Why did Inquisitor Flop?

[voidtrekker]

Or maybe you don't think it did. If so, I'd be interested to hear that too. However, the rest of this post assumes it did flop, and offers my reasons for why.

Really, I think it was a pretty good game. A bit complex, but only on the combat side of things. Inquisitor actually made a pretty good rpg as well as a skirmish game, and it had the advantage of being enormously flexible. You could pretty much play anything. Unlike Dark Heresy -which, BTW, I also think is a good game, though for different reasons- you were not restricted to a certain subclass of adventures. In Inquisitor, the Inquisitorial warband was obviously the archetype, but if you wanted to play something oddball, like a Navigator household or a planetary governor's bodyguard, or whatever, you could easily do it.

Quite frankly, I think the problem was scale. The figures were WAY too expensive, and why would anybody bother to purchase them? Every game of Inquisitor I ever played was done with 40K figures, and who can blame us? Anybody who would have bought Inquisitor was a 40K player in the first place, and we already had buckets of figures and terrain. Why would anyone in his right mind go into another scale just to play a skirmish game?

The figures were heavy, unwieldy and multipart (meaning one clumsy drop to the floor equalled a major pewter explosion) and add to that the fact that you had to be a class A painter to paint one, and there were just too many negatives to make it worth trying. In fact, though I know people did play Inquisitor with the official 54s, I never even saw it done.

So, for those who agree with me, why do you think GW made the decision to do this in this new scale? Or, if you think I'm nuts, tell me why.

[christars]

Look at Epic: Bigger battles, smaller models.

Inquisitor is the polar opposite. Smaller battles, bigger models.

I think the idea is that regardless of what game system you play, you have a board filled with about the same total mass of models. So that you can play reasonable points of any system on a tabletop, without it looking overcrowded/empty.

[WestRider]

The models were a big part of it. Another issue is that there is a very different mindset between RPGers and Wargamers. Inquisitor was an RPG, but it was marketed as a Wargame. Thus, people went into it expecting something totally different than what they actually got. That kind of difference of expectations will often cause people to dismiss an otherwise good product, simply because it doesn't work as what they thought it was.

Around here, most of the gaming is pickup games and such. Very few people have tight enough gaming groups to play leagues or campaigns, and Inquisitor just doesn't work as a pick-up game. (Again, because it's an RPG, not a Wargame. Nobody plays pick-up games of D&D, either.)

Really, I think it was that frustration of expectations even more than the model/terrain problems that did the game in.

[invictus]

Actually westrider you are wrong, I have played many a pickup game of D&D. Pickup games allow people to see if you like the group. Maybe its just the area I'm in but there is always alot of pickup games here *shrug*

I never got into inquisitor just for the reasons already mentioned. More expensive models, main thing was though I thought it was a wargame.

[WestRider]

I've seen people sit in on a session of an established group, but I've never seen folks just wander down to the store to see if there was a game available, as they tend to do with 40K. I think we're just using slightly different definitions of "Pick-up game".

[invictus]

Well the last 6 times I did it (4 different groups) I just wandered in off the street saw them setting up and asked if I could join in for a session. They were already an established group, but they allowed me to join in. Of course though they had some characters already made up that I could pick from to use. So my guess is that they have had it happen before.

[WestRider]

Yeah, when I was thinking pick-up game of D&D, I was thinking more along the lines of the whole group basically doing that sort of drop in thing, playing one session, and then just dropping it. As in, there was no game scheduled for the day by anyone, but someone said "Hey, who wants to play D&D?" and everybody else just kinda jumped in.

Drop-ins, like you're describing, I see all the time.

[Psychichobo]

The thing I didn't like about Inquisitor was the models too, though mainly for the points that were mentioned - but also the fact that most roleplays don't need models at all. I'm not too sure of the point of having to have models when I've played so many roleplays with simple imagination - I used to love Warhammer roleplays, just needed a character sheet and away we go.

[lowlygaunt]

GW is a company that makes its money on the models it sells for its wargames. You correctly stated that inquisitor was an RPG (and not bad). But when the model sales did not reach the level GW wanted, they stopped the line. The models did not sell for all the reasons you stated; high price, fragility, fewer needed, as well as rarely people collecting more than needed for one "army" type. Also, ALL rpg style games survive because the company supports them with new material. GW does not do this, because again, they are a wargaming company, not really an RPG company.
Most wargamers, and certainly those that fall under the "powergamer" mentality where winning and rules are more important than background and fluff, will find the rules for Inquisitor, even if just for combat, frustrating and completely without balance. There are many who have posted on this forum and others comments to the nature of "I read the rules a hundred times, and the fluff once." These people will not touch a game like Inquisitor.
Inquisitor also needed a GM to create a scenario, even for a pick-up battle. Something that takes time (as any GM knows, GM'ing is a job if you are to do it right), and few people want to take that time for a throw away style game.

PS: I have to agree with Westrider, pick-up games of D&D are a rarirty in my area, and as a Role Player rather than a roll player, rarely do they give me what I am interested in when i sit down for a 4+ hour game at a table. Playing with strangers is less comfortable than playing amongst thiose I am familiar with when role playing. I imagine inquisitor suffered from the same thing.

[The Custodian]

So what do you guys think will happen to Dark Heresy?...

I believe its an RPG like inquisitor...

[WestRider]

But Dark Heresy is being marketed as an RPG. There's not going to be the same sort of confusion of expectations that killed Inquisitor. In addition, as far as I know, Dark Heresy doesn't require models at all, let alone huge ones that are unusable with any of your existing collection. As I understand it, the first print run pretty much sold out on preorders.

[shroomabuser]

I've played Inquisitor on and off over the years, and I loved the rules.
I've never played a 'real' roleplaying game like you guys have mentioned, so I have nothing to compare it to.
For me, its the models that actually made it work for me. I think the idea that a model is useless because it can't be used for other things isn't giving the sculpters enough credit.
These are models that are works of art in themselves, and customisable to your hearts content. Something I would gladly purchase and paint just to sit there and look pretty.
All in all, even if the marketing and consumer base wasn't there, GW did the right thing by going out on a limb(for me ;D ), and created a great all round game.
Its just a pity it was never embraced by enough people. I think you'll find the main reason for this is a large part of Warhammer is a younger player base, without the patience or money to invest time in a new game system, and those that are old enough to appreciate it already have a established system, and see the modeling side as a waste of money.

A bit sad really.

[lowlygaunt]

Good points Shroomabuser (ummm . . i bet I do not really want to know. . ) I bet your right on the age thing.

I was under the impression Dark Heresay had already been dropped as a line by GW?

yep read here:
thetyranidhive.proboards28.com/index.cgi?board=OtherGamesWorkshopstuff&action=display&thread=1202064384

[koran]

I think the argument about the models isnt very fair... Firstly there are ver few roleplay games Ive been in or run that hasnt at some point involved a "Well this pepper pot is player one, the salt is player 2 these doritoes are the guards and this pot of dip if the entrance... Oh you *crow caw* you just ate a guard!" Ok thats a bit exagerated but there is normally some drawing of maps involved. Personally I (and alot of other people I know) really liked the models and it allowed alot of converstions which is always fun.

There in my mind were two (well three kinda) main problems with the game.

The first two points are kinda the same but for different reasons. Basically the rules. The majority of them were very well done... However there were some that were just stupid. Flamers and heavy weapons being prime examples and a space marine throwing a grenade at someone and the grenade hitting the person doing more damage than the actual explosion. Basically the, "My marine throwing an axe is more damaging than a lascannon" syndrome. Another part of this was the the rules were confused.... They concentrated too much on combat than the player interaction which, lets face it, is more what roleplay is about. The game itself (and not just the players) didnt know if it was a wargame or a roleplay.

The second point does revolve around the models and the scale but not for the reasons stated above. As alot of people said it is most often played with 40k models.... Do you actually put this down to them being too expencive? I cant see that being true, you have to buy two or three and thats it and compared to most armies thats nothing. I think the main problem was scenery... There just wasnt anything out there to that scale. And where with the models you only needed two or three for the scenery it would be constantly changing which is VERY expencive to make scenery for. 40k scale scenery on the other hand can be prebought and you have industrial ruins, trees, hives (necromunda)... whatever you want at your local GW that you can just borrow without making yourself.

Anyways... thats why I recon it flopped as you put it. In reality there are still many out there that still play it. But when it is most successfully played you will probably notice that the GM will have a wad of home written rules to be used for the player interaction that doesnt involve trying to kill each other.

[voidtrekker]

koran said:

Do you actually put this down to them being too expencive? I cant see that being true, you have to buy two or three and thats it and compared to most armies thats nothing.

Well... yes and no. Yeah, you could get away with, say, 3 models, but you'd better be prepared to paly the same scenario over and over again. If you wanted any variety in your games (and it WAS supposed to be about narrative CAMPAIGNS after all), then you'd better have at least a dozen figs.

NOW you're talkin' pricey.