, I suppose.
Spoiler:
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/08/07 05:24:02
2017/03/11 20:28:08
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
CoreCommander wrote: The miniatures seem to be nicely casted with plain, ordinary detail - easy to paint and identify by newbs. I see that they turned away from their initial idea of having entirely pre-built models to appeal to a wider audience. You only get one type of model per unit though so all your skeletons, infantry and cavalry look the same. I'd have thought about getting the box for the models only as they're pretty generic and can be used in many games, but the game is still 100 bloody pounds in Europe!
Are Mantic Kings of War miniatures expensive there? The Orcs Army and Undead Army were good prices in the US and paint up fine. Dunno about the specialized models, though.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/11 20:28:50
2017/03/15 18:41:11
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
I thought Bones were sold as a replacement for metal for the RPG gamers. That is, Bones let them sell for $10 a hill giant that would cost $30 in metal. For an army, a $30 larger figure might be acceptable, but, for a GM, this means he's spending $90+ for a single RPG encounter. Creatures that would be "rank and file" for a wargame (eg. skeletons) are sold in 3-per-pack blisters, which is typical for RPGs, not a box of sprues, which is more common for "rank and file" miniatures. The "broccoli bases" Reaper uses makes the figures easier to place down on a mat, but, I think, would make them difficult to push around, compared to army miniatures which have sturdier bases.
Runewars may be good for new players who don't play Star Wars and haven't sunk hundreds of dollars and *hundreds of hours painting* into their "lifestyle" miniatures wargame. But I've spent over three months painting a Mantic Orcs Army, and I'm not interested in doing this over again for Runewars.
Azazelx wrote: If they just want the rules, that's fair enough. Buying the rules and using whatever miniatures you want was the norm before GW created the current Fantasy/Sci-fi ecosystem that we have here, and is still the norm for Historicals. I'm interested in potentially trying Runewars, and I don't dislike the models as many here seem to, but I have a sizable undead army for KoW that's already built and painted (photo from June last year, so there's more there now) and I'd fully intend to continue using it, so if I had to photocopy some cards to do it, c'est la vie. There are a few bones models in there, but sorry. No Lego or MLP. It's mostly Citadel, with Mantic, Reaper, Brigade, RPE, because, you know, I'm such a cheap bastard.
Some miniature wargames, such as Kings of War, have free downloads, because free downloads lead to actual sales, of both dead tree rulebooks, and plastic armies. Some boardgame companies, particularly those in a KS (ObPlug: AEG's Thunderstone Quest), provide free PnP. Free electronic content -- even books -- has been shown to lead to actual sales. So, sure, grognards with tight wallets and no time to paint more armies may be using printed cards, but that will lead to more sales by new players, or those who can afford and want to buy retail-quality components. I don't like the "cards with miniatures" retail model, either, so haven't bought boardgames which use them (unless they were at a deep discount!).
2017/03/24 21:23:19
Subject: Re:FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
fightcitymayor on BGG posted this review of the game:
I've seen the secret selection of your action (the first dial) and actions followed in an initiative order in the Eurogame Havana, but it sounds like a mechanic not seen in most miniature wargames?
You can also modify your secret selection (the second dial), such as selecting a different movement template.
Why should they play RW when they're spending their gaming budget on Star Wars games?
> - Gamers who know first hand FFG's games and trust their products - but haven't yet gotten into minis games
Why should they play miniatures games when they can play FFG boardgames? FFG boardgames are expensive and, like Star Wars, by the time you buy them you don't have much money left for a miniatures wargame.
> - Gamers who haven't played any sort of minis games
Why should they play a miniatures game when there are plenty of less expensive boardgames out there that require no assembly?
> I think the FFG CEO himself said in the GenCon Keynote speech, that this is a game where the rules come first and miniatures come second.
That's a big mistake, as anyone who's seen a CMON KS will tell you.
> Whereas GW games are first and foremost about the amazing minis, and the hobby aspects, and occasionally actually playing the games themselves - this will be about collecting an army, building lists and playing frequently in weekly/monthly tournaments.
Why would boardgamers, who have never done this, want to do it? Why would miniature gamers, who already are invested in their games, do this for another system?
> And yes, the expansions are a bit expensive for the lower than GW quality minis, but I still think this game is very competitively priced for what you can get.
But, if you're already playing a miniatures game, why not buy more miniatures for it?
I guess once they start playing and show that they will *continue* playing, that will be a good sign. I'm not saying you should not play RW, but I think Dakkanauts should wait to see if an audience builds up before deciding to buy this game.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/28 18:38:02
2017/03/28 20:46:16
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
> I'm sure many FFG customers will be the same with FFG.
i know this is true for boardgamers, but will it be true for the miniatures game? The difference between the boardgames and the miniatures game is that the miniatures game is a "lifestyle" game, meaning that you will sink hundreds of not just dollars, but hours for assembly and painting. I've also read threads on Dakka about popularity of X-Wing vs. Armada, namely that X-Wing is more successful than Armada. This suggests that FFG miniatures players don't have the hundreds of dollars necessary to support a second "lifestyle" game. In contrast, with the non-LCG FFG games, after "only" spending $150+ on a base game and expansion, you're pretty much done with the boardgame and can find another one to pick up.
We'll see! Thankfully, RW isn't being KS'ed, so gamers can let the early adapters empty their wallets first and create the community!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/28 20:48:16
2017/03/29 09:13:47
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
Very good point! With GW entering the boardgames market, that's a definite strategy. *Now* I recall that a video reviewer commenting on Asmodee's acquisition of companies might be a strategy to create a "one stop shop" of game lines that a Big Box -- and, by extension, smaller retailer -- could order from.
2017/03/30 02:53:02
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
Hmm... From the BGG Battlelore forum, I get the impression that FFG pretty much dumped it. The RW mechanics are different from Battlelore. Would be good for FFG to release these miniatures for BL as well, but I haven't seen any promo materials mentioning BL: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/25417/battlelore
Now paint and play those RW miniatures and tell us what you think of the game!!!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/30 02:53:20
2017/03/30 17:34:23
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
I don't know if anyone is still subscribed to this thread, but I just read back over it all again. It was a great discussion at the time and reflecting back on it now is rather enlightening.
FFG did end up rounding out the Dwarves. But they also rounded out the humans (which was great) before finishing up the line (which was devastating!).
Second edition has come out since then, changed many of the core rules and didn't get past three factions either before being put out to pasture... it is a frustrating journey that Battlelore took in the end.
For me first edition was the better of the two, but I realise that second edition did change things that (although I personally didn't like at all) brought some others more enjoyment. But even they are now out of luck with the line being sold off in the holiday sale.
I still hold out hope for someone to handle a Fantasy C&C game properly...
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/03/30 17:37:00
2017/03/30 17:56:26
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
Gotcha. Two years, though, is quite awhile ago. What other FFG product lines had over two years between expansions? I follow their Eldritch Horror line and used to follow FFG more closely, but can't think of more than two years between expansions, off-hand.
2017/03/30 21:23:32
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
Well, they need to make as many expansions as their fanbase wants so that these fans aren't saying that FFG has let them down, that's for sure. BL is crosses the line from boardgame to miniatures wargame, so its fanbase *expects* more than the usual one or two expansions that boardgames had, as well as regular releases, certainly more frequent than over two years.
The biggest disappointment in my gaming life was the way Battlelore has been handled by FFG. What a let down.
Are there any retail companies who make plastic miniatures in the USA or other first-world country? I assumed they'd be made in China.
Dunno who makes rock golem miniatures, but resin and metal tends to be cast in the same country as the creator, and resin and metal hold details better, so mebbe some hunting will find the miniatures you're looking for.
Google search for "rock golem minaiture" found these. The first pic is from Rothand Studios and looks nicely rockish.
Haven't seen any RW threads on the BGG Descent forums, or crossover posts of any Terrinoth game among the BGG forums, for that matter. Terrinoth is a generic fantasy setting that hasn't been developed by FFG (same for their Android universe, I think). It's certainly not like GW, where, as soon as they announce a game, all the GW gamers start posting about it (same for Glorantha, I suppose!).
2017/04/08 09:03:53
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
The problem about "better" is the cost of this utility. This cost is the hundreds of dollars the miniatures are expected to cost, the time it takes to paint them, and whatever work is needed to build the community.
Reviews have said the game is, indeed, better, but that the reviewer would not have picked up the game if they had to pay for it. Considering that the starter set MSRP is something like $100, that means this "better" isn't worth the cost of the game.
2017/04/08 20:51:25
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
Shrapnelsmile wrote: These last few lines ... so true, so sad. I've invested in countless small systems and they usually don't end well. Still play some, but it's not as much fun as a supported game.
Why we are doing Age of Sigmar at the moment. Fun and manageable, but active and current as well.
That's pretty much why I stick to "flagship" games, such as Songs of Blade and Heroes. These are the best-selling and primary products of their companies, so these companies are less likely to stop supporting them than a company which has other, better selling, product lines. This is also why I'm skipping CMON's Game of Thrones and Wrath of Kings, as well as various Mantic and FFG games. Of course, if a game doesn't need support, by all means pick it up!
2017/04/08 20:59:55
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
Eilif wrote: I was that reviewer. It's true I wouldn't have picked up the game if it hadn't been given to me, but that has much more to do with my love of indie wargaming and my satisfaction with the games I've been playing, (in some cases for years) rather than the cost of this set.
I think, though, that your typical wargamer's "satisfaction with the games (they've) been playing" certainly is a major barrier to entry to RW.
Do we have any numbers or threads of new miniature wargamers who pick a new system with proprietary figures over current established ones? I know Kings of War, Frostgrave, and Songs of Blade and Heroes gained a foothold because you can use your own miniatures. I'm guessing that Warmachine Hordes and Malifaux entered the market because they were unusual enough from generic fantasy for gamers to pick up. X-Wing certainly was different enough that it could tap a larger market, of miniature gamers who liked Star Wars and didn't want to paint miniatures. (Anyone know how Star Trek: Attack Wing is doing and why?)
And, as rmeister0 says, I'm also curious about the market for unpainted miniature wargaming. Anyone here live nearby the FFG event center and can take photos of RW games a few months from now?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/08 21:02:31
2017/04/09 04:39:55
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
Eilif wrote: As for the market for gaming with unpainted minis, have you been to an FLGS? I don't think I've ever been to an FLGS Warmahordes night where more than 35% of the minis on the table were painted. I've been to 40k nights where more than 50% were painted, but it doesn't seem to be the norm. I doubt that Runewars will be much different. This is a large part of the reason I prefer to game with my club, but I'm willing to give the Runewars scene a chance if one develops.
Hmm... Come to think of it, the manager of my FLGS is a Crystal Brush participant and teaches his employees to paint, so maybe that has something to do with it...
Anyway, Bobb on BGG said: "There have been 2 other post XWing ganes using the Attack Wing system, and one failed (a fantasy game no less) and the other is a struggling niche game. The original Wing of War/Glory system remains a niche game. Star Wars is the main reason XWing is so popular, not the system."
You can also brush on the dip (varnish), but that's what I do with my washes, anyway. ObPlug: Army Painter will have its Quickshade Ink wash set increased by three washes with their June 2017 release!
I'm starting to think (shoulda noticed earlier!) that FFG isn't going after the Dakka hobby miniatures market, which demands high-quality sculpts and paints to at least tabletop, but usually higher. They're going after tabletop-only painters, or those who don't care for the painting hobby. Which is reasonable, considering how crowded the hobby miniatures market already is.
However, of course, CMON's GoT miniatures are coming soon, and, with their colored unpainted miniatures that don't need assembly, may cater *more* to this niche-within-a-niche-within-a-niche audience.
2017/04/15 19:03:28
Subject: FFG launches Runewars (Rune Wars?), their own tabletop miniatures game
