4786
Post by: legoburner
What are your feelings on the matter? Keep the discussion mature and within the rules of dakka as well please.
5636
Post by: warpcrafter
If people don't like the bewbs, they have the option of not buying the minis. It is not everybody else's job to raise your children.
5516
Post by: Major Malfunction
As long as it's not truly obscene (like depicting sexual acts or overt arousal, shall we say) then nudity in and of itself is not offensive to me. I say keep it tasteful but that's about it.
15658
Post by: Shake Zoola
I wrote other as I dont really care one way or the other...
15753
Post by: Schmapdi
There are certain types of minis where nudity makes sense:
Demons,
Hedonists,
Amazons (or any deep jungle theme)
Egyptians (or any desert theme)
Beserker units
and prolly a few more I'm forgetting. That are prefectly acceptable IMO. As long as it's not "everyone's naked for no reason,and by everyone I mean only the women."
Personally I think it'd be funny if a giant or ogre had their big giant dong dangling below their kilt or somesuch. Likewise if most female demons are portrayed as succubi-like, more male demons should be packin'.
16487
Post by: Samus666
It's just nudity. Couldn't care less, and really don't understand why some people get so worked up over it (whether their reaction is disgust, amusement or titillation). I also agree that for many armies lack of clothing just makes sense. Of course, if you have an explicitly themed army it's inappropriate to show it to young 'uns. But that's really the only time it should be an issue.
6454
Post by: Cryonicleech
Alright...
Nudity is, technically, art. Even in a miniature form. So, they have a right to do so.
But, I'm sick of mini's with the overly sized "Assets", who do absolutely nothing but show off their "Assets".
Come on! You're in the middle of a damn battlefield, show some common sense (rather than skin) and get yourself some armor of some kind.
Hedonistic Pleasure Daemons would be, of course, incomplete without said "Assets", and are excused from the above argument.
But, a little off topic, it's not like the new plastic Slaanesh Daemonettes evoke anything than utter disgust...
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
Breasts on minis is fine, genitals should be covered up. Esp soulgrinder's erect ones...
Give me back the diaz daemonettes... 
15894
Post by: Mistress of minis
Just like in the movies, I feel we're a long ways from equal opporunity in regards to full frontal nudity.
I dunno how many times I head "Watchmen was awesome except for the that blue dudes #$%^ hanging out all the time".
If the blue dude had been a blue chick the whining would have been minimal.
14869
Post by: Wrexasaur
Were people really all that offended by Watchmen? The guy was translucent blue FFS... anyway.
I could honestly care less what GW produces, that is their decision ultimately. Nudity is not offensive to me, but I can honestly say that a ding-dong monster is just way to freaking disturbing. Geiger has done a fantastic job of using the form without the detail, and I see nothing particularly nasty in his art. Just because something is nekked, does not mean it is any more artistic than the Porky's movie.
This is my opinion basically, but I feel that a war-gaming mini is not art until you choose to make it that way; miniatures are mainly a medium that you choose to work in. Some miniatures such as many of the Forge World models were designed to be display pieces, without much thought to how they would function on a gaming table; the fans get to figure that one out  .
If I am not mistaken most of the vehicles used in War-gaming are built a lot thicker than some of the vehicles kits you get for dioramas or display pieces. Just one of many factors that make most war-gaming miniatures less accurate to their original designs as a sacrifice to the functional aspects of the model. As soon as a piece of art becomes literally functional, it ceases to be "true" art, which I consider to be a purely aesthetic thing. For these reasons you could say any "Art" that has has intention beyond aesthetic value is actually not art at all. Whether you choose to call it art is entirely up to you, but the limitations of this definition confine your perspective to a generalized and rather metaphorical twist from what is truly intended by the term of "Art".
Hence, a photo of a cherry blossom tree is not art until the shot has been taken. Even then the image is so generically embedded in our subconscious, the form of "Art" that is invoked by such images has a much more socially accepted "normal" response. This should be the same for nudity when you add all of the factors up, but there are a lot of reasons for this overt-sexuality taking form through nearly every facet of our media (war-gaming included). Anyway... I may be ranting technically .
14062
Post by: darkkt
The nudity in the watchmen was possibly the only Non-gratuitous nudity in a movie I have ever seen. It was an essential indication of Dr Manhattan's increasing separation from his humanity - why would he worry about clothes, when 'its all just molecules anyway'.
Anyway, If you are building your own artistic army, Im not going to deny you the ability to make it as artistic/graphic as you like. Art should be confronting, and make us question our morals and ethics.
However if you are playing at the FLGS, maybe keep the Codpieces on your Termies, and the tops on your SoB's - This is a gaming environment, not the Louvre.
15297
Post by: Ramos Asura
So long as its done well and done tastefully, I dont mind a bit.
Guess I dont care too much either way =P
3963
Post by: Fishboy
I know in the part of the US I live in, when they had the boobed daemonettes most stores shied away from displaying the models in storefront windows and such. Like it or not little kids do see this stuff and it can be tough for parents to explain the nudity part to younger kids. Trust me...I love boobs!!! but there is a time and place for it and I don't feel it is the table top.
14996
Post by: Canonness Rory
Nudity is fine, I view the hobby as an art form, but overtly sexual stuff is not art. This doesn't come up much, a naked woman or a willy here and there is fine, (see littleboyblues* gallery images for excellent examples of tastefully done work) a rhino with a sex toy attached to the top of it is not. *Link to his profile: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/user/profile/13017.page
6829
Post by: Cheese Elemental
I think we need more Soulgrinders with penises.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Not if they're giant, tasteless fething horse cocks we don't.
Nudity is just fine, I don't have a problem with it. Personally though I don't think it's really necessary to sculpt genitalia on Warhammer models, but if it's at least done tastefully I won't complain since I guess technically it is an art form. But a soulgrinder with no other conversion work done to it, except a stupidly long, erect penis complete with appropriately-sized nutsack, just sorta tacked on at the bottom? I really think there's something wrong with your head.
And the people that try to excuse it because "It's Slaanesh, lolz why so serious?!"...I really don't know what to say to you, other than you're fething stupid. Slaanesh can be faithfully represented on the tabletop without every single demon in the army being nude or depicting sexual acts, without 20 foot long "lashes of submission" that coil around the prince/sorceror's body, and without "power swords" attached to cod pieces. Crap like that is just crude and disgusting and makes the entire hobby look bad, and we don't need any more stigma attached to it.
That said, I won't disagree with you. If someone wants to do a Slaaneshi soulgrinder with a penis, go for it, but FFS do it well. If you can make it work then more power to you, but if you're just going to do it for the "lolz penis" reaction then please, don't bother.
15628
Post by: ShotgunFacelift
Go for it, but dont go overboard.
11892
Post by: Shadowbrand
The Old Daemonette's were way better,
Nudity is art isn't it
Well a wise man once said "Nudity is Art I came here to see you naked and have no shame at it at all!"
18663
Post by: RennyD
I agree with most of you all... females in bikini chainmail or less is funny, but totally tasteless.. daemonettes of slaanesh makes perfect sense, as do the old keeper of secrets.. heck, even the beasts of slaanesh have what... 5 pairs of boobs... now THAT is something I would think people would find horrifying, and OMG what are you doing to my kids.. but yes, you DON'T have to buy the minis... And I do agree with "equal opportunity" nudity... but find it amazing that more than a few seconds of full frontal male nudity will give a movie an X rating.. but not with females... is it really different?? Just because there is "more to see" in terms of us guys shouldn't matter.. in my humble opinion.  That's why I was SO glad to find my old dusty unopened box of daemonettes, yeah they weigh a ton being metal, but they look SO dang COOL!!
Peace,
RennyD
15873
Post by: person person
Yeah, same here, RennyD, on a similiar note, I've seen a terminator sticking the finger thanks to the Chaos terminator lord kit's oversized middle finger power fist.
Why would GW make a bit like that?
14408
Post by: Darkwulf
Guess if you really want boobs you can just go to the internetz and find more boobs than you can handle. Wargaming just isnt the place to be worrying about boobs.
18690
Post by: Jimsolo
The players of these games are adults (I dont see too many chiddrins playing, or being able to afford it) so we should all be able to accept a little skin. While I dont think it makes sense for your Chapter Master's sausage to be hanging out of his pants, if you have an army of demons, then the nudity can make them all the more horrifying (it provides a very visceral connection to the bodies we know as real, which when companied with the horrible demon-y bits makes for a nice kick to the 'that's just wrong' part of the brain)
However, I also understand that a games store owner might not want you playing with the nudie models (because kids DO shop in his store) during games at the FLGS.
And on a side note, I totally understand that this may further alienate us from non gamers. I mean, sitting around in a dark room and playing weird games with naked toys that you hand painted looks just a tad strange to an outsider.
494
Post by: H.B.M.C.
Who cares about nudity?
It never ceases to amaze me that people will cry foul over nudity on miniatures in a game where the good guys are warrior monks hell-bent on genocide.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Some historical wargame figures, such as Celts, are available with dangly bits. It's historically realistic.
17996
Post by: JEB_Stuart
Hahaha, this should lead to another poll: How many junior highers on voted for unbridled nudity?
17341
Post by: Lynx0193
If you want to put your units into battle half naked then they should forfeit their armour save or something...
4727
Post by: Makaleth
I just think keep it away from the kids.
That means not really in stores.
I have never really seen the daemonettes in store windows, but I imagine that this might be a reason.
I honestly prefer less nudity,
but they are models, not real people, I love the art aspect, but I totally disagree that nudity equals art. Art should be more and skin does not grant you meaning if it is crap!!
IE, if you are going to do nudey models,
you better do it well and tastefully or I don't want anything to do with it.
17295
Post by: Ridcully
I always sculpt genitalia on my models, especially in the case of kroot (both male and female).
Well, maybe i don't. I'm quite happy seeing bare chests on both male and female models, but I think taking it further than that is just asking for trouble.
14869
Post by: Wrexasaur
Canonness Rory wrote:Nudity is fine, I view the hobby as an art form, but overtly sexual stuff is not art. This doesn't come up much, a naked woman or a willy here and there is fine, (see littleboyblues* gallery images for excellent examples of tastefully done work) a rhino with a sex toy attached to the top of it is not.
*Link to his profile: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/user/profile/13017.page
I am assuming that you mean gratuitous sexuality, like... well most of this stuff (if not all) is done through conversion work. On a funnier note I would buy a penis-men army and I would laugh about it every single time I played a game... go that direction GW, I dare you .
"Note"
The turd and boob armies are currently being conceptualized as we speak... a veritable gold-mine I tell you.
9407
Post by: Lint
I say do whatever you want. It's your army. There is no threshhold, for all the people saying to "keep it tastefull," where do you draw that line? Daemon tits are ok, but not dongs? Human nudity is ok, but only if they are from a warm climate?
You do realize that you are basing your arguments on an imaginary reality, right? Either that or simply pushing your own standards of "acceptable" and "unacceptable" nudity. It's my fething army, and if I want to show my Slaaneshi Demon beating himself raw I should be able to do that.
I understand why certain flgs wouldn't want you showing of that stuff in front of underagers, but I feel that if ANY type of nudity is allowed, then ALL type of nudity should be allowed, or else NO type of nudity is allowed.
17295
Post by: Ridcully
TV networks should either show full frontal nudity at any time of the day or submit to having everyone wear a burkha 24/7. Anything in between is just ridiculous.
18213
Post by: starbomber109
I agree with the "There is a time and a place for boobies"
Half naked Daemonette? Ok, fine. Some Wyhces with a 'wardrobe malfunction' Ok, that works. Soul Grinder naughty bitz, errrrr, probably not....Sister of battle w/o armor, just no.
And be aware of the (im)maturity of your club as well, and you should be fine 
131
Post by: malfred
What about nudity WITH minis, eh? EH?
8954
Post by: fynn
A mate of mine used to do 25mm historic battles, and he used ancent celts. He went to a tourny unpacked his army and was asked withing miniutes to pack his army, leave the building and was then banned. all becourse his army contained true celt beserkers wearing nothing but woad and there weapons, and he was accussed of being a dirty old perv for daring to bring such filth to the tourny.
damm idiots
375
Post by: chris_valera
Voted for, "It's art."
Amazing how everyone here is okay with nudity, yet this forum doesn't allow the posting of photos or profanity?...
Also, it's worth noting Victoria Lamb's website says she finds some of the figures produced by some companies distateful. Can't say I blame her...
--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com
9407
Post by: Lint
Here's the thing. GW invites us to create our own world within their's. We are encouraged to make our own histories, our own stories, basically use our imagination to the fullest when it comes to creating our armies. But it's a double standard when you allow any display of violence you can imagine, bloody dismemberment, melting rotting flesh, decapitation, whatever, but you draw an arbitrary line when it comes to sexuality. (I thought you Brits kicked out the puritans a long time ago?)
The point is, wether you consider painting miniatures "art" or not, it is designed by GW to be entirely subjective to the player how he/she wants to interpret and display his or her army. So giving players that freedom, and then pulling a carrot/stick trick on them is a little ridiculous. Same goes for other players who are "offended" by your explicit army. What if I were offended by the blatant violence, and bloody weapons you have painted on your berzerks? Could I be TFG and ask to have you banned from the store? Yeah, not likely.
16064
Post by: Tauzor
The Green Git wrote:As long as it's not truly obscene (like depicting sexual acts or overt arousal, shall we say) then nudity in and of itself is not offensive to me. I say keep it tasteful but that's about it.
I want the obscene 
6536
Post by: GeneralX
hahahaha
"my demon beating himself RULES AS WRITTEN"
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
Creating life is horrible, but killing is A-Okay.
Edit: To add a little more, it does annoy me when my only option in some cases is an overtly sexualized model. Some of my projects will have lots of sluttty models, but others will have none because of what they are. Lucky for me, it's easier to GS clothes on a model than off.
14571
Post by: gretar
If you dont whant the nudity for your children , dont buy them Slaneesh Models .. simple !!
And yes , i voted Nudity is art , sex is aswell ... a very good , sweaty , satisfying art ...
17808
Post by: oadie
I voted for "other", due to my personal considerations of practicality. In general, I'd say it's your army, do whatever you want with it. I don't, however, necessarily agree that it's all art (luckily for all of you, I'm not going to go on a lengthy "what is art?" rant), nor would I necessarily make an explicit army for myself.
That's not to say I would never do so, on principal, merely that (at this point, at least, not having a regular gaming group whose tolerance for such things is established) I'd like to be able to field my army at a buddy's house as well as at any tournament/FLGS table/etc. where there will be kids present. Do I think seeing a Daemonette's nipples will irreparably corrupt the kids? No. But I do know that I'd rather take my entire collection of needle files to my eye socket than be around when their incensed, uppity parents come around with the torches and pitchforks. It may not even be for the kids' sakes. Some people would be incensed in their own right. I may feel that they should be shaken up a bit for their betterment (sadly, the most uppity are usually also the most stubborn and belligerent), but if it would cost me the ability to play there, it's not worth it to me.
That said, if you want to make a full legion of the Emperor's Phallus (I'm thinking scorched static grass on the base, red helmets, pink armor - with one vital and vulnerable area left intentionally exposed) for the silly factor, go for it. If you want to throw some Silent Hill-level explicit, gruesome torture (including sexual acts) of nude figures into a Daemon army for the grotesque factor, I totally understand. I just wouldn't field it in my army if I want to be able to play it wherever I want, without the hassle.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
Lint wrote:Either that or simply pushing your own standards of "acceptable" and "unacceptable" nudity.
People aren't allowed to form opinions based on their own standards?
18871
Post by: jimmyrice
i dont think the nude daemon unit look very good but that just my opinion so i would never have them but i dont have a problem if others do, i would never have tau or necrons but i dont want them banned
17098
Post by: scarab5
The Green Git wrote:As long as it's not truly obscene (like depicting sexual acts or overt arousal, shall we say) then nudity in and of itself is not offensive to me. I say keep it tasteful but that's about it.
Sex being obscene is an opinion. Held by many but that doesn't mean it isn't a twisted self loathing causing opinion non the less...
9104
Post by: Sgt. Salt
I was raised surrounded by all kinds of art and I consider the human form to be a beautiful thing. As long as it's done in a tastful and mature manner I don't mind it at all.
I think carefully sculpting penises onto your sphess mureenze is just ridiculous and means that you are just the kind of person I would never talk to for an extended period of time.
16789
Post by: Kyley
The main point I would make is no genitals, it's just wierd, if you have a soulgrinder pummeling grots you feel great about it...iif those grots are better endowed than your soulgrinder you will feel pretty bad about it. Second point...nothing sexual, daemonettes with six knockers are great, I'm a big fan there of...some harlet rubbing pedro cantors face in her bristols is just out of place and unncessary. And on the kids and FLGS thing, fine don't display them, people look closly at them, but just playing a game when theres one unit...nobody's gonna notice. BTW this does not apply to sisters of batttle, If ever there' sa model of one of those getting her tits out I WILL buy it, hint hint GW and speaking of realms of acceptability, did anyone see that slaaneshi army where the cannon were dildo's, that made me laugh EDIT eople also question whether sex is obscene, how can sex be obscene it's creating life and that's beautiful, but sex is obscene, it's a private and intaimate thing (or at least it should be, I think, I'm not sure, I'm glad it isn't, but in some ways sadened) so showing it especially as these are WARgames, not foreplay, is innapropriate, however nudity is seperate frome that, one last thing, regardless of how much nudity will I accept, but how much do I WANT, slaaneshii daemons, suure, it's what their all about but I dont have any reason to see marneus calgars dong swinging aroung whilst he's pummeling 'nids...might get bitten by a ripper (ouch)
11705
Post by: Oldgrue
Mistress of minis wrote:
If the blue dude had been a blue chick the whining would have been minimal.
I chalk it up to envy. How many folks would want their hardware plastered on a fifty foot screen? *I*'m not that confident.
Still, on minis, nude doesn't have to equal porn.
4056
Post by: Bla_Ze
The more tits, vaginas and penises you can cram onto a model the better!
If you dont want it, don't buy it.
If you dont like it, don't look at it.
And concerning this BS that children should not see miniatyre titties is ridiculous
10808
Post by: Karoline Dianne
I personally don't mind nudity at all in art or miniatures. I do, however, prefer things to be at least somewhat tasteful, or make sense.
Exposed breasts are perfectly fine, I really don't understand the problems people have with them. But at the same time, needlessly making all of your miniatures endowed and topless is a little much. If you're playing Slaanesh, Dark Elves, or some kind of woodland-elfy-amazon army, then fine. However, your sisters of battle should be fully clothed/armored... because that's what they do... they wear armor.
Genitalia on the other hand, is a bit more iffy. In some circumstances, it can be acceptable. Okay, your succubus isn't wearing pants... All right, your minotaur forgot his loincloth... So long as it's tasteful and just 'there', it should be fine. However, blatantly splaying such things can be a little upsetting. I don't want to see your Daemonettes spreading their legs out to the world, and I don't want to see your 'Conan the Barbarian's' massive member erected like the regimental flag.
So long as the model isn't pornographic or completely unnecessary, It should be fine. After all, this is a miniature wargame we're playing. If you're really that desperate to see explicit nudity and erotic models, stay at home and look up some smut on the internet...
Just don't bring your fantasies to the gaming stores...
9079
Post by: FITZZ
Severed heads,piles of skulls,demons,genocide,plague...hey that's all just dandy,but >GASP< a pair of breast...>GASP< a penis..OH Lawdz no!!
C'mon,we are talking about little plastic/metal minis,if an adult wants to buy and paint those sorts of minis,then he/she should be able to.
7908
Post by: aurelion
It is kinda funny, I notice people complaing about the old 'nettes, but not a word about Slayers and Marauders or even Garagrim Ironfist, a model that is more nude then any of the 'nettes.
I dont mind nude models, as long as it is tastefull
14869
Post by: Wrexasaur
FITZZ wrote: Severed heads,piles of skulls,demons,genocide,plague...hey that's all just dandy,but >GASP< a pair of breast...>GASP< a penis..OH Lawdz no!!
C'mon,we are talking about little plastic/metal minis,if an adult wants to buy and paint those sorts of minis,then he/she should be able to.
The problem here could be that pretty much anyone can buy them, including kids. Putting an age limit on such items would be ludicrous to say the least regardless of any light-weight pr0n they might be packing.
In any case GW is most likely moving to get rid of anything besides the imperium where nudity is punishable by death unless you are packing torturesque design. BOOBIES ARE BAD ... what a joke.
9079
Post by: FITZZ
@ Wrexasaur
I understand your point ,however I can see a few sulotions to the children/nude mini question.
First,nude minis could be a "behind the counter" item ,if your not age appropiate,you don't get to buy them.
second,parenting, I myself have two children,they can't watch porn,though my girlfriend and I have some,they can't listen to Dimmu Borgir,although I do, and at the ages they are now,they wouldn't be allowed to have a"naughty" mini, although,when they get older (teenagers) I don't think I would have a big problem with it.
And incedently,I think you may be right about GW,soon all breast will be outlawed,or encased in power armour.
9711
Post by: Morgrim
I don't have a problem if it is tastefully done.
My definition of 'tasteful' is whether it is appropriate for the situation or not. As a general rule, erect and oversized penises plastered all over models mean the person with that army is immature. It's no different to those school children who scrawl genitals (and often hitler mustache and glasses) all over the photos in magazines. Sure, glad you're entertained, sorry but I don't quite see the point.
If it is fitting, go for it. One of my male wyches is not wearing any pants, and you can see his bum. Do I think that is inappropriate? No. Can you see his genitals? No, he's got a bit of lovely scaly loincloth/choker/cloak thing covering it. I feel that if many males will wear protective boxes over their genitals while playing sports, then they're idiots not to do the same in a combat zone. My wyches are the only ones not wearing full armour, because it fits them not to (and their 'armour save' fits this, annoyingly). Granted, many of my male wyches have gratuitously bare chests, but I'm willing to admit a personal fondness of such. And I don't want the guys wearing more clothes than the girls.
I think people get too caught up in the 'sex' idea of Slaanesh, too. He is about excess and hedonism and sensations; if the choice between straightforwards missionary sex and completely clothed sensation play came up, any slaaneshi worshiper would avoid the sex entirely. And, er... can anyone actually give me a reason that a soulgrinder needs a penis? I thought that they were independent of the chaos gods, and as they can't reproduce sexually they don't exactly need them. I thought demonettes had breasts mostly to cause emotional reactions in the (mostly human male) enemies that they fought?
14869
Post by: Wrexasaur
FITZZ wrote: @ Wrexasaur
I understand your point ,however I can see a few sulotions to the children/nude mini question.
First,nude minis could be a "behind the counter" item ,if your not age appropiate,you don't get to buy them.
second,parenting, I myself have two children,they can't watch porn,though my girlfriend and I have some,they can't listen to Dimmu Borgir,although I do, and at the ages they are now,they wouldn't be allowed to have a"naughty" mini, although,when they get older (teenagers) I don't think I would have a big problem with it.
And incedently,I think you may be right about GW,soon all breast will be outlawed,or encased in power armour.
You sound like a responsible parent that knows how to set boundaries for your kids. I do think that in general the buck stops with the parent, but in some cases I do think that this stuff is a bit too accessible. I do not have kids, but I cannot imagine being all that mad if they came home with a dirty mini, even actual pr0n would hardly set me aflame in a parental fit of rage  .
The main responsibility does lay with GW however, but that really comes down to a moral vs. economic argument in the full spectrum. I really think that any parent that sees a real problem with some of the dirtier minis (to date I have not seen a mini that offended me... perhaps sickened me a bit though) even existing is a bit strange. Darknight started this subject, and I am still unsure what he was specifically talking about. A Jessica Rabbit figurine is hardly realistic, but it still conveys that same sort of sexual energy. The Brat figurine that was posted at some point is the same type of thing, they are very cool designs and IMHO quite harmless to a kids psyche.
91
Post by: Hordini
It's art. Anything goes. If I don't like it, I won't buy it.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
aurelion wrote:It is kinda funny, I notice people complaing about the old 'nettes, but not a word about Slayers and Marauders or even Garagrim Ironfist, a model that is more nude then any of the 'nettes.
I dont mind nude models, as long as it is tastefull
I don't think people looked at the nudity of a slayer. Most people would be too busy laughing at the notion of a crazy, axe-wielding, naked, red-haired midget. As for the maruaders and Ironfist, haven't seen 'em.
There is a time and place for sexualy explicit material. I don't think wargamming is it. What is the purpose of slaneesh deamonettes modeled to look like they're having a field-f***? There's no point, other than so some fat guy can fap over them. Giant Penises on Soul Grinders? No thank you. Slaanesh models can look alluring and attractive (The current models are pretty much fine), but that you'd go out of your way and convert them to be THAT explicit is kind of disturbing. 
9407
Post by: Lint
Orkeosaurus wrote:Lint wrote:Either that or simply pushing your own standards of "acceptable" and "unacceptable" nudity.
People aren't allowed to form opinions based on their own standards?
Mostly I was in a pissy mood yesterday. I honestly don't care about nudity on models. But I absolutely hate censorship.
7908
Post by: aurelion
@Emperors Faithful....
I agree with you. Sexauly explicit material doesnt belong in wargameing. Nudity can be discussed depending on the model. A naked Slayer gives the same statement as the naked celt warriors "we dont fear death".
9711
Post by: Morgrim
aurelion wrote:@Emperors Faithful....
I agree with you. Sexauly explicit material doesnt belong in wargameing. Nudity can be discussed depending on the model. A naked Slayer gives the same statement as the naked celt warriors "we dont fear death".
And we have cool hair.
19160
Post by: Grogwog SkullTaka
come on guys! this is a hobby! we do this to get out of non creative boring jobs (quote on quote tsoalr)
well, as long as its not TOO sexual, like models in the middle of you-know-what.
otherwise, there should be no reason to rant/whine/complain about nudity on models.
its all in the spirit of beer and pretzels and having fun. a bit of nudity doesnt hurt.
thanx alot and go roll a six. 
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
aurelion wrote:@Emperors Faithful....
I agree with you. Sexauly explicit material doesnt belong in wargameing. Nudity can be discussed depending on the model. A naked Slayer gives the same statement as the naked celt warriors "we dont fear death".
I think the body hair pretty much acts as clothing for the Slayer. Also, no one's going to get upset over a crazy naked midget.
11893
Post by: deffskullz
I am still on the younger side and i feel that peole should have the ability to but them if they want but don't over due it it's hard enough to play this game without parents freaking out and the a whole army being naked doesn't help
i'm not saying PG FOR ALL OR DIE or something just try to keep it tasteful and don't fill the store's windows all the way with it
11886
Post by: Great Unclean One
Erm, there are allready sex slaves in 40k... Just look at that special Dark Eldar Raider.
Two sex slaves, right there also the old harlequins O_O
Yea but I voted for the first one, i'd just like to see how far GW would take it.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Emperors Faithful wrote:aurelion wrote:@Emperors Faithful....
No one's going to get upset over a crazy naked midget.
This just about sums up the spirit of good-natured Nudity.
19183
Post by: action-man09
NO nuditiy on models... I mean it justs ruins the whole game and the figures are fine how they are. Who would be running round a futuristic battle-feild nude. It's just stupid  Automatically Appended Next Post: deffskullz wrote:I am still on the younger side and i feel that peole should have the ability to but them if they want but don't over due it it's hard enough to play this game without parents freaking out and the a whole army being naked doesn't help
i'm not saying PG FOR ALL OR DIE or something just try to keep it tasteful and don't fill the store's windows all the way with it
See this guy has some sense also there are really little kids who play and it's not really appropiate. I mean all of the gamesworkshop's future hobbyists are little kids. But making nude figures will freak out the parents and that means the gamesworkshop could get into a bit of trouble and there will be less models being sold. Automatically Appended Next Post: Actually as long as it is kept tasteful and behind the counter might be alright. Also it needs to make sense. Also no genitals.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
for all the people saying to "keep it tastefull," where do you draw that line?
I draw the line at fething horsecocks.
It really isn't that hard to be tasteful, all you have to do is not intentionally be a fething slow and do stupid gak like tack a 2" long green stuff horsecock on a model for no other reason than to get a "LOLZ PENIS! LOOKITS A PENIS!" reaction. Am I really being that unreasonable?
I mean really? Did you just think the wargaming hobby wasn't already weird enough, you have to do gak like that and make passers by think there's actually something wrong with our fething heads? Kids get away with crap like that because they're stupid, but grown men should really be over that whole putting penises on everything stage don't you think?
Daemon tits are ok, but not dongs?
I knew this would come about eventually.
No, it's not about that, and it's never been about that. I don't have a problem with tits, witches (EDIT: c*nts = witches? wtf) or dongs, all I'm saying is 1) is it really appropriate to sculpt detailed genitalia on models in the first place, and 2) does doing so make any fething sense.
I'm sorry, but I don't think "It's Slaanesh!" is a good enough excuse to be crude and tasteless. If anything, a Slaaneshi army calls for the exact opposite. I really don't know where the hell people got the idea that Slaaneshi armies would only fight in the nude and use their dicks as swords or guns...
Human nudity is ok, but only if they are from a warm climate?
I'm not sure I get what you're saying here, kind of afraid to ask.
A mate of mine used to do 25mm historic battles, and he used ancent celts. He went to a tourny unpacked his army and was asked withing miniutes to pack his army, leave the building and was then banned. all becourse his army contained true celt beserkers wearing nothing but woad and there weapons, and he was accussed of being a dirty old perv for daring to bring such filth to the tourny.
damm idiots
Sounds pretty damn stupid. Were they simply "historically accurate", he didn't do anything weird with them at all? Can't believe someone would get banned for that.
But it's a double standard when you allow any display of violence you can imagine, bloody dismemberment, melting rotting flesh, decapitation, whatever, but you draw an arbitrary line when it comes to sexuality. (I thought you Brits kicked out the puritans a long time ago?)
First of all, in my case at least, there is no double standard. I'm just as put off by unnecessary gore and violence as I am crude and tasteless nudity.
Second, it's a fething war game. You kind of EXPECT some violence.
Finally, everything you listed actually makes a lot of sense for most armies. Tyranids for example, every bug is an engineered killing machine with teeth and claws, and exists only to eat the galaxy. A couple of flayed limbs here and there is fine, all things considered. Chaos Space Marines are another one, a few nasty trophies and rotting flesh fit the theme perfectly.
With all that said, I'd be just as disgusted by someone who felt the need to graphically model someone being dismembered or having holes blown in them, it's just excessive and yes, while it is a wargame (sort of) and horrible stuff happens on a battlefield, do you really need to get that god-damned realistic when painting up toys for a freaking game?
The point is, wether you consider painting miniatures "art" or not, it is designed by GW to be entirely subjective to the player how he/she wants to interpret and display his or her army. So giving players that freedom, and then pulling a carrot/stick trick on them is a little ridiculous. Same goes for other players who are "offended" by your explicit army. What if I were offended by the blatant violence, and bloody weapons you have painted on your berzerks? Could I be TFG and ask to have you banned from the store? Yeah, not likely.
So if I run into someone with an Emperor's Children army, and they felt the need to be very true to their fluff and modeled a couple of Marines raping random civilians, I have no right to be offended or question why the hell they'd do that since I'm effectively taking away their freedom to interpret and display their army the way they want? Or if someone sculpts a big horsecock for a soulgrinder's battlecannon, but doesn't do anything else to the model except paint it pink, then I have no right to be offended despite their obvious lack of effort or any real care beyond trying to get a shock reaction?
I'm getting real tired of your arguments thus far. I'm basically being told that if I have a problem with some nudity, I have a problem with ALL nudity, and I'm being painted as a fething puritan when I'm really nothing of the sort.
Creating life is horrible, but killing is A-Okay.
Oh yeah, that's not oversimplifying the issue at all, is it?
At this point I feel the need to say, just for the record, that I don't think sex is "obscene". God knows I love it, and the female body, but that doesn't mean I want it plastered all over the god-damned fething place, either. Some of you are being very close-minded in that regard. "If you don't let me sculpt rape scenes, huge tentacle-like dicks and power swords coming out of people's groins then you're just a prude and you probably are a virgin and don't even like boobs or girls lolol!"
If the blue dude had been a blue chick the whining would have been minimal.
Now that I kinda have to agree with, and it's sad. That's pretty much all I ever heard about the Watchmen movie, "LOLZ BIG BLUE PENIS!"
Just get over it! At least they were being true to the source material and didn't make him wear a damn thong.
The more tits, vaginas and penises you can cram onto a model the better!
If you dont want it, don't buy it.
If you dont like it, don't look at it.
And concerning this BS that children should not see miniatyre titties is ridiculous
Also, who the hell, in this thread, is actually saying nipples are going to warp children?
Exposed breasts are perfectly fine, I really don't understand the problems people have with them.
BUT IT'S SLAANESH PURITAN! You just don't get it lololz.
The new plastic daemonettes should have had realistic vaginas and spread legs, and even more exposed breasts! Like 8-12 breasts per model! WTF GW?!
Severed heads,piles of skulls,demons,genocide,plague...hey that's all just dandy,but >GASP< a pair of breast...>GASP< a penis..OH Lawdz no!!
C'mon,we are talking about little plastic/metal minis,if an adult wants to buy and paint those sorts of minis,then he/she should be able to.
Yet more oversimplification. Is anyone even reading the rest of the thread before they post? It's not "Oh lawdz a penis!", it's "What the feth man, that looks stupid and doesn't even make sense, why the hell did you do that?"
So I assume all you pro-nudists (even though I'm pro-nudity myself, if anyone's actually been paying attention) would have no problems whatsoever with the guy who felt it was necessary to model Marneus Calgar with a huge swinging dong between his armor-clad thighs, yeah? Because that just makes a world of fething sense doesn't it?
My definition of 'tasteful' is whether it is appropriate for the situation or not.
Exactly!
As a general rule, erect and oversized penises plastered all over models mean the person with that army is immature. It's no different to those school children who scrawl genitals (and often hitler mustache and glasses) all over the photos in magazines. Sure, glad you're entertained, sorry but I don't quite see the point.
Will you be my friend?
Slaanesh models can look alluring and attractive
For some reason though, most people seem to think that "alluring and attractive" = "completely nude all the time". It really doesn't.
NO nuditiy on models... I mean it justs ruins the whole game and the figures are fine how they are. Who would be running round a futuristic battle-feild nude
Well, a demon would. The Celts are another good example.
Really nothing wrong with the nudity itself, the only nudity I hate on models is the immature kind.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
As a general rule, erect and oversized penises plastered all over models mean the person with that army is immature. It's no different to those school children who scrawl genitals (and often hitler mustache and glasses) all over the photos in magazines. Sure, glad you're entertained, sorry but I don't quite see the point.
Will you be my friend?
Slaanesh models can look alluring and attractive
For some reason though, most people seem to think that "alluring and attractive" = "completely nude all the time". It really doesn't.
QFT. All of it. But this bit here especially. I still do laugh at the angry, nekkid midget though. Automatically Appended Next Post: oh, fekkit, the qoute messed up...
9407
Post by: Lint
Don't misunderstand me, I feel no need to model horsecocks, or any other nudity. But I still don't see why, if somebody paid good money, and is encouraged by the company to be as creative as he can, why then he can't model the army as he sees fit.
Dr.Thunder's femmarines are agood example (not to start that argument here.) I think female sm's are slowed. But it's his army, and he spent alot of time/money making them.
It's debatable how much this hobby can actually be defined as "art." But it is still entirely subjective to the creator/painter how he/she wants to do it. After all it's your personal army.
I said it before, that I can see tourney's and all ages stores not letting you play with your bonerific models. But if your playing at a friends house and he's got an army that you find "distastefull" don't be such a dick, have a laugh, and play the game. I mean, really? Does it really bother you that much? Were you raped with a tentacle when you were younger? Really? It's not that big a deal.
Btw, have you considered that people don't create over-the-top nude models because they are immature, but they do it to provoke reactions, and see the look on your face?
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Lint wrote:
Btw, have you considered that people don't create over-the-top nude models because they are immature, but they do it to provoke reactions, and see the look on your face?
QFT. They probably do it just to hear you say "OMG BEWBS!!!"
That or they really do have a problem.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
Lint wrote:Mostly I was in a pissy mood yesterday. I honestly don't care about nudity on models. But I absolutely hate censorship.
Ah, well I can certainly agree with you there.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Lint wrote:Were you raped with a tentacle when you were younger?
Actually, yes I was. Thanks for bringing back that memory, you insensitive jackass.
I've never gone to the aquarium since. Can't even look at fish again.
Anyway, you're one to talk about "misunderstanding"...once again, thanks for deliberately missing the point. This is the kind of person arguing for nudity on models, ladies and gentleman: "Durr, your daddy must have touched you when you were younger, that's why you don't like boobies! Hurr hurr hurr!" Ignoring the fact yet again that I've stated numerous times that I'm a-okay with nudity on models so long as it has a point. I'm not trying to get anyone's army banned because of an exposed breast FFS, all I'm saying is that, like it or not, there is a line drawn, albeit a line that you have to be trying very hard to cross.
But no, for some reason I'm not allowed to be pro-model-nudity if I don't support ALL nudity, even pointless, gratuitous nudity or even graphic depictions of sexual acts. Why is the daemonette giving someone a blowjob in the middle of a battlefield? I dunno, can't really question it I guess because I don't want to look like a "prude" or anything, or be accused of stifling someone's creativity/taking away someone's right to freedom of speech/expression or whatever other bs excuse people come up with to put dildos on tanks... 
Lint wrote:Btw, have you considered that people don't create over-the-top nude models because they are immature, but they do it to provoke reactions, and see the look on your face?
Yes, I have considered that, and personally I think the need to do stupid things simply to provoke a negative reaction reeks of immaturity, as well. You're not going to convince me otherwise.
I can take a joke, like I've said before. I certainly wouldn't bite someone's head off if they showed up to the table with Pretty Marines or Angry Marines, for instance, or a jokey conversion or two. But I find it insulting to my intelligence, and me personally, when the guy across from me isn't trying to get anything out of the game itself but just trying to get some laughs with his friends at my expense with his overcompensating soulgrinder. feth that, I have better things to do with my time if that's the case. I'm here to play the game, not to act as the punchline to your fething joke.
I don't want to stifle creativity, I'm not telling people what they can or can't do with their models, obviously I personally have no right to. But I think I deserve more respect than that, don't you? And also, just because I personally don't like the stuff doesn't mean I'm going to confront anyone about it. The most I'll do is sigh and shake my head, the only way I would react any stronger is if YOU were the one pushing the issue.
9407
Post by: Lint
Sidstyler wrote:
Actually, yes I was. Thanks for bringing back that memory, you insensitive jackass.
I've never gone to the aquarium since. Can't even look at fish again.
lolz. We're having a good heated debate, but this did make me smile
Anyway, you're one to talk about "misunderstanding"...once again, thanks for deliberately missing the point. This is the kind of person arguing for nudity on models, ladies and gentleman: "Durr, your daddy must have touched you when you were younger, that's why you don't like boobies! Hurr hurr hurr!" Ignoring
I think you missed the point brohem. I was simply using juvenile humor to say that you should probably calm down, and stop using the Feth-word. It really shouldn't make you this mad.
Lint wrote:Btw, have you considered that people don't create over-the-top nude models because they are immature, but they do it to provoke reactions, and see the look on your face?
Yes, I have considered that, and personally I think the need to do stupid things simply to provoke a negative reaction reeks of immaturity, as well. You're not going to convince me otherwise.
You make a good point, it probably is immature, but while I seem to be the one pushing your button today you're just giving me free rent in your head. Immature on my part? Perhaps, but it's the internet, and it's funny as hell.
I can take a joke, like I've said before. I certainly wouldn't bite someone's head off if they showed up to the table with Pretty Marines or Angry Marines, for instance, or a jokey conversion or two. But I find it insulting to my intelligence, and me personally, when the guy across from me isn't trying to get anything out of the game itself but just trying to get some laughs with his friends at my expense with his overcompensating soulgrinder.
Seriously, why does it have to be at your expense? What is it that makes you take it so personally? So some guy is an idiot who crudely slapped an erection on his chapter master? Why is this a personal affront to you?
I don't want to stifle creativity, I'm not telling people what they can or can't do with their models, obviously I personally have no right to. But I think I deserve more respect than that, don't you? And also, just because I personally don't like the stuff doesn't mean I'm going to confront anyone about it. The most I'll do is sigh and shake my head, the only way I would react any stronger is if YOU were the one pushing the issue.
So you can flame all over this forum, but when push comes to shove you won't speak up about something that has so obviously touched a nerve? Unless it's me? Like I said thanks for the free rent, but sadly I can't stay in your head any longer. Go ahead and make your rebuttal, just try to keep it civil, and we can agree to disagree.
17072
Post by: crazypsyko666
I think it's fine, but it spawns immaturity. People should play slaanesh armies because it's their style. /rant
9079
Post by: FITZZ
@ Sidstyler
Despite your many points,the matter still boils down to one of personal choice.
If one chooses to model his/her army,that he/she paid for,in a sexauly provocitive or even explicit manner,then that is their choice,just as it would be your choice to not interact with them.
10254
Post by: Golden Eyed Scout
As long as they don't make figs of hardcore scenes, I'm fine.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
So you can flame all over this forum
Who am I flaming?
but when push comes to shove you won't speak up about something that has so obviously touched a nerve?
"Touched a nerve"?
Anyway, no, I won't "speak up" about it in real life because I honestly don't care that much. Just because I spend a few minutes debating about it on the internet does not mean that my whole life revolves around this one issue. All I did was state my opinion on the matter, that was it. Like I said, I'm not trying to ban anyone's army, I'm not trying to cause any trouble myself, I have an opinion about excessive or pointless nudity on toys and that's that. What exactly are you trying to imply, that I should be confronting people and going to blows over crude conversions or dick armies?
Unless it's me?
"Don't be a dick, just play the game."
All I was saying is that that's what I fully intended to do. I wasn't targeting you specifically, I meant "you" as if you were the one who brought said "offensive" army to the table. Maybe it's just a poor choice of words, I don't know, but I wasn't trying to imply that you or anyone else posting here was a special case.
16487
Post by: Samus666
Sidstyler wrote:So you can flame all over this forum
Who am I flaming?
but when push comes to shove you won't speak up about something that has so obviously touched a nerve?
"Touched a nerve"?
Anyway, no, I won't "speak up" about it in real life because I honestly don't care that much. Just because I spend a few minutes debating about it on the internet does not mean that my whole life revolves around this one issue. All I did was state my opinion on the matter, that was it.
At the risk of sounding like a dick or being confrontational...
I feel the need to point out that, counting quotes, you have posted 117 lines of text on this page alone about something you allegedly don't really care about.
Just sayin'.
Although you claim this isn't a big issue for you, your fixating on the subject gives the impression that it is, that nudity and sexuality really offends you and you won't put up with it. Could be this is completely wrong and that you're just trying to explain you're point of view in detail. In fact I believe that's probably the case. In which case, no prob. Just be aware that you might be giving the wrong impression, and that when you write at such length about your opinions it may seem like you're ranting even if you're not.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Samus666 wrote:At the risk of sounding like a dick or being confrontational...
I feel the need to point out that, counting quotes, you have posted 117 lines of text on this page alone about something you allegedly don't really care about.
Just sayin'.
...wait, you actually counted?
Samus666 wrote:Could be this is completely wrong and that you're just trying to explain you're point of view in detail. In fact I believe that's probably the case. In which case, no prob.
Well I'm glad you realized that, because I literally laughed out loud when I read the line about being offended by nudity and sexuality and not tolerating it. It's just so far off the mark it's not funny...even though I laughed about it...you know what I mean.
Samus666 wrote:Just be aware that you might be giving the wrong impression, and that when you write at such length about your opinions it may seem like you're ranting even if you're not.
Well if what you said before is true then I really must be, because that's not what I think at all.
I do have a tendency to rant, but it's the internet, who doesn't?
16487
Post by: Samus666
Lol very true, I love a good rant. But I hate it when people think I'm ranting when I'm not. Leads to all sorts of hassle.
There seemed to be a bit of a misunderstanding emerging between you and Lint, Lint seemed think that you were getting all worked up, when actually you were just explaining at length. And I thought maybe an outside perspective could help avert a needless flame-war 
And yeh I counted lol. It served a purpose. Plus it was late here, and I was bored and drunk.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
FITZZ wrote: @ Sidstyler
Despite your many points,the matter still boils down to one of personal choice.
If one chooses to model his/her army,that he/she paid for,in a sexauly provocitive or even explicit manner,then that is their choice,just as it would be your choice to not interact with them.
And should said person with models having a battlefied orgy be allowed to place his army on the board in a store or tourney for all to see? What kind of parent wants thier kids to see pink/purple deamon soul-grinder with massive c*cks? In fact, what mature person does? Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, just noticed the @Sidstyler. Oh, well. Anyway, if you want to buy those models and convert them in 'that' way, that's fun. But don't bring that junk(substitute fouler word) in here and show it to the little kids, okay?
16064
Post by: Tauzor
Ok , thats it.. I now know what my next WIP is.
Thanks Dakka
9407
Post by: Lint
Here's a question I guess we haven't asked... What circumstances are we talking about these nude models being displayed? I don't think anybody wants to expose little kids (besides the dubious legality) to explicit material. But if it's just a private game would you still have a problem?
12471
Post by: Buttlerthepug
Orcs need boobies... yup
7783
Post by: BloodofOrks
I vote anything goes. My first soulgrinder is a tad risque but it'll be nothing compared to what i have planned for the second one. Let's just say lamprey tongues will be involved...
9079
Post by: FITZZ
Emperors Faithful wrote:FITZZ wrote: @ Sidstyler
Despite your many points,the matter still boils down to one of personal choice.
If one chooses to model his/her army,that he/she paid for,in a sexauly provocitive or even explicit manner,then that is their choice,just as it would be your choice to not interact with them.
And should said person with models having a battlefied orgy be allowed to place his army on the board in a store or tourney for all to see? What kind of parent wants thier kids to see pink/purple deamon soul-grinder with massive c*cks? In fact, what mature person does?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, just noticed the @Sidstyler. Oh, well. Anyway, if you want to buy those models and convert them in 'that' way, that's fun. But don't bring that junk(substitute fouler word) in here and show it to the little kids, okay?
If you've read this complete thread, then you should have read that I myself have 2 children, so of course I'm not saying that sexauly explicit material (be it mini or magazine) would be appropriate for children,nor am I saying that one should bring his "battlefield orgy" to a location that would be questionable.
I am simply saying that modeling ones army,in any fasion,is a matter of personal choice & freedom, and while there are certianly people who would choose not to play against such an army,there are those who wouldn't bat an eyelash about it as well.
As for the question of maturity,I think that anyone who could be tantilized by a 2 inch plastic figure,nude or other wise,is in need of a great deal more contact with the opposite sex.
9407
Post by: Lint
FITZZ wrote: As for the question of maturity,I think that anyone who could be tantilized by a 2 inch plastic figure,nude or other wise,is in need of a great deal more contact with the opposite sex.
What?!? I always have my models getting naked and pretend they're doing it. Tastefully of course.
19183
Post by: action-man09
Its stupid to be blunt
3002
Post by: Swordguy
Lint wrote:Here's a question I guess we haven't asked... What circumstances are we talking about these nude models being displayed? I don't think anybody wants to expose little kids (besides the dubious legality) to explicit material. But if it's just a private game would you still have a problem?
Our local historics group has a 12-year old who plays DBA. His main armies are Celts, Vikings, and Egyptians. There's nudity - duh. Evidently, that nudity's OK, even though he's a little kid, because it's accurate to the source material.
He also has a WFB Slanessh-themed Chaos army (and Skaven and Empire for god measure). There are nude minis, which are accurate to the source material. Why would these NOT be OK in light of the preceeding observation? Or, more to the point, if you're OK with nude minis in one game, you should be OK with them in another, right?
19183
Post by: action-man09
Buttlerthepug wrote:Orcs need boobies... yup
that just makes me feel sick 
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
FITZZ wrote: As for the question of maturity,I think that anyone who could be tantilized by a 2 inch plastic figure,nude or other wise,is in need of a great deal more contact with the opposite sex.
Well, time to pack up and go ladies and gentlemen. I believe FITZZ has this in the bag.
FTW 
19154
Post by: Dedrith
Things like nudity on miniatures simply brings out the immaturity in our Warhammer community.
After reading through the four pages on this thread, I am at a loss for words, I could have sworn the people here at DakkaDakka were more respectful than this.
Disappointing, to say the least.
5269
Post by: lord_blackfang
Dedrith wrote:Things like nudity on miniatures simply brings out the immaturity in our Warhammer community.
Yeah, I can't believe how many people aren't mature enough to handle seeing a tiny pewter boob or dong without throwing a fit.
19440
Post by: Cambrius
Mistress of minis wrote:Just like in the movies, I feel we're a long ways from equal opporunity in regards to full frontal nudity.
I dunno how many times I head "Watchmen was awesome except for the that blue dudes #$%^ hanging out all the time".
If the blue dude had been a blue chick the whining would have been minimal.
Yeah, the whole "Dr. Long Island" thing was a bit on the hypocritical side. But who was it doing the bitching? Dudes. But I digress.
Nudity on minis is fine so long as there is a logical reason why the character would be baring skin. Otherwise, there's no real point. I dunno about you, but given the option in say, a football game, I'll be wearing my cup instead of swinging lumber. Might be the same occurs to warrior-types, yes?
While we don't raise other people's kids, bear in mind that when playing against a child, the responsible thing to do would be to exercise some common decency.
19154
Post by: Dedrith
lord_blackfang wrote:Dedrith wrote:Things like nudity on miniatures simply brings out the immaturity in our Warhammer community.
Yeah, I can't believe how many people aren't mature enough to handle seeing a tiny pewter boob or dong without throwing a fit.
I would like to thank you for proving my point.
Games Workshop doesn't appreciate such obscenities, so as a war gaming community, neither should we.
9079
Post by: FITZZ
Dedrith wrote:lord_blackfang wrote:Dedrith wrote:Things like nudity on miniatures simply brings out the immaturity in our Warhammer community.
Yeah, I can't believe how many people aren't mature enough to handle seeing a tiny pewter boob or dong without throwing a fit.
I would like to thank you for proving my point.
Games Workshop doesn't appreciate such obscenities, so as a war gaming community, neither should we.
No,as a community we should be a colection of diverse individulals who think for ourselves,and concerning what GW doesn't appreciate,don't get me started on things GW has done,that as a contributor to their sales,I don't appreciate.
14152
Post by: CT GAMER
H.B.M.C. wrote:Who cares about nudity?
It never ceases to amaze me that people will cry foul over nudity on miniatures in a game where the good guys are warrior monks hell-bent on genocide.
I don't object to the nudity, nor the depiction of it. I find the people that get a little too aroused/excited by sculpting dongs and giant breasts on every model they can get their hands on a little sad/creepy...
I'll cut you some slack when your 15. When your 35 and your really proud of the giant vagina you sculpted on the front of your land raider and can't stop giggling about it or going out of your way to show it to every one?!?
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
While I'm OK with gratuitously-naked Daemonettes and such, I'm not really sure anybody really needs to have erect phalli or otherwise anatomically-correct genitalia on their wargaming models.
19800
Post by: calgarisgay
I think boobs are funny so why not put them on the battle field
Oh and another thing, warhammer fantasy is based a few hundred years ago and back then there was alot of poverty so is alright to put boobs on mini's
hmmm i wonder if orks like boobs?
19154
Post by: Dedrith
calgarisgay wrote:I think boobs are funny so why not put them on the battle field
Oh and another thing, warhammer fantasy is based a few hundred years ago and back then there was alot of poverty so is alright to put boobs on mini's
hmmm i wonder if orks like boobs?
I wouldn't advise this, you might find yourself laughed at by the other wargamers...
19873
Post by: The Fallen Angel
It is art but keep it tasteful
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
My Plaguereaper will feature a dildo for it's Pus Cannon. It will only come out for private games, but it will be pretty stinkin' epic. One of my Slaaneshi banners also has a pair hanging from it, to make up for the boobage otherwise present in the army.
1656
Post by: smart_alex
Yes, and the streakers take the field!
18627
Post by: get to the chopper!
I don't have anything against it per se, I just hate the idea of painting a miniature wang .
Painting miniature boobs would be right up my street though  .
19725
Post by: Boss 'eadbreaka
I'm 12 and up until a month ago, i figured that if adults wanted *ahem* minis with their anatomy showing, then they could have minis with their anatomy showing. I didn't care less. But then mum, whilst in my local GW saw a guy in his 30s with a Forge World Greater Daemon of Slaanesh.
I came within an inch of being permenantly been banned from 40k...
19307
Post by: Liquidice281
Well since the game is for ages 12 and up i see no reason for GW to be so conservative. I think when i was that age i was all into the nudity =D As long as its not Space marines with dongs I'm fine.
2977
Post by: Pirate_joe_666
As miniature painting is an art form aside from the actual gaming aspect. There is a place for nudity on a model. But you have to have a good reason for it aside from "Hurr, BO0bIes!"
But on the table top, its not really needed, aside from like a slaanesh army or witch elves. Its not really practical for average joe guardsmen to get his wang out.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Boss 'eadbreaka wrote:I'm 12 and up until a month ago, i figured that if adults wanted *ahem* minis with their anatomy showing, then they could have minis with their anatomy showing. I didn't care less. But then mum, whilst in my local GW saw a guy in his 30s with a Forge World Greater Daemon of Slaanesh.
I came within an inch of being permenantly been banned from 40k...
Definitely a good point. Remeber ladies and gentlemen, this is a community game. If you want your minnies to look like the result of squirrel-butsex then you sould keep it to yourself. Kids play these games you know.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Or at least keep it tasteful...
9079
Post by: FITZZ
JohnHwangDD wrote:Or at least keep it tasteful...
See,the above mini,with various adeptations/conversions,could easily be used in a Dark Eldar Whych unit,Slaanesh Army ( WHFB or 40k) or hell,just a simple Chaos undivided army,perhaps even alterd to represent Daemonettes,and I honestly wouldn't see the problem with it.
20022
Post by: Norwulf
Nudity on mini's isnt worth it i think. It usually looks goofy if anything. I'm not against it, with either gender. But unless you make you minis nakey for historical reasons, or they're like slaanesh demons, why bother? If you find the boobies on your succubus mini hot, let me introduce you to the internetz. You'll be much more satisfied, unless of course nude figurines are like your "thing". I'll have to respcet that. To each his own i guess.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
*directs Norwulf to the 'OMG I just acidentally my whole army thread'*
(Wait...was that thing locked?)
20768
Post by: Forgotmytea
Cryonicleech wrote:Alright...
Nudity is, technically, art. Even in a miniature form. So, they have a right to do so.
But, I'm sick of mini's with the overly sized "Assets", who do absolutely nothing but show off their "Assets".
Come on! You're in the middle of a damn battlefield, show some common sense (rather than skin) and get yourself some armor of some kind.
Hedonistic Pleasure Daemons would be, of course, incomplete without said "Assets", and are excused from the above argument.
But, a little off topic, it's not like the new plastic Slaanesh Daemonettes evoke anything than utter disgust...
Ditto. I don't think there's a problem with it; heck, there's some models where fluff-wise it's very appropriate, but it's when models with no reason for nudity end up like Ivy in Soul Calibur IV that it gets ridiculous =P Learn the meaning of the word 'armour'!
20106
Post by: Bascilica
Personally, i belive that if you have the ability to spend long tiresoem hours painting up a beautiful nude model (many renaisance artists, botticelli, rembrant, ect, did this) then you have the maturity to paint such a model, use it. If your a dirty little fool who just slaps a coat of paint on it, your never going to get it to look graphic enough to be offensive anyway.
16064
Post by: Tauzor
Dedrith wrote:lord_blackfang wrote:Dedrith wrote:Things like nudity on miniatures simply brings out the immaturity in our Warhammer community.
Yeah, I can't believe how many people aren't mature enough to handle seeing a tiny pewter boob or dong without throwing a fit.
I would like to thank you for proving my point.
Games Workshop doesn't appreciate such obscenities, so as a war gaming community, neither should we.
Get a grip and keep that holy than thou to your self thanks.
19154
Post by: Dedrith
Tauzor, I hardly find that comment necessary. If you want to go around flaming people you can do it somewhere else.
20983
Post by: Ratius
Cant agree with the nudity thing, fluff-wise arguments? nonsense, if all models followed fluff we'd have a hugely different game.
Historical reasons, oh come on, someone cited the celts earlier, loincloths were the very least they had on, disagree, check your history.
As for the daemonettes et all, even a bra would help things, they really dont need to have fully exposed parts imo.
Ontop of this you have the minors argument, they do have access to these models for better or worse.
You can throw the freedom of choice thing around all you want but what happened to moral/corporate responsability?
16064
Post by: Tauzor
Dedrith wrote:Tauzor, I hardly find that comment necessary. If you want to go around flaming people you can do it somewhere else.
I find it was nescessary to point out to you , not everybody shares your point of view , so wind your neck in.
19132
Post by: 1317
Does it really matter? youre gonna have to answer the birds and the bee's question someday...... but yes, keep it tastefull and i'd rather my kids found out about it from a sister of battle or a DE [provided they're not stupidly young] than from internet porn.
11893
Post by: deffskullz
I never said that i think that the sight ofa nude chest is turning all fo our gentle little future is going to be warped perverts
no it's find in all respects (IMO) just none of the OMG [insert wheterver you want]
It doesn't help that i spend most of my free time alone in a corner painting models instead of hanging with friends
adding in the factor that im painting nekkid models with everything showing isn't going to
A) help my social status
or B)let me ever buy or stay in a LGS ever again without parental supervision
20662
Post by: Hawkins
http://www.hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/
Best example i can find is here, take a gander.
19132
Post by: 1317
Big lol though... sheer mention of the female form uncovered and everyones 16 years old again
18602
Post by: Horst
keep the wangs in the closet.
9407
Post by: Lint
Horst wrote:keep the wangs in the closet.
QFT. I like to keep my wang in as many different closets as I can.
18602
Post by: Horst
if by closet, you mean forum members mothers, then yes, i agree with you, horst.
19132
Post by: 1317
"I like to keep my wang in as many different closets as I can"
"hairless maw of destruction"
Bit ambiguous.....
17244
Post by: The Good Green
It can be art, but it isn't all art. Some of it is pure hobby craft. There is an amazing set of dungeon victims that are all naked ladies tied to polls and racks and whatever else you call all the furnishings of a dungeon. All of the torturers were women too, in hoods, and some were bare breasted. There was one priest sacrificing someone, too.
My point is, some people are going for realism and some are going for fantasy. Who would say there were no naked people running around a battlefield or a dungeon. Do you think a bunch of hopped up, drunk as hell, blue painted Irishmen (or was it the Scots?) didn't rampage across the field with their willies hanging out and flopping about.
I say do what you want, even if you don't want art.
20870
Post by: Brother Gideon
I see nothing wrong with it. You have blood thirsty warriors clawing each others eyes out and ripping people limb from limb, but a nipple is going to make some people get offended. I see Warhammer as being a game for more mature people, so a few dangly bits or gubbins shouldn't be a problem.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
It's not a problem, the question is if it's really necessary. If we're all as mature as you claim then why do we have to model said "dangly bits" in the first place?
Fluff is one thing, but the arguments for nudity in Warhammer armies aren't really that convincing. "It's Slaanesh!" isn't good enough for me. Being what he/she is, I doubt Slaanesh and all of his/her daemons would be so crude as to march off to battle completely in the nude. Sometimes the concealed can be sexier than the revealed.
11893
Post by: deffskullz
If you want all the dangly nipples watev please start your own gaming group
but please dont bring it to the actual stores it just furthers the stereotype and makes parents squeel
21197
Post by: binky
Nudity is fine, I think completely acceptable.
And definately becomes a sexist issue when most people will complain about exposed male anatomy and not female. (Watchmen is a great example - also 300 was specifially altered for this reason - check out the graphic novel to see what his "vision" was)
But it's mostly common sense, it's your army but if you don't want nasty looks from parents or their horrified children do not bring explicitly nude models to the tabletop. Pretty simple.
* Also someone argued it makes more sense to wear armour into battle (and while I agree with this) it isn't historically accurate. I mean look at the Celts they ran often naked into battle covered only in blue war paint and little else, truly terrifying *
21243
Post by: GamzaTheChaos
I vote for "other" its their army and they can have a whole army of naked space marines with a third leg or an extra close combat weapon glued to them if you know what I mean for all I care lol.
or you can have a whole army of people making babies too if you like! or a Daemon of Khorne attacking a daemon of slaanesh from behind heck I don't care in fact I would be laughing the whole game prob hahaha.
and who cares about what others think there is more important things to worry about then a small naked piece of plastic and metal on the table down the street from your house. let them cry all they want!
3502
Post by: Rubberanvil
binky wrote:
And definately becomes a sexist issue when most people will complain about exposed male anatomy and not female. (Watchmen is a great example - also 300 was specifially altered for this reason - check out the graphic novel to see what his "vision" was)
Iirc only reason the leather thongs were in the movie was the actors potraying the Spartans said  no to the idea of them doing the film nude before filming began.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
And definately becomes a sexist issue when most people will complain about exposed male anatomy and not female
In some cases yes, but definitely not mine. I don't discriminate, I'm somewhat opposed to exposed genitalia on wargaming models period, since from all the examples I've ever seen it's rarely tasteful or even justifiable in a fluff sense. "It's Slaanesh!" is more often than not a very poor excuse to sculpt little wangs and pussies on your models and snicker about it like a tit...I've never seen it done "well", except on maybe ONE occasion on another forum and there was an entire thread, with a poll, devoted to the discussion on whether or not modeling a realistic vagina on a greater daemon would be "too much". The result turned out pretty nicely if I recall correctly, but it was just unnecessary in my opinion...
I've seen people argue about them being daemons and saying they obviously wouldn't wear clothes, but it's a fething daemon, a creature from another dimension that the mortal mind can barely fathom, who's to say they would even have genitalia in most cases? Obviously that won't be true in the case of the Porn God's daemons, but nevertheless...
I am, however, willing to accept that Slaanesh is a moody son of a bitch. It's wrong to claim that all of his daemons would go to battle clothed or armored, but it's just as wrong to claim they would all fight naked. I believe it's said in the Daemons codex that Slaanesh's greater daemons differ wildly in appearance because it's dependent on his/her mood at the time of the daemon's creation. Sometimes you'll get one that looks like a slim, sexy daemonette with tentacles for hair, sometimes you'll get a huge muscled beast with a bull's head and crab claws. I imagine their attire would differ wildly as well...some will fight nude, others will be wearing fine silk or leather, etc.
As for Watchmen and 300, yeah, I thought all the whining about his wang was pretty infantile. I think the only reason people bitched so much about it is because they were afraid they would look gay if they didn't say anything. To be fair though I'm pretty sure it wasn't just the men, and that if every Spartan in 300 were fighting naked the girls would probably complain just as much as the guys. Some girls would love it, sure, but there are a lot of women out there who just don't find the male body all that attractive. Too much hair and muscle I guess...well, mostly hair, since not a lot of guys out there are ripped like Leonidas.
But boy if I was... 
20870
Post by: Brother Gideon
Sidstyler, you hit the nail right on the head. I couldn't agree with you more.
In theory, i am okay with nudity on miniatures, but i am sure that if i fought an entire army of plaguebearers with penises, i would feel differently.
When it comes to daemonettes, i am okay with them having breasts showing. (No i am not a perv) It just makes sence when you read their backstory etc... But anything more would just seem like a bit too much for a wargaming miniature.
As for 300, i am glad that they decided to wear clothes, i would have been fine with the nudity, but some people would just take it too far and blow it out of purportion. Example: Irresponsible mothers who let their underaged kids go to R rated movies, and then complain that it was inapropriate and petition to shut that movie down.
All and all, my oppinion is, keep it subtle, and keep it tasteful.
20880
Post by: loki old fart
pics please
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Sidstyler wrote: if every Spartan in 300 were fighting naked the girls would probably complain just as much as the guys.
How about realistic casting? Using actual Greeks fighting in the nude, rather than shaved Baywatch extras?
300 hairy, swarthy guys crouching down would empty the theater in a hurry!
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Here Here Lint
21349
Post by: Herohammernostalgia
Honestly, can someone explain to me why some parents find it difficult to explain nudity to their kids?
It's only natural!
And it can be sooo simple in this context, here's how:
"mommy? why are those female figures with blades and claws instead hands totally nude?"
"well dear, because those blades and claws they have instead of hands make it rather difficult to put on clothes of course!"
or:
"daddy, why do witch elves only wear bikini's?"
"Now son, just look at how pale they are! They just want to get a healthy tan!"
In general, why do some people feel terrified for their kids when nudity is involved? It's not like kids are scared of it of their own accord, it's because their parents act like slow morons when they see nakedness.
Now, porn, that's a different story... but just nakedness? Have a little faith in your kid's intelligence!
21946
Post by: ZacktheChaosChild
I don't care about nudity as long as it doesn't depict sex but yeah don't really lose sleep over it :/ Automatically Appended Next Post: Dedrith wrote:Tauzor, I hardly find that comment necessary. If you want to go around flaming people you can do it somewhere else.
YOU are the one who is telling people that WE should not like whatever GW doesn't like, calling US all immature for not giving a gak about nudity, AND YOU are the one telling people they are flaming you?
I agree with everyone else who has "Flamed" you...
Go be ignorant somewhere else. Grow up.
21878
Post by: Stoic Kiwi
I really don't think it is a big deal, I mean it is artistic interpretation of the model designers.
I think nearly all the nudity is tasteful and warranted.
Except maybe the anitomically correct OOP Bloodthirster....
3802
Post by: chromedog
Nudity in miniatures is no more abhorrent to me than nudity in other forms of sculpture.
I am more offended by various small-minded religious bigots insisting on chiseling off bits of art, than I am opposed to the depiction of boobies on a 28mm miniature.
5531
Post by: Leigen_Zero
I don't mind nudity on miniatures, even anatomically correct stuff goes imo, but it should be done with taste and within the context of a miniature, daemonettes have 2-6 boobs = yes, big floppy penis on a soulgrinder = no. (for those that remember those infamous pics...
173
Post by: Shaman
Nudity is fine..
21392
Post by: Cambak
The Green Git wrote:As long as it's not truly obscene (like depicting sexual acts or overt arousal, shall we say) then nudity in and of itself is not offensive to me. I say keep it tasteful but that's about it.
22577
Post by: colonnello
binky wrote:Nudity is fine, I think completely acceptable.
And definately becomes a sexist issue when most people will complain about exposed male anatomy and not female. (Watchmen is a great example - also 300 was specifially altered for this reason - check out the graphic novel to see what his "vision" was)
ooh I love the film 300 it's awsome, as for nuditiy, it's a big No no from me because it seems a bit weird painting nude plastic minatures!
6846
Post by: solkan
Was the obvious and safe poll response "Nudity on miniatures is the same as nudity in any other format or medium" left out because it wouldn't have spawned a six page discussion on the topic of whether nudity itself is okay?  
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Yeah, needless to say I wouldn't have gone for the same poll options.
20190
Post by: chaos
i say keep it tasteful it's most commonly parents that buy it for young children so if they don't like it they don't have to buy it.
19787
Post by: Newt-Of-Death
I dont understand why anyone old enough to understand would have a problem.
Get it out!
24898
Post by: c34r34lk1ll3r
I think anything should go. I don't really care. draw super nipples on your female figs and giant wangs on your SM for all I care. They're your figs do what you want with them. The problem is that the TO may not agree with that.
7637
Post by: Sasori
As long as it's tasteful I don't have a problem with it.
I'd say chests are fine, but anything beyond that is a bit off, for me at least. If I want more than that, I'll go talk to my wife.
14031
Post by: LiberatedObject
Nudity is fine, but don't have them doing anything sexually explicit. I understand it is art, but great artists knew how to do it tastefuly.
24150
Post by: ChocolateGork
Well i dont care and would be pleased if there were more nude models (WERE DO ORKS GET ALL THEIR PANTS FROM!!)
And GW doesnt care to a certain extent as a naked demmonette won a golden demon
24489
Post by: Orky-Kowboy
Unfortunately the number of miniature models I would LIKE to see without clothes are, shall we say, minimal? Also, what the hell?
27447
Post by: ShivanAngel
One of the most hillarious Conversions i have ever seen is a butt nekkid orc shaman showing his jibblies to the world.
Spent a while laughing at that mini.
I think nudity is fine in the wargaming world. Harpies for example, they are feral flying beast women.... I also doubt anyone will get stiff from those....
It needs to be realistic tho, a topless model with a 2+ armor save.... just no.
24150
Post by: ChocolateGork
REPENTIAAAAAAA WWOOOOOOHHHH 1 in five models is half topless and they always turn the model around in the codex so you cant see it.
25668
Post by: ChaosxVoid
warpcrafter wrote:If people don't like the bewbs, they have the option of not buying the minis. It is not everybody else's job to raise your children.
QFT!!!! completely agree with you!! the same can be said about tv, you dont want things on the air dont remove them change the channel raise your kids dont let other things be the babysitter. QFT brother QFT
24150
Post by: ChocolateGork
Yes so true
Also with games
14854
Post by: Anshal
Dose anyone really have issues with nudity in minis at all?
28899
Post by: Pvt. Jet
ChaosxVoid wrote:warpcrafter wrote:If people don't like the bewbs, they have the option of not buying the minis. It is not everybody else's job to raise your children.
QFT!!!! completely agree with you!! the same can be said about tv, you dont want things on the air dont remove them change the channel raise your kids dont let other things be the babysitter. QFT brother QFT
Of course, if you like the game, enjoy the hobby, and you like doing it with your kids.... especially if you've invested money in a product that's already been marketed in a 'clean' way, you're not exactly hoping for your kid to show up at a tourney and face 'Slaanesh's Boobies Brigade.'
As the poll describes, there is a time and place for boobies. And this is not it. :p They're preferred, however, at the afterparty.
23332
Post by: Daemon-Archon Ren
Other (Write in):
Look at the average demographic.
Its not art, its marketing, plain and simple.
22053
Post by: ComputerGeek01
I never understood why parents flip out about this kind of stuff, it isn't graphic, it's not a strip club it's just plastic, metal and or putty. I for one would be more upset at my kid if they acted in an inappropriate manner at the site of something like a "fleshy" toy model.
17930
Post by: JubJubMarine
As long as noone is having sex in a model i don't have a problem with it
Go NZ in rugby world cup 2011!
29373
Post by: Mr. Self Destruct
Mr. SD likes but does not own any Daemonettes...
I don't think it's that out of line, we have armies that slaughter to feed their hedonistic gods and urges (DE) or to murder and massacre just for giggles (orks) and just because they're mad (Khorne) so I think showing some skin is not that...bad..really.
27097
Post by: dark6spectre
think of, in italy you have statues of naked men everywhere, so why not have it on miniatures if they are posed in a, lets say, non obscene way.
31247
Post by: UbiSwanky2
Mr. Self Destruct wrote:Mr. SD likes but does not own any Daemonettes...
I don't think it's that out of line, we have armies that slaughter to feed their hedonistic gods and urges (DE) or to murder and massacre just for giggles (orks) and just because they're mad (Khorne) so I think showing some skin is not that...bad..really.
I do have to agree with Mr. SD...most people do paint their models sensibly a few go to the extreme but it is few and far between. I mean if you think about it is a gorefest army of berserkers covered in blood and having entrails dangling from there chain swords any better then a tit hanging out?
21348
Post by: Sarnath666
I've been playing since I was very young and even owned some of the Deamonettes. Seriously if a kid is mature enough to handle this game he's mature enough to handle some nudity here and there.
30591
Post by: Boss Goretoof
It's ok; it's the game makers responsibility to put out a tasteful product, but it's also the parents responsibility to be involved with their kids and help them make good decisions.
32867
Post by: johnscott10
If people dont like the bewbs, then cut/file off the nipple then paint it like its a piece of clothing, problem solved. lol
23400
Post by: Ma55ter_fett
It adds a bit of spice to life.
25990
Post by: Chongara
I've nothing wrong with nudity itself. That said, I'm not exactly confident in the average game or gamer to be doing for reasons other than tacky fanservice. At least human nudity anyway.
25220
Post by: WarOne
So long as the model(s) in question do not have anything else wrong...the degree to which a model is naked is okay by me.
25622
Post by: necrongod
I dont really care. GW would only include nudity if the fluff and feel of the model felt right. slaanesh: sure, i dont care. space marines: oh god, no!
35808
Post by: Mukkin'About
WHY ARE YOU LETTING CHILDREN PLAY 40K?!?!?!
27097
Post by: dark6spectre
well more children have begun playing 40k than in the past, and gw know this, hence why the recent daemonettes had their multiple breasts covered up. on the old models there was virtually nothing there.
35785
Post by: Avatar 720
Couldn't care less if there was nudity. I think there should be more nudity. The world needs more nudity. Nudity for President!
32545
Post by: Element206
Art is Art
23332
Post by: Daemon-Archon Ren
Element206 wrote:Art is Art
Couldn't resist!
37584
Post by: Squat Kid
I just dont want my squats being beaten to death by greater demon dongs lol, but in all seriousness, nipples are fine but everything else is a little much
30024
Post by: A Black Ram
Tastleful tasteful tasteful tasteful tasteful tasteful tastleful tasteful tasteful tasteful tasteful tasteful.
Okay, now that I go that out of the way, I just would like to say art is making people feel emotions as the artist did while making the piece. Even if it is erect.
41688
Post by: Grenat
Cryonicleech wrote:Alright...
Nudity is, technically, art. Even in a miniature form. So, they have a right to do so.
But, I'm sick of mini's with the overly sized "Assets", who do absolutely nothing but show off their "Assets".
Come on! You're in the middle of a damn battlefield, show some common sense (rather than skin) and get yourself some armor of some kind.
Hedonistic Pleasure Daemons would be, of course, incomplete without said "Assets", and are excused from the above argument.
I agree.
The same is true in most stories of heroic-fantasy. Mail G-string everywhere, seriously ?
42223
Post by: htj
Where is the 'only if it makes sense in the context of the miniature' button? I suppose that's 'Other' but seeing as how many people have replied as such, I reckon the poll could have done with one.
Chalk me up for the anti-chainmail bikini, pro-pervy daemons camp. That having been said, I'd probably feel odd painting a Slaaneshi daemon prince's Gentleman Jim. I suppose it would be an experience that would help me grow as a person.
21364
Post by: FM Ninja 048
It's only a model
43032
Post by: King Pariah
I'm okay with it, in fact sometimes it's hilarious such as this one guy's conversion of the Deceiver which looks like Dr. Manhattan from Watchmen in all his blue nude glory
40180
Post by: guyperson5
I know some troops go to work without getting clothes on (most being daemons) but I have seen 7 yr olds playing
36094
Post by: DickBandit
Could care less, but I'm surprised I haven't seen the Imperial Guard - Eldar gang rape diorama.
35556
Post by: nickick
There are lots of young people around so...
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
My biggest beef with nude miniatures is that they tend to be poorly sculpted and end up being very off-putting.
35485
Post by: GoldenKaos
I don't mind it on other people's armies, but I like to keep mine decent at the very least. Christian household.
42040
Post by: grayshadow87
I really want to say that I care about nudity on models, but at the end of the day it's just a plastic/metal/resin facsimile of the same stuff that people have. If someone wants to sculpt an ork dong or show some pirate breasts, it's not that big of a deal. Unless it's a dwarf. No dwarves are ever allowed to be naked. EVER.
40093
Post by: SoliderSnake
I've got nothing wrong with nudity on minis, in fact, I think it's hilarious, especially that Inifinity model with that thong wearing nun. The only problem I have is....does that thong have any tactical advantage whatsoever???
34291
Post by: smudgethekat
I say as long as it adds to the feel of the army (which armies I don't know) and it isn't overdone, I'm cool with it.
41151
Post by: lukewild1982
Wargaming is not for just for children. Kids do play but thats not the point. Art is littered with nakedness and its not a problem.
37404
Post by: Jordan
On display miniatures, absolutely. I don't think nudity belongs in an army that gets played on the table top in public.
37886
Post by: Goddard
The only thing I have a problem with is practicallity. If you have a prostitute model, you can have all the cleavage/leggedness you want. But if you have a warrior/knight, an iron bra will not keep you alive.
26957
Post by: diesel7270
You know how in 4chan how they have nude and even outright pornographic homebrewed 40K artwork? (Like the Tyranid I have started to call a "tittygaunt"). The people who like drawing that or go for that are the kinds of people who would buy quantities of minis with boobs. The same thing with the $180 statuettes of anime girl characters with removable clothes. Are these guys that lonely, or do they just have an overactive drive?
Men who have a woman to come home to are (generally) a lot less interested in such things. Those that still are probably have a hard time holding onto those items with a woman having a say-so. The only people I know who seriously buy minis with huge cleavage are complete neckbeards. There was a time when I would have hesitantly admitted I wanted those things... 10 years ago when I was 16. Now I just want to play the game.
I'm not denying that the minis I've seen are art. I'm not denying that they are tasteful art. Frankly. I find nudity completely inoffensive. I'm not even denying that the models are pleasing to the eye for me. But if you for one minute think that someone sculpted the master model with the impression that buyers would spend money on it's artistic value alone, you're deceiving yourself about the virtues of humanity.
Regardless, I couldn't take myself seriously charging a group of murderous zealots with an army of Taarna clones from Heavy Metal (let's see who remembers that one). That's why I voted the "time and place, but not wargames" option.
44058
Post by: diceMaster
only on the women
42032
Post by: CadianCommander
4DChan is comedic. So big difference there and you can just 'not look at the website'.
I don't mind nudity, not in the least. But when it's sexual or or obscene or done in a way that cannot be construed as tasteful, it's easy to say "don't buy those minis, not up to other people to raise your kids" but when they're in that "safe place" the FLGS and they're right there on the table....big difference. Kids are usually (or should be) okay with nudity. If not, take them to a freaking art gallery already - great places to run around as a little tacker. But there is a line.
And yes, the stupid obsession with stupid corsets drives me insane. Even my limited release female commissar is wearing a damn corset. Put some clothes on! For Emperor's sake you're in the middle of a war! Every woman who does martial arts or paintballing or is in the armed forces or anything like that knows this. It drives me and all my female-gamer friends nuts the prediliction for corsets and chainmail bikinis (esp as a lot of us have done medieval fighting at the very least).
To have female combatants in the Guard, you don't need to change the bodies. They're bulked up under armour and fatigues, just more feminine looking heads. They don't need corsets and cleavage.
I agree with Goddard though that if it is 'appropriate to the model' and in context. Not power armour that shows how big their girls are though.
1985
Post by: Darkness
Nudity is the same as violence on models. If you are going to show a Khorne figure drinking its victim's blood, the same level of extreme is allowed for the Slaanesh figure.
Showing a models that has is intestines spewing out is no better than a naked elf, and in some ways worse.
27727
Post by: Bonde
To me, a fluffy army is the most important thing. If you can defend your modelling and painting decisions from a fluff point of view, then anything goes - I will never get offended. To me it is hypocritical that you can depict armies like The Purge (infamous CSM nurgle warband) comitting genocide and using their dozer blades to push piles of the dead out of the way, but can't show some Dark Eldar slavemaster whipping naked disobedient slaves (in a Golden Daemon competition for example).
I don't really like the idea of kids in the 40K hobby (or Warhammer fantasy for that matter, although that is not as bad), but GW seems to need the money they bring to the hobby. If you ask me GW should make a more child oriented game, perhaps still located somewhere in the 40K universe. When the kids then grow up, then they would quickly be able to adopt their playstyle and create a new and fitting army for the real 40K. I don't mind kids as gamers per se, I just don't want to make space for them and be caucious with them when it is my hobby that is on the line.
9697
Post by: MattRendar
if war , death , demons , mass attrocities , murder , evil magic , gore and extreame violence and demoinc man eating aliens don't bother you ... boobies shouldn't either !
7597
Post by: Kirbinator
Darkness wrote:Showing a models that has its intestines spewing out is no better than a naked elf, and in some ways worse.
I find that level of gore and violence significantly more offensive than the slave girls on Asdrubael Vect's love boat. Yes, the game and many others are set in a warzone with terribly horrific weapons, but that doesn't mean the minis need to be spilling their guts. Same applies to television and movies to me... for example, the Saw series is just as debased as the most shameless of "adult films" if not more so.
506
Post by: the_trooper
I normally don't mind it but if the person using the model is a creep, I mind. My definition of "creep"? A 50 something dude who is best described as "Buffalo Bill" but in a fatter, lispy way.
I suppose it's all in context. If you are not a perv and have questionable ethics, go nuts. Pedophiles use porn to allure children. I'm not saying my example above is one but lets just say I wouldn't trust my niece with him.
30139
Post by: 40k Ninja
I dont really mind it. :/
45397
Post by: CiaranAnnrach
All depends upon context. If you know you are going to be around little kids, don't be too sexual. But forbidding a thing only increases that thing's attraction.
34612
Post by: Ledabot
With the gothic theme that is in 40k you get certain styles of art, some include nudity. You see it in stained glass windows, statues, hulking betamoths of metal and guns... But if your going to do that sort of stuff keep it the same kind of stuff.
The only way you should sneek in anything dodgey is on the inside of an IG charmera, and then glue it closed.
40392
Post by: thenoobbomb
Armor is for the cool people. Nudity not. Go watch some random music videos ^^
47498
Post by: Battle Brother Ambrosius
1d4chan on Eldar Farseers: "You know, I think the bigger their breasts are, the stronger psykers they are."
42979
Post by: Dual Face
I chose "Everybody should be wearing full suits of armour at all times" because for the most part, we are playing WARgames after all.
otherwise, I really don't mind nudity, people put work into designing, sculpting, and painting these models, I consider them art. Just as long as its all tasteful
nudity on miniatures, sure
hardcore xxx pron on miniatures..........no
44431
Post by: killykavekommando
To me, it should be kept down a bit, just because it really isn't necessary. Sure, some daemons may be partially uncovered, but they're within taste (generally). Personally, I think it kind of takes away from the wholesome fun of the game, but I have no true beef with anyone who thinks its okay, it just annoys me.
45397
Post by: CiaranAnnrach
So, how do people feel about nudity on miniatures which are not meant to be used for gaming? Like the Reaper mini's or Studio McVey's Resins - (though, Studio McVey does not have any nude minis AFAIK.) If it's purely a display piece, is it ok, or still no?
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
Its art. Doesn't matter how bad. Its art, someone put their blood and tears into it.
37130
Post by: Skylifter
I voted "other", so here is my explanation: I do not think it is art, but I think anything goes simply because nudity is nothing special or bad. I also think anyone worried about miniatures of nude people.. well. I will reign myself in here. Let's just say I detest sillyness of that kind.
46144
Post by: Nocturn
Karoline Dianne wrote:
So long as the model isn't pornographic or completely unnecessary, It should be fine. After all, this is a miniature wargame we're playing. If you're really that desperate to see explicit nudity and erotic models, stay at home and look up some smut on the internet...
Just don't bring your fantasies to the gaming stores...
What if you are creating a Blood Pact army from the Gaunt's Ghosts series? In several of Mr. Abnett's books, the Blood Pact are described as having tattoos of various demons engaging in lascivious conduct with the saint. From a fluff perspective, you might be able to argue this in your flgs.
Ratius wrote:Cant agree with the nudity thing, fluff-wise arguments? nonsense, if all models followed fluff we'd have a hugely different game.
Not necessarily. One of the main descriptors of the Blood Pact is that they were a well drilled and well equipped force, which is comparable to guard infantry. It's perfectly possible to use the Blood Pact fluff and still have a playable army.
Sidstyler wrote:It really isn't that hard to be tasteful, all you have to do is not intentionally be a fething slow and do stupid gak like tack a 2" long green stuff horsecock on a model for no other reason than to get a "LOLZ PENIS! LOOKITS A PENIS!" reaction. Am I really being that unreasonable?
What kind of cover save would that offer for the models behind him? (I'm assuming it's a "him" because otherwise it would open up a whole new can of worms that I'm sure none of us want to take a crack at right now)
Sidstyler wrote:
Why is the daemonette giving someone a blowjob in the middle of a battlefield?
I almost choked I was laughing so hard.
ChocolateGork wrote:REPENTIAAAAAAA WWOOOOOOHHHH 1 in five models is half topless and they always turn the model around in the codex so you cant see it.
Yet in the Warhammer Forces of Chaos codex I count at least 3 drawn pictures in the fluff and rules sections where nudity is depicted.
FM Ninja 048 wrote:It's only a model
HA!
What about trucknutz on a rhino?
44431
Post by: killykavekommando
Wait- nids don't wear clothes! they're NAKED!
32867
Post by: johnscott10
killykavekommando wrote:Wait- nids don't wear clothes! they're NAKED!
Indeed they are naked, but they dont have 6ft massive dongs on them either.
44431
Post by: killykavekommando
Then what are they holding and firing bugs from?
47498
Post by: Battle Brother Ambrosius
killykavekommando wrote:Then what are they holding and firing bugs from?
Indeed. If you read their background very carefully, their weapons actually base on ejaculation... 
44431
Post by: killykavekommando
So, "deathspitters' aren't all they say they are, eh?
45397
Post by: CiaranAnnrach
killykavekommando wrote:So, "deathspitters' aren't all they say they are, eh?
Actually I'd be more worried about the Fleshborers....that CAN'T be pleasant.
Then you have the Impaler Cannons. Can't imagine being impaled by one of those...
24341
Post by: Riddick40k
Art is art, they don't keep David's crotch covered
46982
Post by: MrMerlin
hell guys, wargaming miniatures are full of voilence and blood, wich i consider WORSE than absolute and exessive nudity. latter one is actually very natural and shoud not be made into a bad thing by church, society etc...
34779
Post by: shadeyaces
I would like to see more female nudity on models but no male nudity.
38148
Post by: Red Comet
Miniatures are art. I see no reason why this can't be done.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Rule of cool, is my feeling. You're going to do it, do it well, just like anything else in this hobby.
33495
Post by: infinite_array
Ouze wrote:Rule of cool, is my feeling. You're going to do it, do it well, just like anything else in this hobby.
I'm going to guess this is going to land outside 'cool', yeah?
46059
Post by: rockerbikie
I don't care about nudity in models.
46969
Post by: DreadlordME!
Grot rigga on Stompa has middle finger up! Daemonettes are disgusting nudists!
20677
Post by: NuggzTheNinja
Voted "Anything goes" but not because it's art. Let's be honest here...any boobies or cooters are about 3 or 4 square mm, who cares. If you can paint explicit details of the female reproductive organ in that kind of space, then kudos to you. From above, in the context of a wargame, unless you show me I'm not going to even notice.
43553
Post by: Sharkvictim
I voted write in, and it's because as far as gaming goes it should all be in context. This is not a slight on gamers that convert or field nude miniatures, but rather on the companies that produce them. If in the context of the game you have written there is a niche for models with boobies or what have you (Slaanesh for example) that's fine.
Let's say your loyalist fluff chapter is called "The Emperor's Ballsacks". Now just because you plan to green stuff hefty scrotes all all of your tac marines is no reason for GW to produce such a miniature to suit those needs. And honestly if someone fielded such a chapter against me I would laugh heartily and enjoy my game, provided the testes didn't provide some kind of 2+ invul or something (dood! you said I could use my fluff-dex!)
What I'm saying is that maybe this particular poll question should be re-worded. If we are talking about someone's preferences as far as conversion and stuff then that could speak of someone's personal character on a slightly perverse level, and that thing should GENERALLY have no place on the forums anyway... unless we're talking about a certain tyranid thread of ill repute... which is awesome.
24150
Post by: ChocolateGork
Does ANYONE like the new demonettes more than the old ones? NO
48706
Post by: Viersche
If it's going to be used in wargaming and doesn't give any fluff advantage i don't see why not.
If it's for display purposes. I don't see why not. It's supposed to be art.
40344
Post by: master of ordinance
GO SLANNESH
49288
Post by: BLOODCLAWallday
Who cares if a plastic miniature is nude? It really can't be considered THAT big of a deal...
47498
Post by: Battle Brother Ambrosius
BLOODCLAWallday wrote:Who cares if a plastic miniature is nude? It really can't be considered THAT big of a deal...
I now call upon the unholy power of the warp. Arise, thread!
49382
Post by: StringBassKnight
If the nudity makes sense, then fine (ie slaanesh). Just not excessive, and no daemonettes giving BJ's to random dudes on the battlefield
39427
Post by: pyre
The way i look at is this. From a gaming standpoint it doesn't matter at all, and i don't think that can really be argued. From a modelling standpoint it DOES get tricky. Some modles and armies do have a better reason to have nudity present than others. It makes sense for a Daemonette or a Wyche to have some nudity present, while a terminator makes no sense at all. In the end i think everyone does have the right to model anything as they see fit, but bear in mind that FLGS are businesses, and to alienate several people just so one person can play something that's so over the top to be blatantly offensive, makes no business sense. Make sure the subject is appropriate for the venue.
Model what you want, that's your right, but it's also another person's right to not like it. Personally as long as it's a fitting addition to a model, anything goes. But i think something that adds nothing but shock value doesn't belong. A Slaaneshi Daemon army engaged in the most extreme acts of depravity, while stunning and well made, doesn't really have a place around folks that aren't mature enough to handle it.
50671
Post by: ParatrooperSimon
If someone wants to make a naked baby armie, thats fine with me, though I would be tempted to ask what they do in their spare time
46535
Post by: Brother-Captain Scotti
As long as it aint downright sick then fair play I think.
The good thing about having a naked mini is, you can model the clothes on yourself, which is a project I'm doing now, so really nude mini's can be really quite handy
22704
Post by: CalasTyphon216
BOOBIES!
14703
Post by: mayfist
I love the way we could just replace the word nudity by BOOBS.
Realy, there is no big deal with boobs. There evry where ! Let it be on your mum, your gf, your sister, television, posters, etc....
And I wouldnt mind nudity in 40K, some would just have to put up a tutorial for schlong painting....
53223
Post by: Crimson-King2120
YEY SLANEESH
38043
Post by: BattlePope
I have sculpted a gigantic, veiny, throbbing phallus on my Bloodthirster (Turns out to be head-height for the average SM, and about the same length, lovingly dubbed by my fellow gamers as "The Dick-Monster"). I have a photo posted here on Dakka, but I wasn't done painting it, and my camera is crappy at best. I've fielded him many times, and never get anything more than a chuckle. To be honest, I think it would be damn intemidating to be fighting a battle against such a daemon. Of course, I initially had no intention of making the sculpt permanent, it was a silly and immature joke, but since then i have, mostly because no one I have played has ever complained. I stand by the sentiment that anything and everything can be art, no matter the content. It certainly doesn't hurt anyone. You cannot shelter your children forever. Furthermore, why is the nude human form so feared in modern society? It's a helluva lot more natural and pure than the majority of the things we celebrate it today's world. We glorify acts of violence overseas by calling it "patriotism", but someone slips a nip and our little world seems to go into crisis mode. I'm aware that I'm a victim of geography, residing in the Bible belt, and I appreciate the opportunity to rant for a bit. Good talk.
54216
Post by: TheRobotLol
Anything fine exept the distasteful and the unnesissary *COUGH female commisars COUGH* (Squad morale restored)
Just keep dem kiddies away.
54773
Post by: Galdos
I pretty much agree with iIt is art but keep it tasteful. However I really only care for it on Daemons. Anything else seems kind of... dumb. I mean one can easily wear a light leather shirt or something but whatever. Not a big deal.
In short, keep it tasteful.
56820
Post by: TheSinheizer
There is only war... No time to stand there and look hawt.
If nudity / sexiness is literally ALL the character can really offer, it'll infuriate me.
If it feels like the creator is doing everything in his power just to sex up the game, it'll infuriate me.
For 40k I just don't feel like generic sexiness really... fits. Like, at all.
Slaanesh are awesome however. They're far from generic.
47728
Post by: Gutstuf Ugfang
The gritty sci fi story of Warhammer 40K is a dark, grim, and far from perfect. Slaanesh/Dark Eldar are ecstasy/decadence, theres no real way to sugar coat it. if you dont want your children exposed at a young age to such things then be a responsible parent. enough said.
11892
Post by: Shadowbrand
Keep it in good taste.
83381
Post by: Hive Fleet Cerberus
I dont particularly like it, and find that it would probably throw off the mood on the tabletop, but if you want to do it then go right ahead.
Edit: Ah damn, did not realize that this thread died in 2012. So,uh, sorry for the necropost. Wont happen again
74232
Post by: poppa G
Meh, even if it's painted well I still think it's pretty lame.
79992
Post by: Bishop F Gantry
Whoa do you suffer Spontaneous Human Combustion whenever you see yourself in the mirror while showering or something?
Aka dont care.
52315
Post by: korbenn
It depends on the context. I’m fine with both female and male nudity. Also why are lots of alien races being depicted as apparently nude or bare foot in lots of sci-fi ranges?
In case of player armies:
Vehicle/Banner pin-ups are fine in my book so are demons, brutes and berserker/Amazonian characters.
Ragtag characters with torn or little revealing tribal garments are ok too by me. Otherwise characters who can’t dress themselves. Like the rat ogre model who has both his hands replaced with blades. Why does he have a loincloth? Is there some Skaven slave whose ungrateful task it is too dress this violent and unpredictable creature. I would like to see that model. Complete with a look in his eyes that says he is dead inside.
Depicting explicit sexual acts on vehicles and banners is just lame and only serves to provoke a reaction if you plan to bring them to the gaming table. Not to mention if you have miniatures preforming sexual acts. Don’t have sex during a battle goddammit it would get you killed!
Commissars don’t put up with that gak!
In case of miniatures not for playing, or for those used in dioramas:
I would say go nuts. You want to depict a hedonistic orgy of excessive sex. Fine by me.
Rat ogre/Demon with an erection. Sure.
The horrors of war, featuring rape and murder. I can go with that.
Keep your weird kinks to yourself if you know it’s going to offend lots of people also don’t bring them to painting competitions and other public displays. The “it’s art and I am being provocative” won’t go down well in general. Especially if it only serves, to ruin other peoples fun.
Although you still need to hide it like porn if you ever get visitors.
84813
Post by: inferno445
It's okay as long as the nudity isn't overboard and makes sense in the lore/fluff/whatever else you call it.
78973
Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl
So, hurray for necroposting !
I actually would enjoy more non-sexual nudity and less sexualization of female characters.
49983
Post by: gobbsmakkar
I like it , but use common sence when your in a public place where kids are.
124786
Post by: tauist
They're your minis, you do what you will with them. But for an old geezer like me, that Kindom Death Hentai ish feels weird when sweaty beardy hikikomori's are in the same room. I don't want to be smelling any funny erections nahmean
34439
Post by: Formosa
keep it tastful, anything goes is ANYTHING goes and there are several illegal and taboo subjects that should not be crossed even in the name of art.
6209
Post by: odinsgrandson
 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:So, hurray for necroposting !
I actually would enjoy more non-sexual nudity and less sexualization of female characters.
Indeed.
I don't think it is a good fit for every game (by a lot) but I rather like grotesque nudity on minis. Like the body horror stuff you see in Kingdom Death or Cthulhu Death May Die.
105865
Post by: Rolsheen
It is art - anything goes.
But keep it relevant, yes Slaanesh daemons are more than likely to be showing a lot of skin, female Commissars are not.
|
|
