Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I can remember buying my first minis as a kid and marveling over the complexity of the rulebook with all its options in 2nd edition. IN many ways I miss the variation of 2nd edition. I STILL have paints, still perfectly usable, from the late 80s!
Over time I've noticed themes I can't say I am very excited about:
1. the miniatures have gone from 'realistic' representation to an over-the-top representation of the people and creatures they represent. I feel like there has been a shift from armies to champions, and these champions are often armed with weapons 5 times their size or wearing helmets of ridiculous proportion. I mean come on I'll go buy some he-man figures if I want that crap.
2. Every new faction is some kind of bombastic over-the-top evil faction. Ogres, chaos this that and the other thing, undead and more undead. What about Estalia or Tilea? What about the Norse or Araby? What about the far east? Is all this childish really representative of the player base? I have to think not considering how many people are willing to play high elves.
I hope I don't piss off too many people by saying as much. I love warhammer and the warhammer world, and value much of what has been done. I just wish they would diversify a bit and remember the core of the fantasy genera and work with what they have available.
I don't know where you get the idea that any of these figures are wielding weapons five times their size, but I just don't know of any figures where this is the case. Especially the newer models. They all seem pretty right to me - at least within the general fantasy setting. If anything, it's not the weapons that has gotten more "over-the-top," as you said, but rather the dynamics of the poses they are now able to cast for their models. I just cannot see how you can say the models have been getting worse when I look at the new Black Knight models that just replaced the 4th Edition ones. They're the primary reason I want to play VC because they look gorgeous!!
As for your second point... 7 of the factions are evil, yes, but 6 are good, and 2 are neutral. Straight out of GW's rulebook, this is stated. Now, if you take a look at the Warhammer world's lore, there are generally two sources of evil: the Gods of Chaos, and Nagash. Chaos spawned the army that eventually split into three armies (Beastmen, WoC, Daemons) and caused the rise of the Dark Elves. Nagash is responsible for Skaven, VC and TKs. So I don't really see how you can make such a statement like "Warhammer Fantasy is nothing but Chaos Chaos Chaos Chaos Chaos omg everyone is just so childish let me complain about it!" Only four armies are Chaos themed. Now, Warriors of Chaos naturally appeals to a younger audience (they're like the Call of Duty or Doom of WFB, obviously meant for a mature audience, and that forbidden fruit makes them more 'badass'), so it's only natural for them to be one of the most loved and talked-about armies in the game. But that doesn't make the army immature, nor does it make the entire game immature. If you're perceiving immaturity in the audience you surround yourself with, I would suggest finding a new group to play with.
Besides, Ogres are neutral. They're not evil. They're just gross. Which is part of their charm.
But yeah, let's be honest, evil is like sex... it sells. So you can't blame Games Workshop for prioritizing armies they believe will lead to more sales. They need to make a living, too. In the meantime, take advantage of all the shiny new plastic models the High Elves got (basically they're entire army).
As for that comment about Chaos being for kids. I've played Chaos for 18 years Mr!! Although I never have grown up......
1990ish i cannot remember
Now imagine putting on a helmet like this and guess what happens when you do that:
a) Nothing. youre praying the wind doesnt blow your hat away though.
b) Your armour goes up in value and you feel magically empowered
c) Your head bends over and snaps off because of the sheer size and weight of this impressive piece of work.
now lets have a look at Nagash and compare some minotaurs... no just kidding im not that cruel =D
i have never considered GW to produce realistic models, that is something their competitors did, you know, the ones that are now bankrupt (i admit i was rooting for the other side back then). But it's been trademark for the company. apparently it sells better or so they say.
Boys N Toys
i dont agree that it has gotten worse. I think the quality of the models and realism has gone up massively.
Warchief Diggah o da Bloodmoon Squiggahs
Having, a good decade before I even knew that the minis existed, played the warhammer RPG (starting in '89,iirc), I think the vast difference between the two may have something to do with the OP's point.
I think he's complaining about seeing scores of Dark Elves fighting dozens of Ogres on one table while forty bretonian knights duke it out (pun intended!) with a Fatecrusher list on the next table? What's wrong with that? Well, nothing, but it doesn't match the world that the RPG depicts, where you might play for months, and if you're on the mainland, see three elves, thirty dwarves, if you're lucky, a (single) questing French kaniggit, and, if unlucky, half a dozen ghouls or an ogre. Of course, that doesn't translate well to a tabletop war-game, does it? Furthermore, the difference between Estalia and Marienburg is huge in the RPG, but irrelevant on the table.
Making the minis game faithfully and accurately reflect the Warhammer world would wreck the game, of course!
I think that yes the models have changed, but lets not forget, the moulding methods at the time really didn't allow for the detail that's on the models now unless it was big stuff like the great spined dragon and the great emperor dragon they used to do. In terms of high fantasy I suppose that Nick Lund's black orcs were as radical as it got (he later took the whole model line to Grenadier).
It was the days of Tony Ackland and John Blanche and until the perry twins came along, the models were conservative I agree.
For me the mental stumbling block comes in the form of paying thirty or forty pounds for a big model which is made of plastic - I still struggle to equate the cost with the weight in my hand. But you can't deny the sheer quality now, and I was in denial for some time. It's only when I look at some very old miniatures for sale on the fleabay that I realise and now accept how far its all come.
Admittedly, as Lord Borak says, it is a modelling hobby and there are still miniatures from other vendors who will fit the look you miss. Unless you intend to go into GW and play of course, then they might get the hump!
I think though that one thing I've observed since 1st and 2nd ed is that other than the cover art on the box is still my favourite, the whole armies thing has been tidied up. As has been said, the races have always been there, but in the day you could just have a 'chaos army' - beastmen and warriors and monsters. Or, just an undead army or just a minatour army etc.
I'm happy that we're back to champions, heroes and lords again, I felt the level 5 -25 hero thing was pretty pants.
Don't forget that for extreme silliness there was Ravening Hordes (1st book) and the Realms of Chaos - Slaves to Darkness book for just sheer you've got to be kidding value! 12 man orc stone thrower with a 10" template!?!
Also back on the miniatures, lets not forget they're not true 25mm any more, they're 28. The Lord of the Rings GW stuff is 25mm, and perhaps thinking of it, those models pretty much meet what your miss about the older styles.
For me the wonder is in the rediscovery of it all again, and how it has all changed, 3rd edition was when I left it, so yes early 90's. Its just a pity I don't see many more people in our age group in the local games workshop enjoying the hobby again, and that I gave away all my models and paints bugger!
As for over the top. well, it's fantasy, and like any roleplaying game, you can choose to not have high monster / magic rich campaigns or alternatively you can go for broke and it looks like a total FX free for all!. I know what you mean, about the various armies, but from a model point of view, if they don't have enough 'meat' to sell whats the point for GW - harsh to say I know.
I remember the Nippon armies of the Ravening hordes book, pretty much oriental High elves stat wise, with samurai being nearly up there with chaos warriors. What about Estalia or Tilea? What about the Norse or Araby you say, I suppose we have to ask whether norse and Kislev would be so different from an army point of view for example to warrant an army book of their own - or if GW see them as a bit unremarkable. At some point or another they've existed, but haven't been a commercial success - I had loads of samurai figures looking to build a Nippon army. I suppose looking at the Warhammer world as well, it focuses on the old world, so hence the army choices - apart from the decision to split the undead into distinctly wet and dry undead so to speak, because of course, in 2nd ed undead were undead- fill your boots!
I suppose really we have to be sensible and just decide how much of the rules we want to use and in what way. Unless you're a tournament player or the like is there any need to stick with the 'look' as defined by GW?, and what's to stop you from finding a stash of the older miniatures you liked. It'll take some doing, but it is do-able.
Perhaps also, it's be worth dropping a note to GW, I would imagine if the demand is there, there would be no reason why no revive something from the archives. There's still stuff I don't like in 8th ed WH don't get me wrong, but I remember how one sided the old rules were for some armies that I welcome the things that have changed. Rules are just rules, and it's your game and your take on the WarHammer world thats important. I reckon.
I know how the inital post feels, Ive been away for 10+ years and have alot of the old models including the old Tyrion, and on the downside, Ive got loads of characters that arnt around anymore
But like when I got back into Bloodbowl a few years ago Ive noticed the models from the mid 90's were posed standing, I think the main difference is the newer models have abit of a fighting/moving more action stance, maybe that takes a little getting used to
Like everything change takes getting used to especially after 10 years, Ive found plenty of models I like on the GW website, just wish I was good enough to paint them to the standard they deserve and need for the cost, I admit that puts me off getting some of the larger expensive fine cast models only to bodge the paint job up, but practise will get me there lol
Ogres appeal to a younger audience. Most of the WoC players I've seen are mid 20s-early 30s. Though I suppose we'll have to start defining young at this point...
Fear me, mortals, for I am The Anointed, The Favored Son of Chaos, The Scourge of the World. The armies of the Gods rally behind me, and it is by My Will and by My Sword that your weakling nations shall fall. - Archaon, The Everchosen, Lord of the End Times
WoC was love at first sight for me. I'm new to warhammer and any tabletop war game aside from Risk of course. I'm 26 and WoC is the best looking army for me. 2nd choice is hands down the Tomb Kings which I just started.
Last edited by AshBorn; February 19th, 2012 at 06:16.