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.
2016/04/08 18:16:13
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
Thanks Manchu, hopefully it is a couple of months and not November. Sad, I think of November as LotR release date lol.
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
2016/04/08 20:02:29
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
- Kingdoms of Men
- Free Peoples
- Fallen Realms
- Moria & Angmar
and one each for the Hobbit movies (the Bo5A one is a free PDF)
No, no... I mean, I know those were the most recent books for army lists... but looking at Ebay I see a couple different covers... are there multiple editions of these? As I said, the one has a still from the movie as a cover, "Mordor" for example with some Uruks... and another auction has a picture of a book with the GW armored Troll on the cover. Both say they are the LotR: SBG Mordor Sourcebook.
11527pts Total (7400pts painted)
4980pts Total (4980pts painted)
3730 Total (210pts painted)
2016/04/08 20:43:49
Subject: Re:GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
The current sourcebooks for LotR will look like this...
There is only one printing of the Hobbit books.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
2016/04/08 21:13:21
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: Incidentally, which source books were the most recent? On Ebay I saw one Mordor book with an image from the movies on the cover, another with a GW Troll model wielding a flail. Both just say they are Mordor Sourcebooks.
The army books all have blue covers and photos from the movies. These are the ones you want. There are also older "sourcebooks" that IIRC all have photos of painted miniatures on them. They have background, stats and scenarios, doo, but they are older books and may not have everything.
Davor wrote: Will these books become obsolete once the new Middle Earth book rules come out? I never did buy these. I am just wondering if I will have to buy these and start painting what I never did or just wait till the new onces come out.
What I have heard is that they are "reprinting" them, which would seem to indicate no changes. GW has done errata sheets for each of the books, though, which implies there are some things that need to be added or corrected, so they may update the contents before printing the new books. In other words, we just don't know yet!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/08 22:16:31
2016/04/09 06:13:08
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
MacMuckles wrote: Is there any fluff in the source books? If there is, how's the quality?
I've heard the fluff for this game is pretty good. I think it may have won an award or two at some point.
lol, I definitely had that one coming I meant more along new fluff that expands on the classics, or any GW additions. Do they exist? Are they good?
There is some Games Workshop additions to the fluff, yeah. They named all 9 Ringwraiths (well gave them titles, not names, such as 'the Tainted' and 'the Dark Marshal') where as only two are named in the books; the Witch King and Khamûl the Easterling. They also made sourcebooks around a line in the books (The Khand stuff they did was from one line in the book), and stuff from the appendixes. I'm not sure what the consensus on their fluff is though, I like it personally, but I haven't read the books fully yet to know what's different and what's from the original source.
2016/04/13 15:54:48
Subject: Re:GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
It's really not that surprising that the appendices aren't covered--that's been the way the license was since the beginning. It covered the films and the novels tied to them. Them getting the Appendices and Silmarillion would have been huuuuuuuuuuuge news.
2016/04/13 16:05:54
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
Why are you lumping the Appendices together with the Silmarillion? "The Appendices" are the appendices to The Lord of the Rings, one of the two novels covered by the license. They have always been published as part of LotR, meaning that they were published during the lifetime of the author, which is when these licenses originated. The Silmarillion by contrast was not published until four years after Tolkien's death, long after any licenses were created. It is therefore quite natural to assume that the Appendices are covered as part of the novel - and therefore surprising that they are not!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/13 16:06:31
Manchu wrote: Why are you lumping the Appendices together with the Silmarillion? "The Appendices" are the appendices to The Lord of the Rings, one of the two novels covered by the license. They have always been published as part of LotR, meaning that they were published during the lifetime of the author, which is when these licenses originated. The Silmarillion by contrast was not published until four years after Tolkien's death, long after any licenses were created. It is therefore quite natural to assume that the Appendices are covered as part of the novel - and therefore surprising that they are not!
The reason I'm "lumping the Appendices together with the Silmarillion" is that from what was discussed waaaaaay back when "The Hobbit" license was announced is that apparently the Tolkien Estate considers The Appendices their own thing, tied directly to the novel's content and therefore a separate license to that of the license that GW owns which covers the films and certain materials from the novels(Tom Bombadil, for example) that made its way into the LOTR game but have since gone away.
2016/04/13 16:14:26
Subject: Re:GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
Now if only there were a less pricey way to enjoy some more of the character options out there.
Having just started buying in, the core of lists is amongst the cheapest entry points I have seen in a game of this scale, and yet the minute you add in heroes/captains, the value proposition becomes drastically different.
On the one hand, marquee "characters" like the Fellowship can be had in multiple ways cheaply, but the minute you want Gandalf to be on a horse, we're talking $40+ for the one model. :-p
Guess i'm going the cheapy route of painting up some Uruks and Orcs in "Captain" colors. :-p
11527pts Total (7400pts painted)
4980pts Total (4980pts painted)
3730 Total (210pts painted)
2016/04/13 16:33:44
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
Kanluwen wrote: apparently the Tolkien Estate considers The Appendices their own thing, tied directly to the novel's content and therefore a separate license to that of the license that GW owns which covers the films and certain materials from the novels(Tom Bombadil, for example) that made its way into the LOTR game but have since gone away
This doesn't make any sense. It seems like you don't really know what you are talking about, either in terms of Tolkien or GW or the history of the licenses. "Have since gone away"? Are you saying the license GW holds has become more restrictive? Separately - we are talking about a part of the novel. Tolkien insisted the Appendices be published with LotR as essential to understanding LotR. If the Appendices were never part of the license Tolkien negotiated during his life, that is one thing - I just don't know if that's what happened. It would be surprising given his own take on the Appendices' relationship to the novel.
Slinky wrote: In the follow up Q&Q video on the GBHL channel, they did mention Dain by name.
It was a really frustrating omission. Just a quirk of James (he refused to communicate anything about the news during Throne of Skulls) or is this part of the "bad side" of GW - needless secrecy? Maybe it is needful secrecy but of course that should itself be explained. Note that GW still has not officially announced any of this to the rest of the world, nor given any indication that they intend to. The company has made some good moves lately but it seems like they are still mired in passive hostility towards customers.
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: but the minute you want Gandalf to be on a horse, we're talking $40+ for the one model
And that's just retail. Mounted Gandalf has been going for crazy amounts in the aftermarket. I paid 60 USD for mine.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/04/13 16:39:18
I imagine some of that is the sheer legal hoops needing to be jumped through, on your later point. This is a GW now previewing Bloodbowl content almost a year out.... so I wager New Line, or someone else with a say, is slowing things up?
11527pts Total (7400pts painted)
4980pts Total (4980pts painted)
3730 Total (210pts painted)
2016/04/13 16:48:35
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
I suppose it's possible - but why? The movies are made. The extended editions have been on the shelves for a while now. There are no more secrets to trouble over. I suppose they need to have designs approved but that would not keep them from posting on their website that they plan to re-brand SBG and continue supporting it. If they can tell it to a room full of customers not bound by any NDA then they can tell it to the rest of us.
Manchu wrote: I suppose it's possible - but why? The movies are made. The extended editions have been on the shelves for a while now. There are no more secrets to trouble over. I suppose they need to have designs approved but that would not keep them from posting on their website that they plan to re-brand SBG and continue supporting it. If they can tell it to a room full of customers not bound by any NDA then they can tell it to the rest of us.
For what it is worth, I have worked with Warner Brothers on completely unrelated projects... and in my experience... they're insane and make all kinds of demands of licensees. :-p
11527pts Total (7400pts painted)
4980pts Total (4980pts painted)
3730 Total (210pts painted)
2016/04/13 17:01:21
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
Manchu wrote: I suppose it's possible - but why? The movies are made. The extended editions have been on the shelves for a while now. There are no more secrets to trouble over. I suppose they need to have designs approved but that would not keep them from posting on their website that they plan to re-brand SBG and continue supporting it. If they can tell it to a room full of customers not bound by any NDA then they can tell it to the rest of us.
The Babylon 5 Wars game from Agents of Gaming was cancelled simply because the show went off the air. I wouldn't be surprised at any requirements a licensor makes, even if there are no new films coming from them.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
2016/04/13 17:05:56
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
Once again - GW has announced this stuff to people not bound by NDAs ... it isn't secret. Why not put up something on the website or on their new FB accounts?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/13 17:06:09
Manchu wrote: Why are you lumping the Appendices together with the Silmarillion? "The Appendices" are the appendices to The Lord of the Rings, one of the two novels covered by the license. They have always been published as part of LotR, meaning that they were published during the lifetime of the author, which is when these licenses originated. The Silmarillion by contrast was not published until four years after Tolkien's death, long after any licenses were created. It is therefore quite natural to assume that the Appendices are covered as part of the novel - and therefore surprising that they are not!
It was my understanding - and don't ask where it came from - that the Zaentz licence only covered part of the Appendices, specifically the Tale of Years from Appendix B. Sadly many conversations from the early days of the game have long since departed the net, and confirming the exact nature of the licence is not straightforward - I'm sure you'll take my statement with the pinch of salt it merits
It's certainly interesting that the Ruin of Arnor - the one truly "historical" SGB supplement - was surprisingly thin on detail. There's no mention of Glorfindel or Earnur (even though the latter is listed in the timeline) in the Battle of Fornost scenario, for example.
I do have one copy of LotR from the late 60s (I appear to have... several) that has only the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen, not even all of Appendix A. Apparently Tolkien himself pleaded for that to be included as an absolute minimum,as a number of paperback versions and foreign-language translations planned to drop the appendices completely (indeed,many included only that one part). If it drops the price, why not just buy the rights to the main text?
Certainly The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales - and anything later - is right out. A number of licensees have played fast and loose with that limitation - Iron Crown Enterprises seem to have ignored it completely producing their MERP books, and there's an apocryphal story about GW threatening the Tolkien Estate that they'd call Khamul "Bob the Nazgul" if they couldn't use the name.
But this is little more than Kremlin-watching - we'll see what GW has planned soon enough.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/04/13 20:16:58
2016/04/13 20:27:14
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
In any case - the point is that Mr. Troke clarified that GW does not hold a license for material from the Appendices to the Lord of the Rings. I interpret this as his warning to us not to scour the Appendices for concepts we would like made into models ... unless of course there is also a reference to them in the "main body of the text" of the novel. If this has been the state of GW's licensing all along, it hasn't stopped them from using tiny details and allusions to give us models for Arvedui, Malbeth, Khamûl, etc. - although I guess it did stop them from calling the Khandish charioteers "wainriders" (which would not have been technically appropriate anyhow) or depicting them as wagon-mounted warriors. Mr. Troke apparently did reiterate that their license includes room for taking some creative liberty, such as inventing names/titles for the Nazgûl.
On that note, I would love to see updated Nazgûl based on their appearance in The Battle of the Five Armies:
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/13 20:34:09
I thought there was a lot of source material when ICE used to hold the rights to LotR.
I loved that system... Still have the old books.
No madam, 40,000 is the year that this game is set in. Not how much it costs. Though you may have a point. - GW Fulchester The Gatling Guns have flamethrowers on them because this is 40k - DOW III
2016/04/13 20:46:44
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
Bad news for me, I've got most of the original source books, and I was hoping to sell them on for vastly inflated prices in a year ot two
but with these new books coming out, GW have foiled my plans!!!! Damn you GW!
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
2016/04/13 21:10:50
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
Manchu wrote: In any case - the point is that Mr. Troke clarified that GW does not hold a license for material from the Appendices to the Lord of the Rings. I interpret this as his warning to us not to scour the Appendices for concepts we would like made into models ... unless of course there is also a reference to them in the "main body of the text" of the novel. If this has been the state of GW's licensing all along, it hasn't stopped them from using tiny details and allusions to give us models for Arvedui, Malbeth, Khamûl, etc. - although I guess it did stop them from calling the Khandish charioteers "wainriders" (which would not have been technically appropriate anyhow) or depicting them as wagon-mounted warriors. Mr. Troke apparently did reiterate that their license includes room for taking some creative liberty, such as inventing names/titles for the Nazgûl.
On that note, I would love to see updated Nazgûl based on their appearance in The Battle of the Five Armies:
Someone sculpted them for a fan made SBG magazine and they look phenomenal, I really like their depiction in BotFA.
2016/04/13 21:13:36
Subject: GW continuing support for Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game
11527pts Total (7400pts painted)
4980pts Total (4980pts painted)
3730 Total (210pts painted) 
No madam, 40,000 is the year that this game is set in. Not how much it costs. Though you may have a point. - GW Fulchester 
The Gatling Guns have flamethrowers on them because this is 40k 