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.

WayneTheGame wrote:

Toofast wrote:
I bought the physical SW codex because I play them but I have the others to reference when I play against some familiar opponents so I don't have to keep asking to see their book when I have a question. Everyone here likes to pretend there's just no possible way to play without spending $135 on rules and that isn't true.
1. Every GW (where I play 95% of my games) has store copies of every rulebook and has never had a problem with people using them for games
2. You can buy the mini rule book out of storm claw for $30 on ebay

I'm not sure if people aren't aware of these things or if they just like to pretend those options don't exist so they have something else to complain about regarding GW.

Seriously?

I don't think pointing out you can pirate the books is justification for saying they aren't expensive. I could steal a Ferrari too, it must not be that expensive...

Nor is saying eBay as we are comparing retail. Those things you mention are being ignored because they are irrelevant.

Edited the quote too

You lost me when you compared downloading a pdf to grand theft auto. You guys are comparing retail of one brand to another. I was simply making the point that it is not necessary to spend $135 on rules just to play the game.

Currently the main rulebook is $85 with no other primary options for purchase. Eventually I'm sure they will release an eBook version of 7th that will have a discount (I believe this was the case with 6th) and that will provide another avenue to get the book cheaper, but at this moment if a new player wanted to start Space Marines from scratch (and are buying retail since they are brand new), the rule would cost at minimum:

- 7th Edition Main Rulebook: $85 (no digital version yet)
- Space Marine: $58 (not $50 because they're the cash cow man! Reap that money! Also the digital version is $1.99 more than hardback)

So that's $143 right away with no models. Now, with secondary sources (i.e. third party, eBay), you would see a discount in these books, but that applies to *any* gaming products you buy from these sources (i.e. the Warmachine MkII rulebook will be cheaper here than it is from PP as well), so I don't really consider that much of a detractor from cost of investment comparisons.

With the release of Sanctus Reach and DV, the price of second-hand mini-7th's should be reasonable, so that will make things more tenable. If you're able to get the mini rulebook for, let's say, $30 off ebay and the Space Marine book for $40, then your total expenditure on rules-only is more like $70. But it's not like someone didn't have to buy the Space Marine book at $58 in the first place, so GW is still getting a good share at such a high price for the book.

@Toofast: the only option you provided I would agree with is the Stormclaw option- however, since this boxset is now sold so its supply of mini-rulebooks to the market is limited. However, DV should be able to supply this gap.

Option 1 is no better or different than any other FLGS offering rules for reference for any other game. Plus I feel saying that the local GW manager is completely cool with you not buying the rules and just borrowing his copy is a bit disingenuous. The Option 3 you originally supplied was literally theft, and again applies to all games across the board.

KommissarKarl wrote:
They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.

Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.

KommissarKarl wrote:
They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay

You say that like it's a good thing, like increasing the barrier to entry (which they have, are and will do again) is something to aspire to.

Brother Gyoken wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:
They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.

Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.

and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.

 Wayshuba wrote:


most are going to be surprised just how fast their business will unravel.

Suggested new thread title: Do you really hope GW is "going under"?

Because every game that depends on social interaction aspires to less people buying and playing it; that clearly means it is of the highest quality.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:
They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.

Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.

and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.

And here we, again, at the point where people have to point out that what other companies with completely different business models do or don't do is completely irrelevant when we are discussing miniature wargaming companies.

How about; "do you believe GW isn't going under despite all evidence? "

If you've got nothing more than sniping at people (and posting pictures of receipts?) rather than what the people are saying Oblivion, kindly go away.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If you've got nothing more than sniping at people (and posting pictures of receipts?) rather than what the people are saying Oblivion, kindly go away.

Sorry to bring the facts into the discussion. Upsetting to some people, obviously.

Understood, in a perfect world businesses would sell us everything at the price we want. GW publish in hardback first, and however much it upsets you, that's not a uniquely evil practice.

personally, we bought the hardback, and flogged it off on eBay for what we paid when Stormclaw came out. You don't have tp spend loads on 40k if you don't want to.

Anyways, once again this topic has deteriorated, away from the subject. Just because a company annoys you doesn't mean it's going to go bust.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If you've got nothing more than sniping at people (and posting pictures of receipts?) rather than what the people are saying Oblivion, kindly go away.

Sorry to bring the facts into the discussion. Upsetting to some people, obviously.

Except they aren't really facts, you've cited nothing backing up your claims and just dismiss anyone who thinks GW is going down (who, by the way, DO provide evidence) as whiners.

What evidence did you actually provide again?

I'm pretty sure everything I said was "facts," as are a number of other comments in this thread, both for and against. I would advise against claiming the banner of veracity too hard.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:

And if the new Ork codex is the indicator of 7E, you've lost not only a major chunk of original artwork to more studio photos, but you've also lost one of the most useful sections in the book. It's flat out objectively worse than the previous layouts.

Ah, so you don't actually own and haven't seen the Ork codex, correct?

The new Ork codex is better than the previous one. Not as good as it could/should be, but it's better. Yes, we got annoyed when we heard they were using photos for model rules, but it makes sense in context - all the illustrations are with the fluff, it's more logically laid-out, and easier to find stuff. There are quite a few nice touches, little illustrated bits, and the repro is much better than the previous codex, where the blacks were all filled out.

So the three editions out of date, 6 year old book isn't as good as the new one? Well, colour me surprised.

What about the fact that the current one isn't considered as good as books that have been produced this year? Personally, I couldn't give a gak about the photos over artwork, I've long since stopped regarding the codexes as anything other than rules supplements (a consequence of recycling substantial amounts of fluff and art every edition is that it massively devalues repeat purchase from those who have no use for the gaming part) but the omission of the fold out summary at the back, which was a genuine step forward in terms of the utility of the book from a gaming point of view, is a real step back over the 6th Ed books.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:
They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.

Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.

and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.

I must have missed the release of all those paperback codexes?

Oh, and the release of a paperback core book that didn't require the purchase of a bunch of models I don't want?

I did genuinely miss the limited edition, cheaper, smaller format, hardback rulebook for 6th. Because it was, well, limited. Hindsight shows I dodged a bullet on that though I guess.

WayneTheGame wrote:


Except they aren't really facts, you've cited nothing backing up your claims and just dismiss anyone who thinks GW is going down (who, by the way, DO provide evidence) as whiners.

What evidence did you actually provide again?

Same as the way people get really angry about GW for everyday business practices, they seem to imagine people calling them "whiners" .

Again, and we're getting distracted, it's a demonstrable fact that publishing a hardback first is the convention in publishing. Do i like it? No. Do I get outraged? Strangely, no.

 Azreal13 wrote:


So the three editions out of date, 6 year old book isn't as good as the new one? Well, colour me surprised.
.

Sure. But I was responding to a post that asserted the new codex was "objectively worse" than the previous one. It's demonstrably not. Could it be better? Yes, it could and it should.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:


Except they aren't really facts, you've cited nothing backing up your claims and just dismiss anyone who thinks GW is going down (who, by the way, DO provide evidence) as whiners.

What evidence did you actually provide again?

Same as the way people get really angry about GW for everyday business practices, they seem to imagine people calling them "whiners" .

Again, and we're getting distracted, it's a demonstrable fact that publishing a hardback first is the convention in publishing. Do i like it? No. Do I get outraged? Strangely, no.

Name someone else who did this? IIRC Privateer put both out, and the *hardback* was LE while the softcover was the normal one. Okay, I guess Bolt Action's rulebook is only hardcover, but it's also $35 and has basic army lists for the major factions so you don't need the Army book (what a novel idea! Provide all the rules to play in one book?!). Again, GW is the outlier. Only hardcover, charge an arm and a leg for it and rarely if ever put out a softcover despite the fact that more people would buy it.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
Sorry to bring the facts into the discussion.

Oh for God's sake...

Calm down please people.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:


Except they aren't really facts, you've cited nothing backing up your claims and just dismiss anyone who thinks GW is going down (who, by the way, DO provide evidence) as whiners.

What evidence did you actually provide again?

Same as the way people get really angry about GW for everyday business practices, they seem to imagine people calling them "whiners" .

Again, and we're getting distracted, it's a demonstrable fact that publishing a hardback first is the convention in publishing. Do i like it? No. Do I get outraged? Strangely, no.

Name someone else who did this? IIRC Privateer put both out, and the *hardback* was LE while the softcover was the normal one. Okay, I guess Bolt Action's rulebook is only hardcover, but it's also $35 and has basic army lists for the major factions so you don't need the Army book (what a novel idea! Provide all the rules to play in one book?!). Again, GW is the outlier. Only hardcover, charge an arm and a leg for it and rarely if ever put out a softcover despite the fact that more people would buy it.

I got the Bolt Action Core Rulebook for ~£2 as a digital download from Amazon, I got the Infinity rules for free, and I got the X Wing rulebook alongside everything else I needed to play a game for less than the cost of a codex.

The fact is game companies want you to have easy access to their rules, in the hope that the prospect of playing will excite you enough to buy in. Only Games Workshop seem to think that you should need to invest heavily in books just to see if you like the idea of playing or not. Also, before anyone weighs in with "but you can get a demo game in a GW store for free" as a counter, this is a very limited, biased and, IMO, inadequate alternative, for geographical, impartiality and superficiality reasons.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
Suggested new thread title: Do you really hope GW is "going under"?

Actually, if we did a new thread it should be titled, "Do you really hope GW is going to stay afloat despite evidence to the contrary?"

I am no longer emotionally tied to GW at all. Over 20 years of stuff is gone. My interest in GW strictly lies in a business perspective. They are showing all the signs and trends of a company in the later stages of the death spiral. The next financial report is only going to indicate how far down they are in it.

Strictly from a business perspective, to experience a double digit decline in revenue without a significant event where it was expected (such as the bursting of the LOTR-SBG bubble) is a clear sign of a company in serious distress (and thus why a 25% stock price decline on that day). This time there is no planned decline from an artificial product inflation unless we all want to say it is the 40k bubble popping this time.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.

That's a model for publishers for novels and stories, never seen it with school books or technical books.

And it should not be used for rulebooks. GW should release a softcover and hardcover both.

Well their shares are declining slightly ATM, so investors might be concerned with up coming report.
http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/LON:GAW/Games-Workshop/shares

The dividend was paid on 4th July, their last month makes a lot of sense when viewed with that fact in mind.

 Azreal13 wrote:
The dividend was paid on 4th July, their last month makes a lot of sense when viewed with that fact in mind.

Yup price went up in anticipation.

It spiked just before the qualification date, then has been steadily settling back down again since the dividend was paid.

Not unique to GW, lots of people will pick up some shares to get the dividend, then try and offload the shares at a profit/break even, easy money if you have the capital and can afford to be stuck with shares that are below what you paid for them until the price recovers (assuming it does.)

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

That's a model for publishers for novels and stories, never seen it with school books or technical books.

And it should not be used for rulebooks. GW should release a softcover and hardcover both.

The only gaming books I can think of besides GW joints are RPGs. The difference being that those ARE the product. You don't really need to buy anything beyond the initial books.

It's a really disingenuous move for that poster to call it "the standard" when they are comparing novels to gaming rules.

KommissarKarl wrote:
They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.

Isn't that what happened in 4th edition? Most people waited for Battle of Macragge to come out and get the small paper back version instead of buying the BRB. Then when 5th edition came out, they released the BRB first because they knew people just waited for Blackreach when it came out.

GW gave people what they wanted in 7th. A rule book they don't have to LUG around and be so bulky and heavy. People still complain.

Because they charged a record price for it and lumped it in with books that players likely already largely own or are not interested in.

There's a world of difference between doing something and doing something right.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:
They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.

Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.

and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.

Bolded the part you overlooked. GW don't do that. They released a mini 6th edition hardback which was still quite expensive and it doesn't look like 7th is getting a mini rulebook at all considering the new Dark Vengeance has the normal rulebook from the 3 set in it.

The more they de-regulate their rule set, the more they make themselves irrelevant when it comes to selling rulebooks.

I have to buy Dark Vengeance for $110 to get a small rule book which is easily portable and a bunch of models I may not want.

OR

I have to buy the core rules for $85 which includes 2 books I don't need to play the game.

AND

I have to spend $50 on a Codex.

That is minimum of $135 unless I go via some covert route like eBay. I cannot impulse buy the rules for an army for less than $135.

I can impulse buy Warmachine for $75 ($30+$35), but I really only need the core rulebook. All the unit information is displayed on the card that comes with the model.

I can impulse buy X-wing for $40 and again additional rules come with the models.