What has happened to the poor servants of Slaanesh?

The Keeper of Secrets is so weird it breaks the weird-gak-o-meter. All the Greater Daemons are in need of new models, but the Keeper of Secrets.....OOH!

The 3rd edition Daemonettes were good. They looked like Daemons of excess and desie without invoking reactions of 'WHOA!"but the new Daemonettes just look silly.

The Fiend of Slaanesh has FREAKING BACKWARDS DUCK'S LEGS. If you ask me, they should have taken a more spidery appearence.

What do you think the new Daemons of the Prince of Excess should look like?

I agree on the current daemonettes. The current models look less like daughters of the prince of excess, hedonism, and perfection, and more like what would happen if a DnD hag had a baby with papa nurgle.

Fiends could look more dynamic, the keeper could have smaller hands, and the monettes could be more shapely, but dont detract from the wierdness and depravity please.

Yeah agreed the Daemons of Slaanesh don't really match their lore or what you'd think they would be. Maybe they can't get away with something more risque. I think they'd work best as 'almost' humans with subtle perverse differences. Small variations on the human form are always more creepy than large ones.

I think the Lord of Change is still a nice model though, the other two Greater Daemons less so.

The new plastic Daemons seem like a throwback to the first daemon models imo. However the faces on those Daemonettes just makes me scream in terror (and not the good way). The Masque is pretty good, but otherwise we could use a bit of an update (which is not likely to happen soon, given that the Seekers were relatively recently released). Personally the Steeds of Slaanesh looks good, but that's about it.

Trilobite wrote:Fiends could look more dynamic, the keeper could have smaller hands, and the monettes could be more shapely, but dont detract from the wierdness and depravity please.

Weirdness and depravity is fine, ugliness is not. Really, the only Slaanesh daemons that looked properly Slaanesh-y to me were the ones released during 3rd edition: Diaz's Daemonettes and Seekers, and the boobworm.

One thing I don't understand is how they couldn't make them too risque....and then release Witch Elves and Harpies?

One thing that would be nice is a new face.

The current Daemonette face looks like it was hammered in by a 2x4.

I miss the keeper of sexrets cow head..

AlexHolker wrote:

Trilobite wrote:Fiends could look more dynamic, the keeper could have smaller hands, and the monettes could be more shapely, but dont detract from the wierdness and depravity please.

Weirdness and depravity is fine, ugliness is not. Really, the only Slaanesh daemons that looked properly Slaanesh-y to me were the ones released during 3rd edition: Diaz's Daemonettes and Seekers, and the boobworm.

Pretty sure the Slaanesh daemons are meant to display the superficially attractive side of the prince of excess as well as the uglier more repellent side. So unless you meant that the sculpting itself is bad, in which case I disagree, then Im not sure what your problem is. I just don't think they were aiming for maximum T&A all the time with them, which makes sense to me.

Trilobite wrote:Pretty sure the Slaanesh daemons are meant to display the superficially attractive side of the prince of excess as well as the uglier more repellent side. So unless you meant that the sculpting itself is bad, in which case I disagree, then Im not sure what your problem is. I just don't think they were aiming for maximum T&A all the time with them, which makes sense to me.

Quoted for Salience.

People have this strange idea that Slaanesh is supposed to be pretty, rather than weird and disturbingly alluring.

Trilobite wrote:Pretty sure the Slaanesh daemons are meant to display the superficially attractive side of the prince of excess as well as the uglier more repellent side.

Then why aren't Slaanesh daemons superficially attractive? Their ugliness should show itself in their monstrous personalities, or in their fundamental wrongness, not by having faces like these. They should look like the in-universe response to seeing one would be a sudden desire for a long, cold shower, not a declaration that they'd lose a beauty contest to a cross-dressing Ork.

Well true

Slaneesh have to brainwash people to attract it's cult, if they want them to think that is beauty

even taking that the slaneesh daemon should be Attractive and repulsive, there's nothing attractive on that model
it's all repulsive

Slannesh is hard to put into miniture form. After all the KOS actually looks different to all who look at it. It takes the form which each individual aspires to have.

I personally think it requires a very skilled painter to make the new plastics look good. But they can look good.

Myself, I'm happy with my 20 metal ones and will never trade them in. They may not represent Slannesh perfectly, but nothing wrong with pretty models on the table in the first place.

Nurglitch wrote:

Trilobite wrote:Pretty sure the Slaanesh daemons are meant to display the superficially attractive side of the prince of excess as well as the uglier more repellent side. So unless you meant that the sculpting itself is bad, in which case I disagree, then Im not sure what your problem is. I just don't think they were aiming for maximum T&A all the time with them, which makes sense to me.

Quoted for Salience.

People have this strange idea that Slaanesh is supposed to be pretty, rather than weird and disturbingly alluring.

They're not disturbingly alluring. Not really even disturbing. Certainly not alluring.

Just ugly.

Slaanesh is repulsive. Their game rules represent their superficial attractiveness to the enemy.

Slaanesh is the god(dess) of lust, pleasure, hedonism, perfectionism, and excess. Revulsion isn't anywhere in there...

The governor enjoying far too much of his/her fine foods, the handsome/beautiful dancer tempting men to depravity, the artist obsessed with perfecting their work, the soldier making too many visits to a brothel, and so on are the domain of Slaanesh.

If you are fighting (not falling for their charm) with Slaaneshi daemons do you not see their true forms? Twisted mockeries of beauty, more horrifying than words can describe.

Read Codex: Chaos Daemons.

"In appearance the Daemonettes are both beautiful and repulsive. They have slender clean-limbed bodies with pale, smooth skin, and an androgynous charm that is heightened by the scent of the musk that glistens from their sleek bodies. Instead of hands, the Daemonettes have long, dextrous claws, with which they can bestow the gentlest caress or a deadly slash with equal skill. They have bird-like feet, and move swiftly with languid strides of their long legs. Their faces are genderless masks, dominated by opal eyes that bewitch any who look into them. Their true appearance matters little, however, because they are surrounded by the bewitching aura of their Master. This supernatural power makes them always appear as the ultimate beauty and object of desire in the eyes of their unfortunate enemies, regardless of their race, gender or morality." Daemonettes, Daemonic Forces, Codex: Chaos Daemons, p.33.

Slaanesh is corruption, perversion, subversion, and lies. That's why Its Greater Daemons are the Keepers of Secrets ("There is nothing so loathsome yet beguiling as a Keeper of Secrets" Keepers of Secrets, Daemonic Forces, Codex: Chaos Daemons, p.29) and not something else.

Slaanesh has six domains: Avidity, Gluttony, Carnality, Paramountcy, Vainglory, Indolency. In each one desire is corrupted, perverted, subverted, or otherwise warped into its foul reflection. If you want wealth, the daemons of Avidity will devour your soul. If you are hungry, you will burst from gluttony, if you are lustful, then daemons will you apart, and so on.

Lust is neutral to Slaanesh, but lust that drives one to deviancy, that's driven by warped desire, or unnatural taste, then Slaanesh is there waiting for you...

Yes, and they've failed to capture that feeling of Slaanesh in these miniatures.

One side of slaanesh might not be represented well in some of the figs. The way I see it is that when you get in real close with slaanesh's physical manifestations, the veneer of glamour and beauty is torn back and you see the truely abhorrent and disfigured forms beneath that mask. Look at figures like the newer daemonettes as more the result of constantly indulging in the 6 "domains" highlighted by nurglitch above. Rather than being truely beautiful and perfect beings, they are mockeries and twisted versions of that characteristic. The Masque is another fig that pulls that off nicely.

Personally I kinda like the current Keeper of secrets. The only bad thing about it is the gigantic hands (which, given the era it's made in, is forgivable since it isnt an actual design flaw but due to the improvements in miniature quality). The two faces are really good and suits the character.

In particular the Forgeworld Keeper of Secrets was really well done. From a distance it appears to be a slender and attractive woman. it's only when you look close up that all of the horrors and scary bits become apparent.

The Daemonettes' faces look strangely skeletal and somewhat manly, which is partly due to their hair. Some of them look like they had a bad hair cut and the faces no longer had the semblance of pleasure on them. They all look jaded and worn out.

I always thought the new monettes looks pretty dynamic with all the hair flicked everywhere. As for the faces, I thought that the way they were sculpted was to reinforce their being androgynous, therefore nothing overly female or male, making the face's features seem a little minimalistic.
Totally with you on the keeper. I would:
Make the sword less goddamn huge,
Scale down the cartoony hands,
Scale up the utterly tiny hooves.

I think it's mainly due to the foreheads. Proportionally it's correct, but it looks like their foreheads look huge...I would like it more if they had a few strains of hair over it.

Nurglitch wrote:"In appearance the Daemonettes are both beautiful and repulsive. They have slender clean-limbed bodies with pale, smooth skin, and an androgynous charm that is heightened by the scent of the musk that glistens from their sleek bodies.

There is no beauty in the new models, and no "androgynous charm". They went the exact opposite route, making them ugly by male and female standards.

Their true appearance matters little, however, because they are surrounded by the bewitching aura of their Master. This supernatural power makes them always appear as the ultimate beauty and object of desire in the eyes of their unfortunate enemies, regardless of their race, gender or morality."

A cop-out. It's like they made the new models, realised how ugly they were, then realised they needed to modify an old piece of fluff to excuse their failure.

Trilobite wrote:I always thought the new monettes looks pretty dynamic with all the hair flicked everywhere.

Hair flicked everywhere does not a dynamic miniature make, if the rest of the miniature doesn't back that movement up.

Melissia:

Your opinion. My opinion is that they've done an excellent job.

Alexholker:

I think they have plenty of androgynous charm. If anything the new models better match the old background. I could quote Slaves to Darkness if it would make you feel better.

No gak, really? I thought what I said was pure fact, and not just opinion. How dare you refute this fact that my facts are factual.

Sarcasm aside, the previous models looked far more disturbingly alluring.

Melissia:

You phrased it as fact, not opinion. If you want to express an opinion, say "I think" or "It seems to me". If you want to express a fact, simply state the fact. For example:

Melissia wrote:Sarcasm aside, I think the previous models looked far more disturbingly alluring.

This is because one's unique and beautiful opinion is uncontestable, while one's weak and feeble grasp of the facts may be cause for argument.

I don't desire to, nor need to, state "in my opinion" in every post I make. THis is the internet people, this is a forum on the internet. Common sense, such as it is, dictates that posts made on Dakka-Dakka are opinions. The only exception to this are those with citations.

Wrong again, and as usual so much for common sense. Some posts on Dakka Dakka reflect facts. For example, when someone asks a question about rules and someone provides the right answer, that answer is right regardless of whether it can be checked with citation. Citation is a courtesy, much like saying "I think" and "It's my opinion that", to help readers distinguish fact from opinion.

Even if I were the type to post image macros, I do not believe I have a facepalm image macro epic enough for my feelings on your previous post.

Suffice it to say, this is off topic and let's drop it and talk about hermaphroditic daemons.

Melissia wrote:Even if I were the type to post image macros, I do not believe I have a facepalm image macro epic enough for my feelings on your previous post.

Suffice it to say, this is off topic and let's drop it and talk about hermaphroditic daemons.

Ooh, a facepalm. Perhaps if I educate you enough you can learn to use words as well as pictures and internet memes.

But since we're just discussing your opinion of neuter daemons, and your opinion is far less important than the facts of the matter, I think I'll take the opportunity to step out of this thread so you can continue telling people about your fantastic and wonderful opinion, and I can go discuss facts in other threads.

Why do people think 6-breasted, crab-clawed, fish-faced daemons were alluring? The new daemonettes are fine, they look, well, daemonic. I think the faces should repulse you, in fact the entire thing is supposed to be repulsive and awkward. That's kinda Slaanesh's thing, not to mention you can't sculpt personality or whatever onto a model so the whole "superficially beautiful, but ugly on the inside" thing would be pretty hard to do. They look more like classic christian succubi than the "Amazing 3 Breasted Fish Women from the Planet Erotica V!"

But the greater daemon is made of vomit and broken dreams

asimo77 wrote:I think the faces should repulse you, in fact the entire thing is supposed to be repulsive and awkward. That's kinda Slaanesh's thing,

Daemons of Slaanesh are supposed to be repulsive because of what they are, not what they look like. They should look alluring, and inspire self-loathing for the fact that you find them alluring. That is Slaanesh's thing.

not to mention you can't sculpt personality or whatever onto a model so the whole "superficially beautiful, but ugly on the inside" thing would be pretty hard to do.

If you can't sculpt "ugly on the inside", then don't. But don't use that as an excuse to replace "superficially beautiful" with "superficially ugly". We've already got more than enough daemons that are superficially ugly, but ugly on the inside, and we don't need to destroy Slaanesh's distinguishing feature in order to create more.

They look more like classic christian succubi than the "Amazing 3 Breasted Fish Women from the Planet Erotica V!"

No, they don't.

Ok all that aside, did people find the old ones pretty? Is there no one who thinks both were ugly? Besides don't they use musk, sorcery, and such to appear beautiful? Besides I don't think there's one piece of artwork that has good looking daemonettes (in the codicies at least).

That being said I'm about to collapse out of exhaustion so I'm not suprised if my last few posts have not been too articulate.

asimo77 wrote:Why do people think 6-breasted, crab-clawed, fish-faced daemons were alluring? The new daemonettes are fine, they look, well, daemonic. I think the faces should repulse you, in fact the entire thing is supposed to be repulsive and awkward. That's kinda Slaanesh's thing, not to mention you can't sculpt personality or whatever onto a model so the whole "superficially beautiful, but ugly on the inside" thing would be pretty hard to do. They look more like classic christian succubi than the "Amazing 3 Breasted Fish Women from the Planet Erotica V!"

But the greater daemon is made of vomit and broken dreams

They look like Night Hags to me, but then I AM a huge nerd who has played DnD for too long.

My grandmother was a night hag, I demand you rescind your offensive claims this instant!

Slaanesh Daemonettes have more than one pair of boobies... how is that not pretty?

If I was playing daemonettes, I would mix up the squads with the current models and something from the fantasy line of pretty female models to represent daemonettes with their aura NOT broken.

I don't mind the new Daemonettes, I guess. I do miss the old ones, though. I tend to think of them as more representative of what a Daemonette might actually look like. I mean, yeah, they were shapely enough, but they also had huge talons and tendrils for hair.

Brother Ramses wrote:If I was playing daemonettes, I would mix up the squads with the current models and something from the fantasy line of pretty female models to represent daemonettes with their aura NOT broken.

I did that. Mine are a mix of half new demonettes, and half converted Dark Elf witches. Add a few claws and demon bits to demon them up, and they are excellent.

Frazzled wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:If I was playing daemonettes, I would mix up the squads with the current models and something from the fantasy line of pretty female models to represent daemonettes with their aura NOT broken.

I did that. Mine are a mix of half new demonettes, and half converted Dark Elf witches. Add a few claws and demon bits to demon them up, and they are excellent.

Well I think that is an issue that people are having with the models. What daemon player wants to play daemonettes with just their disguise up all the time? The current models represent the un-glamorized demon beneath the allure.

I certainly disagree with that-- rather, they look like they merely represent a Daemonette who has gotten a bit to close to papa nurgle and contracted a few disfiguring diseases.

I am thinking(see, my opinion ) that the current Daemonettes models are a representation closer to their "True form". Since beauty is subjective the sculptors stopped making them is a "beautiful/sexy" image and left that to obscure fluff about them being encased in a "Glamour" appearing as the most beautiful/sexy women in the eyes of the beholder.

Let's face it, Daemonettes are a 40k representation of the old Succubus legends; but they also take a more direct route in combat.

All that said i do still miss the "anatomically approximate"(they certainly were not "correct") models; and I do feel the rest could use updating as well(hopefully also going back to some previous models but looking, you know, good).

Brother Ramses wrote:Well I think that is an issue that people are having with the models. What daemon player wants to play daemonettes with just their disguise up all the time?

I am not a daemon player (and never will because I prefer previous codices that showed their reliance on the actions of mortals to get from the Warp to the material universe), but if I was, I would never use the plastic Daemonettes. Not because I want them to have their disguise up all the time, but because I hate the models and think the idea that daemonettes need to have a disguise up all the time to avoid looking like that is stupid.

Well all I know is when I'm using daemons I want them to look like daemons, not super-models (not that the old ones were at all). Scary faces, claws, and the like are more daemonic than what the old ones were packing. Also the 1/2 male and female thing is pretty neat.

To be fair, the 3rd edition Daemonettes weren't ALL glamour. If you remember, they had crabby claws and tentacle horn hair. The new ones look no more daemonic than the 3rd edition ones. Plus, like I say, the fact that the embodiments of hedonism and forbidden desire are the only lesser daemons to keep themselves modest is......ludicrous.

Plus, you forget, the Daemonettes aren't the only Slaanesh Daemons I object to. You forgot about the backwards-ducks-legs-mutant-horned mouse-fiend and the WHATTHEHELLISTHAT Keeper of Secrets, a creature about as darkly alluring as a haemmaroid-I hope I spelt that right..

Oh, well I only run the lesser and greater daemons in my CSM list so I don't care either way for the fiends and what not. Also I objected to the greater daemon, like I said before

"But the greater daemon is made of vomit and broken dreams " That's why I'm getting the forgeworld one.

I like the daemonic evil dionysus feel of the keeper, but feel that it could probably be done better.
The fiends arent dynamic at all, which is their main let down IMO, but apart from that I can TOTALLY see them flicking those proboscis in and out lazily, their countless breasts rippling and undulating while they wait to tear and rend with their claws, hooves, horns and stingers in an orgy of destruction.
They symbolise the depths of depravity that Slaanesh encompasses. I agree the feet should be the right way round, they are real pain to put together, also the horns look crap and should probably be redone.

I think people are getting the wrong idea with the new daemonettes. IMO, it's more that you can't look away because of the perversion of beauty than the actual beauty itself.

I feel that the new plastics do a great job of portraying a succubus-esque daemon that is in combat not one that is lounging around busy corrupting people.

Shrike325 wrote:I think people are getting the wrong idea with the new daemonettes. IMO, it's more that you can't look away because of the perversion of beauty than the actual beauty itself.

People keep saying things like this, but you cannot have a perversion of beauty without beauty, superficial attractiveness without attractiveness, or be weirdly and disturbingly alluring without being alluring. A daemonette that has a face like a hag and hides its body is like a horror that looks stagnant, a plaguebearer that doesn't look infectious, or a bloodletter that looks like it couldn't fight its way out of a wet paper bag: a failure.

Melissia wrote:I certainly disagree with that-- rather, they look like they merely represent a Daemonette who has gotten a bit to close to papa nurgle and contracted a few disfiguring diseases.

Indeed!

Actually yes, you can have perversion of beauty without beauty, it's called "ugliness".

Nurgle, Tzeentch, and Khorne, by contrast, are not about perversion and consequently the comparison to a stagnant Horror, a non-infectious Plague Bearer, or anemic Bloodletter is invalid, logically speaking.

After all, if one were so inclined one could get a lot of mileage out of models of Medical Orderlies as Plaguebearers, geometrically precise Horrors, and pale Witch-Elves as Bloodletters.

The old models had much more dynamic poses, and looked like beings who prance and sashay into battle. The current designs are ok in thier basic form, but look really static. I am going to have to fix that on the ones I plan to use as Summoned Daemons.

That Daemonettes had their makeover, that's the problem. The older ones were a better sculpt, the new ones have lost that lithe graceful look and are a bit more comic book with silly big hair and armour to cover all the embarrassing bits...and that's the problem. It was the nipples that made them change the perfectly good range for these more kiddie friendly but inferior plastics. GW don't even offer the older daemonettes for sale through their collectors range unlike a lot of previous release figures. It's like they are determined people shouldn't be able to get the old ones.

The Daemonettes got their makeover and ended up in what some people apparently feel is a completely UNPRECEDENTED style, but is actually much closer to the style of their first releases. Isn't absolutely astonishing that GW would redo the figures to look more in line with what the previous appearances?

Now, please excuse me while I go run the kids off of my lawn.

Are the nipples really that important? Isn't it more immature to make such a fuss over the scantily clad ones than to have covered daemonettes?

I have a sneaking suspicion that the people who complain about the daemonettes also have problems with BA "nipple" armour.

Dare I say they might also harbor desires for slaaneshi SOB and even the dreaded lady marines?

I'm not bothered with the Sanguinary Guard nipple armour. In fact, I think they look awesome (the Sanguinary Guard, not the nipples!).

As for the Sisters of Battle, I think that the Canoness' chest armour is far too...pronounced. The standard Battle Sisters need a new multi-part plastic kit, and need their faces de-third edition-ifying. By which I mean, getting them properly proportioned and shrinking those ludicrously large lips-forgive my onematopeia.

I just think that you can't have "perverted beauty" if there is no beauty to pervert. Plus, I quite liked the "Coo-ee!" expression on the faces of the old Daemonettes, as opposed to the "BLEHBLEHBLEHBLEH!" expression on the new ones.

Hello? Anyone here?

Juan Diaz was it? His demon sculpt have a very smooth , graceful feel to it. Certainly does Deadly Quicksilver justice , especially the curve / angle of the horns on their head ( very beautiful in the art work , which his sculpt captured )
every "exposed" un armored body part existed to accentuate and emphasized the power and speed , which flowed right into their weapon arms and legs.
Original


New and "evolved" angry banshees in S&M attire. As most of the daemon fans say " sigh... we are getting aggravated ..." , "yes we are"

Umm now looking at the current models I'd say they need new Daemonettes, it just feels like they dont capture the feeling of slaanesh as well as they should a mix of beauty and horror I fail to see, just an ugly bunch of models I wouldnt pay for.

Well last time I checked Slaanesh is androgynous so I cant figure out why the daemonettes are predominately female if not for the sole reason of taking advantage of a predominately male market. Which is insulting to me cause whenever I see a bunch of female models as either representative of being hedonistic (Slaanesh) or dominatrix (SoBs) then I kinda of find it a little insulting. In that GW doesnt see its customer base as suave males who have hit the gym, have a career, a girlfriend, and a child, such as myself. Nope they see thier customer base as a bunch of lonely guys who will buy something purely on the bases that it is an enticing 28 mm female, give me a break. What is this the 1960's heyday of DnD? Overall I dont see the fluff matching with the models. Where are the female IGs, or male Demonettes, and why the hell do SOB's need cup sizes for thier armor? Ya I can imagine Joan of Arc telling the local blacksmith, "Hey your going to have to reforge this, its cup size is too small". Even in modern day sports women wear bras that actually suppress thier breast size to help enhance thier manuaverability on the field, even the gals in our modern day armies do so, so why is this different in 40k. I guess what I'm saying is that for the models to match the fluff we need an entire industry shift on how miniature gaming views its predominately (and why is it predominately) male market. Basically they need to start adhering to fluff and stop thier bias that the people who play thier games are girl hating, loners, with a secret desire to be loved. Out of all the people I have meet and forged friendships with at my LGS I can't find one who fulfills that stereotype. Yes we are usually men, who are successful in our careers (after all we can afford the outrageous prices for the crap), outgoing, yes we can and do see real naked women and dont really care for 28mm fantasies, who would like to see the hobby become more female friendly for the simple fact that we appreciate a mental struggle of the minds that can occur in a minature war game because chess was just too damn easy.

The argument that women just do not like strategy games is a null argument because micromanagement games are infamously popular with female gamers in the video game market. And dispite the stereotypes wargaming is a social game experience and some of my best friendships where made at my LGS. Rather it is an overall misogynistic aesthetic determined by how the miniature industry views its audience that limits its appeal and causes a disjunction between the fluff and the models.

marxlives , im not too good with GW fluff , but if im not mistaken the androgynous property on Slaanesh "god" doesnt necessarily apply on the Daemonettes.

Besides , artist design wise i ( maybe GW aswell ) would love to hear a suggestion to what would make a good visual "trait" to represent slaanesh ( Ecstasy , Pleasure , Lust , Pride , Self Indulgence )

I think the thing that bugs me most about the current daemonettes (and there's a lot about them that I don't like) is that they've got enough wrinkles for a 60-year old. Getting rid of the wrinkles and fleshing out their faces a bit would probably go a long way toward fixing their issues. These are daemonettes, not vampires or liches. In fact, if you painted them up properly you could probably pass them off as a Tomb King's harem, "fresh" out of the pyramid...

Having said that, I also think that these are the worst daemonettes that GW has ever released. Even the bald daemonettes from the RoC: Slaves to Darkness era looked better than the ones we have now.

As for the fiends...

The only daemon miniatures that I've ever owned were two fiend models from back in the RoC: Slaves to Darkness era. They looked sleek, lithe, exotic, and disturbing all rolled into one. The current fiend, in a word, isn't.

Scary faces, claws, and the like are more daemonic than what the old ones were packing.

The previous daemonettes had claws. I never owned any and never took a close enough look at them to determine whether or not they had "scary faces". But they did have claws.


I liked the old minotaur Keeper of Secrets, but I can appreciate that it probably wasn't the way that the KoS should look. I'm not quite sure what to make of the current version. I don't dislike it, but I'm not sure whether it fits or not.

The minotaur Keeper of Secrets is the current model. It comes with two heads-the Chaos Cow head and the 6-horned Squidhead.

Unless you were looking at the Forge World version (which is awesome!)


I must admit, if I were assembling a Keeper of Secrets, I would give it the 6-horned Squidhead. It looked slightly more humanoid than the Chaos Cow head, which just looked slightly bewildered.

Squigsquasher wrote:The minotaur Keeper of Secrets is the current model. It comes with two heads-the Chaos Cow head and the 6-horned Squidhead.

No, they've changed the body as well. The previous one looked exactly like a hermaphroditic minotaur. The body was bulky and stocky, and the only things that told you that you weren't looking at a minotaur body were the single breast and the two extra arms with crab claws. The current one has a different body that's much thinner - almost cadaverous at points. And the non-clawed hands look misshapen and monstrous. IIRC, the previous version had more or less normal hands on those arms.


And yes, the Forgeworld KoS is pretty good.

I see. Actually sounds better than the current one.....Although I don't really dig the whole minotaur thing.


Must....Keep.....Useless.....Thread...Afloat...

Seem to be failling to breath life into this dead (and useless) thread.

Must keep trying....GODS, DO NOT FORSAKE THIS THREAD!

It seems prettymuch agreed (although not unanimous) that people want an update to the Slaanesh Range. Daemonettes were suppose to be alluring until you got to their freakishly clawed hands and they were with the 3rd ed Metal Models. 4/5th ed ones made them go in the completely opposite direction and the fact that the butt ugly Greater Daemon models didnt get updated either didnt help the cause.

marxlives wrote:wall of text

You just described yourself as suave. What a tool.

Simply put, I wish the daemonettes looked more like the artwork than they do now. If you're that worried about bewbage then but a bra on, or stick with the corset thing!!

Or even simpler , just file down the nipples , same concept as the Bloodletters are naked down there yet its ok.

Enormous phallic swords notwithstanding...

But seriously, whenever anyone reads this thread's title, do they imagine a flock of Daemonettes at the salon in curlers and housecoats getting their claws lacquered and hair extensions put in?

That sounds quite amusing...


And as for the Bloodletters, well, I wouldn't say the swords are phallic....What I would say is that they have rather large lunchbags.....Ahem...

Ammo pouches aside, the Bloodletters are awesome.

marxlives wrote: Out of all the people I have meet and forged friendships with at my LGS I can't find one who fulfills that stereotype. Yes we are usually men, who are successful in our careers (after all we can afford the outrageous prices for the crap), outgoing, yes we can and do see real naked women and dont really care for 28mm fantasies, who would like to see the hobby become more female friendly for the simple fact that we appreciate a mental struggle of the minds that can occur in a minature war game because chess was just too damn easy.

WALL O' TEXT! I don’t know what kind of civilized gentlemen’s league you game at... But most gaming stores I’ve been to are full of socially inept young males with poor hygiene habits and are most likely virgins. And most of them have prolly never played chess...

I don’t think this game is misogynistic or sexist as you claim but really just trying to make money. GWs predominant buyers (^) want women with sex appeal, not Bertha the warrior woman. lol Now is that unfluffy? No most sisters of battle and women are depicted and described as shapely and attractive in the 41st millennium so it sticks to fluff. Now is that realistic? No way in hell. Not even female gamers would want to play with ugly scared up flat chested females in miniature version as they see the models the table as a reflection of themselves, just as males don’t want to field ugly, flabby, whimps as an army. Human nature friend...

Now back to point. I’m scared with the new PG direction GW is going with everything that Slaanesh models of any kind will be getting dumbed down. Losing the true spirit of Slaanesh. Makes me weep inside. All the EC references to drugs, sex, and excess in the new children’s version of 40k just aren’t going to fly, so as sad as it is expect GW to ruin every reason why we play Slaanesh themed armies...

Slaanesh is suppose to be about lust, deprivaty and debauchery. Suddenly becoming kid friendly feels like they just suck the soul out of the soul-sucker.

I would think its more childish to go "BAWWWWW WE WANTZ BEWBZ BACK!!!" than just making do with the new daemonettes.

The message still gets across well enough: they're androgynous, shapley, wear corsets, have claws, and so on.

Aside from the face, which has people upset, they still look more or less like demonic succubi.

asimo77 wrote:I would think its more childish to go "BAWWWWW WE WANTZ BEWBZ BACK!!!" than just making do with the new daemonettes.

Only in your mind is giving a damn about quality a childish attribute. The 3rd edition daemons were actually decent models, and the new ugly daemonettes and static horrors are not acceptable replacements.

The message still gets across well enough: they're androgonous (sp?),

You use that word, but I think you don't know what it means. If someone has androgynous looks, this means they could pass as either a woman or a man at first glance. The new daemonettes can do neither, simply being ugly.

Aside from the face, which has people upset, they still look more or less like demonic succubi.

The faces are the most important part of the model. And they don't look like succubi, because they lack the most important attribute of a succubi, as they look like they couldn't seduce their way out of a wet paper bag.

Yikes, thar be a touchy subject for ya I see! YARRR!

That was a pirate.

"Only in your mind is giving a damn about quality a childish attribute"
Well as far as I can tell the only thing that was more seductive about the old ones were that they had breasts. Are their fish faces really anymore cute than the new ones? In other words if breasts=quality then I'd say that's a little silly.

When I said androgyny, I was getting at the fact that they have a breast on one side and the other torso-half is male looking. Sorry for being so loose with my language Mr. Webster.

As for the faces, they're creepy/scary/repulsive/and whatever else we've thrown out in this thread and I'm fine with that.

Finally to quote Jackson Browne "Take it easy"

asimo77 wrote:Finally to quote Jackson Browne "Take it easy"

If you want me to take it easy, don't insult me and then pretend you have the moral high ground.

When did I do that? I don't think there's any ground, high or low, to take in a discussion on the attractiveness of plastic daemons. But...

"Only in your mind is giving a damn about quality a childish attribute"

"You use that word, but I think you don't know what it means"

thems fightan words son

All I meant by "Take it easy" is that there's no reason to get riled up over a WH forum, I didn't think it was really that insulting, sorry if it was.

FLAME WAR!!!.... stop it.

^It's a good thing He'Stan is a poker buddy of mine then!

All kidding aside I apologize AlexHolker

Actually, the fish-faces were MUCH more cute than the current ones. For one thing, they were smiling, and had big, cute eyes. For another thing, they had needle-horn hair, which was a lot more Daemonic than the friggin' mohicans you get on the current, vastly inferior models. And, if I'm honest, the models really do need to be topless, being creatures of excess and debauchery. Whereas I struggle to even find the breasts on the new ones.

But maybe we should stop arguing and actually discuss what we think the next range of Slaaneshi Daemons should look like?

Most of my ire stems from the goth-punk hag-like head of the new ones. The body can stay, but they should redo the head to be more like the 3rd ed ones. They should leave one breast uncovered too, as that is the symbol of Slaanesh. What they do with the other one, I really dont care. The exaggerated sexuality of the things was what made them awesome. Remember the 6 boobed snake-horse? That is still one of my favourite models.

Terminus wrote:

marxlives wrote:wall of text

You just described yourself as suave. What a tool.

Totally agree, he also forgets that the word daemonette is feminine for daemon, that is why they are 'female'.

Laughing God wrote:Not even female gamers would want to play with ugly scared up flat chested females in miniature version as they see the models the table as a reflection of themselves, just as males don’t want to field ugly, flabby, wimps as an army. Human nature friend...

Now back to point. I’m scared with the new PG direction GW is going with everything that Slaanesh models of any kind will be getting dumbed down. Losing the true spirit of Slaanesh. Makes me weep inside. All the EC references to drugs, sex, and excess in the new children’s version of 40k just aren’t going to fly, so as sad as it is expect GW to ruin every reason why we play Slaanesh themed armies...

I totally agree with both these points.


All i have to say on the topic is that the last metal deamonettes were near perfect, why did GW ruin it?, they were perfectly modeled.

Don't fix what isn't broke, this had to be one of GW's biggest fails in my opinion, just last night I was discussing this with Laughing God (dakka user) and saying what a morally twisted game we play, where GW chaos models come with the option to mount spikes with severed heads on everything, yet bare breasts are viewed as too graphic.....WHAT!?

In essence GW is saying that the picture below, is too graphic for the younger players


But that the next image is A-okay for little Timmy and his friends? I though America had warped morals!

Its the same old thing, films like saw and hostel get a world release but if a film has realistic sex in it or full nudity it is banned. doesn't make sense.

Exactly, never made sense to me. The only time I've seen fair representation of both sides was when I was in Italy in 2006, I discovered that the tv had both porn and action movies on public access. Needless to say, this was such a novelty to my close-minded American consciousness that I almost had a seizure from an overload of common sense.

Ever watch that South Park episode "Good Times with Weapons"? Sexual sensitivity was parodied HARD there.

So all this summed up? How do I want the new Slaaneshi daemons to look?

Keeper of secrets/DP- Look at forgeworld/cover of Dec white dwarf. THAT is how a keeper of secrets should look, lithe, seductive, deadly, terrifying, all at the same time.

Fiends- Something arachnid/serpentine/graceful. Really anything but whatever that obomination is now. Think Graceful, swift, yet disturbing in its appeal.

Daemonettes- Simple, just make the old ones in plastic with more detailes. jewelry and what not.

Seekers- Same as ^

Also wouldnt mind seeing a model that represented the non sexual side of slaanesh. Just the Pride, greed, gluttony, perfect, addition side that is not so often thought of as an aspect of slaanesh but is just as much if not more a part of slaanesh than physical seduction. Think the best they did with that ideal was Sigmund in warhammer fantasy, basically Fulgrim of the fantasy universe.

Yes. Hmm. If they make a new Keeper of Secrets, it should have six breasts-3 should have nipples, and 3 should have eyes. It should keep the claws, but they upper arms should'nt have those giant hands-what it should have is an extremely long, katana-like blade, a bit like that absurdly long pig-sticker that Sephiroth has.....whoever he is. The head sould have a roughly humanoid face, but with six large, spider-like eyes. It should have tendrils for hair, and six horns. Horns are fine, as long as they don't seriously distort the head. And for the Emperor's sake, give it buttocks.

I think the FW one is pretty damn good. I'll probably chop off the crab-claw arms though.

Crab claws are kind of iconic for slaanesh thou

Crab Claws are used to balance out the supposed attractiveness of Slaaneshi daemons. Something monstrous on something that should be graceful.

Hurm I guess when I get the model in my hands I can make a better desicion on the crab arms.

But that's never going to happen because it's like a bazillion pounds for one :(

Let's just hope that Games Workshop decides to bring out some new Greater Daemons.

Must....re-invigorate....old....useless....post...

Anyone else got their opinions on this thread? Or is it just going to collapse like a flan in a cupboard?

Seems like the general consensus is that They need to redo the old Metal Daemonettes in plastic instead of the current ones and release new GDs. Other than that it's just a bunch of people going in circles.

Let it die friend... let it die. Had a good run and reached a productive conclusion, now let it rest on the many busoms of slaanesh.

Laughing God wrote:Let it die friend... let it die. Had a good run and reached a productive conclusion, now let it rest on the many busoms of slaanesh.

perhaps, as per our discussion last night, Slaanesh is the mother of tits?

Boobworm brought to you by the titmother slaanesh. lol

Laughing God wrote:

Boobworm brought to you by the titmother slaanesh. lol

all hail the titmother. lol

Be silent on the matter of tits! There could be minors on these forums!



Tap-dancing Trygons, did I just say that?