Restoration Games is no stranger to crowdfunding backers pledging hundreds of dollars for premium versions of its games – but its Kickstarter for The Lord of the Rings: The King’s Gambit has taken that to an entirely new level.

The crowdfund had raised $2.33m from more than 7,300 backers in the early hours of its final day, equivalent to almost $319 per supporter – an average spend well above Restoration’s previous major crowdfunding campaigns, including the roughly $260 from last year’s Battle Monsters: Godzilla x Kong.

Almost three-quarters of backers who have committed to one of the game’s various versions opted to spend at least $379 on one of the Mithril tiers, with more than 2,800 people going all-in on the game’s most expensive $449 option.

Those Mithril pledges together account for about 82% of the total raised at the time of writing – a figure well above that expected by Restoration prior to the campaign’s launch, co-owner Justin Jacobson told BoardGameWire.

He said the company had expected Mithril to be most popular, but had conservatively projected about three Mithril pledges for every two people committing to the base-level Limited tiers of the game

He said, “I’m not entirely surprised. We created the Limited Edition as a sort-of compromise pledge level for folks who wanted some deluxe elements but didn’t want to go all-in for the Mithril Edition.

“Ultimately, though, most Kickstarter backers are there precisely because they do want to go all in, and we try to make that pledge level as appealing as possible and as good a deal as possible.”

Despite the much higher-than-expected proportion of backers opting for Mithril, Jacobson said the campaign’s overall performance was “pretty in-line” with his expectations ahead of the campaign’s final few days – and that “in a vacuum” he would have hoped for slightly higher numbers.

He pointed to the absence of a standard retail edition from the campaign, Free League’s The One Ring RPG crowdfund running at the same time and wider global economic conditions among the factors potentially working against it.

Jacobson said the pattern of backers favouring Restoration’s most expensive option was familiar from what he described as the company’s previous “spectacle” campaigns, with all-in pledges typically outstripping other pledge levels at the close of those crowdfunds.

But King’s Gambit is generating substantially higher spending per backer compared with Restoration’s previous projects offering similarly expensive all-in options.

Last year’s Battle Monsters: Godzilla x Kong offered a $379 Mega Bundle – the same price as the basic Mithril Edition of King’s Gambit – but averaged about $260 across its 2,301 backers.

Return to Dark Tower: Expeditions went even higher with a $499 all-in pledge including the base game, its expansions and upgraded components – although as an expansion-led campaign, existing owners could enter at just $45. Its $1.49m haul from 11,665 backers amounted to an average of $128 per supporter.

King’s Gambit is currently averaging almost $319 across its backers to date – despite almost 1,000 people having committed just $5 for access to the pledge manager.

Jacobson nevertheless cautioned against seeing the campaign as evidence that $379-plus board games were likely to become commonplace.

“This campaign is unusual, and I wouldn’t expect this to become the norm,” he said. “It stems from the unique way in which the original licensing deal and co-publication arrangement came to be in the first place.”

Opening Gambit

Jacobson told BoardGameWire that the publisher decided to pitch licence holder Middle-earth Enterprises in 2023 for a new version of cult 2000 board game Star Wars: The Queen’s Gambit, but instead based on The Lord of the Rings.

Bringing Queen’s Gambit back had been an ambition for Restoration since its inception – it was the first game Jacobson suggested reviving when he approached designer Rob Daviau about founding the company in 2016, although they decided at the time that it was too ambitious for their first project. Daviau had worked on the original during his time at Hasbro.

Jacobson told BoardGameWire, “I put together a big proposal and sent it in. Meanwhile, while that proposal was under consideration, Rob was at the Cannes Game Festival and got approached by Asmodee about doing the exact same thing.

“It seemed like serendipity so we just started that conversation about working on it together. It offered a lot of benefits to both parties.

“We brought our design pedigree and Kickstarter experience, and they brought their massive team for art, sales, distribution, and more. It’s always challenging working outside your own team, but [Asmodee studio] Space Cowboys have been absolutely amazing and have helped make this game the best it can be.”

Space Cowboys plans to release a retail edition of the game next year, which while sharing the same gameplay will use smaller boards, omit the large plastic Minas Tirith and Mordor set pieces and use just two colours of plastic for its miniatures.

Jacobson said, “It was important that our offering was a stark contrast to the retail edition. That edition will be what lives on for as long as the game is sold, long after the Kickstarter campaign is fulfilled. So, first things first, we had to align on what that version of the game was going to be.

“Then, we basically brainstormed all of the ways we could ‘deluxify’ that. The Limited Edition was a slight bump and the 3D plastic set pieces; the Mithril Edition was the whole list.”

When asked if there had been any concern internally over having such a large gap between the price points of the Limited and Mithril editions, Jacobson said, “Not really. There are so many variables and options in setting up any campaign. You’re never going to be 100% certain that you’ve gone the optimal path.

“That said, we were confident in the overall structure of the campaign, i.e., folks who want the cool 3D set pieces and folks who want everything.

“As I’ve always said, the price is always a function of the cost to produce. So once we determine what a pledge level includes, setting the price is relatively straightforward with some minor adjustments. For example, we actually shaved a bit off the Mithril Edition to try and make it a bit more appealing.”

He added, “It does highlight that all of the economic turmoil folks are feeling are not being felt uniformly.

“It also speaks to hobby gamers in general. When you compare it to other hobbies, it’s still a relatively good deal even at the highest end of things.”

Jacobson told BoardGameWire that Restoration deliberately looked beyond established tabletop audiences when marketing the game, in an attempt to leverage the vast fanbase of The Lord of the Rings.

About half of King’s Gambit backers are supporting a Restoration Games crowdfund for the first time, he said – a slightly higher proportion than the company has seen on some of its more recent campaigns.

“We made a concerted effort to try and reach out to influencers whose audience comprises The Lord of the Rings fans and not specifically gamers,” Jacobson said.

He believes the licence was likely part of the explanation for the campaign’s performance, although added that Restoration titles tend to come with followers even without a large IP, given the nature of the company’s strategy of taking memorable, usually long-out-of-print games and redeveloping them for the modern hobby market.

He said, “Fans of The Lord of the Rings are certainly avid and show up in large numbers, but we’ve seen similar excitement from fans of Return to Dark Tower and the like.”

Aragorn Art

Despite the campaign’s strong performance, the release has attracted a backlash from a small minority of online commenters for depicting Aragorn as Black.

That reaction has spilled into the unreleased title’s BoardGameGeek ratings, where some users have awarded it scores of 10 specifically to counter what they believe are 1 ratings motivated by objections to Aragorn’s skin colour.

Jacobson described the reaction as “disappointing but not entirely unexpected”, while stressing that not everyone who preferred a depiction closer to previous versions of Aragorn was motivated by racism.

He said, “The art team for both Space Cowboys and Restoration Games spent countless hours working on an extensively researched and thoughtful art brief for the look of the entire game along with each individual character. It’s 59 pages long!

“Our first priority is always to do something true to the source material. Within those pages though there are a number of interpretations. Ultimately, for each depiction, not just Aragorn, we were looking to do something interesting and perhaps novel that still stays true to the source material.

“I can point to details in the lore that support this depiction, but this just isn’t something I have any interest in debating.

“Great works, whether that’s a game or an epic fantasy novel or something else, only arise when the people creating them have a strong vision for what they want to make and put their full effort into realizing that vision.

“In every case, some folks won’t share that vision. But, in every case, if you set out to try and please everyone, you cannot make something extraordinary.”

He added, “There are folks who prefer a depiction more in keeping with prior ones; where other folks enjoy seeing broader depictions. Whenever you are working with an IP, the fans will have strong opinions. I want to be clear: not everyone who would prefer the former do so from a place of racism.

“That said, there are certainly racists, who are using these types of situations to espouse their abhorrent beliefs. It’s unfortunate that they muddy what can be an otherwise interesting conversation.

“As for folks on BGG rating a game a 1 before it comes out, this has been going on for a while for a host of reasons. There’s nothing we can do about it, so we press on and just make the best game we can.

“When people actually receive and start playing the game, we are confident that there will be a lot of great ratings for it that will make the current kerfuffle just so much background noise.”

The King’s Gambit’s crowdfunding campaign ends at 8.30am EDT on October 20.

The post “I wouldn’t expect this to become the norm”: backers overwhelmingly choose King’s Gambit most expensive tiers, power crowdfund past $2.3m first appeared on .

Chip Theory Games has hired eight-year Keymaster Games veteran Jennifer Graham-Macht to lead its lighter-games imprint Neon Knight, after discovering that building the business means developing a new audience – as well as rethinking some of the approaches behind its prior success.

The Too Many Bones publisher told BoardGameWire it is very happy with Neon Knight’s progress since it began building the studio two years ago, but has acknowledged being “maybe naive” about how many of its existing fans would follow it into lighter games.

Chip Theory chief marketing officer Josh Wielgus said, “We had hoped there would be a very high percentage of ‘omni-gamers’ in the Chip Theory audience who would gladly come along for the Neon Knight ride. That hasn’t been as true as we had initially hoped for, and thus we’re learning that we really need to put the effort into building that audience and brand.

“That has meant on the Chip Theory side investing more resources into the building of Neon Knight than we first anticipated. Obviously the biggest move we’ve made to that end is bringing in an experienced pro’s pro like Jen.”

Chip Theory has spent more than a decade building a hugely successful business around expensive, lavishly produced games aimed at a devoted audience of heavier and solo-focused hobby gamers – with standout hits including Too Many Bones, Cloudspire and The Elder Scrolls: Betrayal of the Second Era.

But the publisher looked to expand the breadth of its offering in April 2024 by bringing in Dice Throne co-creator Manny Trembley’s recently-launched studio Good Knight Games, which it rebranded to Neon Knight.

That move was designed to give Chip Theory a dedicated route to more retail friendly and affordable lines of games, while drawing on its longstanding operations, customer support, fulfillment and marketing experience.

Wielgus told BoardGameWire, “We’re very happy with the direction things are going, even if thus far there hasn’t been a ‘megahit’ to speak of.

“We’re really proud of the titles that have been released thus far and are learning a ton about a market – the light/medium/mass market side of board games – that we have historically been absent from on the Chip Theory side.

“We fully understand that this basically needs to be treated as building a new business. Chip Theory proper didn’t really find its footing until after Too Many Bones released, which was almost five years into the company’s existence.”

But he said one assumption the company had got wrong with Neon Knight was expecting the tastes of Chip Theory’s staff – who enjoy games across a range of weights and genres – to be mirrored across its customer base.

“I think we were maybe naive about the number of traditional Chip Theory fans who would be excited about this direction,” he said.

“Chip Theory caters primarily to a heavy and solo-forward audience, but all of us here in the building love most types/genres/weights of games. We presumed that much of our audience was likely the same.

“That hasn’t turned out to be as true as we maybe hoped, and so it didn’t take long to realize we needed someone who didn’t have their mind in Chip Theory world at all to help us really reach what has turned out to be a very new audience.”

Theory Into Practice

New Neon Knight lead and managing director Jennifer Graham-Macht previously spent about eight years at Parks publisher Keymaster Games, initially as community manager before taking on roles in production, project management and ultimately being named Games Director.

She has also recently returned to board game retail as co-owner of New Jersey-based retailer The Player Agency, having previously run Satellite Comics and Games in the mid-2010s.

Graham-Macht told BoardGameWire that moving into full studio leadership felt like a natural next step after a long spell at Keymaster, and described Neon Knight as having “equal parts amazing pedigree and plenty of room to keep improving”.

Her new role sees her responsible for the “health and growth” of the studio as well as leading its operations, with Trembley remaining creative director with responsibility for game design and art direction.

She said, “I’ve spent the first couple of months getting clear with Manny what the vision is for the imprint. We first want to make that clear internally and then use it to start shaping how we grow our catalog and talk to our audience.

“In every aspect of studio work, I’m focused on making sure we are walking well before we run. That includes how we say yes to projects, how we work with external partners, developing a sustainable omni-channel strategy, and much more.”

Part of Graham-Macht’s role will be helping determine which lessons from Chip Theory’s existing business are useful for Neon Knight – and which do not fit a company targeting a different market.

Wielgus told BoardGameWire, “The lesson we’re learning is that not every lesson we’ve learned with Chip Theory is applicable on the Neon Knight side of the business.

“Jen’s here to really help us gauge what bits of our experience are helpful and what bits of our experience are perhaps holding us back from doing mass market well.

“Our penchant for ‘overproduction’, a laser focus on making games solo-friendly, and a crowdfunding-first mindset don’t necessarily benefit us here.

“Jen has been helping us shed those tendencies where we need to and really think about Neon Knight stuff as its own distinct creature with very distinctly different needs.”

He cited Fight 5, Neon Knight’s reimagining of classic card game War, as a prime example, saying, “We were very proud of our box for Fight 5. It’s sleek and sexy and we kind of modeled it after the Compile box (which is also sleek and sexy).

“Post-release, we learned that for the type of game Fight 5 is, we did a horrible job of making it a retail-friendly box. It doesn’t tell you what the game is at all and is far too abstract to sell itself.

“We’re also learning that the direct to consumer marketing we rely on so heavily for our big Chip Theory stuff isn’t a silver bullet for retail/distribution/mass market audience acquisition.

“While the games and the mechanics can be great (and we believe they are), you need to stop and consider a whole lot more things when you don’t have the luxury of literally speaking to your audience directly the way we can on our big Chip Theory crowdfunding campaigns.”

Future Plans

Graham-Macht said her experience at Keymaster had taught her about connecting with customers through different sales channels, adding that it was “exciting to apply that knowledge to a different vision”.

She added, “I think the biggest challenge for any new brand right now is discoverability. There is a lot of competition for how a person chooses to spend a weeknight hour with friends, family, a spouse.

“Most customers won’t know that Neon Knight is an imprint of another brand let alone what that brand stands for. The products themselves need to shine.

“And that being said, a premium experience can look and feel like a lot of things. More than component materials, I think thoughtful product design and attention in all the right places goes a long way to building customer trust and loyalty. That’s the mark we’re striving for.”

She added, “Any amount of that community engagement we can foster at Neon Knight will be a big win for the studio.”

Crowdfunding is another area where Chip Theory is reconsidering whether its established approach is the right one for Neon Knight.

Wielgus said its debut Neon Knight title, Neon Reign, had launched with almost no pre-marketing, as the agreement to bring the studio into Chip Theory was signed just two days before its campaign.

He said, “That one I would chalk up as simply an experiment. Jump Masters I think we hoped would do a bit better than it did, but again so much of that I think is that we were relying on CTG’s existing Gamefound audience to show up for a lighter game that has no solo mode.

“As we look at the possibility of future campaigns, we’re having a lot of conversations about how to go about generating a unique audience and brand for Neon Knight, as well as things like moving Neon Knight campaigns back over to Kickstarter which seems to be a better fit for more accessible fare. “

Crowdfunding will not necessarily be the default route for future Neon Knight releases either, with Wielgus saying the company expects to use it occasionally, but will assess each game individually to decide whether a campaign is necessary or beneficial.

Graham-Macht added that while for now Neon Knight would rely on internally-developed designs, putting out games from other creators was “something we see in our future”.

“We’ve honed in that our games are inspired by/re-imagined modern classics, and that’s where we’re excited to explore”, she said. “Manny has a lot of ideas in this vein, but as we continue to grow and get our sea legs, there will be room for other designers’ work as well.”

Chip Theory is also hoping to staff up Neon Knight further following Graham-Macht’s hire, with the company gearing up to make two more hires that will split their time between the two arms of the business.

Wielgus told BoardGameWire he hopes the business will expand “in a huge way” across its release slate, staff numbers and amount of investment, but added that time – and sales – would tell if the business is able to achieve that.

He said, “I may be crazy, and I know a lot of folks consider Chip Theory one of the most successful board game companies of the last decade (I don’t have a way to measure that really, maybe they’re right. We certainly feel like we’ve been very successful!) – but I think Neon Knight can absolutely grow to match Chip Theory’s success.

“That can look a lot of different ways financially (sales quantity vs actual profits is always a bit of a moving target), but ultimately we’re excited enough about this brand that we really want to give it the full send.

“If Covid and tariffs have taught us anything, it’s that having a lot of irons in the fire and a strong diversification of our portfolio is the best way to shield ourselves from catastrophe.”

The post Chip Theory hires Keymaster veteran to grow lighter game imprint Neon Knight, as it learns to build beyond its existing audience first appeared on .

Plaid Hat Games launched its Kickstarter for The Monolith in June with a trio of successful crowdfunding campaigns under its belt – only to pull the project three days after launch when pledges unexpectedly ground to a halt, despite quickly beating its $20,000 goal. Less than two months later the revamped campaign is back, and has already pulled in almost four-times the amount the cancelled campaign managed in the same amount of time. In this first-person piece for BoardGameWire, Plaid Hat founder and CEO Colby Dauch explains why The Monolith exposed flaws the publisher’s previous campaigns had masked, what he believes it got wrong, and why the changes made for the relaunch appear to be working.

Plaid Hat Games is relatively new to crowdfunding and we’ve experience our first major setback in that arena. We launched our fourth ever crowdfunding campaign back in June, this time for a new game called The Monolith.

By the second day of the campaign the pledges had fully stalled out. It was self-evident that we had made mistakes, so we pulled the campaign with the intention to relaunch it after analyzing what had gone wrong, and doing what we could to address it.

As I write this article, I don’t know if our hunches will turn out to be correct. This article is scheduled to be posted as we relaunch the campaign, so I suppose we are all going to find out together! I’m more than a little nervous. Allow me to provide some background essential in understanding how we’ve come to make the choices we’ve made.

We’ve been around since 2009 and watched from the sidelines as crowdfunding took hold and grew into a large part of the board game industry.

For many years we swore off crowdfunding. Internally we were critical of it for a number of reasons. My biggest reservation was that it felt dishonest to me that an established company would tell its customers “we need your help to make this product”, when they had already proven previously that they were capable of putting together the funding necessary to launch a new product onto the market, without requiring the customer to buy said product a year or more in advance of its release.

However, things have changed over the years in more ways than one and honestly, it has been a bad business decision to hold out on the crowdfunding model for as long as I have.

When we did finally enter the crowdfunding space a couple of years ago I told myself, and others, that there was clearly no longer an expectation that the companies going to crowdfunding needed to be there. I believed it to be understood that it was more akin to a pre-order system and that the consumer knows that. I even said as much in the article I was interviewed for on this very site, posted on June 30th, about us pulling the Monolith from Kickstarter. It’s not true. I had only convinced myself that it was.

I’m in the midst of reflecting on every decision I’ve made that led to a failed campaign, and what that failure means for my company, the people I employ and my family, if I’m not able to correct course. The reality is that we moved to crowdfunding because the things that made us successful in the past aren’t working anymore and we were growing desperate for a solution.

Getting attention on a board game release announcement isn’t free anymore. It’s not news. At best it’s a bullet point on a long list of new release announcements for the week. The traditional method we’ve long employed of selling to distributors who sell to retailers who sell to players, sadly seems to be falling apart for us, and I suspect for most publishers.

So we found ourselves trying to incorporate crowdfunding into our business model while simultaneously telling ourselves we could do it different – better. Our approach:

• We will severely limit the use of exclusives. We don’t want people feeling like they HAVE to buy the product now or they will be missing out.
  
• We aren’t seeking to punish the people who have long supported their local board game shop by purchasing our products through them.
  
• Most of all we don’t want to manipulate our customers by preying on their fear of missing out.
  
• We will reduce the long wait between the time you back a game and the time you get that game by being fully ready to go to production at the time of the Kickstarter.

There were flaws in this approach. Flaws that I believe were masked in our first three campaigns because they all had something else big going for them.

Wandering Galaxy was the latest installment in a series of games we had released that had gotten a lot of attention for their amazing storytelling and voice acting (in a companion app).

Ashes Ascendency was a reinvigoration for a game that has ten years worth of glowing reviews to put in front of people and a dedicated fanbase.

Super Auto Pets Card Battle was based on an amazing and charming digital game, and we were able to rely on the attention of fans from that.

The Monolith had no predecessor.

This is why I believe our attempts to do things ‘different from the others’ has come back to bite us:

We wanted to limit FOMO.

A crowdfunding campaign must be compelling beyond the presentation of the game itself. You are asking the customer to pay for a game long before they can expect to have it in their hands. We need to give them a compelling reason to do that.

In the Super Auto Pets Card Battle campaign, the most popular pledge was by far the ALL-IN pledge, because it was the most compelling. You got all of the sets, all of the add-ons and in a storage box that would organize it all and only be available during the campaign.

I took away the wrong lesson. What I decided was that what those results were telling me was just that people want all the stuff, so with The Monolith let’s just make the core product all of the stuff.

We wanted to reduce the wait time on the game.

This is the one where I really messed up with The Monolith. As I established, the reality is that we needed to make changes to how we were doing things and I allowed myself to miss out on a key advantage to crowdfunding: measuring demand.

In an effort to shorten the window on how quickly we could deliver on a campaign, and further spurred on by a yearning to have a line at our booth for a new game release at GenCon or Essen (that feeling is the highest of highs), I started having plastic molds for the game well before the campaign so that they wouldn’t delay production – and remember this game was going to have all the upgrades packed in, so it was a lot of plastics and a lot of mold costs.

Further compounding the issue was that the mold costs were so high, to get the cost per unit down, I felt like I needed to be prepared to produce 10,000 copies. And like the molds, I got that production started before the campaign even started.

It was the exact kind of risk we had always needed to take when producing a game, but crowdfunding should have given me a chance to mitigate that risk, and in doing so really been a fulfillment of the core concept of crowdfunding to begin with: Asking the player to help be a part of bringing the game to the market.

So here is what we are doing differently with the relaunch of The Monolith campaign to try to address what went wrong with the initial campaign:

• Creating a 1-2 player mini-expansion.
  
• Lowering the retail price of the game and offering a larger discount on that already lower price for backers.
  
• Creating a 6th shaman character add-on.
  
• Creating glass blood tokens add-on.
  
• Creating a metal first player and surge tokens add-on.
  
• Creating an All-In tier with all of the add-ons included at a lower price than purchasing them separately.
  
• Different marketing partner and strategy.

Finally, here are my take aways for how we will do campaigns differently in the future:

• When possible, create a version of the game that focuses on lower price and a version that focuses on maximum bling.
  
• Be more willing to compete with the price point that we and everyone else knows online retailers are going to put on our games.
  
• Give the campaign a chance to communicate what the demand is. We will still be production ready, but I won’t be putting the cart directly in front of the horse again.
  
• Better leverage the community-based systems that already exist to support crowdfunding.

Follow Up

As I write THIS bit, the campaign has relaunched about 24 hours ago and is doing much better this time!  By a large margin, backers are opting for the pledge level that includes all the add-ons. So I believe this supports the theory that the add-ons were essential for a successful campaign. 

It is hard to quantify exactly how much each of our changes contributed to the better result, but overall, the adjustments seem to be working.  I’m so grateful to everyone who has backed.

The Kickstarter for The Monolith, which is designed by Phil Gross, is set to run until September 17.

The post “Our attempts to do things ‘different from the others’ came back to bite us”: Plaid Hat’s Colby Dauch on The Monolith’s Kickstarter failure and rapid turnaround first appeared on .

Allplay is making its biggest strategic shift since its predecessor Boardgametables.com entered publishing in 2018 – launching a trio of new product lines aimed at markets well beyond the accessible, smaller-box strategy games that have defined it to date.

The publisher’s newly-announced Masterworks, Epics and Creations lines mark its expansion into heavyweight eurogames, large-scale adventure titles and licensed or fandom-driven games respectively – beginning with a remake of highly-regarded Chad Jensen design Dominant Species.

Allplay’s decision to broaden its portfolio into larger, more expensive productions stands out as one of the more ambitious publisher expansion plans announced this year – especially given many have been shifting towards smaller-box, lower risk releases amid ongoing cost pressures such as tariffs and rising manufacturing expenses.

The move represents a notable evolution for a company that has built its reputation around approachable strategy games with consistent box sizes and accessible price points, alongside carefully-produced new editions of established hobby titles such as Container. Notable titles from the publisher to date have included releases like River Valley Glassworks, Mountain Goats and Things in Rings.

“We’ve always made games with constraints – on principle”, Allplay COO Joe Wiggins said. “We’re proud of what we’ve been able to make with these constraints.

“The consistent box sizes, accessible price points, and simpler rulesets are great for families and gamers who want strategy without rules overhead.

“Those core products aren’t going away. But now that we’re eight years into publishing games, we’re ready to show what else we can do.”

Allplay began life as boardgametables.com in 2014, specialising in high-end, custom-built wooden gaming tables manufactured in the US, before dipping its toes into board game publishing four years later.

The business rebranded as Allplay at the beginning on 2023 to better reflect its expansion, having reached the point where it was also providing bags, playmats and shelves, in addition to having published 17 board games and eight expansions.

When asked what gave Allplay the confidence to expand its remit again given the current challenges in the hobby games environment, Wiggins told BoardGameWire, “In the last four years we have gone from eight titles to 75. We are not known for bad games or shoddy components, but rather timely deliveries and solid productions.

“We have a very strong team and system in place, and while this growth might mean bigger impacts we have been for three years producing over 20 games per year – and this will see us lowering to about 12 – 15. We’re opening bandwidth to allow for these projects.”

He added, “This wasn’t a decision we made lightly. It was very specific and thoughtful in how we wanted to grow”, and went on to point out: “In the last five years we’ve gone from four of us at Allplay to now hiring our 22nd full time person, with an army of freelancers helping as well. We’ve been ready for this step!”

The most eye-catching announcement was the launch of Masterworks, a heavyweight strategy line created in partnership with acclaimed graphic designer and artist Ian O’Toole, whose portfolio of work includes Voidfall, On Mars and Galactic Cruise.

Rather than simply commissioning artwork, Allplay said O’Toole will become a full partner in the Masterworks line, helping select projects as well as contributing to their development, graphic design and visual direction.

Wiggins told BoardGameWire, “We are seeking out the best heavy euros to bring to market and he is key in the selection, development, art, and graphic design. He isn’t a paid artist – he’s a full partner in the line. We fully believe each release will make a massive impact on the heavy euro scene.”

He added that despite kicking off with a high-profile established title in Dominant Species, almost all of the games in the three lines will be new designs.

Wiggins said, “We just had such an amazing opportunity to launch with Dominant Species, which is one of our favorite all time games and will make such an impact when this amazing game gets phenomenal art and graphics for a modern gaming audience. Don’t expect too many classics – though I do have my eye on one for later down the road in the Masterworks line.”

Alongside Masterworks, Allplay’s Epics line will be dedicated to larger-scale hobby games including Sail Legacy and new survival game Crash Landed, while Creations will focus on games built around recognisable fandoms and licensed intellectual property – beginning with John D Clair’s theme park-themed Have a Magical Day.

Allplay has been clear that its existing publishing strategy will continue alongside the new initiatives, including a Kickstarter campaign in October for Through The Mountains – a sequel to Reiner Knizia’s Through the Desert, for which it ran a crowdfund at the end of 2023.

Wiggins told BoardGameWire that the company had been working on some of its expansion ideas since 2024 – adding that the commercial success of its Allplay partner programme had been key in giving the company the resources to expand its operations.

That partner programme has seen Allplay team up with more than 40 other publishers such as Bitewing Games, Kinson Key Games and Cardboard Alchemy, giving them access to its own infrastructure and providing services such as fulfillment for crowdfunding projects.

Wiggins told BoardGameWire, “As a group we are all stronger and can rely on each others success. Our partnership allows them to focus more on making more and better games and that lets them grow which lets us grow. It’s very symbiotic.”

That network will also help shape the company’s crowdfunding strategy for its new publishing lines, Wiggins said, giving it crucial information on how to successfully market different weights and styles of games.

He said, “When we launch Dominant Species we are able to key into audiences that liked Container and Galactic Cruise. When we launch Crash Landed we have access to the audiences of Tidal Blades 2 and Arydia, [and] when we launch Have A Magical Day we can speak to people who have loved Flamecraft and River Valley Glassworks.

“And people that come to us for Dominant Species will find Galactic Cruise… etc. We’re all working as a team and this is a big difference maker. Lifting each other up.”

Dominant Species, Crash Landed and Have a Magical Day are all set to come to Kickstarter in 2027.

The post “We’ve been ready for this step!”: Allplay’s Joe Wiggins on its striking push into heavier games, bigger productions and new audiences first appeared on .

2026 saw the third iteration of Roll The Dice Cornwall’s South West Cornwall Games Expo, and it was the best yet. The first time was at a small church hall in Helston. The second was in a bigger hall on the outskirts. This time it basically took over the old Cattle Market Building and Coronation Park. and it was brilliant. Hot sunshine, vendors selling anything and everything geek…

Source

Few people in the hobby game industry have seen as many sides of the business as Scott Morris – from leading global strategy at Lucky Duck Games, building publishing partnerships at GTS Distribution and running sales, marketing and social media at Arcane Wonders. Now Morris is applying that experience to his own venture as founder of Steelwing Games, whose debut title Rainbow Blvd. has been nearly a decade in the making. He spoke to BoardGameWire about deciding to launch as a publisher in a challenging market, why he believes a slower, more selective approach is the right fit, and the lessons he is bringing from his career at Lucky Duck Games and beyond.

BoardGameWire: How long has the idea of you launching your own publisher been rolling around your head? I think I remember you saying you registered Steelwing some years ago?

Steelwing originally began to take shape in 2016, after first playtesting Rainbow Blvd. (which was then called Leprechauntractors as a play on words with Leprechauns and Contractors). Like a lot of people who work in games, I’ve always had ideas about the kinds of projects I’d love to help bring to life if the timing, team, and titles were right.

The company itself was set up in 2021, and I’ve been very intentional about not rushing into publishing just for the sake of launching something. For me, it was important that Steelwing start with the right game, the right creative partners, and a clear sense of what we wanted the company to stand for.

What was it that finally got you to make the jump and launch?

It was really a combination of timing, people, and product. Rainbow Blvd. is the perfect first game, it always has been. It has a fun identity, a strong table presence, it is easy to teach, and has the type of meaningful gameplay that Steelwing is focused on.

I also reached a point in my career where my experience across multiple areas (sales, marketing, crowdfunding, distribution, licensing, production, and working with designers) has given me the confidence to give Steelwing a thoughtful and responsible start.

What does Steelwing represent or offer that perhaps hasn’t been possible for you in your other board game industry roles?

Steelwing gives me the chance to build something from the ground up with a clear creative point of view. The goal is to publish games that are welcoming, polished, distinct, and deliver a satisfying and rewarding experience for players.

The name reflects that mission. The “steel” represents the experience and discipline I’ve built in the industry, while the “wing” represents using that experience to help create opportunities for others and give talented people new pathways into board games when and where we can.

At its heart, Steelwing is about making games we would be thankful to have in our collection while trying to leave the industry a little better than we found it, along the way.

The industry has been facing higher manufacturing costs, tariffs, freight disruption and increasing competition for attention. Many people might see this as a difficult time to launch a publisher. What makes you optimistic?

It is absolutely a challenging time, that can’t be minimized in any way. Costs are high, attention is hard to earn, and publishers need to be more thoughtful than ever about what we make and how we make it.

What makes me optimistic is that players still respond to games that they can connect with, that have that special feel, and are well cared for. This is a time to be disciplined, focused, and clear about why a game deserves to exist. That is the mindset I am bringing to Steelwing.

Of course it will be challenging. There is never a perfect time to start a new business. One of the principles I try to live by is, “Be good today and be better tomorrow.” Staying humble, listening carefully, continuing to learn, and making games that bring people joy, will result in positive outcomes for Steelwing and more importantly, for the community.

Having worked in the industry for more than a decade, which experiences most shaped the way you’ll run Steelwing?

Not to date myself, but it’s closer to two decades, and actually my second stint in the industry. A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away (known as Poughkeepsie, New York), I had my first opportunity in games as a retailer, managing a local store called Iron Vic’s.

The experiences that have helped shape me are the ones where I’ve been able to see the full path a game takes from idea to table. A great design is essential, but game development, product development, manufacturing, communication, and post-release support all shape the experience players ultimately have with a game.

One night, while developing Rainbow Blvd., we realized the rainbow borders on some cards felt slightly different. Opening the files in InDesign, we found that one border was 13 pixels from the cut line and another was 15. Those two pixels bothered me more than they probably should have, but I knew someone, somewhere, would have that same subtle feeling that something was off. So we spent several hours fixing it. Was it necessary? Maybe not to some, but for me, it was 100% necessary.

I’ve also been fortunate to learn from many generous and experienced people across the industry. Those relationships have shaped how I think about publishing, leadership, and the responsibility that comes with bringing a game to market.

My goal with Steelwing is not to assume we’ll get everything right. We won’t. But experience gives us a better chance to be thoughtful, avoid preventable mistakes, and build trust with the people who help bring our games to life and with the people who enjoy them.

Your recent newsletter makes clear Rainbow Blvd. has been in development for years, with prototypes dating back to 2016. What made you confident about launching a new publisher with this title?

Rainbow Blvd. has had a long and amazing road, and I’m looking forward to sharing more of that story through our updates and crowdfunding campaign. At times, it has felt as though it has a life of its own. The core idea has stayed strong through a slow-and-steady development process, while the game itself has become more focused, more accessible, and more visually distinct over time.

What stood out to me is that Rainbow Blvd. has immediate appeal, while also providing a very satisfying experience underneath the surface. People are drawn to the colorful 3D rainbows and cozy city-building theme, and then after they play a turn or two, they find meaningful decisions, shared incentives, and strategic choices that make the experience engaging for many different types of players.

That is exactly the space for Steelwing to live in; games that feel welcoming regardless of a player’s experience level, while being memorable and rewarding. Great games have “stand up moments” where players feel rewarded for their choices, and even greater games leave players with that “I can’t wait to play again” feeling. Rainbow Blvd delivers on those two things and [designer Adam Wyse] has done a tremendous job developing it into something approachable, clever, and special! I’m excited to help bring it to players around the world.

What kinds of games are you actively looking to sign? What does a Steelwing game look like?

A Steelwing game should be welcoming and engaging while delivering a memorable experience. The experience is everything. Positive, clever, engaging, intriguing, and above all else, fun.

We are actually not actively looking for games, as we have a publishing plan in place until 2029. If and when we open up for submissions, some key elements are games that are teachable, replayable, and have a clear reason to exist on the table. Strong table presence helps, a unique theme helps, and unique components turn simple into satisfying. That is where my strength as a publisher is; taking a good game design and helping turn it into a full product that delivers a positive experience.

Are there any particular themes, mechanisms or types of games you’re especially excited about right now? Or any genres or play experiences you think are currently underserved?

I believe there are still so many themes, mechanisms, and combinations in games that have not been fully explored yet. I’m especially interested in games that create positive interaction without relying only on direct conflict. I like games where players are paying attention to each other and the choices being made, where timing matters, and where the table feels alive, but not necessarily because players are attacking each other or tearing each other down.

Rainbow Blvd. is a good example of that. We’ve worked hard to make sure players stay engaged even when it is not their turn, because what other players choose can also create opportunities for others. That kind of shared excitement and mutual interest keeps the game active from turn to turn and feeling alive.

There is still a lot of room for beautiful, accessible strategy games, games that families, couples, casual players, and hobby gamers can all enjoy together for different reasons. As a wise person once said, “The people around the table are more important than the game on it.” I hope Steelwing games can help create many of those nights.

How many games are you realistically aiming to publish each year?

The plan is to stay steady, planned, and manageable. Realistically, the goal is not to publish a large number of games each year. I would rather do fewer games better than stretch the company too thin. Right now, we have Rainbow Blvd. crowdfunding this year on Kickstarter and delivering in 2027, plus an unannounced game to crowdfund in 2027 and deliver in 2028. Releasing games in a measured and manageable way is the pace to keep at the start and the primary focus.

Is the goal to remain deliberately boutique, or would you like Steelwing eventually to become more of a mid-sized publisher?

The goal is to grow responsibly. I’m not opposed to Steelwing becoming larger over time, but only if the growth supports the quality of the games and the experience for players. For now, I would describe the goal as focused. We want to be selective, build trust, and make each release feel intentional, delivering the best possible experiences to players.

Will you primarily publish original games, or are licensed titles also part of the long-term strategy?

Original games are the main focus, especially as we establish Steelwing’s identity. That said, I have a lot of respect for what a well-matched license can do when it genuinely supports the gameplay and audience. “Never say never” is the saying, but fit also matters. I am not looking to chase licenses for the sake of it, and our focus is on Rainbow Blvd and the next title, which is also an original, internal game. (Which, I can’t wait to talk more about, as it is also a very unique game like Rainbow Blvd. that gets me excited every time I play it.)

Are you actively accepting pitches? And if so, what kinds of games are you most hoping designers will bring to Steelwing? How should they contact you?

We’re not accepting unsolicited pitches right now. Steelwing already has a publishing plan in place for the coming years and I want to make sure we give those projects and relationships the attention they deserve. If and when we do open submissions, we’ll be looking for games that feel welcoming, replayable, visually engaging, and have a clear reason to exist on the table. However, I don’t want designers sending us projects before we have a proper process in place, especially if those games could be finding the right home elsewhere. We’ll share clear guidelines through SteelwingGames.com and our social channels.

Will every game crowdfund first, or do you plan to vary that from title to title?

Crowdfunding will be an important part of Steelwing’s strategy, especially early on, because it allows us to build community around each game and communicate directly with the players most excited about it. That said, I do not think every game has to follow the exact same path. The right approach depends on the game, the audience, the production needs, and the retail strategy.

Looking back over your career so far, what’s the biggest lesson you’re taking into Steelwing?

The biggest lesson I’m taking into Steelwing is that publishing is a long-term relationship business built on trust. A good game matters, of course, but so does how you communicate, how you treat people, how you handle problems, whether your decisions are sustainable, and how well you stand behind your product after it reaches the table.

I want Steelwing to be known not just for the games being made, but for being thoughtful, reliable, and committed to delivering exceptional experiences. Steelwing is intentionally lean right now, supported by a group of passionate and talented contractors, partners, and collaborators who believe in the goals and the games.

One of the things I love most about the board game industry is how accessible and personal it can still feel. I want to have direct relationships with our players. I want to hear their stories of fun, triumph, defeat, and laughter. And just as importantly, I want to hear where we can improve, because every release should help us get better at serving the people who choose to put our games on their table.

Are there any elements of being a publisher that you’ve experienced in your time in the industry that you’re deliberately trying not to do with Steelwing?

One of the most challenging things in this industry, and in life in general, is the art of saying “no” when it needs to be said. Every company has different pressures and constraints. For me, the goal is to avoid growing too fast, avoid overpromising, and avoid taking on games that cannot be given the attention they deserve. That means being honest about what can be done well, while being disciplined enough to say no when something is not the right fit.

You’re still part of Lucky Duck Games. How do you balance those responsibilities with running Steelwing?

The true answer is, “Very carefully”. My responsibilities with Lucky Duck Games remain my professional priority, and I take them seriously. I’m grateful for the opportunity I have here and for the talented people I continue to work with. Steelwing is a separate project, and I’m careful about keeping those responsibilities distinct. That means being thoughtful with my time, avoiding conflicts, and making sure Steelwing is built in a way that does not interfere with my daily obligations. Maintaining trust and professionalism matters a great deal to me.

If you were to look forward five years into the future of Steelwing, what do you hope you’ll see?

Five years from now, I hope I’ve grown to become a better publisher and I hope Steelwing has a meaningful catalog of games that people are excited to recommend to their friends and family. I would love for players to see the Steelwing name and feel like it stands for games made with intention, love, and care.

I do not think success has to mean being the biggest publisher. For me, success would be building something sustainable, respected, and joyful, both for the people who make the games and the people who play them.

Rainbow Blvd.’s Kickstarter pre-launch page can be visited here.

The post “This is a time to be disciplined, focused, and clear about why a game deserves to exist”: industry veteran Scott Morris on launching new publisher Steelwing Games first appeared on .

After years spent engaging with publishers and designers – both at Capstone Games and through his Board Again Gaming podcast – Christopher High believes the several thousand new board games and expansions released each year are pushing publishers towards commercially safer bets. Now he’s wagering his company Valor Mountain Games can succeed by taking chances on the kinds of titles other publishers are passing over.

High, who spent the past two years as a product manager at Ark Nova and Gaia Project publisher Capstone, co-created Valor Mountain in 2023 alongside Tim Densham as an offshoot of the latter’s historical games-focused publisher Catastrophe Games.

He became sole owner of Valor Mountain in May after buying out Densham’s share of the business – and now plans to expand the company from creating small side projects into a business targeting five or six traditional print-run releases a year.

High told BoardGameWire he is “putting his own money on the line” betting on a strategy built around taking chances on games other companies might reject – saying he believes the hobby industry has become increasingly focused on commercially safe decisions, leaving opportunities to back more unusual designs and under-represented creators.

He said, “Generally publishers make safe decisions. And that’s their job. As far as breaking the mold, I rarely see a game anymore that truly ‘wows’ me in this sense.

“It happens, it just seems like our industry defaults a lot to what they think will sell a game rather than being willing to take a risk”, adding that he highly rates the kinds of designs currently being put out by publishers such as DVC, Hollandspiele and CMYK.

He added, “There are tons of games that get passed over in traditional publishing because they aren’t safe bets. I want to be a smart business person, but I also want to take some risks on designs and designers that are doing interesting things.

“There are literally thousands of products that come out each year which are just iterations of previous designers, maybe smashed together in a new way. It would be fantastic to give some games a chance at a larger audience which would be too risky for other publishers.

“I also want to give voice to more artists and designers who may be from overlooked or under-represented communities. As to genres, I would love to see a truly branching narrative euro game that isn’t afraid to let you push the limits of what’s acceptable in that genre.”

Asked whether his comments about ignoring what other publishers are doing reflected increasing “trend chasing” within hobby games, he replied “Yes”, adding “I have to do my own [thing].

“….What I do need is community and art. I want these things and my values to drive what we do as a company, not the market. The market is and will always be fickle.”

High’s new strategy has seen Valor Mountain seal a partnership with Pink Troubadour Games, which will see it bring several of the European publisher’s titles to the North American market – including Pilgrims: Curious Adventures, Movie Fight, Loony Clues and Dirt & Glory.

High’s previous employer Capstone partnered with Pink Troubadour while he was with the US company, to bring SETI creator Tomáš Holek’s design Galileo Galilei to North America.

High told BoardGameWire, “I had a good working relationship with the Pink Troubadour team when I worked for Capstone. However, I reached out after I was done working at Capstone to see if there were new ways I could work with them. 

“I am planning on taking steps to foster our relationship as I see their trust as essential, since in some ways we are a new company to the market.”

High added, “It’s exciting, and it came about because I reached out to them since I saw that these games were not available in the North American English market.  They are a wonderful team to work with, and it is my hope to do more games in the future with them as our capacity increases.”

High seems especially enthusiastic about bringing family-weight competitive movement puzzle game Pilgrims: Curious Adventures to North America, saying, “I played the video game it is based on and it is super quirky. The board game, like the video game, is very straightforward.

“If I had to describe it in one word: chill. I think it is that perfect type of game for those who want to explore board games without diving in too deep, it feels like you are doing something without being overwhelmed.

“It’s one of those bridge games between gamers and non-gamers and has delightful artwork from Amanita Design.”

Valor Mountain has also dipped its toes into crowdfunding again, following campaigns for a trio of small-box titles in 2023 and roll and write game Birdsong in August last year – all of which raised between about $1,300 and $3,000.

The new campaign features a trio of trick-taking titles – Supercollider, Growing Groves and The Franciscan Diamond, the latter of which High said was a great example of the kind of Valor Mountain release other publishers might not take a chance on.

He said, “Trick-taking games are probably past the zenith of recent popularity, plus this game has a super obscure scoring system. It’s by an unknown designer, but it is really clever.

“I love it. Will anyone else? Maybe? I think it’s going to be a divisive game though.”

He added, “I hope to eventually move away from crowdfunding. There are lots of reasons I don’t like it. However, with all of the capital outlay I have right now, I need just a little more to ensure I can do everything I want to do this fall.

“My project goal on there is a true goal, it helps ensure the proper operational flow of putting these games out.”

High also credited years of conversations with designers and publishers through the Board Again Gaming podcast with shaping his approach to publishing, and helping “keep my curiosity alive”. 

He said, “I love talking to and hearing from designers. It reminds me how little I know and how much there is to learn.

“The world is a big place and people have so much creativity. I want to help bring more of that to a wider audience.”

For High, that curiosity may ultimately be Valor Mountain’s defining characteristic. Whether betting on unusual designs proves commercially successful remains, by his own admission, an open question.

Asked whether a publisher can succeed by deliberately pursuing games larger companies pass over, High said: “I don’t know. I guess I will find out as I put my own money on the line.”

Valor Mountain’s latest Kickstarter campaign runs until August 10.

The post Valor Mountain challenges hobby game publishing’s “safe bet” mentality as it ramps up ambitions first appeared on .

As trading card games continue to drive growth across the tabletop industry, hobby retailers are increasingly looking beyond games themselves to the accessories that support organised play and competitive communities. In this sponsored article, TCG and board game accessories maker Sanseking explains how changing player behaviour is influencing retailers’ approach to inventory, merchandising and long-term store strategy, and why competitive accessories are becoming a more important part of the European hobby market.

A growing crossover between board gaming and trading card games is beginning to reshape hobby retail strategy across Europe according to TCG, board game, and collectible accessories maker Sanseking, with competitive accessories emerging as an increasingly important category for stores.

What was once a relatively clear divide between casual board game retail and competitive TCG communities has evolved into a far more interconnected ecosystem, the company says, where stores are expected to serve multiple types of players simultaneously.

That shift is particularly visible in the accessories market according to Sanseking production manager Ding Guang, who says retailers are increasingly treating competitive sleeves and protective products as core components of long-term business planning rather than simple add-on purchases.

“Accessories used to be viewed mainly as supplementary sales,” Guang told BoardGameWire. “But competitive communities create repeat purchasing behaviour that changes how retailers think about stability, inventory, and customer retention.”

Hobby retailers now commonly operate within a mixed environment that includes casual board gamers, organised play communities built around titles such as Magic: The Gathering, Pokémon and Yu-Gi-Oh!, and players who actively move between both spaces.

That convergence has become especially visible at events such as Spiel Essen, where accessory brands increasingly exhibit alongside publishers and competitive card players mix naturally with broader tabletop audiences.

But for retailers, the two customer groups behave very differently.

Board games typically generate one-off purchases tied to seasonal launches or major releases, while competitive TCGs create recurring engagement cycles through tournaments, deck rebuilding, league play and shifting formats – and those cycles also generate consistent accessory demand.

Competitive players replace sleeves far more frequently than casual players, Sanseking points out, adding that frequent shuffling, tournament preparation, the need for consistency and sensitivity to tactile feedback all contribute to repeat purchases.

That rise in accessory demand has also been driven by the stellar growth of TCGs more generally, with long-time heavyweights such as Pokemon, Magic: The Gathering and Yu-Gi-Oh! joined more recently by a flurry of other successful entrants to the market, including One Piece, Disney Lorcana and Star Wars Unlimited.

That demand pushed the overall value of the global TCG market to $7.8bn last year according to veteran research firm BCC, which projects the segment will reach $11.8bn by 2030 with a CAGR of 7.9%.

In many European hobby stores, tournament nights now represent some of the most reliable recurring foot traffic. Players attending weekly organised play events increasingly view accessories not as optional extras, but as part of their competitive equipment.

According to Guang, that recurring demand can help retailers smooth revenue fluctuations during slower periods in the board game release calendar. But at the same time, competitive players also tend to be far more selective.

“They pay attention to things casual players may never think about,” Guang said. “Edge structure, shuffle consistency, durability over repeated use, and manufacturing consistency between batches all matter.”

The Growing Importance of Segmentation

That growing attention to performance characteristics is also pushing retailers to rethink how accessories are presented in-store, according to Sanseking.

Historically, sleeves were often treated as largely interchangeable products differentiated mainly by colour or price point.

But as organised play communities mature, stores are increasingly recognising that accessories serve multiple functional segments, ranging from casual ‘kitchen table’ play, to hobby-level regular play and competitive or sanctioned environments.

Retailers that fail to distinguish between those categories can create unnecessary friction, Sanseking says.

The company points out that a product optimized for softness and casual handling may not satisfy a competitive player seeking predictable shuffle feedback. Conversely, a structure-focused sleeve may feel unnecessarily rigid or specialized for a board gamer.

As a result, some retailers are beginning to adopt more structured merchandising approaches, using clearer pricing tiers, competitive-focused shelving, and staff recommendations tailored to different player types.

“The stores performing well are usually the ones creating clarity,” Guang said. “Not necessarily carrying the most SKUs, but helping customers understand which products fit which type of play.”

Risk, Inventory, and Shelf Strategy

From a commercial perspective, competitive accessories also offer several advantages compared to boxed games, including lower unit cost, a smaller shelf footprint, faster turnover when tied to active communities and strong repeat purchase potential.

Retailers can still perceive the category as niche, however – particularly when shelf space is limited. According to Sanseking, the most effective approach is usually a balanced one – not one that offers endless fragmentation, but a core range which covers general use, alongside clearly identified competitive-focused options for players who care about performance.

The importance of organised play also continues to shape purchasing behaviour, with competitive events a significant driver of repeat store visits, even amid wider economic pressure on hobby spending.

Within those communities, accessory choices increasingly function as part of player identity.

“Players often become loyal to specific performance characteristics rather than just aesthetics,” Guang said. “That creates opportunities for retailers to position themselves as serious competitive venues.”

Some stores are already leaning into that approach by highlighting ‘competitive-ready’ accessory sections, aligning certain products with tournament nights, and using more technical product descriptions instead of purely visual merchandising.

The growing overlap between board game audiences and competitive TCG players is also accelerating the trend, according to Sanseking’s experience of the market.

The firm said that many customers who first enter hobby stores through board games gradually become exposed to organised play environments, while competitive card players often purchase board games for more social settings.

Accessories sit directly at the centre of that crossover, with protective products one of the few categories that naturally serve both audiences while still supporting different performance tiers, it added.

For retailers, that makes accessory strategy not just an operational decision, but a bridge between communities, Sanseking says.

As Europe’s tabletop market continues to evolve, Guang believes accessories will become more strategically significant across the retail landscape.

“Players are becoming more informed about performance trade-offs, and retailers are having to serve more diverse communities across the same limited shelf space,” he said. “Clear segmentation and clear communication are becoming much more valuable.”

For brands, that means designing products with defined use cases rather than relying on broad universal claims. And for retailers, Guang argues, success may depend less on scale than structure.

“In a market where casual and competitive audiences increasingly overlap, clarity is often more important than simply offering more products.”

Anyone interested in working with Sanseking can visit their website for more details about what they offer, and contact them here.

The post How competitive TCG accessories are influencing hobby retail strategy in Europe: Sanseking [Sponsored] first appeared on .

Maybe you’re quite new to board and card games and have heard people talking about trick-taking games. Maybe you’ve been into the hobby for ages and don’t know anything about trick-taking, but you’re too scared to ask at this point. Either way, I’ve got you covered. In the context of card games, a trick is usually a round of play in a card game. Most commonly in trick-taking games…

Source