Sisters of Battle petition

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**AllSeeingSkink**

I'd take it all with a grain of salt. Gamers are the sorts of people who would buy anything if they had the money and time to put it together, so I'm sure there's a lot of people who say they'd like a Sisters army who wouldn't follow through when it strikes them that they have to spend several hundred dollars buying them then several hundred hours getting them ready for a game.

**Kid_Kyoto**

Seriously come up with a list of bits or models you want, and do a petition to Dreamforge or someone.

There are small companies out there that would listen to you.

Convince them that Grimdark Space Nuns would outsell, I dunno, the War of Spanish Succession and someone might bite.

**Vermis**

migooo wrote:
I like the way you alienate anybody who bought RH figures, Sisters fans

Thank you. I thought it was fairly deft, myself. But you forgot female SM and Firefly fans too.

Sisters sold fine

Aaand then they didn't.

**Buttery Commissar**

I know so many people who'd pick up tastefully handled SoB.
Myself included.

They represent one of two things that 40K has a shortage of, this futuristic nobody-matters-but-nobody-matters-equally Imperium setting.
Women (and anyone who isn't white as feth in artwork).

I was laughed at (sympathetically) when I asked how to play a female army in my local GW.

**Bottle**

-

**Buttery Commissar**

To us. I understand that, Bottle.

But It's not as easy as walking into the store and tripping over Cadians or Astartes. It is not acceptable to have to say to a girl, child or woman, "If you want to play with varied female figures, you have to buy twice as many kits and cut them up."

SoB are no longer in the physical stores, "I can show you a female figure online." makes it feel like a secondary niche interest to want a figure that even vaguely represents yourself.

**Bottle**

-

**Buttery Commissar**

I was reading 40K fluff long before I started playing. I played the RPGs with friends, and I was hooked.

I went into my local GW and asked what forces I could play that would represent what I wanted to do: Humans with character; women and men.

There was a tangible sense of embarrassment as they showed me the Cadians and then the SoB online.
"Why are those ones half naked?"
"We don't talk about them."

I ended up going with Mordians and Tanith because they remind me of the hard working people in my home area. But it was a complete compromise from what I'd thought was possible.

**Bottle**

-

**Elemental**

Bottle wrote:
Gonna white knight and say maybe GW want to release updated sisters for the fans, but also want to be successful and profitable and haven't yet found a way to make it all click.

On the other hand, you have the Adeptus Mechanicus release, for a faction that was never before represented with models. Surely that was more risky than a range with a proven audience.

**Jimsolo**

Again, no skin in the game (I've already got all the Sisters I need), but I find it highly unlikely that there is a larger AdMech audience (or a larger Harlequins audience) than there is a Sisters of Battle audience.

**MWHistorian**

And to anyone that says "female models don't sell" I say, look at the other major game systems. They have plenty of female models and they sell very well.
GW just don't support Sisters so they don't sell. I had over 2,000 pts of SOB back in the day. The fact that they're doing every sub faction instead of SOB shows how little they care about them.

**TheAuldGrump**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Seriously come up with a list of bits or models you want, and do a petition to Dreamforge or someone.

There are small companies out there that would listen to you.

Convince them that Grimdark Space Nuns would outsell, I dunno, the War of Spanish Succession and someone might bite.

This strikes me as the more method most likely to succeed.

As for the Raging Heroes models... I quite like the Jailbirds (a friend uses them for his Escher gang), and use the three Kurganova sisters in a Fallout game (for characters with Dominance and Submission kinks, they fit fine).

GW has too many factions, and the Sisters suffer from not being Marines.

The Auld Grump

**migooo**

Vermis wrote:
migooo wrote:
I like the way you alienate anybody who bought RH figures, Sisters fans

Thank you. I thought it was fairly deft, myself. But you forgot female SM and Firefly fans too.

Sisters sold fine

Aaand then they didn't.

Only because they had nobody to champion them. They had a few new bits in the early 2000s

That's exactly the state Dark Eldar were in you know before the revamp. How can you expect a line to sell without decent updates. People loathe metal for some reason and as GW is going plastic only and yet won't approach sisters yet how many generations of SM have we had?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Buttery Commissar wrote:

There was a tangible sense of embarrassment as they showed me the Cadians and then the SoB online.
"Why are those ones half naked?"
"We don't talk about them."

The repentia are more fetishist than I'd like but its art and art should not be censored.

Yes I hope they change how they look but still keep the theme. But the way you describe that is they had a omg Females displaying some skin, run away attitude.

**Jimsolo**

Honestly, the repentia are the least of the problem with fetishized SoB. The whole line is elbow deep in the chicks-with-guns fetish market as it is. Especially once you start looking not just at their models, but the art in the books.

**Smacks**

As much as I'd like to see sisters get an update, I think this is a waste of time. GW don't listen to customers, and even if they did take note and bring out a new range of sisters, it would be too little to late for me. I'd probably look at the pictures, but I doubt I'd be interested in buying any, at least not at GW prices. Especially, when the rules are such a mess.

I petition GW every day, the only way they understand: by not giving them my money. If you want to write your name on something to make a difference, write it on a cheque, hand the cheque to Corvus Belli in exchange for an Infinity starter set, don't look back.

**Vermis**

migooo wrote:

The repentia are more fetishist than I'd like but its art and art should not be censored.

Yeah. Just like the AoS sets are art. They're over-the-top adolescent fantasies too. They're selling like... what the opposite of hot cakes? Cold broccoli? Cold steamed broccoli? But as long as GW stick to their artistic principles!

As some folk are fond of reminding us, GW's a business. And it's not the business of sucking up to Charles Saatchi either. Apparently it means that GW should ignore all those irrational things that customers want (like balanced rules, reasonable prices etc.) but in the case of the repentia I'd venture that it might be a good thing. As Jimsolo says the power armour sisters weren't exactly dressed in habits (weird that) but were a truckload less cringeworthy than how their expansion turned out. Pity they couldn't expand things with a set or two of female, y'know, soldiers, and start reducing the number of incidents like that Buttery Commissar experienced.

And to unpack my first comment, a bit, Raging Heroes' ranges are barely an improvement. During that kickstarter I looked down the long list of concepts and I think I saw one that wasn't designed around as much skin as possible, or space-corsets. No wonder it made as much as it did. I'd go as far as assuming that KS campaign was the biggest single reason a shop like Bad Squidoo exists. It's the best argument for female space marines 'cos we need more ranges of female troopers in (halfway) practical spacesuits to balance it. More Dreamforge, more Victoria.

**Buttery Commissar**

migooo wrote:

Buttery Commissar wrote:

There was a tangible sense of embarrassment as they showed me the Cadians and then the SoB online.
"Why are those ones half naked?"
"We don't talk about them."

The repentia are more fetishist than I'd like but its art and art should not be censored.

Yes I hope they change how they look but still keep the theme. But the way you describe that is they had a omg Females displaying some skin, run away attitude.

Or that there was a woman involved in the conversation. Yes it was fething embarrassing.
Amusing but embarrassing.

It would be easier to argue for the Repebtia if they were extreme artistic exceptions in a line that had moderate female figures for sale.
"You don't need to pay those attention, there's something for everyone!"

They make up about a fifth or sixth of the currently available SoB figures. The line where empowering women is basically putting blades on the stilettos.

**migooo**

Vermis wrote:
migooo wrote:

The repentia are more fetishist than I'd like but its art and art should not be censored.

Yeah. Just like the AoS sets are art. They're over-the-top adolescent fantasies too. They're selling like... what the opposite of hot cakes? Cold broccoli? Cold steamed broccoli? But as long as GW stick to their artistic principles!

As some folk are fond of reminding us, GW's a business. And it's not the business of sucking up to Charles Saatchi either. Apparently it means that GW should ignore all those irrational things that customers want (like balanced rules, reasonable prices etc.) but in the case of the repentia I'd venture that it might be a good thing. As Jimsolo says the power armour sisters weren't exactly dressed in habits (weird that) but were a truckload less cringeworthy than how their expansion turned out. Pity they couldn't expand things with a set or two of female, y'know, soldiers, and start reducing the number of incidents like that Buttery Commissar experienced.

And to unpack my first comment, a bit, Raging Heroes' ranges are barely an improvement. During that kickstarter I looked down the long list of concepts and I think I saw one that wasn't designed around as much skin as possible, or space-corsets. No wonder it made as much as it did. I'd go as far as assuming that KS campaign was the biggest single reason a shop like Bad Squidoo exists. It's the best argument for female space marines 'cos we need more ranges of female troopers in (halfway) practical spacesuits to balance it. More Dreamforge, more Victoria.

Me and you are never going to see eye to eye I think that its fine they exist ( the repentia) even if its not the way I'd go and I hope that they don't go this way if they get redone but I don't have any simply because they are poor figures ( I like the mistress but the rest are kinda naff)

Look if you want practical Armoured space suits for men and women there would be no difference . Just paint space marines in a way and say they are female. No need for New kits.

I like Victoria minis but dreamforge no I think they suffer from blocky syndrome.

SoB are not SM they have existed as long as them. I want a nice new kit but from all my digging all my pokes into the hornets nest they are dead I just want GW to finally admit it so I can move on. They did for Squats and DoW eventually.

And yes all the minis They make are art and I wouldn't censor any. Ever.

Bad squidoo?...Oh dice bag lady.... okay I understand. As long as you let people enjoy and have both say some RHesque sets and some more toned down fine. But if it gets to the stage video games are in now.. I think I'd completely hope GW dies.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Buttery Commissar wrote:
migooo wrote:

Buttery Commissar wrote:

There was a tangible sense of embarrassment as they showed me the Cadians and then the SoB online.
"Why are those ones half naked?"
"We don't talk about them."

The repentia are more fetishist than I'd like but its art and art should not be censored.

Yes I hope they change how they look but still keep the theme. But the way you describe that is they had a omg Females displaying some skin, run away attitude.
Or that there was a woman involved in the conversation. Yes it was fething embarrassing.
Amusing but embarrassing.

It would be easier to argue for the Repebtia if they were extreme artistic exceptions in a line that had moderate female figures for sale.
"You don't need to pay those attention, there's something for everyone!"

They make up about a fifth or sixth of the currently available SoB figures. The line where empowering women is basically putting blades on the stilettos.

I'm sorry if I offended. And jumped to conclusions.
Like the death cult assassins? But that's kinda the theme with those

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jimsolo wrote:
Honestly, the repentia are the least of the problem with fetishized SoB. The whole line is elbow deep in the chicks-with-guns fetish market as it is. Especially once you start looking not just at their models, but the art in the books.

Eh they've been like that since the first pictures in RT. But I'd say more nuns with guns.

**Fenrir Kitsune**

You need GW to tell you to move on?

**migooo**

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
You need GW to tell you to move on?

No just that the army won't be supported

**mechanicalhorizon**

Has anyone at GW said anything "official" about SOB being discontinued?

The last I had heard was there were quality issues with turning them into plastic, but that they did have many new models as well as some that would be cast in metal/resin.

That was about a year ago though, so has anything really changed?

**MWHistorian**

mechanicalhorizon wrote:
Has anyone at GW said anything "official" about SOB being discontinued?

The last I had heard was there were quality issues with turning them into plastic, but that they did have many new models as well as some that would be cast in metal/resin.

That was about a year ago though, so has anything really changed?

No, that was three years ago, I think.
Sounded like an excuse then. Even more so now.

**Fenrir Kitsune**

migooo wrote:
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
You need GW to tell you to move on?

No just that the army won't be supported

But why do you need them to sit you down and explain that? They got any form in telling the customers this sort of thing? Did they ever officially announce squats were gone? They just don't mention them any more.

**Kid_Kyoto**

Jimsolo wrote:
Again, no skin in the game (I've already got all the Sisters I need), but I find it highly unlikely that there is a larger AdMech audience (or a larger Harlequins audience) than there is a Sisters of Battle audience.

Or a wall of dead Cadians, or a Wizard's observatory, or a Blood Angel tac squad, or any of 100 other marginal plastic kits GW has found time and money for.

But not Sisters.

On the cheap sisters could be done with 2 plastic infantry kits and a character.

(obviously a lot of people would want more, but I'm talking minimum here)

But it is not to be...

**Steelmage99**

I signed.

Nothing to lose and everything to win. It's not like GW (should they read it) can do any less than what they currently do.

Anyway, it cost me nothing to sign, but a minute or two of my time.

**Psienesis**

mechanicalhorizon wrote:
Has anyone at GW said anything "official" about SOB being discontinued?

The last I had heard was there were quality issues with turning them into plastic, but that they did have many new models as well as some that would be cast in metal/resin.

That was about a year ago though, so has anything really changed?

That oft-repeated mention of "quality problems with the new Sisters kits" is now a decade old.

And, yes, they *did* announce that the Squats were gone. Jervis Johnson confirmed the death of the Squats years ago, which you can still access via the Way-Back Machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20060129002420/http://forums.specialist-games.com/epic/forum_b/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=2532&whichpage=3

For those who CBA:

Jervis Johnson wrote:
I know I shouldn't get drawn on this... but... can't... resist

Seriously, a couple of points just so you can have an informed debate based on the real reasons that Squats are no longer available. Be warned, it is going to be hard reading for people that like the Squat background.

First of all, Squats were *not* dropped because they were not selling well. There were then, and are now, plenty of other figure ranges that sell in the sort of % quantaties that the Squats pulled down, especially when you look across all of the ranges produced by GW rather than just those for 40K.

No, the reason that the Squats were dropped was because the creatives in the Studio (people like me, Rick, Andy C, Gav etc) felt that we had failed to do the Dwarf 'archetype' justice in its 40K incarnation. From the name of the race (Squats - what *were* we thinking?!?!) through to the short bikers motif, we had managed to turn what was a proud and noble race in Warhammer and the other literary forms where the archetype exists, into a joke race in 40K. We only fully realised what we had done when we were working on the 2nd edition of 40K. Try as we might, we just couldn't work up much enthusiasm for the Squats. The mistake we made then (deeply regreted since) was to leave them in the background and the 'get you by' army list book that appeared. With hindsight, we should have dropped the Squats back then, and saved ourselves a lot of grief later on.

Anyway, the Squats made it into 2nd edition, and since we were doing army books for each of the races, we started to try and figure out what to do with them. Unfortunately we just couldn't figure out a way to update them and get them to work that we felt was good enough. The 'art' of working on an army as a designer is to find the thing that you think is cool and exciting about an army, and work it up into a strong theme. This 'muse' didn't strike any of us, and so, rather than bring out a second-rate product simply re-hashing the old background, we kept doing other army books instead, with stuff we did feel inspired by.

Now, while this was all going on for 40K, we were actually doing some rather good stuff for the Squats in Epic. On this scale there was a natural tendancy to focus on the big 'hand-made' war machines the Squat artisans produced, and this created an army with a feel that was very different to the biker hordes in 40K. However, this tended to reinforce the problems we saw in the Squat background rather than alleviate them, underlining what we *should* have done with the Squats in 40K.

In the end (and it took years to really get to the roots of the problem) this led to a realisation that we were going to have to drop the Squats in their 'Squat' form from the 40K background. There was little point having a major race that we weren't willing to make an army book for, and their inclusion in the background meant that people kept asking us when we'd do a Squat Codex. Instead we decided that we'd write the Squats out of the background by saying that their Homworlds had been devoured by a Tyranid Hivefleet. This would give us the option in the future to return to making a race based ont he Squat archetype for 40K. This race was given the name of Demiurg, and a certain amount of preliminary work was done to get a 'feel' for what the race would be like. At present the only hint of the Demiurg in 40K is the Demiurg spaceship for BFG. However, we do have this race 'in our back pocket' as a possible new race for 40K, or an interesting character model in Inquisitor, or whatever. So far the Demiurg have lost out to other projects, and it may be that their time never actually comes, as they will have to win through on their merits, not simply because we once made some Squat models in the past. At present, I have to say that it is more lilely that they *don't* make the cut than do, as there is a certain predudice these days to simply taking races from Warhammer and cross them over to 40K like we did in the early days, so it may be that the Squats/Demiurg end up remaining a footnote in the history of the 40K galaxy. Only time will tell...

The second point I'd like to make is about 'old moulds'. In the past, Mail Order in the UK and US used to be the place that we kept all of the retired moulds for Citadel Miniatures, and we used to offer a service where you could order any Citadel Mniature ever made from MO. However, there are now so many of these 'back catalogue' miniatures that it is simply impossible to keep all of the old moulds in Mail Order and offer this service. Instead, we pick and choose which back catalogue miniatures are kept available. At present we're still struggling to produce special catalogues for these ranges (in the US there is the 'Phone Book' catalogue with everything in it, while the UK has special 'collectors guides' that are themed round a race). Once we've ironed out the kinks in the way we deal with the range of collectors models we want to keep permenantly available, the plan is to offer up other parts of the back catalogue for limited periods of time. In effect this will divide the back catalogue into three parts: a range of classic models that are permenantly available, a range of classic models we dip into and bring out for a limited release, and a range of retired models that will no longer be sold either because we've decided that they are embarrassingly bad, or because we are no longer allowed to sell them due to licencing agreement changes. So far we're still slowly working on deciding which classic models we want to keep permenantly available, and its going to take several years to work through just those. The old Squat range is most likely to end up as retired models, I have to say, though there is a good chance that the Squat war engines they could simply into the limited release classic range. Once again, only time will tell...

I'll finish off by saying that whatever we decide to do 'officially', there is nothing stopping players with Squat armies from using them, either in Epic or 40k for that matter. There is no GW 'rule' against using old Citadel Miniatures, as long as you use them with exisiting army lists and in a way that won't cause confusion for other players. I recommend taking a positive stand by saying "Have you seen these cool old models? They're called the Squats and GW used to make them back in the late eighties/early nineties. I love 'em, so I count them as Imperial Guard and use them with the current rules..." Put like this I can't imagine that anyone would stop you from using your army.

Best regards,

Jervis Johnson
Head Fanatic

We just, within the past few years, got an updated Sisters Codex. Yes, it was digital-only. Yes, it was for the last edition of the game. Yes, we lost a bunch of flavor. However, it was something and, given the history of the army, it is exactly those kinds of crumbs that GW sometimes throws to the fans of the Sisters that keep people hoping that Sisters will get a DEldar revamp.

Personally? I have no faith in GW of any kind anymore. My Sisters are the last GW products I own, and the last I will ever buy. GW could revamp the army and make them top-tier, and plastic, launching tomorrow, and I would not give a feth. I'm done with GW, but there are others who still hold faith.

**migooo**

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
migooo wrote:
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
You need GW to tell you to move on?

No just that the army won't be supported

But why do you need them to sit you down and explain that? They got any form in telling the customers this sort of thing? Did they ever officially announce squats were gone? They just don't mention them any more.

Yes they did actually the squats removal was mentioned by Jervis, now however they snuck them back fluff wise. In a few pieces.

Look I want to know if ill get a new kit in the next 10 years or I should move onto pastures New is that a lot to ask for? Oh its GW yeah it is.

**Zywus**

IMO GW left money on the table by not doing anything with the sisters. There was potential for a great atmospheric faction seeped in grimdark-done-right, had they added some esoteric stuff with whole catholic themes they had going on.

The sisters themselves had the potential for some awesome female representation that's unfortunately lacking in 40k. There is in fact possible to create miniatures that's badass and identifiable as female without resorting to the power of bulletproof nudity.

The amount of fan-made artwork and interest that still exist is pretty amazing considering the decades of neglect GW has shown the sister faction.

All that said. GW don't want to make any money from it's sisters of battle IP. They don't listen to their customers in general and certainly not to fans of a obscure faction that they themselves seem to at best be indifferent to and at worst despise.

Assume that GW will never ever do anything with the sisters and treat anything other as a unexpected bonus.

**Fenrir Kitsune**

migooo wrote:
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
migooo wrote:
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
You need GW to tell you to move on?

No just that the army won't be supported

But why do you need them to sit you down and explain that? They got any form in telling the customers this sort of thing? Did they ever officially announce squats were gone? They just don't mention them any more.

Yes they did actually the squats removal was mentioned by Jervis, now however they snuck them back fluff wise. In a few pieces.

Look I want to know if ill get a new kit in the next 10 years or I should move onto pastures New is that a lot to ask for? Oh its GW yeah it is.

Sounds like yr waiting on a dead loss to me.