Honestly... the sculpting is great but that model is horrible. Under what sense would anyone use it for or even paint it for. I have seen models that are of bondage on coolmini and those were more tastefull then that. I am sorry but I really don't like this one.
i don't know what it's supposed to be. just gross for gross sake? is it from a book or other source? though great sculpting on the women, looks accurate if disturbing.
See although I commend the sculpting skill, I couldn't put that on the table with a straight face.
Plus any model that requires the response 'Ah I wish you hadn't found that one' to be uttered when the father in law or my sons find it would immediately disqualify it from my house.
The girls if seperate would be tempting for Dark Eldar or Chaos, I'd probably add clothes of some kind, but yeah not something I'd pick up.
MajorTom11 wrote:Subject wise, I don't know what the hell you are supposed to do with that when you are done painting it lol.
I think you're supposed to put it back on your desk on it's scenic base you carved from children's hollowed skulls and go and check on the girl you're holding captive whilst waiting for her skin to be lotioned enough to make a dress out of it, you argue with her and then go and have a little dance with your crown jewels tucked between your legs.
It's a very well done sculpt. Not to my tastes though.
To me, this is a great representation of an aspect of Shub Niggurath.
The Black Goat of the woods with 1000 young. The Mother whose Milk gives essence to her Children. The All-Mother and wife of the Not-to-Be-Named-One.
A very lovecraftian horror. Very creatively depicted. Masterfully sculpted.
I see nothing really GW related about the model other than it being perverse and by proxy being under the auspices of slaanesh. Other than that, this is a pure horror figure.
MajorTom11 wrote:Subject wise, I don't know what the hell you are supposed to do with that when you are done painting it lol.
I think you're supposed to put it back on your desk on it's scenic base you carved from children's hollowed skulls and go and check on the girl you're holding captive whilst waiting for her skin to be lotioned enough to make a dress out of it, you argue with her and then go and have a little dance with your crown jewels tucked between your legs.
It's a very well done sculpt. Not to my tastes though.
I saw this, this morning before I was able to read the NSFW.
Interesting sculpt, and I agree about the female sculpts as chaos/DE usable, but holy cow the acutal model is quite disturbing.
It is one of those things that you look and and don't want to again, but can't tear your eyes from.
Shudder...
Upon closer inspection, while it does have a certain obvious Shub Niggurath quality, it could easily be an aspect of Yog Sothoth as well.
The whole "Key and the Gate" thing fits well with this model too.
"It was an All-in-One and One-in-All of limitless being and self — not merely a thing of one Space-Time continuum, but allied to the ultimate animating essence of existence's whole unbounded sweep — the last, utter sweep which has no confines and which outreaches fancy and mathematics alike. It was perhaps that which certain secret cults of earth have whispered of as YOG-SOTHOTH, and which has been a deity under other names; that which the crustaceans of Yuggoth worship as the Beyond-One, and which the vaporous brains of the spiral nebulae know by an untranslatable Sign..."
Not very Dunwich Horror, but it could be that what the albino Lavinia Whately encountered in order to give birth to her two sons conceived by Yog Sothoth.
Its a very obviously lovecraftian horror with hints of geiger aesthetics. Part of that madness has been given a form to view and is faithful to its inspiration.
I like it. Really fething scary, the stuff of nightmares. I mean, I wouldn't buy it because I really have no use for it (I don't play Chaos, and even if I did, I really don't like painting large models), but it's damned good for what it is.
Now, excuse me while I change my pants, I seem to have soiled them in my terror.
Looking at their web store, these are supposed to be for a game that isn't even out yet, but they've already stopped selling the first two miniatures. What the hell?
Where as it is disturbing, I think the naked women around it are what make it something you wouldn't want sitting out in your house. its' just a weird she-deamon thing without them. Once you have the naked women around it, in compromising positions, it starts to take on a different meaning to me. It just looks like a big thing that goes around stealing and breat feeding babies, but with the girls in there, I honestly don't have a clue as to what the is going on there.
As much as I think it's an amazing sculpt, I agree with everyone else. I'd be honestly embarrassed to be caught owning this model. Then again, I'm prude enough to file off all the nipples from my Infinity models.
I'm not liking the creative decision to put a plethora of dangling breasts all over. Take those off and replace the penis-tail with something else and it may be more marketable.
I love the baby-face and the disturbing textures.
For those saying this is Slaaneshi, this is NOT Slaaneshi. Everything with nudity is not Slaaneshi.
I also find it ironic that some people are saying the model is somewhat inappropriate, and then they think the nude, pregnant women would make great Dark Eldar slaves.
...wat?
Hello,
Well as a slaanesh player, I am rather intrigued by this, as it shows the adrogney (sp), that he/she/it is known for. From a usability standpoint, well there it becomes problematic. Might make a really nifty spawn model, or even a really scary greater unclean one (nothing healthy is going on there), as a new transmission method (read carriers) for his bountiful plagues. The child suckling at the teat of this model could very well be a nurgling, acting as they always do. As for the LGS, I do get alot of freedom to paint what I want, however, this one might be regarded as beyond acceptable. It is a wonderful sculpt, as many of thier minis are, but that may not redeem its value in the eyes of of the non-gaming masses.
I see Lovecraft and Dragon Age inspiring alot of this. I feel it is a beautiful model. The baby being fed is the most disturbing thing for me.
As for using the anatomically correct women for Vect/Slaanesh/wet dreams...two are major pregnant so I would actually find that more disturbing than this model set itself.
I love it. I would paint it. And I would show it to those who would understand the inspiration enough to appreciate it. Considering all the Slaanesh 6 breasted deamons that are out there, I honestly thought that the prudish comments would have been less than they are. It is a model that draws from numerous subjects for its inspiration, and while it is rather disturbing in many ways, I feel that it is the subject itself that should be found disturbing to most. Not the actual model.
Just thought I'd chime in and clarify on something:
The Wet Nurse does not birth anything, nor does it impregnate women. It's function is solely to raise the young. The large sack in the front is a milk sack, that is drained from other women.
Thank you for amazing comments. I will admit that Berserk and Lovecraft are huge influences of mine.
I also totally understand if its not your cup of tea.
In all honesty? To drain miscarriages as nutrients.
Good lord.
Alrighty then lol.
Honestly though, it's a very dynamic and interesting model, and it looks brilliantly cast as well. I won't be purchasing it, but, honestly an amazing piece!
Nope no story posted as of yet. I have a series of illustrations being worked on, that visually tell the story of the holy lands and the birth of a baby leading up to its solitary and almost mechanical place in the bizarre area.
Nope no story posted as of yet. I have a series of illustrations being worked on, that visually tell the story of the holy lands and the birth of a baby leading up to its solitary and almost mechanical place in the bizarre area.
I am a big fan of show not tell.
Then let's get that series up! I want to know more!
BTW, I may have scored you a couple of orders by posting links here and there. The Pinup Forsaker is rapidly growing in popularity, judging by the responses.
Those are some really nice models. Creepy and too risque for my tastes.
The other things the store offers maybe worth a gander, especially the Forsaker Pinup as I reclicked my refresh button a few hundred times to see it again and again.
[First thoughts] wtf?
[Second thoughts] Really good scuplting. Really weird and creative and... unlike anything else. What's that no the end of that tentacle??
[Third thoughts] Wtf?! It has boobs AND a one-eyed snake?
At this point I really couldn't articulat anything but "wtf" for a while (like it seems a lot of us are caught up on for a brief moment) but this model is both impressive and repulsive and I'm not sure if it's more sexual or just plain weird. I've never seen anything like it but the confused feelings of sexual?/weird? I have about it reminds me of Lady Gaga.
Wow.. that's just.. um.. well... wow... hmm.. nice boobies I guess... but... I dunno, all I see is boobies everywhere... can't concentrate enough to form a complete sentence...
Hellfury wrote:
A very lovecraftian horror. Very creatively depicted. Masterfully sculpted.
I don't remember Lovecraft having titmonster tentacle rapists, but whatever. It succeeds in being absolutely disgusting and horrifying, and is well sculpted from a technical standpoint. I don't think I could stomach owning one.
battle Brother Lucifer wrote:Hmm, I bet the DE players are going to love the extra women models...
And Slaanesh CSM/DoC
Not really. Technically it's a great sculpt but... It's quite disgusting. No way I'm painting naked pregnant female minis for my army. And less, things with penis-whips. Weird creatures like the monsters of the manga/anime Claymore (I don't know how you call that creaters in English) are cool for me, but the hentai stuff... is too much. BTW, Claymore creatures are quite H.R. Giger too, I would say.
I like Giger's stuff but this goes slightly further. Nice job, but I wouldn't buy it.
You guys can complain now of the cover of AlexiZ's DVDs... LOL
And personally, I'd be far more ashamed to be caught with WGF's Amazons than I would with that. I probably wouldn't rush to show that mini to my grandmother, but I don't see why anyone should be ashamed just to own it.
You just got to love some the detailing on the ladies. I can understand going that extra mile for completeness , and on one level I applaud it, but, such detailing doesn't add anything to the models except make them an adult oriented purchase?
...god daaaamn...that's fething disturbing. I want one. lol
I don't even know what I'd do with it, I'd honestly be too scared of it to even take it out of the box let alone paint the fething thing, and I'd be afraid to admit I actually owned one, but still. It reminds me a lot of Giger paintings, though like it was said, much more blatantly sexual. The implied tentacle rape (even if it's not actually capable of impregnating anything) and the uh, "milking" going on are probably a little too much, but obviously this is more of an art piece and not something you'd be gaming with out in public, so if it's not your thing then just don't buy it.
This is a really weird model, needless to say. Really makes me ask myself when too much is too much...but I get the feeling the sculptor wasn't doing it just because he's immature and was thinking "lolz boobs, lolz tentacle rape" the whole time.
Hellfury wrote:
A very lovecraftian horror. Very creatively depicted. Masterfully sculpted.
I don't remember Lovecraft having titmonster tentacle rapists, but whatever.
How do you think the Dunwich Horror and its brother Wilbur Whately were conceived? By fluffy-bunny pillow-fights? I really doubt the eldritch horror Yog Sothoth came courting Lavinia with flowers and chocolates. I also doubt Lavinia's father even thought for a second about stopping the extraterrestrial coupling since he stood to gain much by the spawn being brought to this world.
All of which isn't specifically spoken of, but thats Lovecraft's style. While he labors over details, the true genius of the horror lies in what he doesn't describe... Its sickeningly perverse in its implication.
Haha... cant take that seriously... I mean some great sculpting work there i guess.... I get the rows and rows of boobs i guess... But was there any need for the extra 2 Boob horns on the back of its neck.
Reminds me of that guy with boobs on his head from "little Nicky"
Tortured-Robot wrote:I get the rows and rows of boobs i guess... But was there any need for the extra 2 Boob horns on the back of its neck.
Look closer. Those "boob horns", it's back arch, and those shriveled appendages coming off the back are yet another composite of the pregnant female form blended into the sculpt.
Monster Rain wrote:It kind of makes me sad that people look at something that's really well sculpted and creative and can't get past the "bewbs."
I'm not so sure it was the "bewbs" that people couldn't get past, except for the tormented android quoted above . In fact nearly everyone agreed it was beautifully sculpted, but it was the overall image the artist created that was a bit much for their tastes. I honestly doubt the artist would want it any other way!
Noisy_Marine wrote:I like it! Why only a limited run of 100?
My understanding that Kingdom Death do a run of 100 copies in resin when they first release a figure, aimed at the painting market. When the game is released, my understanding is that the figures will then be available again - possibly in metal, though I'm not 100% certain on that.
kingdomdeath wrote:To celebrate I've put the Gorm and the Preacher on sale at 50% off!
If you put the two pinup models on at 50%, I'd gladly buy them.
Honestly, maybe it just means that I'm screwed up, but I didn't find the Wet Nurse all that disturbing. The level of detail on the pregnant women, however, caught me off guard. Maybe I just watch too many horror movies, maybe I've played too many horror games, but it's not all that horrifying to me.
Do not take that as a bad thing, I think it's a very awesome model. I too wondered what Dark Eldar players would want to do with naked/pregnant women models, I personally can't think of any reason to use them.
Edit: On second thought, I'd just love the Twilight Knight pinup. I have no idea what I'd use her for, but it's an awesome model, and I'm sure I could find some use for it.
Absolutionis wrote:For those saying this is Slaaneshi, this is NOT Slaaneshi. Everything with nudity is not Slaaneshi.
Speaking for myself, I feel rather comfortable classifying tentacle rape as a Slaaneshi sort of thing to do. I can't really see Nurgle getting into that.
kingdomdeath wrote:Just thought I'd chime in and clarify on something:
The Wet Nurse does not birth anything, nor does it impregnate women. It's function is solely to raise the young. The large sack in the front is a milk sack, that is drained from other women.
OK, so while you're clarifying, what exactly is the, like, life cycle here? What's with the penis-tentacle? Is it snatching babies from pregnant women and raising them, and if so, what's with the non-naked women?
It's a boob monster. Trying to make it make sense is a bit pointless. It has boobs and it's trying to make you uncomfortable by using imagery related to sexual organs and pregancy.
I would rather see something like this without all the boobs to be honest.
Da Boss wrote:I would rather see something like this without all the boobs to be honest.
Get rid of all the boobs, and what do you have left? If it's supposed to raise (undead?) babies, having boobs is important to that role. A giant rolling tanker of baby formula just wouldn't be the same.
To me, the baby thing seems like a justification to sculpt lots of boobs on the model, especially given the proportions on the pregnant ladies.
I mean OBVIOUSLY feeding babies is what boobs are FOR, but that's how this comes across, to me. Giant freaky eerie faced monster thingy would work better for me without all the boobs everywhere.
Though I must compliment the sculptor on his technical skill, as always. Kingdom Death stuff is always well executed, even if I don't <3 the concept.
Da Boss wrote:It's a boob monster. Trying to make it make sense is a bit pointless. It has boobs and it's trying to make you uncomfortable by using imagery related to sexual organs and pregancy.
I would rather see something like this without all the boobs to be honest.
No offense, but this is simultaneously the best, and the most useless criticism.
The best, because you're getting the point of the work: the unease and perturbation created by the juxtaposition of the the familiar and the fantastical, the contrast between the familiar, nurturing elements and the exotic and grotesque elements.
The worst, because, having "gotten the point", you simply don't like it. Or, specifically, you don't like one element, which happens to be the critical element. You're asking for the defining element to be removed, or, put another way, you just want something else entirely.
It's like a situation where a chef prepares a delicious roast of beef for a diner, and after the dish is set onto the table, the diner remarks that the roast is beutifully done, but he doesn't like meat. Now, contrast that to a diner being served a beef chili, and saying he would prefer it without meat. A chef can prepare a meatless chili*, he can't prepare a roast-less roast.
Having said all that, the sentiment is exactly why I haven't commented before; I think the sculpting is fantastic technically, and the associated females are simply fantastic (if they were available separately I think the market for them would be far larger then the item as a whole). But it just doesn't "do it" for me. There's no one thing that I can say "oh, take that off and I'd buy 2", it's as a whole just not to my tastes. So I'll wait, confident that with the level of skill and courage on display at Kingdom Death, it's only a matter of time before they produce something that compels me to finally pry open my wallet.
*Yes, I know that there is a long and storied argument about what exactly constitutes a proper chili, but let's leave that sleeping dog lie.
Also, seriously, make those ladies available separately.
I get why it has all the boobs, but the penis-look the miscarriage vacuum has doesn't seem needed and if anything makes people assume it is for getting it on with the ladies. It would be better if it was given a different look so that people wouldn't get confused over it.
As for the model itself, I quite like it. It is pretty creepy. I'd make it available separately without the women though, just to make it more viable for the average painter to own. On its own you could get away with it, but with them involved it isn't exactly the greatest conversation starter, and goes from "That is pretty creepy" to "Ah...".
Buzzsaw wrote:Also, seriously, make those ladies available separately.
terribletrygon wrote:I'd make it available separately without the women though, just to make it more viable for the average painter to own. On its own you could get away with it, but with them involved it isn't exactly the greatest conversation starter, and goes from "That is pretty creepy" to "Ah...".
It looks like there are people from both sides in favour of this idea.
Not keen on the nudes tbh they look ok at first glance, with some nice sculpting. But the relationship of parts and proportions are a bit squiffy.
The lower legs of the terrified nude are far too long. And just for a change the bubbies are straight from the "Adolescents Book of Wet Dreams". When will miniature sculpters go to some life drawing classes instead of looking at pics from www.siliconvalleysluts.orgi?
The Wet Nurse (aka Mama Multi-megamamms) is all those things already said. Creepy as intended. Not sure I would want it on the mantlepiece myself, but impressive.
Monster Rain wrote:Is there some kind of story behind these things?
That is really crazy, but I see potential for some really mind-boggling strangeness in the fluff for something like that...
As I understand it, in the Kingdom Death world, the few remaining humans are little more than a food supply for monsters. But the monsters know that they can't just eat all humans or they'd starve, so they keep them the way we keep cattle.
Just by looking at this model, I'd guess that it's purpose is to impregnate human women en masse and nourish lots of babies at once until they grow large enough to slaughter... Just a guess.
Sick? Yes. Weird? Yes. Totally Inappropriate for anything? No.
It's a very well crafted model, but isn't something you'd use for just anything, though it would suit some things very well. This would make a perfect generic greater daemon in a CSM army or an Unaligned Greater Daemon for a Dark Heresy game acting as a BBEG for example, or for something like World of Darkness or Call of C'thulu.
I wish we had more truly disturbing and creepy models out there, and less of the cartoony generic monster demons.
Wierd (and perverted, if we must call it that) as it is, I love it. I want to paint one up just to see what I could do with it, and would make a great decoration to someone who was into horror flicks. Incredible cost too!
Vaktathi wrote:Sick? Yes. Weird? Yes. Totally Inappropriate for anything? No.
It's a very well crafted model, but isn't something you'd use for just anything, though it would suit some things very well. This would make a perfect generic greater daemon in a CSM army or an Unaligned Greater Daemon for a Dark Heresy game acting as a BBEG for example, or for something like World of Darkness or Call of C'thulu.
I wish we had more truly disturbing and creepy models out there, and less of the cartoony generic monster demons.
I would hardly call this 'generic', what with all the sexuality involved. Just looking at it you immediately notice lots and lots of boobs (a trademark of Slaaneshi models) and what can only be called a tentacle penis. It's surrounded by naked pregnant women, undoubtedly its victims.
Easily one of the best models that I've ever seen and it nearly left me speechless. Subtle it isn't, but as so many games out there talk about inhuman horrors as being part of their setting, it's good to see a company actually come out with something horrifying (as opposed a vaguely ogrish thing with spikes and wings).
Vaktathi wrote:Sick? Yes. Weird? Yes. Totally Inappropriate for anything? No.
It's a very well crafted model, but isn't something you'd use for just anything, though it would suit some things very well. This would make a perfect generic greater daemon in a CSM army or an Unaligned Greater Daemon for a Dark Heresy game acting as a BBEG for example, or for something like World of Darkness or Call of C'thulu.
I wish we had more truly disturbing and creepy models out there, and less of the cartoony generic monster demons.
I would hardly call this 'generic', what with all the sexuality involved. Just looking at it you immediately notice lots and lots of boobs (a trademark of Slaaneshi models) and what can only be called a tentacle penis. It's surrounded by naked pregnant women, undoubtedly its victims.
Just because it has a sexual nature doesn't mean it is automatically slaanesh, just as some other killy daemon isn't automatically Khorne. It could stand in for something slaaneshi, but not in the normal "omg bewbs" sense, but rather the kind of excess that arises from psychopathy of parents that end up doing terrible things to their children or something.
I love it and would make a great KoS but I would have second thoughts about putting that thing on the table :L maybe it should include a bra....or ten for when theres kids around
Its not the breasts that are really disturbing. Check out statues of Diana of the Ephesians from greek culture sometimes (though there is some debate about what they are).
What's disturbing are the vaginas.
The three figures are pretty normal, though the poses seem to be explicitly revelatory instead of more naturally at rest.
But the orifice in the back, and the vestigial woman's legs on the top that create the impression that the entire monster is inserting itself in the vagina of some poor woman now rendered vestigially irrelevant.
That's what's disturbing.
Boobs? So what. The breasts are actually being used to nurse a little baby in one instance.
Vaktathi wrote:Sick? Yes. Weird? Yes. Totally Inappropriate for anything? No.
It's a very well crafted model, but isn't something you'd use for just anything, though it would suit some things very well. This would make a perfect generic greater daemon in a CSM army or an Unaligned Greater Daemon for a Dark Heresy game acting as a BBEG for example, or for something like World of Darkness or Call of C'thulu.
I wish we had more truly disturbing and creepy models out there, and less of the cartoony generic monster demons.
I would hardly call this 'generic', what with all the sexuality involved. Just looking at it you immediately notice lots and lots of boobs (a trademark of Slaaneshi models) and what can only be called a tentacle penis. It's surrounded by naked pregnant women, undoubtedly its victims.
Just because it has a sexual nature doesn't mean it is automatically slaanesh, just as some other killy daemon isn't automatically Khorne. It could stand in for something slaaneshi, but not in the normal "omg bewbs" sense, but rather the kind of excess that arises from psychopathy of parents that end up doing terrible things to their children or something.
So you argue against my assertion that it's Slaaneshi... and then provide another explanation as to why it IS Slaaneshi? Thanks, I guess...
pduggie wrote:Its not the breasts that are really disturbing. Check out statues of Diana of the Ephesians from greek culture sometimes (though there is some debate about what they are).
What's disturbing are the vaginas.
The three figures are pretty normal, though the poses seem to be explicitly revelatory instead of more naturally at rest.
But the orifice in the back, and the vestigial woman's legs on the top that create the impression that the entire monster is inserting itself in the vagina of some poor woman now rendered vestigially irrelevant.
That's what's disturbing.
Boobs? So what. The breasts are actually being used to nurse a little baby in one instance.
O.O
Oh. My. Raptorjesus. How the **** did I not notice that before?! That just bumped this up from 'moderately disturbing' to 'OHGODITBURNSSSSSSS!!!!!!! CANNOT UNSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'
pduggie wrote:Its not the breasts that are really disturbing. Check out statues of Diana of the Ephesians
That's EXACTLY what I was thinking of, but I couldn't come up with the name! Thank you sir!
Oddly enough, this is the first Kingdom Death figure I have really considered buying. The other ones don't really do it for me much past "That is a nice sculpt". This one though is really like nothing else out there, and captures that primitive goddess look really well. To me at least, ancient gods, especially eastern and some very early European ones, really say "Hi, I am creepy as hell, but you are still going to worship me because I am eldritch terror otherwise. KTHNXBAI!" This model really kind of hits that spot for me. I can definitely see why it sold out the first day.
I could take or leave the random chicks around it, and depending on the use lose the tail peen, but they are nicely done and might find their way into other uses. The monster itself though would make an excellent greater daemon or similar monstrosity. Possibly an epic sort of eldar god summoned by primitives living past the edge of civilization. What is the scale on it?
Honestly, the part that I dislike about it is the women. The proportions are those of surgically-enhanced pornstars, and seem designed to appeal to the sexually frustrated. They (as well as the balloonlike boobs on the body) detract from the effectiveness, scariness, and artistic quality of the central sculpt, which is otherwise impressive (and disturbing), with definite shades of Giger. Giger's nightmare female/sexual creatures didn't include elements designed to be attractive, IIRC.
If the artist had made the women and the "body-boobs" more realistic, this would be a really impressive piece, and something I could easily see displayed with other works of frightening art, like Giger or Goya.
pduggie wrote:Its not the breasts that are really disturbing. Check out statues of Diana of the Ephesians
What is the scale on it?
35mm I do believe.
The female genetalia and tail phallus definately push the model "over the top" for me. Lets not even consider what gloss havnish could do to this piece once its painted.
I have been wondering how you would paint such a thing, do you paint it to be evil? Or would you paint it to be sort of a peaceful, all knowing being?
Without the boobies and the v slits and tentacles, it would make a great 'overlord' character. Very freaky with all the arms and face. Maybe a little conversions and you got a norm queen or something. Tervigon? LOL.
Mewiththeface wrote:Without the boobies and the v slits and tentacles, it would make a great 'overlord' character. Very freaky with all the arms and face. Maybe a little conversions and you got a norm queen or something. Tervigon? LOL.
overlord? if you're going that far i'd lean more towards silent hill myself
lolololololololololololololololol
Hey I just found a new DP (and no not that DP)
I always wanted something that keeps the kids away from my mini table!
Ouze wrote:Well, I like it. I would not buy it, but I do like it, and now I'm interested in the Kingdom Death mythos.
Honestly I don't think KD cares if everyone in this thread who said they wouldn't buy it don't buy it... It sold out on Day 1. Well I'm sure it matters, but you know what I mean right? Anyway I totally agree with you, I want to know more about the Kingdom Death mythos. And I want to see more models.
And on the upside, to those who don't like it, the blatantly sickosexual niche has seemingly been filled by this piece, so I doubt we'll see it again to anywhere near this degree...
MasterDRD wrote:Honestly I don't think KD cares if everyone in this thread who said they wouldn't buy it don't buy it... It sold out on Day 1. Well I'm sure it matters, but you know what I mean right?.
I do. More importantly, though, I guess I should point out that although I wouldn't buy that specific model, I wound up going to their site and seeing models that I would buy, and one that I will buy - the Twilight Knight.
Melissia wrote:Oh great, they've made a tentacle rape miniature now. So that's one less thing I can value western sculpts for over Japanese sculpts.
That's not really a fair comparison. Tentacle rape hentai exists because there is a certain group of people that it sexually arouses. I seriously doubt the sculptors intended anyone to be aroused by this Wet Nurse model. Not all nudity is sexually arousing, as I was informed the last time I went to a public bath.
That is nicely detail model, I personally think it's beautiful.
Takes quite a lot to freak me out, and this isn't anything to shocking.
I think the model would find lots of love with today's collectors.
Melissia wrote:Oh great, they've made a tentacle rape miniature now. So that's one less thing I can value western sculpts for over Japanese sculpts.
That's not really a fair comparison. Tentacle rape hentai exists because there is a certain group of people that it sexually arouses. I seriously doubt the sculptors intended anyone to be aroused by this Wet Nurse model. Not all nudity is sexually arousing, as I was informed the last time I went to a public bath.
Its an excellent comparison. Thats pretty much what this thing is.
Melissia wrote:Oh great, they've made a tentacle rape miniature now. So that's one less thing I can value western sculpts for over Japanese sculpts.
That's not really a fair comparison. Tentacle rape hentai exists because there is a certain group of people that it sexually arouses. I seriously doubt the sculptors intended anyone to be aroused by this Wet Nurse model. Not all nudity is sexually arousing, as I was informed the last time I went to a public bath.
Its an excellent comparison. Thats pretty much what this thing is.
MasterDRD wrote:Pinup or other one? I liked them both, but I'm too broke to buy any of them...
Pinup. I dread painting the cloak, because I am terrible at cloth. Flesh, I'm not so bad with.
Is it wrong/weird that I'd love to get the Twilight Pinup and use it as an alternate Archon for my Dark Eldar? I'm kind of assuming the size of the model would be all right, maybe a bit tall.
She'd look awesome if...what little armor she has was painted like my DE army.
MasterDRD wrote:Pinup or other one? I liked them both, but I'm too broke to buy any of them...
Pinup. I dread painting the cloak, because I am terrible at cloth. Flesh, I'm not so bad with.
Is it wrong/weird that I'd love to get the Twilight Pinup and use it as an alternate Archon for my Dark Eldar? I'm kind of assuming the size of the model would be all right, maybe a bit tall.
She'd look awesome if...what little armor she has was painted like my DE army.
I think she's make a great Archon. As the sword has the hand attached, I don't see why you couldn't also swap it for a dagger and use her as a Wych - although the pose is a little un-dynamic for that.
Only problem is I'm not sure if the scale would work - did you see that picture next to a quarter?
The other problem I have with her as a Wych is conceptual. Not with that specific model, but with Wyches in general. They all have knives. Jes Goodwin said that was intentional, to show how dangerous they are... that all they need is a dagger. Really? A drug using woman with a knife? Any policeman in a metro area is equipped to deal with that now, in 2010, and does so regularly "Yeah, I tazed some crackhead, bringing her in." C'mon.
Hehe I agree with that sentiment, but only in the larger "bringing a [melee weapon] to a gunfight" sense. A suitably quick and aggressive person with a knife or two is still extremely dangerous even if you have a more suitable melee weapon like a sword. If you have a gun, however, both Knifey McStabby and Swordy McSlashy are going to die in a hurry.
I kind of think 40k needs Stand and Shoot reactions.
Mannahnin wrote:Honestly, the part that I dislike about it is the women. The proportions are those of surgically-enhanced pornstars, and seem designed to appeal to the sexually frustrated.
yes to the poses, no to the proportions. They're pregnant and nursing.
Melissia wrote:Oh great, they've made a tentacle rape miniature now. So that's one less thing I can value western sculpts for over Japanese sculpts.
That's not really a fair comparison. Tentacle rape hentai exists because there is a certain group of people that it sexually arouses. I seriously doubt the sculptors intended anyone to be aroused by this Wet Nurse model. Not all nudity is sexually arousing, as I was informed the last time I went to a public bath.
Its an excellent comparison. Thats pretty much what this thing is.
Are you saying you're aroused by this model?
No I don't get off on tentacle rape. I'm not a repressed 13 year old. How about you?
MasterDRD wrote:Pinup or other one? I liked them both, but I'm too broke to buy any of them...
Pinup. I dread painting the cloak, because I am terrible at cloth. Flesh, I'm not so bad with.
Is it wrong/weird that I'd love to get the Twilight Pinup and use it as an alternate Archon for my Dark Eldar? I'm kind of assuming the size of the model would be all right, maybe a bit tall.
She'd look awesome if...what little armor she has was painted like my DE army.
I think she's make a great Archon. As the sword has the hand attached, I don't see why you couldn't also swap it for a dagger and use her as a Wych - although the pose is a little un-dynamic for that.
Only problem is I'm not sure if the scale would work - did you see that picture next to a quarter?
Whoo!
Anyways, I did think of the scaling problem. I thought of the sword being the equivalent to a Huskblade, I'd even paint it all fancy and all that jazz! Alas, maybe she is to be a replacement Archon for friendly games only? A shame. Maybe I'll just have to buy it and then see about the scaling.
Frazzled wrote:No I don't get off on tentacle rape. I'm not a repressed 13 year old. How about you?
Nope. As I said above, I one of the millions of people in the world who can look at nudity (or in this case, nude bitz of women) and not be locked into seeing it as sexual. I honestly doubt anyone could see this as sexually arousing. Just look at this thread. We're six pages in and we've had a variety of responses saying everything from, "Ew," to "That's terrible," to "I like it, it's horror," but I don't think we've had even one person respond with, "HOTT".
Definitely different.
Lot of detail sculpt wise but perhaps a little to much detail in certain areas, at least for me.
Wouldn’t be a sculpt my wife would approve of for sure.
Is there any actual potential to use this model in current games systems or is it just self indulgent crap?
Someone mentioned as a GD of Slaanesh earlier? I lol'd but to each their own.
Erasoketa wrote:I think that those represent bull testicles, not boobies.
And that's better... how?
Did I say it's any better? I didn't.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Fragile Breath wrote:
Ouze wrote:
MasterDRD wrote:Pinup or other one? I liked them both, but I'm too broke to buy any of them...
Pinup. I dread painting the cloak, because I am terrible at cloth. Flesh, I'm not so bad with.
Is it wrong/weird that I'd love to get the Twilight Pinup and use it as an alternate Archon for my Dark Eldar? I'm kind of assuming the size of the model would be all right, maybe a bit tall.
She'd look awesome if...what little armor she has was painted like my DE army.
I have the Twilight Pinup and the new Archon model, both still unassembled and unpainted. I'll try to make a pic of both when I have enough time, for scale reference
MajorTom11 wrote:Subject wise, I don't know what the hell you are supposed to do with that when you are done painting it lol.
I think you're supposed to put it back on your desk on it's scenic base you carved from children's hollowed skulls and go and check on the girl you're holding captive whilst waiting for her skin to be lotioned enough to make a dress out of it, you argue with her and then go and have a little dance with your crown jewels tucked between your legs.
IT PUTS THE LOTION ON ITS SKIN OR ELSE IT GETS THE HOSE AGAIN! It does this whenever it is told...
Ratius wrote:Is there any actual potential to use this model in current games systems or is it just self indulgent crap?
Oh wow, I've heard of gamers being self-righteous and obtuse, but you, sir, take the cake. Something that's not instantly useable in a game is automatically "self-indulgent crap". Wow. If your point of view was any more narrow you'd probably say that dice are only useful for 40k and any non-40k use of dice is pointless and stupid.
Ratius wrote:Is there any actual potential to use this model in current games systems or is it just self indulgent crap?
Oh wow, I've heard of gamers being self-righteous and obtuse, but you, sir, take the cake. Something that's not instantly useable in a game is automatically "self-indulgent crap". Wow. If your point of view was any more narrow you'd probably say that dice are only useful for 40k and any non-40k use of dice is pointless and stupid.
Oh wow, I've heard of gamers being self-righteous and obtuse, but you, sir, take the cake. Something that's not instantly useable in a game is automatically "self-indulgent crap". Wow. If your point of view was any more narrow you'd probably say that dice are only useful for 40k and any non-40k use of dice is pointless and stupid.
Let me clarify: I do think the model is self indulgent crap. However everone is entitled to their opinion.
I also admit I dont have much knowledge of many game systems outside the mainsteram.
However the question remains a valid one. Not answering, taking my comments semi-personally and playing the "you sir" card, accompanied by your general tone fits you snugly into the self-righteous catagory, not me.
Beautfiul also how you take one comment and are immediatly able to draw a sweeping generalisation on my overall outlook on gaming. I guess some things just dont change.
Ratius wrote:Is there any actual potential to use this model in current games systems or is it just self indulgent crap?
Oh wow, I've heard of gamers being self-righteous and obtuse, but you, sir, take the cake. Something that's not instantly useable in a game is automatically "self-indulgent crap". Wow. If your point of view was any more narrow you'd probably say that dice are only useful for 40k and any non-40k use of dice is pointless and stupid.
Well if you're not getting it for a game, but are just getting it for...personal use...
Ratius wrote:Beautfiul also how you take one comment and are immediatly able to draw a sweeping generalisation on my overall outlook on gaming. I guess some things just dont change.
I was using your comment as a generalization of a larger phenomenon among other people's opinions, not as a deep analysis on your views in particular. I've heard the comment "I can't use this model in a game so it's useless" so many times it's long ago ceased to be amusing. I collect models as aesthetic objects in their own right, so the notion that a piece's worth and value is somehow linked to whether or not it has corresponding game statistics is bizarre and I'm afraid your word choice simply unwittingly painted a target on your forehead in this case. See, my collection is full of "self-indulgent crap", from Rackham, Reaper, Heresy, Hasslefree, etc, etc.
To finally answer your original question, I understand the KD people do have some kind of game system in the works, but I've not heard much of it
Duely noted, I apologise if my post came across as overly defensive, it was a genunie query, as I mentioned I dont have a lot of experience of the non mainstream games.
I also accept your point regarding collecting models from as aesthtic PoV, you must concede though that not everyone does and so seeing something as "non mainstream" as this is going to cause some.....well discussion.
I am always sort of surprised that more people don't buy cool models just to have them. I usually have to remind myself to avoid such "lust buys" because I have way too much metal and plastic things lying around that I don't use in games. Great fun to paint though.
Probably a difference in perspective from those who own models to play, and those who play to give them something to do with all their painted models :-P
Wehrkind wrote:I am always sort of surprised that more people don't buy cool models just to have them. I usually have to remind myself to avoid such "lust buys" because I have way too much metal and plastic things lying around that I don't use in games. Great fun to paint though.
Probably a difference in perspective from those who own models to play, and those who play to give them something to do with all their painted models :-P
I have acquired models just to have. Indeed you're forgetting the much larger market for artistic models-(Revell/Tamiya). I'd proffer this doesn't meet that standard.
Frazzled wrote:I have acquired models just to have. Indeed you're forgetting the much larger market for artistic models-(Revell/Tamiya). I'd proffer this doesn't meet that standard.
I wouldn't be so sure, I've seen all kinds of strange things in the 54+ mm figures market, especially from Japanese "garage" producers.
Sorry Frazzled, was referring more to the "What's the point of this model if I can't use it in a game" mindset."
Trust me, I am not forgetting the artistic market
I agree with Aggie that there is a really large market for "strange" large scale models just for display/painting, which was my point. Use is game is often secondary (or completely irrelevant in many cases) for such models.
For me it is more an effort to remember that some people only buy models as game markers, treating them essentially as I do my templates; a means to play the game, not an end in themselves.
Erasoketa wrote:I have the Twilight Pinup and the new Archon model, both still unassembled and unpainted. I'll try to make a pic of both when I have enough time, for scale reference
Good man! I look forward to it, though I intend on getting the model anyways. If it doesn't work...I don't know, I wouldn't mind having just an awesome model. That, and my friends would allow it as a stand-in Archon for friendly matches.
Ratius wrote:Is there any actual potential to use this model in current games systems or is it just self indulgent crap?
Current games? Not sure.
In the Kingdom Death game? I would kinda hope so - however, I'm not sure what the timescale is on the game coming out. This release was one of the 100 resin copies, which are aimed at the painters' - as opposed to gamers' - market.
Erasoketa wrote:I have the Twilight Pinup and the new Archon model, both still unassembled and unpainted. I'll try to make a pic of both when I have enough time, for scale reference
Good man! I look forward to it, though I intend on getting the model anyways. If it doesn't work...I don't know, I wouldn't mind having just an awesome model. That, and my friends would allow it as a stand-in Archon for friendly matches.
Well, here it is. The quality is a bit gakky, I took the pic with my phone. I hope it will help. I guess it's enough to check the scale. The Twilight Pinup is a bigger scale than the Eldar, might be about 32mm vs 28mm. The choice is yours
No problem! Mind you, both minis come with their heads as a separate bit, so it might be a bit tricky to decide, but I would say that the difference between their shoulders is enough clue.
Ashtetics are a personal choice. I think the model is creepy as hell but, its remarkably well sculpted.
For anyone questioning its merits as a model... I'm just going to say that 80+% of the modelling market (both resin and plastic) is for display purposes only. Miniature gaming is a relatively small part of the market. There are hundreds of modelling competitions around the world. Military modelling of all sorts outnumbers mini gaming not to even mention the strange folks who do model cars
On topic, I REALLY like the model. Its creepy, but strangely attractive. and the poses for the woman around the beast are also very well done. But, what could this be used for...?
It might be all the comic books but, it kind of reminds me of some of Garth Ennis's work on Hellblazer. The Son of Man story arc comes to mind. You know, the one where the little kid is actually a demon with a two foot penis. Which he than uses for mayhem.
Empchild wrote:Honestly... the sculpting is great but that model is horrible. Under what sense would anyone use it for or even paint it for. I have seen models that are of bondage on coolmini and those were more tastefull then that. I am sorry but I really don't like this one.
i agree with this, i kinda like cant eat the chex in front of me right now.
Wehrkind wrote:Hehe I agree with that sentiment, but only in the larger "bringing a [melee weapon] to a gunfight" sense. A suitably quick and aggressive person with a knife or two is still extremely dangerous even if you have a more suitable melee weapon like a sword. If you have a gun, however, both Knifey McStabby and Swordy McSlashy are going to die in a hurry.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but that is a common misconception.
Lets start with the accepted firearm use rule. In almost all Police Depts. in the US firearm use regulations place the officer in "close combat range".
This is to reduce the posibility of civilain collaterial damage.
Close combat range is within, say, 10 - 20 feet.
I have a friend. a teacher of mixed combative arts, who has provided close combat training to the police forces in our area.
Most officers enter this training with the attitude of "I have the gun. I am already the winner".
With a rubber training knife, at 15 feet, guns holstered, and holsters unsnapped (standard police force approach rules), the office looses 100% of the time.
Usually before the gun leaves the holster.
Multiple wounds, all dibilitating, most terminating.
Seen it happen.
Seen it happen with military personel, too.
It is even worse with untrained opponents.
The message is, knives do win in a gun fight.
The reality is that the knife fighter does not have the constraints that the officer has.
The knife fighter also, usually, picks the environment the confrontation takes place in.
These are the determining rules for any physical confrontation.
first control your opponent with his choices, the control your self with your choices.
Wehrkind wrote:Hehe I agree with that sentiment, but only in the larger "bringing a [melee weapon] to a gunfight" sense. A suitably quick and aggressive person with a knife or two is still extremely dangerous even if you have a more suitable melee weapon like a sword. If you have a gun, however, both Knifey McStabby and Swordy McSlashy are going to die in a hurry.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but that is a common misconception.
Lets start with the accepted firearm use rule. In almost all Police Depts. in the US firearm use regulations place the officer in "close combat range". This is to reduce the posibility of civilain collaterial damage. Close combat range is within, say, 10 - 20 feet.
I have a friend. a teacher of mixed combative arts, who has provided close combat training to the police forces in our area. Most officers enter this training with the attitude of "I have the gun. I am already the winner".
With a rubber training knife, at 15 feet, guns holstered, and holsters unsnapped (standard police force approach rules), the office looses 100% of the time. Usually before the gun leaves the holster. Multiple wounds, all dibilitating, most terminating. Seen it happen. Seen it happen with military personel, too. It is even worse with untrained opponents.
The message is, knives do win in a gun fight. The reality is that the knife fighter does not have the constraints that the officer has. The knife fighter also, usually, picks the environment the confrontation takes place in.
These are the determining rules for any physical confrontation. first control your opponent with his choices, the control your self with your choices.
Commodore Perry
I don't disagree with any of that, and have seen the same effect in place personally with both guns holstered and polearms slung etc.
However, the police example misses out on three big issues (beyond even the fact that most police can't shoot to save their asses, literally):
1: Police and most civies start with weapons holstered. That makes sense when you are not in combat transitioning to "OMG gotta kill someone" mode. In combat, you ARE expecting to kill folks, in other words have already made the transition, so your gun is out and ready, and as importantly your mind is too.
2: Pistols are pretty ineffective outside of 10 yards for most shooters, true. A half decent rifle, however, is certainly not, even against moving opponents. If your opponent has a rifle, and can see you at >30 feet, you are pretty hosed.
3: Police situations != military situations. This is where your police knowledge fails you sharply, starting with "the accepted firearm use rule. In almost all Police Depts. in the US firearm use regulations place the officer in "close combat range"" is not how combat generally works. Police approach their "target" not knowing if they need to shoot them or not, and have severe restrictions on what they can do as a result of this, in addition to considerations of civilian collateral damage etc. This, combined with the fact that in general police never actually have to shoot anyone (I have heard officers say that most never draw their weapons even, but don't have numbers for that) means most officers are not in any sort of combative mind set until it is too late (nor do I think they should be necessarily, but that's another thread ) Soldiers, when not doing police actions and engaged in actual combat, have the option of essentially shooting first and asking questions later. There is no reason to get within 20 feet of an opponent, you just shoot him at 20 yards and bitch out your point man for letting him get that close anyway. In the case that we were talking about, say SM vs Wytches, "Shoot everything not in power armor" is a pretty easy rule of thumb, and unless the enemy can hide and ambush or sneak up very close they are going to have a bad day. The native Americans and Zulus learned this the hard way, despite being excellent fighters in their own milieu.
I would agree though that heavy urban environments would give short range fighting a new lease on life in 40k. The only thing that really makes melee viable in the rules as is is the short range of missile weapons to scale (24" ~= 120 feet = 40 yards, which is cake with a rifle; 1.5 times that would be a better estimate) and the absence of a stand and shoot reaction. As it is the rules allow for a unit to run 30+ feet directly at a unit sporting full/semi auto weapons and not take a single shot. Running 10 wytches at an IG heavy weapons squad with HBs works in game, but would be suicidal in the extreme in real life.
So yea, guns win knife vs gun fights when both those involved are aware of the fact they are fighting. In a larger sense, "Knowing you are fighting" wins vs "Not sure you are fighting" every time too, as is usually the case in police actions when the police are not certain whether or not they are in a killing fight or not. Going back to the Indian/Zulu example, if you can ambush (aware of combat vs unaware) or otherwise close the gap then yea, melee can win. If you can't, you die in droves.
That's an interesting thing to ask yourself, is this more or less "appropriate" than the famous rape diorama that's caused so much controversy? It's got a feth ton more nudity, that's for sure, and I think there's no questions asked about what that tentacle thing is about to do. But as far as intent goes I'd say they're pretty much the same, they're both designed to shock and disturb you, it's just that his model is doing it much more blatantly .
Sidstyler wrote:It has implied rape, though. That makes it art.
That's an interesting thing to ask yourself, is this more or less "appropriate" than the famous rape diorama that's caused so much controversy? It's got a feth ton more nudity, that's for sure, and I think there's no questions asked about what that tentacle thing is about to do. But as far as intent goes I'd say they're pretty much the same, they're both designed to shock and disturb you, it's just that his model is doing it much more blatantly .
I agree with all of the above, if I read your post with a sincere and positive tone of voice.
Well, the "It's got rape so it's art!" thing was a joke, but yeah, I was serious because I went back and read my response to this model and realized it wasn't quite as negative as my response to the diorama. (Not that I really hated the diorama though.)
Hey now...how do you know she doesn't want it? It being a giant tentacle monster and stuff.
On the sculpt itself:
I'm sure the artist put a lot of effort into the CG sculpt, but I'm at a loss as how it got past the concept stage. It's just a mash up of parts. It doesn't offend me, it doesn't disturb me, its just dumb looking. I mean its a boob monster...okay but why does it have implants? This is the kinda of thing I used to draw when I was 12. The best monsters are grounded in reality as much as possible. You know, believable anatomy, form following function, etc. I'm kinda disappointed really, as I do like the rest of the model range.
After beeing a vivid painter and collector I haven't seen such a breathtaking mini in 25 years.
The idea and sculpt is amazing. I LOVE it and as soon it will be available again I will buy one of these !!! ^^
Nagashek wrote:Am I disturbed? Am I aroused? I'm not sure...
Those those female models make me want to start a beast man army...
Yeah, I am going with "disturbed". What kinda sick mind thought this thing up? And what kinda drugs was he on at the time? It is obvious the sculptors had skill, but why the heck did they even bother with this...thing? It is just a buncha random parts thrown together, and the pregnant women make NO sense. Utter mind-crap.
Personally, I see a monster yes, but I also see the cycle of birth and nurturing in this model. Look at the way in which the "monster" nurtures the baby in its arms, the amount of breast to allow nurishment to flow to the offspring....in a way, this model could just as easily be portrayed in a positive light.
The overly long male organs are one thing, but there is nothing horrid or horrific in this model, I see no torture, and no sign of rape, if anything the female aspects seem to be worshipping this thing, and willingly giving birth to its offspring, only one of the females is wearing what appears to be manacles, but no chains inhibit her movement or ability to flee.....
All in all, an interesting piece of fantasy. Why this should illicit any more negativity than the Harem women sold by Hasslefree is beyond me.
Sersi wrote:Hey now...how do you know she doesn't want it? It being a giant tentacle monster and stuff.
On the sculpt itself:
I'm sure the artist put a lot of effort into the CG sculpt, but I'm at a loss as how it got past the concept stage. It's just a mash up of parts. It doesn't offend me, it doesn't disturb me, its just dumb looking. I mean its a boob monster...okay but why does it have implants? This is the kinda of thing I used to draw when I was 12. The best monsters are grounded in reality as much as possible. You know, believable anatomy, form following function, etc. I'm kinda disappointed really, as I do like the rest of the model range.
Its not rape if you yell "SURPRISE!" first.
I could see this thing used as a daemon prince in a slaanesh themed army. And, oddly enough, this thing has had less controversy then "ALIEN CONTACT", which fits around the same theme... kinda...
Happygrunt wrote:I could see this thing used as a daemon prince in a slaanesh themed army. And, oddly enough, this thing has had less controversy then "ALIEN CONTACT", which fits around the same theme... kinda...
Just because it has breasts doesn't mean it's suddenly Slaaneshi. This thing is grotesque and centers around birth and caretaking. That's Nurgle is anything.
Hell, a Barbie Doll is more Slaaneshi than this thing.
kingdomdeath wrote:Thought I would let you guys know that the Wet Nurse has been nominated as the best sci-fi miniature of 2010 over on tabletop gaming news!
We have 1 vehicle (Nova-RusBear), 1 unit box of heavily clothed, gender indeterminate troopers, 3 "aliens" for whom gender may or may not be appropriate (Anathematic, Wet Nurse, Hurn), 1 humanoid male (Saladin), and 4(!) humanoid females (Lelith, Calico Kate, Naga Sniper and Kara Black).
Happygrunt wrote:I could see this thing used as a daemon prince in a slaanesh themed army. And, oddly enough, this thing has had less controversy then "ALIEN CONTACT", which fits around the same theme... kinda...
Just because it has breasts doesn't mean it's suddenly Slaaneshi. This thing is grotesque and centers around birth and caretaking. That's Nurgle is anything.
Hell, a Barbie Doll is more Slaaneshi than this thing.
Pretty sure Slaanesh deals with excess and pleasure in all things, which is what I am seeing in this model. Excess and ecstasy. But nurgle could also work.
Eldar Goddess of healing. She's also Nurgle's "wife".
Happygrunt wrote:Pretty sure Slaanesh deals with excess and pleasure in all things, which is what I am seeing in this model. Excess and ecstasy. But nurgle could also work.
It's a monster that seems to systematically impregnate humans and leech out their milk. It's excessive in the way that Khorne has an excessive amount of skulls and blood. However, it's as "pleasurable" as a maternity ward at a hospital full of fat people.
Of course, it wasn't designed with any Chaos God in mind, but it's tiring to see people think anything with tits immediately belongs to Slaanesh.
I personally think the grotesque look plus the nurturing qualities fit nicely into Nurgle's paradigm. Nurgle is, after all, loving towards his children.
Does it have sex features from both genders? Yes +5 No-5
Is it perverted? Yes +3 No-5
Is some form of rape involved? Yes +5 No+0
Is it a total perversion of normal human sexuality? Yes +5 No+0
Is it such a horrible and disgusting perversion of human sexuality that merely looking at it it turn the stomach of a sane viewer? Yes +10 No+0
Hot chicks with big boobs isn't hard core Slaanesh perversion, the broodmother is hard core Slaneesh perversion. Calling hot chicks with big boobs hardcore Slaanesh perversion is like trying to sell glitter pants Edward from twilight as a hard core vampire to telling fans of the old hardcore vampire genre such as Bran Stroker's Dracula or Anne Rice's books. A lot of 40k players continuously say "needs more grimdark", but the wetnurse might be more than some of them ordered as people can easily make a good argument that the wetnurse is too hardcore.
Does it have sex features from both genders? Yes +5 No-5
Is it perverted? Yes +3 No-5
Is some form of rape involved? Yes +5 No+0
Is it a total perversion of normal human sexuality? Yes +5 No+0
Is it such a horrible and disgusting perversion of human sexuality that merely looking at it it turn the stomach of a sane viewer? Yes +10 No+0
Hot chicks with big boobs isn't hard core Slaanesh perversion, the broodmother is hard core Slaneesh perversion. Calling hot chicks with big boobs hardcore Slaanesh perversion is like trying to sell glitter pants Edward from twilight as a hard core vampire to telling fans of the old hardcore vampire genre such as Bran Stroker's Dracula or Anne Rice's books. A lot of 40k players continuously say "needs more grimdark", but the wetnurse might be more than some of them ordered as people can easily make a good argument that the wetnurse is too hardcore.
Oh my god thank you for that, it's pretty much the gist of what I was thinking every time someone denounced this model as not Slaaneshi...
Is it me, or are you guys obsessed with Rape? Where's the suggestion of rape in this model? Do you know what "to rape" actually means? I see nothing about this model which suggests overtly that the female elements are being forced into a sexual act?
I guess if you twist your imagination, you could come to that conclusion, but then the same could be said for any "love" depicting scene.....and to do so would say more about the person imagining then the scene itself.
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:See although I commend the sculpting skill, I couldn't put that on the table with a straight face.
Plus any model that requires the response 'Ah I wish you hadn't found that one' to be uttered when the father in law or my sons find it would immediately disqualify it from my house.
The girls if seperate would be tempting for Dark Eldar or Chaos, I'd probably add clothes of some kind, but yeah not something I'd pick up.
LOL
Imagine taking it to a tournament and using it as a demon prince. And pretending to be puzzled when they comment about it.
The use of transgressive, sexual imagery for art purposes is very, very common. This mini is a great example. Plenty of major 20th century artists and art movements have used it, though. Geiger is certainly one of the most well-known, but look at Bellmer's Poupee, or some of Helmut Newton's more openly fetishistic art, or even Epstein's Rock Drill.
I like it, a lot, as a piece of art. My wife wouldn't have it in the house -- nor the Gorm, which I like even more -- but they're both quite brilliant.
And yes, perfect for Slaanesh, or for any number of tabletop RPGs.
Does it have sex features from both genders? Yes +5 No-5
Is it perverted? Yes +3 No-5
Is some form of rape involved? Yes +5 No+0
Is it a total perversion of normal human sexuality? Yes +5 No+0
Is it such a horrible and disgusting perversion of human sexuality that merely looking at it it turn the stomach of a sane viewer? Yes +10 No+0
Hot chicks with big boobs isn't hard core Slaanesh perversion, the broodmother is hard core Slaneesh perversion. Calling hot chicks with big boobs hardcore Slaanesh perversion is like trying to sell glitter pants Edward from twilight as a hard core vampire to telling fans of the old hardcore vampire genre such as Bran Stroker's Dracula or Anne Rice's books. A lot of 40k players continuously say "needs more grimdark", but the wetnurse might be more than some of them ordered as people can easily make a good argument that the wetnurse is too hardcore.
Oh the model is definitely Slaaneshi. The hot chicks with big boobs, are what get you into the club; this thing is what up in the VIP room. As much as I think its ugly, and un-original I can almost see people buying it out of novelty. It looks like a Japanese hentai statue or something... Not that theres anything wrong with that.
Oh, and don't be grouping Anne Rice's - Androgynous, sexy vamps in with Bram Stoker. If anything she's one of the main culprits in the sexualization of vampires, from horrific undead monsters to the abomination's seen in twilight. In short its partly her fault.
Wow! I really thought this thread was dead, or would have died awhile ago... And I realize I'm not helping by posting this, but ugh, let this thread die, PUH-LEEZE!
Judging from the comments here I guess I'm the only one that sees this fitting into the 40K universe more as a source of warp power for the Golden Throne and not as any sort of chaos deamon?
?
suckling at the teat of this model could very well be a nurgling, acting as they always do. As for the 
In short its partly her fault.