I made a thread the other day about what army everyone wanted to pick up, but never did. The responses were good, so I decided to do another thread. This time name an army that you would NEVER play.

For me it's Tau. I like anime, but I hate the aesthetic on most of their models. I despise the idea of fielding so many drones. Their shooting game is powerful, and a bit attractive, but I would never pick them up no matter how good they are.

Squats. Not even if they got a new release. Friggin space dwarves.

Eldar in all it's forms for me. I've personally never been drawn to elves, so the space equivalent of it for me draws the same disdain for "dem poncy point eared ladz". Up until the crazy DBZ power up for marines, Eldar always seemed to break the rules in some way mechanically and while I don't mind the aesthetic (them power ranger aspect warriors and Incubi for DE are always cool for me) in terms of fluff, they have the usual "dying elder race" vibe that narratively comes off as a dead end for me so I'm not overly interested.

I would probably never touch Tau either, mainly because ever since they doubled down on suits, I've felt that they've missed a big opportunity to explore the "Empire" part of the Tau in assimilating different alien species and the playstyle is not fun for either player. It's too binary and it usually begins and ends with how close your opponent is to your gunline.

Tyranids are another one I'd not start mainly because I've never been a huge fan of the bug aesthetic and I like seeing different vehicular and heavy armoured style armies, which Nids being an organic exclusive army basically rules them out.

In terms of Imperials, I would never touch Space Wolves, both for fluff and model reasons given that they've been flanderized so much in each area and that they have some incredibly thick plot armour in terms of how much they've gotten away with for their mutations, deviations and general hypocrisy. I also wouldn't go for Imperial Knights as an army since they're too one note and boring IMO.

Chaos Daemons are another army I wouldn't start mainly because of how weirdly it's written to play mono-God and the general repetition of equivalents (even if they play differently) for God-specific units, and me disliking Chaos in general.

Chaos. I just don't care much for the EXTREME!!! edge lord presentation and I've never been into outright evil armies (not saying Imperium is "good" but you occasionally have good people in their armies). I cant get over the blood, pus, tentacle, aesthetics either.

A second would be Tyranids because im not into the bio weapon aesthetic. I would, however, roll with Genestealer Cults because their models have a TON of class.

Probably Orks.. Probbaly custodes.. Probably chaos demons.. Probably DG.. Probably ad mech..

Custodies, Knights as a standalone army.

For the custodes, I strongly feel that they should not be a full army. They really should not be on the table at all. If they want to include them, it should really be a single guy as an advisor. Kinda like the inquasition. Not an army, but part of a grab bag of imperial allies.

Knights should not be in the 40k scale as an army. Maybe one as part of a larger force. But pure knights? No.

The odds of me starting another loyalist SM army are pretty low. I’ve got Ultras and Deathwatch, and small ancient force of BA. I just don’t see me doing something like Space Wolves.

But “never” is a very long time.

Tau and Orks.

The Tau aesthetically just don't do anything for me. I also don't really like their lore.

Orks, I dislike their whole schtich. I can appreciate the comic relief they bring, but I'm just not a fan of them at all.

Grey Knights. Horrible, horrible models. Don't like the thinking behind or style either.

Standalone knights. Special characters. Not an army.

Really only the knights I think, because those models simply don't belong in the scale 40k is designed at.

I wouldn't play T'au with the way the faction is currently set up, but if they ever turn them into a real coalition army with good non-T'au auxiliaries playing a meaningful role in the army, I might.

Stuff like Ultramarines and Salamanders leave me totally cold but I could see myself playing White Scars so I can't say no to Space Marines outright.

Space Wolves. I don't like them in the fluff, I can't stand Wulfen and Thunderwolves, and I find all the wolfy-mcWolf-wolf stuff really lazy.

Armies I have owned an won't play again in 40k at this Point.
Primarachads, #notrealmarines
Guard, I am not spending that kind of money on cadian models from 3rd ed
Real Marines, their rules are broken and the player base is toxic.

Armies I haven't owned and never will
Nids because screw painting 300 plus models
Orks see above
GSC too much gimics
SoB not a fan of the nuns with guns theme.
DG just too disgusting.

space marines. Never ever in a million years will I touch that filth. I would play filthy tau before i played marines.

Eldar, DE, SW, BA, UM, Tau

Proably eldar for me, something about the aestetic just doesn't appeal to me

Primaris.

For all the things I hate about Primaris - and there is a lot I hate about Primaris - the models (even the grav tanks, to me) look awesome, and if someone handed me Primaris for free I'd play it after some nerfs. I've got some history with the Marines, I've got a few intercessors and inceptors that look amazing. I will say "not anytime soon," but I won't say NEVER.

All I can think of that I would just never run even if someone handed me an army for free are Craftworld Eldar and (Despite my relatively recent turn to Chaos) Death Guard/Nurgle Daemons.

CWE fails all on all levels - aesthetics, mechanics, and backstory - to appeal to me, and for some of the same reasons as Grimskul; I've never been a huge fan of elves, the Eldar have the break-the-mechanics issue that just leaves a bad taste in my mouth which echoes the problems I have with Marines right now, and the CWE in particular take themselves way too maudlin and seriously in a patently ludicrous universe, which isn't the same thing as grimly and straight-facedly doing catastrophically dumb things like the Imperium does on a regular basis. I won't rule out the DE forever; They at least have the decency to go well beyond Banana Nut Bugger Town in what they do. But not the CWE.

To say Nurgle fails on aesthetics isn't quite right; It does what it sets out to do, and to such a degree that I couldn't conceive of starting an army. a well-painted Nurgle army gets my immune system riled just by looking at it. The palette is muted pastel green/yellow, and just not in the part of the color wheel I want to play with, and the naming is disgustingly effective. It's awesome in its own way, I respect people who can paint and play them well, and I do not want to touch them.

Dark Eldar and Slannesh, not into hedonism in general. I'm always confounded by many gamers in my area over the...rather perverse and disturbing stuff they get into. *Cough* Kingdom Death *Cough*.

Craftworld Eldar because I'm not a fan of the Aspect Warriors idea.

Nurgle and Death Guard just seem gross to me. There's plenty of Nurgle players in my area anyways.

Tyranids just don't appeal to me. Would I paint a model or two? Maybe to test out some pattern? But not a whole army.

Can't bring myself to do Tau with a Mech Suit focus. Just not my thing.

Tzeench I don't like the troops choices.

Pure Space Marines.

I love them artistically, conceptually, video game wise - but model wise they just don't grab me. They've a few great models don't get me wrong, but the overall effect just never sparks my desire to build a whole army.




Note Custodes (esp the FW offersings) and Sisters of Battle are exempt from this as they are armies I would potentially build.

Nurgle anything & damn Tau.

My biggest problem in wargaming is that I can't answer this in most systems

I don’t think I’d ever play Nids. The lack of “singular” personalities sets my raging individualist mindset on fire.

I wouldn’t paint or collect Nurgle, despite my enjoyment of their fluff and play style because I don’t think I’d like painting them. I wouldn’t do the models justice.

I amusingly have a small collection of Orks, recently given to me by a friend as, again, I love the fluff and don’t mind the play style, but I *HATE* painting Boyz. So many fiddly details, they just take so long to paint even decently, and you just scoop them up by the handful.

I have no interest in Knights as an army. Single centrepiece model? Absolutely! But I like combined arms forces and Knights really are just good at everything. Fast (ish), tough, shooty and stompy, they *are* a combined arms force in a single model.

Harlequins just don’t do it for me as models, and painting them *well* would drive me nuts.

 greatbigtree wrote:

I wouldn’t paint or collect Nurgle, despite my enjoyment of their fluff and play style because I don’t think I’d like painting them. I wouldn’t do the models justice.

I'd second this. I think well painted nurgle is perhaps right up there as one of the hardest to paint when you consider all the myriad of putrid organics they have

I've painted the new plague marines and they aren't that hard to paint, they just have a lot of extra details that a bland space marine doesn't. The 'hard part' is noticing all of the maggots and little details. I can't tell you how many times while doing batch painting that I had to go back and pick something out on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd run through.

Never?

DE - But only if I had to use the original 3e models. The vehicles are ok, but the only models I liked from that line were Vects two slave girls.... The rest I'd never spend $ on. Don't even want to own any of them. I could play the army just fine, I'm sure, but it's pretty hard to make an army out several raiders & just 2 slave girls.

A close 2nd would be Custodes. I don't hate them like I do 3e DE models, but when I look at them I just feel nothing. So there's not much reason to spend any $ on them.

Necrons based on models. Not because I don't like how they look, but to properly paint them how I'd want them to look would be an insane nightmare with how they're designed, getting brushes into certain spaces is impossible, and the they've increasingly got a lot of effects going on (the characters especially) that often require a higher level of painting skill than I possess to do proper justice to. Also Imperial Fists, because **** painting that much Yellow.

That said, most Daemons don't really do it for me, they're an army that just hasn't interested me for many years, like, at all. I don't hate them, they're just not something that in any way scratches the itch.

Dark Eldar. Not into sadism.
Nurgle. Yeeech! (Not interested in models I should look in toilets for color references for.)
Khorne. Mindless animals. (Would use 'daemon bombs' in a Chaos undivided army as they are basically fire and forget weapons)
Orks. Too many models. (But I do love orkicons here) Come to think of it i might possibly go with a high octane ork army consisting mostly of more powerful units someday, but it's unlikely.
Guard. See above.
Nids. Mindless animals.

I didn't respond to the last one for the same reason this one's tough - I've started every army I really want to start, and I can see myself start just about any army. But if there's one I just can't see myself starting, it'd be T'au. I just don't like the aesthetic. Funny thing is, I either have or have had a little bit of almost EVERY other army, even if just for conversion purposes.

Eldar.

Literally every other faction I think I could rustle something up for, or already have an army of it (hell, I already have one of every Imperial force!), but basic Eldar, I just don't feel the urge for them.

Actual fantasy elves? Pretty cool, elves rate in my top five PC races. WHFB and AoS Aelves? No real complaints. 40k eldar? Aside from literally only Rangers, I don't see myself doing them.

DE? I'd lean heavily on Kabalites and Scourges, love those models.
Daemons? Small daemonic retinues of multiple gods, and they make awesome NPCs for "random incursions" in other games/campaigns.
Orks? I'd love a Stormboy/Kommando heavy warband, with strong air support.
Tau? One of the three armies I first wanted to play, and the one I've not done for the longest time. So many ideas I have.
Harlequins? Playing cards, or Commedia dell'arte themed.

But Eldar? Just not for me.

There isn't a lot of armies I would never play. I can find qualities and attractive elements in pretty much all of 40K armies, but my two least favorite by far are Chaos Demons since they are more like 4 pretty damn lame fantasy demon armies and Custodians as they are unapealing both in terms of esthetic and story. I'm very surprised they became an actual faction too.

Never is a very strong word. However, in the interest of contributing to the thread...

Probably the Dark Eldar. I have a kill team of Kabalites and Wytches which I quickly painted up over a couple of weeks. Then I fielded them and they just felt dirty to play. They only saw the board two more times at the request of my opponent. They made every part of the battlefield field dangerous which I like, but is more a Kill Team thing. What I didn't like is they seem to have a lot of demoralizing your opponent (not their army, but the actual opponent) with bait and switches, traps and other trickery. I know Kill Team is a long ways from full 40k for a lot of factions, but I felt anything I kinda like that's in the Dark Eldar faction has something close enough in the Craftworld Eldar faction.

I also probably would never play Harlequins, at least not as a solo army. They don't feel like a full faction for the platoon/company sized game that 40k is today to me. I want to believe that any faction I play can possibly neutralize a planet or at least a Hive City and can be involved in a massive battle. I think a chapter of marines (I am not going to argue this) could do that as could a very large Genestealer Cult. Even a Knight house could bring a planetary governor to its knees. Dark Eldar don't really work this, but as preternatural pirate raiders I could a sizable warband (well beyond a 3,000pt army) do an actual army's worth of threat. Less so with a troupe of Harlequins with me. I am sure I am wrong about this feeling as I haven't really read their lore, but the clown elves just don't feel like a military open battle threat that I visualize 40k battles being representative on the table. That's just me though. They work fine for the number of models in a typical game so long as that is pretty much the entirety of the skirmish. Anything bigger I think the Harlequins should have been more covert.

Honorable mention to Grey Knights. Their a neat concept and without a doubt and some cool looking terminators, but specialized daemon hunting psykers don't appeal to me enough to want to field a whole army of them.

Second honorable mention solo Knights. I believe that 28/32mm in an infantry scale for a miniatures wargame. Going full armor doesn't feel right to me. Now you go to 20mm or smaller, and I think the game moves away from infantry to armor as the star.

It would have been the old Necrons, but they came out with new aesthetic and models, so my answer is the Nids, just can't stand the aliens holding guns, rather than guns morphed from their body.

Honorable mentions: Ultrasmurfs, IF, Space Wolves, Harlequins, Sisters, 1ksons, DA, anything Nurgle.

You can bet the house that I will never play the following factions:

1: Primaris: I already have one chapter of perfectly good Space Marines. We don't need any more damn marines, when we have about a half of a dozen variants already.(Which is an issue in of itself)

2: Anything Chaos: I really have a pet peeve about the gods of Chaos interjecting themselves into the games plane of existence yet other gods are not able to. I did not like that concept in WFB either. It seems rather one sided to me. That and most of the chaos stuff out there just turns me off, whether it be CSM or Daemons.

Notable Mention: Dark Elder: The faction does not interest me, however, I am not outright against them as the other two. I also have an Eldar faction that I am putting together one piece at a time so they are a little redundant for me. I probably will focus on my six factions that I do have forces on, so adding an additional factions is highly unlikely, especially these days given my distaste for what is coming out of Nottingham.

Slaanesh and Tzeentch Daemons, they're simply very ugly.
Imperial Knights, too.
The only kind of loyalist Marines I'd play would be Marines painted in Alpha Legion colors, so make of that what you want. Grey Knights are cool, though.
Tyranids also look pretty bad, that said I do have a collection of Aliens/ Xenomorphs that I'll probably use as Tyranids at some point, but GWs Tyranids are not for me.

Ultramarines, they are the narrative nemesis for my orks since 3rd edition, I can't stand those guys. All primaris armies as well.

I'd also never play chaos daemons as I don't like how they look and tau because they're shooting only. AM is also shooting only but at least I love the models.

Last but not least Imperial Knights: to me they're not even an army and I could never play with armies that don't even have 30-40 models in standard games at least.

So yeah those 4: Space Marines, Chaos Daemons, Tau, Imperial Knights.

I just love Space Elves, specially Dark Eldar and Harlequins, and I really like the Ynnari lore, so that's all.
I could see me playing Orks or Adepta Sororitas too, but not anything else right now.
I despise all the Primaris nonsense, while I don't hate Space Mrines.

Knights. Tau. Probably Custodes. GK. Probably any other SM than my Ultras The ones that don’t have a lot of variety in unit choices or play styles.

I’ve got some DA but i only painted the DW/RW and think of them as an alternate SM build/army, nit their own exactly.

Nids might be my favorite second army, they can do melee they can do shooting, they can do big bugs, and scuttling hordes.

Space Wolves.

They've always been laughable and ridiculous, but not in that vaguely satirical 40k way that a lot of other armies get away with. Everything they reference is so on the nose as to be silly and it's all treated with a level of seriousness and total lack of irony that makes the entire faction, from its visuals, lore, culture and everything else just feel totally embarrassing. There's contrived themes and silly naming conventions in 40k aplenty and most of them are charming or can be ignored, but Space Wolves are just one big infantile joke.

Plus, the huge amount of model support and special character bloat they've gotten in the past is something I've always found distasteful. It's also handy to keep it in mind whenever someone insinuates that Primaris releases are too much as if Marine oversaturation is something that started in 2017.

Oh yeah and the tiny box dreadnoughts carrying around axes and shields is the dumbest looking thing GW have ever created. Possibly more so than Grimnar's sleigh.

I can't see myself ever touching Orks, no matter how revamped they get. They are lovely miniatures but not for me.

And I guess Dark Eldar, but that's just the ages-old inner animosity of a Tyranid player.

Tough question, can't really say 'never' to anything. I never really expected to get Space Marines, but now I'm working on the Indomitus set and enjoying them well enough.

As it stands I'm not really interested in CW Eldar I guess...

Despite their technically amazing models, Deathguard are the only faction I can't see myself collecting. They are so rank, and I really don't fancy spending hundreds of hours painting pustules and boils and seeping sores.

 Bosskelot wrote:
Space Wolves.

They've always been laughable and ridiculous, but not in that vaguely satirical 40k way that a lot of other armies get away with. Everything they reference is so on the nose as to be silly and it's all treated with a level of seriousness and total lack of irony that makes the entire faction, from its visuals, lore, culture and everything else just feel totally embarrassing. There's contrived themes and silly naming conventions in 40k aplenty and most of them are charming or can be ignored, but Space Wolves are just one big infantile joke.

Plus, the huge amount of model support and special character bloat they've gotten in the past is something I've always found distasteful. It's also handy to keep it in mind whenever someone insinuates that Primaris releases are too much as if Marine oversaturation is something that started in 2017.

Oh yeah and the tiny box dreadnoughts carrying around axes and shields is the dumbest looking thing GW have ever created. Possibly more so than Grimnar's sleigh.

you realize grimnar's sleigh is a referance to norse mythology right?

BrianDavion wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Space Wolves.

They've always been laughable and ridiculous, but not in that vaguely satirical 40k way that a lot of other armies get away with. Everything they reference is so on the nose as to be silly and it's all treated with a level of seriousness and total lack of irony that makes the entire faction, from its visuals, lore, culture and everything else just feel totally embarrassing. There's contrived themes and silly naming conventions in 40k aplenty and most of them are charming or can be ignored, but Space Wolves are just one big infantile joke.

Plus, the huge amount of model support and special character bloat they've gotten in the past is something I've always found distasteful. It's also handy to keep it in mind whenever someone insinuates that Primaris releases are too much as if Marine oversaturation is something that started in 2017.

Oh yeah and the tiny box dreadnoughts carrying around axes and shields is the dumbest looking thing GW have ever created. Possibly more so than Grimnar's sleigh.

you realize grimnar's sleigh is a referance to norse mythology right?

So? Does that make it look any less stupid?

Khorne anything, No interest in that for Fantasy OR 40K. And that includes Blood Angels.

Mine would be dark eldar. Beautiful models, awesome fluff and I like their general play style.
But there is no way I'm going to build and paint them. My hands are huge and I have the dexterity of a grizzly bear. I already stuggle with gretchin, how am I supposed to ever get one of those tiny models done?

I'm also amazed by how many people are afraid of death guard because of how hard they are supposedly to paint. Compared to my orks, they are ridiculously easy to paint, and I am using a white paint scheme. If I would use GW's death guard green armor instead of white it would just be painting highlights and then washing them until they look nurgle enough.

 Bosskelot wrote:
Space Wolves.

This basically.
Grey Knights are in a similar spot for me. The models do nothing for me while the fluff is actively off-putting to how I conceive of 40k. So hard pass.

Tau & Necrons:

Tau try to recapture the mecha and battlesuit vibe from Appleseed but fail miserably because their models are bulky like pregnant whales and therefore unattractive compared to the suits of the show which are sleek, cool & flashy.

Besides that there are already the Eldar as a technological advanced race in the setting. So there is actually need for ugly smurfs.


Necron models still have this hunched posture as if they would moonlight as a bell toller when they are not disintegrating people. In addition to that their heads are pretty lacklustre too. Instant pass.
Ah, one more thing. This space Egypt fluff is abysmally bad. They could have been great with just a ton of very alien machine models and an identity of being just mysterious killer robots but that ship sailed away years ago.

Knights. I know a lot of people like them, but I just find them to be unbelievably ugly models. I also want to play 40k, not Mechwarrior.

Tau. I don't care for their aesthetic or their playstyle.

Most of the SM factions are of little interest to me. I don't hate them (aside, perhaps, from the fact that their bloated range devours new releases and steal the once-unique identities from other factions), but I just don't have any great desire to play them.

Orks. I actually like this faction and I love playing against them. However, I don't think I'd enjoy using them myself.

Space Marines. They're far too prominent and even before their recent overpowered buffs, you were still looking at 50%(+) of your games being against them. The majority of games being Blue on Blue gets pretty immersion breaking. If somebody put a gun to my head and told me I had to play something (loyalist) Space Marines I'd choose Minotaurs only because they've a history of fighting other Marines.

TinyLegions wrote:


2: Anything Chaos: I really have a pet peeve about the gods of Chaos interjecting themselves into the games plane of existence yet other gods are not able to.

except the other gods DO interject themselves into things, the emperor clearly does (he even arguably has his own deamons in the form of living saints like Celestine and the Legion of the damned) and it's basicly eistablished fact that Gork and Mork are indeed working through Ghaz

For me it's simply a case of choosing armies not to play for practical reasons - not because I don't want to, or don't like the faction or anything.
Orks and Guard are up there just from sheer time taken to paint everything, I'd hate fielding the dreaded grey boys and I'm too fussy to go for the dipped / pure contrast approach.
Knights I don't think I'd go for, for the sake of carrying the things around, they're just too big for the boxes I've got. I understand the appeal though.

Aside from that though - I'm one of those people who'll happily pick up 500 points of an army, then only getting round to painting half of it before getting distracted by the next new shiny.

Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Primaris.

Lot of BA players locally, don't like the space wolves style, and the primaris vehicles are silly in all the wrong ways.

Nothing Chaos, no nids, no Tau. Nothing non Imperium as a main army tbh. I could play Eldar or Dark Eldar as a side force. I love Orky models and I have a bunch for Gorkamorka so they are also a side force possibly.

I'd have to say TAU or any of the Eldar the they just don't appeal to me at all.

Horde armies. Once I had an Ork army in the 5th edition, played one tourney, won it and then sold - too powerful at that time.
Tau.
CSM as they lack mobility for my liking, but played them in former editions (3-5) and Daemons.
Primaris overpowered in all ways.

I don't think I could go for a Slaanesh Daemon army or a daemon army in general, I always feel that they need a CSM counterpart in order to feel like they're relevant as most incursions are brought on by some mortal shenanigans. Also, a lot of the models are lacking.

Orks was an army I tried, but after 30 boys I didn't fancy painting anymore, mainly due to not liking the models.

I wouldn't go for Imperial Guard. Love the tanks, hate the guardsmen, they're very bland and the cool regiments are OOP or very expensive.

Ultramarines. They are so generic and uninspiring.

A.T. wrote:
Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Primaris.

Lot of BA players locally, don't like the space wolves style, and the primaris vehicles are silly in all the wrong ways.

You've literally just named all the Space Marine armies I have. Though I won't touch the Primaris grav-tanks or Redemptor with a Nemesis Baby-Carrier's polearm either.

GSC, not because i dislike the models, but i allready own a hordy army and the infantry centric playstyle i'd imagine to play them with , would be simply to taxing on my general hobby budget.$

Nurgle - hate Chaos and the models are gross.

Also, Dark Eldar. No interest in the army, and I actively dislike the sadism associated with them. Don't really like the models either.

Primaris marines.
Genestealer Cults.

Definitely Slaanesh daemons, Craftworld Eldar, and Space Wolves.

The whole Slaanesh look and S&M vibe just doesn't jive with me.

Craftworlds. . . i just really hate pretty much all regular elf fluff ever. Always presented as haughty and aloof. I can't abide that behavior.

And Space Wolves. . . well, they look ridiculous, have ridiculous names, and their fluff doesn't do them any favors with all the rampant hypocrisy. Space Vikings would be cool, but Space Wolves are dumb.

Orks.cant stand their playstyle for one,but more importantly I really don't like the ramshackle nature of the army.

A mixed god Chaos Daemons army.

Mono-god armies are great, but the mixed armies feel so disjointed. They're appearance is like an incoherent rainbow. Some may like it and even suggest that it's narrative, but it's not for me.

Sister of Battle. "These genocidal fascists are morally pure because they have vaginas!" doesn't do it for me.

Hecaton wrote:
Sister of Battle. "These genocidal fascists are morally pure because they have vaginas!" doesn't do it for me.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

Imperial Guard.

Kinda missing the point of 40K.

If I wanted to go that way, I'd play Bolt Action or some such.

On thinking upon this a bit more, I'm going to add to my earlier answer and add Tau. Which is odd as I actually have a Tau army, but it's fundamentally a 4E list that I've made work for a few games through the various editions since then, and that kind of list just doesn't work with the current Tau design paradigm. I really liked them as more advanced combined arms mechanized Guard or a slower but longer ranged Mech Eldar, running mechanized hover infantry with skimmer MBTs and single digits worth of what effectively was large but highly mobile power armor. Now they're much more about the robots for everything, and it's just not what I was into the faction for. They're also wayyyyyy more expensive than they used to be to get into.

I wanted to add Space Wolves to the list, for the fluff reasons already mentioned. They're just stupid, hypocritical, contradictory, and confused in the worst ways, the ultimate definition of try-hard, and the Space Wolves end up coming off more as a tween's bad internet fanfic where they want their made up superhero to have all their favorite traits from every other superhero no matter how awkward. That said, they're a faction that I could see myself playing with a much more narrowed and defined lore focus, viewing and playing them mostly as normal Space Marines with culturally nordic iconography and names, but without the "we want to be wolverine! and the punisher! and loki! and thor! all at once!" aspects.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Imperial Guard.

Kinda missing the point of 40K.

If I wanted to go that way, I'd play Bolt Action or some such.

Hrm, to be fair, that's limited only by how one views the guard. You can take pretty much any non-heavily armored human from almost any setting/culture/etc and have them work as Guard. That said, I can totally understand that feel with the basic main model lines.

1. Tau, I just don’t like their look or their play style.
2. Sisters of Battle, not into the models or religious theme.
3. Knights of any kind, just not fun to play with or against

 l0k1 wrote:
I made a thread the other day about what army everyone wanted to pick up, but never did. The responses were good, so I decided to do another thread. This time name an army that you would NEVER play.

For me it's Tau. I like anime, but I hate the aesthetic on most of their models. I despise the idea of fielding so many drones. Their shooting game is powerful, and a bit attractive, but I would never pick them up no matter how good they are.

Either Daemons, because a bunch of fantasy swords guys is the exact opposite reason why I'm playing 40k and not fantasy, I like the concept of space daemons from space hell but as I've said before, the direct port of generic fantasy daemons is just lame. Space daemons from space hell should have space-daemonic hell guns.

Alternatively, craftworld eldar, because I don't like their aesthetic.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Imperial Guard.

Kinda missing the point of 40K.

If I wanted to go that way, I'd play Bolt Action or some such.

We are very different people.

To me, Imperial Guard is very much on point for what 40k is, and is the "most 40k" of the 40k factions. The gigantic industrial military of a fascist regime kept in line by propaganda and fear, indoctrinated in the party line, and sent to die to keep masters they will never know or care about in political power. Entirely encapsulating the spirit of the grim darkness of the far future, where the worst timeline has come to pass and all is war fought in vain with no purpose but to continue the fight and no victory even pursued.

The thing with "current" Guard is, the options readily available to us don't really match the wider Guard lore. We've got Cadians, who are relatively well trained and equipped compared to many regiments, and who are the bravest of the brave, keeping on fighting when even their own planet broke...! Or there's Catachans, who are tougher-than-tough and meaner-than-mean, and could kill an ordinary man with a paperclip just for looking at him funny.
They're not exactly the "bodies to the grindstone" example that I think of as typical 40k grimdark.

Death Korps of Krieg is much more like it - if you make them a proper, widely available model range and bring back the Valhallans, and Captain Chenkov? NOW we're talking.

Ynnari... yuck.

Never gonna play Chaos of any stripe. I tried once, in Dawn of War, to make myself play through the Chaos campaign, but I couldn't even get through the tutorial mission.

I just don't Chaos. Had my fling with Chaotic Neutral or Neutral Evil characters in college and I'm done. That's not what RPGs or tabletop games are for. The empire is dark enough, I can't make myself play actual an actual soul-destroyingly evil army.

Dark Angels and Deathwatch. I just don't care.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dadx6 wrote:
Never gonna play Chaos of any stripe. I tried once, in Dawn of War, to make myself play through the Chaos campaign, but I couldn't even get through the tutorial mission.

I just don't Chaos. Had my fling with Chaotic Neutral or Neutral Evil characters in college and I'm done. That's not what RPGs or tabletop games are for. The empire is dark enough, I can't make myself play actual an actual soul-destroyingly evil army.

The Imperium was founded on the principles of fascism and xenophobia my man, and is a totalitarian dystopia where the value and dignity of a human being's life are not respected or even considered. I don't understand these posts taking some weird moral stance against playing armies like Chaos or Dark Eldar.

 Thousandeyes wrote:
Primaris marines.
Genestealer Cults.

Wow, that's 2/3 of my 40k armies. No commentary on that. Just an observation. From the Tzeentch avatar I am guess my Black Legion army would be more agreeable with you at least.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Dark Angels and Deathwatch. I just don't care.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dadx6 wrote:
Never gonna play Chaos of any stripe. I tried once, in Dawn of War, to make myself play through the Chaos campaign, but I couldn't even get through the tutorial mission.

I just don't Chaos. Had my fling with Chaotic Neutral or Neutral Evil characters in college and I'm done. That's not what RPGs or tabletop games are for. The empire is dark enough, I can't make myself play actual an actual soul-destroyingly evil army.

The Imperium was founded on the principles of fascism and xenophobia my man, and is a totalitarian dystopia where the value and dignity of a human being's life are not respected or even considered. I don't understand these posts taking some weird moral stance against playing armies like Chaos or Dark Eldar.

Been feeling this lately; Eventually came to the realization that a vast plain of constant Valhallan slaughter/abyssal maze of non-euclidean L-space/cheerful plague cauldron/continent-wide yiff pit is arguably not a worse place for the average Imperial citizen than being slowly worked to both mental and physical death on a Hive manufactorum, having your personality wiped and made into a Servitor, *not* having your personality wiped when you're made into a Servitor, or having the Inquisition demonstrate the millimeter-precise elasticity of your scrotum because someone in your hab block recited a prayer to the Emperor with a lisp. Rather than, y'know, for fun.

Like, just by playing 40K at all, you're 98% either the bad guy or working for the bad guy.

I've got a force of pretty much everything from 40k, before they started splitting things like deathguard off.

So, basically I have an army or small force of every faction from 5th ed I think.


Don't own any imperial knights as they cost too much.

I have no problem enjoying every faction for its specific identity.

I love marines as the monsters created by humanity to defend it from the monsters out in in the void.

I love the eldar as an ancient race of perfectionists that are tenaciously clinging to existence through pure skill and technology.

I love the guard as the utilitarian answer humanity has for protecting itself from everything, a meatgrinder that is fed perpetually by the endless supply of the Imperium's one main commodity - human lives.

I love the orks as the brutal remnant of a bio weapon created to fight perpetual war, enjoying their lives like no one else and without any restrictive rules on how they live.

I love the tyranids for their cold and alien single-minded desire to consume and evolve.

I love the tau as a race in its own golden age of technology, where humanity was 20,000 years ago, how their hope is slowing being worn away be the terrors of the galaxy.

I love chaos for its intrinsic connection to reality and existence, being an inevitable mirror to the galaxy and inescapable.

I love the necrons as a fallen dynasty attempting to rebuild its glory (even if I'm not a fan of the retcon of the c'tan-necron dynamic).


I love 40k, I love all its factions and own models from all of them.


What I have never liked is GW's insistence on turning some factions into the protagonists and others into the NPC fodder for those protagonists, while trying to sell it as a wargame where you choose your faction and the general represents you on the field.

What I don't like is favouritism of one faction over others and the lack of support for mainly xenos factions.


I don't like how there aren't heroic characters for other factions that aren't marines.

I wouldn't be surprised if you counted up named marine characters across all chapters and found more of them than the total number of units in individual xenos codexes....


So what I don't want to play, is favourites.

 Hellebore wrote:
So what I don't want to play, is favourites.

That's beautiful. I have no idea what exalting actually does if anything, but I'm hitting it on that post.

 oni wrote:
A mixed god Chaos Daemons army.

Mono-god armies are great, but the mixed armies feel so disjointed. They're appearance is like an incoherent rainbow. Some may like it and even suggest that it's narrative, but it's not for me.

I actually wish it was part of the narrative. But the sub-faction hatred is still there. So Khorne + Nurgle or Slaanesh + the one of the other two are the only really viable combinations, and even then it doesn't make much sense, as they have their own goals and mixed on the table they look awful.

But mono-god armies just feel incomplete and really should have mortal elements anyway to justify them being in real-space at all.
Its a crying shame they've never gone in for fixing it in almost 30 years, despite doing exactly what they need to do for AoS.

BrianDavion wrote:

you realize grimnar's sleigh is a referance to norse mythology right?

Yes.
And the piece in your pic looks pretty cool (model/statue wise, what's it from btw?)

Sadly this: https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Logan-Grimnar-on-Stormrider does not look that cool....

Voss wrote:

 oni wrote:
A mixed god Chaos Daemons army.

Mono-god armies are great, but the mixed armies feel so disjointed. They're appearance is like an incoherent rainbow. Some may like it and even suggest that it's narrative, but it's not for me.

I actually wish it was part of the narrative. But the sub-faction hatred is still there. So Khorne + Nurgle or Slaanesh + the one of the other two are the only really viable combinations, and even then it doesn't make much sense, as they have their own goals and mixed on the table they look awful.

But mono-god armies just feel incomplete and really should have mortal elements anyway to justify them being in real-space at all.
Its a crying shame they've never gone in for fixing it in almost 30 years, despite doing exactly what they need to do for AoS.

Khorne is more likely to get along with Tzeentch than Slaanesh.

Really a shift in lore I could get behind is deep 6'ing Khorne's hatred of psykers. Have Khornate blood priests with psychic powers focused around buffs and anti-magic.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Dark Angels and Deathwatch. I just don't care.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dadx6 wrote:
Never gonna play Chaos of any stripe. I tried once, in Dawn of War, to make myself play through the Chaos campaign, but I couldn't even get through the tutorial mission.

I just don't Chaos. Had my fling with Chaotic Neutral or Neutral Evil characters in college and I'm done. That's not what RPGs or tabletop games are for. The empire is dark enough, I can't make myself play actual an actual soul-destroyingly evil army.

The Imperium was founded on the principles of fascism and xenophobia my man, and is a totalitarian dystopia where the value and dignity of a human being's life are not respected or even considered. I don't understand these posts taking some weird moral stance against playing armies like Chaos or Dark Eldar.

To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

 Just Tony wrote:


To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

The fact that you think that what the Imperium does is necessary is already a pro-fascist attitude. People in the Imperium get sick joy out of the horrors they inflict on aliens and nonbelievers.

Hecaton wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:


To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

The fact that you think that what the Imperium does is necessary is already a pro-fascist attitude. People in the Imperium get sick joy out of the horrors they inflict on aliens and nonbelievers.

Oh boy here we go again. The last thread that included this topic deteriorated at some point so let's try to not go too deeply into this or start calling people names.
The imperium is horrible by real life standards. Real life fascists exaggerate fears through propaganda to dehumanize and justify atrocities. Never once was this right or justified by the slightest stretch throughout our real life history.
The imperium does the same only that the dangers they face are real. They actually have to face beings that literally eat your soul or murderous space elves that will torture you for fun. So while you can recognize that the imperium are horrible people by real life standards, you are not pro fascist (in the real life sense of the definition) by saying that the flawed ways of the imperium have at least kept them alive for the last 10k years. A good life? No, but there are far worse things in 40k. This is a big part of what makes the imperium interesting in the first place.

After playing csm for two decades I could never play Loyalist Scum. They're only good for casualties to decorate my bases and vehicles.

Tiberias wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:


To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

The fact that you think that what the Imperium does is necessary is already a pro-fascist attitude. People in the Imperium get sick joy out of the horrors they inflict on aliens and nonbelievers.

Oh boy here we go again. The last thread that included this topic deteriorated at some point so let's try to not go too deeply into this or start calling people names.
The imperium is horrible by real life standards. Real life fascists exaggerate fears through propaganda to dehumanize and justify atrocities. Never once was this right or justified by the slightest stretch throughout our real life history.
The imperium does the same only that the dangers they face are real. They actually have to face beings that literally eat your soul or murderous space elves that will torture you for fun. So while you can recognize that the imperium are horrible people by real life standards, you are not pro fascist (in the real life sense of the definition) by saying that the flawed ways of the imperium have at least kept them alive for the last 10k years. A good life? No, but there are far worse things in 40k. This is a big part of what makes the imperium interesting in the first place.

Nope, you're wrong. The Imperium is specifically *senselessly* brutal, corrupt, and backwards. What's more, they feed their biggest enemy (Chaos) with all the gakky things they do; Chaos is just the Imperium reflected back at itself, because the Imperium as a society makes people have screwed-up psyches, and those negative emotions play out in the immaterium and empower demons and the Dark Gods and so on. 40k was initially created as a satire/takedown of the British right-wing; the Imperium is not supposed to be noble, making the hard choice, and so on. It's supposed to be villainous, cruelty for the sake of cruelty, with plenty of self-interested and backstabbing people involved so that it doesn't even have any sort of clarity of purpose.

Space Marines
Grey Knights
SoB
Custodes
Knights
Eldar
Tau

Imperial Guard and AdMech are the only loyalist factions that appeal, and I really like IG but they're going to need a lot of new models to convince me to go down that route.

Every other faction appeals to me. CSM and tyranids are my main two factions, historically. I keep going back to orks and daemons. For a long time the only thing holding me back from necrons was the glowing green rods, now they seem to be gone. Dark Eldar are a little bit dark for me in terms of fluff, but I like everything else about them. General aesthetic, the model range, the play style looks fun.

Hecaton wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:


To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

The fact that you think that what the Imperium does is necessary is already a pro-fascist attitude. People in the Imperium get sick joy out of the horrors they inflict on aliens and nonbelievers.

Oh boy here we go again. The last thread that included this topic deteriorated at some point so let's try to not go too deeply into this or start calling people names.
The imperium is horrible by real life standards. Real life fascists exaggerate fears through propaganda to dehumanize and justify atrocities. Never once was this right or justified by the slightest stretch throughout our real life history.
The imperium does the same only that the dangers they face are real. They actually have to face beings that literally eat your soul or murderous space elves that will torture you for fun. So while you can recognize that the imperium are horrible people by real life standards, you are not pro fascist (in the real life sense of the definition) by saying that the flawed ways of the imperium have at least kept them alive for the last 10k years. A good life? No, but there are far worse things in 40k. This is a big part of what makes the imperium interesting in the first place.

Nope, you're wrong. The Imperium is specifically *senselessly* brutal, corrupt, and backwards. What's more, they feed their biggest enemy (Chaos) with all the gakky things they do; Chaos is just the Imperium reflected back at itself, because the Imperium as a society makes people have screwed-up psyches, and those negative emotions play out in the immaterium and empower demons and the Dark Gods and so on. 40k was initially created as a satire/takedown of the British right-wing; the Imperium is not supposed to be noble, making the hard choice, and so on. It's supposed to be villainous, cruelty for the sake of cruelty, with plenty of self-interested and backstabbing people involved so that it doesn't even have any sort of clarity of purpose.

I never said the imperium was noble, nor did I imply it...actually far from it. And the dark gods existed in the way they are way before the imperium turned out the way it has been for the last 10000years in the lore. Implying that the threat of chaos got that bad because the imperium is evil and stupid is just not true, chaos always was this way in the lore.

Edit: To stay on topic. Armies I'd never play: Genestealer Cults. Their models are cool to look at if someone else plays and paints them, but I don't like the line enough to buy and paint them on my own. Also grey knight, because I always thought that their sculpts were actually a downgrade to their 3rd ed versions.

 Just Tony wrote:

To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

There's no appreciable difference to the victims whether you killed them for pleasure or for "necessity", and make no mistake many in the Imperium take pleasure in the purging of the heretic and the alien, be they benign or not.

The Imperium, even in the days of the Great Crusade, would order the extinction of xeno species and even other humans for the crime of not wanting to join them.

Stop making excuses for a fictional dystopian shithole and acknowledge what it is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tiberias wrote:

Oh boy here we go again. The last thread that included this topic deteriorated at some point so let's try to not go too deeply into this or start calling people names.
The imperium is horrible by real life standards. Real life fascists exaggerate fears through propaganda to dehumanize and justify atrocities. Never once was this right or justified by the slightest stretch throughout our real life history.
The imperium does the same only that the dangers they face are real. They actually have to face beings that literally eat your soul or murderous space elves that will torture you for fun. So while you can recognize that the imperium are horrible people by real life standards, you are not pro fascist (in the real life sense of the definition) by saying that the flawed ways of the imperium have at least kept them alive for the last 10k years. A good life? No, but there are far worse things in 40k. This is a big part of what makes the imperium interesting in the first place.

They also have faced benign societies of allied humans and xenos and completely destroyed them for the crime of not wanting to join the fascist empire that is aggressively colonizing the galaxy.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

There's no appreciable difference to the victims whether you killed them for pleasure or for "necessity", and make no mistake many in the Imperium take pleasure in the purging of the heretic and the alien, be they benign or not.

The Imperium, even in the days of the Great Crusade, would order the extinction of xeno species and even other humans for the crime of not wanting to join them.

Stop making excuses for a fictional dystopian shithole and acknowledge what it is.

TBF, selfdefense is an argument, especially after the great crusade, that beeing said, the great crusade indeed was also war crime galore so the underlined part is still a valid assertion

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

There's no appreciable difference to the victims whether you killed them for pleasure or for "necessity", and make no mistake many in the Imperium take pleasure in the purging of the heretic and the alien, be they benign or not.

The Imperium, even in the days of the Great Crusade, would order the extinction of xeno species and even other humans for the crime of not wanting to join them.

Stop making excuses for a fictional dystopian shithole and acknowledge what it is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tiberias wrote:

Oh boy here we go again. The last thread that included this topic deteriorated at some point so let's try to not go too deeply into this or start calling people names.
The imperium is horrible by real life standards. Real life fascists exaggerate fears through propaganda to dehumanize and justify atrocities. Never once was this right or justified by the slightest stretch throughout our real life history.
The imperium does the same only that the dangers they face are real. They actually have to face beings that literally eat your soul or murderous space elves that will torture you for fun. So while you can recognize that the imperium are horrible people by real life standards, you are not pro fascist (in the real life sense of the definition) by saying that the flawed ways of the imperium have at least kept them alive for the last 10k years. A good life? No, but there are far worse things in 40k. This is a big part of what makes the imperium interesting in the first place.

They also have faced benign societies of allied humans and xenos and completely destroyed them for the crime of not wanting to join the fascist empire that is aggressively colonizing the galaxy.

Urgh...again I even said in the beginning that the imperium is horrible, but there are more horrible things still in this fictional universe, which is part of what makes the imperium interesting. But if you really want to discuss this pm me, because this thread will get locked in no time if this discussion continues, which would be unfair to the OP.

 oni wrote:
A mixed god Chaos Daemons army.

Mono-god armies are great, but the mixed armies feel so disjointed. They're appearance is like an incoherent rainbow. Some may like it and even suggest that it's narrative, but it's not for me.

Daemons are an awkward faction. Mixed god gives them the variety to work like other factions, but the aesthetic issue remains. For lore I can get my head around having a two god army by considering them as completely different forces, that just happen to converge and fight together once or twice in a campaign. When I play, it's the army at that specific moment. The aesthetic issue remains, I really don't like soup aesthetics and love a force that's extremely consistent in appearance.

Mono god is just so limiting for army composition, and 9th isn't helping since the HQ section is by far the biggest for daemons. Khorne, for example, has nine HQ's and four other options. Ten and six if we include daemon princes, furies and soul grinders. Lore and aesthetics encourage mono-god armies, while tabletop effectiveness does the opposite

Hecaton wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:


To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

The fact that you think that what the Imperium does is necessary is already a pro-fascist attitude. People in the Imperium get sick joy out of the horrors they inflict on aliens and nonbelievers.

Void__Dragon wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

To some there is a VAST difference between wiping out opposing factions out of necessity and wiping them out because you are aroused by the action, whatever form that arousal takes.

There's no appreciable difference to the victims whether you killed them for pleasure or for "necessity", and make no mistake many in the Imperium take pleasure in the purging of the heretic and the alien, be they benign or not.

The Imperium, even in the days of the Great Crusade, would order the extinction of xeno species and even other humans for the crime of not wanting to join them.

Stop making excuses for a fictional dystopian shithole and acknowledge what it is.

Two posters who can't see that saying one army is decidedly MORE evil is NOT the same as saying one of the other factions is NOT evil/corrupt/argleblargleCutOurselvesWhileListeningToMorrissey or whatever. Trust me, I know that there was only ever 1 altruistic faction for either WFB or 40K and those were thoroughly retconned into corruption in the early/mid 2000's.

Hecaton wrote:

Voss wrote:

 oni wrote:
A mixed god Chaos Daemons army.

Mono-god armies are great, but the mixed armies feel so disjointed. They're appearance is like an incoherent rainbow. Some may like it and even suggest that it's narrative, but it's not for me.

I actually wish it was part of the narrative. But the sub-faction hatred is still there. So Khorne + Nurgle or Slaanesh + the one of the other two are the only really viable combinations, and even then it doesn't make much sense, as they have their own goals and mixed on the table they look awful.

But mono-god armies just feel incomplete and really should have mortal elements anyway to justify them being in real-space at all.
Its a crying shame they've never gone in for fixing it in almost 30 years, despite doing exactly what they need to do for AoS.

Khorne is more likely to get along with Tzeentch than Slaanesh.

Really a shift in lore I could get behind is deep 6'ing Khorne's hatred of psykers. Have Khornate blood priests with psychic powers focused around buffs and anti-magic.

Azariah Kyras says hello

Hecaton wrote:
Khorne is more likely to get along with Tzeentch than Slaanesh.

Gotta disagree on this - even outside of the whole psyker/sorcerer thing, Khorne has plenty of reason to hate Tzeentch.
Because as much as Slaanesh might preen and prance and be all too distracted by such petty concerns as anything-other-than-a-battlefield, the Prince is still all too willing to shed blood in combat, even if the reasons are vile. Tzeentch by comparison is an utter coward, always skulking in his plots and getting others to do his dirty work for him. The Lord of Skulls has no time for such foolery!

 Super Ready wrote:

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Khorne is more likely to get along with Tzeentch than Slaanesh.

Gotta disagree on this - even outside of the whole psyker/sorcerer thing, Khorne has plenty of reason to hate Tzeentch.
Because as much as Slaanesh might preen and prance and be all too distracted by such petty concerns as anything-other-than-a-battlefield, the Prince is still all too willing to shed blood in combat, even if the reasons are vile. Tzeentch by comparison is an utter coward, always skulking in his plots and getting others to do his dirty work for him. The Lord of Skulls has no time for such foolery!

Way to misquote dude - I didn't say that.

Tiberias wrote:
I never said the imperium was noble, nor did I imply it...actually far from it. And the dark gods existed in the way they are way before the imperium turned out the way it has been for the last 10000years in the lore. Implying that the threat of chaos got that bad because the imperium is evil and stupid is just not true, chaos always was this way in the lore.

The Eldar are at fault too, certainly, but you're saying that what the Imperium does is necessary. It's not. Life could be a lot better, but the members of the Imperium get off on the cruelty. They are humanity at their worst, and every time they're attacked by xenos or Chaos they're getting their just deserts. This is the "cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable," remember, not the stoic defenders of humanity.

This is why "reasonable marines" were a joke about marines playing against type. The Imperium is inherently unreasonable and wasteful, not expedient in anything except oppression and cruelty.

Whhhhhoops! Sorry NoiseMarine - that's just me not being careful with the quote-snipping, I hate using multiple embedded quotes if it's avoidable. I've corrected it now.

Getting the thread back on topic... (hint hint)

One army that I don't think I would ever play would be Orks. I like Orks and their whole Mad Max-type schtick, but I don't think I would particularly enjoy painting or playing with them. I do enjoy seeing what others do with them, both paint and game-wise.

Another that I probably wouldn't play would be Craftworld Aeldari. On the whole they just don't do anything for me, lookswise. I've seen some amazingly painted examples of their models, so it's not like it can't be done, but to me they are just boring. If for some reason I did want to play Aeldari I would likely run Wraith constructs, competitiveness be damned. The Wraithknight is probably one of the few Craftworld models that I really like.

 Snake Tortoise wrote:

 oni wrote:
A mixed god Chaos Daemons army.

Mono-god armies are great, but the mixed armies feel so disjointed. They're appearance is like an incoherent rainbow. Some may like it and even suggest that it's narrative, but it's not for me.

Daemons are an awkward faction. Mixed god gives them the variety to work like other factions, but the aesthetic issue remains. For lore I can get my head around having a two god army by considering them as completely different forces, that just happen to converge and fight together once or twice in a campaign. When I play, it's the army at that specific moment. The aesthetic issue remains, I really don't like soup aesthetics and love a force that's extremely consistent in appearance.

Mono god is just so limiting for army composition, and 9th isn't helping since the HQ section is by far the biggest for daemons. Khorne, for example, has nine HQ's and four other options. Ten and six if we include daemon princes, furies and soul grinders. Lore and aesthetics encourage mono-god armies, while tabletop effectiveness does the opposite

Well, you can do the unthinkable and... uhm... paint all the DIFFERENT daemons in the SAME colour scheme. Yeah, I know, it's a complete heretical train of thought but will do nicely for sure.

yukishiro1 wrote:

I wouldn't play T'au with the way the faction is currently set up, but if they ever turn them into a real coalition army with good non-T'au auxiliaries playing a meaningful role in the army, I might.

Alot of people who play Tau wish that was an actual thing. GW is missing out on not expanding Alien auxiliaries for the faction as there are many different species mentioned in the lore that are used in battle. It would give the faction a boost in close combat department (to at least be able hold ground in combat) and more uniqueness among the races. Not that the faction isn't unique already but not using aliens means a good part of the species lore & Greater Good is missing from the army. Just allowing Human Gue'Vesa to be playable would be a nice gift to their player base.

 Strg Alt wrote:

 Snake Tortoise wrote:

 oni wrote:
A mixed god Chaos Daemons army.

Mono-god armies are great, but the mixed armies feel so disjointed. They're appearance is like an incoherent rainbow. Some may like it and even suggest that it's narrative, but it's not for me.

Daemons are an awkward faction. Mixed god gives them the variety to work like other factions, but the aesthetic issue remains. For lore I can get my head around having a two god army by considering them as completely different forces, that just happen to converge and fight together once or twice in a campaign. When I play, it's the army at that specific moment. The aesthetic issue remains, I really don't like soup aesthetics and love a force that's extremely consistent in appearance.

Mono god is just so limiting for army composition, and 9th isn't helping since the HQ section is by far the biggest for daemons. Khorne, for example, has nine HQ's and four other options. Ten and six if we include daemon princes, furies and soul grinders. Lore and aesthetics encourage mono-god armies, while tabletop effectiveness does the opposite

Well, you can do the unthinkable and... uhm... paint all the DIFFERENT daemons in the SAME colour scheme. Yeah, I know, it's a complete heretical train of thought but will do nicely for sure.

Forge World used to sell and maybe still sells some deamons of the ruinstorms that were not from a single god and has an interesting paintscheme actually

I probably won't ever play Tau because I don't think they fit into 40K and I hate all shooting armies.

I probably won't ever play Genestealer Cults because I have no interest in the army. The models are fine, but I've always thought Genestealers were the worst part of the Tyranid look, which I actually like quite a bit. Having a whole army of them is uninteresting to me.

As for factions that I currently can't see myself building, playing, converting it would boil down to these:
Craftworld Aeldari & Harlequins - Their lore doesn't inspire me & neither do their models. I mostly just don't find the Space Elves attractive in anyway. Expect the Craftworld Wraith units are kits that I do like.

Drukhari - The Drukhari have models & bits that have given me ideas for conversions. I've also made a Haemonculus character named Khankei. Who experiments & torture on daemon or chaos infested species. In an attempt to better understand how chaos ticks and get his Drukhari kicks of feeding on suffering. The idea of inflicting pain upon the servants of Slaanesh is especially enjoyable in his eyes.
The other Eldar haven't given me interesting ideas like that as of this post. And I'm not tempted in trying to play them. Drukhari is the only Aeldari faction that I would currently consider trying out on the tabletop.

Chaos - Outside of a good amount of bits to be used I'm against the faction as a whole. However, it does provide interesting ideas for lore especially with Human cults, Astares & Aliens who pledge themselves to the dark gods. As for gameplay I'd might be tempted to try chaos hereteks & Astartes over daemons. Heretic Astartes bits are more varied than the Loyalist variants. Except for the unique Dark & Blood Angel & Space Wolves kits. Their mutations and willingness to express their new allegiance gives people freedom to go crazy in kitbashing. Still there are those on this l

Mechcanicus, Sororitas, Astartes, Knights, Custodes, Guard - I'm usually the guy that plays/roots for Humanity in wargaming lore. The Imperium of Man has alot of lore tidbits to get creative juices in gear. As for the physical armies they don't do it for me.
Loyal Astartes have the biggest pull model-wise especially with the Space Wolves, Dark Angel & Blood Angels bits & kits. Though I like the possibilities Astartes present, the idea of normal Humans fighting against the odds gives the Imperial Guard a slight bump. With the many different regiments/planets the variations are staggering & inspiring. The problem is that unlike the Astartes GW hasn't given the options to bring these ideas to life without 3rd parties or large conversions. Still the Anvil (Guard) & the Scalpel (Astartes) are the two Imperium forces I'd choose if I went Imperium.
As for the others:
Mechanicus overall doesn't appeal to me. With only a couple of kits that interest me from a conversion standpoint. Mainly Skitarii ones.
The Sororitas never clicked with me and GW's chance to bring them up to date fell flat. I don't feel any different about them lore wise & their new models, while better, are not to my liking.
Imperial & Chaos Knights & their houses are something I'd investing since I don't like their look. I have seen some neat conversion of both sides but the amount of money need to be spent to procure the bits needed is not worth it to me.
Custodes & Grey Knights, the cream of the Imperium's super-soldier crop. Neither one excites me. Deathwatch is more preferable since you can mix and match different chapters together. In that regard Deathwatch might be the Astartes I'm more likely to dive into if I decide to play them.

Necrons - The Necronyr are not in my top category of Xenos lore-wise but many of their kits have nice conversion possibilities. I did create a unique fallen dynasty a couple of years back focusing of pirate Necrons who want to return to fleshly forms in order to reexperience the feeling of pleasure. It's name is Iah'Iaret which is ancient Eygptian for Moon Cobra. I though it would be interesting to make the female Necronyr in high positions of power be the only ones to retain their minds. They hope that somehow they can bring back their lost loved ones but as time goes on this outlook has turned into a grim prospect. Who knows if I will make this idea a reality.

Orks - Orks are a favorite of the community and it is not hard to see why. Likable to an extent as you wouldn't want them to be real or meet one face to face. Their lore, demeanor & kits encourage concocting your own WAAAGH! Including their behaviour of taking enemy vehicles or weaponry and mickey-mousing them. Still while they have all of this going for them I'm not completely sold on playing them. While I focus on the hobby side much more than playing, hence why converting is a priority for me, many of the Ork kits don't appeal to me. I rather play a certain cow-hoofed alien than an Ork Boy.

Tau - Outside of Orks this was the first Xenos army I truly considered collecting/playing. Tau Firewarriors & Pathfinders drew me into the faction. I love how they look. Blowing the Imeprium's Cadian & Catachan models out of the water. The gunline & style of gameplay appealed to me over the other factions. I'm into Historical wargaming and thus the idea of a sci-fi gunline with suits made the Tau click with me the most.
Plus I don't need nearly as many models as the Imperial Guard & I hate tanks. Too many of GW's Guard line are kits I dislike except the Tempestus Scions are really nice along with the Valkirye. Maybe that could be a future army but that is a pipe dream for now.
Having no psychic phase is a bonus in my book. One less section of the turn that I don't need to perform. Helps simplify the game when you have less to keep track of.

Tyranids & Genestealer Cults - These two along with Tau are my top faction picks. I like the majority of the kits. More so with the Tyranids while some of the Cult's kits I don't care for. The whole reason for me choosing the Hive Mind was due to the release of the Genestealer Cults two years back. I really liked both Hybrid box kits (Neophyte & Acolyte) and their designs sold me on the faction. Since then the brood has been continually been pushed off it's perch and tumbling downward. A fate that their parents the Tyranids have shared over the years.
Still the monster creature bugs and their infected Human hybrids are up their with Tau as my favorite overall model ranges. Concerning the entire model range without changing/converting them. I could stay with Tyranids, Gene Cults, T'au & be content with the lots I've chosen. Sure they are not in the top tier anymore but having an army that you really enjoy the look of will help keep them from going stale. At least that is one part of the hobby you can control. GW will always do what it wills with the rules and change the meta to sell models. If you have factions that you can get behind and stay behind through thick and thin is the best goal a hobbyist can hope for. I think I've found mine and hopefully you will find yours as well.

 Golem2God wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:

I wouldn't play T'au with the way the faction is currently set up, but if they ever turn them into a real coalition army with good non-T'au auxiliaries playing a meaningful role in the army, I might.

Alot of people who play Tau wish that was an actual thing. GW is missing out on not expanding Alien auxiliaries for the faction as there are many different species mentioned in the lore that are used in battle. It would give the faction a boost in close combat department (to at least be able hold ground in combat) and more uniqueness among the races. Not that the faction isn't unique already but not using aliens means a good part of the species lore & Greater Good is missing from the army. Just allowing Human Gue'Vesa to be playable would be a nice gift to their player base.

The problem is that that would make the Tau too interesting/fun, and Imperium players in general and Astartes players in particular have an acute negative play experience when that's true of their opponents' faction.

Incidentally, Tau are the actual "making hard choices to survive in a harsh galaxy" faction. The Imperium is cruel, sadistic, and corrupt.

Jun 2020 TangoTwoBravo: I would never play Necrons. Anything that came after I started is bad. Plus I don't like them.

Aaaaaand now I have a Necron army and I played my first game with them today. Three weeks of leave, a pandemic, Midwinter Minis' videos on sandstone Necrons and the Indomitus box and now I have Necrons. Got to say its been a fun journey - a cleansing of the palette. Don't be afraid to try new things.

Hecaton wrote:

 Golem2God wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:

I wouldn't play T'au with the way the faction is currently set up, but if they ever turn them into a real coalition army with good non-T'au auxiliaries playing a meaningful role in the army, I might.

Alot of people who play Tau wish that was an actual thing. GW is missing out on not expanding Alien auxiliaries for the faction as there are many different species mentioned in the lore that are used in battle. It would give the faction a boost in close combat department (to at least be able hold ground in combat) and more uniqueness among the races. Not that the faction isn't unique already but not using aliens means a good part of the species lore & Greater Good is missing from the army. Just allowing Human Gue'Vesa to be playable would be a nice gift to their player base.

The problem is that that would make the Tau too interesting/fun, and Imperium players in general and Astartes players in particular have an acute negative play experience when that's true of their opponents' faction.

Incidentally, Tau are the actual "making hard choices to survive in a harsh galaxy" faction. The Imperium is cruel, sadistic, and corrupt.

man making swipes agaisnt entire swaths of people for the army they choose to play? pretty lame

Hecaton wrote:

 Golem2God wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:

I wouldn't play T'au with the way the faction is currently set up, but if they ever turn them into a real coalition army with good non-T'au auxiliaries playing a meaningful role in the army, I might.

Alot of people who play Tau wish that was an actual thing. GW is missing out on not expanding Alien auxiliaries for the faction as there are many different species mentioned in the lore that are used in battle. It would give the faction a boost in close combat department (to at least be able hold ground in combat) and more uniqueness among the races. Not that the faction isn't unique already but not using aliens means a good part of the species lore & Greater Good is missing from the army. Just allowing Human Gue'Vesa to be playable would be a nice gift to their player base.

The problem is that that would make the Tau too interesting/fun, and Imperium players in general and Astartes players in particular have an acute negative play experience when that's true of their opponents' faction.

Incidentally, Tau are the actual "making hard choices to survive in a harsh galaxy" faction. The Imperium is cruel, sadistic, and corrupt.

Oddly enough the altruistic race I was referring to was the Tau, but we can't have any altruism in our grimderp so 4th ed codex basically reframed the Greater Good as a form of mind control.

Admech. I painted a kill team and that is enough for me. They look good, but I found them tedious.

Tyranids, I just can't paint organic miniatures as well as I can paint machines.

I toyed with the idea of some kind of mecha-nid army, but I just think it would be too much work.

Eldar. I think they're boring and dry with even more boring and dry rulesets.

It's a shame really, because space elves could be neato

Tau. Awful design gameplay wise. No other complaints about them really.

Hecaton wrote:

 Golem2God wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:

I wouldn't play T'au with the way the faction is currently set up, but if they ever turn them into a real coalition army with good non-T'au auxiliaries playing a meaningful role in the army, I might.

Alot of people who play Tau wish that was an actual thing. GW is missing out on not expanding Alien auxiliaries for the faction as there are many different species mentioned in the lore that are used in battle. It would give the faction a boost in close combat department (to at least be able hold ground in combat) and more uniqueness among the races. Not that the faction isn't unique already but not using aliens means a good part of the species lore & Greater Good is missing from the army. Just allowing Human Gue'Vesa to be playable would be a nice gift to their player base.

The problem is that that would make the Tau too interesting/fun, and Imperium players in general and Astartes players in particular have an acute negative play experience when that's true of their opponents' faction.

Incidentally, Tau are the actual "making hard choices to survive in a harsh galaxy" faction. The Imperium is cruel, sadistic, and corrupt.

The Tau were never as you say. Even before Games Workshop decided to give in to the neckbeards, who whined that the Tau were too optimistic and not grimdark enough for the setting. Now, the Tau are really no better than any other faction. They're just smart enough to hide it behind high sounding BS, propaganda, mass murder, and mind control. And the Ethereals are now just cardboard cutout, Saturday morning cartoon, moustche-twirling villains who make the Dark Eldar seem deep by comparison. The only thing that keeps the Tau even remotely interesting lore-wise are characters like Farsight and Shadowsun developing doubts about the current system, and begin to question.

The closest to truly "honorable" factions in 40k are the Orks and Tyranids. They are honest and/or straightforward about what they do. The Hive Mind is about pure survival of the whole, at the expense of all non-Tyranid life. They don't make it personal. They need the biomass and resources of your world, and you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The Orks just like to fight, steal, waste ammo, and raise unholy hell. And the Orks will tell you that's how it is.....then smash your face in.

I won't derail the thread further by debating over the Imperium with you. I will say that you are correct.....to a point. The Imperium, at all levels, is a bit more nuanced than simply HURR DURR CATHOLIC SPHESS NAHTZEEZ!!!11oneeleventyone11!


Back on topic.......


I have no interest in the Dark Eldar, since I'm not into gothic vampire horror ultra-kink. Nor am I interested in Chaos, since GW has ignored the multiple aspects of the Chaos Gods, dumbing them down into evil one dimensional, one-trick ponies.

I was excited for the plastic Sisters. And the new ladies in PA look good. But I'm put off over the changes to the Repentia and Pentient Engine models. I get the feeling that they were trying to make them more kid-friendly, which is hilarious considering the setting.

I have no desire to play any canon Space Marine chapters or canon Chaos Space Marine Legions/warbands. I like the concept of the Space Marines, however. If I ever throw together an army, it will be a homebrew chapter. The same goes for the Primaris Marines, with whom I hope Games Workshop will stick with the high-speed, low-drag super-soldier theme, and not turn them into overly grimdark smug bastard, psycho warrior-monks (i.e. the 'First Born" Marines, just bigger). The Primaris are supposed to represent a new age in the Imperium. An age where the Imperium needs super-soldiers to act like super-soldiers, not roid-raging nutters that charge a gazillion insane, nasty galactic a******s with just a chainsword and a battlecry.

I don't care much for the Harlequinns or craftworld Eldar, either. Now, if GW came out with an Exodite line, I would be sold on it in a heartbeat. There is just something about Sphess Elfz riding dinosaurs that's just plain awesome.

Probably Tau for me, from what I've seen of them, it looks like they mostly just sit back and shoot all game, which seems kinda boring to me

BrianDavion wrote:
man making swipes agaisnt entire swaths of people for the army they choose to play? pretty lame

It's pretty true in my experience.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
The Tau were never as you say. Even before Games Workshop decided to give in to the neckbeards, who whined that the Tau were too optimistic and not grimdark enough for the setting. Now, the Tau are really no better than any other faction. They're just smart enough to hide it behind high sounding BS, propaganda, mass murder, and mind control. And the Ethereals are now just cardboard cutout, Saturday morning cartoon, moustche-twirling villains who make the Dark Eldar seem deep by comparison. The only thing that keeps the Tau even remotely interesting lore-wise are characters like Farsight and Shadowsun developing doubts about the current system, and begin to question.

No, with the current fluff there's a very crucial difference between them and the Imperium - the Tau do things because it's necessary for survival. The Imperium is senselessly cruel, and in fact will compromise its own survival to inflict more pain and misery on its own people and everyone else.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
I won't derail the thread further by debating over the Imperium with you. I will say that you are correct.....to a point. The Imperium, at all levels, is a bit more nuanced than simply HURR DURR CATHOLIC SPHESS NAHTZEEZ!!!11oneeleventyone11!

Sure, there's a surprising amount of nuance there, but it's important to note that the Imperium isn't *amoral* but rather *immoral*, and the system brutally punishes anyone with anything we would consider a conscience or morality, and rewards the selfish and corrupt.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
I was excited for the plastic Sisters. And the new ladies in PA look good. But I'm put off over the changes to the Repentia and Pentient Engine models. I get the feeling that they were trying to make them more kid-friendly, which is hilarious considering the setting.

They weren't trying to make them more kid-friendly, they were trying to make them seem more unironically heroic, because women are all perfect moral angels amirite?

Hecaton wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
I was excited for the plastic Sisters. And the new ladies in PA look good. But I'm put off over the changes to the Repentia and Pentient Engine models. I get the feeling that they were trying to make them more kid-friendly, which is hilarious considering the setting.

They weren't trying to make them more kid-friendly, they were trying to make them seem more unironically heroic, because women are all perfect moral angels amirite?

oldravenman3025 wrote:
I was excited for the plastic Sisters. And the new ladies in PA look good. But I'm put off over the changes to the Repentia and Pentient Engine models. I get the feeling that they were trying to make them more kid-friendly, which is hilarious considering the setting.

Okay, I have a bunch of things to say about this:

1: Are we seeing the same models for old and new? This isn't the FW keeper of secrets with six exposed nipples we're talking about. The old repentia were pretty hideous models, but weren't naked or not-kid-friendly or anything [or at least, no less kid friendly than the new ones. They've traded sacks over their heads in exchange for spiked collars and more dangly chains, and also some like grafts on their skin]. I would say my disappointment with the repentia was that they kept the weird leather & chains bondage cult aesthetic the old models had instead of going for something like "clad in parchment" like the art often shows. They still look like a goofy BDSM cult, but like, they always looked like that which was the general criticism of their old models, so, uh... not sure what's up with the kid friendlyness.

As a side note, I don't get this whole thing with "40k isn't/shouldn't be kid friendly". This might be my American sensibilities speaking [wherein violence is acceptable for children of all ages but even thinking about the idea of sex is instantly like no-show for anyone under 21] or maybe just a really warped vision of what's acceptable for kids, but like with the exception of the FW keeper of secrets and that one dark eldar model, it's mostly just fantasy/cartoon violence that's almost certainly less realistic than what they're seeing in their video games [also, like it's miniatures. The least kid friendly thing about them is the glue and fine motor skills involved with assembly].



2: Also, like, what's this about the moral angels and how do the pentient engines and repentia have anything to do with that? They're definitely not showing the organization that is the sororitas to be a particularly nice organization, and there are and always have been male and female pilot options for the things.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


Okay, I have a bunch of things to say about this:

1: Are we seeing the same models for old and new? This isn't the FW keeper of secrets with six exposed nipples we're talking about. The old repentia were pretty hideous models, but weren't naked or not-kid-friendly or anything [or at least, no less kid friendly than the new ones. They've traded sacks over their heads in exchange for spiked collars and more dangly chains, and also some like grafts on their skin]. I would say my disappointment with the repentia was that they kept the weird leather & chains bondage cult aesthetic the old models had instead of going for something like "clad in parchment" like the art often shows. They still look like a goofy BDSM cult, but like, they always looked like that which was the general criticism of their old models, so, uh... not sure what's up with the kid friendlyness.

They covered up their bodies more with athletic gear, for some reason. It doesn't seem very 40k to me, and is strange juxtaposed with the piercings and so on. Like "Oh these are murderous fascists who kill people who look different but wouldn't want to accidentally catch a sideboob!"

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
As a side note, I don't get this whole thing with "40k isn't/shouldn't be kid friendly". This might be my American sensibilities speaking [wherein violence is acceptable for children of all ages but even thinking about the idea of sex is instantly like no-show for anyone under 21] or maybe just a really warped vision of what's acceptable for kids, but like with the exception of the FW keeper of secrets and that one dark eldar model, it's mostly just fantasy/cartoon violence that's almost certainly less realistic than what they're seeing in their video games [also, like it's miniatures. The least kid friendly thing about them is the glue and fine motor skills involved with assembly].

I'm American as well, and I've been playing GW games since I was about eight. My parents didn't really understand how fethed up the setting was, though. But the "not kid friendly" comes in more in terms of actually having the genocidal fascists of the Imperium be, well, genocidal fascists, instead of whitewashing and sanitizing them so that a wine mom will buy them for her kid.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
2: Also, like, what's this about the moral angels and how do the pentient engines and repentia have anything to do with that? They're definitely not showing the organization that is the sororitas to be a particularly nice organization, and there are and always have been male and female pilot options for the things.

Overall, the new changes make the organization seem "nicer."

Chaos.

I have nothing against the Chaos Gods, just how the models are. The Thousand Sons Rubrics are IMHO about as far as I'd go, even though their god is Changer of Ways.

I don't get the tusks and spurs and pus and whatever. I'm toying with the idea of an AL army with only a few embellishments. The "cover in glue and roll in animal parts box" doesn't really do it for me.

I'd like to play Slaanesh, but the 80's music era Noise Marines aesthetic spoiled it for me.

I've had Chaos, so in general, Chaos isn't so bad for me.

Specifically, Nurgle just isn't an army I will ever collect, and only play if someone was loaning me the army (as I have none at present). The sick and rotting theme doesn't work for me and intimidates my painting more than probably any other army, including Harlequins (barely). It also doesn't help that it seems that half the representation of Chaos locally is in Nurgle (they like the painting challenge and do amazing at it, so I can't argue).

Formerly, it would have been a tie between Nurgle and Dark Eldar, but the newer sculpts aren't as S&M as they used to be, and they actually have sparked some interest.

Everyone else I'd probably collect if I had the money to do so.

Hecaton wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


Okay, I have a bunch of things to say about this:

1: Are we seeing the same models for old and new? This isn't the FW keeper of secrets with six exposed nipples we're talking about. The old repentia were pretty hideous models, but weren't naked or not-kid-friendly or anything [or at least, no less kid friendly than the new ones. They've traded sacks over their heads in exchange for spiked collars and more dangly chains, and also some like grafts on their skin]. I would say my disappointment with the repentia was that they kept the weird leather & chains bondage cult aesthetic the old models had instead of going for something like "clad in parchment" like the art often shows. They still look like a goofy BDSM cult, but like, they always looked like that which was the general criticism of their old models, so, uh... not sure what's up with the kid friendlyness.

They covered up their bodies more with athletic gear, for some reason. It doesn't seem very 40k to me, and is strange juxtaposed with the piercings and so on. Like "Oh these are murderous fascists who kill people who look different but wouldn't want to accidentally catch a sideboob!"

Uh... I'm sorry, I'm not seeing this anti-fanservice PG-rating conspiracy you're talking about. I have both new and old ones, and they look pretty aesthetically consistent [though the old models are ugly and kind of distored and unnatural looking as hell, but that's just the hallmark of like 25 year old sculpts].

Like,
A: I'm not convinced that their top-thing being strapless was critical to the model's aesthetic or conveying the lore of being disgraced members of the order who wear no armor and trust in faith to protect them. Like, the new models are really faithful to the old designs for the Repentia in a bad way. They still look like a BDSM fetish cult instead of what they're supposed to be because I don't know, naughty nuns are hot for leather, chains, and piercings?
B: Neither the old nor new aesthetic looks at all like the art and general thematic description where they wore a tabard made of scripture.

Like, I understand "I don't like them, they're weird looking," or "I don't like them, they don't match the old lore." I don't understand "I don't like them because they're less hot than the old models" because they're not any less weirdly fanservice-y, unless you're into face-sacks, in which case, well, that's very specific and I don't think having bags on their heads made them unsuitable for children before.

There are lots of reasons to dislike the army, some of them valid and some that I won't touch with a 11ft pole. But this one confuses me like hell.

Hecaton wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
As a side note, I don't get this whole thing with "40k isn't/shouldn't be kid friendly". This might be my American sensibilities speaking [wherein violence is acceptable for children of all ages but even thinking about the idea of sex is instantly like no-show for anyone under 21] or maybe just a really warped vision of what's acceptable for kids, but like with the exception of the FW keeper of secrets and that one dark eldar model, it's mostly just fantasy/cartoon violence that's almost certainly less realistic than what they're seeing in their video games [also, like it's miniatures. The least kid friendly thing about them is the glue and fine motor skills involved with assembly].

I'm American as well, and I've been playing GW games since I was about eight. My parents didn't really understand how fethed up the setting was, though. But the "not kid friendly" comes in more in terms of actually having the genocidal fascists of the Imperium be, well, genocidal fascists, instead of whitewashing and sanitizing them so that a wine mom will buy them for her kid.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
2: Also, like, what's this about the moral angels and how do the pentient engines and repentia have anything to do with that? They're definitely not showing the organization that is the sororitas to be a particularly nice organization, and there are and always have been male and female pilot options for the things.

Overall, the new changes make the organization seem "nicer."

I'm not sure how. Like, none of the lore has been changed, they've even added in the Anchorite and Mortifier [which are recaptured defectors from the order and repentia who rout in battle, respectively], and the models themselves have more torturey medieval stuff on it. Like, seriously, I'm not even sure if we're looking at the same models, the new pilots are screaming and contorted with all kinds of hoses and face masks and syringes and even an iron maiden on one of them.
That said, I'm kind of sad they dropped the religious punishment overtones that was the previous pilot being in a tunic in a crucifix pose with no real other ancillary torture-stuff for just going ham on the "medieval torturer's dungeon" aesthetic with like that mask with the hoses into his eyes, the coffin with the syringes, or the stocks that one guy has.

Tau!

"But you own a Tau army?"

Yes, but I didn't buy that army. It was given to me. I would never have started a Tau army of my own accord.

For me it's space marines (any flavor). The knights/humans+1 in space archetype just doesn't do it for me. I could have been tempted by the 2nd ed incarnation though.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


Okay, I have a bunch of things to say about this:

1: Are we seeing the same models for old and new? This isn't the FW keeper of secrets with six exposed nipples we're talking about. The old repentia were pretty hideous models, but weren't naked or not-kid-friendly or anything [or at least, no less kid friendly than the new ones. They've traded sacks over their heads in exchange for spiked collars and more dangly chains, and also some like grafts on their skin]. I would say my disappointment with the repentia was that they kept the weird leather & chains bondage cult aesthetic the old models had instead of going for something like "clad in parchment" like the art often shows. They still look like a goofy BDSM cult, but like, they always looked like that which was the general criticism of their old models, so, uh... not sure what's up with the kid friendlyness.

They covered up their bodies more with athletic gear, for some reason. It doesn't seem very 40k to me, and is strange juxtaposed with the piercings and so on. Like "Oh these are murderous fascists who kill people who look different but wouldn't want to accidentally catch a sideboob!"

Uh... I'm sorry, I'm not seeing this anti-fanservice PG-rating conspiracy you're talking about. I have both new and old ones, and they look pretty aesthetically consistent [though the old models are ugly and kind of distored and unnatural looking as hell, but that's just the hallmark of like 25 year old sculpts].

Like,
A: I'm not convinced that their top-thing being strapless was critical to the model's aesthetic or conveying the lore of being disgraced members of the order who wear no armor and trust in faith to protect them. Like, the new models are really faithful to the old designs for the Repentia in a bad way. They still look like a BDSM fetish cult instead of what they're supposed to be because I don't know, naughty nuns are hot for leather, chains, and piercings?
B: Neither the old nor new aesthetic looks at all like the art and general thematic description where they wore a tabard made of scripture.

Like, I understand "I don't like them, they're weird looking," or "I don't like them, they don't match the old lore." I don't understand "I don't like them because they're less hot than the old models" because they're not any less weirdly fanservice-y, unless you're into face-sacks, in which case, well, that's very specific and I don't think having bags on their heads made them unsuitable for children before.

There are lots of reasons to dislike the army, some of them valid and some that I won't touch with a 11ft pole. But this one confuses me like hell.

Hecaton wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
As a side note, I don't get this whole thing with "40k isn't/shouldn't be kid friendly". This might be my American sensibilities speaking [wherein violence is acceptable for children of all ages but even thinking about the idea of sex is instantly like no-show for anyone under 21] or maybe just a really warped vision of what's acceptable for kids, but like with the exception of the FW keeper of secrets and that one dark eldar model, it's mostly just fantasy/cartoon violence that's almost certainly less realistic than what they're seeing in their video games [also, like it's miniatures. The least kid friendly thing about them is the glue and fine motor skills involved with assembly].

I'm American as well, and I've been playing GW games since I was about eight. My parents didn't really understand how fethed up the setting was, though. But the "not kid friendly" comes in more in terms of actually having the genocidal fascists of the Imperium be, well, genocidal fascists, instead of whitewashing and sanitizing them so that a wine mom will buy them for her kid.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
2: Also, like, what's this about the moral angels and how do the pentient engines and repentia have anything to do with that? They're definitely not showing the organization that is the sororitas to be a particularly nice organization, and there are and always have been male and female pilot options for the things.

Overall, the new changes make the organization seem "nicer."

I'm not sure how. Like, none of the lore has been changed, they've even added in the Anchorite and Mortifier [which are recaptured defectors from the order and repentia who rout in battle, respectively], and the models themselves have more torturey medieval stuff on it. Like, seriously, I'm not even sure if we're looking at the same models, the new pilots are screaming and contorted with all kinds of hoses and face masks and syringes and even an iron maiden on one of them.
That said, I'm kind of sad they dropped the religious punishment overtones that was the previous pilot being in a tunic in a crucifix pose with no real other ancillary torture-stuff for just going ham on the "medieval torturer's dungeon" aesthetic with like that mask with the hoses into his eyes, the coffin with the syringes, or the stocks that one guy has.

It's not about how "hot" they are; it's more about how they look in athletic gear. If the same amount of skin was covered up but it was parchment stapled to their skin I'd be down. But they should look wretched and psycho, and running around nearly-naked is a good way to signify that.

I would never play any form of Imperium scum. I might consider it though if they created a Frixum Pisces Chapter. It would require kit bashing some unique heads however...

Hecaton wrote:

It's not about how "hot" they are; it's more about how they look in athletic gear. If the same amount of skin was covered up but it was parchment stapled to their skin I'd be down. But they should look wretched and psycho, and running around nearly-naked is a good way to signify that.

I agree with that sentiment, because that's how they're drawn in the art. Clad in a tabard made of scripture, because they're proclaiming that their faith will protect them, which is the point. I don't think they should be naked, that's just fanservice and serves no purpose for the unit. Arcoflagellants are wretched and psycho and pumped up with drugs and their hands replaced with weapons and all that, Sisters Repentia are Sisters who have somehow failed the order and have been placed in a suicide unit to redeem themselves. There's definitely no lore reason for them to be tits out or even in their whole spikes-and-chains BDSM get up, besides some like truly unnecessary and evocative idea of exactly what kind of naughty the naughty nuns are.

That said, even if I don't think the BDSM cult look is the way they should have redone them, I cannot deny that the old models also had the same BDSM fetish cult aesthetic going, and the new models are really true to form with the old models, just much better looking, so like, I can get some disappointment that the models weren't changed aesthetically, but they're definitely not more kid/moral guardian friendly, I think, given that the alternative of having like robes of scripture as often illustrated is pretty much less fanservice unless you have a very specific thing.

I know they were a thing in Spain from history, and that they were a thing in eastern europe too, although no longer practiced, but having processions of hooded half naked men and women whipped or performing scarification isn't just a BDSM thing.

And petitioners to lifting an official curse from a priest or a bishop often had to come to the bishop palace with a text of the excomunication nailed to the skin on their fore head, and wearing no cloths other then a sack.

Karol wrote:
I know they were a thing in Spain from history, and that they were a thing in eastern europe too, although no longer practiced, but having processions of hooded half naked men and women whipped or performing scarification isn't just a BDSM thing.

And petitioners to lifting an official curse from a priest or a bishop often had to come to the bishop palace with a text of the excomunication nailed to the skin on their fore head, and wearing no cloths other then a sack.

Yeah, but like, I'm 99% certain those medieval flagellants were not dressed like the repentia.

Most art depicts them with like the cone-hats and relatively formless smock-tunic-thing; which is pretty different from tight bodysuits with short-shorts [or a strapless leather top with a high-slit skirt thing/front/back tabard for the old models].

they had hood and loin cloths at least if we were to trust paintings from the XVIIth century. And they were a thing, at least here, till the partition of the country. Then Prussians and Russians forbade most religious expression, not being catholics and all, and the austro hungarians played the catholics vs ortodox vs greek catholics.

Historicaly even some polish kings were flaglants. All 3 of the Wasas were, and when their joined the processions they wore hoods and a loin cloth. Certain closed female convenants practicied whipings and processions till the outbreak of WWII.
And in case of those we have still people alive that saw it as kids and pictures. Wasn't very popular back then, as the socialists in the goverment really didn't like the church between WWI and WWII.

And for easters we still have crucifictions with real people in rural areas, and then flagglants, although only males are part of the procession. Only difference is that today that they don't wear masks at all.

 Irbis wrote:

And in case of those we have still people alive that saw it as kids and pictures. Wasn't very popular back then, as the socialists in the goverment really didn't like the church between WWI and WWII.

What socialist government? You mean fascist, authoritarian right wing regime that in fact jailed socialists for the 'crime' of opposing them and was so militarist/antisemitic that allied powers during WW2 did everything to remove its members from any possible political and military post, an intervention unique in both WW1 and WW2?

Wait, are you seriously arguing that the National Socialists weren't socialists?

Yeah, don't start all that bollocks again.

The only army I wouldn't play I genuinely gave a go and bought some box sets for. However, I just couldn't get into painting them at all and sold them to a mate at a discount.
Sadly, it was Tau.

Im actually on board with the fluff, it's just the aesthetic and game style of the army. Just cannot be bothered with that. If they had some mechanism for bringing in alien auxiliaries, exotic and interesting ones, then maybe.

Interestingly enough one army I said I´d never play due to aesthetics and lore (Death Guard) I ended up playing because eventually I did like some of their lore and value game play over aesthetics. So while I wont say never, armies I'm very unlikely to ever play are Primaris because they are a blatant cash grab drowning out proper releases, Eldar of any kind because I dislike elves and their attitudes, DE doubly so because DE/Slaanesh attitudes are just not for me.
Knights/Custodes/LoW models in general, because they do not belong in 2k point games for me. Other than that most armies are fine to me although really the main thing keeping me from just having 10+ armies is obviously money and time for painting/building.

 Castozor wrote:
Interestingly enough one army I said I´d never play due to aesthetics and lore (Death Guard) I ended up playing because eventually I did like some of their lore and value game play over aesthetics.

Out of interest, did you modify the DG aesthetics at all for your own army, or do you just use them as-is?

BrianDavion wrote:

TinyLegions wrote:


2: Anything Chaos: I really have a pet peeve about the gods of Chaos interjecting themselves into the games plane of existence yet other gods are not able to.

except the other gods DO interject themselves into things, the emperor clearly does (he even arguably has his own deamons in the form of living saints like Celestine and the Legion of the damned) and it's basicly eistablished fact that Gork and Mork are indeed working through Ghaz

Not nearly to the extent that Chaos gods do and that is my point. You are comparing a few token personalities and a very rare unit with whole armies of Daemons, in addition to CSM which are basically space marines with adjustments. This is not including Dark Eldar which are basically in league with Slanneash IIRC. I have not rolled dice on felt in a while so I may be out of the loop as far as power ranking goes, but that is whole armies who are directly affected by their gods vs a few personalities that are affected by theirs. I don't see that as a balance in favor of the deities in opposition to chaos.

You can say the same thing with Eldar as well, you have the Avatars, which are basically the equivalent to Daemon Princes, but it is just them against the above. Its the same problem WFB had, you have a few token personalities against the whole horde of chaos.(which "everyone" used to complain how overpowering they were due to these damn marks)

Dark Eldar are by no means in alliance with Slaanesh - in fact if you suggested it they'd probably gut you for the insult. They are just as fearful and maddened by their desire to avoid She Who Thirsts as the Craftworlders. However the Dark Eldar take a different pathway toward trying to ensure that their souls don't get stolen by Slaanesh.

TinyLegions wrote:
[ This is not including Dark Eldar which are basically in league with Slanneash IIRC.

As Overread pointed out, this is completely and utterly false.

Whether they like to pretend otherwise, or not... they're certainly doing his bidding and giving him strength.

 Super Ready wrote:
Whether they like to pretend otherwise, or not... they're certainly doing his bidding and giving him strength.

No more so than anyone else. Do Space Marines give succor to Khorne through their actions? Quite possiby, but it is not their intent, pretend otherwise or not.

Actually I'd say yes, more so. One because Eldar emotion is that much more powerful for feeding Chaos, we know this from how Craftworld Eldar behave with the path, and it's fair to say that Drukhari are not showing the same kind of restraint...!
Secondly, I've gotten the impression over time that because they're literally using such acts to stave off death, they have to go over-the-top out of necessity.

Your point's valid, though, the gods do very well feed off other races as well, however unwittingly - it's just that Drukhari actions are going to be particularly tasty for Slaanesh even when you take that into account.

Yup I agree. I suppose their eschewing of their psychic nature is an attempt to reduce their impact.

Orks, there's nothing about them that interest me, they're by far my least favorite faction.

Anything melee heavy. I like my guns.

Careful. You might set off the argument about whether orks are a 'melee faction' or a 'dakka faction.'

Well that's just silly. Clearly the only point of even having dakka, is so that you can krump something you can't get to yet...!

Anything non-Chaos really, the way it should be.

Without a doubt: Tau.

- Don't like the models - at all.

- Don't really like their lore.

- Don't like their playstyle. I prefer killing stuff in the close combat phase over the shooting phase, or potentially doing a bit of both. The notion of an army without any form of dedicated close combat units just makes me retch.

Voss wrote:
Careful. You might set off the argument about whether orks are a 'melee faction' or a 'dakka faction.'

You summoned me? *points to signature*

I don't know if there are any armies I would NEVER play. I think it's cool that GW supports as many different factions as they do (for varying values of "support"), and I really enjoy modeling and collecting.

That being said, Death Guard and most Chaos units don't really appeal to me. I enjoy some of the out-there Slaanesh designs, I don't mind the ripped-from-a-metal-album-cover infantry, and the Heldrake is SWEET, but a lot of their other special units and characters feel overdone.

Also, Custodes.

Second least likely is Death Guard. I hate the whole zombie escteshtic and its really hard to find new directions to take thier paint schemes when you need so much flesh. That and their lore started out good and just fell over and died halfway through the Horus heresy and never recovered even in 40k.

The only thing that would be worse would be Dark Eldar. I will burn every model I own, set fire to my hands, and use the flaming stumps to demolish the GW corporate offices before I ever assemble another freaking DE model.

I'd never play Primaris Space Marines or Knights of any flavour. Primaris are a very 'on rails' army, and Knights are boring.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:
Careful. You might set off the argument about whether orks are a 'melee faction' or a 'dakka faction.'

The real question you need to ask is whether Orks are a morker faction, or a gorker faction.

Probably would never do Eldar of any flavor.

I could probably never do a full Khorne army. Occasional Khorne stuff in a mixed Chaos army, but just Khorne is too much for. After so much blood and skulls, after a while it starts to feel a bit corny(no pun intended... well not much at least).

I hate Eldar....but now have a full army of the stupid space elves.
Dark Eldar also were a no go...until I got a bunch of them.
I hated Orks until the Mrs. bought a bunch of them.

I guess I wouldn't ever buy and build basic Tyranids. I do have some, but made them all as Xenomorphs.

A full Chaos army is probably something I wouldn't do either, but I am interested in doing something with the Alpha Legion.

I would have liked to do an old Necrons army, but the new fluff kinda makes me not want to.

-STS

Did some cleaning, warnings have been issued and I have removed the off-topic bs and quotes referring to said off-topic bs. I would kindly ask one and all to keep politics and religion out of your discussion and to stay on topic.

Thank you.