# GW Renews LotR License



## Red Corsairs (Jun 8, 2008)

GW have renewed the license it seems, allowing them to continue with LotR range and when released, produce miniatures for the Hobbit.



> WARNER BROS. CONSUMER PRODUCTS EXTENDS LICENSING AGREEMENT WITH GAMES WORKSHOP TO INCLUDE
> 
> "THE HOBBIT" AND "THE LORD OF THE RINGS"
> 
> ...


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

I would be interested, but I feel its just gonna expand more on war of the ring, the biggest failure around while ignoring the skirmish game and just giving us crappy WD stats.


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

GW needs to drop LotR... soon as The hobbit blows over, it'll be back to being its lowest earner.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

GrizBe said:


> GW needs to drop LotR... soon as The hobbit blows over, it'll be back to being its lowest earner.


oh god here comes the uneducated bullshit again, we should just get all LotR topics closed as soon as they open, just to avoid the idiotic comments like this


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

I love seeing facts without evidence. That one gave me a bit of a hardon, GrizBe. Seriously, Lowest Earner? Inquisitor is by far lower than LotR. It's basically a Pen and Paper Game.


----------



## Doelago (Nov 29, 2009)

GrizBe said:


> GW needs to drop LotR...


Fuck off, the normal "Lord of the Rings" table top game (Not "War of the Ring") was great, and I would be sad to see them just throw it out through the window. Never played it, but I am considering the option of buying the "Caves of Moria" starter set at some point, but other than that I would probably just buy individual and interesting figures, for 40k armies are enough for me.


----------



## the cabbage (Dec 29, 2006)

GrizBe said:


> GW needs to drop LotR... soon as The hobbit blows over, it'll be back to being its lowest earner.


I would drop it..... but only because I don't play it. :laugh:

I'd rather they concentrated on 40K. Just selfish old me again.


----------



## Varakir (Sep 2, 2009)

GrizBe said:


> GW needs to drop LotR... soon as The hobbit blows over, it'll be back to being its lowest earner.


Isn't earning money a good thing?


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

Compared to 40K and Fantasy, LotR makes about a third of what they do. Its the lowest earner in the sense of it being a main system... but yes, obviously it makes more then the specialist games as they aren't supported anymore, and you don't need an entire army to play them. 

Fact of the matter is, LotR earned big when there was still interesting in the movies, but now that thats wained, no-one cares about it anymore. In my local store, which is 12ft x 20ft it earns so little, the manger can devote an entire section to new releases, one to black library books, and another to scenery... and still have a large space for a notice board, the computer and paints while having the entire boxed ranges of 40k and fantasy on display, with duplicates. Now, when the Hobbit arrives, it'll do okay again... but pretty much its just Fantasy with a different skin and simpler rules. 

For what time and effort and money they devote to it, we could have a boxed specialist game released yearly, or armies updated much more quickly, and much more wave release models for 40k and fantasy.

Okay, I'm not a fan of it, but then no-one I've ever met in any GW store in my region was either.... They can devote time and money to other system that would earn them much more.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

I forgot. Your corner of the world is all that matters. There's weekly games in Liverpool.


----------



## Doelago (Nov 29, 2009)

GrizBe said:


> Okay, I'm not a fan of it, but then no-one I've ever met in any GW store in my region was either....


Ignorance, just cause they dont play it over there does not mean that it could not be popular elsewhere.



GrizBe said:


> They can devote time and money to other system that would earn them much more.


And people would complain about having to buy new Codexes and rulebooks at a faster rate to be able to play? Ouh, and they would also complain when we would get a new Space Marine codex every three months then.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I quite like this news. Some of the models from the LotR range is excellent like the Gulavhar model. I hope that when the Hobbit comes out we get a badass epic Smaug model as well as an awesome Beorn.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

this news was posted 3 days ago in another thread and ignored.....weird

I think its good news, LOTR was a big money spinner for GW and the company as a whole benefitted from the aditional sales generated during the purple patch, the up shot of that is that they invested money in to new technology like cad and rapid prototyping and we are for the most part reaping the rewards of that, plus it gives the perry twins something to do other than ruin warhammer and 40k models.

I personally love th movies but have no interest in playing the wargame, but its good for the company and it raises GW'S profile outside of the wargaming niche and many players discovered GW because of LOTR games which adds to the number of players who move on to 40k and warhammer,thats not a bad thing.


----------



## TheReverend (Dec 2, 2007)

GW having LOTR kinda completes the circle, considering LOTR was such an inspiration for Warhammer (fantasy and 40K) in the first place, so it kinda feels right that GW have it. 
I don't play it but the mini's look great and make me want to buy them just to paint. Although I have so far resisted, those dragons look tempting, and I'll be interested in the things they bring out for the Hobbit, some of my favourite characters are in that book, so maybe, just maybe i will buy something.
As for being the lowest earner (apparently), as long as they are making profit, who cares? And the rights have to go to someone now that teh film company have poked thier finger in the wargames pie, so why not GW?

Rev


----------



## admiraldick (Sep 9, 2008)

just so that we are absolutely clear the Hobbit and the LotR licences are two different licences. the chances are not much will be different between the two, but don't be surprised is there are some dramatic changes (like no longer stocking some LotR characters or changing their appearence entirely).

i for one am really pleased that GW have the licence. for me, the Hobbt is a significantly better fantasy story than LotR. its effectively the same story arch, but with more fantasy creatures and less padding. granted there isn't as much conflict, but i've been hankering for a Battle of the Five Armies board for a while now. also, i'd like to say that both the skirmish and the War of the Rings systems are excellent fun to play. i just wish i got to play them more.

i think the biggest problem that the LotR game suffered was one of marketing. the whole time the skirmish game was being promoted, it was never put across as being something for serious gamers. the hotch-potch attitude towards releasing rules and lack of clear definition between forces made it feel more like collecting football stickers than collecting a serious wargame. the rules themselves were excellent, but lent themselves to the narrative, story-telling and campaign styles of play much more than pick-up, and yet it was always marketed for pick-up games. its no wonder than more mature gamers rejected it in favour of something they thought made sense. then when War of the Ring was introduced, rather than saying, 'hey, here is a more serious wargame that you can play with the same collection of miniatures' it was billed as being a replacement for the skirmish game. that tragic bit of marketing only served to alienate the few loyal fans who had grown up with the skirmish game and weren't willing to give up on it. the current 'Mines of Moria' box only serves to compound the inheirent distrust for the game as it is such a bad deal in comparison to the Warhammer and 40k boxed games.

personally, if i were in GW's shoes, i would release a new edition of the skirmish game, which focused on campaign and narrative play, like a simplified version of the nearly identical and much better game Legend of the Old West or the fan favourite Mordheim. i'd then release the War of the Ring as a boxed game with the Battle of the Five Armies in it, so that gamers got a range of races and miniatures and could focus on the elements that they were interested in most. it really wouldn't be hard to make the two games significantly more popular.


----------



## sybarite (Aug 10, 2009)

GrizBe said:


> Okay, I'm not a fan of it, but then no-one I've ever met in any GW store in my region was either....


In his defence this is a bit true,
the store l go to buy my models is an independent store and they no longer stock LotR at all.

l remember him saying that he only ever sold 4 box's (that's about $250) but he had 75 in stock......

in the end he removed them all but lost a fair bit of money for it. As of people who play the game in my local club of 150 members, (not all of them active) only 4 of them play LotR.

Now if it still makes them money then go for it. l just don't see how it can when they got to pay royalties on top of that.


----------



## tu_shan82 (Mar 7, 2008)

What's with all the WotR hate, my brother bought the rule book along with a sizable Rohan allied with Gondor army, and I quite like the game after browsing through his rule book, so much so I'm going to collect a fallen realms army as I really like the miniatures and also so my bro and I can play together. I even got four of the Ringwraiths for Christmas. Before WotR came out and it was the LotR Strategy Battle Game, I had little to no interest in the system what so ever. I think WotR appeals to me because it lets you fight larger games which are more representative of the batles in the movies, and I'd imagine the books also, I haven't gotten around to reading them yet.


----------



## TheReverend (Dec 2, 2007)

admiraldick said:


> just so that we are absolutely clear the Hobbit and the LotR licences are two different licences. the chances are not much will be different between the two, but don't be surprised is there are some dramatic changes (like no longer stocking some LotR characters or changing their appearence entirely).



the news release says they renewed the LOTR licence as well as the Hobbit licence, so I don't think it will be a case of LOTR characters suddenly being discontinued.


----------



## El Mariachi (Jun 22, 2008)

Meh it's an alright game LotR, I've played it a couple of times way back when but it wasn't anything particularly great. As I no longer play at Games Workshop stores it doesn't bother me either way, however, if they were to relegate LotR to the Specialist Games range and then periodically visit each game in turn (say focus on a game for 3 months at a time), then I'd be very happy.

I might as well wish for a lottery win whilst I'm at it though.


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

Considering how much money they made from Space Hulk, its stupid not to exploit the specialist gaming.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Nostalgia was a beautiful thing. It's never played, and it was mostly misty eyed nostalgics, perplexed newbies wanting to see what the fuss was about, or painters looking for limited edition models to paint and show off, and use in their collection.

That's why it was why there was so much made in such a short while. As soon as something becomes regular, it's loses it's lustre. ALWAYS.


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

If they did a different one every year it could work... Okay, with 12 specialist games, it'd be more then a decade between editions if they did them in a cycle... but it'd still be a big chunk of profit for them from the collectors/nostalgia/newbie crowd.

And yes.. there are 12. Space Hulk, Blood Bowl, Epic Armageddon, Battlefleet Gothic, Warmaster, Battle of Five Armies, Warhammer Quest, Necromunda, Inqusitor, Mordheim, GorkaMorka, Man o' War.


----------



## Eleven (Nov 6, 2008)

the cabbage said:


> I would drop it..... but only because I don't play it. :laugh:
> 
> I'd rather they concentrated on 40K. Just selfish old me again.


Agreed. Wouldn't make me upset if they got rid of fantasy also.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Eleven said:


> Agreed. Wouldn't make me upset if they got rid of fantasy also.


can we get rid of 40k as well


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

New starts all round!

Just this time no Matt Ward. And bring back that guy who called himself Space Mcquirk!


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Orochi said:


> New starts all round!
> 
> Just this time no Matt Ward. And bring back that guy who called himself Space Mcquirk!


wait...they would start again?...damnit, well fine, no ward, no quirk, and no jervis please, and keep fat bloke


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

What`s LotR? :scratchhead: 

Oh wait, that thing! 

Didn`t they just rip off Warhammer anyway? :laugh:


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Serpion5 said:


> Didn`t they just rip off Warhammer anyway? :laugh:


*facepalm+headdesk*


----------



## Red Corsairs (Jun 8, 2008)

Serpion5 said:


> What`s LotR? :scratchhead:
> 
> Oh wait, that thing!
> 
> Didn`t they just rip off Warhammer anyway? :laugh:


Warhammer wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Lord of the Rings.

As for the topic, hopefully having the Hobbit films to base minis on will mean the models start to look better again, not like some of the stuff they've been releasing as of recent (although the cave drake is damn nice).


----------

