MrMoustaffa wrote:In before the inevitable cycle of argument starts. I like the idea of them, and one of my to do projects is to build a small squat army (either counts as IG or maybe grey knights to take advantage of all their crazy gear since that's similar to what squats had supposedly) I wasn't around when they existed, but wouldn't mind them coming back

The problem is, they were a bunch of biker midgets with some of the most insane vehicles in the game. They kept it lighthearted and funny (like orks, argue it all you want, but their comic relief is something this game desperately needs) When the age of grimdark fell upon us, it was inevitable that they'd get the boot. I think they could've had a better send off though. Something like a heroic last stand against a massive ork invasion or even the imperium trying to exterminatus them would have been cool. You know, let them go out with dignity.

And that's why we will never see them "officially" in another GW authorized material, because they clash with the grimdark feel of the universe.

That, and they're not SPESS MEHREENS, so of course GW probably doesnt care about them

Kain wrote:

How is going down to a massive series of Hive Fleet Kraken tendrils not heroic?

Nurgle wrote:I loved them in Epic. I like the biker idea though. We dont have good bikers in 40k (real bikers not these sporty looking bikes) I also loved the comic relief about them and the orks. The orks lost comic relief around 3rd edition to me. I recently started trading units at my game store for squat. I am already at 200 points
I just need a codex.

Jervis Johnson wrote:
"I know I shouldn't get drawn on this... but... can't... resist

Seriously, a couple of points just so you can have an informed debate based on the real reasons that Squats are no longer available. Be warned, it is going to be hard reading for people that like the Squat background.

First of all, Squats were *not* dropped because they were not selling well. There were then, and are now, plenty of other figure ranges that sell in the sort of % quantaties that the Squats pulled down, especially when you look across all of the ranges produced by GW rather than just those for 40K.

No, the reason that the Squats were dropped was because the creatives in the Studio (people like me, Rick, Andy C, Gav etc) felt that we had failed to do the Dwarf 'archetype' justice in its 40K incarnation. From the name of the race (Squats - what *were* we thinking?!?!) through to the short bikers motif, we had managed to turn what was a proud and noble race in Warhammer and the other literary forms where the archetype exists, into a joke race in 40K. We only fully realised what we had done when we were working on the 2nd edition of 40K. Try as we might, we just couldn't work up much enthusiasm for the Squats. The mistake we made then (deeply regreted since) was to leave them in the background and the 'get you by' army list book that appeared. With hindsight, we should have dropped the Squats back then, and saved ourselves a lot of grief later on.

Anyway, the Squats made it into 2nd edition, and since we were doing army books for each of the races, we started to try and figure out what to do with them. Unfortunately we just couldn't figure out a way to update them and get them to work that we felt was good enough. The 'art' of working on an army as a designer is to find the thing that you think is cool and exciting about an army, and work it up into a strong theme. This 'muse' didn't strike any of us, and so, rather than bring out a second-rate product simply re-hashing the old background, we kept doing other army books instead, with stuff we did feel inspired by.

Now, while this was all going on for 40K, we were actually doing some rather good stuff for the Squats in Epic. On this scale there was a natural tendancy to focus on the big 'hand-made' war machines the Squat artisans produced, and this created an army with a feel that was very different to the biker hordes in 40K. However, this tended to reinforce the problems we saw in the Squat background rather than alleviate them, underlining what we *should* have done with the Squats in 40K.

In the end (and it took years to really get to the roots of the problem) this led to a realisation that we were going to have to drop the Squats in their 'Squat' form from the 40K background. There was little point having a major race that we weren't willing to make an army book for, and their inclusion in the background meant that people kept asking us when we'd do a Squat Codex. Instead we decided that we'd write the Squats out of the background by saying that their Homworlds had been devoured by a Tyranid Hivefleet. This would give us the option in the future to return to making a race based ont he Squat archetype for 40K. This race was given the name of Demiurg, and a certain amount of preliminary work was done to get a 'feel' for what the race would be like. At present the only hint of the Demiurg in 40K is the Demiurg spaceship for BFG. However, we do have this race 'in our back pocket' as a possible new race for 40K, or an interesting character model in Inquisitor, or whatever. So far the Demiurg have lost out to other projects, and it may be that their time never actually comes, as they will have to win through on their merits, not simply because we once made some Squat models in the past. At present, I have to say that it is more lilely that they *don't* make the cut than do, as there is a certain predudice these days to simply taking races from Warhammer and cross them over to 40K like we did in the early days, so it may be that the Squats/Demiurg end up remaining a footnote in the history of the 40K galaxy. Only time will tell...

The second point I'd like to make is about 'old moulds'. In the past, Mail Order in the UK and US used to be the place that we kept all of the retired moulds for Citadel Miniatures, and we used to offer a service where you could order any Citadel Mniature ever made from MO. However, there are now so many of these 'back catalogue' miniatures that it is simply impossible to keep all of the old moulds in Mail Order and offer this service. Instead, we pick and choose which back catalogue miniatures are kept available. At present we're still struggling to produce special catalogues for these ranges (in the US there is the 'Phone Book' catalogue with everything in it, while the UK has special 'collectors guides' that are themed round a race). Once we've ironed out the kinks in the way we deal with the range of collectors models we want to keep permenantly available, the plan is to offer up other parts of the back catalogue for limited periods of time. In effect this will divide the back catalogue into three parts: a range of classic models that are permenantly available, a range of classic models we dip into and bring out for a limited release, and a range of retired models that will no longer be sold either because we've decided that they are embarrassingly bad, or because we are no longer allowed to sell them due to licencing agreement changes. So far we're still slowly working on deciding which classic models we want to keep permenantly available, and its going to take several years to work through just those. The old Squat range is most likely to end up as retired models, I have to say, though there is a good chance that the Squat war engines they could simply into the limited release classic range. Once again, only time will tell...

I'll finish off by saying that whatever we decide to do 'officially', there is nothing stopping players with Squat armies from using them, either in Epic or 40k for that matter. There is no GW 'rule' against using old Citadel Miniatures, as long as you use them with exisiting army lists and in a way that won't cause confusion for other players. I recommend taking a positive stand by saying "Have you seen these cool old models? They're called the Squats and GW used to make them back in the late eighties/early nineties. I love 'em, so I count them as Imperial Guard and use them with the current rules..." Put like this I can't imagine that anyone would stop you from using your army.

Best regards,

Jervis Johnson
Head Fanatic"

Lobukia wrote:Okay, we know this. Jervis is doing damage control. GW did not have the IP to the squats. Way back when in the 90s, they let their in house game designers retain control of their own IP. One of them left in a bitter fued, and took the squat's rights with him. Every thing else is just a ribbon on the pig.

Lobukia wrote:Okay, we know this. Jervis is doing damage control. GW did not have the IP to the squats. Way back when in the 90s, they let their in house game designers retain control of their own IP. One of them left in a bitter fued, and took the squat's rights with him. Every thing else is just a ribbon on the pig.

Hunterindarkness wrote:I myself hate both the idea of them and the way GW handled them< I mean viking midgets bikers...just ugh. That said the reconning them out was handled poorly, but poor setting management is what i have come to expect from GW.

Buttons wrote:

Hunterindarkness wrote:I myself hate both the idea of them and the way GW handled them< I mean viking midgets bikers...just ugh. That said the reconning them out was handled poorly, but poor setting management is what i have come to expect from GW.

God you are depressing. Why must everything be doom and gloom with you?

helgrenze wrote:They could take both bikes and heavies as troops choices, something I believe no other army then or since could do. (I could be wrong, if so, tell which army can).

Buttons wrote:

Hunterindarkness wrote:I myself hate both the idea of them and the way GW handled them< I mean viking midgets bikers...just ugh. That said the reconning them out was handled poorly, but poor setting management is what i have come to expect from GW.

God you are depressing. Why must everything be doom and gloom with you?

helgrenze wrote:
As for the idea that they were a "joke race", that opinion was only really held by people that never faced them.

Lobukia wrote:Okay, we know this. Jervis is doing damage control. GW did not have the IP to the squats. Way back when in the 90s, they let their in house game designers retain control of their own IP. One of them left in a bitter fued, and took the squat's rights with him. Every thing else is just a ribbon on the pig.

Hunterindarkness wrote:I can't say I like the name Scrunt much better. But at lest its a slight improvement.

Lobukia wrote:Okay, we know this. Jervis is doing damage control. GW did not have the IP to the squats. Way back when in the 90s, they let their in house game designers retain control of their own IP. One of them left in a bitter fued, and took the squat's rights with him. Every thing else is just a ribbon on the pig.

Omegus wrote:Please, Jervis going away is no loss. He hasn't contributed anything to the game in a long while, and the things he did contribute were the most bland and boring books ever written for 40K (Dark Angels, and Dark Eldar with Gav Thorpe, who then carried that "inspired" writing style to Codex: CSM).

His mentality was always "you don't need no interesting rules or variety of choices when you has imagination!" Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Really? His WD articles have often given me a different (better) outlook of 40k. I for one support him.

Omegus wrote:Please, Jervis going away is no loss. He hasn't contributed anything to the game in a long while, and the things he did contribute were the most bland and boring books ever written for 40K (Dark Angels, and Dark Eldar with Gav Thorpe, who then carried that "inspired" writing style to Codex: CSM).

His mentality was always "you don't need no interesting rules or variety of choices when you has imagination!" Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Buttons wrote:

Hunterindarkness wrote:I myself hate both the idea of them and the way GW handled them< I mean viking midgets bikers...just ugh. That said the reconning them out was handled poorly, but poor setting management is what i have come to expect from GW.

God you are depressing. Why must everything be doom and gloom with you?

BairdEC wrote:I'd guess points. Back then (mid-90s) a blister of two lead or pewter minis cost $6. Used to be this hobby wasn't ridiculously expensive. Then the bean-counters took over GW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kain wrote:

How is going down to a massive series of Hive Fleet Kraken tendrils not heroic?

'Cos all the Squats got was a "oh, the Squat homeworlds got eaten by 'Nids. So sorry."

(Yes, I'm bitter. I wouldn't be a proper Squat warlord if I weren't, though.)

Coolyo294 wrote:So you're recasting GW models?

MrMoustaffa wrote:I'm pretty sure at this point it's no big deal. GW has shown no desire to remake them. and they're getting harder to find everyday. GW isn't losing money when they refuse to sell the product to begin with. It'd be like reprinting the 3rd edition rulebook for personal use or something.

porkuslime wrote:BUT.. MAN OH MAN.. the reactions of the management was priceless to behold..

A Customer had uttered the dread S**** word...

insaniak wrote:

porkuslime wrote:BUT.. MAN OH MAN.. the reactions of the management was priceless to behold..

A Customer had uttered the dread S**** word...

Not to be rude, but if this actually happened, I suspect that you were projecting, rather than that there was any significant reaction. The GW attitude towards squats is nowhere near as over-the-top as people on the internet keep trying to make out.

MrMoustaffa wrote:In before the inevitable cycle of argument starts. I like the idea of them, and one of my to do projects is to build a small squat army (either counts as IG or maybe grey knights to take advantage of all their crazy gear since that's similar to what squats had supposedly) I wasn't around when they existed, but wouldn't mind them coming back

The problem is, they were a bunch of biker midgets with some of the most insane vehicles in the game. They kept it lighthearted and funny (like orks, argue it all you want, but their comic relief is something this game desperately needs) When the age of grimdark fell upon us, it was inevitable that they'd get the boot. I think they could've had a better send off though. Something like a heroic last stand against a massive ork invasion or even the imperium trying to exterminatus them would have been cool. You know, let them go out with dignity.

And that's why we will never see them "officially" in another GW authorized material, because they clash with the grimdark feel of the universe.

That, and they're not SPESS MEHREENS, so of course GW probably doesnt care about them

insaniak wrote:Lots of talk and noise... So just as much chance that he was reacting to something someone else said... Or to a dodgy lunch.

Dogface 76 wrote:I did not really understand the strength of the hatred towards these little guys. I was lucky enough to get my hands on 30 of the lil blighters, outfitted with Lasrifles, pistols and some kind of shoulder mounted bolters. My gaming group allows me to use them as an IG infantry Platoon, we play the shoulder mounted weapons as straight Bolters to keep with the Rapid Fire aspect of the rest of the army. It was a great addition to my collection

Lobukia wrote:Okay, we know this. Jervis is doing damage control. GW did not have the IP to the squats. Way back when in the 90s, they let their in house game designers retain control of their own IP. One of them left in a bitter fued, and took the squat's rights with him. Every thing else is just a ribbon on the pig.

ArbitorIan wrote:

MrMoustaffa wrote: Me talking about things and stuff

Just to be clear..

The squats were mainly armed with flak armour, lasguns and boltguns. In 40k they had bikes and Exo-Armour (like a not-quite-as-good Terminator Armour). They could take a lot of heavy weapons, but these were still mainly Heavy Bolters and Heavy Plasma Guns. There is no way they were anything like as powerful as a Grey Knight army, and they didn't really have any 'crazy tech'. In 1ed, there were practically no standard vehicles. Once some did come out, all Imperial forces, including Squats, just used Rhinos and Land Raiders. No crazy vehicles either. In EPIC, though, the force was fleshed out to use lots of crazy massive war machines - Overlord Airships, Land Trains, Moles, etc. However, all these vehicles are Apocalypse sized models.

There's very little reason to field Squats as anything other than Imperial Guard (maaaaybe Orks). I guess Space Marines, at a push, would get you Terminators and Bikes, with the majority of troops as Scouts, but Grey Knights would be pretty OP...

Uhlan wrote:I think the Squats were a bit too tongue and cheek for my liking. The Orks are enough to fill my need for a comedic army, one that sets me to giggling now and again.

Had they just made them engineering gurus it wouldn't have been so bad. Still, it's a tiresome emulation of the fantasy universe, but it completes the circle of life that is the Space Elfs, Space Orks, and of course Space Dwarfs... some fans need to complete that holy triumvirate.

They could have done them justice, but they didn't... biker dwarfs are just too campy a theme. Perhaps their reinvention as the Demiurg might be a way to give them a second chance.

MrMoustaffa wrote:

Coolyo294 wrote:So you're recasting GW models?

I'm pretty sure at this point it's no big deal. GW has shown no desire to remake them. and they're getting harder to find everyday. GW isn't losing money when they refuse to sell the product to begin with. It'd be like reprinting the 3rd edition rulebook for personal use or something.

Although knowing GW, they'd still probably hunt you to the ends of the earth with their lawyers anyways

Reivax26 wrote:For all of you that like Squats I read something on one of the other sites a while back that might make you happy. Apparently when the new Tau codex comes out, the Demiurg are going to be the new Allied race in their book. There was such a positive reaction to the Jokaero release for the Grey Knights that GW is going to include the "Squats" in the Tau Codex under the name Demiurg. Don't know how many units you are going to be able to take but someone specifically mentioned those ExoArmor guys as a close combat unit that would be taken in the Elites selections.

Reivax26 wrote:For all of you that like Squats I read something on one of the other sites a while back that might make you happy. Apparently when the new Tau codex comes out, the Demiurg are going to be the new Allied race in their book. There was such a positive reaction to the Jokaero release for the Grey Knights that GW is going to include the "Squats" in the Tau Codex under the name Demiurg. Don't know how many units you are going to be able to take but someone specifically mentioned those ExoArmor guys as a close combat unit that would be taken in the Elites selections.

Coolyo294 wrote:Good god no. The Squats were a terrible idea and they need to stay dead.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:They're back! Officially listed as an abhuman race in the 6th Edition rulebook.

Probably won't get new models or a codex, which is fine, but at least it means the Squat ban is officially over. And hopefully that the unofficial, andextremely stupid "ate by Tyranids" story is gone.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Veteran Sergeant wrote:They're back! Officially listed as an abhuman race in the 6th Edition rulebook.

Probably won't get new models or a codex, which is fine, but at least it means the Squat ban is officially over. And hopefully that the unofficial, andextremely stupid "ate by Tyranids" story is gone.

I don't believe this for a second. I mean they existed, but they don't exist anymore..

Veteran Sergeant wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Veteran Sergeant wrote:They're back! Officially listed as an abhuman race in the 6th Edition rulebook.

Probably won't get new models or a codex, which is fine, but at least it means the Squat ban is officially over. And hopefully that the unofficial, andextremely stupid "ate by Tyranids" story is gone.

I don't believe this for a second. I mean they existed, but they don't exist anymore..

Why would I make this up? Good lord some people...




There ya go son.

Pacific wrote:I think the concept and some of the models might be regarded as a joke race by modern standards, in the same way that any other army would be when comparing its first edition form to how they look nowadays. And yes, that includes marines, eldar and IG for the most part. The design aesthetic has changed considerably since 1st edition, and it is not fair to judge them based on that.

Skriker wrote:

Pacific wrote:I think the concept and some of the models might be regarded as a joke race by modern standards, in the same way that any other army would be when comparing its first edition form to how they look nowadays. And yes, that includes marines, eldar and IG for the most part. The design aesthetic has changed considerably since 1st edition, and it is not fair to judge them based on that.

I thought they were a little goofy with all their bikes, especially the exo-armored squats on bikes. That was REALLY goofy, but never really saw them as a joke. The only really joke race for me in the various GW universes were the Slaan in early Warhammer Fantasy Battle. Humanoid frogs dressed up like Aztec or Mayan warriors? Who thought that was a cool idea?

Skirker

ZebioLizard2 wrote:I didn't mind the squats, I didn't care for the normal models, but that huge train thing in Epic was kinda cool.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Squats.. we're back baby.

Hmm.. need to add a Veteran Squad of noble and honour filled virtue, yet a little short in stature to my Imperial Guard.

did not really understand the strength of the hatred towards these little guys

Trench-Raider wrote:As one of the most notorious Squat fans, I have to weigh in here. I just now noticed this long running thread, so much of what I normally point out in Squat threads has been pointed out by others already. But allow me a few points.

GW themselves caused alot of the hard feelings by the Squat partisans with the very foolish way they handled the removal of the race from the game. By quietly dropping the race with no explanation, wiriting them out of the fluff in a manner akin to Stalin removing purged political enemies from photos, and then showing outright hostility and dirision toward anyone who dared ask about them, GW caused alot of hard feelings that persist to this day. I have two minds about Jervis Johnson's famous "explanation" about the removal of the Squats. While it was nice to finally get a high level member of the studio staff to give a semi-official explanation, the whole post smacks of being a cop-out. Esentially, GW was too lazy to come up with a suitable Space Dwarf concept for 40k? Really? I don't buy it. I also find Johnson's repeating of some of the prevalant myths about the Squats (a joke race etc) annoying. But the bottom line is that the explanation was a half hearted attempt at damage controll that came years too late.

As someone else pointed out early, I'm a bit hopeful these days. With some of the rumors about a Space Dwarf type race as part of the next Tau codex, the return of an allies mechanism to 40k, and GW finally officially mentioning Squats (by that name) in the fluff I think it's POSSIBLE that we might see something in the next few years. It will probably be just a unit or two in the Tau book, but GW would do well to produce an article in White Dwarf with a few units as a new ally force for existing armies. But in the end, given GW's greter tendecy to not announce their future plans, it's anyone's guess.

As for me, I have about 200 Squat models, that take pride of place in my collection. Squats came very close to being my first army in 40k. But the local store I was buying my miniatures from in the 1989-90 period had more Ork models, so I went with them instead. I play my Squats on a regular basis and aside from a small handful of nasty comments by clueless kiddies, they are always a big hit when I trot them out. These days I tend to play my Squats as "counts as" Space Wolves. The higher than espected armour save aside the list is a good fit. The Wolves have a vaugely similar nordic background fluff, they can be configured as a nasty shooting army that is capable of close combat in a pinch, and have the bonus of being a very effective army on the table as well as being a good "fit". If by some crazy chance GW produces a new Space Dwarf type army I'll make the change to that, but until/if that occurs Space Wolves are the best "counts as" option.

Finally, two points addressing some things that others have said ealier in the thread...

Several times folks on this thread have repeated that tired old myth that Squats were modeled on "drunken miget bikers". Jervis Johnson's regretable spreading of that myth aside, it's demonstratably not true and I wish people would educate themselves rather than just repeat rumors. Take a look at this link: http://www.collecting-citadel-miniatures.com/wiki/index.php/Squat_-_Collectors_Guide It catalogs the entire Squat range. Going over it you will see that there are few if any "drunken biker" inspired figures. Most Squat models are in fact a melding of RT era Imperial Guard with fantasy Dwarf concepts.

Finally..

did not really understand the strength of the hatred towards these little guys

I do.
In my experience, much of it is a "clueless kiddie" thing rather than any rational reason. Don't get me wrong. Some people have some valid reasons for disliking Squats. Some folks just don't like fantasy Dwarves in any form and others are in favor of the move of GW to try to distance 40k from it's "fantasy in space" roots and thus opoose any further inclusion of fantasy elements. But these seem to be in the minority and most Squat haters seem to be younger players who have never seen a real Squat model in person (let alone an army of them) who repeat the tired old myths and talking points. They tend to be koolaid drinking GW fanboys who's "ranionale" is something along the lines of "well, GW removed them for a reason, so they must suck!". Others fall into that annoying mindset of "new is always good and old is always bad". It's akin to the common teenage mindset when it comes to music that if somethig was not produced in the last six months, it's "old" and thus automaticly not any good. Of course that sort of player is going to dislike Squats.

TR

You sir are amazing.
Out of all the things ive seen on dakka dakka you laid the facts down dude! One thing however I noticed is the "new is better" well many punks I see think this and I cant say a single thing or else they go into a chirs-chan mindset. To tell you the truth on the people who like squats, I always thought that the younger 40k players liked them more than the older 40k vets.
Watch this guys video and then see why I aprove of how you laid this all down, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61Hx2HICtbA

Trench-Raider wrote:In my experience, much of it is a "clueless kiddie" thing rather than any rational reason. Don't get me wrong. Some people have some valid reasons for disliking Squats. Some folks just don't like fantasy Dwarves in any form and others are in favor of the move of GW to try to distance 40k from it's "fantasy in space" roots and thus opoose any further inclusion of fantasy elements. But these seem to be in the minority and most Squat haters seem to be younger players who have never seen a real Squat model in person (let alone an army of them) who repeat the tired old myths and talking points. They tend to be koolaid drinking GW fanboys who's "ranionale" is something along the lines of "well, GW removed them for a reason, so they must suck!". Others fall into that annoying mindset of "new is always good and old is always bad". It's akin to the common teenage mindset when it comes to music that if somethig was not produced in the last six months, it's "old" and thus automaticly not any good. Of course that sort of player is going to dislike Squats.

Trench wrote:Some folks just don't like fantasy Dwarves in any form and others are in favor of the move of GW to try to distance 40k from it's "fantasy in space" roots and thus opoose any further inclusion of fantasy elements...

Jefffar wrote:I think that the mention of the squats as an existent race of abhumans in the new rule book, while not a herald of their return to playable status does at least retcon out the retcon that removed them from the universe as anything other than Tyranid turds.

Trench-Raider wrote:
http://www.collecting-citadel-miniatures.com/wiki/index.php/Squat_-_Collectors_Guide It catalogs the entire Squat range. Going over it you
TR

htj wrote:

Trench wrote:Some folks just don't like fantasy Dwarves in any form and others are in favor of the move of GW to try to distance 40k from it's "fantasy in space" roots and thus opoose any further inclusion of fantasy elements...

This is close to why I don't like Squats. I've not got a problem with the 'Science Fantasy' aspects of 40K, and am a big fan of the various flavours of Eldar, but I never liked the Squats. I think the thing that bugged me about them was that they were too reminiscent of fantasy dwarves. If they were a bit more subtle I would probably have gone for them, but they were just to heavy-handedly bearded, mine dwelling dwarves in space. That's how they felt to me, anyway, and that's why I don't miss them.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Well I'll be damned..Mainly it's since Jervis "I never change my damn mind" Johnson never goes back when he pushes something out and gets groups to ban people for even mentioning squats because he was pissed that people were still discussing the things. And considering his last few words in the Ogre FAQ he still seemed the same since than.

Jefffar wrote:I think that the mention of the squats as an existent race of abhumans in the new rule book, while not a herald of their return to playable status does at least retcon out the retcon that removed them from the universe as anything other than Tyranid turds.

Pacific wrote:Look back at the other comments further back in the thread and above mate. In a nutshell - Squats suited the Rogue Trader design ethic, and fit as well nowadays as any other miniature line you care to mention from the late 80's (i.e. they don't). Any reincarnation of them would be sure to distance itself firmly away from the cigar chewing, bike riding and beer swilling space truckers that were the original Squats. I have no doubt that the new ones would be a lot less humourous Look at the 'Forge Father' background produced by Mantic, I think something similar would be closer to the mark.

I find that most fans that were around at the time felt that they worked no better or no worse than most of the other Rogue Trader race concepts, in that they were merely the embryonic stage of a greater development that came later. I think a lot of fans simply felt aggrieved that the Squats didn't receive the same treatment that some of the other races did, and so they look like relics by today's standards (as indeed they are).

htj wrote:

Trench wrote:Some folks just don't like fantasy Dwarves in any form and others are in favor of the move of GW to try to distance 40k from it's "fantasy in space" roots and thus opoose any further inclusion of fantasy elements...

This is close to why I don't like Squats. I've not got a problem with the 'Science Fantasy' aspects of 40K, and am a big fan of the various flavours of Eldar, but I never liked the Squats. I think the thing that bugged me about them was that they were too reminiscent of fantasy dwarves. If they were a bit more subtle I would probably have gone for them, but they were just to heavy-handedly bearded, mine dwelling dwarves in space. That's how they felt to me, anyway, and that's why I don't miss them.

aka_mythos wrote:

htj wrote:

Trench wrote:Some folks just don't like fantasy Dwarves in any form and others are in favor of the move of GW to try to distance 40k from it's "fantasy in space" roots and thus opoose any further inclusion of fantasy elements...

This is close to why I don't like Squats. I've not got a problem with the 'Science Fantasy' aspects of 40K, and am a big fan of the various flavours of Eldar, but I never liked the Squats. I think the thing that bugged me about them was that they were too reminiscent of fantasy dwarves. If they were a bit more subtle I would probably have gone for them, but they were just to heavy-handedly bearded, mine dwelling dwarves in space. That's how they felt to me, anyway, and that's why I don't miss them.

I like fantasy, but I like Sci-fi more. 40k for me has been the happy marriage of the two. I think its funny that you'd want them a bit more "subtle" when there is nothing "subtle" about Eldar and Orks. Those two also have the benefit of tweeking, that Squats never really had. If you tweek squats you have the demiurge. Back in the day, all the factions had relatively identical equipment, Squats never even recieved the benefit of having their bolters become Shootas or their lasguns become Shuriken catapults. Squats as they were abandoned were just a different version of the Imperium. I want to see the inclusion of the space dwarfs concept in 40k, whether its just as a single abhuman unit in the IG or in the form of Demiurge auxiliaries for the Tau.

some - like the eldar - arguably are as good as the newer sculpts

There was however another high-up person who reputedly said that "there will be no Squats while I work at GW", so perhaps you are mistaking words from that person rather than Jervis?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

There was however another high-up person who reputedly said that "there will be no Squats while I work at GW", so perhaps you are mistaking words from that person rather than Jervis?

I might be mistaking a few things to Jervis, considering at times I still have the belief that it was his design, from words with Gav as to why we have split chaos in fantasy/40k.

Might just be bitter at someone who hasn't done anything, but than again it's GW, you can barely at times figure out who does what with all the secrecy.

Roadkill Zombie wrote:
Yeah, that would be Gordon Davidson I believe. If I remember properly he's the one that had a serious hatred of anything with the word Squat attached to it.

Roadkill Zombie wrote:GW says Squats don't do the Dwarf Archetype justice in the 40k universe as squat bikers apparently turn them into a joke...yet the Grey Knights have savant monkey men with lascannons for fingers...named jokaero...

shad0wen wrote:from what i remember reading they are under a new name and 2-3 brotherhoods have joined the tau empire. i know we have them in battle fleet gothic ^_^

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Or maybe they are just Squats of a different type. The "Chaos dwarves" to the "Normal"

MrMoustaffa wrote:So, slightly off topic, but if a person was interested in making a counts as IG army full of squats, would there be any of the original squat minis worth getting to put in it? I've seen a few that look like they would fit (for example, there's this commander guy I keep seeing who looks cool) but I've not been able to get good pics of any other models. Reason I ask is there's a guy at my store who has a massive squat army and I could probably get just about any of them from him if I asked. I really like the idea behind the squats and since we have so many IG players at my store already, having a squat army would be an awesome way to stand out from the others.

Also, is there a good place to look up squat history and fluff, like a squat wiki? I've tried some like lexicanum but they always have the same, generic article in them...

MrMoustaffa wrote:So, slightly off topic, but if a person was interested in making a counts as IG army full of squats, would there be any of the original squat minis worth getting to put in it? I've seen a few that look like they would fit (for example, there's this commander guy I keep seeing who looks cool) but I've not been able to get good pics of any other models. Reason I ask is there's a guy at my store who has a massive squat army and I could probably get just about any of them from him if I asked. I really like the idea behind the squats and since we have so many IG players at my store already, having a squat army would be an awesome way to stand out from the others.

Also, is there a good place to look up squat history and fluff, like a squat wiki? I've tried some like lexicanum but they always have the same, generic article in them...

MrMoustaffa wrote:So, slightly off topic, but if a person was interested in making a counts as IG army full of squats, would there be any of the original squat minis worth getting to put in it? I've seen a few that look like they would fit (for example, there's this commander guy I keep seeing who looks cool) but I've not been able to get good pics of any other models. Reason I ask is there's a guy at my store who has a massive squat army and I could probably get just about any of them from him if I asked. I really like the idea behind the squats and since we have so many IG players at my store already, having a squat army would be an awesome way to stand out from the others.

Also, is there a good place to look up squat history and fluff, like a squat wiki? I've tried some like lexicanum but they always have the same, generic article in them...

Trench-Raider wrote:

You sir are amazing.
Out of all the things ive seen on dakka dakka you laid the facts down dude! One thing however I noticed is the "new is better" well many punks I see think this and I cant say a single thing or else they go into a chirs-chan mindset. To tell you the truth on the people who like squats, I always thought that the younger 40k players liked them more than the older 40k vets.
Watch this guys video and then see why I aprove of how you laid this all down, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61Hx2HICtbA

Well, I don't know about "amazing", but I do pride myself on pulling no punches. Not suffering fools very well is both an asset and a flaw of mine. But thanks for the kind words in any event.

As to the clown in the video you posted, he's clearly a complete idiot. I stopped watching and wrote him off as cluelessly repeating things he had heard rather than actually being informed at about the 2:30 mark when he started in with the "short drunken biker" myth.
He also has a potty mouth, which also goes a long way toward harming his credibility...

TR