I actually like going from Imperial Guards into Astra Militarum. But the others have been complete misses for me. However, as a long time fan of the franchise, some of the new names don't really stick to me. Furthermore, there are a ton of other Sci-fi stuff out there with much cooler names and GW is still naming like this is the 80s.

Eldar into Aeldari.

Craftworld into Asuryani.

Dark Eldar into Drukhari.

Tau into T'au.

And now Tyranids into Forces of the Hive Mind. Please no. We already have Forces of Chaos. Why not just call them Tyranids? Genestealer Cults are Tyranids as well. Don't argue they are half-some-other-race because it is the purpose of the Tyranids to absorb and assimilate genetics of other races, so the Genestealers Cultists are fully Tyranids just as Reapers are no longer Squiqs. If you are going to call them Forces of the Hive Mind, then bring back the Zoats.



I was looking at a tournament result analysis and the name Forces of the Hive Mind stuck out like a sore thumb.

Blame Chapterhouse Studios, or rather GW's complete panic in the wake of Chapterhouse Studios.

I agree that the old names were better. Imperial Guard especially sounds better than Astra Militarum.

But what the feth was wrong with the 80s?

What was wrong with the old names was that on nearly every point of IP infringement that was ruled against GW in court was do with the fact that they can't claim IP on generic fantastical labels.

It's why you no longer have Orks, but Orruks.

It's why you no longer have Elves, but Aelves.

Imperial Guard, Eldar and Space Marines are not original names which is why steadily over the years they have been rebranded under a clearer IP and their own creation.

The tournament could've called them anything, but they went with 'Forces of the Hive Mind' to indicate it wasn't a pure Tyranid army, but a Tyranid/GSC/maybe-Guard Soup list. It's not an official name in the sense of AM etc.

Curious: why the change back to Space Marines with their codex 2.0 from Adeptus Astartes in their 1.0 codex?

Personally I like the change and wish we could go back to all the original names.

I like them, but GW introduced them in a hamfisted way (why is that a running theme of 8th..?) and it was down to Black Library to explain it properly.

Drukarhi and Asuryani are no different from what they did in WHFB decades before (Druchii and Asur for Dark Elves and High Elves). They are simply what the races call themselves. The old names are not invalid by any means.

Same with Orruks/Ogors. I dislike both names but both are explained as a simple bastardised version of the original spelling due to many thousands of years between the OG ones and now. Exactly like with our own words, which drop and add letters and spellings all the time over different epochs.

As for Astra Militarum, not a fan either but GW has been doing it for a while. AM is simply their High Gothic name. IG is Low Gothic, just like Carcharadons Astra/Space Sharks or Vlka Fenrika/Space Wolves. Both names are interchangeable.

I was in total shock when I couldn't find gak in Age of Sigmar. Where are simply Orks? They are gone now? W40k version was more of a hit than a miss to me, because those names existed for a long time prior of this. I think the biggest issue is that these names were introduced so suddenly, if these names would had existed at least edition previously, people would get to know those names and it would be easier to shift them. Also, I'm not sure if GW still refers them in their old names. Legally their creation primary names have to be what they are now, but each thing can be called in dozen other less known names for sake of consumers.

I won't use the new names. I feel like a 12 year old if I have to order any of the units or talk about about them. It's Guard, Space Marines, Eldar Dark Eldar, etc, etc. At the time no one remembers the old names, I'll drift off into memory, like the road warrior as my time will have passed.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
I agree that the old names were better. Imperial Guard especially sounds better than Astra Militarum.

But what the feth was wrong with the 80s?

It was a racist time? At least here. though I doubt it was much different in other parts of the world.

Only problem I have with some of the names is adding unneeded vowels. Going from elf to aelf is just silly.

At least the Astra Whatever gave us this meme. Silver lining?

Karol wrote:
Only problem I have with some of the names is adding unneeded vowels. Going from elf to aelf is just silly.

It's not just adding an a to the front, but a ™ to the end.

I think a lot of the backlash against the new naming convention is just hollow nostalgia and largely unjustified. Almost all of the old names are still used by players, GW staff, and in-universe characters when talking in normal conversation.

We all know why they're changing, and it's not surprising or unreasonable that GW want to protect their IP. Maybe you prefer Eldar to Asuryani. That's your valid opinion and you can call them whatever you like. But you're not forced to use the new term. Imperial characters in Black Library novels and other fluff still call them the Eldar. They still call Space Marines Space Marines.

As for the Tyranids example, this isn't even a name change. It's just a new term (more a title really - no new words there) for the Tyranids and Genestealer Cults collectively. Now that they have two/three factions they can use in the same army, it makes sense for there to exist a term for their combined forces.

I do not really mind to much, as far as the game goes I think there is far worse offenders within it.
I do not even mind using them within context of the game for the most part even if they are so jarring at times.
It does not help that you then suddenly have, space wolves, blood angels, dark angels mixed in with all this high fantasy names.

Off topic, I need to read up on the soaps coming back. It’s got to be a huge departure from current tyranid stuff right.

bibotot wrote:
I actually like going from Imperial Guards into Astra Militarum. But the others have been complete misses for me. However, as a long time fan of the franchise, some of the new names don't really stick to me. Furthermore, there are a ton of other Sci-fi stuff out there with much cooler names and GW is still naming like this is the 80s.

Eldar into Aeldari.

Craftworld into Asuryani.

Dark Eldar into Drukhari.

Tau into T'au.

And now Tyranids into Forces of the Hive Mind. Please no. We already have Forces of Chaos. Why not just call them Tyranids? Genestealer Cults are Tyranids as well. Don't argue they are half-some-other-race because it is the purpose of the Tyranids to absorb and assimilate genetics of other races, so the Genestealers Cultists are fully Tyranids just as Reapers are no longer Squiqs. If you are going to call them Forces of the Hive Mind, then bring back the Zoats.



I was looking at a tournament result analysis and the name Forces of the Hive Mind stuck out like a sore thumb.

I dont think thats official GW language. It was the tournament expressing a term for "tyranid soup".

"You're not forced to" continued to be a terrible and meaningless counter-argument.

And it's not just nostalgia. There are so many terrible triple-barrelled Adjective Nounverb names out there, and the list keeps growing, even for very old units that have been renamed:

Grimghast Reapers
Deadwalker Zombies
Dreadblade Harrows
Myrmourn Banshees
Glaivewraith Stalkers
Pusgoyle Blightlords
Feculent Gnarlmaw
Sloppity Bilepiper
Spoilpox Scrivener
Dankhold Troggboss
Aleguzzler Gargant
Icefall Yhetees
Fellwater Troggoths
Icebrow Hunter
Drakesworn Templar
Melusai Blood Stalkers
Grundstok Thunderers
Onager Dunecrawler
Skorpius Dunerider
Sicarian Ruststalkers
Plagueburst Crawler
Foetid Bloat-Drone
Foul Blightspawn
Biologus Putrifier
Myphitic Blight-Hauler
Haarken Worldclaimer

So many of these could just be shortened and sound ten times better. Bilepiper over "Sloppity Bilepiper". Blighthauler over Myphitic Blight-Hauler. Grimghast over "Grimghast Reapers", and so on.

Icefall Yhetees

I am sorry but that name

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
"You're not forced to" continued to be a terrible and meaningless counter-argument.

And it's not just nostalgia. There are so many terrible triple-barrelled Adjective Nounverb names out there, and the list keeps growing, even for very old units that have been renamed:

Grimghast Reapers
Deadwalker Zombies
Dreadblade Harrows
Myrmourn Banshees
Glaivewraith Stalkers
Pusgoyle Blightlords
Feculent Gnarlmaw
Sloppity Bilepiper
Spoilpox Scrivener
Dankhold Troggboss
Aleguzzler Gargant
Icefall Yhetees
Fellwater Troggoths
Icebrow Hunter
Drakesworn Templar
Melusai Blood Stalkers
Grundstok Thunderers
Onager Dunecrawler
Skorpius Dunerider
Sicarian Ruststalkers
Plagueburst Crawler
Foetid Bloat-Drone
Foul Blightspawn
Biologus Putrifier
Myphitic Blight-Hauler
Haarken Worldclaimer

So many of these could just be shortened and sound ten times better. Bilepiper over "Sloppity Bilepiper". Blighthauler over Myphitic Blight-Hauler. Grimghast over "Grimghast Reapers", and so on.

This.

I'm pretty sure other companies manage to protect their IP without making it look like their unit names were badly translated from a language that doesn't exist.

Some of those I could see as names with titles.
Something like Myrmorn Zombies are a little clunky.

But I could see them expanding that with more zombies down the line. Using the name as both a name and a type like other games do.

But something like Feculent Gnarlmaw is a bit weird, since seems like you could just call it a Gnarlmaw. I would need to look that one up lol

Yeah all these stupid names that GW is coming up these days

Ghazghkull Thraka
Wazdakka Gutsmek
Robute Guilliman
Lord Solar Macharius
Castellan Creed
Adsrubael Vect
Anrakyr the Traveler
Abbadon the Despoiler
Tzeentch
Slaanesh

uuuuuugh shorten it UP gw you can protect your precious IP without coming up with these stupid long unpronounceable names!

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah all these stupid names that GW is coming up these days

Ghazghkull Thraka
Wazdakka Gutsmek
Robute Guilliman
Lord Solar Macharius
Castellan Creed
Adsrubael Vect
Anrakyr the Traveler
Abbadon the Despoiler
Tzeentch
Slaanesh

uuuuuugh shorten it UP gw you can protect your precious IP without coming up with these stupid long unpronounceable names!

Yes, because proper names and titles are comparable to descriptive names. Or do you go about calling trees and animals by their latin names?

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah all these stupid names that GW is coming up these days

Ghazghkull Thraka
Wazdakka Gutsmek
Robute Guilliman
Lord Solar Macharius
Castellan Creed
Adsrubael Vect
Anrakyr the Traveler
Abbadon the Despoiler
Tzeentch
Slaanesh

uuuuuugh shorten it UP gw you can protect your precious IP without coming up with these stupid long unpronounceable names!

Oooh, and you missed Adeptus Astartes and Adeptus Mechanicus! Exalted.

I really don't have a problem with the new names. They're used interchangeably with the old ones we all know via nostalgia, and it's pretty clear that, in many cases, the names are just their own native language being used. Forces of the Hive Mind, IMO, whilst not even a GW term, is more accurate than just Tyranids - because Tyranids and Genestealer Cults aren't the same thing, but do fight for the same cause. It's a better descriptor, when they're being taken together. And complaining about T'au for adding in an apostrophe? It's hardly the end of the world.

It's just for trademarking's sake, but it's not like Eldar and Dark Eldar are gone from history. They're just used as informal terms - which, arguably, makes more sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sim-Life wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
uuuuuugh shorten it UP gw you can protect your precious IP without coming up with these stupid long unpronounceable names!

Yes, because proper names and titles are comparable to descriptive names. Or do you go about calling trees and animals by their latin names?

We do with dinosaurs. Or shall I be referring to old Rexy as Tyrant Lizard King these days?

And, as I added, how about Adeptus Astartes, or Adeptus Mechanicus?

 Sim-Life wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah all these stupid names that GW is coming up these days

Ghazghkull Thraka
Wazdakka Gutsmek
Robute Guilliman
Lord Solar Macharius
Castellan Creed
Adsrubael Vect
Anrakyr the Traveler
Abbadon the Despoiler
Tzeentch
Slaanesh

uuuuuugh shorten it UP gw you can protect your precious IP without coming up with these stupid long unpronounceable names!

Yes, because proper names and titles are comparable to descriptive names. Or do you go about calling trees and animals by their latin names?

Proper names and...titles? Titles like "Morghast" or "Grundstock" or proper names like "Haarkon Worldclaimer"? We should give a pass to those? What is the functional difference between "Abbadon the Despoiler" and "Haarkon Worldclaimer"?

the_scotsman wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah all these stupid names that GW is coming up these days

Ghazghkull Thraka
Wazdakka Gutsmek
Robute Guilliman
Lord Solar Macharius
Castellan Creed
Adsrubael Vect
Anrakyr the Traveler
Abbadon the Despoiler
Tzeentch
Slaanesh

uuuuuugh shorten it UP gw you can protect your precious IP without coming up with these stupid long unpronounceable names!

Yes, because proper names and titles are comparable to descriptive names. Or do you go about calling trees and animals by their latin names?

Proper names and...titles? Titles like "Morghast" or "Grundstock" or proper names like "Haarkon Worldclaimer"? We should give a pass to those? What is the functional difference between "Abbadon the Despoiler" and "Haarkon Worldclaimer"?

It depends if you're referring to him by his name or as "Warmaster of Chaos". Or if you're in AoS land "Warmaesterogis Of The Chaeotic Aermies"

The fact that his name is Worldclaimer is the dumb but, but well done on missing the point with what I said and just including a bunch of named characters rather than unit names.

Where are simply Orks?

There never were any Orks in Fantasy, that's a silly made up name for 40kids. They were Orcs, thank you, proper english spelling.

I'd be quite happy to see the Space Wolves take their novellised names.
Vylca Fenryka-Folk of Fenris
Jarls-Wolf Lords
Huskjarls-Wolf Guard
Skjald-Any priest

At least it'll take some of the pain out of a Space wolf player moving his Wolf Lord with Wolf Claws, the Wolf Belt of Russ and Thunderwolf mount while covered by the Stormwolf that's carrying his Wolf Guard and Wolf Scouts.

Cronch wrote:

Where are simply Orks?

There never were any Orks in Fantasy, that's a silly made up name for 40kids. They were Orcs, thank you, proper english spelling.

Now they are the Orruk Warclans. Since it needed to be a bit silly again.

Some I am fine with after all most of the older names are the inuniverse names for the races

So Dwarfs is the human name for the Dawi ( it was amusing when Gotrek was called out on this) and the "Eldar" and "Dark Eldar is the same for the Asuryani Drukhari.and both are better than "Space Elves"....

However completely agree with the Wolfy Wolf Wolf names and namy of the unit names

Apple fox wrote:

Cronch wrote:

Where are simply Orks?

There never were any Orks in Fantasy, that's a silly made up name for 40kids. They were Orcs, thank you, proper english spelling.

Now they are the Orruk Warclans. Since it needed to be a bit silly again.

And they're made up of Ironjawz and Bonesplitterz, I am well aware. Just poking fun at the fact that Ork is actually the "silly, copyrighted" version of Orc to start with

They'll definitely always be 'Space Elves'. All you 'Eldar' player were just too late to the party!

Karol wrote:
Only problem I have with some of the names is adding unneeded vowels. Going from elf to aelf is just silly.

You mean going back to, since ælf is the Old English word that elf is based on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elf#Etymology

 vipoid wrote:
This.

I'm pretty sure other companies manage to protect their IP without making it look like their unit names were badly translated from a language that doesn't exist.

What other miniatures company has a far-reaching IP like 40K? King of War can do generic unit names all day, because no one is going to copy their miniatures.

Here are some fine units from Warmachine

Iron Fang Uhlans
Dawnguard Destors
Exemplar Vengers
Bloodgorgers
Blighted Trollkin Marauders
Mechanithralls
Flameguard Cleansers
Precursor Knights
Tempest Blazers
Flame Bringers
Also better watch out for....the Deliverers.

Dang new fangled names.

Its Imperial Amry!
Crazy rebranding Imperial guard my patoot

Apple fox wrote:

But something like Feculent Gnarlmaw is a bit weird, since seems like you could just call it a Gnarlmaw. I would need to look that one up lol

Maybe they'll be releasing a Skankulous Gnarlmaw at some point, and need the distinction...

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
This.

I'm pretty sure other companies manage to protect their IP without making it look like their unit names were badly translated from a language that doesn't exist.

What other miniatures company has a far-reaching IP like 40K? King of War can do generic unit names all day, because no one is going to copy their miniatures.

Here are some fine units from Warmachine

Iron Fang Uhlans
Dawnguard Destors
Exemplar Vengers
Bloodgorgers
Blighted Trollkin Marauders
Mechanithralls
Flameguard Cleansers
Precursor Knights
Tempest Blazers
Flame Bringers
Also better watch out for....the Deliverers.

I would just like to point out that some of those are used not as singular units.
Iron Fang Uhlans are a iron fang unit.
Just as Iron Fang pikemen, Iron Fang Kovnik and Iron Fang Kovnik Markov.
Black Dragons are also a Iron Fang unit.
As well Kapitan Sofya Skirova being both an Iron Fang and effecting them

I do not play khador tho, so I could be wrong there. I just looked it up.

Names can serve a very important reason, I think for the most part people complained at the sorta just made up to sound cool names with little substance.
Stuff like all the wolf stuff in space wolves, fine on there own. But can get a little silly fast, and often obserd when you look at it.

Deliverers are a fire bomb user from a highly religiosity faction that use fire to cleanse the unholy and is also a unit name I actually kinda like it, but it may be the more silly of those names.
But considering I think that list was not really that bad as a whole.
Internals probably have weirder names, but I not sure they are really naming there beasties in world. And maybe just named on what soldiers run away from.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
This.

I'm pretty sure other companies manage to protect their IP without making it look like their unit names were badly translated from a language that doesn't exist.

What other miniatures company has a far-reaching IP like 40K? King of War can do generic unit names all day, because no one is going to copy their miniatures.

Here are some fine units from Warmachine

Iron Fang Uhlans
Dawnguard Destors
Exemplar Vengers
Bloodgorgers
Blighted Trollkin Marauders
Mechanithralls
Flameguard Cleansers
Precursor Knights
Tempest Blazers
Flame Bringers
Also better watch out for....the Deliverers.

I don't think those are making the point you seem to think they are.

literally the only reason people are upset about Aeldari or Orruks is because they grew up with Orcs and Eldar. Objectively both naming conventions are just as childish/cheap fantasy sounding. Goshdarn newfangled cars, in my days we called them horseless carriages!

The other game I play is infinity. If only Games Workshop would adopt the un-confusing naming conventions present in this game.

My faction has access to the following units:

Corregidor Jaguars
TOMCATS
WILDCATS
HELLCATS
Tunguska Interventors
Bakunin Moderators
Mobile Brigada
REAKTON Zonds
STEMPLER Zonds
SALYUT Zonds
Bakunin Uberfallkommando

Luckily, my friend plays a different faction, with even easier to remember, shorter, and more intuitive names like

Kuang Shi
Zhanshi
Zhanying
Daoying
Daofei
Hac Tao
Hsien
Hulang

Cronch wrote:
literally the only reason people are upset about Aeldari or Orruks is because they grew up with Orcs and Eldar. Objectively both naming conventions are just as childish/cheap fantasy sounding. Goshdarn newfangled cars, in my days we called them horseless carriages!

I have zero issue with Orruks, my entire point was with Warclans. Since War is a bit redundant, unless Orruks have Cookclans as well or a washclan.
It’s mostly just saying the same thing but longer, and I do not Think that is a Orruk thing. Or anyone other when talking about them.

Cronch wrote:
literally the only reason people are upset about Aeldari or Orruks is because they grew up with Orcs and Eldar. Objectively both naming conventions are just as childish/cheap fantasy sounding. Goshdarn newfangled cars, in my days we called them horseless carriages!

It could be because it makes the game more confusing to talk about with new people if we all have to learn and remember multiple names for everything.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Cronch wrote:
literally the only reason people are upset about Aeldari or Orruks is because they grew up with Orcs and Eldar. Objectively both naming conventions are just as childish/cheap fantasy sounding. Goshdarn newfangled cars, in my days we called them horseless carriages!

It could be because it makes the game more confusing to talk about with new people if we all have to learn and remember multiple names for everything.

As opposed to such obvious things as striking scorpions, ogryns, tervigons, redemptor dreadnoughts, grey hunters, blood claws....let's be honest, learning that space elves are aeldari, and space terminators are necron hardly seems like a mental feat.

Cronch wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Cronch wrote:
literally the only reason people are upset about Aeldari or Orruks is because they grew up with Orcs and Eldar. Objectively both naming conventions are just as childish/cheap fantasy sounding. Goshdarn newfangled cars, in my days we called them horseless carriages!

It could be because it makes the game more confusing to talk about with new people if we all have to learn and remember multiple names for everything.

As opposed to such obvious things as striking scorpions, ogryns, tervigons, redemptor dreadnoughts, grey hunters, blood claws....let's be honest, learning that space elves are aeldari, and space terminators are necron hardly seems like a mental feat.

Whether or not it makes things much harder is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that it makes things harder than it would be if they didn't.

Or if they tried collapsing identical profiles instead of making more of them. Do storm bolters, combi-bolters, and twin bolters really need to have different names and weapons entries?

the_scotsman wrote:
The other game I play is infinity. If only Games Workshop would adopt the un-confusing naming conventions present in this game.

My faction has access to the following units:

Corregidor Jaguars
TOMCATS
WILDCATS
HELLCATS
Tunguska Interventors
Bakunin Moderators
Mobile Brigada
REAKTON Zonds
STEMPLER Zonds
SALYUT Zonds
Bakunin Uberfallkommando

Luckily, my friend plays a different faction, with even easier to remember, shorter, and more intuitive names like

Kuang Shi
Zhanshi
Zhanying
Daoying
Daofei
Hac Tao
Hsien
Hulang

Literally no one ever said Infinity was simple. You're deliberately being obtuse about it.

Okay then riddle me this. Which name tells you most about what the model is in terms of theme
a) stone troll
b) dankhold troggoth

Not that I expect you to answer honestly of course.

the_scotsman wrote:
...Luckily, my friend plays a different faction, with even easier to remember, shorter, and more intuitive names like

Kuang Shi
Zhanshi
Zhanying
Daoying
Daofei
Hac Tao
Hsien
Hulang

Wait, you find Yu Jing unit names intuitive? I'm curious what your thought process is in seeing, oh, I don't know, Hulang Shocktroopers and figuring out from that they're pseudo-HI close-quarters that carry D-charges and can score as specialists.

(I'm trying to figure out what it means in Chinese but I can't see the characters on the unit patch clearly, the best translation I've figured out from the pinyin is "lake wolf", which doesn't seem to help.)

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Wait, you find Yu Jing unit names intuitive? I'm curious what your thought process is in seeing, oh, I don't know, Hulang Shocktroopers and figuring out from that they're pseudo-HI close-quarters that carry D-charges and can score as specialists.

(I'm trying to figure out what it means in Chinese but I can't see the characters on the unit patch clearly, the best translation I've figured out from the pinyin is "lake wolf", which doesn't seem to help.)

I gather that they're being intensely sarcastic.

But I'm 100% with Sim-Life. When I started with AoS I found that my Ogre army can now take 'Troggoths'. I had no idea what a Troggoth is and had to look it up- lo and behold, it's a renamed troll.

Or Space Marine class names. Tactical, Devastator, and Assault are pretty easy to keep track of. But I regularly hear Intercessor, Inceptor, and Interceptor all used interchangeably.

The simpler names can lean on the audience's presumed understanding of fantasy tropes or basic English words. You know what 'assault' means. You probably don't know what 'intercessor' means without consulting a dictionary.

And so many of the compound names are unnecessary. Ad Mech have an Ironstrider and a Dragoon, you don't need to call them Ironstrider Ballistarius or Sydonian Dragoon to tell them apart. Death Guard have Bloat Drones, Blightspawn, Putrifiers, and Blight Haulers- the Foetid, Foul, Biologis, and Myphitic prefixes don't add semantic meaning. Name + Title (Abaddon The Despoiler) is fine. Class + Variant (Skorpius Dunerider) is fine. Name + Name (Biologis Putrifier) is redundant. Sloppity Bilepiper is syllable salad.

 Sim-Life wrote:

Okay then riddle me this. Which name tells you most about what the model is in terms of theme
a) stone troll
b) dankhold troggoth

Not that I expect you to answer honestly of course.

Both are pretty bad in terms of theme. If every unit needs to be named after what they do, then the Dankhold Troggoth ought to be renamed to "Mushroom-Eating Underground Troll with hammer"

GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able, so they can't be generic fantasy concepts.

 Thadin wrote:
GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able

They really don't. They choose to; for the dubious reason of forcing third-party manufacturers to then call their stand-in models 'stone trolls' instead of being able to use the copyrighted term 'dankhold troggoth'.

 Thadin wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

Okay then riddle me this. Which name tells you most about what the model is in terms of theme
a) stone troll
b) dankhold troggoth

Not that I expect you to answer honestly of course.

Both are pretty bad in terms of theme. If every unit needs to be named after what they do, then the Dankhold Troggoth ought to be renamed to "Mushroom-Eating Underground Troll with hammer"

GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able, so they can't be generic fantasy concepts.

How is stone troll a bad name? Explain it to me how a troll with stone elements would otherwise named better?

Also, browsing models I realised that stone trolls are actually called rockgut troggoths now. So theres that.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Thadin wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

Okay then riddle me this. Which name tells you most about what the model is in terms of theme
a) stone troll
b) dankhold troggoth

Not that I expect you to answer honestly of course.

Both are pretty bad in terms of theme. If every unit needs to be named after what they do, then the Dankhold Troggoth ought to be renamed to "Mushroom-Eating Underground Troll with hammer"

GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able, so they can't be generic fantasy concepts.

How is stone troll a bad name? Explain it to me how a troll with stone elements would otherwise named better?

It makes me think of LOTR and that sunlight will kill it, neither one of which is true.

 catbarf wrote:

 Thadin wrote:
GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able

They really don't. They choose to; for the dubious reason of forcing third-party manufacturers to then call their stand-in models 'stone trolls' instead of being able to use the copyrighted term 'dankhold troggoth'.

Round-about way of agreeing with me. Third-party stores can make their generic stand-in trolls, and call them Stone Trolls because that generic of a name can't be claimed by any one company. Meanwhile, GW can copyright the non-generic name they attatch to their model, and nobody else can use it.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
It makes me think of LOTR and that sunlight will kill it, neither one of which is true.

And another Stone Troll from the Witcher, where it's a hunched-over creature covered in stones, that eats stones.

 Thadin wrote:
...GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able, so they can't be generic fantasy concepts.

Why?

bibotot wrote:
I actually like going from Imperial Guards into Astra Militarum.

To be fair, just because they are re-branding for the sake of copy-write doesn't mean you need to change how you think of them in your head. Just think of them how you want to

 Thadin wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
It makes me think of LOTR and that sunlight will kill it, neither one of which is true.

And another Stone Troll from the Witcher, where it's a hunched-over creature covered in stones, that eats stones.

Oh wow my quote made your banner

 catbarf wrote:

 Thadin wrote:
GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able

They really don't. They choose to; for the dubious reason of forcing third-party manufacturers to then call their stand-in models 'stone trolls' instead of being able to use the copyrighted term 'dankhold troggoth'.

Do you think it ever occurred to GW that the 3rd party copies are now more intuitively named than their own models?

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Thadin wrote:
...GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able, so they can't be generic fantasy concepts.

Why?

I'm a new customer to GW. I just saw my buddy playing and some models looked cool.

I wish to buy some Dankhold Troggoth.

I google the name. Now at this point I would get only GW links. If a third party were able to use the same name their links would show, too. Now I would have to hunt to find out that Stone Trolls from company X are a suitable stand-in.

I see Dankhold Troggoth images - reinforcing what I want to purchase. I see Dankhold Troggoth videos. What would happen if it was called Stone Troll? Well then I'd see some of the old GW Stone Trolls, a bunch of other trolls, and Tolkein stuff.

Distinct names aren't just smart for copyright. They're smart, because they carve out the internet in a way that focuses the customer on GW product.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Thadin wrote:
...GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able, so they can't be generic fantasy concepts.

Why?

I'm a new customer to GW. I just saw my buddy playing and some models looked cool.

I wish to buy some Dankhold Troggoth.

I google the name.

This is a great point, on the flip side though, some of the names are so complicated that its hard to know how they are spelled, or what they are properly called if someone has just told you what the model is called.

"I saw my friend playing with a Dancold Toggoth"



Clicking the "did you mean" gets same results.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Thadin wrote:
...GW needs to assign names to their models that can be copyright-able, so they can't be generic fantasy concepts.

Why?

I'm a new customer to GW. I just saw my buddy playing and some models looked cool.

I wish to buy some Dankhold Troggoth.

I google the name. Now at this point I would get only GW links. If a third party were able to use the same name their links would show, too. Now I would have to hunt to find out that Stone Trolls from company X are a suitable stand-in.

I see Dankhold Troggoth images - reinforcing what I want to purchase. I see Dankhold Troggoth videos. What would happen if it was called Stone Troll? Well then I'd see some of the old GW Stone Trolls, a bunch of other trolls, and Tolkein stuff.

Distinct names aren't just smart for copyright. They're smart, because they carve out the internet in a way that focuses the customer on GW product.

I think you're being quite optimistic with regard to potential new players remembering not just the name of a faction but also the very awkward and unintuitive name of a specific unit.

It seems more likely they'd be thinking to themselves "What were those units called? They were big, troll things. 'Dark Trolls', maybe?"



And like magic Games Workshop and its stupid names are suddenly nowhere to be seen.

Sometimes there are advantages to calling a spade a spade, rather than a Malefesicic Splodulator (TM).

^Naming products can be aggravatingly complicated.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Okay then riddle me this. Which name tells you most about what the model is in terms of theme
a) stone troll
b) dankhold troggoth

Not that I expect you to answer honestly of course.

People seem to think that listing off names will somehow prove their point, but as you said, they're missing the point or being intentionally dishonest/obtuse about it.

I mean I even stated how these sorts of names could be fixed:

ME! wrote:So many of these could just be shortened and sound ten times better. Bilepiper over "Sloppity Bilepiper". Blighthauler over Myphitic Blight-Hauler. Grimghast over "Grimghast Reapers", and so on.

So GW can keep their copywritten IP stuff without needing to turn everything into an Adjective Nounverb bit of word salad.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I wish to buy some Dankhold Troggoth.

I google the name. Now at this point I would get only GW links. If a third party were able to use the same name their links would show, too. Now I would have to hunt to find out that Stone Trolls from company X are a suitable stand-in.

I see Dankhold Troggoth images - reinforcing what I want to purchase. I see Dankhold Troggoth videos.

And it could have just as easily been a Troggoth, and a Troggboss, and Grimgast, and a Gnarlmaw, and a Blight-Hauler, or the Bilepiper, and so on. We don't need all the extra extraneous words to achieve what you've set out above.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What would happen if it was called Stone Troll? Well then I'd see some of the old GW Stone Trolls, a bunch of other trolls, and Tolkein stuff.

gak, I dunno... I'd put "Warhammer" in front of Stone Troll because I'm not an idiot and know how search engines work.

But simply you can remember just "Troggoth" and still get to where you need to be.

Even Warhammer mushroom troll gets you somewhere close.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rippy wrote:

This is a great point, on the flip side though, some of the names are so complicated that its hard to know how they are spelled, or what they are properly called if someone has just told you what the model is called.

"I saw my friend playing with a Dancold Toggoth"

But this results in the user adjusting their search. They won't likely just give up at this point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
7Shit, I dunno... I'd put "Warhammer" in front of Stone Troll because I'm not an idiot and know how search engines work.

You may not be, but when dealing with SEO and getting customers dialed you never presume knowledge. You're also dealing with a lot of younger customers. There's more room for error and losing customers with Stone Troll than there is with Troggoth.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
But simply you can remember just "Troggoth" and still get to where you need to be.

Even Warhammer mushroom troll gets you somewhere close.

But if they are already searching by brand/company-name then surely it doesn't matter anyway?

If they are set on buying stuff from Games Workshop then GW could just as easily have called the thing a Mushroom Troll to begin with.

Meanwhile, it someone isn't set on buying something from GW (possibly because they saw GW's prices ), then they can probably figure out some appropriate searches to look at alternatives from other companies.

Users won't always preface their searches with brand.

e.g. Customers search for "tires near me" far more than "michelin tires near me"

Protesting against faction renaming is, ultimately, futile. It’ll continue regardless of anyone’s wishes, preferences, skill or lack of internet search-fu, or any other concocted reasons.

But the OP’s off the mark on some bits.

Craftworlds is still used. On the cover of the Codex, for one.

Tyranids is still used. Calling Genestealer Cult the same thing as Tyranids is wrong, and in this case the more expansive “Forces...” tag works quite well. It’s not a GW-mandated thing as far as I’m aware, and as others have noted. It’s text they use inside the Codexes that some tourney runners have borrowed to better describe “Tyranid soup” (or allies to use the pre-8th term). It fits pretty well tbh and is more descriptive than “Tyranids”, suggesting as that does an army drawn purely from Codex: Tyranids.

Drukhari is probably actually a better term than “Dark Eldar”, which was never particularly clever or imaginative.

T’au is just silly. That one I’ll give ya.

 Ghaz wrote:

Karol wrote:
Only problem I have with some of the names is adding unneeded vowels. Going from elf to aelf is just silly.

You mean going back to, since ælf is the Old English word that elf is based on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elf#Etymology

I am not following you here. isn't old english just germanic dialect?

Karol wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

Karol wrote:
Only problem I have with some of the names is adding unneeded vowels. Going from elf to aelf is just silly.

You mean going back to, since ælf is the Old English word that elf is based on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elf#Etymology

I am not following you here. isn't old english just germanic dialect?

It's a crossbreed.
Germanic and Latin.

Reading these names aloud just made me laugh so hard. I Think it's a secret plot to make you sound like a crazy person when you talk of the game in mixed company. Maybe like our own version of secret language.

I think they are dumb, no matter how it is justified. I get they want to trademark it but if people are going to third party, they're going to third party regardless of what crazy names they give them.

Can we all agree that the Dankhold Trogorths must have some killer grass on hand ? I mean, it's in the name.

" Hey man, like, you got some of the good stuff Dankhold ?...yeah, far out man..lets just find a moldy stump and get our Torgorthes off..right on. "

 Ghaz wrote:

Karol wrote:
Only problem I have with some of the names is adding unneeded vowels. Going from elf to aelf is just silly.

You mean going back to, since ælf is the Old English word that elf is based on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elf#Etymology

If this is accurate, then it's doubly stupid of GWS to go with it. It sounds dumb, and as a generic word, is just as unprotectable as where they started.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Reading these names aloud just made me laugh so hard. I Think it's a secret plot to make you sound like a crazy person when you talk of the game in mixed company.

"Well, hello ladies. Wanna see my sloppity bilepiper?"

The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

Cronch wrote:
The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

I'm sorry to hurt them so, to think a name such as Dankhold Torgred or Sloppity Bilepiper is stupid, how dare I.

Though to be fair to your comment, I never said they couldn't get it, I said it sounds stupid. Though to add further it sounds more strange than it has to.

Is talking of a swamp troll any cooler than a danrkhold Trogladon, not really. However does talking about my amazing sloppity bilepiper make me feel like a dip more ? Yes, yes it does.

As fun as tossing a bunch of things together to make names that make me giggle is, at some point you gotta be like. Nah, that's fine I'll stick with the old one.

I mean if people think these new names are amazing, more power to them, I don't see how but I've found some people generally like everything regardless of how off the wall gobsmacking I find it.

As an idea, something I like to do, is keep remaking the name every time I say it, get it more and more out there. Like the sloppity bilepiper , why not change it up to slippery bellylicker, slobbery bagriddler, slappity slurplibber.

Why stop at the dumb GW names, make up your own ! Take conversion to the next level ! Never let your beloved Dankfiend Trogshanks go a day without a fresh new name. Forge the narrative.

I don't see why it couldn't have just been called "Bilepiper" that has a nice ring to it. The "Slopity" is just indulgent.

"Forces of the Hive Mind" makes sense to me though, I don't have a problem with it.

Cronch wrote:
The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

No, the problem is that the made up names sound like Joey from Friends hitting the thesaurus for his letter to the adoption agency.

Cronch wrote:
The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

If it suits their argument people will claim that their fictional people are barely functional humans who have no ability to act with independent thought, problem solving abilities or agency.

Woah, I just got knocked off my feet by the rush of air as the hyperbole train just took off from the station ! Did anyone say people couldn't figure things out or call fictional gamers barely functional ?

I mean I get hyperbole sells views but come on now. If people are going to say these names aren't over the top that isn't a hill I'd want to die on but I do love a good last stand.

I guess some people also love the classics like Bloodfists, Bloodstrike Missiles, Murderfang, etc, etc. I mean these were the Genesis of our current classics like every marine unit being a essor or some kind of another, Dankcrab Trigladees, Flibbery Bellyslappers. It wasn't an instant arrival but now that its on us, people can think it sucks.

No one has to use them or love them but lets not jump to conclusions I'd like to believe all of the game world is smart enough to know what the strange names mean, doesn't mean they'll like it when they do.

Accidentally double posted.

Damn I never realised I wanted to buy a flibbery bellyslapper until now, I 100% love that and want a model for it.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
"Forces of the Hive Mind" makes sense to me though, I don't have a problem with it.

The way they are using it, I totally agree. From this thread I thought they had totally renamed the Tyranid faction, which turned out to not be accurate at all.

How dare you all make fun of Mr. Bilepiper's given name!

Crispy78 wrote:

Cronch wrote:
The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

No, the problem is that the made up names sound like Joey from Friends hitting the thesaurus for his letter to the adoption agency.

It still wasn't explained how it's a problem beyond "me no like". Maybe I have a different perspective than some, as english is my 2nd language, but all the names, new or old, sound utterly silly. Space Wolf Blood Claw is not more dignified than a Dankhold Troggoth, and it's in no way more descriptive- it's not a wolf in a spacesuit (which would make 40k much better) with bloody claws, it's an underage kid on steroids with a chainsaw.
YOU know what it is because you're a long-time player. To a new person, a Land Raider is just as much random noise as a Repulsor.

 Sim-Life wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
The other game I play is infinity. If only Games Workshop would adopt the un-confusing naming conventions present in this game.

My faction has access to the following units:

Corregidor Jaguars
TOMCATS
WILDCATS
HELLCATS
Tunguska Interventors
Bakunin Moderators
Mobile Brigada
REAKTON Zonds
STEMPLER Zonds
SALYUT Zonds
Bakunin Uberfallkommando

Luckily, my friend plays a different faction, with even easier to remember, shorter, and more intuitive names like

Kuang Shi
Zhanshi
Zhanying
Daoying
Daofei
Hac Tao
Hsien
Hulang

Literally no one ever said Infinity was simple. You're deliberately being obtuse about it.

Okay then riddle me this. Which name tells you most about what the model is in terms of theme
a) stone troll
b) dankhold troggoth

Not that I expect you to answer honestly of course.

Well, I can actually test this one, having never seen the model in question.

Stone troll: Sounds like a rockman. Since troll usually means a guy is going to be deformed/ugly, I'm expecting a big nose or big "pete from mickey mouse" lips and jowels with bulldog teeth, and he's going to be made of rocks or at least have like big stones/crystals growing out of him. short legs, long arms, pot belly, weapon is either a club or just like a boulder.

Dankhold Troggoth: Dankhold sounds like an underground cave kingdom, and trog makes me think of troglodyte. the suffix "oth" usually means a thing is big, strong, brutish like a mammoth. So from this description he sounds like he's going to be a flesh thing instead of a guy made of rocks, his general theme is going to be "underground" and maybe he'll have like no eyes?

Now, let me google him.

So, I guess to answer your question, both names gave me an anticipation of one aspect of him. From Stone Troll I was able to predict his basic shape - big nose, pot belly, long arms, and a simple club weapon. But I was also kind of expecting him to be made of rocks at least partially, and I'd be more likely to expect him to have a "mountain" theme than a "mushroom" theme.

The only misconception I got out of Troggoth was the idea that he might have no eyes like a troglodyte, but he's got small eyes instead. Still got that he'd be a giant brute type dude, got that he'd be cave themed, and But it did hit his "cave theme" down a lot better. If you wanted a simple, generic name to describe this dude "Cave Troll" would probably be the best one. But from a branding perspective I totally understand why you'd go for the different name because you've got a lot of people who already envision what a cave troll looks like from LOTR/Harry Potter, and in the gaming space you've got Hordes with trolls as a main posterboy faction.

I'll definitely give you one thing: I'd never describe this dude as a Dankhold Troggoth in a game. I'd immediately shorten it to Trog or something. So ease of use for players is one serious advantage just calling it a "Troll" would have. But I would say it's a better name for getting people unfamiliar with the game interested.

On the flipside, though: Absolutely no unit in Infinity has any kind of intuitive understanding inherent in their name, even their full name. My starter box came with "Wildcats: Polyvalent Tactical Unit". What the feth is a polyvalent? Their role is...tactical unit? Are they gonna be cat themed somehow? (Spoiler alert: Not at all.)

Not having context on first viewing of a words use does not make for a bad name.

To take similar things, for me a troll is a small mean creature, so stone trolls I would expect to be maybe a dwarf sized creature.
The dankhold trogoth I have very little context for outside of other fantasy which are conflicting. So underground water creature of some kind.
Both of which in context of there world I think could be fine.

I know nothing about the dankhold trogoth, do they come from a dankhold kingdom or some such.

Spinning over to infinity, I think of lots of weapons a military tech that will have a technical name and a sorta Cool name for what ever reason. So within infinity context the names could be really good, or bad.
I think this is why people are more upset here with GW, so many come off more as the advertising team coming up with its heaps uniqueness than any real thought to its place in the worlds and context.

The reason the warmachine list was so flat is it looks like just pulling random things out to make fun off. Without really understanding it.

Cronch wrote:

Crispy78 wrote:

Cronch wrote:
The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

No, the problem is that the made up names sound like Joey from Friends hitting the thesaurus for his letter to the adoption agency.

It still wasn't explained how it's a problem beyond "me no like". Maybe I have a different perspective than some, as english is my 2nd language, but all the names, new or old, sound utterly silly. Space Wolf Blood Claw is not more dignified than a Dankhold Troggoth, and it's in no way more descriptive- it's not a wolf in a spacesuit (which would make 40k much better) with bloody claws, it's an underage kid on steroids with a chainsaw.
YOU know what it is because you're a long-time player. To a new person, a Land Raider is just as much random noise as a Repulsor.

I think you have a very wise point here, in that often the difference between silly names people dislike verses silly names people are OK with is simply how long that name has been around.

Apple fox wrote:
Not having context on first viewing of a words use does not make for a bad name.

To take similar things, for me a troll is a small mean creature, so stone trolls I would expect to be maybe a dwarf sized creature.
The dankhold trogoth I have very little context for outside of other fantasy which are conflicting. So underground water creature of some kind.
Both of which in context of there world I think could be fine.

I know nothing about the dankhold trogoth, do they come from a dankhold kingdom or some such.

Spinning over to infinity, I think of lots of weapons a military tech that will have a technical name and a sorta Cool name for what ever reason. So within infinity context the names could be really good, or bad.
I think this is why people are more upset here with GW, so many come off more as the advertising team coming up with its heaps uniqueness than any real thought to its place in the worlds and context.

The reason the warmachine list was so flat is it looks like just pulling random things out to make fun off. Without really understanding it.

Sure, I mean from a legal standpoint that is absolutely what they are doing: Making sure their product is unique. And that's absolutely what they're going for with Infinity, too - going hard on the idea that these are names that the relevant military uses to describe things, in their own language. And they do have meanings, like the chinese words all mean things that are relevant in chinese - a hsien I remember from one of our games is the word for one of those stone soldiers that they have hundreds of in the ancient emperor's tomb. That's cool. Infinity's company is also not designing the game for primarily an english speaking audience, so if they were they'd probably call them "Hsien Terracotta Soldiers" or something.

But to say that the name "Dankhold Troggoth" is undescriptive while "Stone Troll" is descriptive is just...kind of wrong. Like you said, "Troll" is a word with tons of different cultural connotations to it, and depending on what you're used to you could either be expecting a mischeivious ugly little santa claus elf or a big hulking Lord of the Rings brute.

And "stone" to me, usually means a fantasy creature that is either made of rocks or has some affinity with rocks. The model in question doesn't seem to have any kind of elemental rocky-ness except for the fact that he is holding a club with a rock in it. If he didn't have the mushrooms I'd guess he was some kind of sea-troll with the little barnacle things he's got on him honestly.

Meanwhile the word "Troggoth" while it is "a made up word" (like all words are...) has two specific parts with connotations I can figure out. Trog almost always means something that lives underground and oth is a suffix that usually gives you an idea of either a big hulking powerful creature or some kind of barbarian like a Visigoth. Dankhold being some kind of cave kingdom or stronghold makes immediate intuitive sense.

So it's some kind of hulking troglodyte creature that lives in a cave kingdom.

Yep, checks out!

This thread reminds me of the "mfw when americans call..." copypasta. I'll hide it behind spoilers.

the_scotsman wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
Not having context on first viewing of a words use does not make for a bad name.

To take similar things, for me a troll is a small mean creature, so stone trolls I would expect to be maybe a dwarf sized creature.
The dankhold trogoth I have very little context for outside of other fantasy which are conflicting. So underground water creature of some kind.
Both of which in context of there world I think could be fine.

I know nothing about the dankhold trogoth, do they come from a dankhold kingdom or some such.

Spinning over to infinity, I think of lots of weapons a military tech that will have a technical name and a sorta Cool name for what ever reason. So within infinity context the names could be really good, or bad.
I think this is why people are more upset here with GW, so many come off more as the advertising team coming up with its heaps uniqueness than any real thought to its place in the worlds and context.

The reason the warmachine list was so flat is it looks like just pulling random things out to make fun off. Without really understanding it.

Sure, I mean from a legal standpoint that is absolutely what they are doing: Making sure their product is unique. And that's absolutely what they're going for with Infinity, too - going hard on the idea that these are names that the relevant military uses to describe things, in their own language. And they do have meanings, like the chinese words all mean things that are relevant in chinese - a hsien I remember from one of our games is the word for one of those stone soldiers that they have hundreds of in the ancient emperor's tomb. That's cool. Infinity's company is also not designing the game for primarily an english speaking audience, so if they were they'd probably call them "Hsien Terracotta Soldiers" or something.

But to say that the name "Dankhold Troggoth" is undescriptive while "Stone Troll" is descriptive is just...kind of wrong. Like you said, "Troll" is a word with tons of different cultural connotations to it, and depending on what you're used to you could either be expecting a mischeivious ugly little santa claus elf or a big hulking Lord of the Rings brute.

And "stone" to me, usually means a fantasy creature that is either made of rocks or has some affinity with rocks. The model in question doesn't seem to have any kind of elemental rocky-ness except for the fact that he is holding a club with a rock in it. If he didn't have the mushrooms I'd guess he was some kind of sea-troll with the little barnacle things he's got on him honestly.

Meanwhile the word "Troggoth" while it is "a made up word" (like all words are...) has two specific parts with connotations I can figure out. Trog almost always means something that lives underground and oth is a suffix that usually gives you an idea of either a big hulking powerful creature or some kind of barbarian like a Visigoth. Dankhold being some kind of cave kingdom or stronghold makes immediate intuitive sense.

So it's some kind of hulking troglodyte creature that lives in a cave kingdom.

Yep, checks out!

I do not think trogoth was non descriptive, unless you are referring to what Sim-life said before.

Trog I associate with water, and oth means nothing to me. I cannot even think of any other words other than mammoth and do not know the word well enough. So dankhold trog is more watery with the dank part. Otherwise trog are stone like beings.

Trolls often work with rocks, so stone troll.
I also said that I think both in there context they are both probably fine. And not really what a lot of people thinking off when this subject come up, but can still be annoying with everything else.

The wolf bits in space wolves being done to death I think is prime annoying to listen about :p

But from a legal standpoint, it’s only slightly better than the stone troll. Dankhold is unremarkable and troggoth is just the extra G and Oth added to Trog used in other places. Hardly great on its own. Probably the word Warhammer added to both. You may even get away With a Dankhold Trog model, but probably safe on the Dank Trog and refer to Warcraft for inspiration.

We are probably not in disagreement on this two examples really.

Back in fifth edition when I played space wolves I created my HQ model specifically to have the most wolf possible on one model.

He was Wulfrick Wolfington, wolf lord of the wolf on a wolf with wolf claws wearing a wolftooth necklace, wulfenstone accompanied by wolves.

the_scotsman wrote:
Back in fifth edition when I played space wolves I created my HQ model specifically to have the most wolf possible on one model.

He was Wulfrick Wolfington, wolf lord of the wolf on a wolf with wolf claws wearing a wolftooth necklace, wulfenstone accompanied by wolves.

Its funny when players do it, not as much when it’s a professional team trying to sell me a world where they intend me to take them serious.
But even jokes wear thin. But that is not really so much about this thread topic

the_scotsman wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
The other game I play is infinity. If only Games Workshop would adopt the un-confusing naming conventions present in this game.

My faction has access to the following units:

Corregidor Jaguars
TOMCATS
WILDCATS
HELLCATS
Tunguska Interventors
Bakunin Moderators
Mobile Brigada
REAKTON Zonds
STEMPLER Zonds
SALYUT Zonds
Bakunin Uberfallkommando

Luckily, my friend plays a different faction, with even easier to remember, shorter, and more intuitive names like

Kuang Shi
Zhanshi
Zhanying
Daoying
Daofei
Hac Tao
Hsien
Hulang

Literally no one ever said Infinity was simple. You're deliberately being obtuse about it.

Okay then riddle me this. Which name tells you most about what the model is in terms of theme
a) stone troll
b) dankhold troggoth

Not that I expect you to answer honestly of course.

Well, I can actually test this one, having never seen the model in question.

Stone troll: Sounds like a rockman. Since troll usually means a guy is going to be deformed/ugly, I'm expecting a big nose or big "pete from mickey mouse" lips and jowels with bulldog teeth, and he's going to be made of rocks or at least have like big stones/crystals growing out of him. short legs, long arms, pot belly, weapon is either a club or just like a boulder.

Dankhold Troggoth: Dankhold sounds like an underground cave kingdom, and trog makes me think of troglodyte. the suffix "oth" usually means a thing is big, strong, brutish like a mammoth. So from this description he sounds like he's going to be a flesh thing instead of a guy made of rocks, his general theme is going to be "underground" and maybe he'll have like no eyes?

Now, let me google him.

So, I guess to answer your question, both names gave me an anticipation of one aspect of him. From Stone Troll I was able to predict his basic shape - big nose, pot belly, long arms, and a simple club weapon. But I was also kind of expecting him to be made of rocks at least partially, and I'd be more likely to expect him to have a "mountain" theme than a "mushroom" theme.

The only misconception I got out of Troggoth was the idea that he might have no eyes like a troglodyte, but he's got small eyes instead. Still got that he'd be a giant brute type dude, got that he'd be cave themed, and But it did hit his "cave theme" down a lot better. If you wanted a simple, generic name to describe this dude "Cave Troll" would probably be the best one. But from a branding perspective I totally understand why you'd go for the different name because you've got a lot of people who already envision what a cave troll looks like from LOTR/Harry Potter, and in the gaming space you've got Hordes with trolls as a main posterboy faction.

I'll definitely give you one thing: I'd never describe this dude as a Dankhold Troggoth in a game. I'd immediately shorten it to Trog or something. So ease of use for players is one serious advantage just calling it a "Troll" would have. But I would say it's a better name for getting people unfamiliar with the game interested.

On the flipside, though: Absolutely no unit in Infinity has any kind of intuitive understanding inherent in their name, even their full name. My starter box came with "Wildcats: Polyvalent Tactical Unit". What the feth is a polyvalent? Their role is...tactical unit? Are they gonna be cat themed somehow? (Spoiler alert: Not at all.)

Polyvalent means it has different functions. Wildcats is just a call sign, I would hazard.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Polyvalent means it has different functions. Wildcats is just a call sign, I would hazard.

Yea, but it is a really smarmy and unconventional way to state that. Like, look at my awesome thesaurus!

But ultimately I don't care (about Infinity or GW names or any of them), because I'm playing a game. People that get bent out of shape over names...just...I dunno. Worry about more important things?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Polyvalent means it has different functions. Wildcats is just a call sign, I would hazard.

Yea, but it is a really smarmy and unconventional way to state that. Like, look at my awesome thesaurus!

But ultimately I don't care (about Infinity or GW names or any of them), because I'm playing a game. People that get bent out of shape over names...just...I dunno. Worry about more important things?

As opposed to "look at the copyright friendly nonsense words I cobbled together from the butchered remains of words from a thesaurus?"
They both aren't great, but at least one doesn't make whoever is using those terms look like a loon. Its actually one of the reasons I can't get into AoS, because getting into AoS would mean using those names, and for some reason I get really embarrassed when using them seriously.

Then again, repeating the word wolf a bunch of times isn't really inspiring either, so I guess GW is just really bad at naming things.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
Back in fifth edition when I played space wolves I created my HQ model specifically to have the most wolf possible on one model.

He was Wulfrick Wolfington, wolf lord of the wolf on a wolf with wolf claws wearing a wolftooth necklace, wulfenstone accompanied by wolves.

I hope you fielded him with thunderwolves, wolf guard, wolf scouts and wulfen, just to complete the ensemble


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Drukhari is probably actually a better term than “Dark Eldar”, which was never particularly clever or imaginative.

I fail to see how naming an entire faction after a 61 year old American actor and comedian is better.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:


As opposed to "look at the copyright friendly nonsense words I cobbled together from the butchered remains of words from a thesaurus?"
They both aren't great, but at least one doesn't make whoever is using those terms look like a loon. Its actually one of the reasons I can't get into AoS, because getting into AoS would mean using those names, and for some reason I get really embarrassed when using them seriously.

Then again, repeating the word wolf a bunch of times isn't really inspiring either, so I guess GW is just really bad at naming things.

Yea, i'm not particularly fond of either end of the names thing. It just doesn't matter to me. The troggoth i'll call a troll or a trog or whatever. A slaughterpriest is a priest. A bloodsecrator *shudders* is just a banner.

But really the AoS stuff people hold up is all the early silly Khorne stuff. I don't particularly have issue with "Mortek Shield-Corps" or "Kavalos Deathriders" or "Mortisan Boneshaper" all of which get referenced by their "surname".

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Polyvalent means it has different functions. Wildcats is just a call sign, I would hazard.

Yea, but it is a really smarmy and unconventional way to state that. Like, look at my awesome thesaurus!

But ultimately I don't care (about Infinity or GW names or any of them), because I'm playing a game. People that get bent out of shape over names...just...I dunno. Worry about more important things?

As opposed to "look at the copyright friendly nonsense words I cobbled together from the butchered remains of words from a thesaurus?"
They both aren't great, but at least one doesn't make whoever is using those terms look like a loon. Its actually one of the reasons I can't get into AoS, because getting into AoS would mean using those names, and for some reason I get really embarrassed when using them seriously.

Then again, repeating the word wolf a bunch of times isn't really inspiring either, so I guess GW is just really bad at naming things.

I haven't had any real problem with the faction I've been playing in AOS.

I've got Namarti Thralls and Reavers - perfectly reasonable. Namarti is a nonsense word, it's the thing they're called, and Thralls tells me they're slaves while Reavers tells me they're some kind of raider type thing.

Akhelion Guards, again, no issue with it. Akhelions are like the nobles, and they ride on creatures like knights while the Namarti are sort of a slave underclass. Cool, fine.

The monsters are called Leviadons, Morsaar eels and Alopexes. All pretty cool words that sound like the thing they're describing, particularly if you know that allopex is the latin word for shark.

The characters are called Akhelion Kings, Isharann Tidecasters, Isharann Soulrenders and Isharann Soulscryers.

"Eiodolon of Mathlann" is the only thing that is kinda weird, but it's a proper name and I guess it comes from old fantasy because he's an echo of the dead Elf sea god sort of akin to an Avatar of Khaine in 40k.

So you've got three totally made-up elf words, Akhelion, Namarti and Isharann, which all correspond to different castes within this fantasy society, and then you've got mostly normal descriptive roles and names. King, Reavers, Thralls, Guards, Tidecasters, Soulrenders, Soulscryers. All of those pretty immediately tell you what the thing does and what it's about. I don't feel any sillier using an Isharann Tidecaster than I do an Eldar Farseer.

 NurglesR0T wrote:
What was wrong with the old names was that on nearly every point of IP infringement that was ruled against GW in court was do with the fact that they can't claim IP on generic fantastical labels.

It's why you no longer have Orks, but Orruks.

It's why you no longer have Elves, but Aelves.

Imperial Guard, Eldar and Space Marines are not original names which is why steadily over the years they have been rebranded under a clearer IP and their own creation.

Or they could just, like, make really good orks (and orcs)
for really good universally inclusive backgrounds (cuz the Old World really was, and 40k was this in space, turned on its head)
using really smartly designed rules that afford play at different levels of sophistication and at different scales,
with different degrees of realism according to player preference.

In so doing, sure, other companies might profit,
and a healthy, flourishing community of artists and writers, sculptors and painters,
never mind hobbyists and well, small business owners and independent retailers, brush manufacturers and so on,
would, well, be healthy and flourish.
And all would look to GW as a beacon, Gw's the Cadillac of ork minis,
and aspire someday understand their source of genius,
rather than spend increasing amounts of time oscillating between disappointment and disdain for the callous ineptiude as fattened shareholders effectively trip product development teams in the stampede for mo monay.....

No argument from me there.

The IP overhaul was an overreaction that probably was a result of hysteria between GW's legal counsel and Kirby.

The other option (IMO the better one) would have been to update several kits and start including several options (none of this let's include only one chaincannon per havocs box nonsense) to give their player base the incentive to not want to refer to third party sellers.

That coupled with the revival of an official bitz store will all but remove the need to look elsewhere. You'd still have some people interested in other model ranges but you'd definitely cut down a vast majority.

 NurglesR0T wrote:
havocs box nonsense) to give their player base the incentive to not want to refer to third party sellers.

The CHS debacle really was a "Be careful what you wish for!" situation for the players.

We wanted GW to have a kits everything that had rules. And so they did just that... by cutting the rules for things that didn't have kits. Not the outcome we wanted.

 NurglesR0T wrote:
That coupled with the revival of an official bitz store will all but remove the need to look elsewhere. You'd still have some people interested in other model ranges but you'd definitely cut down a vast majority.

The previous bitz store made sense when everything was metal, rather than on sprues, and even then it was shaky from a financial perspective as you'd need to keep all the parts you make in inventory at all times. That costs a lot. I lament the loss of their bitz service, but I also completely understand why it had to go.

Cronch wrote:
The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

It is very daunting jumping in to 40k, let alone in to miniature games. Figuring our how to hobby, let alone how to build armies, what is available etc. When you have 100 weird names on top of that to try and remember its not very fun. I think that's the main point.
Not that its impossible for new people to get in to it, just its a lot harder when everything has a stupid name (rather than "Space Marine Troops").

 Rippy wrote:

Cronch wrote:
The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

It is very daunting jumping in to 40k, let alone in to miniature games. Figuring our how to hobby, let alone how to build armies, what is available etc. When you have 100 weird names on top of that to try and remember its not very fun. I think that's the main point.
Not that its impossible for new people to get in to it, just its a lot harder when everything has a stupid name (rather than "Space Marine Troops").

Further to this, take Stormcast Eternals - below is a list of their main units. Now as someone new to AoS, or even someone familiar but new to SCE - just how identifiable are these units from the names? (Hint, some are made up... but which?? )

Retributors
Sequitors
Vexitors
Evocators
Judicators
Fulminators
Zephitors
Decimators
Concussors
Protectors
Immolators
Liberators
Tempestors
Desolators

I know that over time you become familiar with the common units etc, but to be honest in my circle of AoS players some SCE players don't even refer to them as their proper names. eg. "These hammer guys are charging"

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The CHS debacle really was a "Be careful what you wish for!" situation for the players.

We wanted GW to have a kits everything that had rules. And so they did just that... by cutting the rules for things that didn't have kits. Not the outcome we wanted.

Truly, it was the Monkey's Paw of our generation.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

Cronch wrote:
The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

It is very daunting jumping in to 40k, let alone in to miniature games. Figuring our how to hobby, let alone how to build armies, what is available etc. When you have 100 weird names on top of that to try and remember its not very fun. I think that's the main point.
Not that its impossible for new people to get in to it, just its a lot harder when everything has a stupid name (rather than "Space Marine Troops").

Further to this, take Stormcast Eternals - below is a list of their main units. Now as someone new to AoS, or even someone familiar but new to SCE - just how identifiable are these units from the names? (Hint, some are made up... but which?? )

Retributors
Sequitors
Vexitors
Evocators
Judicators
Fulminators
Zephitors
Decimators
Concussors
Protectors
Immolators
Liberators
Tempestors
Desolators

I know that over time you become familiar with the common units etc, but to be honest in my circle of AoS players some SCE players don't even refer to them as their proper names. eg. "These hammer guys are charging"

The storm cast are the worst for names I think, as a whole army is there a worse example GW put out.

Apple fox wrote:
...The storm cast are the worst for names I think, as a whole army is there a worse example GW put out.

Primaris Marines. Stormcast at least start with different letters, but someone at GW decided naming two units "Inceptors" and "Intercessors" that had nothing to do with each other was a good idea.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
...The storm cast are the worst for names I think, as a whole army is there a worse example GW put out.

Primaris Marines. Stormcast at least start with different letters, but someone at GW decided naming two units "Inceptors" and "Intercessors" that had nothing to do with each other was a good idea.

infiltrators and Incursors
I forgot half of these exist

I play marines and i get some of these units all mixed around still.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
That coupled with the revival of an official bitz store will all but remove the need to look elsewhere. You'd still have some people interested in other model ranges but you'd definitely cut down a vast majority.

The previous bitz store made sense when everything was metal, rather than on sprues, and even then it was shaky from a financial perspective as you'd need to keep all the parts you make in inventory at all times. That costs a lot. I lament the loss of their bitz service, but I also completely understand why it had to go.

the problem is not the material, but how the Sprues are set up

As an example, Perry Miniatures, Mantic or Warlord Games have no problem to sell single Sprues with the special parts on it.
Because they can be made individually as there is a Command Sprue, Horse Sprue, Weapon Sprue

GW did the same, it was possible to buy a Land Raider or Predator Weapon Sprue, or Command Sprue.

It became a problem for GW as they upgraded and re-designed their process to be more efficient.
Now they don't have different Sprues that can be made individually but 1 unit box is just 1 Sprue (cut in half or smaller to fit in the Box) with the bits all over it.
So there is no point to offer customers the buy the single Command Sprue because it is identical to the the full unit box.

 Rippy wrote:

Cronch wrote:
The main takeway from this thread is that a lot of people think very poorly of potential gamers' intelligence. Poor drooling babes will be confused by made up names, as opposed to other made up names.

It is very daunting jumping in to 40k, let alone in to miniature games. Figuring our how to hobby, let alone how to build armies, what is available etc. When you have 100 weird names on top of that to try and remember its not very fun. I think that's the main point.
Not that its impossible for new people to get in to it, just its a lot harder when everything has a stupid name (rather than "Space Marine Troops").

All of the names in 40k and AoS will be weird to someone who never played. An Ogryn is just as weird a name as Bloodthirster which is just as weird as a dreadnough (which is neither a boat nor sports unified caliber armaments).

This thread was certainly interesting to read.

I must confess, GW can call their models whatever the hell they want, they're no different than the hundreds of fantasy novels out there who come up with their own names for generic fantasy tropes. Naming the models for their place in their games world is fine. The models are no more cringy than the other hundreds of sci-fi and fantasy games/worlds out there.


By all means you can hate it, but I must confess this thread smacks more of 'I hate this, GW sucks!' than any form of constructive critisim? I mean most GW naming even back in the day is stupid. Terrorgeist? Oh some kind of scary ghost!.. Wait it's a god damn undead bat?

It may lack constructive criticism because it wasn't designed to give any ? This is literally just a throw away topic for people to voice how they hate Danklord Troglidians , or love them. GW won't ever read it, so constructive criticism would be pointless, voicing your opinion on likes or dislikes is almost entirely what a forum is for however.

Terrorgeist is also a pretty dumb name, and if you took a gander of the whole thread you'd see the current trash can list of names has been a work in progress and with AoS it just went up to 11.

Terrorgeist isn't even really that old of a product, in fact I think it was the last army book that vampire counts got that featured that model in it so its been heading towards this climax of silly sounding and just because something else is cring doesn't make a like word not solid cringe as well.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
It may lack constructive criticism because it wasn't designed to give any ? This is literally just a throw away topic for people to voice how they hate Danklord Troglidians , or love them. GW won't ever read it, so constructive criticism would be pointless, voicing your opinion on likes or dislikes is almost entirely what a forum is for however.

Terrorgeist is also a pretty dumb name, and if you took a gander of the whole thread you'd see the current trash can list of names has been a work in progress and with AoS it just went up to 11.

Terrorgeist isn't even really that old of a product, in fact I think it was the last army book that vampire counts got that featured that model in it so its been heading towards this climax of silly sounding and just because something else is cring doesn't make a like word not solid cringe as well.

True about the whole constructive part, but the names in GW have been silly since day one. AoS is no different to me, they're a bit more extravagantly named, but the whole setting is balls to the wall high fantasy, so the over the top names is par for the course!

It's fairly normal for GW model names to be confusing to non or new hobbyists, rebranding wont change that.

Cronch wrote:

All of the names in 40k and AoS will be weird to someone who never played. An Ogryn is just as weird a name as Bloodthirster which is just as weird as a dreadnough (which is neither a boat nor sports unified caliber armaments).

Good old times were local translation Studios were able to change those names
Cybot sounds better than Dreadnought, or Blood Damon instead of Bloodthirster

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Polyvalent means it has different functions. Wildcats is just a call sign, I would hazard.

Yea, but it is a really smarmy and unconventional way to state that. Like, look at my awesome thesaurus!

But ultimately I don't care (about Infinity or GW names or any of them), because I'm playing a game. People that get bent out of shape over names...just...I dunno. Worry about more important things?

“A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.”
“Not if you called them stench blossoms”
“Or crapweeds”
“I’d sure hate to get a dozen crapweeds for valentines. I’d rather have candy.”
“Not if you called them scumdrops”



Names are important.

Seraphim for Lizardmen is just inexcusable. Everything else, I have no desire to learn even more non-sensical names for units or factions that I’ve been familiar with for years.

Though I have to admit that Drukhari is slightly better than Dark Eldar (I had a similar reaction when D&D changed the Anti-Paladin to Blackguard - having a proper name instead of a not/anti-this).

They're called "Seraphon", not "Seraphim"...and the units themselves didn't change names.

You know that right?

 Kanluwen wrote:
They're called "Seraphon", not "Seraphim"...and the units themselves didn't change names.

You know that right?

But that is also annoying as Malekith's dragon is called Seraphon

 Kanluwen wrote:
They're called "Seraphon", not "Seraphim"...and the units themselves didn't change names.

You know that right?

That could easily have been auto-correct. Besides, what was wrong with Lizardmen? Aside from being generic and non-copyrightable...

We all know that's the main reason why this is being done, and not only does it suck but it's also pointless. As many 3rd party manufacturers have already proven - while GW may indeed own the copyright on, say, "Feculent Gnarlmaw", there's nothing stopping someone else making an "evil poo tree, compatible with popular 28mm tabletop games"...

 Kanluwen wrote:
They're called "Seraphon", not "Seraphim"...and the units themselves didn't change names.

You know that right?

Not having the book or GW’s site open in front of me, I chose the wrong word - and that’s part of the problem. It’s silly, inexcusable and needs to stop.

Crispy78 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
They're called "Seraphon", not "Seraphim"...and the units themselves didn't change names.

You know that right?

That could easily have been auto-correct. Besides, what was wrong with Lizardmen? Aside from being generic and non-copyrightable...

We all know that's the main reason why this is being done, and not only does it suck but it's also pointless. As many 3rd party manufacturers have already proven - while GW may indeed own the copyright on, say, "Feculent Gnarlmaw", there's nothing stopping someone else making an "evil poo tree, compatible with popular 28mm tabletop games"...

Hell, it's worse than that. There is nothing preventing them from using those copyrighted names when saying that their kits are compatible with GW kits.

So if a company made a kit that was designed to add onto a GW kit, they could legally say that their kit is compatible with X kit, using the copyrighted name.

All the copyright prevents is them using it in the name of their kit (and frankly, who would want to for some of these ). They are still free to use it when saying what their kit is compatible with.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
They're called "Seraphon", not "Seraphim"...and the units themselves didn't change names.

You know that right?

But that is also annoying as Malekith's dragon is called Seraphon

Let us not forget the tickle porn of the same name too that appeared when you image searched "Seraphon". Though, it appears in the years since, GW's Lizzies have overtaken that in Google image top search results.

Where's all the people complaining that Skaven are called Skaven, and not Ratmen?

As with most things, it seems to be a case of nostalgia. Give it some years/decades, and the natural growth of new players into the hobby, and Intercessors and Seraphon and Drukhari will all be normal, just like how Sternguard and Vindicators and Skaven and Astartes and Callidus/Eversor/Vindicare/Culexus all were.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Polyvalent means it has different functions. Wildcats is just a call sign, I would hazard.

Yea, but it is a really smarmy and unconventional way to state that. Like, look at my awesome thesaurus!

But ultimately I don't care (about Infinity or GW names or any of them), because I'm playing a game. People that get bent out of shape over names...just...I dunno. Worry about more important things?

“A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.”
“Not if you called them stench blossoms”
“Or crapweeds”
“I’d sure hate to get a dozen crapweeds for valentines. I’d rather have candy.”
“Not if you called them scumdrops”



Names are important.

You got a good chuckle out of me there.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Where's all the people complaining that Skaven are called Skaven, and not Ratmen?

As with most things, it seems to be a case of nostalgia. Give it some years/decades, and the natural growth of new players into the hobby, and Intercessors and Seraphon and Drukhari will all be normal, just like how Sternguard and Vindicators and Skaven and Astartes and Callidus/Eversor/Vindicare/Culexus all were.

Indeed most Skaven names are quite amusing - and I love Skaven

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Where's all the people complaining that Skaven are called Skaven, and not Ratmen?

As with most things, it seems to be a case of nostalgia. Give it some years/decades, and the natural growth of new players into the hobby, and Intercessors and Seraphon and Drukhari will all be normal, just like how Sternguard and Vindicators and Skaven and Astartes and Callidus/Eversor/Vindicare/Culexus all were.

I think this only apply to like half the issues presented here. There are some issues that I think if GW would take the effort to improve would probably benefit the settings a great deal.
They are selling both nostalgia and Cool and they should be mindful that cool very easy to break if they do not place it well into the world.

Edit, seriously what’s with auto correct this week. It feels like it is messing me up way more here >.<

the_scotsman 785337 10715113 wrote:

Akhelion Guards, again, no issue with it. Akhelions are like the nobles, and they ride on creatures like knights while the Namarti are sort of a slave underclass. Cool, fine.

The monsters are called Leviadons, Morsaar eels and Alopexes. All pretty cool words that sound like the thing they're describing, particularly if you know that allopex is the latin word for shark.

The characters are called Akhelion Kings, Isharann Tidecasters, Isharann Soulrenders and Isharann Soulscryers.

"Eiodolon of Mathlann" is the only thing that is kinda weird, but it's a proper name and I guess it comes from old fantasy because he's an echo of the dead Elf sea god sort of akin to an Avatar of Khaine in 40k.
.

The stuff doesn't sound very fake. My greek is horrible, but from the stuff my grandmother tought me. An eidolon is just a word english idol. Akhilion of Mazembri was a greek philosopher from Quo Vaids. Alopex is a, and this rightlfuly stupid, a fox in greek. A leviadon is a smaller baby version of leviathan.

Yeah, shark in latin is actually Pistris.

Now, there's Alopias, which is the genus that thresher sharks belong to, and that might have been what allopex is derived from.

An Eidolon is basically just the greek word for a phantom.

LoL, should have left him as alopias or alopiax, because alopex is an actual non sea animal. Well I guess people at GW hope that no one knows greek.

The thrall/slave warriors sound a bit like the half fish servent of Poseidon race. The females were called neraida, or something like that.

They really should have a triton though.

Karol wrote:
LoL, should have left him as alopias or alopiax, because alopex is an actual non sea animal. Well I guess people at GW hope that no one knows greek.

The thrall/slave warriors sound a bit like the half fish servent of Poseidon race. The females were called neraida, or something like that.

They really should have a triton though.

Curiously, nobody has a trident in the whole range as far as I know. A couple of the models typically the lead guys on the bigger creatures carry bidents, but the namarti use weaponry that looks like it's carved from bones.

At least, that's how I've got them painted up. I decided to ditch the white skinned gollum from lord of the rings look for blue skin, and gave them white tattoos based on maori tattoos I could find images of. Originally I wanted the weapons to look like scrimshaw, but there was no good way to get the scratchy art style to translate to paint, so I left them just bone.

This isn't the first time GW has just used a random greek word that didn't make sense for a unit. A bunch of the tyranid units are like that. A Haruspex is like a high priest/doctor, and Lictors are like, bodyguards for nobles and senators. Some make sense, like Carnifex, but most are just like...nothing. One of them was like "A nagging woman" - Hormagant I think.

Regardless, from a comprehension standpoint, there's not a whole lot that's confusing with my AOS stuff. Most of the nonsense names make some intuitive sense and all the rest make sense once you read the tiniest bit of the models' fluff.

Even the most basic space marine stuff isn't always particularly logical. Ask a rando to tell you which of the following is a transport, a battle tank, a hybrid tank/transport, a heavy transport, and a siege tank destroyer:

Rhino
Land Raider
Predator
Vindicator
Razorback

Or how about from this list?

Chimera
Taurox
Leman Russ
Malcador
Devil Dog

I mean, names from REALITY don't make sense either, in the same vein. Tell me which of the following are Tank Destroyers, Armored Transports, Self-Propelled Artillery, or Tanks simply from name alone:

USA:
Sherman
Priest
Slugger
Bradley

Germany:
Wasp
Bumblebee
Panther
Rhino

Israel:
Leopard
Chariot
Cruel

Russia:
Armata
Terminator
Armata (lol)

Termagant is a nagging woman.
Originally they were Termagaunts, it got changed to termagant for some reason.

Horma is derived from the greek hormon which means to assault.

There's an interesting article about tyranid etymologies on bell of lost souls

https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2014/01/dissecting-the-bugs-meaning-of-tyranid-names.html

I would copy and paste, but the formatting is terrible I can't be bothered tidying it up.

Doesn't it litteraly mean the woman that bites with words?

Karol wrote:
Doesn't it litteraly mean the woman that bites with words?

No, actually, the etymology is stranger than that.
Apparently it actually refers to a god that the Christians believed the Muslims worshipped, which was a violent, troublesome god, and as such it was used to describe someone (anyone, not just women) as ill-tempered.

It became a term for women during Shakespeare's time when people misinterpreted the traditional outfit of a termagant type character in a play (which was modeled after Arabic clothing, ie, a long gown and a turban) as being a woman's outfit, and remember back then only men were actors, even for women's roles. So the idea that a termagant was an ill-tempered woman caught on and it stuck.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Karol wrote:
Doesn't it litteraly mean the woman that bites with words?

No, actually, the etymology is stranger than that.
Apparently it actually refers to a god that the Christians believed the Muslims worshipped, which was a violent, troublesome god, and as such it was used to describe someone (anyone, not just women) as ill-tempered.

It became a term for women during Shakespeare's time when people misinterpreted the traditional outfit of a termagant type character in a play (which was modeled after Arabic clothing, ie, a long gown and a turban) as being a woman's outfit, and remember back then only men were actors, even for women's roles. So the idea that a termagant was an ill-tempered woman caught on and it stuck.

And later, in the 18th century, bones of dinosaurs were misinterpreted as the bones of muslims in the leadup to the 25th crusade. The advanced crossbow technology used against the crusaders in the first crusade was said to be satanic insect-firing laser guns, leading to the church propagandizing arabs as velociraptors holding insect-firing laser guns.

Which is exactly how GW designed the termagant!

the_scotsman wrote:

Curiously, nobody has a trident in the whole range as far as I know.

Aspect of the Sea has a trident in its build.

Worth mentioning as well that the Eidolon is less of the "Avatar of Khaine" situation and more of a tulpa/Gozer situation. Its form is because of the souls of deceased Idoneth are used to form it, and it takes the form of what they believed Mathlaan looked like. They took the stories that Teclis told them and ran with it.

A couple of the models typically the lead guys on the bigger creatures carry bidents, but the namarti use weaponry that looks like it's carved from bones.

Coral for the most part, with some metal, same as the howdahs on the Leviadons and the platforms that the Allopex have on their back for their riders.

It's weird that there are not too many tridents in the range, since they're supposed to be Aquaman style of 'symbol of royalty'.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Doesn't it litteraly mean the woman that bites with words?

No, actually, the etymology is stranger than that.
Apparently it actually refers to a god that the Christians believed the Muslims worshipped, which was a violent, troublesome god, and as such it was used to describe someone (anyone, not just women) as ill-tempered.

It became a term for women during Shakespeare's time when people misinterpreted the traditional outfit of a termagant type character in a play (which was modeled after Arabic clothing, ie, a long gown and a turban) as being a woman's outfit, and remember back then only men were actors, even for women's roles. So the idea that a termagant was an ill-tempered woman caught on and it stuck.

the_scotsman wrote:A Haruspex is like a high priest/doctor, and Lictors are like, bodyguards for nobles and senators.

A Haruspex was a priest who would read fortunes from entrails. As in, literally tear an animal apart and then read it like tea leaves. Seems kind of appropriate, if a bit of an artistic flourish, for what a Tyranid Haruspex does.

Lictors were bodyguards, yes, but their primary duty was to bear axes in public- symbolizing the power of the magistrate- and to clear space in crowds for the arrival of the magistrate. In other words, they went ahead to herald the arrival of their master.

I think Tyranid naming is generally rather clever. The variant names get a bit weird, (like using 'thrope' as a suffix- the original name is zo-anthrope, so chopping half the Greek suffix makes it nonsensical), and I'm curious as to who exactly thought a 'Hierodule' should be a big nasty monster, but by and large they're derived from real words that have semantically appropriate meaning. The use of Latin and Greek gives their naming a clinical, scientific feel, where you can picture the grunts using more colloquial names like 'hunter-slayer' and 'spook'.

They're not immediately intuitive, but they're evocative, memorable, have interesting real-world tie-ins if you do the research, and most importantly are short. If they were all NounNoun NounVerbers of 6+ syllables apiece, with mixtures of English and made-up words that maybe sound kinda like Latin, nobody would be able to remember them.

I think people get too hung up on the idea that names should intuitive convey meaning, when that's only one of the ways a good naming convention can be helpful.

Sometimes GW phones it in though when it comes to Tyranid names, with "Venomthrope" and "Pyrovore" always sticking out to me. Toxicrene ain't much better.

But I like how a lot of Tyranid names have meanings.

5th ed marked the start of the lack understanding in the naming.

Nid names were clever, but new authors took the syllables as discrete vocals and just started adding things to them, making non sensical portmanteaus.

"These things are all giraffe like, so they should be bikaffes, caraffes (lol actually a word), trainaffes and cupaffes. Geddit?"


I tend to think about names by imaging someone actually saying them in conversation. If it seems ridiculous then it probably is. Long made up names, repetitive flanderised names all sound ridiculous when a someone is trying to be serious.

Wolf guard wearing wolf claws riding thunderwolves is stupid.

It's one thing to have a couple of names and terms using repetitive terms, it's another entirely for everything to go that way

Hellebore wrote:

Wolf guard wearing wolf claws riding thunderwolves is stupid.

not as stupid as Murderfang and Helfrost

I think 5th was the last edition the writers were sane

Helfrost isn't that bad. It fits the Norse theme, considering how Hel is the Norse underworld, and unlike Hell its supposed to be very, very cold.

Murderfang is pretty terrible though. It feels puerile.

Land Raider and Rhino, Predator, these all align with worldly expectations.
I mean, a Land Raider is a go everywhere tank of a vehicle, even by association with contemporary vehicles.
Rhinos are hard charging tough and a lot of critters might ride on top of one, but otherwise without offence.
Predators are... well, predatory. Hunters. Big sharp guns.

These are all quite sensible.

Flying Investigitigitators? Trademarkable due its patent inanity, solely - this is the only thing reasonable about the new names.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Helfrost isn't that bad. It fits the Norse theme, considering how Hel is the Norse underworld, and unlike Hell its supposed to be very, very cold.

I know were it comes from, but having Frost Weapons was kind of fine, but going a step further and start explaining everything with Helfrost technology (Helfrost Guns, Helfrost Stasis) is a little bit too much

Leviadon is just GW's fetish for the word tooth. Nothing new, stegadon was first named in the 90s, and now we also have the bastiladon. I swear, if they could, GW would call all reptiles X+don. Lizarddon, coldonedon, the chapter of salamanderdons...

As for the allopex, i'm fairly sure they just looked up tresher sharks, which are Alopiidae, literally sea foxes. Which is also proof that IRL names can be dumb as heck too.

Rhinos are hard charging tough and a lot of critters might ride on top of one

Ah yes, rhinos, famous for being easy to ride

I remember being disappointed as a kid when I discovered that Sea Lions are not, in fact, underwater lions.
Still cute though.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Where's all the people complaining that Skaven are called Skaven, and not Ratmen?

As with most things, it seems to be a case of nostalgia. Give it some years/decades, and the natural growth of new players into the hobby, and Intercessors and Seraphon and Drukhari will all be normal, just like how Sternguard and Vindicators and Skaven and Astartes and Callidus/Eversor/Vindicare/Culexus all were.

So you'd want to see an exhaustive list of all the names everyone might find silly and or overly dumb ? Would that more meet with approval ? Seems like yet another post of someone trying to downplay valid dislikes by brushing it off with an all too often thrown out phrase to belittle a comment or opinion out of hand.

" You don't like GW rules ? That's toxic "

" You dislike this dumb name ? That's nostalgia "

" You don't want to put 40 dollars for one human sized model ? You're cheap "

What does it matter why someone doesn't like it ? Does it make someone feel good to so out of hand disregard their opinion and chuckle to themselves how superior their lack of nostalgia is on the topic ? Sometimes the old ways were better ways, I know its shocking to believe but not every new age marvel is actually a good thing and some come with bad side effects. That said, this isn't one of those things. It's an opinion based thing, so we can not see eye to eye but please let us stop at assuming that someone doesn't like it because " You have wrong think nostalgia eyes " I don't need nostalgia to tell me a sloppity bilepiper sounds moronic.

Skaven apparently is a portmanteau between Scabies and Craven, referring to the fact that they are both diseased and cowards.

That's one theory I read, anyway. Makes sense though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cronch wrote:
Leviadon is just GW's fetish for the word tooth. Nothing new, stegadon was first named in the 90s, and now we also have the bastiladon. I swear, if they could, GW would call all reptiles X+don. Lizarddon, coldonedon, the chapter of salamanderdons...

As for the allopex, i'm fairly sure they just looked up tresher sharks, which are Alopiidae, literally sea foxes. Which is also proof that IRL names can be dumb as heck too.

Rhinos are hard charging tough and a lot of critters might ride on top of one

Ah yes, rhinos, famous for being easy to ride

In theory, you can ride a rhino, like you can with an elephant. Its just its not very practical because its a large, heavy animal and trying to straddle it would be very painful. You'll need like a howdah or a special chair or something. Its really not worth the effort.

Cronch wrote:
Leviadon is just GW's fetish for the word tooth. Nothing new, stegadon was first named in the 90s, and now we also have the bastiladon. I swear, if they could, GW would call all reptiles X+don. Lizarddon, coldonedon, the chapter of salamanderdons...

As for the allopex, i'm fairly sure they just looked up tresher sharks, which are Alopiidae, literally sea foxes. Which is also proof that IRL names can be dumb as heck too.

Rhinos are hard charging tough and a lot of critters might ride on top of one

Ah yes, rhinos, famous for being easy to ride

But stegadons were actual animals .

Karol wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Leviadon is just GW's fetish for the word tooth. Nothing new, stegadon was first named in the 90s, and now we also have the bastiladon. I swear, if they could, GW would call all reptiles X+don. Lizarddon, coldonedon, the chapter of salamanderdons...

As for the allopex, i'm fairly sure they just looked up tresher sharks, which are Alopiidae, literally sea foxes. Which is also proof that IRL names can be dumb as heck too.

Rhinos are hard charging tough and a lot of critters might ride on top of one

Ah yes, rhinos, famous for being easy to ride

But stegadons were actual animals .

No, Stegasaurii were actual animals.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Karol wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Leviadon is just GW's fetish for the word tooth. Nothing new, stegadon was first named in the 90s, and now we also have the bastiladon. I swear, if they could, GW would call all reptiles X+don. Lizarddon, coldonedon, the chapter of salamanderdons...

As for the allopex, i'm fairly sure they just looked up tresher sharks, which are Alopiidae, literally sea foxes. Which is also proof that IRL names can be dumb as heck too.

Rhinos are hard charging tough and a lot of critters might ride on top of one

Ah yes, rhinos, famous for being easy to ride

But stegadons were actual animals .

No, Stegasaurii were actual animals.

The Stegodon was an animal, too. Was an elephant though, not a dinosaur.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Karol wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Leviadon is just GW's fetish for the word tooth. Nothing new, stegadon was first named in the 90s, and now we also have the bastiladon. I swear, if they could, GW would call all reptiles X+don. Lizarddon, coldonedon, the chapter of salamanderdons...

As for the allopex, i'm fairly sure they just looked up tresher sharks, which are Alopiidae, literally sea foxes. Which is also proof that IRL names can be dumb as heck too.

Rhinos are hard charging tough and a lot of critters might ride on top of one

Ah yes, rhinos, famous for being easy to ride

But stegadons were actual animals .

No, Stegasaurii were actual animals.

The Stegodon was an animal, too. Was an elephant though, not a dinosaur.

True, but they were stegodons, not stegadons

AngryAngel80 wrote:So you'd want to see an exhaustive list of all the names everyone might find silly and or overly dumb ? Would that more meet with approval ? Seems like yet another post of someone trying to downplay valid dislikes by brushing it off with an all too often thrown out phrase to belittle a comment or opinion out of hand.

My comment was specifically about the complaints about Lizardmen being called Seraphon. Lizardmen is perfectly descriptive, yes, but so is Ratmen.

Why the double standard?

" You don't like GW rules ? That's toxic "

No-one said that.

" You dislike this dumb name ? That's nostalgia "

Dumb isn't a fact. It's an opinion, and as I *actually* said, I used the term "most", in that I think "most" complaints wouldn't be being made if GW had always called it that. Hence why people don't complain about Skaven not being Ratmen.

" You don't want to put 40 dollars for one human sized model ? You're cheap "

Again, add that to the list of things nobody said.

What does it matter why someone doesn't like it ?

It doesn't matter. But OP uses an imperative - "NEEDS to stop" - why? Is that not worth a discussion, perhaps mentioning how the naming convention isn't really all that bad in context?

Sometimes the old ways were better ways

Not denying that, but sometimes, when the "old ways" were just the same as the current ones, and there's no complaining, doesn't that come across a little unfair? Specifically talking about Lizardmen/Seraphon vs Ratmen/Skaven here. Why is one bad, but the other just accepted?

That said, this isn't one of those things. It's an opinion based thing, so we can not see eye to eye but please let us stop at assuming that someone doesn't like it because " You have wrong think nostalgia eyes "

It is opinion, I agree, and if that opinion is based off of nostalgia, that's not a bad thing at all.
Don't mistake my "you prefer this because of nostalgia" as a criticism - it's perfectly valid, because that's your opinion.

There's no "wrongthink" here.

I don't need nostalgia to tell me a sloppity bilepiper sounds moronic.

I'm going to be honest, "Sloppity Bilepiper" isn't a good name. "Bilepiper" is fine though, IMO. That's why I'd only refer to it as the Bilepiper, same way I'd only refer to something like the Swordmasters of Hoeth as "Swordmasters", or an XV88 Broadside Battlesuit as a "Broadside".

I'm fully on board that a lot of the Adjective-Noun units sound a bit off, but it's not hard to refer to them by their noun, and it sound a lot better. So, a Death Guard army might consist of Bilepipers, Blightbringers, Plaguecasters, Bloat-Drones, and Blightlords, which is much more palatable. It's not to say GW are perfect, but their naming isn't irredeemably bad.

Idk, that's a lot of b sounds in one list. Its like a tongue twister. And then you have primaris, where nearly everything beings with I and you have a couple of words that sound almost the same. Its not as bad as spamming wolf or blood, but its still pretty bad.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Idk, that's a lot of b sounds in one list. Its like a tongue twister. And then you have primaris, where nearly everything beings with I and you have a couple of words that sound almost the same. Its not as bad as spamming wolf or blood, but its still pretty bad.

I'd say honestly it's worse. I still cannot tell the difference between the basic unit names of some of the primaris stuff. It's just asinine.

re the Tyranid names, given the names are simply the IoMs reporting names for types of organisms some having names that make sense, and others beig idiotic and dervitive actually makes sense.

you've got some Tyranids specificly idnetified by AdMech biologists named via a naming pattern.

then you have new tyranid bioforms named by the first guard officer to describe them. well it turns out that guard officer wasn't very original

 Gnarlly wrote:
Curious: why the change back to Space Marines with their codex 2.0 from Adeptus Astartes in their 1.0 codex?

I hadn't even noticed that

Cronch wrote:
Leviadon is just GW's fetish for the word tooth. Nothing new, stegadon was first named in the 90s, and now we also have the bastiladon. I swear, if they could, GW would call all reptiles X+don. Lizarddon, coldonedon, the chapter of salamanderdons...

As for the allopex, i'm fairly sure they just looked up tresher sharks, which are Alopiidae, literally sea foxes. Which is also proof that IRL names can be dumb as heck too.

Rhinos are hard charging tough and a lot of critters might ride on top of one

Ah yes, rhinos, famous for being easy to ride

The word "easy" wasn't in my description...
I guess if it were easy, then adeptus restartes would be able to do it...

there are legends about people raiding on mamooths, great cave bears and wool rhinos. The normal rhino is much smaller, so it shouldn't be that hard to ride on one. especialy with todays technology.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Idk, that's a lot of b sounds in one list. Its like a tongue twister. And then you have primaris, where nearly everything beings with I and you have a couple of words that sound almost the same. Its not as bad as spamming wolf or blood, but its still pretty bad.

True, but in all fairness, look at the Grey Knights with with Purgation, Paladin and Purifier Squads, or Stormraven, Stormhawks, Stormtalons, and Storm Eagles?
How about the bevy of AM superheavies? (Banehammer, Stormblade, Bladehammer, Banesword - I don't even know how many of them are real! )

Basically, confusing names and similar sounding things aren't exactly uncommon in 40k, past and present, which is my main point - given enough time, things largely become common knowledge. And, while I understand it's very much my experience vs other people's experience, I didn't really have a problem getting to grips with Primaris names any more than I did Knight classifications (which I still struggle with, despite those names being around for decades before I started 40k in Epic), or with AM superheavy variants. But, as I said, YMMV.

BrianDavion wrote:
re the Tyranid names, given the names are simply the IoMs reporting names for types of organisms some having names that make sense, and others beig idiotic and dervitive actually makes sense.

you've got some Tyranids specificly idnetified by AdMech biologists named via a naming pattern.

then you have new tyranid bioforms named by the first guard officer to describe them. well it turns out that guard officer wasn't very original

Fine. So then, why is "Drukhari" being the eldar name for..themselves, not a thing that is good or makes sense?

They're clearly big fans of the American version of Whose Line is it Anyway, and named their entire race after the host

Why would you as a human, use the name some xeno use to describe themselvs? That would be like puting them on the same level as humans as far as validity of existance goes, which happens to be heretical.

Karol wrote:
Why would you as a human, use the name some xeno use to describe themselvs? That would be like puting them on the same level as humans as far as validity of existance goes, which happens to be heretical.

Because the whole "this is how the humans describe the things" shtick only makes sense for stuff like Tyranids, who probably call their various monsters SHRAAAAARKGHLKHGLKEARRRGS and SKREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPs and not really for races like Eldar, who probably would prefer to use their own names for stuff thank you very much.

the_scotsman wrote:
Fine. So then, why is "Drukhari" being the eldar name for..themselves, not a thing that is good or makes sense?

It is odd to me that the faction is 'Drukhari', using their language's name for themselves, but then all their units are English names- presumably translations or reporting names.

IRL it's usually the opposite. I would refer to a Heinkel He-219 aircraft as a 'German Uhu', not a 'Deutsch Eagle-Owl'. A particular nuclear submarine is typically called either the 'Russian Akula-class' (Russian designation) or 'Russian Typhoon-class' (NATO reporting name), not a 'Russkiy Shark-class' (Russian word for 'Russian' + translation of the literal name).

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

AngryAngel80 wrote:So you'd want to see an exhaustive list of all the names everyone might find silly and or overly dumb ? Would that more meet with approval ? Seems like yet another post of someone trying to downplay valid dislikes by brushing it off with an all too often thrown out phrase to belittle a comment or opinion out of hand.

My comment was specifically about the complaints about Lizardmen being called Seraphon. Lizardmen is perfectly descriptive, yes, but so is Ratmen.

Why the double standard?

" You don't like GW rules ? That's toxic "

No-one said that.

" You dislike this dumb name ? That's nostalgia "

Dumb isn't a fact. It's an opinion, and as I *actually* said, I used the term "most", in that I think "most" complaints wouldn't be being made if GW had always called it that. Hence why people don't complain about Skaven not being Ratmen.

" You don't want to put 40 dollars for one human sized model ? You're cheap "

Again, add that to the list of things nobody said.

What does it matter why someone doesn't like it ?

It doesn't matter. But OP uses an imperative - "NEEDS to stop" - why? Is that not worth a discussion, perhaps mentioning how the naming convention isn't really all that bad in context?

Sometimes the old ways were better ways

Not denying that, but sometimes, when the "old ways" were just the same as the current ones, and there's no complaining, doesn't that come across a little unfair? Specifically talking about Lizardmen/Seraphon vs Ratmen/Skaven here. Why is one bad, but the other just accepted?

That said, this isn't one of those things. It's an opinion based thing, so we can not see eye to eye but please let us stop at assuming that someone doesn't like it because " You have wrong think nostalgia eyes "

It is opinion, I agree, and if that opinion is based off of nostalgia, that's not a bad thing at all.
Don't mistake my "you prefer this because of nostalgia" as a criticism - it's perfectly valid, because that's your opinion.

There's no "wrongthink" here.

I don't need nostalgia to tell me a sloppity bilepiper sounds moronic.

I'm going to be honest, "Sloppity Bilepiper" isn't a good name. "Bilepiper" is fine though, IMO. That's why I'd only refer to it as the Bilepiper, same way I'd only refer to something like the Swordmasters of Hoeth as "Swordmasters", or an XV88 Broadside Battlesuit as a "Broadside".

I'm fully on board that a lot of the Adjective-Noun units sound a bit off, but it's not hard to refer to them by their noun, and it sound a lot better. So, a Death Guard army might consist of Bilepipers, Blightbringers, Plaguecasters, Bloat-Drones, and Blightlords, which is much more palatable. It's not to say GW are perfect, but their naming isn't irredeemably bad.

Ok Captain, see the list of things not said in this post doesn't mean it's not said all the time, I was adding the nostalgia thing to the list of often tossed around phrases you'd find countless times on this board to pick at someones disagreement in the most useless fashion. So yeah, not said here, as this doesn't involve those topics but disregarding dislike for rose shades, nostalgia, etc, is just like labeling anyone who dislikes something as toxic, or doesn't want to pay overly high prices cheap, that was why I put that there and if you read the intent you'd have realized that.

I never said the naming was all terrible but the vast amount of confusing or dumb names are relatively new creations within the last 5 years or so give or take. Yet again, I didn't say it was unable to be dealt with, and if they are dumb names it is in fact a fact for the person who feels they are dumb. Like, I think many of these names are stupid, that's a fact of how I feel. Now some may agree, some may not. Many of them you'd really be hard pressed to find good merit to however.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Idk, that's a lot of b sounds in one list. Its like a tongue twister. And then you have primaris, where nearly everything beings with I and you have a couple of words that sound almost the same. Its not as bad as spamming wolf or blood, but its still pretty bad.

True, but in all fairness, look at the Grey Knights with with Purgation, Paladin and Purifier Squads, or Stormraven, Stormhawks, Stormtalons, and Storm Eagles?
How about the bevy of AM superheavies? (Banehammer, Stormblade, Bladehammer, Banesword - I don't even know how many of them are real! )

Basically, confusing names and similar sounding things aren't exactly uncommon in 40k, past and present, which is my main point - given enough time, things largely become common knowledge. And, while I understand it's very much my experience vs other people's experience, I didn't really have a problem getting to grips with Primaris names any more than I did Knight classifications (which I still struggle with, despite those names being around for decades before I started 40k in Epic), or with AM superheavy variants. But, as I said, YMMV.

I think its a missing the forest for the trees thing. I think many of these names are bad, I'd probably rather skaven be Rat men just because it does make it more simple and easy to understand and many still don't know what the different super heavy tank names are for the Baneblade. I often joke about how they sound stupid.

It's just the level of which these silly sounding named groups pop up now. One, two, a dozen silly names is one thing, hundreds and hundreds and growing of them you start to go " Ok, can we calm down now with this. " It's the saturation that people eventually get disgusted by a dumb name here or there I'd think is expected but even the most jaded among us. Though some like, Murderfang, I will never stop saying is awful.

 vipoid wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


I think you're being quite optimistic with regard to potential new players remembering not just the name of a faction but also the very awkward and unintuitive name of a specific unit.

It seems more likely they'd be thinking to themselves "What were those units called? They were big, troll things. 'Dark Trolls', maybe?"
...
And like magic Games Workshop and its stupid names are suddenly nowhere to be seen.

Sometimes there are advantages to calling a spade a spade, rather than a Malefesicic Splodulator (TM).

Umm, no. If I had a friend playing the game, and I was interested in the unit, and I somehow then managed to forget that name between the time I saw it and the time I googled it (considering I have google and a notebook in my pocket at all times, this is unlikely), in the unlikely event this happened, I wouldn't just pick a random name out of the air and expect that to work.

I'd expect to end up on a Tolkien site. Or some other random fantasy page.

What I (and anyone with a brain) would do, is go to the GW website and look at the pictures. I'd then see the units I wanted, and the names. And THEN I might google them to look up cheaper prices or maybe tactics pages. All of which would only show the official models, instead of pages of third-party knock offs.

GW lose a lot of money due to copyright infringement, even after making these changes. Love them or hate them, you can't blame them for trying to protect their IP as best they can. Their lawyers suggested doing this, to make web searches less likely to direct people to forgeries.

It also makes things like recasters and 3D printers harder to use. Searching on a 3D model site for "Stone Troll" will get you lots of models, some usable some not. But if you search for "Dankhold Troggoth" might get you the model you want... but it also makes it INFINITELY easier for GW to find those models themselves and have them taken down.

So 3D models have to be hidden, making them harder to be used. Dedicated people will still find a way, but adding the hurdle will push a few more people to actually buying the models they can't find.

I honestly can't blame GW for any of this. I know a lot of artists, and people who produce things that -can- be pirated very easily, and it's a daily battle to avoid it. Just because GW are a big company doesn't mean they should just lie back and take it.

Not saying I'm completely innocent in this, because I'm not, but I don't blame GW for doing what they need to do. If the worst they do is change a few names, then good for them.