I always get a bit confused on the difference between a board game and a miniatures game. The WotC Star Wars Miniatures game was a game played with miniature figures, damage counters, cards, dice and on a board (well, the RotS starter came with the battle map on a board...) Board game are defined here by FFG as exactly that. It goes on to define Miniatures game as just games featuring "detailed miniatures" and "tactical decisions". So is there any real difference to them producing a game such as Runebound (this was the only FFG game I played until July this year) and calling it a miniatures game? The distinction seems, to my casual-gamer mind, to be exceptionally blurry so as to be non-existent.

I must admit though - Hellfury, you have a very valid point! I weight it up, and following the announcement that FFG has the license, I thought I'd buy the LotR card game to see "What can I expect from the Star Wars game when it comes out?" (and I had an amazon voucher that almost covered the total cost of the game), and was so impressed I promptly bought all three expansions and am on the hook to continue with this game. Enjoying the LCG concept so much I investigated the Warhammer: Invasion game. And shortly thereafter bought all 21 expansions for that, as well. FFG just having the license for Star Wars, without actually producing any game for it that is available yet, have had nearly £350 in just two weeks off me.

I can't be the only person this nuts...can I..?

spalanzani said:

Nope!

After the announcement, I came to this site to poke around, got curious about the Battlestar Galactica board game, bought it, loved it, bought the first expansion, and am going back to buy the second expansion quite soon. So all-in, that's $100 from me! :)

Star Wars announcement is what got me into ffg's version of lord of the rings, now me and my friend have collected every expansion and card to date :)

 Wow. I'm glad my assessment was correct, but I honestly didn't expect that many people to agree with me. As for myself, I got figuratively "this close" to buying the LOTR starter set when my local game store was having a sale. I was totally pumped for it; I just didn't have the money.

Just curious if anyone knows the answer to this...I know in the film industry, rights to a character or property can expire if the studio does not make a movie in a certain amout of years. This is why we are seeing a new Spider-Man origin story in 2012...Sony did not want to have the rights the the character go back to Marvel.

Is this the same for the gaming industry? If Hasbro lets the SW property sit on the shelf will the right to the property revert back to LucasFilm?

Depends what's in their contract.