55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
Think about it. Humanity goes to the stars. Most worlds will not be terra-formable. Those that are would probably not be perfect conversions to earthlike worlds. It is a question whether a world that is only moderately terraformable could even sustain a human population for a long period, but, 40K assumes that this is possible.
So, some worlds would tend to have heavier gravity. Again, man could probably not survive if it was too heavy, but let's say he could handle 1.1 to 1.2 g.
It seems to me that men living under such conditions might eventually become shorter, more compact, and stronger to deal with the environmental situation. Maybe it wouldn't work out this way, but it's at least a resonable speculation. They might even tend to live underground, as the subtrata would probably be stronger, because of the effects of the high gravity.
Larry Niven gives an example of the Jinxians in his Known Space universe as a muscular, high gravity race, though he departs in making them have shorter life spans, because of the pressure on their hearts.
Would they likely develop customs and attitudes making them like Norse Dwarfs? Probably not, and that is mildly silly, but, hey, it's 40K.
However, compare them to space hobbits, space ogres, space orcs and space elves, and they are not even on the same scale of silliness. The only reason I can think of for why people believe the Squats to be sillier, is because GW said they were, and fanboyism took over from there.
However, I'd like to hear the counter-argument.
Cheers.
P.S. Why anyone would start a flame-war over such a benign question, I can't imagine, but... this is 40K. So I'll just say, please don't. Let's keep it light hearted.
29878
Post by: Chowderhead
TRICYCLES HO!  And that's all I have to say. Besides for the fact that Squats don't fit at all.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Space hobbits, space ogres, space orcs, and space elves all had something which could be salvaged.
Squats had been painted into a corner as bearded biker midgets, with the majority of their tech being portrayed in Epic rather than 40k proper.
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
Chowderhead wrote:TRICYCLES HO!
And that's all I have to say.
Besides for the fact that Squats don't fit at all.
And orks of the same period (1ed) had armed dune buggies. You could also buy a ratling with a chef's hat, wooden spoon, and laspistol. Whacha gonna do?
However, saying they don't fit...? Original 40K was Tolkien in spacesuits, plus a few additions like the jokaero and primitive 'nids. For the most part, it's still Tolkien in space suits. How do dwarves not fit into that?
14070
Post by: SagesStone
Wasn't that they were silly, most of 40k was back then (sort of still is), but that they apparently couldn't find them a niche other than just dwarves in space; a sort of crappy excuse when you consider at least the Orks and Eldar. 
Now days I think they could have fit in as a sort of mech heavy force, however it's likely taken up by guard now. Though I'd think they'd be less in numbers and be more of an elite force, but that brings them into marine territory.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
It's really not Tolkien in space suits now. The archetypes might still exist, but the concept has been altered dramatically.
Ratlings, for example, are a divergent branch of humanity. As are Ogryns. They're not unique races of their own.
Orks are a fungoid based race which reproduces through shedding spores off their skin before they're finally killed.
Eldar are kind of/sort of still close to the concept of Elves.
29878
Post by: Chowderhead
Zinderneuf wrote:Chowderhead wrote:TRICYCLES HO!
And that's all I have to say.
Besides for the fact that Squats don't fit at all.
And orks of the same period (1ed) had armed dune buggies. You could also buy a ratling with a chef's hat, wooden spoon, and laspistol. Whacha gonna do?
However, saying they don't fit...? Original 40K was Tolkien in spacesuits, plus a few additions like the jokaero and primitive 'nids. For the most part, it's still Tolkien in space suits. How do dwarves not fit into that?
Original 40k, it fits.
Modern 40k, it does not.
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
The most fun I ever had in a 40K campaign was a horde of orks ravaging through a Squat subsector. All of the battles wwere fought in underground chambers, which combined a lot of terrain with a very dungeon-y feel. Add to that there were relics of Slann (boy, am I dating myself ;-) ) tech in some of the planets, and it was an absolute blast.
I was disappointed when the Squats were removed, and especially for the reason GW gave. Given their willingness to retcon at the drop of a hat, I felt that they could have tried a little harder.
As to how they fit in, most of the battles I played in that involved Squats were not biker-gang wars. They tended to be sieges of mines, space stations, juggernaut vehicles, etc., as described above. When pitted against orks in those games, I thought the feel was perfect, like a high tech version of Tolkien's War of the Dwarves and Orcs.
My nostalgia anyway. When I can, I still drag 'em out and play 1ed.
48860
Post by: Joey
Well the name itself invokes the image of somebody preparing themselves for a bowel movement.
And they look like they smell really, really bad.
Can't say I miss them.
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
Joey wrote:Well the name itself invokes the image of somebody preparing themselves for a bowel movement.
And they look like they smell really, really bad.
Can't say I miss them.
As opposed to, say, ratlings? ;-) Automatically Appended Next Post: Kanluwen wrote: Ratlings, for example, are a divergent branch of humanity. As are Ogryns. They're not unique races of their own.
Same with Squats. They were also variant humans.
And BEASTMEN? Why would humanity evolve into bipedal goats?
123
Post by: Alpharius
Chowderhead wrote:
Original 40k, it fits.
Modern 40k, it does not.
The concept as originally portrayed 'back in the day' does not fit in "modern" 40K.
Can it be updated and made super delicious awesome x 2 for 'modern" 40K?
Of course it can.
14070
Post by: SagesStone
Zinderneuf wrote:Kanluwen wrote: Ratlings, for example, are a divergent branch of humanity. As are Ogryns. They're not unique races of their own.
Same with Squats. They were also variant humans.
And BEASTMEN? Why would humanity evolve into bipedal goats?
Chaos?
47893
Post by: Iracundus
They did reasonably well in Epic, which is where most of the efforts at expansion were based. The original Battle of Golgotha between Yarrick and Ghaz was actually a battle report between Andy Chambers and Jervis using Orks and Squats/Imperials respectively.
However Squats had little to distinguish themselves from humans in 40K scale, and their Epic goodies were obviously too large for the scale of 40K in that era.
48860
Post by: Joey
Zinderneuf wrote:Joey wrote:Well the name itself invokes the image of somebody preparing themselves for a bowel movement.
And they look like they smell really, really bad.
Can't say I miss them.
As opposed to, say, ratlings? ;-)
I would be more than happy for ratlings and ogryns to leave 40k for good. They're both "weird". Considering humanity has committed genocide over trvial matters (no need for any examples, I'm sure), I find it incredibly hard to beleive they'd be tolerant of such huge differences in physicality.
And ogyns being stupid doesn't make any sense either. I suspect this is because insecure weak little nerds like to think that anyone with muscles is a blundering neanderthal, but even so there's no reason for increased muscle mass to automatically mean a decrease in intelligence.
Realistically ogryns would overwealm humanity and ratlings would be wiped out as inferior. It don't make sense!
14070
Post by: SagesStone
Realistically, in 40k terms, this would have happened.  I'm unsure why they tolerate these mutants yet the others get a cozy fire.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
n0t_u wrote:Realistically, in 40k terms, this would have happened.
I'm unsure why they tolerate these mutants yet the others get a cozy fire.
Because Ogryns make exemplary bullet sponges AND they are too stupid to turn traitor.
Really, its a win-win for the imperium. They get good meat shields who are too stupid to question orders, and if they die it won't matter, because they are mutants and not people.
14070
Post by: SagesStone
Then they try to make them smarter.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
n0t_u wrote:Then they try to make them smarter.
Oh right, bone 'eads 
Now that's just silly. Aren't the bone 'eads still too stupid to question orders though? I thought the upgrade was so that they could relay orders to their fellow ogryns more efficiently.
14070
Post by: SagesStone
I think it mentioned it boosted them to the intelligence of a small child. Still controllable and hilarious if they have to ride in a Chimera.
9765
Post by: Illeix
Not a problem though, because Imperial fluff that has nothing to do with power armor is quite mutable. I daresay possibly even laughable...
46277
Post by: squidhills
Squats both CAN and SHOULD be returned to 40K. The only problem with them back in the day, was that they had a very comical aspect to them. Of course, everyone except the SM and Eldar had a comical aspect to them back then. All they would have to do is drop the redneck space biker imagery. There is absolutely nothing wrong with just porting the Dwarves from WHFB into 40K. The current edition of Dwarves are a solid foundation and can be easily tweaked to fit into 40K with no resulting silliness. They brought Tomb Kings into 40K, why not Dwarves?
GW's claim that they couldn't find a theme for the Squats in 40K is false, since they were being handled well in Epic. What was wrong with their Epic fluff and portrayal? Nothing at all, that's what. But the GW game designers were just straight up too lazy to translate the Epic fluff into 40K and give the Squats another go. They were also too lazy to sculpt up an entire army of new models (though a few test pieces were put together that look very good for the era).
Why should they, when they can just release another SM codex and make more money off of already existing models?
722
Post by: Kanluwen
squidhills wrote:Squats both CAN and SHOULD be returned to 40K. The only problem with them back in the day, was that they had a very comical aspect to them. Of course, everyone except the SM and Eldar had a comical aspect to them back then. All they would have to do is drop the redneck space biker imagery. There is absolutely nothing wrong with just porting the Dwarves from WHFB into 40K. The current edition of Dwarves are a solid foundation and can be easily tweaked to fit into 40K with no resulting silliness. They brought Tomb Kings into 40K, why not Dwarves?
Squats aren't coming back. The Squats you probably didn't know are dead and gone--and good riddance at that!
I'd also suggest that if you want to claim that "Tomb Kings were brought into 40k, why not Dwarves?" you do a bit of research into the background.
Dwarves, right now, do exist in 40k's background. They're called the Demiurg.
Demiurg, quite thankfully, are a fairly fleshed out concept. The only thing is they have not been represented on the tabletop. They're a wandering race, living in great fortress ships. They're responsible for the Tau developing ion weaponry, and have occasionally aided Imperial ships in fighting Tyranid or Ork fleets.
There are quite a few races like this, which have a background presence but no tabletop presence.
GW's claim that they couldn't find a theme for the Squats in 40K is false, since they were being handled well in Epic. What was wrong with their Epic fluff and portrayal? Nothing at all, that's what. But the GW game designers were just straight up too lazy to translate the Epic fluff into 40K and give the Squats another go. They were also too lazy to sculpt up an entire army of new models (though a few test pieces were put together that look very good for the era).
Except being almost exactly the same as the Imperial Guard, and their Epic portrayal relying upon warmachines--which we've only just started seeing become "mainstream" 40k?
Why should they, when they can just release another SM codex and make more money off of already existing models?
This is just a silly stance to take. It could have absolutely nothing at all to do with the fact that 40k as it stands is already crowded with concepts and ideas, with little to no room for anything new?
Cripes, if GW wanted to they could have released an Adeptus Mechanicus army by now and probably gotten a huge shot in the arm, profitwise. But what niche would they take?
46277
Post by: squidhills
Kanluwen wrote:
Squats aren't coming back. The Squats you probably didn't know are dead and gone--and good riddance at that!
I'd also suggest that if you want to claim that "Tomb Kings were brought into 40k, why not Dwarves?" you do a bit of research into the background.
Dwarves, right now, do exist in 40k's background. They're called the Demiurg.
Demiurg, quite thankfully, are a fairly fleshed out concept. The only thing is they have not been represented on the tabletop. They're a wandering race, living in great fortress ships. They're responsible for the Tau developing ion weaponry, and have occasionally aided Imperial ships in fighting Tyranid or Ork fleets.
I know bloody well about Hive Fleet Ninja and the Demiurg. Nothing there that says the Squats can't be brought back. The Tau hold less territory than the Squats did at their height; why not say "Well, with IoM help, a handful of holds survived the Tyranid attack. They are trying to reclaim what used to be theirs, but they don't have the numbers they once had. If they can't take some new worlds, they will go the way of the Eldar..."
It's called a "retcon" Kanluwen. After 25 years of 40K, I would think you would have encountered one or two before.
The Demiurg are a fleshed out concept? So were the Squats, at least in Epic. Yes, their army relied on huge war machines, but there is no reason that couldn't have been scaled down to 40K. As for what niche could they fill? How about the same niche they fill in WHFB? An army of guys with better than average CC skill, low Initiative, good Toughness, and average BS. They don't move around a lot on the tabletop (they can never run!) but they have a lot of guns to shoot you with (but their guns are IoM-level tech, not Tau-level, so they don't exterminate an entire army each shooting phase).
As for Newcrons not being TK in space... Really? You really think there's no connection? A race obsessed with death has a huge empire, loses that empire, goes into a long sleep, and re-awakens to fight amongst itself (and others) to reclaim what it has lost? And the armies consist of soulless automatons led by powerful kings who have distinct personalities? Oh, and all the pseudo-Egyptian SC names, too?
722
Post by: Kanluwen
squidhills wrote:Kanluwen wrote:
Squats aren't coming back. The Squats you probably didn't know are dead and gone--and good riddance at that!
I'd also suggest that if you want to claim that "Tomb Kings were brought into 40k, why not Dwarves?" you do a bit of research into the background.
Dwarves, right now, do exist in 40k's background. They're called the Demiurg.
Demiurg, quite thankfully, are a fairly fleshed out concept. The only thing is they have not been represented on the tabletop. They're a wandering race, living in great fortress ships. They're responsible for the Tau developing ion weaponry, and have occasionally aided Imperial ships in fighting Tyranid or Ork fleets.
I know bloody well about Hive Fleet Ninja and the Demiurg. Nothing there that says the Squats can't be brought back. The Tau hold less territory than the Squats did at their height; why not say "Well, with IoM help, a handful of holds survived the Tyranid attack. They are trying to reclaim what used to be theirs, but they don't have the numbers they once had. If they can't take some new worlds, they will go the way of the Eldar..."
It's called a "retcon" Kanluwen. After 25 years of 40K, I would think you would have encountered one or two before.
Sure, there are plenty of retcons. But there's one which has remained consistent--and likely will out of simple spite by this point, driven by the people who kept the "joke" of pestering the game developers at events with demands for the Squats to be returned.
The Squats are DEAD.The Demiurg are the "Dwarves in Space".
The Demiurg are a fleshed out concept? So were the Squats, at least in Epic. Yes, their army relied on huge war machines, but there is no reason that couldn't have been scaled down to 40K.
And you don't see the issue with this?
Epic works just fine for Squats--but 40k didn't. The simple fact is that, contrary to belief, it wasn't "simple laziness". The developers thought they had royally screwed up the concept and didn't want a joke army.
Orks, while certainly having a bit of silly to them, did at least have that whole "We kill for fun" thing going on.
As for what niche could they fill? How about the same niche they fill in WHFB? An army of guys with better than average CC skill, low Initiative, good Toughness, and average BS. They don't move around a lot on the tabletop (they can never run!) but they have a lot of guns to shoot you with (but their guns are IoM-level tech, not Tau-level, so they don't exterminate an entire army each shooting phase).
And you don't see the problem of the niche?
So what you've done is create another IG/Tau army with "better than average CC skill, low Initiative, and good Toughness".
As for Newcrons not being TK in space... Really? You really think there's no connection? A race obsessed with death has a huge empire, loses that empire, goes into a long sleep, and re-awakens to fight amongst itself (and others) to reclaim what it has lost? And the armies consist of soulless automatons led by powerful kings who have distinct personalities? Oh, and all the pseudo-Egyptian SC names, too?
And I'm the one who needs to research the background?
The majority of Necrons(not "Newcrons") willingly gave themselves to the C'Tan, and created their "deathless empire". Those who did not were basically forced into a shiny new body and turned into a Warrior.
The Tomb Kings were forcibly given their "deathless empire" by Nagash the Great Necromancer, who basically killed and then raised the entirety of Nehekara.
There is a major difference in how that works. I should also add that the Tomb Kings do not "awaken to reclaim what it has lost". They fight to keep what they have.
24436
Post by: CrashCanuck
The best hope for "squats" coming back is the rumor I heard a while back about the Demiurg being added as another inducted race to go with the Tau.
The only comparison between current Necrons and TK is the aesthetics, they look similar. If you look at how each army is designed to fight, they are very different from each other.
46277
Post by: squidhills
Kanluwen wrote:Epic works just fine for Squats--but 40k didn't. The simple fact is that, contrary to belief, it wasn't "simple laziness". The developers thought they had royally screwed up the concept and didn't want a joke army.
So what you've done is create another IG/Tau army with "better than average CC skill, low Initiative, and good Toughness".
The majority of Necrons(not "Newcrons") willingly gave themselves to the C'Tan, and created their "deathless empire". Those who did not were basically forced into a shiny new body and turned into a Warrior.
The Tomb Kings were forcibly given their "deathless empire" by Nagash the Great Necromancer, who basically killed and then raised the entirety of Nehekara.
There is a major difference in how that works. I should also add that the Tomb Kings do not "awaken to reclaim what it has lost". They fight to keep what they have.
Condensed quotes...
Firstly, the army was only a joke army because GW was too lazy to re-envision them. Just because it was a joke in 40K doesn't mean it can't be made a serious army in the next codex. The Orks are a prime example of a joke army being re-envisioned into a non-joke army. The Orks of 5th edition are similar to the Orks of 2nd edition only in the color of their skin. And even that got a shade or two darker...
There is a difference between the IG and Tau and how the (theoretical) Squats would play. Guard can drown you in tanks or men. They are average in CC and average at range. Their basic gun is lower-than average for strength (3 may be the average for BS, WS, s, etc, but it's below par for weapon damage). They would prefer to shoot you, but they can get by in a pinch in CC due to sheer numbers. The Tau have crap for CC, average BS, and absurdly powerful guns. They want to shoot you because they know they are dead in CC. The theoretical Squats would have average BS and below-par weapon strength, but a large enough volume of it that you couldn't ignore their shooting. They want you to get into CC where they are about as hard as Orks, they just shoot at you so you will run closer to them... just like in WHFB, actually.
And before you repeat the belief that the theoretical Squats would be no different than IG and Tau, and thus do not fill a nice, how different are the Eldar to the Tau? Frankly, if it's not DE, MEQ, or Orks, most armies can play a very similar way to each other.
I'll call the new Necrons "Newcrons" if I want. Especially since I actually really love their new fluff. The ancient space Terminators were cool, but they had zero personality. Now they can have some character and each army can have a feel of its own. I heartily approve of the Newcrons. But I also know they are TK in space. The only difference you've cited in their fluff is that the TK were raised by Nagash, and the Newcrons voluntarily served the C'tan.
That's it.
But the end result is the same: That which created them no longer has a hold of them. They war amongst themselves amidst the ruins of their former empire. The army consists of mindless drones led by a powerful king. They have pseudo-Egyptian names. Oh! And their soldiers can get back up after being killed! Maybe if that last one wasn't a factor, you'd have a point. But unfortunately, it is a factor. The Newcrons are the WHFB Egyptian Undead In Spaaaaaace.
And there's absolutely NOTHING wrong with that, because it actually works within the context of the universe.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
I don't know where in the world this idea that the "too lazy" thing comes from.
Squats were a mess. Epic does not necessarily translate to 40k.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
squidhills wrote:
There is a difference between the IG and Tau and how the (theoretical) Squats would play. Guard can drown you in tanks or men. They are average in CC and average at range. Their basic gun is lower-than average for strength (3 may be the average for BS, WS, s, etc, but it's below par for weapon damage). They would prefer to shoot you, but they can get by in a pinch in CC due to sheer numbers. The Tau have crap for CC, average BS, and absurdly powerful guns. They want to shoot you because they know they are dead in CC. The theoretical Squats would have average BS and below-par weapon strength, but a large enough volume of it that you couldn't ignore their shooting. They want you to get into CC where they are about as hard as Orks,
So a bit like space marines then?
14070
Post by: SagesStone
Probably more like Tau Marines.
46277
Post by: squidhills
Kanluwen wrote:I don't know where in the world this idea that the "too lazy" thing comes from.
Squats were a mess. Epic does not necessarily translate to 40k.
Well, let's see.... 2nd Edition Orks are a slapstick comedy routine. 3rd edition Orks got seriously re-vamped into something serious.
2nd Edition (Black Codex) Chaos was a mess. Beastmen, Minotaurs, Cultists, Marines, Daemons, etc. The 2nd Edition CSM codex streamlines the whole affair. 3rd edition even more so.
2nd Edition: No Dark Eldar... 3rd Edition: Dark Eldar! (and in their first incarnation, DE played like regular Eldar with worse armor saves).
With so many armies being heavily re-worked, or in the case of the Dark Eldar, being created from the ground up, the only excuse for NOT doing the same to the Squats (heavily re-working them) is laziness and/or disinterest. The Squats worked fine in Epic and not just from a gameplay standpoint (which I know wouldn't translate to 40K). Their fluff was much less "drunken redneck biker gang" in Epic than it was in 40K. It would not have been hard to re-work the Epic fluff into the 40K fluff. BOOM! Suddenly the Squats aren't a "joke" army anymore. Squats are only regarded as a joke today, because everyone remembers them as a bunch of drunken redneck bikers. They were a bunch of drunken redneck bikers, not because that is the only way Dwarves can possibly be portrayed in spaaaace, but because GW never tried (in 40K) to make them anything else. If Orks had been dropped in 2nd edition, everyone would consider them a joke army today because they were very comedic back then.
The idea that Squats were a mess, therefore they could never be worked into 40K blatantly ignores the fact that GW has radically altered armies in the past (Newcrons, anyone?). They did it before. They will do it again. They should have done it to the Squats. The only reason they didn't is that they couldn't be bothered to do so. GW has stated that the Squats sold well enough when compared to other armies of the day, so they weren't overlooked because they weren't selling. It would have taken less effort to translate the Epic fluff into 40K fluff, than it would to create an entire race from scratch (Dark Eldar). The fact that GW chose to create an all-new race, rather than tweak an existing one smacks of laziness.
Especially when you consider they have created 2 more armies since then (Tau and Necrons).
Could GW bring the Squats back today? They could, but I will concede that the number of armies in existence now makes that difficult. Too many new molds, too many new rules, for how much profit? So they won't bring back the Squats (at least, not as their own army).
But they could have updated them back in 1995. There were 3 fewer races then, and they already had an idea of what to do with the race.
51464
Post by: Veteran Sergeant
Squats themselves weren't silly. It was the underground living space bikers theme of their army that was silly.
GW eliminated them from the universe because they were too lazy to revamp their army to something less silly, or alternatively were lazy and felt they wouldn't be economical or profitable to continue as a model line.
Honestly, the original idea that Squat players should just use them as Imperial Guard was the best. I think they could have easily given them a slightly altered IGuard list, or even made them an entry in an expanded Codex: Imperial Guard. But, they didn't.
I will agree with the posters who contest that Space Dwarves weren't "too silly" or "didn't fit". That's absurtarded. This is a universe with sentient idiot savant space fungus, immaterium dwelling elven space fetishists, elite shock troopers with hair too long for them to easily achieve environment seals on their armor, and space nuns who obtain divine powers from a deity that isn't a deity and hated being worshiped as one. Space Dwarves are downright serious in that context.
But this is irrelevant. Everything was silly in Rogue Trader, and got more serious as the game evolved. The reason the squats seem kinda silly is they never got the extra-grimdark treatment that everyone else did.
27564
Post by: Gorskar.da.Lost
They could have kept them in the game, I'll give you that.
However, they didn't, and as a result the effort it would now take to revamp them and make them "modern 40K" would be pretty hefty.
Squats aren't coming back in their classic form.
I think it's time to move on from them.
51586
Post by: Bond
"and space nuns who obtain divine powers from a deity that isn't a deity and hated being worshiped as one."
Wow, reminds me of someone...
51138
Post by: AtariAssasin
I miss the the squats myself, and I loved the ratlings. For all the improbable things in the 40k fluff I don't think they're any more outrageous then say orange monkey geniuses with fingers that shoot lasers, or orks that come from mushrooms and speak with a British accent.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
And of those things, only one has an army(the Orks who come from fungi[mushrooms are fungi, but not all fungi are mushrooms] and speak with a British accent).
If Jokaero or Ratlings had their own armies, it'd be a bit different. Jokaero, I might add, only recently made a return to the tabletop. They had models early on but vanished in everything except fluff references for digital weapons.
22783
Post by: Soladrin
Kanluwen wrote:And of those things, only one has an army(the Orks who come from fungi[mushrooms are fungi, but not all fungi are mushrooms] and speak with a British accent).
If Jokaero or Ratlings had their own armies, it'd be a bit different. Jokaero, I might add, only recently made a return to the tabletop. They had models early on but vanished in everything except fluff references for digital weapons.
And are still fething dumb.
45570
Post by: DeadlySquirrel
Someone reset the clock
44326
Post by: DeffDred
Squats? Seriously?
We have more than enough races in the game. The last thing we need is yet another codex to slow the release scedual of codexs people actually want.
Squats were stupid. Stupid name. Stupid concept. Stupid models. Stupid story.
They were dwarves who smoked cigars and traded with orks and eldar. They rode around on powerwheels with engines.
They are nothing more than short Imperial Guard who act like bikers and red-necks. Sure they had powered armour and other junk.
Epic? Who cares. Different game. Keep them there.
The Squats are now the Demiurg. Subterrainian rock people. Small of stature. Tubes will give the apearance of beards. They will be part of the Tau because they are unworthy of their own codex.
37700
Post by: Ascalam
I may have to build a Squat (bad name.. How about Svart) Land Train some day, probably out of ork Battlewagons.
Hmmm
Ork codex counts as Squats... the IRONY
34242
Post by: -Loki-
DeffDred wrote:The Squats are now the Demiurg. Subterrainian rock people. Small of stature. Tubes will give the apearance of beards. They will be part of the Tau because they are unworthy of their own codex.
Wasn't the 'squats becoming rock monsters' rumour from ghost21? If so, be careful in stating it as even a reliable rumour.
45570
Post by: DeadlySquirrel
Demiurg are space based miners. They live on big ships in clans and mine asteroids IIRC.
44326
Post by: DeffDred
Wasn't the 'squats becoming rock monsters' rumour from ghost21? If so, be careful in stating it as even a reliable rumour.
I dont know about Ghost21.
All I know is that I saw the design sketches and the models on sprue.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
-Loki- wrote:DeffDred wrote:The Squats are now the Demiurg. Subterrainian rock people. Small of stature. Tubes will give the apearance of beards. They will be part of the Tau because they are unworthy of their own codex.
Wasn't the 'squats becoming rock monsters' rumour from ghost21? If so, be careful in stating it as even a reliable rumour.
It has nothing to do with ghost21, so there is no problem with stating it at all.
Demiurg = Squats has been around for years--mostly since the release of the Tau codex.
51859
Post by: Squidmanlolz
GW killed off most of the Squats in the fluff. They are near extinction after the Imperium began exterminatus-ing their planets.
But, now we have the Demiurg, under that hard rocky exterior, lies the squishy nougat center of the squat race.
44276
Post by: Lobokai
I thought it was pretty widely known by now that Squats dissapeared because one of the employees who developed them won an intellectual property lawsuit after he was fired and the Squats went with him.
Seriously, this is why. Everything else was normal GW CYA BS.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
That's also why they are gone and won't ever come back.
51464
Post by: Veteran Sergeant
Squidmanlolz wrote:GW killed off most of the Squats in the fluff. They are near extinction after the Imperium began exterminatus-ing their planets.
What? The Squats just disappeared from the fluff. There was never a "killing off", especially by Exterminatus. There was an offhand comment from Jervis Johnson about their homeworlds being eaten by Tyranids (from some magical Hive Fleet that apparently only ate the squats then disappeared, lol), but it was never in the fluff.
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
Like I've said before, Squats should have been brought back as the Tau. Not the Demiurg(although the name is better tha "Squats", but as the tau are mechanically, just as "dwarves". A shooty, gun-line army with technology that in ways surpasses the Imperium (because it'd be from the Dark Age of technology). They make up for their small stature with armored suits and big weapons.
They are found on the edge of Imperial space which they had held since the Dark Age. The Imperium wages war with them because they are an empire of abhumans, and so they claim "outcast unclean!"
There could even be hints that their vehicles, whatever form they might take, were actual STC vehicles.
39296
Post by: gpfunk
"Yes they deserved to die, and I hope they burn in HELL!" - Samuel L. Jackson on the extermination of the Squats
52137
Post by: Draigo
Squats have a horrid name and on that basis are the silliest of the 40k races.
50044
Post by: Connor MacLeod
I always figured Squats could have survived into modern 40K by being yet another of the many second-class servant abhuman races that the Imperium keeps floating around. They can't and don't exist as a separate/independent army anymore, but they might be some subset of the Guard or something.
47893
Post by: Iracundus
Veteran Sergeant wrote:Squidmanlolz wrote:GW killed off most of the Squats in the fluff. They are near extinction after the Imperium began exterminatus-ing their planets.
What? The Squats just disappeared from the fluff. There was never a "killing off", especially by Exterminatus. There was an offhand comment from Jervis Johnson about their homeworlds being eaten by Tyranids (from some magical Hive Fleet that apparently only ate the squats then disappeared, lol), but it was never in the fluff.
That isn't correct. This did appear in text. See the reprint of the old Ian Watson novel Inquisitor, which was retitled as Draco. There is an added on part that says the story is difficult to verify, because the Squats were destroyed by the Tyranids.
44531
Post by: Agent_Tremolo
I'd say the portrayal of orks of 40k not only does the stereotype justice, but also gives them back some of the dignity other universes deny them (and all without making them "green klingons", that is). Let's not forget that "the orc" is the embodiment of the ultimate antagonist, a creature so foul its very existance is an affront to all that's good and holy. It's a touchy stereotype, not entirely devoid of racist undertones. IMHO, Games Workshop handled it perfectly.
Ogryns and Halflings are there in the limelight, as useful mutants with a minor role. Space Undead have also been dealt with quite elegantly, forgoing the fantasy imagery in favor of a blend between Ancient Egypt and the Cybermen from Doctor Who. The Squats, however, were HORRID.
I'm not saying Dwarves are completely out of context in 40k. But norse bikers in leather? With ties to the Mechanicus? Oh, please. The idea of Dwarves in Space was ok. The execution was monstrous. I desperately wanted to like the Squats as I've always liked Dwarves, but this time I just couldn't. Reading 2nd ed. Codex Imperialis it felt like they were there, sitting in the middle of an otherwise perfect setting like a greasy, purulent zit in the face of a top model. Their fluff a slapdash collection of random occurences, their units an incoherent bucket of "meh", their fiction a lame piece taking place in some sort of subterranean german bierhalle. They HAD to go.
I'm not opposed to the idea of Space Dwarves. With some major modifications from the established stereotype (like, getting rid of the norse angle), I think they could find a room in 40k. But if dwarves are returning to 40k please, pretty please, let it not be Squats...
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
I agree. The old fluff was really goofy, other than their base origins.
I would like to see 'space dwarves' if they resembled something more like Mantic's Forgefathers, but with near-future body armor more like Mantic's Corporation or the Tau rather than anything resembling WH fantasy Dwarf architecture and armor.
And unlike any dwarf ever made by GW, they have to have anatomically correct legs. You know, the ones with both thighs and shins on either side of knees?
51464
Post by: Veteran Sergeant
Agent_Tremolo wrote:I'd say the portrayal of orks of 40k not only does the stereotype justice, but also gives them back some of the dignity other universes deny them (and all without making them "green klingons", that is). Let's not forget that "the orc" is the embodiment of the ultimate antagonist, a creature so foul its very existance is an affront to all that's good and holy. It's a touchy stereotype, not entirely devoid of racist undertones. IMHO, Games Workshop handled it perfectly.
By making them idiot savant sentient space fungus?
Okay.
The Orks are the most cartoonish possible stereotype of the orc. Which is fine. They're quite amusing. But they are anything but "so foul their very existence is an affront to all that's good and holy". Heck, Orks in 40K aren't even evil. They're just stupid and determinedly militaristic. They don't fight to be evil bastards, they simply fight because they don't know how to do anything else. Hardly "evil" or "foul". Like I said, a cartoon villain. But that's fine. At least they do it with panache. A lot of the 40K villains are just mustache twirlingly over-dramatic.
2636
Post by: NagothDaCleaver
Zinderneuf wrote:Chowderhead wrote:TRICYCLES HO!
And that's all I have to say.
Besides for the fact that Squats don't fit at all.
And orks of the same period (1ed) had armed dune buggies.
Orks still have armed Dune Buggies:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440267a&prodId=prod1090183
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
The worst thing about it, is, the more I think about Redneck Drunk Biker Dwarves in space, the more I think it would be perfect as a faction. Admittedly, it would fit more Gorkamorka than 40k, but I feel I could deal finely with an other comical faction in the game.
35894
Post by: Son_Of _Deddog
Not wanting to be contraversial or anything, but if people want to play Squats, then play Warpath from Mantic Games..
http://www.manticgames.com/Shop-Home/Warpath/Forge-Fathers/Infantry.html
Rules are free, models ok IMO....Everyones a winner!!!
In truth, I personally think Squats could have been re done...but they weren't for whatever reason. Lets all move on rather than look back.
42179
Post by: ObliviousBlueCaboose
So Squats where redneck bikers. Thats lame. I thought they were super smart miners, who actually understand technology. I just lost all respect for them.
35894
Post by: Son_Of _Deddog
ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:So Squats where redneck bikers. Thats lame. I thought they were super smart miners, who actually understand technology. I just lost all respect for them.
They were both. They made fantastic tech, but rode on bikes. They were thematically a bit of a mess...in a good way...
55602
Post by: Hunterindarkness
In no way are they the "Lest silly". The name itself takes them out of the running, and the steam-tech/super tech, Viking, bigwheel riding bikers was just...a bad joke. In my 40k They never happened. I could see a heavy worlder type of Abhuman, but not a whole xeno race and not that silly. May be a bit odd but I do not like a lot of silly in my 40k.
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
Alpharius wrote:Chowderhead wrote:
Original 40k, it fits.
Modern 40k, it does not.
The concept as originally portrayed 'back in the day' does not fit in "modern" 40K.
Can it be updated and made super delicious awesome x 2 for 'modern" 40K?
Of course it can.
My thoughts exactly.
"Since they were to come in the days of the power of Melkor, Aulë made the dwarves strong to endure. Therefore they are stone-hard, stubborn, fast in friendship and in enmity, and they suffer toil and hunger and hurt of body more hardily than all other speaking peoples; and they live long, far beyond the span of Men, yet not forever." – The Silmarillion, "Of Aulë and Yavanna"
2636
Post by: NagothDaCleaver
Hunterindarkness wrote:In no way are they the "Lest silly". The name itself takes them out of the running, and the steam-tech/super tech, Viking, bigwheel riding bikers was just...a bad joke. In my 40k They never happened. I could see a heavy worlder type of Abhuman, but not a whole xeno race and not that silly. May be a bit odd but I do not like a lot of silly in my 40k.
Squats were abumans... not xenos.
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Abhuman#.T1JQE_WD9WU
33033
Post by: kenshin620
If they ever come back, they're going get more grimdark faster than you say "skulls for the skull throne"
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
I think they could be perfectly fine without a single bit of grimdark. No skulls, no arcane techno-religion, nothing. That's what would bring them into conflict with the other factions. They'd be the base of Squats, but that's it.
How this?
[Insert name/Demiurg]: High gravity-world abhumans, lost after the Dark Age. They had to succeed on their own until M41, so their technology remains "pure" of the religious facet of Adeptus Mechanicus meddling (so no purity seals, sacred oils). Maybe their plasma weapons don't malfunction (much like Chaos vs Imperial in 2nd ed) and their vehicles mount a high number of old tech like conversion-beamers. Their vehicles could actually be sleeker versions of Imperial vehicles, maybe hinting that they are using less-degraded STC plans that they saved/found.
They don't have the high numbers of the other races, so maybe they make up for it by still using Robots. (Which would be akin to the old Imperial Robots, which were completely mechanical, but kept limited to be as intelligent as Servitors.)
They have no inherent psychic abilities, and a very long lifespan compared to humans, but a few of them go above and beyond that age. As they get older, they unlock their psychic potential, and their households revere them as "Living Anscestors".
I really can't see how that would seem strange in the modern 40K game setting.
It was all the Mad Max stuff they slapped on the originals that made them goofy.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
AegisGrimm wrote:
They have no inherent psychic abilities, and a very long lifespan compared to humans, but a few of them go above and beyond that age. As they get older, they unlock their psychic potential, and their households revere them as "Living Anscestors".
Well, that's not contradictory at all.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Demiurg already have an established background.
And it most certainly is not that of them being Abhumans! They are their own, unique alien species.
36391
Post by: Roadkill Zombie
And again, GW is showing how un origional and silly their game designers are with the name demiurg. While the word demiurg as a whole word does not mean short, the word demi does. Jervis mentioned in his Citadel Journal article about how it was a very bad idea to name a race "squat" to show prejudice towards their height. Now they are going to call them "Demiurg" ? With Demi being the root word of demiurg?
Can't they be more origional without being condescending?
Personally I want the Squats back, but with a different name and upgraded technology. I don't want the name to show any connotation towards their height either.
The Squats now fit in to 40k more than they ever did in Rogue Trader or 2nd edition, if GW would just get their act together and realize that there really is a player base that actually likes the concept and it isn't as small as many people paint it.
Yeah, the whole biker theme may not appeal to some people and I get that, but there has always been more to the Squats than that. The fact that they have a lot of tech that was origionally concieved in Epic Space Marine can now be brought into Apocalypse and even regular 40k.
Some Space Marines have a stunty Thunderhawk Gunship. Imperial Guard now have Valkyries and vendettas. Squats had Iron Eagle Gyrocoptors which look strikingly similar in design. But Squats had the Iron Eagle before the Guard had valkyries or vendettas.
Space Marines have the Thunderfire Cannon. But Squats had a piece of anti aircraft gear called a Thunderfire Cannon. They also had Mole Mortars and Thudd Guns, which the current Space Marine Thunderfire Cannon mimics. So they basically took the name of Squat gear from one piece of tech, and put two other pieces of Squat tech together, and gave it to the Space Marines.
So if the Squats were such a bad idea, why are they now using those same ideas with Space Marines? Doesn't that by default also make the Space Marines a bad idea?
All of the races in 40k during the Rogue Trader era were silly. They still are. This is a kids game, not an adult game. Sure, adults play it, but it is marketed towards children.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Roadkill Zombie wrote:And again, GW is showing how un origional and silly their game designers are with the name demiurg. While the word demiurg as a whole word does not mean short, the word demi does. Jervis mentioned in his Citadel Journal article about how it was a very bad idea to name a race "squat" to show prejudice towards their height. Now they are going to call them "Demiurg" ? With Demi being the root word of demiurg?
Can't they be more origional without being condescending?
Personally I want the Squats back, but with a different name and upgraded technology. I don't want the name to show any connotation towards their height either.
What makes you think that the "demi" in "demiurg" refers to their height?
There exists an actual term in the form of "Demiurge" which makes far, far more sense to have been used as the basis rather than it being a short people joke.
The word "demiurge" is an English word from a Latinized form of the Greek δημιουργός, dēmiourgos, literally "public worker", and which was originally a common noun meaning "craftsman" or "artisan", but gradually it came to mean "producer" and eventually "creator".
The Squats now fit in to 40k more than they ever did in Rogue Trader or 2nd edition, if GW would just get their act together and realize that there really is a player base that actually likes the concept and it isn't as small as many people paint it.
It's nowhere near as large as people paint it either. It's an outspoken minority, with a large portion of it quite likely never handling or seeking out the models. I'd hazard a guess that much of the "fanbase" just seems to think it's a great idea because veterans talk about it in awed tones.
Yeah, the whole biker theme may not appeal to some people and I get that, but there has always been more to the Squats than that. The fact that they have a lot of tech that was originally conceived in Epic Space Marine can now be brought into Apocalypse and even regular 40k.
Some Space Marines have a stunty Thunderhawk Gunship. Imperial Guard now have Valkyries and vendettas. Squats had Iron Eagle Gyrocoptors which look strikingly similar in design. But Squats had the Iron Eagle before the Guard had valkyries or vendettas.
Not to be a jerk, but I don't really see any kind of "striking similarity" between the Iron Eagle and the Valkyrie or Vendetta.
Well, except that they are aircraft.
Space Marines have the Thunderfire Cannon. But Squats had a piece of anti aircraft gear called a Thunderfire Cannon. They also had Mole Mortars and Thudd Guns, which the current Space Marine Thunderfire Cannon mimics. So they basically took the name of Squat gear from one piece of tech, and put two other pieces of Squat tech together, and gave it to the Space Marines.
So if the Squats were such a bad idea, why are they now using those same ideas with Space Marines? Doesn't that by default also make the Space Marines a bad idea?
I would suggest you take a look at the Death Korps of Krieg line from Forge World.
They do have mole mortars and thudd guns both, and they do not futz around with the names.
The Thunderfire Cannon has nothing in common with the Thunderfire Cannon of the Squats.
44276
Post by: Lobokai
Still, GW lost IP on Squats... they're gone, anything too similar could start a whole nother round of lawsuits.
IF they come back, they will have to be different enough (which is fine by me).
46636
Post by: English Assassin
Would you care to elaborate in that? I wasn't aware of any legal issues pertaining to the space stunties.
55602
Post by: Hunterindarkness
NagothDaCleaver wrote:Hunterindarkness wrote:In no way are they the "Lest silly". The name itself takes them out of the running, and the steam-tech/super tech, Viking, bigwheel riding bikers was just...a bad joke. In my 40k They never happened. I could see a heavy worlder type of Abhuman, but not a whole xeno race and not that silly. May be a bit odd but I do not like a lot of silly in my 40k.
Squats were abumans... not xenos.
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Abhuman#.T1JQE_WD9WU
Thank you sir for the correction. But making them Abhumans and not xeno's is not much better. As I said I could see a heavy worlder Abhumans...they are simply not it.
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
Lobukia wrote:I thought it was pretty widely known by now that Squats dissapeared because one of the employees who developed them won an intellectual property lawsuit after he was fired and the Squats went with him.
Seriously, this is why. Everything else was normal GW CYA BS.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
That's also why they are gone and won't ever come back.
Is that true, or just a rumor or a shot at GW? I'd be amazed if there was any intellectual property their to claim. However, I'm willing to be educated. Got a source? Automatically Appended Next Post: Hunterindarkness wrote:In no way are they the "Lest silly". The name itself takes them out of the running, and the steam-tech/super tech, Viking, bigwheel riding bikers was just...a bad joke. In my 40k They never happened. I could see a heavy worlder type of Abhuman, but not a whole xeno race and not that silly. May be a bit odd but I do not like a lot of silly in my 40k.
Dude, space orks and space elves with orange mohawks are sillier. Automatically Appended Next Post: Roadkill Zombie wrote:All of the races in 40k during the Rogue Trader era were silly. They still are. This is a kids game, not an adult game. Sure, adults play it, but it is marketed towards children.
That hits the nail on the head, and a lot of people are in denial about it. 40k was always silly and remains silly. The only thing they did with "grimdark" (which translates into English as "I need more skulls on my minis") was make it even sillier. Except the a lot of 40k players don't realize this, which in turn makes them silly which makes the game still sillier.
Me? I love silly. Automatically Appended Next Post: Kanluwen wrote: {refering to the Squat fanclub} It's nowhere near as large as people paint it either. It's an outspoken minority, with a large portion of it quite likely never handling or seeking out the models. I'd hazard a guess that much of the "fanbase" just seems to think it's a great idea because veterans talk about it in awed tones.
How do you know that? Because people don't bring Squats to the local GW store? It would be odd if they did. I have a whole army (about 100 figs) of the little buggers, and I play with them whenever I can play 1ed. If they were brought back, a lot of people I know would dust off their old armies. Why do you make the assumption that the Squat fans are an outspoken minority?
55602
Post by: Hunterindarkness
Zinderneuf wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hunterindarkness wrote:In no way are they the "Lest silly". The name itself takes them out of the running, and the steam-tech/super tech, Viking, bigwheel riding bikers was just...a bad joke. In my 40k They never happened. I could see a heavy worlder type of Abhuman, but not a whole xeno race and not that silly. May be a bit odd but I do not like a lot of silly in my 40k.
Dude, space orks and space elves with orange mohawks are sillier.
Honestly, not to me. sure the Orks are odd and a bit funny at times but the concept isn't bad at all. Many warrior cultures used bright colors, garish outfits and odd hairstyles. An ork is funny, until you stop and think about what an Ork is.They are a biologically engineered race with genetic memory and only programed for one thing. They are built to fight, nothing else, Evey thought , every action, even their biology is built to do one thing. Make war.And then you have this almost perfect weapon, cast adift without someone to shape and aim it.
Eldra started as space elves, all 40k was just fantasy in space, but they are not simply space elves. If you made them look inhuman it would change nothing about the race. In the end you have a long lived, dying race that brought about its own end. You could call them elves or volons or any number of other things. And even if you leave them as space elves how is that more silly then "Steampunk,hightech,big wheel riding dwaven-viking space bikers?"
There is nothing redeemable about the sqauts, nothing. The name is bad, the big wheels are bad, the viking-biker thing is bad, the steampunk/high tech we are not sure what we are thing is bad. All you are left with is dwaves, also kinda bad honestly. If you want heavy world Abhumans cool, but not a single reason they should or need to be "Space dwarfs"
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
Hunterindarkness wrote:Zinderneuf wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hunterindarkness wrote:In no way are they the "Lest silly". The name itself takes them out of the running, and the steam-tech/super tech, Viking, bigwheel riding bikers was just...a bad joke. In my 40k They never happened. I could see a heavy worlder type of Abhuman, but not a whole xeno race and not that silly. May be a bit odd but I do not like a lot of silly in my 40k.
Dude, space orks and space elves with orange mohawks are sillier.
Honestly, not to me.
No, Dude. They really are.
Hunterindarkness wrote: An ork is funny, until you stop and think about what an Ork is.They are a biologically engineered race with genetic memory and only programed for one thing. They are built to fight...
And, evidently, wear orange mohawks.
Hunterindarkness wrote: If you want heavy world Abhumans cool, but not a single reason they should or need to be "Space dwarfs"
Because pointy eared space elves (with orange mohawks) are not silly.
Really man, this is just an exercise in turning an aesthetic judgment into fact. That never works. I personally think that the sadist Dark Eldar are not only silly but extremely chilidish, but I won't tell that to anyone who worked hard on painting such an army. Why? Because all it is, is my opinion, not a fact. I'm only ribbing you with the orange mohawks to make this point. All this stuff is pretty silly, but I don't think that gets you anywhere.
55602
Post by: Hunterindarkness
I admitted the orks are funny and comical, but only until you know what they are. I just find nothing redeemable at all in the squats. You could make the "Orks" Looks different, give them a new name and it changes nothing about them. The same can not be said for the squats. All they have is that they are "Space dwarfs". Once you cut away the odd, silly crap you simply have nothing left worth saving. If you "dark them up" you no longer have the same thing. To "fix" them you have to change them into something else totally.
Its a favor thing, I am ok with a level of silly, but those things took that level, dressed it as a clown, got drunk and rode a rode a rainbow unicorn, naked though the house with it.
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
Hunterindarkness wrote:I admitted the orks are funny and comical, but only until you know what they are. I just find nothing redeemable at all in the squats. You could make the "Orks" Looks different, give them a new name and it changes nothing about them. The same can not be said for the squats. All they have is that they are "Space dwarfs". Once you cut away the odd, silly crap you simply have nothing left worth saving. If you "dark them up" you no longer have the same thing. To "fix" them you have to change them into something else totally.
Its a favor thing, I am ok with a level of silly, but those things took that level, dressed it as a clown, got drunk and rode a rode a rainbow unicorn, naked though the house with it.
But really, you are saying that space dwarfs are sillier than fungus creatures with submachineguns? based on what? Also, remember that the orks were retconned into what they now are, which is arguably infinitely sillier than what they were in 1ed. Why not the Squats as well? Change the name, take away the trikes, give them a nice Norse background where their high tech prowess is favorably compared with the mythological dwarfs making magic weapons, and I think you really have something. I am afraid that this might be heading into flaming if we keep going back and forth, and I don't want that, so I'll let you answer, and then just see what others have to say before making any more replies, but all I have seen so far is " GW says space dwarfs are silly, and space orcs are not, so that is how life works."
55602
Post by: Hunterindarkness
Man I did say to me. Everything we post in this thread is nothing but our own opinion. The OP and the very thread title is just that, an Opinion. I respect yours and take nothing you say personally, no need to worry about flames.
Here is a bit of background. I come in not knowing 1e Warhamer or 2e, nor 4e or any Table top version in fact. I have never played them and came in though the RPG side. I have learned what I know from hunting stuff down and online wikis. So I just see what they were. I like the setting and can except what it was and what is it becoming.
Truth is ( as I see it anyhow) GW seems to be shedding some of the odder and yes sillier stuff. some of the stuff made and fit in just because someone made a mini for it . NAd they seem to feel squats are something that no longer fits.
And yes to me the bio engineered plant people with guns are not as silly as squats. And In my Opinion the squarts are not something worth saving, I do like the concept of a heavy world Abhuman, but they do not need to be space dwarfs. Once you take away stuff that ( I feel) is a poor fit all you are left with is dwarfs.
Now if you want a dwarf like concept , I am cool, but everything about squarts was bad I feel. Over the top silly and bad.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe a wee bit off topic but if you wanted to salvage the concept I would do something like.
Make them have been long cut off or over looked, give them some old tech, maybe that have some nice STC templates or some hertek or border line hertech/archnotech style stuff. I would make them a small empire, no navigators just wrap "skimming"
I would go "dwarf" sized, wide thick limbs, pale and albino like. Hairless, large eyes with poor /weak daylight but great low light vision. Kinda like something that crawled out of the deep mines or a heavy grav, deathworld of some type.
That is what I would do, but they are not really "squats" anymore.
Can we at lest agree squats is the worst name ever?
46636
Post by: English Assassin
Lobukia wrote:I thought it was pretty widely known by now that Squats dissapeared because one of the employees who developed them won an intellectual property lawsuit after he was fired and the Squats went with him.
Seriously, this is why. Everything else was normal GW CYA BS.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
That's also why they are gone and won't ever come back.
I missed this the first time I went through the thread. Despite having played Warhammer 40,000 since the old days when Squats were a viable choice (one which, incidentally, I saw very few people ever actually play), I have never heard this claim, nor even anything similar. It doesn't even make legal sense, since (unless I understand UK law in this instance very poorly) the copyright holder of a work made by an employee in the course of an employment is the employer. Even though (unlike US law) freelance or commissioned work technically belongs to the author of the work, it is an invariable feature of such contracts that intellectual rights to the completed work fall to the contractor.
Unless you can substantiate your claim in some fashion, I'm just going to conclude you're uncritically repeating more of the bitter whining that GW (rightly and wrongly) perpetually attracts from their players.
44531
Post by: Agent_Tremolo
@Veteran Sergeant: Orcs are way older, as a narrative device, than GW's or Blizzard's take on them. Essentially, they were enemies designed to be so lowly and evil the heores could massacre them without any moral qualms.
@English Assassin: I recall having read about this IP thing here in Dakka, later last year. People think that some freelancer single-handledly sculpted the entire Squat range when in fact that's not quite true. Some minis were sculpted by Bob Olley, others by the Perry twins, and there probably were some other sculptors involved.
46636
Post by: English Assassin
Hmm. Sounds deeply dubious to me; the only sculptors I can find listed for the old Squat range are the Perrys and Bob Olley, neither of whom have appear publicly to have claimed anything of the sort.
Surely, even in the unlikely event such a claim were true, the mystery freelancer might be able to claim the ownership of the particular Squat sculpts on which they had worked, but not the rights to the name and concept, which belong unambiguously to GW, since Rogue Trader's principal author (Rick Priestly) and contributing writers (Brian Ansell, Alan Merrett and editor Jim Bambra) were all GW employees. The same goes for the credited writers of the further-developed Squat background (Ansell, Nigel Stillman, Graeme Davis, and later Andy Chambers and Jervis Johnson).
So, unless any kind of substantive evidence emerges to support this unlikely claim, I would write it off as just something else invented for the sake of sneering at GW. (And who needs to make things up when we have Finecast, Mat Ward, Prices and Codex: Space Wolves to disappoint us.)
36391
Post by: Roadkill Zombie
@Kanluwen...I wasn't saying that the word means short, just that it evokes that image. Intentional or not, people around the world will still make the short joke about them because they went from being "Squats" to the "Demiurg" and either word you read evokes images of short people. Maybe not intentionally, but very few people know what the associated word Demiurge even means without looking it up.
So the made up word Demiurg (notice the spelling isn't the same) will without doubt evoke images of short people.
Now about the Gyrocoptor. Remember that it was sculpted in Epic scale and designed at a time when the process of miniature casting was not to the level it is now. So it's a little bulky. But if you were to examine one of the actual models you would see that the nose and tail look a lot like the Vendetta/Valkyrie. The tail was actually supposed to have two sides to it held together with two pieces of metal that formed an x at the center similar to helicopters used by the United States in the Korean conflict.
The giant turbofans take up most of the wings on the gyrocoptor but for the Vendetta/Valkyrie they moved them sideways and made them smaller, thus needing to put more wing on the vendetta/valkyrie.
Now the Gyrocoptor miniature had to be bulked out and made one solid piece on the tail section because if they didn't make it that way the miniature would have been very fragile and it would have broken very easily. However, you can see that the design of the tail section has two sides to it and should have been hollow between those two sides the way the Valkyrie and Vendetta are. The designers then had to bulk out the back of the gyrocoptor so they made it a little blocky near the tail fins but in the 40k scale vendetta/valkyrie they didn't have that problem so they were able to just put a flat piece of plastic between the two sections.
Anyway, when you examine one you will definitely see the similarity. I own 20 of them and the similarity is definitely there.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
I'm fairly certain that people don't think of short people when they think of "Demigods". I cannot think of any case where the prefix "demi" would make someone reasonably exposed to the usage of the prefix to think of "short people".
I really, really, really think you're reaching on this one Roadkill Zombie.
Agent_Tremolo wrote:@English Assassin: I recall having read about this IP thing here in Dakka, later last year. People think that some freelancer single-handledly sculpted the entire Squat range when in fact that's not quite true. Some minis were sculpted by Bob Olley, others by the Perry twins, and there probably were some other sculptors involved.
It was likely put forward as a theory, rather than as fact.
However there is precedent. Chris Fitzgerald, who sculpted much of the Dark Elf metal range, had also produced the new "Mengil Manhide's Manflayers". They were not part of what he was supposed to have sculpted though, and he left the company before they worked out details. The result?
It took almost five years for GW and Fitzgerald to hammer out an acceptable arrangement before they released.
36391
Post by: Roadkill Zombie
It's no reach at all. From the dictionary the word Demi is a combining form appearing in loanwords from french meaning half, or lesser.
How is that a reach to say the prefix Demi means short people when it clearly is talking about something being half or lesser. When used to describe a race we already know as short...therefore demi? half height or a lesser human as the imperium sees them?
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Roadkill Zombie wrote:It's no reach at all. From the dictionary the word Demi is a combining form appearing in loanwords from french meaning half, or lesser.
How is that a reach to say the prefix Demi means short people when it clearly is talking about something being half or lesser. When used to describe a race we already know as short...therefore demi? half height or a lesser human as the imperium sees them?
The prefix--by itself-- does not mean anything but "half". The second part of the word is the important part. In this context, that is "urg". What in the world is "half an urg"?
The fact of the matter is that "Demiurg" is far more closely related to the term "Demiurge" which is an English bastardization of a term used to denote a skilled artisan or craftsman.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
Isn't a Demiurge a creator god? 
722
Post by: Kanluwen
CthuluIsSpy wrote:Isn't a Demiurge a creator god?
It has come to be accepted that it can refer to it.
Wikipedia has a great article on the term "Demiurge" though.
46636
Post by: English Assassin
Gah, I need to learn that 'Edit' and 'Quote' are not the same.
44326
Post by: DeffDred
So the made up word Demiurg (notice the spelling isn't the same) will without doubt evoke images of short people.
Without doubt?
Now thats the most opinionated comment in this thread.
When some someone says Demi... I think of Striptease, GIJane and That Seventies Show.
When someone says Demiurg I think of MtG and little rock men from 40k rumors (and interesting space ships from BFG).
36391
Post by: Roadkill Zombie
DeffDred wrote:So the made up word Demiurg (notice the spelling isn't the same) will without doubt evoke images of short people.
Without doubt?
Now thats the most opinionated comment in this thread.
When some someone says Demi... I think of Striptease, GIJane and That Seventies Show.
When someone says Demiurg I think of MtG and little rock men from 40k rumors (and interesting space ships from BFG).
Yes, without doubt. But I didn't say it would do that to every single human being on the planet now did I ? You, obviously, are one of the exceptions. 
722
Post by: Kanluwen
You still haven't said what an "urg" is that makes you think of a "short human". 
36391
Post by: Roadkill Zombie
That's because the Urg part isn't the part that evokes that image, It's the Demi part that does, regardless of your claims that it doesn't. In the common english language it does. The Urg part is a made up word. It doesn't exist. The only place I've seen it is in comic books.
Urge is the real last part of that word. When put together it was referring to a public worker in the greek city states as well as an artisan or craftsmen or an underling creator for a diety.
However, that isn't the word. The word is Demiurg not Demiurge.
The only real word in that name is Demi...meaning half. The rest of that word isn't real, therefore it means nothing at all.
Anyway, since this is obviously turning into somewhat of a joke, we can stop now.
55602
Post by: Hunterindarkness
I am gonna say the word "Demiurg " does not make me think of short off hand. Nor does the word Demi.
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
'Demiurge' was the evil creator of the physical world in the Cathar, Albigensian and a few other Christian offshoots in the middle ages. He masquerades as the true God, who, in these theologies, only created the spiritual and not the physical world.
I don't know if this is what GW had in mind, but the comparison is, IMO, too close to be random chance.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
Zinderneuf wrote:'Demiurge' was the evil creator of the physical world in the Cathar, Albigensian and a few other Christian offshoots in the middle ages. He masquerades as the true God, who, in these theologies, only created the spiritual and not the physical world.
I don't know if this is what GW had in mind, but the comparison is, IMO, too close to be random chance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demiurge
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
CthuluIsSpy wrote:Zinderneuf wrote:'Demiurge' was the evil creator of the physical world in the Cathar, Albigensian and a few other Christian offshoots in the middle ages. He masquerades as the true God, who, in these theologies, only created the spiritual and not the physical world.
I don't know if this is what GW had in mind, but the comparison is, IMO, too close to be random chance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demiurge
Yes, the Cathars had a lot of gnostic traditions.
51464
Post by: Veteran Sergeant
Agent_Tremolo wrote:@Veteran Sergeant: Orcs are way older, as a narrative device, than GW's or Blizzard's take on them. Essentially, they were enemies designed to be so lowly and evil the heores could massacre them without any moral qualms.
Thanks for the history lesson. Here's another one. Blizzard doesn't have a take on Orcs. Their take was GW's take.
And any original mythology behind Orcs is irrelevant to the way they are depicted in 40K. The Orks of 40K are not evil, foul, or an affront to all that is good and holy like you suggested they were. The orks of 40K bear no resemblance to the classic depiction of monster.
Which isn't a problem by any means. It's just incorrect to suggest that they are. The universe of 40K isn't serious enough for such a depiction, and the Orks are a perfect comic relief when you get too bummed out by planet devouring space bugs or skull bedecked sociopaths.
46636
Post by: English Assassin
English Assassin wrote:Lobukia wrote:Still, GW lost IP on Squats... they're gone, anything too similar could start a whole nother round of lawsuits.
IF they come back, they will have to be different enough (which is fine by me).
Would you care to elaborate on that? I wasn't aware of any legal issues pertaining to the space stunties.
I'll presume from your silence on the subject that you don't have a source, then, and are just repeating unsubstantiated rumour.
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
CthuluIsSpy wrote:AegisGrimm wrote:
They have no inherent psychic abilities, and a very long lifespan compared to humans, but a few of them go above and beyond that age. As they get older, they unlock their psychic potential, and their households revere them as "Living Anscestors".
Well, that's not contradictory at all.
Not when it was officially that way for Squats. Evidently something about reaching unnatural old age unlocked the potential for psyker powers.
"At about 500 years old, certain physiological changes began to occur, As age began to sap their speed and strength, they develop an incredible degree of mental resilience, along with certain psychic powers."
-Squat Army list, page 170, Warhammer 40K Compendium. (1989)
I have the book. In actuality, the whole "power wheels bikers" thing was only for the Engineer's Guild, a faction within the army list. The rest of it is pretty normal troop choices, other than the Warlord and his Hearthguard being able to be in Exo-armor, which despite the horrible models of it, is just Terminator armor with a standard load-out of bolter and power-axe (storm bolters barely existed at this point, and power axes were nearly as good as powerfists).
This is also at the point in the game where Harlequins could loot Imperial Robots and vehicles from other armies. So yes, a Harlequin-painted Land Raider.
34906
Post by: Pacific
It's amazing how many people have replied in this thread, and not really answered what the OP was talking about. He is essentially saying that there is as much reason for spaces dwarves to exist in the 40k universe, as there is gnomes, elves, ogres etc. Not about whether Squats fit in in terms of the game itself (which, by the time 2nd edition came around, they didn't)/
In that sense I think he is right - although the old GW background explanation of how the Squats came about can't be correct (random divergence through evolution could not have produced such a radical difference to the human frame in such a short space of time), the original background was written before genetic engineering became a possibility within science. I think these days, and if the background were written again (perhaps might be for the Demiurg?) they could write that the scientists of the Dark Ages of technology altered the human genome to be able to function in high-G environments. Perhaps the same thing was done with other abhumans - Ogryns as a labouring, slave race. Ratlings as a... erm.. race of thieves?! 
As well as that, the concept of a 'Dwarf in space' does seem much more believable than many of the other species. Dwarves are industrious, good at engineering, and are comfortable living in small and enclosed spaces. They have a high level of technology, and their search for mineral wealth would natually draw them towards asteroids and other planetary bodies. Their long lives and stable society would aid the creation of planetary exploration, as they would be able to look beyond projects that only produced short-term gain.
As Kanluwen has pointed out earlier in the thread, the Demiurg (or what we have heard about them) lends itself well to that concept. This is something quite different to the Squats, who sadly were never given this kind of background in 40k (their Epic incarnation was much closer to that concept listed above).
Labukia wrote:I thought it was pretty widely known by now that Squats dissapeared because one of the employees who developed them won an intellectual property lawsuit after he was fired and the Squats went with him.
Seriously, this is why. Everything else was normal GW CYA BS.
That was Bob Olley, but I think it is by the by that Squats were not made again, rather than the sculptor leaving GW. Jervis illustrated in the letter he wrote that the design team had tried but failed to make the Squats fit into the changing, far more po-faced, 40k universe but they had failed. He admitted that the army list should never have appeared in the 2nd edition book.
During my time at GW I did hear a rumour though that there was a member of the GW upper-management who had said that "there will be no more dwarves in space while I am at this company" (although as so many of the GW design team and other staff have changed now maybe that is not in effect any more?). There is also the issue of FW sculptors apparently being told by GW, "No 40k Demiurg". Was this because of the aforementioned anti-squat in GW management, or because GW had their own Demiurg line on the horizon and didn't want the waters muddied?
Ghost21, a well known rumour poster over on Warseer, did hint that Demiurg were coming. It would also tie in with Mantic making the Forge Fathers (they have produced very little that can't function as a stand-in for GW's games). However, Ghost21 was caught out lying over a subsequent rumour, and so you have to question whether any of the things he had written previously were in face true.
In the meantime though I'm doing a Demiurg army from the quite lovely Mantic Forgefathers line, who with the new releases are everything that the Squats in 40k initially should have been.
44531
Post by: Agent_Tremolo
Veteran Sergeant wrote:Agent_Tremolo wrote:@Veteran Sergeant: Orcs are way older, as a narrative device, than GW's or Blizzard's take on them. Essentially, they were enemies designed to be so lowly and evil the heores could massacre them without any moral qualms.
Thanks for the history lesson. Here's another one. Blizzard doesn't have a take on Orcs. Their take was GW's take. And any original mythology behind Orcs is irrelevant to the way they are depicted in 40K. The Orks of 40K are not evil, foul, or an affront to all that is good and holy like you suggested they were. The orks of 40K bear no resemblance to the classic depiction of monster. Which isn't a problem by any means. It's just incorrect to suggest that they are. The universe of 40K isn't serious enough for such a depiction, and the Orks are a perfect comic relief when you get too bummed out by planet devouring space bugs or skull bedecked sociopaths.
M'afraid you either misread my earlier post. Or maybe I wasn't clear enough. Probably the latter. Orcs, in other fantasy settings, are foul and evil beings of darkness. GW's version of the mythos is comedic and certainly more benign to them. So, in the end we agree, you see. My problem with Squats is not that they're silly. In an universe that can switch from dead serious to dead stupid and vice versa in a matter of seconds, silliness is not much of a concern. Neither is the idea of dwarves in space itself: As Pacific wisely points out, given the right rationale, sci-fi is as good an habitat for dwarves as it is fantasy. The problem comes when you try to port the Dwarves from WHFB to 40k, and do a terribly sloppy job at it. Squats were supposed to have preserved long lost tech from the Dark Age of Technology. I would have gone with robots, AI and wild cybernetics, but instead we got zeppelins and steam-belching road trains, which are fine examples of absurdly advanced technology but only when your opponents are wielding spears and swords, not creating transhuman warrior clones and shooting from massive humanoid walkers. The miner/redneck looks and theme are cool in my books, and suit the Dwarves just fine, but are damn hard to blend with the Viking Eddas. Their background, like most WHFB armies (and unlike 40k, where each race's fluff is largely independent from the others'), relied too much in detailing their interactions with other factions, leaving them in some uncomfortable middle ground carved at the expense of creating inconsistencies in other races' fluff. And there's the name. Oh, the name... If Squats were to go on, they had to be modified to such extent even the existing Squat fanbase would be pissed off. That's how I understand Jarvis' statement: The Squats couldn't stay in 40k without ceasing to be Squats anymore. P.S. I don't think models were an issue. Everything can be redone, and modern sculpting techniques would have worked wonders for them. RT-era minis were nice for their time. Recent (96-97) unreleased models are somewhat dissappointing, but not without the occasional spark of coolness: As for the "IP loss" theory, I'd discard it completely. I've been doing some research, and found out that new Squat sculpts kept being done until the mid-late 90s, almost a decade after Olley (whose RT-era Squats were released by Citadel under the Iron Claw splinter brand, and was my main suspect of having carried the rights to the Squat sculpts along with him) left Games Workshop. Also, his Goblins and Black Orcs made it through the years after his departure. Still, I'm still willing to learn more about this, so if anyone has more info... And a final note for those arguing around the "Demiurg" name. While browsing the wikipedia (I wasn't too sure if the dwarves originated from the Eddas or some other Norse text) I found out the old english word for "dwarf" was dweorg. "Demiurge" doesn't evoke short people to me but, knowing this, the "urg" spells some dwarvish connections.
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
I actually would say that their odd-ness was because I don't think Squats were Space Dwarf enough. They looked too much like "short humans".
I personally think that you could keep the entire background for the Squat race (with some minor updating) and make them fit in with all the other races of WH40 simply by renovating their art style. The original Squats looked far too much like they were simply an Imperial Guard regiment with dwarfism, and it didn't make any part of them seem "unique" as their own race/army. Half their models were mini-humans, and the other half were mini-space marines.
I would like to see a race that split off from the humans. Who cares if they aren't "aliens" it's as good as in this setting. Give them strong elements of the Nordic fantasy battles Dwarf style, while at the same time giving some throw-backs that give a glimpse of what pre-Imperial humans would have looked like if the warp storms had never happened.
No purity seals, no Imperial Eagles, no skulls everywhere, etc.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
The problem with that is the human empires were all ostensibly reclaimed.
The ones which were too far mutated or that stood against the Imperium were destroyed. Humanity is the Imperium.
51464
Post by: Veteran Sergeant
Agent_Tremolo wrote:Squats were supposed to have preserved long lost tech from the Dark Age of Technology. I would have gone with robots, AI and wild cybernetics, but instead we got zeppelins and steam-belching road trains, which are fine examples of absurdly advanced technology but only when your opponents are wielding spears and swords, not creating transhuman warrior clones and shooting from massive humanoid walkers.
This is very true. I mean, nobody should argue the RT Squats would fit in the modern 40K universe. But, then again, only the Eldar really remained consistent across the years. And I attribute that more to a lack of creativity than a perfect mold achieved immediately. However, it's quite valid to argue that the Eldar weren't broke, so there was no need to fix them.
If Squats were to go on, they had to be modified to such extent even the existing Squat fanbase would be pissed off. That's how I understand Jarvis' statement: The Squats couldn't stay in 40k without ceasing to be Squats anymore.
Not sure I can agree here. Pretty much every army was slowly modified, some were even drastically modified. The player bases remained. Squats could have easily occupied the Tau niche, before the Tau existed. After all, a race of short stature and slow movement would benefit greatly from technology. Walkers, fast transports, etc, fit them perfectly. They could have been suitably "Imperialized". Maybe give them jet and speeder technology at a greater percentage than the Imperium. Made the difference between Squats and Imperial Guard be in technology. Biker Squats were kinda silly. Jetbike and Landspeeder Squats could have been awesome, with dreadnought or Sentinel style walkers supporting mechanized infantry.
P.S. I don't think models were an issue. Everything can be redone, and modern sculpting techniques would have worked wonders for them. RT-era minis were nice for their time.
I honestly liked the Squat models. Some of them were silly, but others were pretty awesome. Some of the RT era Squats still look cool today. If they'd evolved away from the nordic biker dwarves in space look, and to something more serious business, they could have been cool. I mean, look how the Imperial Army figs evolved into the modern Cadian plastics. Hasslefree's Grymm are a pretty good example of how the Squats could have evolved in terms of look. "Imperialize" them a bit, and you have an army that I feel like people would consider collecting.
I think the bottom line is that this argument is impossible to make. The Squats never evolved past Rogue Trader, because GW abandoned the line. Trying to say what was acceptable 25 years ago isn't acceptable now is kinda dumb. The game isn't much of anything like what it used to be. It's far more polished and evolved. Not always in the best of ways, but it has changed. Only a modern take on the Squats from GW can accurately be compared to the modern iteration of the game. And it's fairly certain we won't see it.
Which, in my mind, is too bad. But at least it gives some fun character to Squat models that people work into their modern Imperial Guard, or possibly even Tau armies.
55602
Post by: Hunterindarkness
The thing is the game has evolved past "fantasy in space" and honestly the squats never seemed to have fit the fluff anyhow. It seems the folks that liked them , liked them because they are silly dwarf viking bikers with steampunk/high tech stuff. To me removing them was a great idea, other people love em and hate the idea. It is the way of any living game/ Warhammer is still a bit silly, but they try to limit the silly to an extent.
Let me ask. Why do you like squats? why are they a must have? Is it anything more then "I want a dwarf?"
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
Pacific wrote:...the concept of a 'Dwarf in space' does seem much more believable than many of the other species. Dwarves are industrious, good at engineering, and are comfortable living in small and enclosed spaces. They have a high level of technology, and their search for mineral wealth would natually draw them towards asteroids and other planetary bodies. Their long lives and stable society would aid the creation of planetary exploration, as they would be able to look beyond projects that only produced short-term gain.
More points in the Squats' favor (Woot! Woot!), though I do seem to remember in 1ed that they were supposed to be a high gravity subspecies of humanity.
34906
Post by: Pacific
Yes they were, but I think the theory was that they had naturally evolved from humans because of the high gravity world.
But as I said, Rogue Trader was written before genetic engineering had started to become a possibility in real science (although it had been around in science fiction for some time before). Hence why Marines were just 'chemically hardened' at this point, and squats and ogryns had evolved naturally. I think if 'dwarves in space' were written as being originally humans again, the writers would choose the 'genetic engineering' route instead, which makes much more sense than random divergence producing a thing like a dwarf in such a short space of time.
I think Jes Goodwin had implied at Games Day a couple of years ago he would be doing Demiurg after Dark Eldar, but who knows GW sometimes sit on new stuff for years before finding a window in the schedule to release it. And because of their arse-clenching secrecy policy, I think many people (like myself) will have long since bought the Mantic Forgefather models whereas they might have otherwise waited if GW had let us know they were coming (or at least to see which model line was superior).
55071
Post by: Zinderneuf
Pacific wrote:...And because of their... ...secrecy policy, I think many people (like myself) will have long since bought the Mantic Forgefather models whereas they might have otherwise waited if GW had let us know they were coming (or at least to see which model line was superior).
I have often wondered whether this really helps them.
For example, a 40k motion picture might really be popular right now, but, like everything else made by mortals, this game probably won't be around forever, and if they don't loosen up a little, they could well lose their audience.
|
|
