Nomenclature
There has been a lot of discussion about the packaging Warlord 4E is being presented in. We decided to clarify the “tags” for it, to facilitate understanding what is the idea behind the new “format”.
Warlord is being packaged in Adventure Path Sets, each containing two playable and tournament legal decks.
While boosters are eliminated from distribution, there is still a form of rarity: Each Adventure Path Set contains 20 Rare Cards that only appear in that specific set. Uncommon Cards and Common Cards may appear more often in a set. Distributed over the full set each Rare Card appears once, each Uncommon Card twice and each Common Card three times. Warlords and other Fixed Cards take the slots of Rare Cards.
Now you ask “What the heck? We already knew that.”
The distinction becomes necessary because the old nomenclature led people falsely to compare the new packaging with the kind of starter packs known of Warlord (and other CCGs) in the past. The new Adventure Path Sets are not Starters. Each is a complete game by itself, that is customizable through adding additional cards.
As such an Adventure Path Set is roughly equivalent with an earlier two Starters plus twelve boosters where you were extremely lucky to even draw cards that fit your deck(s). Of course your mileage may vary as you might not be interested in the second deck, which then becomes part of your trade pool.
For any new player interested in playing a well balance, quick, and fun customizable card game, Warlord offers a good way to play an intricate tactical card game and expend considerable less money than you would need for any other currently still produced “collectible” card game.
For the collector (also known a suitcase player), Warlord is an affordable option to get into as a secondary game, for example. In previous editions it was nominally impossible to collect a playset of the base edition at below $600 or for an expansion set at below $300, assuming the format continues in the way it has been presented up to this point.
So the new format elegantly combines all the virtues of Warlord: Swift and fun balanced game play, supported tournaments, and an affordable price tag for “serious” players.
October 28th, 2008 at 12:25 am
Complaining starts in three, two, one…
October 28th, 2008 at 12:32 am
As i said befor i really like the new distribution system!
I am pleased keep this goow work going, Arne! We are alle with you and help were we can.
[Ah and no complaining at Jallemar]
October 28th, 2008 at 3:03 am
Pity so many of us aren’t that serious then =/
October 28th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
The group you left out are those that are somewhere inbetween “serious” and “casual”….lets call us faction loyalists. (and I believe the majority of Warlord players fall into this category which may explain why there are so many of us complaining.)
Under the current system a faction loyalist will need to purchase duplicate copies of two different “adventure packs” to acquire the appropriate playsets…and my indeed need to purchase duplicate copies of off faction decks in order to garner a respectable number of items and actions associated with our factions primary classes.
If trading and secondary market sales were real possibilities this would be less of an issue as you could just trade/sell off your chaff and buy or trade for what you need. With so few players and no profitable secondary market, these situations are too few and far between to be considered viable alternatives to over purchasing.
A compromise would be to put more thought into which two decks are paired together as a part of these adventure sets to minimize the amount of money a faction loyalist needs to shell out in order to continue playing this game while at the same time making it a profitable venture for PI.
Because the other option is that the faction loyalists will just say to hell with it…and I think PI would rather have some of my money rather than none.
October 30th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
To Deane Beman
Now this is one out of a few complains that has a serious point.
Complains-> explains why -> proves the oppinion -> sugests a solution and then concludes.
I think that PI should focus on your points and find a suitable solution.
maybe a new redisigned trading cards blog guided by the guys in PI.
or even better an option where the player would send to PI an e-mail with his 50 cards deck list and according to a specific price policy, PI will charge for it as nessesary.
Just a few thoughts about this problem tha you mentioned. I really do not have a clue how this would be helpful, or i am just talking nonsense here.
October 31st, 2008 at 11:06 am
@ Deane: When did Faction loyalists ever have it easy? A booster never had any guarantee that you would get anything for your faction. At least now you have substantial trade material (more in the new set than the base set because of the “veteran problem”).
I think faction loyalty has always been underestimated - we are taking steps where faction counts. A first example are the prizes for the Winter Campaign: You win a tournament, your faction gets a hero. If you faction doesn’t win any of the tournaments - then you faction does _not_ get heroes. Let’s think along those lines!
October 31st, 2008 at 7:43 pm
@Faction loyalism vs AP sets:
I think one part of the solution *might* be to tailor the two decks so that the each deck is a strength for another warlord of the opposing warlord’s faction.
For example, instead of pairing Yavlo against Niobe, you could’ve paired her against Krenthor. That way, items and actions that Brymin wants are in the same box as the Yavlo cards - and vice versa for Scyrax.
(( Logan vs Morhgen and Niobe vs Yavlo gave Freek loyalists a lot of wizard stuff - a class they are unlikely to see as a warlord for a long while. On the flipside, Thekk vs Brymin and Naram Sin vs Alaric did mostly work for the dwarves. ))
This will be hard to do across the board, obviously, but it has some merit, I think.
And should become easier as expansions add more classes to the strengths of each faction - and becomes more of avoiding bad pairings that making great ones.
(( So don’t pair, say, the Dev against a rogue - Dev’s loyalists don’t need rogue cards. But I expect Dev’s could use cards for all three other classes down the road. ))
Other than that, I really like the AP sets - I’m pretty much a completist (acquiring at least two sets of decks) so the fixed rarity is very nice. And, admittedly, the deck pairings has less impact on me.
-VIC