Hi Dakka's,

I just wanted to talk about a new mini GW will be releasing. Its called the "Regimental Mascot".

First Id like to say I'm not complaining about the mini or wanting it stopped from being released. Also, I'm not a fan of animals but when I see this mini it reminds me of the "dancing bears". If you're not familiar with that term then it might sound rather funny. Its not.

The dancing bears are in regard to the bears you see in various countries forced to dance for your entertainment. People don't realise the torture these creatures go through. The bear mother is killed and babys taken. They're then put under buckets for 3 days to "calm them down" or something similarly stupid. The ones that live then have their teeth pulled out and are forced to dance. They never get any 'real' food and are locked away in cages.

If GM released the mini a little different I guess I wouldn't have such a bad feeling towards it. As it is, the bear looks sad (yes, I find it does lol) and has that big chain around its neck. The standing pose seems to magnify this for me as well. The eye patch is suppose to give character I guess but for me, makes the whole thing worse. Even the handler looks like troublesome.

Maybe Im just being paranoid. I know Ill never buy it or like it. I just hope people understand what it seems to portray to myself and maybe others. I have no issues with the other GW minis either.

Pic is below. Make up your own mind. I don't want a troll fight, just what you think? Will you buy it? Do you agree with me? Maybe I'm as mad as a Troll Slayer?

I see what you're getting at, and I understand completely, but we have to remember this is just a game of 28mm high models.

While I don't like the mini very much either, and I think bears are awesome, and definitely don't agree with how they're treated in this regard... it IS only a mini... and talk like this is how the Daemonettes with boobies got discontinued :(

Seriously, it's just a miniature. Are you going to complain next about the sexual trafficking that the Dark Eldar take part in?

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Seriously, it's just a miniature. Are you going to complain next about the sexual trafficking that the Dark Eldar take part in?

Oh the noes! The Skorne are torturing baby Titans!

It is just some pewter and paint man chill, its not like GW chained some bears up and made them dance to get a good picture to use for the sculpt.

anticitizen013 wrote:While I don't like the mini very much either, and I think bears are awesome, and definitely don't agree with how they're treated in this regard... it IS only a mini... and talk like this is how the Daemonettes with boobies got discontinued :(

+1 damn straight!

Platuan4th wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Seriously, it's just a miniature. Are you going to complain next about the sexual trafficking that the Dark Eldar take part in?

Oh the noes! The Skorne are torturing baby Titans!

Ah yes, I had almost forgotten about that. At least they're not removing the Titan's teeth and making them dance. Then that'd be going too far.

I kind of agree with the OP. I don't care a lot about it, but I think that it's a pretty grim mini. Also given that GW could have created a new, cool fantasy creature or brought back an old favorite for this, it's kind of a wasted opportunity.

Polonius wrote:I kind of agree with the OP. I don't care a lot about it, but I think that it's a pretty grim mini. Also given that GW could have created a new, cool fantasy creature or brought back an old favorite for this, it's kind of a wasted opportunity.

I agree with OP as well. however everyone i have a solution.

This gives us all the chance to do some conversions!

You know like... snip that guy's head off and leave it next to the bears feet.

Cause , and effect!

I just think they missed the mark with the mini. I think it's supposed to be amusing, but I don't feel what they're trying to get at.

Most bears would maul that poor sucker standing next to them like that, too . And to top it off, it has a drum!?

It's a fantasy setting... maybe it's not actually a bear, but a soldier from the regiment on punishment duty. Get the regimental wizard to turn him into a bear for a month. Blam, instant mascot.



While the whole 'dancing bear' thing can be pretty grim in the real world, the mini is more or less in keeping with the setting, and aside from the eyepatch doesn't appear to be too badly treated. Even still has his claws.

LunaHound wrote:I agree with OP as well. however everyone i have a solution.

This gives us all the chance to do some conversions!

You know like... snip that guy's head off and leave it next to the bears feet.

Cause , and effect!

Luna wins yet another thread.
I don't play fantasy, but I wanna buy that mini just to make said conversion.

Must......not.....get.....on.....soapbox.....


errrrg........

F it.

Seriously? You are talking about a game where the fluff of the entire universe is bloody gorey war on a galactic scale... but you're "affected" by the poor bear.

Sounds like a PETA member complaining about the treatment of animals while eating a big mac.

I'm pretty tired of PETAspeak. In my profession, I see children, the mentally handicapped, and the eldarly abused, neglected, and generally thrown away, but all I hear about is the poor animals.....

Forget the animals. They are secondary to people. Can we please focus on humanity before we move on to the animals?

But people only pay attention to things right in front of them, once someone else has made a big deal about it, and since you will NEVER see the abuse of humanity, you won't jump on THAT bandwagon.

Impress me. Prove me wrong. Volunteer at a nursing home.

Taking it too seriously I think. Real life is one thing, a mini is a mini. I'm not about to go treat a bear like kak just because I don't mind this after all...

Better question is, if this is disturbing, why aren't all the guys with swords and guns hacking each other apart and blowing villages up a cause for concern?

For me, I like it because it is so morose and horrible, it adds flavor to the cold, sociopathic war hammer world, and paints a picture of how miserable the average life is there.

My army is a bunch of bloodthirsty slaughterhell skullfiend daemons, but that bear in your army offends me!

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If they cannot handle some serious scorn, they should think before sharing that opinion with others.

grizgrin wrote:Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If they cannot handle some serious scorn, they should think before sharing that opinion with others.

That's exactly the sort of attitude that stifles discussion. And is exactly why dakka has rules requiring posters to behave themselves in discussions.



Let's keep it on track, folks. You're welcome to disagree with the opinions of others, but at least try to respect the fact that not everyone will share the same opinion on a given topic, and keep it civil...

I don't think you need to be a PETA fanatic to have more empathy for a wild animal (incapable of guilt) in a grim setting than you do for humans. WFB isn't as grimdark as 40k, but there is still a pretty heavy feeling of "there are no innocents."

And I don't think anybody is saying the mini shouldn't be made or bought. I'm just saying that my empire army wouldn't use such a mascot, so i'm not buying the mini. It does make me want to convert up some regimental mascots to use as objectives...

insaniak wrote:
While the whole 'dancing bear' thing can be pretty grim in the real world, the mini is more or less in keeping with the setting, and aside from the eyepatch doesn't appear to be too badly treated. Even still has his claws.

I like to think the bear is, in fact, the regiment's secret weapon from the frozen wastes of Kislev, rescued and being groomed for vengeance against the evil Chaos bastards who killed his mother.

Also, notice: the handler has a calliope styled instrument.
I just wish he had a picnic basket.

yeah i agree with the OP the model is a bit disturbing and imo unnecessary (is there any unit that uses a bear like this btw?)

It's not meant as a playable mini. It's from a bunch of sets of collector's models they're releasing with the new Warhammer.

Two words.

Bear Cavalry.

Converters, find a way.

OoieGoie wrote:Also, Im not a fan of animals but when I see this mini it reminds me of the "dancing bears". If you're not familiar with that term then it might sound rather funny. Its not.

I have to say that that's honestly the first thing I thought when I saw this mini on the pre-order thing the other day.

Don't know what they were thinking. Might as well have modelled him on a small stool, or wearing a Fez.

I just wanted to throw some support toward the OP. It's not like they declared everyone who might use this mini to be evil or morally wrong. They also specifically noted they weren't complaining or wanted it stopped, they just wanted to note some background information people might not realize.

Personally, like the OP but additionally as a reasonably serious animal rights supporter, I find the mini a little concerning, but no more so than people playing Dark Eldar, or people who focus on playing Nazis in historical games, or wargaming in general. Obviously I'm not so concerned as to not play myself, but it's a legitimate topic of discussion---what exactly does it mean to play and encourage wargaming, glorify morally wrong actors, etc.?

What is the mini used for? It looks like an Empire fig but I don't recall it being in the army list. If it is I suppose we have to put it into the context of the setting. It isn't as if The Empire is some bastion of progressive thinking or that the Warhammer Universe is full of rainbows and sunshine. I am appalled at the fact that stuff like this still goes on and hope that someday we can stop this bizarre abuse but in the Warhammer setting it doesn't exactly seem out of place.

Of course I also understand that one shouldn't want to appear to be endorsing this behavior either.

Thortek wrote:It is just some pewter and paint man chill, its not like GW chained some bears up and made them dance to get a good picture to use for the sculpt.

You know that for a fact?

Ahtman wrote:What is the mini used for? It looks like an Empire fig but I don't recall it being in the army list.

I don't think it's in the list, to be honest.

But man, it'd be a great stand-in for a Banner and Musician in a Militia or State Troops Regiment.

tjkopena wrote:I just wanted to throw some support toward the OP. It's not like they declared everyone who might use this mini to be evil or morally wrong. They also specifically noted they weren't complaining or wanted it stopped, they just wanted to note some background information people might not realize.

Personally, like the OP but additionally as a reasonably serious animal rights supporter, I find the mini a little concerning, but no more so than people playing Dark Eldar, or people who focus on playing Nazis in historical games, or wargaming in general. Obviously I'm not so concerned as to not play myself, but it's a legitimate topic of discussion---what exactly does it mean to play and encourage wargaming, glorify morally wrong actors, etc.?

I think, at least with GW, that there's a certain "cartoon" style grimness over much of the setting. Berzerkers of Khorne are pretty awful guys, but in such an over the top, fantastical way that there's little connection between the violence inherent in their backstory and any form of reality. Compare their fluff to, say, a piece about a character who first starting killing with an uncle that sexually abused him and his siblings for years, which set him off on a quest to fill the psychological holes left by the abuse through random violence. The first is fun and ridiculous, the latter is just upsetting.

For all of it's grimness, the GW universe is still a place of escapist fantasy. Confronting very real, if minor, evils is a little unsettling, even in the backdrop of breathtaking evil.

I like the mini, [omg no way] though the dancing bear stuff is pretty harsh, I just sort of like this mini. Does this make me evil. Maybe its a fighting bear of some sort, that when music plays it goes crazy and starts kicking ass. That's how I look at it.

Polonius wrote:
For all of it's grimness, the GW universe is still a place of escapist fantasy.

You obliviously never played a Ratcatcher in WFRPG (1st or 2nd edition of course). Sometimes it is over the top but other elements are much grimmer and closer to reality, it really just seems to depend on the writer.

This thread has actually compelled me to cease over a year of lurking and post something. So, uh, congrats.

The fact that it is a bear and is called "Regimental Mascot" immediately made me think of Wojtek (Voytek), the brown bear cub that was adopted in 1942 by Polish troops stationed in Iran. Wojtek became the mascot of an artillery supply company and helped to haul ammunition during the battle of Monte Cassino.

Disappointed that no one has brought him up yet, since I'd say that's the most obvious inspiration (especially since Wotjek spent his postwar years in the Edinburgh Zoo and the story is apparently well-known in England).

I think you're reading far too much into it, OoieGoie.

Karon wrote:

Thortek wrote:It is just some pewter and paint man chill, its not like GW chained some bears up and made them dance to get a good picture to use for the sculpt.

You know that for a fact?

I'm sure they used google and found a picture.

@OP: I guess this is the difference between us. To you the handler looks troublesome, to me he looks like he's been near mauled once or twice. Model doesn't bother me anymore than having an entire faction dedicated to excruciating torture lasting for months while the torturers get off on your screams and use your blood for unpleasant purposes or the faction thats dedicated to mass genocide. Considerably less actually.

Yeah, dancing bears and bear-baiting were cruel. (still are in the countries they're practised in)

So? GW isn't actually capturing bears; they're making a model of one. In the same way that they aren't committing interstellar genocide; they're just making models of men doing so. Some bits of history aren't nice, but you can't get offended every time you see a picture of it.

As a side note, I think the designers are aware that led bears would be frowned on today. It's not supposed to be funny, more a bit grim, in keeping with the black plague, dirty peasants atmosphere of WHFB.

WHFB is a fantasy game based on mediaeval/renaissance history.

In those times this sort of cruelty was widely practised. Elizabethan London was host to Shakespeare's Globe and bear baiting pits.

That said, mediaeval war involved a lot of massacring and raping of prisoners -- I don't think we want to see that depicted in miniature form.

To me the bear is the acceptable side of the line, however I can understand if other people don't want to use it.

I don't play WHFB so it doesn't affect me directly.

In olden times, a wild animal that was captured and raised for the circus, menagerie, or traveling entertainment would have a chain with a metal ring through the nose. It made the beast easier to control. GW didn't have the guts to portray things quite so grim/dark as that.

I agree with the OP that it is disturbing, especially considering that the mascot is for one of the "good" races. I play my mini games for the epic confrontation between two warlike combatant races, playing out the eternal dance of war for the gods. Representation of the casual evils and cruelties that beings perpetrate on one another I can do without.

Polonius wrote:Compare their fluff to, say, a piece about a character who first starting killing with an uncle that sexually abused him and his siblings for years, which set him off on a quest to fill the psychological holes left by the abuse through random violence. The first is fun and ridiculous, the latter is just upsetting.

But that story DOES sound rather like the background to Mad Donna Ulanti from Necromunda. GW do sometimes 'throw in' quite disturbing background pieces in their stories, they just never elaborate on them.

Anyway, to the OP...

I don't find the bear offensive at all. Regimental 'mascots' of animals (including Wojtek mentioned above) have been seen throughout history. I remember going to Cardiff Castle, who i believe still have one of their regiment's goat 'mascot' stuffed and on display. Warhammer is loosely based on various periods of history, and the Empire, of all the armies in WHFB, are most likely to have them. It's a characterful replacement for a musician or banner bearer.

If people find the idea 'morally wrong' then, well it WAS morally wrong, but so are an awful lot of wars, and that's what we pretend to do in this game. I can hardly say it's worse than the idea of a lobotomised Servitor or one of the DE slave girl minis...

As a former dolphin trainer and well-versed expert in a wide variety of animal life ... and definitely someone who not only cares about the enviro, but spent an entire first career proving that care ...

It's a little toy soldier.

Get off your butts and do something material to help actual wildlife, the environment, whatever. Seriously. Sniping at "offensive" toy soldiers from the peanut gallery is just silly.

Warhammer is a grimdark setting with grimdark miniatures. This one is no exception and certainly not glorifying dancing bears (that are still existing in Russia BTW). But this is nothing versus what the Empire (or Orcs or Daemons or Skaven) does to their enemies. Skaven even have slaves as a common unit. Not to speak of all those skulls.So this collector's item is just a minor example of how grimdark the Warhammer World is.

As others have suggested I would put the bear baiting and dancing into a historical context.

It happened, and given the Renaissance flavour of Empire and the Fantasy setting, it would be fairly normal for a hurdy gurdy player and dancing bear.

Dancing bears were still being seen with barrel organs in England in the late 19th century and possibly even later.

What's with the caricature style with these figures anyway? Fails to hit the mark imho

FWIW, my favourite animal are bears! they are amazing.
The cruelty still being inflicted on them in some parts of the world is unforgivable.
As a proud Warwickshire chap it is only right to love the Bears!

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:As a proud Warwickshire chap it is only right to love the Bears!

Bear lovin' in Warickshire?

[Adds to places to avoid list]

"Abuse an animal is bad,Killing people is ok."
You think like this,right?

Maybe like this,
"Killing people is way to defend animals! DESTROY ALL HUMANS!!"

Anyway,its just mini.

It's just a game.

We can compare this to totalitarianisms/Imperium, nazis in WWII games...

notprop wrote:

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:As a proud Warwickshire chap it is only right to love the Bears!

Bear lovin' in Warickshire?

[Adds to places to avoid list]

Avoid it if you want mate
your loss it's a great County!


C'mon you BEARS!!!
Not doing so well in the proper game but not bad at the one dayers!

Sir Motor
Who says that it is right to kill humans?
Compassion for animals is not mutually exclusive of compassion for humans.

What's the matter? Too grim and dark for you?

CitizenPrime wrote:Seriously? You are talking about a game where the fluff of the entire universe is bloody gorey war on a galactic scale...

This is a fantasy miniatures, not 40k!

Kroothawk wrote:Warhammer is a grimdark setting with grimdark miniatures... So this collector's item is just a minor example of how grimdark the Warhammer World is.

Raxor wrote:What's the matter? Too grim and dark for you?

I could be wrong, but I've always reserved the phrase "grimdark" for 40k as well. Fantasy is not the same, imho, and definitely not as dark. I am unpleasantly reminded of the historical crusades by many of the space marine pics/jargon. I do not find the same in fantasy... but that is just my $0.02. I just don't think it's as interchangeable as people put, and since this is obviously an empire-type mini, I think the OP had a good point.

If the intent of the mini was Chaos or Dark Eldar enslaving a bear, that's one thing. I think the intent of the mini was to be funny/amusing, which it does not really pull off for me.

I don't really have a problem with it, I just think it's silly to defend something as being "grimdark" when (imho) that was not the intention of the sculpt.

Genosaurer wrote:The fact that it is a bear and is called "Regimental Mascot" immediately made me think of Wojtek (Voytek), the brown bear cub that was adopted in 1942 by Polish troops stationed in Iran. Wojtek became the mascot of an artillery supply company and helped to haul ammunition during the battle of Monte Cassino.

Thanks for registering and posting this! I would never have guessed something like that... it does make sense as the inspiration behind the model, though!

MVBrandt wrote:As a former dolphin trainer and well-versed expert in a wide variety of animal life ... and definitely someone who not only cares about the enviro, but spent an entire first career proving that care ...

It's a little toy soldier.

Get off your butts and do something material to help actual wildlife, the environment, whatever. Seriously. Sniping at "offensive" toy soldiers from the peanut gallery is just silly.

Whose been sniping? I think some people have said they find it personally disturbing, but I'm not sure why saying that so offends you.

Likewise, it's just a little opinion on a toy soldier.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sir Motor wrote:"Abuse an animal is bad,Killing people is ok."
You think like this,right?

Maybe like this,
"Killing people is way to defend animals! DESTROY ALL HUMANS!!"

Anyway,its just mini.

yes. Because I find a mini depicting an abused animal unpleasant, I clearly am a sociopath that wants to end human life. You caught me.

There seems to be a great zest in some people in this thread to shout down those that are "offended" by this mini. That's fine, as i think a grand total of.. let me count... zero people have said they were offended. I think you'll find that some people find the tone of the mini to clash a little with what they expect from WFB, particularly the empire. After thinking and reading some posts, I can see that it does show a bit more of the real atmosphere of the Empire. Still, my Empire regiments wouldn't enslave a bear as a mascot, so I won't be purchasing it.

Ahtman wrote:What is the mini used for? It looks like an Empire fig but I don't recall it being in the army list.

insaniak wrote:It's not meant as a playable mini. It's from a bunch of sets of collector's models they're releasing with the new Warhammer.

...in a similar vein to the Eldar Bonesinger they released back with the last Eldar codex. It doesn't do anything, although you're free to find creative ways to wedge it into your army.

You know what is harsh?

1. people maiming, slaughtering and causing injury to other humans and/or sentient beings.

2. wide-scale war, enslavement,occupation and oppression.

3. Exploitation of the poor and powerless

4. Greed, military/political/reigious corruption, genocide, torture, etc., etc.

5. necromancy and demon-worship

and the list could go on and on...


Of all the things to take offense at or take a moral stand on in GW games/fluff a bear with an eye patch seems pretty low on the list.

CT GAMER wrote:

Of all the things to take offense at or take a moral stand on in GW games/fluff a bear with an eye patch seems pretty low on the list.

Again, great point. Again, nobody has spoken of taking offense or a moral stand.

Genosaurer wrote:This thread has actually compelled me to cease over a year of lurking and post something. So, uh, congrats.

The fact that it is a bear and is called "Regimental Mascot" immediately made me think of Wojtek (Voytek), the brown bear cub that was adopted in 1942 by Polish troops stationed in Iran. Wojtek became the mascot of an artillery supply company and helped to haul ammunition during the battle of Monte Cassino.

Disappointed that no one has brought him up yet, since I'd say that's the most obvious inspiration (especially since Wotjek spent his postwar years in the Edinburgh Zoo and the story is apparently well-known in England).

I think you're reading far too much into it, OoieGoie.

I had never heard of this before, it's quite a light hearted tale. Perhaps it is based on this afterall.

Genosaurer wrote:Wotjek spent his postwar years in the Edinburgh Zoo and the story is apparently well-known in England

Edinburgh being in Scotland. Scotland is part of the UK, not England. Cheers!

Polonius wrote:as i think a grand total of.. let me count... zero people have said they were offended.

don't cast yourself as the prosecuted one.

All of which are represented by Warhammer on a grand scale

I agree CT, but if people find the representation of animal cruelty disturbing, it is probably because they have some empathy and the ability to link it with what is actually happening to bears as we speak. There is no need to chastise people for this.

Klawz wrote:

Polonius wrote:as i think a grand total of.. let me count... zero people have said they were offended.

don't cast yourself as the prosecuted one.

I'm pretty sure you meant persecuted. And how did I cast myself as anything? I'm no victim, I'm just saying that there seem to be a lot of people in this thread with their "shut up you hippies about being offended" rhetoric on hair trigger, despite it nobody really being offended.

And, I suppose, at least one person in this thread has heavily implied that those that don't like this mini want to kill all of humanity. So... there is that.

Polonius wrote:

Klawz wrote:

Polonius wrote:as i think a grand total of.. let me count... zero people have said they were offended.

don't cast yourself as the prosecuted one.

I'm pretty sure you meant persecuted. And how did I cast myself as anything? I'm no victim, I'm just saying that there seem to be a lot of people in this thread with their "shut up you hippies about being offended" rhetoric on hair trigger, despite it nobody really being offended.

And, I suppose, at least one person in this thread has heavily implied that those that don't like this mini want to kill all of humanity. So... there is that.

I did. But I'm sure I can name at least two people who agree with you.

Everyone loves armored war bear and bear Calvary.

Why they chose to make these instead of ^

I dont get you GW....

I'm with the OP on this one. I think it's in poor taste.

CitizenPrime wrote:Must......not.....get.....on.....soapbox.....


errrrg........

F it.

Seriously? You are talking about a game where the fluff of the entire universe is bloody gorey war on a galactic scale... but you're "affected" by the poor bear.

Sounds like a PETA member complaining about the treatment of animals while eating a big mac.

I'm pretty tired of PETAspeak. In my profession, I see children, the mentally handicapped, and the eldarly abused, neglected, and generally thrown away, but all I hear about is the poor animals.....

Forget the animals. They are secondary to people. Can we please focus on humanity before we move on to the animals?

But people only pay attention to things right in front of them, once someone else has made a big deal about it, and since you will NEVER see the abuse of humanity, you won't jump on THAT bandwagon.

Impress me. Prove me wrong. Volunteer at a nursing home.

Ok thanks. Animal suffering isn't more important than human suffering. If there can be any doubt about it, then I agree, but your analysis has nothing to do with this thread.

By releasing this model, GW are tying our own reality to the horrific reality of their 41st century; thus removing a layer of emotional and psychological separation that we have from it, a layer that allows us to enjoy interacting with their reality without being affected by its - intolerably violent, if you care to imagine them - consequences.

In simpler terms, 40k is unreal, and unrealistic, when compared to our world and time; and this model brings it a bit closer to home, too close for some of us.

However, that hardly means they're profoundly wrong to release it. I don't like it, but I can happily avoid the landmine of getting upset about it, or being affected by it, by not buying it.

Legion.

Errrr...three people.
BTW Legion, this is Fantasy, NOT 40K.

Klawz wrote:
BTW Legion, this is Fantasy, NOT 40K.

Oh yeah. I fail at life. Anyway, the sentiment stands, to only a slightly lesser degree.

RiTides wrote:If the intent of the mini was Chaos or Dark Eldar enslaving a bear, that's one thing. I think the intent of the mini was to be funny/amusing, which it does not really pull off for me.

I don't really have a problem with it, I just think it's silly to defend something as being "grimdark" when (imho) that was not the intention of the sculpt.

Buried among all the predictable, tedious "It's just a game!" and "Don't make a big deal of this thing I'm trying to turn into a big deal even though you actually didn't!" responses, this is one of the better observations. Looking at it last night, I couldn't really say it was a bad mini, but it just looked off somehow. I think this is it, I don't know how to interpret it. I can't tell if it's supposed to be humorous or grimdark. The subject matter's not really humorous because of the OP's points, so if that was the intent it would be kind of unfortunate.

Also, not being a Fantasy player myself, someone please tell me that the heavy, metal looking glove on the handler's right hand is the Fantasy equivalent of a powerfist!? (I realize it's probably not, but that would get me even more stoked about starting Fantasy with the new edition!)

Klawz wrote:Errrr...three people.
BTW Legion, this is Fantasy, NOT 40K.

I'm not sure what you're counting. I'm not saying nobody agreed with me, I'm saying that nobody used the specific term "offended" in their post.

Don't think so but it looks like it will make playing his hurdy-gurdy difficult

The Old World is full of ignorant and cruel people. This mini is just a depiction of that.

It's a hilarious mini, you're looking into it too much. The Warhammer universe is many things and kind to animals is not one of them.

PETA agenda do not want thx bye

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:All of which are represented by Warhammer on a grand scale

I agree CT, but if people find the representation of animal cruelty disturbing, it is probably because they have some empathy and the ability to link it with what is actually happening to bears as we speak. There is no need to chastise people for this.

And all the things I listed are happening to human beings as we speak.

My point was that the themes and imagery of this sort of hobby trivializes lots of things that are actually ongoing in the world, but that most gamers have a disconnect.

Most view it simply as entertainment/fantasy with no real-world connotations. For most it is simply a game that utilizes imagery and concepts that might be seen as repulsive in real life as fictional details of a fantasy setting in order to provide atmosphere.

I found it interesting that a bear with an eye patch was the straw that broke the camels back so to speak given many of the human focused atrocities that are central to most of GW's fluff/game imagery...

The original poster had had his own personal "danger sense" triggered by this miniature and was wondering if the emotions it was arousing in him was shared, so yes Polonius he was opening the door to inquire if the miniature is in some way morally offensive or repugnant.

I am reminded of a young man who used to be a customer at my game store that went off on multiple tours of Iraq and upon returning never returned to wargaming or paintball. For him the thought of glorifying and "play-acting" such things was no longer something he wished to indulge in.

Polonius, try to relax just a little huh?

Thanks for the comments to my post. I think some people missed the point I was making though. I was just wondering if anyone could see where I was coming from. Considering nearly everyone likes the mini in some way I am pretty much alone on this. Thats ok.

Yes, it is just a mini in a game of slaughter and death. Yet here we have a bear with a chain. Not a bad thing in the light of things. Was just stating "I" found it bad taste. Dark Eldar may offend others too but not myself so I get the point.

Some stated its just a 40k toy. Well a ton of things could have been done to make the mini more in the feel of 40k and less in the feel of the little "dancing bears". The way its been made to me looks like who ever created it used the dancing bears as reference. I dont see much of "40k" in the feel of this mini. Personally I would have liked to see the bear without the chain. It would be cooler to have the bear as if its a loyal pet that protects its owner. Hell, put an ork head in its mouth or on the ground next to it. Have the owner pointing towards an enemy and the bear growling in that direction. That would be cool. I dunno, whatever...

Some of you mentioned we worry about animals more then humans and that humans come first. Maybe in your world they do. I dont see humans becoming extinct anytime soon. If horses over populated the planet and sucked the resources dry we would be killing them too (Ill leave it at that, better to use on another forum).

As for this Wojtek (Voytek), I have never heard of them but a very good point. If someone can see the min in a positive light then thats great news. Its a pity the mini doesn't have more of a positive vibe about it for you.

I think the model is pretty amusing. Its a game peice for use in game I don't see this as any different from something like the warmachine nightmore warjack that has a small child cowering in fear or the slave girls from arsubral vechts pleasure yatch raider/ravager. Its meant to be fun and amusing some may think its in bad taste which is there right, personally I won't buy it cuase it will probably be something like $40 but I saw it and I laughed. If it was given to me I'd use it an an objective like the mad dwarf that is tied up.

Razzle wrote:It's a hilarious mini, you're looking into it too much. The Warhammer universe is many things and kind to animals is not one of them.

PETA agenda do not want thx bye

To the point. I agree.

Planets do tend to get completely wiped out in 40k.

OoieGoie wrote:
Some of you mentioned we worry about animals more then humans and that humans come first.

Just to clarify: that isn't what i said at all.

I never ranked the value of concern for humans in comparison to animals. Both are equally valid.

My observation was that i found it interesting that of the many thousands of images, stories, and miniatures that make up what GW has produced; most of which glorifies and is based upon some form of human suffering, that the one miniature you keyed in on was a bear with a collar and eye patch.

BTW, I think it's safe to say that the sculptor was indeed referencing the dancing bears, and the "sadness" of the bear was intentional and vitla to selling the intended mood of the model...

hmmm PETA

People for the
Eating of
Tasty
Animals

count me in.

as far as the miniature, if you dont like it dont buy it. personally i wouldnt buy it cause i dont like the way it looks. same reason i didnt buy the current dark eldar wyches i think they looked horrid.

A bit off-topic,but:

While I can´t understand the problem with the bear, which I think is a very cool miniature, I have a similar problem with the Vampire Counts Corpse Cart. Yes,
it´s fluff makes sense and there used to be corpse carts in former editions of the game, too. But I think the pile of dead on top of it is too realistic and very tasteless.
They could have made a less realistic and more dark humourus corpsecart; the way it´s looking now reminds me in a very gruesome way of the victims of the nazis.

I'm a fan of maintaining animals in the best reasonable conditions you can for welfare purposes.

Needless suffering is needless suffering. I possess enough higher reasoning to realise that animals are capable of feeling pain and debilitation due to the way they are treated.

I understand that this mini represents a historically factual imitation, that it represents a historically factual imitation of something I despise, and that still occurs today in parts of the world, means that it's not something I'd wish to own. Perhaps I'll be taking a jovial pig dressed like a Brettonian or a mastiff in armour.

PS, believing living things shouldn't needlessly suffer doesn't make you a PETAfag!!! or whatever, it means you possess empathy. I have hunted and fished throughout my life and that has certainly aided in my opinion about ensuring decent living and clean, efficient ,and as painless as possible, death.

lixulana wrote:hmmm PETA

People for the
Eating of
Tasty
Animals

count me in.

as far as the miniature, if you dont like it dont buy it.

Pointlessly emitting trite assertions?

Of course we are going to buy it

The humorous approach makes it worse inho Bigfoot. Don't see how any amount of Post-Modern irony helps tbh.

Umm....yeah.
So in a game with hedonistic murderers and destroyer gods and undead hordes you worry about the dancing bear.
I don't really see any problem with this. It's not actually a REAL bear with chains and stuff, it's a *representation* of a bear. Why does anyone really care...
Besides, PETA can go shove it sometimes anyway.
P.S. Oh yeah, and any dancing bear that can stand on two legs as well is even more awesome.
Greetz,
Mr. Self Destruct

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:


The humorous approach makes it worse inho Biffoot. Don't see how any amount of Post-Modern irony helps tbh.

By saying "humorous" I didn´t mean that this would make a pile of dead nicer to look at . I thought one could have done something completely unrealistic or
something full of zombie-humour, like the usual over-the-top stuff instead of a realistic scene of massacre.

Mr. Self Destruct wrote:Umm....yeah.
So in a game with hedonistic murderers and destroyer gods and undead hordes you worry about the dancing bear.
I don't really see any problem with this. It's not actually a REAL bear with chains and stuff, it's a *representation* of a bear. Why does anyone really care...
Besides, PETA can go shove it sometimes anyway.
P.S. Oh yeah, and any dancing bear that can stand on two legs as well is even more awesome.
Greetz,
Mr. Self Destruct

Perhaps we could also include camp followers like child prostitutes dying of syphalis?

To be honest when I first saw the mini in white dwarf I thought i was quite cool, I did not even make the real life connection to Dancing Bears or bear baiting. The chain i thought was just to keep it under control (dogs on leads anyone) and the patch I thought just showed it had been through the wars. If i'm not mistaken later in the same issue is a bulldog with a wooden leg, I assumed that any damage done was done by the enemy and that it was a beoloved pet/mascot to the regiment.

Looking at it again after reading this thread I can sort of see what th OP meant. If it was menat to be funny could have been funnier and the bear does sort of look sad, but diregarding the fact its "only a mini" in a fantasy game, how do we know its even a bear. Might be wrong here but in a world populated by goatmen, minitors, lizardmen and the whatever I missed how do we know its not a bear man and he normally walks on two legs? don't know if that makes it better.

It's a bit odd trying to reconcile reality and wargaming.

Atrocities exist in all of these game worlds. I mean, pick
any game world and you're bound to run into conscription,
civilian casualties, genocide, torture, etc.

But I think the important question is, does a line of good taste exist,
and why do we recognize it?

There IS a line, right? I mean, even though we have Dark Eldar
slavers with slave bodies on the skimmer, we wouldn't want minis
that are suffering gross inhumane behavior. In our minds we know
that these things happen in the games, but graphic depictions would
disturb us greatly.

Maybe this is like the uncanny valley from animating human faces. The more literal
realism we see in our hobby, the more disturbed we're bound to get.

I don't know. Just some random thoughts.

And a note on the bear: the suggestion of torture isn't enough for it
to disturb me. I think models depicting the act of torture itself would
be the thing to do it, but then I'm not so sure. The Fantasy worlds
we play in don't trivialize reality, but they abstract it enough for us
to stomach and even glorify battle.

This is going to be my Golden Demon entry.

I'll paint him like a panda bear and model a cattle prod in the master's hand.

I shall title it... 'Damn! Ran out of baby seals.'

I'm so evil.

Everyone assumes that bears innocent.. I like to think he mauled a bunch of children in an orphanage and is now forced to dance for other children.

You like to think that children got mauled?
What sort of mad, depraved, sadistic are you?

Highlighted part in bold:

malfred wrote:It's a bit odd trying to reconcile reality and wargaming.

Atrocities exist in all of these game worlds. I mean, pick
any game world and you're bound to run into conscription,
civilian casualties, genocide, torture, etc.

But I think the important question is, does a line of good taste exist,
and why do we recognize it?

There IS a line, right? I mean, even though we have Dark Eldar
slavers with slave bodies on the skimmer, we wouldn't want minis
that are suffering gross inhumane behavior. In our minds we know
that these things happen in the games, but graphic depictions would
disturb us greatly.

Maybe this is like the uncanny valley from animating human faces. The more literal
realism we see in our hobby, the more disturbed we're bound to get.

I don't know. Just some random thoughts.

I think this actually hits the nail on the head. This mini disturbs the OP because it reminds them of an instance of extreme cruelty to bears in reality. The corpse cart for vampire counts disturbs another poster because it reminds them of the way Nazis piled bodies in concentration camps. I think the line of "bad taste" is usually crossed when we can relate to the cruelty in a way that's too close to reality. There have been a number of times when people attmempted to model IG as Nazis, and it is nearly universally decried as being in bad taste, because it basically reminds all of us of something atrocious in reality.

This mini doesn't touch that nerve for most, so it's not as much of an issue for many of us. But I can see why it would disturb the OP. And for what it's worth, some of the Dark Eldar slave models (or slave models by other mini makers) do disturb me- I might want to play the "bad guys", but actually depicting torture or slavery in my models hits too close to reality for me. I know others might not be bothered by it, but it crosses that "line of taste" that malfred mentions above.

For example, I play a tree army for fantasy. And while I like my trees to be a bit evil, kind of like the forest of mirkwood in Lord of the Rings, I don't actually want to model a person being torn limb from limb by my treeman. I don't know, it's just a bit too much for me. I guess in chess I could model or animate a gruesome deathmatch between pieces, but I prefer just to take the one that lost off the board . I love competition, but torture, cruelty, and inhumanity are things I don't want modelled in my wargames, even if it is something that would occur in reality. That separation from reality is a key reason why I enjoy these wargames, but don't want to experience an actual war.

Just my $0.02

I hope the OP never finds the Malifaux line. There's some stuff there way more disturbing than this. This fig is poor taste IMO.

This miniature is -edit by moderator- sad. - So is deliberately bypassing language filter. Don't do it. - the Of course it's just a game, but nonetheless. They may incorporate bear mascots, okay, but not ones that look so sad. Another sad thing is the internet toughmanship on display in this thread. Disagreeing is one thing, making fun of someone who cares is another.

*shrugs* by the look of the handler is he handling the bear or is the bear handling him? He looks to be a bit mauled to me.

Lets assume the people that found it found it ransacking an orphanage and killing babies and this is its just reward. Oops too grimdark for fantasy I suppose.

back to 40k where you get captured, tortured for months on end, get skinned alive where the torturers get off on your screams and use your blood as... unpleasantries before being sacrificed to daemons and spend an eternity as a whipping/******* slave.
Coming from a line of GW products a bear with a handler aint that bad.

I Look at this mini and think....Where the hell does this fit into ANY army or faction in the Warhammer universe?

Yep it does seem in poor taste, all the more so for me because it is so random.

Even as a collectors mini it bears no relation to Warhammer. All the sculpter has done is put a stupid drum on the bear to make it vaguely fantasy, very vague indeed.

I would buy it. In fact im planning on getting it when i start an empire army

*shrug* I dont see the problem about it, people dont seem to complain about Shemale demons or obvious BDSM references with slaanesh, and yet they make a song n' dance about a bear.

ghosty wrote:I would buy it. In fact im planning on getting it when i start an empire army

*shrug* I dont see the problem about it, people dont seem to complain about Shemale demons or obvious BDSM references with slaanesh, and yet they make a song n' dance about a bear.

Ridiculous comparison is ridiculous.

I AM A BEAR. I HAVE... BEAR POWERS!

I like it, but then again, I thought that the Soviet Attack Bears of RA3 were awesome too, and I can't imagine what horrors they must have gone through at the mercy of Tim Curry.

Ooiegoie: I see your point, and see how someone could find this mini in bad taste.

I, for one, am not as affected by it, but if we were playing I would even go so far as to proxy it out for a different fig if you so asked. (Assuming you asked nicely.)

I mean, I understand people saying 'It's only a game!' but on the other hand, it IS only a game, and I am not so proud of my work that I DEMAND it be on the table.

12thRonin wrote:I hope the OP never finds the Malifaux line. There's some stuff there way more disturbing than this. This fig is poor taste IMO.

Malifaux also in no way resembles reality in any way. As horrible as a giant evil stuffed teddy bear might be, it doesn't reflect real suffering.

I find your zombie western six shooter duelist offensive

daedalus wrote:I AM A BEAR. I HAVE... BEAR POWERS!

I like it, but then again, I thought that the Soviet Attack Bears of RA3 were awesome too, and I can't imagine what horrors they must have gone through at the mercy of Tim Curry.

Daedalus, that's exactly it for me. The attack bears of Red Alert 3 were obvious attempts at over-the-top stereotype/hilarity. This miniature doesn't bother me personally, but it's sculpt does not make it obvious whether it is an attempt at humor or not.

So that's where it fell short for me, even though I am not offended by it... I think they could have made it a lot more over the top and funny and it would have worked for me.

Also, this is a cool image from the Wojtek wikipedia page that Genosaurer linked to. Now something like this would have been pure win, imho


Show me a bear carrying ammunition or loading a cannon for its handler, and that would have been so very cool!!

Nice one RiTides!

Would bears firing small cannons from the hip be acceptable for my Dwarves? Mobile artillary is just what they are wanting.

Well mobile is a relative term where Dwarves are concerned

Servitors, cyber-cherubs, most of chaos, and most of the fluff in the the WH and WH40k universe...really, what you described is a little tame for it.

Yes, it is a barbaric, and pretty damn evil practice. I don't really see how this, though, can be an endorsement of dancing bears.

Perhaps I'll buy one just to resculpt it, with the bear in power armour, sipping a martini, wearing a monocle and making the guy pull his chariot.

The next thing you know people will be promoting themselfs with a rat holding a tiny teddy bear .......

RiTides wrote:
Show me a bear carrying ammunition or loading a cannon for its handler, and that would have been so very cool!!

I think we should combine the best of everything: We have bears wearing monocles that fire cannons that are loaded with more bears that, once propelled, shoot guns.

It's cruel, over the top, and involves more dakka. All at the same time.

i don't like the mini, but thats just because i prefer certain sculpts over others, it does however fit into the fantasy landscape of the game though, the empire is based on a meld of medieval and renaissance europe, and this sort of thing did happen so i don't see the point in the arguement of the OP, this is further undermined by the fact that the game is basically about killing things in war, under the OP arguement the whole of warhammer should be banned as 'this sort of think is still going on and is cruel'.

this miniture isn't going to increase the number of 'dancing bears' or increase its acceptance. the reason it still goes on is because tourists still pay money into it and goverment's let it happen.

somthing like this ? but with him shouldering a organ gun and fireing baby koalas !!

RiTides wrote:Also, this is a cool image from the Wojtek wikipedia page that Genosaurer linked to. Now something like this would have been pure win, imho


Show me a bear carrying ammunition or loading a cannon for its handler, and that would have been so very cool!!

It's kinda sad, but so were those horrific human-mutilation pictures in the 6th ed rule book. Anyone who has played the game for that long knows that the empire is a seriously messed up place.

In that context, I think the bear is a fun, characterful addition to an empire army. Hell, I'd probably compliment an empire player if he fielded one.

Eh, it's just a model. Pretty cool too. Might get it and 40k it up a little.

@Curnow, I just gave myself a headache laughing at that. Rocket propelled prairie dogs? roflmao.

Luco wrote:@Curnow, I just gave myself a headache laughing at that. Rocket propelled prairie dogs? roflmao.

Are those the ones taken from the sailor outfit girl with the hamster gun?

Hamster ammo is just one of the options for the Armorcast Cinematic Effects.

looks like 'em to me, Malf...
she's a fun mini...

i don't find this bear mini to be in the least offensive, but then i don't find any mini offensive...
personally, i don't find ANY art offensive...

personal attacks against me, verbal or physical, offend me...
that's about it...
what anyone else chooses to do doesn't really effect me...

i have been a vegetarian for 20 years, but i am not an animal rights advocate...
what someone does to a bear in Romania has no effect on my life...
it's sad for the bear, but not offensive to me...

when i travel in Alaska, i carry .357 pistol, and a riot shotgun loaded with solid slugs, because bears will eat me if they want to...
i have had many encounters with bears, but have never had to shoot...
i felt a whole lot more confident thanks to being armed "for bear" though...

i will definitely paint this mini, as it fits the setting of the Warhammer world perfectly...

cheers
jah

Lol. He isn't a zombie. He's a harrowed.

Ok so let me get this straight , i have read multiple comparison between badly treated animals vs human being dying ,
hence is not a big deal?

I dont think its right to do a comparison like that. Let me be blunt , so caring about animal isnt your thing,
but thats what it is , it just doesnt raise the flag for you.

If we switch the subject to a sculpt that is depicting sexist or racist , how many flag will it trigger now?

That is my point. Because like.... sexist or racist is "tame" compared to mass genocide and murder in 40k right?

daedalus wrote:I think we should combine the best of everything: We have bears wearing monocles that fire cannons that are loaded with more bears that, once propelled, shoot guns.

Cheers for this and all the posts in that vein above . Gave me a good laugh!

Also, nice pic Genosaurer! You seem to have a veritable wealth of sweet Wojtek info

It's a model of a bear. Anyone can get their panties in a twist about anything, particularly in the Grimdarkness of the Far Future. When someone is crying the blues about the misfortunes of bears in some godless country when seeing a model, it's perfectly reasonable to question why they don't seem to have the same problem with the Genocide and perpetual violence inherent in the game. Genocides happen too, you know. You either appreciate the game(s) as entertainment or you don't.

LunaHound wrote:Ok so let me get this straight , i have read multiple comparison between badly treated animals vs human being dying ,
hence is not a big deal?

I dont think its right to do a comparison like that. Let me be blunt , so caring about animal isnt your thing,
but thats what it is , it just doesnt raise the flag for you.

If we switch the subject to a sculpt that is depicting sexist or racist , how many flag will it trigger now?

That is my point. Because like.... sexist or racist is "tame" compared to mass genocide and murder in 40k right?

To be honest I can't really understand what your saying.

malfred wrote:

Luco wrote:@Curnow, I just gave myself a headache laughing at that. Rocket propelled prairie dogs? roflmao.

Are those the ones taken from the sailor outfit girl with the hamster gun?

? I havent seen that, though I would like to!

LunaHound wrote:Ok so let me get this straight , i have read multiple comparison between badly treated animals vs human being dying ,
hence is not a big deal?

I dont think its right to do a comparison like that. Let me be blunt , so caring about animal isnt your thing,
but thats what it is , it just doesnt raise the flag for you.

If we switch the subject to a sculpt that is depicting sexist or racist , how many flag will it trigger now?

That is my point. Because like.... sexist or racist is "tame" compared to mass genocide and murder in 40k right?

i was saying that if this is your sticking issue with the game, your perspective on the world at large would be a bit wierd in my view. i whole heartedly believe that this practice of 'bear dancing' and many others (read up about bear bile farming by the chinese, to be honest alot of problems exist due to chinese medicine but thats another issue). the model is perfectly suited for the empire just like flangellants (depicting self harm) and warrior priests (depicting zeleous religous violence)

Yeah, a little tacky.

For WHFB, it doesn't really make sense. For 40k, it doesn't look NEARLY brutalized enough. I have a hard time seeing how this fits in with anything.

Some great conversion opportunities, though.

Wow, folks really seem to think fantasy is the cute and cuddly world with gumdrop forests and strawberry rivers. Perhaps this is a 40kers view of things? Ever see that 6th ed Fantasy rulebook? Seen some of the art of zealots with their eyes sewn shut? Or the guys with nails driven into their skin?

Honestly, The Empire seems just as insane as The Imperium of Man sometimes. A dancing bear is the least of their cruelty.

Droofus wrote:
Honestly, The Empire seems just as insane as The Imperium of Man sometimes.

Awww...the little empire's all grown up!

Luco wrote:

malfred wrote:

Luco wrote:@Curnow, I just gave myself a headache laughing at that. Rocket propelled prairie dogs? roflmao.

Are those the ones taken from the sailor outfit girl with the hamster gun?

? I havent seen that, though I would like to!

http://armorcast.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=760&osCsid=47970c5c8a2b8

Nice one malfred

OoieGoie wrote:If GM released the mini a little different I guess I wouldn't have such a bad feeling towards it. As it is, the bear looks sad (yes, I find it does lol) and has that big chain around its neck. The standing pose seems to magnify this for me as well. The eye patch is suppose to give character I guess but for me, makes the whole thing worse. Even the handler looks like troublesome.

Maybe Im just being paranoid. I know Ill never buy it or like it. I just hope people understand what it seems to portray to myself and maybe others. I have no issues with the other GW minis either.

I haven't posted at Dakka for years (I was a member back around 2004), but this actually prompted me to post.

First, I think it is very interesting how different our perceptions of a miniature can be. While you saw this as a sad and troublesome miniature, I looked at the same thing and thought something completely different. Here was my perception:

I assumed that the regiment was associated with the imagery of a bear in some way, possibly even being devoted to Ursun, the Kislevite god of winter, and so I automatically assumed that the bear would have been a valued/important/beloved part of the regiment.

This was reinforced, for me, by the eyepatch. My thought was that a mistreated animal would have been allowed to have open wounds, but a beloved mascot would get something like an eyepatch. For you, on the other hand, that same eyepatch was evidence of mistreatment.

Furthermore, the bear obviously seemed quite intelligent to me, as it was itself carrying a drum. While there is no evidence of this, I assumed it was not carrying the drum for a musician, but actually played the drum itself. A large, semi-intelligent bear would have, in my mind, been too dangerous to keep as a mascot if it were not relatively happy with its treatment.

Finally, I saw the "metal glove" that I believe you interpreted as being used to discipline the bear, and I assumed it was a prosthetic hand, and that the "keeper" had made the mistake of trying to discipline the bear, and had lost a hand for his troubles. Thus, the glove that you saw as evidence of abuse of the bear, I saw as evidence of abuse of the handler.

To me, the handler looked too sad and pathetic (with his torn clothes and slight frame) to be someone really capable of "man-handling" the bear. Compare him to the Kislevite Bear Tamer model, which is much more muscular and robust. Instead, the slight handler seemed to make it clear which of the two was actually the boss in this pair.

I thought it would make a GREAT figure for use in a regiment, using the hurdy-gurdy player as the musician, and the Bear as a unit champion, or even as an actual Hero character (especially with the new rules that open up the hero slots).

Just different perceptions, I guess.


On the topic of people condemning or ridiculing you for your opinion, I think that is really insensitive and unfair. There is plenty of Warhammer imagery that involves mutilation (flagellants), murder (orcs with human heads on spears), religious intolerance (some of the Witch Hunter figures), necromancy (the entire Vampire Counts line), cannibalism (ghouls), physical deformity (Bretonnian peasants), mental degeneration (same peasants), and lots (and lots, and lots) of other "adult" and "unpleasant" themes.

While it is obviously true that the person buying and painting and Orc with a human head on his belt isn't necessarily advocating the murder and dismemberment of humans, that's not the whole point. We all have our own personal comfort levels with the imagery in these miniatures. One person may have no qualms about dismemberment being depicted, yet still not like a depiction of animal cruelty. That doesn't in ANY WAY indicate that person thinks that it is OK to dismember people, but not to abuse bears. Another person might find all of the violent and bloodthirsty acts depicted unobjectionable in a game, but not like the sexual imagery of the slaaneshi demons.

Not wanting to see something depicted doesn't mean that you find the act itself more morally objectionable (it can, but it doesn't HAVE to). I find defecation and urination less morally objectionable than murdering someone and stringing his corpse up on a banner, but I'd MUCH rather have a miniature of a Black Orc Standard Bearer with a dwarf on a pole, than a miniature of a handgunner urinating.

I don't think anyone here was making the argument that animal cruelty is morally more objectionable than murder. I think we should all be able to understand that some people have different tolerance levels for different kinds of artwork. That doesn't make them morally confused, or morally incoherent.

Having said that, I certainly don't think that, compared, say, to the Games Day figure of an Exalted Champion with his hand IN the chest of a wood elf, that the violence apparent in the Regimental Mascot miniature is particularly gratuitous. However, YMMV, and that's OK.

Personally don't like the miniaturebecause I think it is a fairly crappy / mundane sculpt but I think you are being overly sensitive.

As others have pointed out it seems a little odd to randomly pick one miniature out of a host of others and be specifically offended by that. For instance do the naked slave girls on that Dark Eldar vehicles bother you also? These could be taken to represent slavery, sexual sadism, human sex trafficking, and probably a lot of other sick / very wrong stuff. I think what I am trying to tell you and what others are trying to get at are that there is a lot of very adult nasty stuff in Warhammer and 40k that if you really think about are distasteful that is what gives it an adult background which the miniatures sometimes support.

Selectively picking out one out of a multitude of these issues to bring up without looking at the bigger picture usually will get you a lot of "negative" comments on forums because people want to know why you chose that to get upset about and not something else?

RiTides wrote:Show me a bear carrying ammunition or loading a cannon for its handler, and that would have been so very cool!!

I don't play WFB, but I'm sooooo tempted to convert an Empire cannon to have a bear loader.

I have known for a long time that wild animals used for amusement get abused, but the OP gave me a lot of new info about dancing bears, and I learned a lot. So thanks for that.

And learning that made me appreciate this mini more. And not because I'm a fan of bear abuse.

See, maybe I'm a minority here, but I like my Warhammer fantasy to be believable (note I said "believable", not "realistic". People seem to get those two confused a lot.) And part of "believable" for me is there being no "good" team that I'm supposed to empathize with because they're like me. The humans of Warhammer fantasy are backwards and barbaric, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't play Empire, but if I did now that I've learned just how cruel bear dancing is I would absolutely put this model in my army.

I see a growing trend in GW minis to more and more ridiculous and unfeeling extremes- empire engineers on silly clockwork horses, wood elf sorcerors in constipated poses floating on erect cloaks for no reason at all, Space Wolves riding wolves that shoot wolves armed with wolves, the entire Blood Angels line... and it's just nice to see a miniature that interjects a bit of humanity into the game. Sometimes humanity sucks, and I applaud the sculptor of this mini for not being afraid to represent that without falling off the otherside and going the angsty dark "extreme" angle.

It may just be that the bear is one of those S&M bears and likes to be chained up like that...in that case, I feel sorry for the man...I bet he's wondering where his life went wrong...

I like the idea, but not a fan of the mini, +1 poor sculpt (as I think are a coupl eof the other new colelctor ones).

I can understand where OP's ocming from. Yes it's a gorey fantasy game but there is a line where it can become bad taste (line is different from person to person - no offense intended to anyone). Boobs, gore etc. is fine when we know its fake, but if somethings based on something real then it can (and does) offend people. What would you say if gw released guard slaves or something that bore a stricking resembelence to (cliche)ethiopian children? would that be fine because it's fantasy? I think it's a matter of personal taste, I don't think the model should be banned, it's not close enough to a dancing bear to offend me, but that said I don't like the way people have jumped on th OP for showing they care about things, whether you think they should care about something else more shouldn't come into it.

OP - good point. As GW does get 'darker' they need to decide where the line will be drawn in what they produce - kids are a target customer. Having said that DON'T BAN THE BOOBS! or the guns/swords/gore etc

Please don't slate me for this!

The way I see it, there is a Wonderfull thing called prespective.

Theres a big diference of a representation of something in a picture/ miniature/ imaginary alternative worlds and the actual reality!

Every fictional creation has some strong bridges with reality yet its a diferent beast with diferent rules... its purpose is to entertain us.

What i'm trying to say is if you play say GTA games and enjoy it does not makes you a fraked up criminal IRL... and I rather see people using their prespective senses and dump some stress in those games than to be stressed up IRL.

Sounds offtopic? Its not, its the exact same subject... You are categorizing a imaginary reality and transposing it to reality.

I rather paint the miniature as a stress controll mechanism than spending time lableling it with pointless meanings.

I dont really care about animal abuse issues on my miniatures... In fact acts of cruelty in a miniature are rather common and amusing since I look at these in a completely diferent prespective.

Ailaros wrote:Yeah, a little tacky.

For WHFB, it doesn't really make sense. For 40k, it doesn't look NEARLY brutalized enough. I have a hard time seeing how this fits in with anything.

Some great conversion opportunities, though.

how does it not fit into the WHFB world and the Empire? i really don't understand how you can say that, do you read any of the fluff

Bah! The Warmaster Dwarfs have been enslaving bears for years. And this one has a muzzle and thrown in chains, but no one has stepped up and called for his freedom:



I have him somewhere, time to dig him out and set him free!!!!

I love the model and what it represents.

This isn't "Happy Land WHFB." This stuff happens, especially in a more medieval setting.

I believe the OP is overly sensitive, there is FAR worse imagery in Fantasy, let alone 40K. Seriously, a Servitor should be more bothersome to you than this. At least the bear has the option to go nuts and kill everything it can reach before it is put down. A Servitor can do nothing, since they just took a huge ice cream scoop to it's brain pan and MADE A HUMAN INTO AN UNTHINKING SLAVE.

Just a game, just models, calm down.

covenant84 wrote:What would you say if gw released guard slaves or something that bore a stricking resembelence to (cliche)ethiopian children?

See it all comes down to context. The dancing bear fits the Old Worlde context of Warhammer Fantasy. To my knowledge Etheopian-looking child slaves do not. If they did, I wouldn't really have a problem with it (if the minis were well-sculpted). It all comes down to context. Does the mini fit into the already-established setting? Then I don't have a problem with it.

As GW does get 'darker'

Sorry, I have to stop you right there. GW as a whole is not getting darker, IMHO. Orc/ks got darker. That's really about it. The other factions in the setting have been pretty dark for a long time. Lost and the Damned/Warhammer Fantasy Role-Play anyone? I might even say that in some ways GW minis are getting lighter (again, Space Wolves on wolves that shoot wolves armed with wolves).

I gotta say, the mini didn't elicit any real response from me. I didn't know about the barbarity behind dancing bears, but now that I do I'm not sure it makes any difference to me.

In fact, as others said, I think it fits in well with the barbarous setting of the game.

I see what the OP means and can also see why GW have made it to set a medieval grim dark theme. However it is quite an unecessary unit and did not really need to be produces. Maybe they could go on to model dark elves raping and pillaging. Or on the other hand they could just stick to things that are morally correct. Afterall in the real world there are no elves orks etc. But there are dancing bears and other such things so don't advertise it. Oh I'm not an animal rights person but I find human cruelty to animals much more barbaric than human cruelty to each other for some reason.

I don't like this on many levels.

Bear baiting/circus training is a pretty despicable cultural phenomenon, especially for the "good guys" of a setting.

Its 1 piece metal and not plastic so its' worthless aside from being part of the stupid diorama.

WTF is up with the stupid gloves with the claws coming through?

600 pound bear attached to 160 pounds of fresh meat by a 3 foot long chain?

What does the guy use the leather mitten for.. wiping the bear's bum? It seriously is worthless as protection.

It's just a thoughtless, stupid idea.

Now if they were playing from a seated position and the bear wasn't chained. that would be pretty cool. Bear's aren't really agressive by nature anyway so it's not like they would charge into battle.

Bad Taste, Bad Idea, Bad Execution so it gets two claws down from da Bear.

fullybakedbear wrote:I don't like this on many levels.

Bear baiting/circus training is a pretty despicable cultural phenomenon, especially for the "good guys" of a setting.

Its 1 piece metal and not plastic so its' worthless aside from being part of the stupid diorama.

WTF is up with the stupid gloves with the claws coming through?

600 pound bear attached to 160 pounds of fresh meat by a 3 foot long chain?

What does the guy use the leather mitten for.. wiping the bear's bum? It seriously is worthless as protection.

It's just a thoughtless, stupid idea.

Now if they were playing from a seated position and the bear wasn't chained. that would be pretty cool. Bear's aren't really agressive by nature anyway so it's not like they would charge into battle.

Bad Taste, Bad Idea, Bad Execution so it gets two claws down from da Bear.

That's what we're saying though, clearly the bear is the one in charge and the hurdy gurdy man is his slave, not the other way around. Either that or he's completely happy with the situation, a la the previous theory that the poster on the last page. If he's mistreated and brutalized and "just property" to be dealt with however necessary, why put an eyepatch on him?

Ed_Bodger wrote: Or on the other hand they could just stick to things that are morally correct.

So, 80-95% of WHFB/40K content needs to be removed...

I find human cruelty to animals much more barbaric than human cruelty to each other for some reason.

I find both rather disturbing in a real-world context.

However this miniature is very in keeping with much of the Empire imagery that has come before.

This model has a vibe very similar to some of the Mordheim side art, for example...

Real world animal cruelty (like real world war, killing, suffering of humans) is morally repugnant, I just don't get what the fuss is about regarding this figure in the context of this game...

Dark Eldar Prisoners. They're not sex slaves at all.

To be honest, when I saw the bear model I thought

"That trainer is in for it."

I could easily tell who was wearing the pants in that relationship.

CT GAMER wrote:

Ed_Bodger wrote: Or on the other hand they could just stick to things that are morally correct.

So, 80-95% of WHFB/40K content needs to be removed...

Exactly and it really doesnt work that way... GW or other world designers create a compelling universe, if you dont like it its your choice ( dont buy it dont read it), but inserting your moral issues or references in a fantasy world created by others is rather... weird

And this was a wide ranging practice in Olde Europe, where a lot of the Empire flavor comes from. If it was common, there it is a good chance you will see it in some form from GW. In fact I seem to remember some artwork at some point this was probably based off of. From what I know the collectors series is either one offs sculptures create for fun, practice or as training. They then decide to cast them.

I like this mini, and think it fits entirely into the Warhammer World. It's not a nice place for man or beast. Considering it's a nice collar around his neck and not a chain through his snout or lip lessens the reality of it. The bear seems to be in better shape than the man.

I'm going to claim ignorance here. I don't even want to read or contribute to the 'discussion' in this thread, I only read the first post and it make me think of this:

http://www.badassoftheweek.com/voytek.html

That is all.

That was an amazing article. Thanks.

My favourite bit was:
"He was given the rank of Private, assigned a serial number, and from that point on was included in all official unit rosters. The Brits were like, “whatever chaps”, and didn’t even bat an eye when Voytek marched ashore..."

CitizenPrime wrote:Seriously? You are talking about a game where the fluff of the entire universe is bloody gorey war on a galactic scale... ...Can we please focus on humanity before we move on to the animals?

Absolutely!

People slaughtering each other: fine
People possessed/sacrificed w/ demons: fine
Enslaved intelligent creatures: fine
Oppression: fine
Racism: fine
Religious persecution: fine
Slavery: fine

ON NOZ A POOR BEAR ON A CHAIN MINI!!!!

This game is called WARhammer, no one cares about the stupid bear.

PS, its FICTIONAL, grow up

Da Butcha wrote:

Finally, I saw the "metal glove" that I believe you interpreted as being used to discipline the bear, and I assumed it was a prosthetic hand, and that the "keeper" had made the mistake of trying to discipline the bear, and had lost a hand for his troubles. Thus, the glove that you saw as evidence of abuse of the bear, I saw as evidence of abuse of the handler.

To me, the metal glove seems to be there because that's the feeding hand. I know I'm not giving a bear a treat without some form of protection on my hand...

I like the model, I'm sure to throw one into my regiment where I can.

This reminds me of this girl who tried to ban COD World at War because you had to shoot guard dogs (or snap their necks, depending on how close they are), which she as a dog owner found very offensive.

fullybakedbear wrote:Bear baiting/circus training is a pretty despicable cultural phenomenon, especially for the "good guys" of a setting.

While I don't agree that Empire armies are "good guys", it sounds like you think it is inappropriate to portray the "good guys" engaging in this "pretty despicable cultural phenomenon". Why exactly is that? Does it apply to other "good guys" or other cultural phenomena?

Its 1 piece metal and not plastic so its' worthless aside from being part of the stupid diorama.

Plenty of people have already expressed that they intend to use it as part of their regimental command group. Clearly it's not useless. You just don't like it.

JOHIRA wrote:

Its 1 piece metal and not plastic so its' worthless aside from being part of the stupid diorama.

Plenty of people have already expressed that they intend to use it as part of their regimental command group. Clearly it's not useless. You just don't like it.

And since the 8th is the comming back of big blocks of regiments its a very ussefull and cool filler for a unit.

I like it - good, characterful model.

dietrich wrote:I don't play WFB, but I'm sooooo tempted to convert an Empire cannon to have a bear loader.

When I first read this, I read it as an Empire cannon to have a bear loaded. Now that would be some awesome ammunition!

NAVARRO wrote:GW or other world designers create a compelling universe, if you dont like it its your choice ( dont buy it dont read it), but inserting your moral issues or references in a fantasy world created by others is rather... weird

Notably, again, to all the knee jerk "grow up" and "it's a game" responses, certainly the OP and mostly everybody agreeing with them has not complained about the mini and has definitely not tried to push their feelings about it onto anybody. The OP was pretty clear that they just wanted to put some background out there that others may not be aware of and just wanted to throw their thoughts out there to see if anyone else was bothered. How they feel about it for themselves is, as noted here, is up to them, and they appropriately left everybody else to feel their own way as well, only to get a (low level) of flame back. So, you know, congratulations to that whole half of the thread for being completely unable to grasp any sort of nuance in a discussion. Meanwhile, the other half about why this might bother some people and not others has actually been pretty interesting and reasonably insightful.

BrookM wrote:This reminds me of the dumb college bitch who tried to ban COD World at War...

And in other news, shockingly, it continues to be super difficult to get women engaged in gaming. Congratulations BrookM, you're like the manliest dude in a forum about plastic spacemen and metal wizards, you're totally some badass tough guy! Good job, hero!

Rossko wrote:http://www.badassoftheweek.com/voytek.html

Cool article

For anyone just skimming this thread (since it got moved to the WHFB forum) page 4 is win as are any references to Wojtek, which I believe is the same bear as the one in the article Rossko linked to, just with a different spelling (thanks to Genosaurer for first bringing it up!).

Glad to see some people enjoying the article, he's one of my favorite internet writers. Also skimmed through the thread a bit and saw I wasn't the only one thinking about Wojtek(or Voytek).

But back on topic, I think Da Butcha said it best.

This mini does evoke feelings of disgust and regret that such abuse of animals was once, and in some places, still is commonplace in the world. It is well-documented, for example, that in Victorian London pigeons were sold tied to a string in the streets for the entertainment of children. I think this miniature was created with this purpose in mind. GW has stated that the collector's range was created to allow the miniature designers a creative outlet, perhaps because GW has rigid policies on what is and what is not acceptable for "shelf" sculpts.

The collector's range, then, is not a for profit line, maybe? People do complain about GW sometimes, but it seems they're doing this sort of thing "for the fans"

So, is this art in miniature?

(Well, I said all that, but I'm totally using this mini for a lvl 4 wizard)

insaniak wrote:Even still has his claws.

'Course, how else is he going to maul his handler for when he's tired of his crap?

I <3 Wojtek with all my heart.

Personally, I was reminded of that one bear that some Poles adopted in WW2.

A quick google-ing found this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wojtek_(soldier_bear)

EDIT:
*facepalm* I just read the first two pages...

Is it bad that I laughed the first time I saw it?

Ultrafool wrote: I just sort of like this mini. Does this make me evil.

Yes. Yes it does.

somecallmeJack wrote:

Ultrafool wrote: I just sort of like this mini. Does this make me evil.

Yes. Yes it does.

No it doesn't. its only a mini to add a bit of character to your unit

The figure stands for a Mordheim Bear Trainer (hero) and bear (henchman) from the KISLEV warband.

http://www.mordheimer.com/warbands/official/kislevite.htm

Just to contrast with a few posts from this thread...

I enjoy the stories of Warhammer and 40k both for their relatively realistic mirror of human nature and history. 40k goes a little over the top, but then it's an over the top setting. Fantasy drives a little closer to home.

The Empire in particular pulls a lot of our own cultures and histories in Europe. We have religious zealotry, piss-poor and oft-plagued peasantry, intense caste structures, venomous politics, and constant war somewhere or another. You also have legions of poor bloody infantry lining up under a banner and fighting to the death to protect their homes. It was a struggle just to live in this period, and the same could be said for this fantasy setting.

The point of that is, it's not a pretty setting or a pretty army and I don't think GW, through rulebooks or Black Library, has portrayed them as such, at least not in many years.

If you're looking for an army of moral absolutes, I'd go for Lord of the Rings. I love the fiction of both, but know what you're getting into/

Gosh, having to spend my days dancing, banging on a drum as loud as I want and having all the fish I can eat. It does sound downright abusive.

Fearspect wrote:Gosh, having to spend my days dancing, banging on a drum as loud as I want and having all the fish I can eat. It does sound downright abusive.

nice...someone will be right over to induct you into a lifetime of dancing, drumming, fish-eating servitude. its probably not what you want to do, but its not abusive, so im sure youll enjoy it.

How the feth is this thread still alive? Shouldn't a mod put it down for all our sakes?

Because people like you keep umping it up to the top with new posts... Wait a second...

ser_hag wrote:

Fearspect wrote:Gosh, having to spend my days dancing, banging on a drum as loud as I want and having all the fish I can eat. It does sound downright abusive.

nice...someone will be right over to induct you into a lifetime of dancing, drumming, fish-eating servitude. its probably not what you want to do, but its not abusive, so im sure youll enjoy it.

Bears don't have wants; their brains are smaller than a handful of loose change.