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.

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
Cool. Thanks. Although I really wished they hadn't added a mini plastic base under the feet. Just makes basing that much more awkward.

Im inclined to agree i hate slotterbases miniatures for the same reason.

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
Cool. Thanks. Although I really wished they hadn't added a mini plastic base under the feet. Just makes basing that much more awkward.

I'd say it's pretty standard outside of gw.

Has this been posted? Image of the Lich from the new expansion.



Edit: and on integral bases. As has been said they're the standard for a lot of companies, which is why North Star went for them. How they're more difficult to base than ones without I have no idea, as its just a case of gluing the model to a base then adding the sand.

I picked up a set of their soldiers. As you can see in the sprue images on the past page they're a bit ...hmn, GW looking? As in quite similar to the style of the Mordheim sprues, particularly with the oversized weapons. Not sure if I'm too happy with those, which I'll probably have to replace with more realistically sized ones myself. I'll probably use them as Nords for my Elder Scrolls stuff, though they'd do for hunters and such types as well I suppose.

Which weapons seemed oversized? The only one I could see on that score was the hand axe, really. The swords looked a bit small, if anything.

 Wyrmalla wrote:
Edit: and on integral bases. As has been said they're the standard for a lot of companies, which is why North Star went for them. How they're more difficult to base than ones without I have no idea, as its just a case of gluing the model to a base then adding the sand.

True. If you assume everyone bases that way. And I can assure you not everyone does. I think that style basing looks awful, personally.

Think about what it will take to mount the figures on a scenic base and you'll understand why some folks don't like them.

The best solution is a peg on one foot that can be inserted into the base or snipped of as need be. At the very least, removing a slot tab is miles easier than removing an integral base. I honestly don't know why companies cling to the integral base anymore.

Just my two cents.

~Eric

 Taarnak wrote:

 Wyrmalla wrote:
Edit: and on integral bases. As has been said they're the standard for a lot of companies, which is why North Star went for them. How they're more difficult to base than ones without I have no idea, as its just a case of gluing the model to a base then adding the sand.

True. If you assume everyone bases that way. And I can assure you not everyone does. I think that style basing looks awful, personally.

Think about what it will take to mount the figures on a scenic base and you'll understand why some folks don't like them.

The best solution is a peg on one foot that can be inserted into the base or snipped of as need be. At the very least, removing a slot tab is miles easier than removing an integral base. I honestly don't know why companies cling to the integral base anymore.

Just my two cents.

~Eric

I'm with you there!

I can't stand them either - the do make using custom/scenic bases a bit more work...

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
Which weapons seemed oversized? The only one I could see on that score was the hand axe, really. The swords looked a bit small, if anything.

Ahem, all of them. Anyone want some paddles? That claymore's ridiculous looking especially. The boys are fine, but everything else is way too wide. Of course put that down to the manufacturing method perhaps requiring them to be a bit thick, but I've seen plenty of other plastic kits which have better proportioned ones. The models in general look quite chunky actually, though its been said elsewhere that that's the sculptor's style. Overall though they look like they'd fit in with Games Workshop's line, which given that those models look like they're stuck in the early nineties, that's not a good thing. =P

On integral bases, I'm not defending them, rather personally I have no problem with them for standard bases with a bit of sand on them. Of course if you have resin ones then there's your issue, though I wouldn't think that there's massive effort in cutting eight models (if that) off of their stands. =/

Ah, the two-handed sword seemed pretty sensible compared to the one on the weapon rack. I think it's intended to be a Landsknecht style one (sometimes called zweihander or bidenhander) -- they could be pretty big -- up to 84" (7 ft.!) apparently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweih%C3%A4nder#Application

I agree that they're generally a bit broader than you'd expect in strictly realistic minis, but they fit well with the GW, mantic, and Bones ones I also use for fantasy skirmishing, so I don't really mind. The metal Frostgrave knight's sword is much thicker -- not sure what to do about it really (might bite the bullet and give him the plastic axe instead). Looks like a baseball bat. :(

I'm reminded of a particular Skyrim weapon mod when looking at those. Length, kind of sort of fine, width, eugh...



Though the length's a bit off on them too - look at the one handed axe for example, its more like a two handed one. Though if I start getting pernickity about that then I may as well start picking at the whole models for not having realistic proportions. The silliness of the weapons just jumped at me when I first looked at the sprue out of the box though and its a tad glaring when you match them out with other miniature lines unfortunately. ...Though if people are using chunky 80s looking models besides these then they'll be fine. I personally find that style makes them look a bit cheap though (which is ironic given how GW charge for their blocky models).

Edit: heh and how the hell is a person supposed to fit their hand around that ricasso (leather bit above the guard on the blade) on that two handed sword? Its like twice the width of a hand. Oh god I am not getting involved in another discussion in News and Rumours about designers who don't have a clue about what parts of a weapon are actually for (its that rifle with the inappropriate bullpup stock all over again).

 Wyrmalla wrote:

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
Which weapons seemed oversized? The only one I could see on that score was the hand axe, really. The swords looked a bit small, if anything.

Ahem, all of them. Anyone want some paddles? That claymore's ridiculous looking especially. The boys are fine, but everything else is way too wide. Of course put that down to the manufacturing method perhaps requiring them to be a bit thick, but I've seen plenty of other plastic kits which have better proportioned ones. The models in general look quite chunky actually, though its been said elsewhere that that's the sculptor's style. Overall though they look like they'd fit in with Games Workshop's line, which given that those models look like they're stuck in the early nineties, that's not a good thing. =P

On integral bases, I'm not defending them, rather personally I have no problem with them for standard bases with a bit of sand on them. Of course if you have resin ones then there's your issue, though I wouldn't think that there's massive effort in cutting eight models (if that) off of their stands. =/

The weapon size and figure styling issue is all down to the sculptor chosen.

It's not necessarily that removing 8 or 10 figures from integral bases is too much work. It's that it's entirety unnecessary work. New ideas for dealing with the problem have arisen and manufacturers are way too adverse to change. Also, Wargamers as a whole seem to be too afraid to criticize anything, and are way too accepting of "good enough". Which is why we have the basing issue and you have the figure issues...

Until those things change, we'll still have these problems.

I really like the Frostgrave game, but I'll likely never touch one of the official figures.

~Eric

On the upside, the makers of the game really don't mind which figures you uses (even on the Frostgrave Day coming up in November). I find that kind of refreshing.

I'm really liking the minis I put together, but as I said elsewhere, I've assembled the soldier box mostly as archers, crossbowmen (and crossbow-women -- thank you, Statuesque Heroic Female Heads), thugs, and thieves, which avoids the big two-handed weapons entirely. My son gave one of his soldiers the zweihander, though, and it seems to look fine on the table, as far as I can see.

 Wyrmalla wrote:
Has this been posted? Image of the Lich from the new expansion.



Edit: and on integral bases. As has been said they're the standard for a lot of companies, which is why North Star went for them. How they're more difficult to base than ones without I have no idea, as its just a case of gluing the model to a base then adding the sand.

I picked up a set of their soldiers. As you can see in the sprue images on the past page they're a bit ...hmn, GW looking? As in quite similar to the style of the Mordheim sprues, particularly with the oversized weapons. Not sure if I'm too happy with those, which I'll probably have to replace with more realistically sized ones myself. I'll probably use them as Nords for my Elder Scrolls stuff, though they'd do for hunters and such types as well I suppose.

fnureddstdjhn


oh im sorry i really like this mini id have to buy an entire game though right?

On a table, most minis even with a basic paintjob is going to look fine. It's just the little things.

Like Eric said, I'd rather spend those few minutes on other projects rather than slicing through HIPS.

@ migooo

No you can buy all of the Frostgrave miniatures individually or in sets of two on their site. At the moment however that particular model hasn't been released, but will be some time in November.


Pondering a bit here, but I wonder if the game will ever be expanded to included leaders other than Wizards? The Lich Lord is one example, so are the Demons planned for a future release. The Demon in particular has been described as a either being a magic heavy user or only having a handful of spells. On that note then perhaps regular soldier captains or mercenaries would be a possibility? Instead of spells they could have orders or bits of wargear to use. So functionally the same as Wizards, or rather with more of an emphasis on personal ability rather than magic, but with a different style.

I donno. It perhaps takes the game away from its emphasis on magic, but then again the number of wizards in the world are few, but there's plenty of regular folks and petty nobility out there looking to make a buck. It maybe something which would have to be done via proxying a captain as a wizard and just changing the names of spells, though I would be interested in seeing something like that come out as an expansion eventually (possibly included along with a general addon to the soldiers for classes like assassins or merchants-who'd boost your gold intake outside of games, etc).

Some teaser images:

 Taarnak wrote:

It's not necessarily that removing 8 or 10 figures from integral bases is too much work. It's that it's entirety unnecessary work. New ideas for dealing with the problem have arisen and manufacturers are way too adverse to change. Also, Wargamers as a whole seem to be too afraid to criticize anything, and are way too accepting of "good enough". Which is why we have the basing issue and you have the figure issues...

Except I prefer integral bases. I hate hate HATE tiny connection points - one or two soles of boots at most for figures, and I despise the "this guy weights 1000 lbs so has sunken into the earth" effect that happens when you base around a model's foot.

I also prefer chunky models, ala the Warhammer aesthetic, and these Frostgrave models are _infinitely_ better than any GW human infantry models on the market, so I'm quite pleased with them and are an excellent price.

That being said, my actual Frostgrave warband will probably be Mierce minis.

 judgedoug wrote:

 Taarnak wrote:

It's not necessarily that removing 8 or 10 figures from integral bases is too much work. It's that it's entirety unnecessary work. New ideas for dealing with the problem have arisen and manufacturers are way too adverse to change. Also, Wargamers as a whole seem to be too afraid to criticize anything, and are way too accepting of "good enough". Which is why we have the basing issue and you have the figure issues...

Except I prefer integral bases. I hate hate HATE tiny connection points - one or two soles of boots at most for figures, and I despise the "this guy weights 1000 lbs so has sunken into the earth" effect that happens when you base around a model's foot.

The connection point, especially on polystyrene models, could easily be made to fit onto a hole on a base, effectively making it an integral base. Then you could base as normal. As for the "1000 lbs...sunken into the earth" look, you still get it when you have an integral base. Worse, from what I see on the net.

 judgedoug wrote:

I also prefer chunky models, ala the Warhammer aesthetic, and these Frostgrave models are _infinitely_ better than any GW human infantry models on the market, so I'm quite pleased with them and are an excellent price.

In my opinion, these are _infinitely_ worse than anything GW human infantry models on the market. And I don't particularly like those. These are guys in rags, hobos, right down to the shopping bags wrapped around their feet. The GW figures at least don't look like homeless people. Except the ones that look like that by design, that is. Lol.

 judgedoug wrote:

That being said, my actual Frostgrave warband will probably be Mierce minis.

And that says _infinitely_ more than anything else you've written here. Including making me think that this entire post is just an attempt to start an argument.

~Eric

Edit: Removed unnecessary shark.

Please point me to where I can find more plastic injection hobos.

I would love to fill my city streets with unruly vagrants.

I do agree that integral bases should remain a thing of the past.

I thought Wrath of Kings' figures were perfect in this regard. A good sized peg on each foot, easily snipped off if you didn't want to use it.

 Taarnak wrote:
The connection point, especially on polystyrene models, could easily be made to fit onto a hole on a base, effectively making it an integral base. Then you could base as normal. As for the "1000 lbs...sunken into the earth" look, you still get it when you have an integral base. Worse, from what I see on the net.

Not understanding this. You mean a separate base that then gets glued onto a 1mm thick renedra-style base? Or you mean the thick pedestals of GW/PP/etc with holes molded into them? Which also are awful. That's the worst solution ever.

 Taarnak wrote:
In my opinion, these are _infinitely_ worse than anything GW human infantry models on the market. And I don't particularly like those. These are guys in rags, hobos, right down to the shopping bags wrapped around their feet. The GW figures at least don't look like homeless people. Except the ones that look like that by design, that is. Lol.

Whew, I mean, the Free Company are still pretty good, but every other human model, especially the Empire monkey soldiers, are terrrriiibbbllleeee.
These guys look like they're mercenaries in a cold environment. Two thumbs up. Now, Empire State troops can't be bothered to wear boots, so they actually ARE hobos. Well, I guess weird neanderthal infantry can hit someone with a halberd but doesn't perhaps understand the benefit of footwear.

 Taarnak wrote:
And that says _infinitely_ more than anything else you've written here. Including making me think that this entire post is just an attempt to start an argument.

No, I appreciate quality and have spent several thousand bucks of Mierce miniatures. But when it comes to plastic infantry, integral bases is just straight up superior. Much greater surface area for plastic-to-plastic-glue-to-plastic Renedra base or, especially, plastic-to-superglue-to-mdf bases. As someone who routinely assembles and paints armies of hundreds of guys, not having integral bases would make projects take an order of magnitude longer to complete.

 judgedoug wrote:

But when it comes to plastic infantry, integral bases is just straight up superior. Much greater surface area for plastic-to-plastic-glue-to-plastic Renedra base or, especially, plastic-to-superglue-to-mdf bases.

As always, and this should be obvious, the above is the opinion of judgedoug - and it doesn't necessarily have to be 'your' opinion too!

Wait, you hate basing around a models feet, but prefer integral bases... How do you base a model with an integral base without basing around his feet?

I've just ordered some Arthurian Hooded Pict heads from West Wind over at FRPGames to mix up into my plastic Frostgrave models. I'm curious to see if anyone has tried mixing some Gripping Beast, Fireforge, GW, or other miniature lines into the set for variety. Seems like the GW bits market has really dried up for Fantasy...

~iPaint

 -iPaint- wrote:
I've just ordered some Arthurian Hooded Pict heads from West Wind over at FRPGames to mix up into my plastic Frostgrave models. I'm curious to see if anyone has tried mixing some Gripping Beast, Fireforge, GW, or other miniature lines into the set for variety. Seems like the GW bits market has really dried up for Fantasy...

~iPaint

If you go check on LAF a guy called Captain Blood has some mixed with bits on his Westeros thread in the fantasy section.

Ah here it is: http://www.lead-adventure.de/index.php?topic=62778.375

 Mymearan wrote:
Wait, you hate basing around a models feet, but prefer integral bases... How do you base a model with an integral base without basing around his feet?

This.

Integral bases are the absolute worst with regards to different basing possibilities. Even slottabase inserts are comparatively easy to cut off if one wants to put the model on a scenic base.

The best solution is to extend a pip from one or more of the ground contact points. Very easy to cut off and can be kept for increased contact strength by drilling a hole in any base one wants to use.

Dreamforge has gotten it right but suprisingly few others. (Valkir sprues in spoiler)

I dislike integrated bases too, but I do wish that more companies would just extend the bottom of the foot down a mm or a half to avoid the sinking look when adding flock. Granted, people DO sink down into grass and dirt a bit, making it hard to see the soles of early era boots, but still I find myself adding little tiny bits of expired credit card under the feet of many models so their little piggies can be seen properly. I could do without that.

 Zywus wrote:
Integral bases are the absolute worst with regards to different basing possibilities. Even slottabase inserts are comparatively easy to cut off if one wants to put the model on a scenic base.

The best solution is to extend a pip from one or more of the ground contact points. Very easy to cut off and can be kept for increased contact strength by drilling a hole in any base one wants to use.

Foot pegs are a half-measure because that requires giant pedestals to base your miniatures on. Unsurprisingly, a lot of people don't like pedestal bases.

It's quite simple...integral basing is a superior consumer product. This is why.

1. for those who want special spiffy magical basing, just trim off the base. The vast majority of these people will be doing special spiffy magical basing for, at most, a few dozen models.
2. for those with more than a couple dozen models, NOT having integral basing is a _nightmare_. Attempting to assemble twenty 36-man regiments of infantry where the only contact point are two small boots is inferior, inefficient, and maddening, and will not just take longer, but HOURS longer than if you needed a single dab of glue on an integral base and glopped it directly onto a plastic or mdf element base.

Well, anyways, it's moot as the Frostgrave dudes come w/ integral bases and we're straying pretty off topic.

 Manchu wrote:
Some teaser images:

I really hope it comes with lots of heads I only like the one.

 judgedoug wrote:


1. for those who want special spiffy magical basing, just trim off the base. The vast majority of these people will be doing special spiffy magical basing for, at most, a few dozen models.

Citation needed on the above ratios.
I have broken/bent many legs and ankles cutting off too thick integrated bases. Doesn't always happen, but it is irksome. I have multiple armies with custom bases under every model, and having to cut off integrated bases makes me nuts when I have to do so many.

2. for those with more than a couple dozen models, NOT having integral basing is a _nightmare_. Attempting to assemble twenty 36-man regiments of infantry where the only contact point are two small boots is inferior, inefficient, and maddening, and will not just take longer, but HOURS longer than if you needed a single dab of glue on an integral base and glopped it directly onto a plastic or mdf element base.

Not sure I can agree with you here. With metals I totally agree: they need something more than just a skinny foot. I prefer a short peg, but something is really handy. For plastics or resins, you really don't need so much. I could see a really good middle ground being a small integrated base under each foot but not connected to each other. I'd be alright with that, although it would still take time to clip off for me, but wouldn't result in broken ankles. Then again, even when assembling large armies I don't use the "glop" method of attachment, so there are probably differences in expected functionality at work for us

 judgedoug wrote:


Foot pegs are a half-measure because that requires giant pedestals to base your miniatures on. Unsurprisingly, a lot of people don't like pedestal bases.

This is quite simply wrong. See the above Dreamforge figures. Foot pegs, and no "giant pedestals" for bases.

The rest of your post is (unsurprisingly), your opinion presented as fact in the most insulting way possible, and is honestly not worth addressing.

 judgedoug wrote:
Not understanding this. You mean a separate base that then gets glued onto a 1mm thick renedra-style base? Or you mean the thick pedestals of GW/PP/etc with holes molded into them? Which also are awful. That's the worst solution ever.

I was honestly thinking of the DFG bases. Which could then be attached to a multi base or washers or whatever if one chose to do so.

 judgedoug wrote:
Wew, I mean, the Free Company are still pretty good, but every other human model, especially the Empire monkey soldiers, are terrrriiibbbllleeee.
These guys look like they're mercenaries in a cold environment. Two thumbs up. Now, Empire State troops can't be bothered to wear boots, so they actually ARE hobos. Well, I guess weird neanderthal infantry can hit someone with a halberd but doesn't perhaps understand the benefit of footwear.

These guys look like hobo mercenaries who couldn't find any actual clothing to cover up with and had to use rags instead. The GW Empire troops were made to look like poor, ill equipped soldiers on purpose, because they reference historical troops who had the same issue. I'm not the biggest fan of the GW figures either, seriously. Especially the faces. But they still come out better than these do, in my opinion.

 judgedoug wrote:
No, I appreciate quality and have spent several thousand bucks of Mierce miniatures. But when it comes to plastic infantry, integral bases is just straight up superior. Much greater surface area for plastic-to-plastic-glue-to-plastic Renedra base or, especially, plastic-to-superglue-to-mdf bases. As someone who routinely assembles and paints armies of hundreds of guys, not having integral bases would make projects take an order of magnitude longer to complete

Hefty doses of opinion as fact and bragging all in the same paragraph. Bravo sir.

Done arguing about this. If you like eating gak, keep eating it. I don't care.

~Eric

I hate integral bases on plastic miniatures. They are a huge pain, and a near constant source of frustration for me. You either have to spend precious hobby time building up the base around the little tab with some goop of your choice, or clip or slice off the dang thing without breaking ankles or cutting the bottom of the feet at an angle etc.

I wish someone would get somebody other than Bob Naismith to sculpt some plastics. He is responsible for a crazy number of the smaller companies releases in plastic. I just can't take anymore of his style. I hate hate hate his dumb axe heads (seen on the halberd in frostgrave set or all of Mantic's orcs) because they look like something that was cast not forged ( with the stupid little blobby spikes on the sides.) and never have a proper spike on the top.

That being said, when it comes to fantasy plastics I'll take what I can get, and I remain excited to see the cultists.