Canoness Veridyan - have we had her name before?? Please be stats with the model
she’ll also be accompanied by a new selection of Made to Order miniatures, from the Inquisition, Ecclesiarchy and Adepta Sororitas range, including some classics not available for years.
oh dear this could be expensive - although the Deamonettes were very reasonable for GW...
The problem with recreating stylised art is that elements of it only work in said style. The way she is standing, what she is standing on, and her proportions, are quite messy on the plastic figure. Not just that but the battle heels look atrocious, while her hair is something of a mess - though that could be down to a paint job.
God-Emperor bless friendly and knowledgeable Store owners like this holy man! Didn't even have to open my mouth, his first sentence was "Yes, I know, I'll keep one Canoness for ya"
GW, you are bleeding me dry this end of the year!!
Only thing is I wish someone cut her hair with a smaller bowl.
Very nice pose though, thank you sculptor!
Glad the Inquisition range is coming to that Made to Order, but the SoB has me worried, either it's a case of, they're being shunted to old metal order or GW are just trying to sell as many as possible until they release the new lot. Is the Made to Order permanent or are they limited runs?
God Damn GW, Smart thinking
Hype Up Imperial Agents with a Canoness model, and use that hype to shift the Inquisition and SOB Metal Models that have been collecting dust in the factory in preperation for a Plastic Release!
The question is, which modeles have been out of print?
I know Gideon Lorr ....and...hmm the female Inquisitor with either the Hell Rifle or the Mace...
But most others have stayed available on the site.
Any ideas?
BloodGrin wrote: The question is, which modeles have been out of print?
I know Gideon Lorr ....and...hmm the female Inquisitor with either the Hell Rifle or the Mace...
But most others have stayed available on the site.
Any ideas?
Not to mention today someone spotted one in this image and thought it was a new model. The Dude with the red mohawk and club
BloodGrin wrote: The question is, which modeles have been out of print?
I know Gideon Lorr ....and...hmm the female Inquisitor with either the Hell Rifle or the Mace...
But most others have stayed available on the site.
Any ideas?
Not to mention today someone spotted one in this image and thought it was a new model. The Dude with the red mohawk and club
Oh yeah the melta zealot..good call.
I hope Sergeant Centurious makes it.
BloodGrin wrote: The question is, which modeles have been out of print?
I know Gideon Lorr ....and...hmm the female Inquisitor with either the Hell Rifle or the Mace...
But most others have stayed available on the site.
Any ideas?
Not to mention today someone spotted one in this image and thought it was a new model. The Dude with the red mohawk and club
BloodGrin wrote: The question is, which modeles have been out of print?
I know Gideon Lorr ....and...hmm the female Inquisitor with either the Hell Rifle or the Mace...
But most others have stayed available on the site.
Any ideas?
Special weapons sisters with storm bolters, flamers, and melta all had helmeted versions that are OOP, ditto for seraphim... basically any unit that they sell as individual models used to have a few alternate sculpts that they no longer sell.
BloodGrin wrote: The question is, which modeles have been out of print?
I know Gideon Lorr ....and...hmm the female Inquisitor with either the Hell Rifle or the Mace...
But most others have stayed available on the site.
Any ideas?
Special weapons sisters with storm bolters, flamers, and melta all had helmeted versions that are OOP, ditto for seraphim... basically any unit that they sell as individual models used to have a few alternate sculpts that they no longer sell.
Such a terrible looking model. It's a real shame. We've seen such gems out of GW from sculpts recently. This looks as old and poorly detailed as the old metal sisters. I guess in that respect it will fit in.
The doomsayers were right. There are going to be new Sisters. And they're going to be carbon-copies of terrible, terrible 2e art, nobody's going to buy them, and GW is going to squat the army for good.
Cephalobeard wrote: Such a terrible looking model. It's a real shame. We've seen such gems out of GW from sculpts recently. This looks as old and poorly detailed as the old metal sisters. I guess in that respect it will fit in.
How is it poorly detailed? It's festooned with little details, from the skulls on the gauntlet to the ribbing on the leg armor. This model looks fan-freaking-tastic and I hope I can get one.
When the paint job goes so far as to have the red reflections on the right boot from the original painting, it is not a poor paint job! I'm not a Sisters uber fan but this model is coooool.
I really like the model apart the face. Good to know that GW is still unable to sculpt female faces. Luckily I happen to have some spare Statuesque heads.
I prefer the art over the model, the model simply looks stubby and less long and lithe like the art. I can see why people don't like Blanches art...but for me IMO its that gritty stylized look that was the genesis of 40k as something unique in the first place as a high tech medieval gothic look. That look has been watered down significantly over the years and a return to that look with this model makes it look very retro compared to the sisters of silence in the prospero set.
It's literally copied from the artwork, so any criticisms of the design (and paint job, which is also replicated) should really be directed at John Blanche twenty-odd years ago.
Which people are doing plenty of too, but you know...
I'll be trying to get this model anyway, I think. The art is iconic, although I'll paint her to fit in with my army.
I don't really like it. Never been a fan of John Blanche's art, but at least the drawing had some reason 20+ years ago. The model looks way too stubby, with a body too thick for its head and an hideous looking pair of legs.
I understand the nostalgia feeling, but it's terrible, imo.
Meh not to my taste even though I quite like the original artwork. Hopefully its not an indicator of the style of future SoB models and is just intended to ape that particular painting.
Thargrim wrote: I prefer the art over the model, the model simply looks stubby and less long and lithe like the art. I can see why people don't like Blanches art...but for me IMO its that gritty stylized look that was the genesis of 40k as something unique in the first place as a high tech medieval gothic look. That look has been watered down significantly over the years and a return to that look with this model makes it look very retro compared to the sisters of silence in the prospero set.
Actually sums up my opinion better than my own post tbh. I've always seen(and I think GW and the man himself have said the same) Blanches stuff as more about 40ks flavour and style then a realistic representation of life in the 41st millennium.
I hope the leaks come soon because the made to order system is a pain.
You get as little as a weekend to order what you want before it disappears and without knowing what's available In the codex or what is actually usable on the tabletop rules wise it will be a pain to figure out what to buy.
Don't like it. in the artwork she seems to be standing taller but i think that's down to the model's proportions. She's too short & too chunky. The feet don't quite work either. The shoulder guards don't flare as much as they should. Her eye-piece is also wonky & slightly not the right shape.
The paint job, especially on the face is, IMO, poor. The lips are too pale & shaded in such a way that's she's lost her pout. The chin looks horrid. Don't know if it's the paint job or the model but it looks lumpy & a fraction too pointed.
Probably still order one if I get up in time though.
Thommy H wrote: It's literally copied from the artwork, so any criticisms of the design (and paint job, which is also replicated) should really be directed at John Blanche twenty-odd years ago.
Which people are doing plenty of too, but you know...
I'll be trying to get this model anyway, I think. The art is iconic, although I'll paint her to fit in with my army.
To be fair to everyone involved, it isn't a direct copy. Some of the issues I think have to do with the transition between the tall, skinny stylized form Blanche uses and the heroic scale proportions GW minis use. When adapting the piece from one medium to another it's important to capture the essence of what's being depicted without being slave to the details that don't work in your medium.
The higher contrast between the lights and darks on the model's face turn the subtly scarred cheek into a distracting mangle and age up the face considerably. The pose is equally awkward in both renders, but the title-wave of skulls in the art provides a stylistic context while the little pile in the model looks like some heretical shrine or fetish she's stomping out. (Maybe a staircase scenic base would look good?)
Also, typical of GW's painters, they dotted her eye with a micron laser, which I also find distracting.
Thommy H wrote: It's literally copied from the artwork, so any criticisms of the design (and paint job, which is also replicated) should really be directed at John Blanche twenty-odd years ago.
Which people are doing plenty of too, but you know...
I'll be trying to get this model anyway, I think. The art is iconic, although I'll paint her to fit in with my army.
To be fair to everyone involved, it isn't a direct copy. Some of the issues I think have to do with the transition between the tall, skinny stylized form Blanche uses and the heroic scale proportions GW minis use. When adapting the piece from one medium to another it's important to capture the essence of what's being depicted without being slave to the details that don't work in your medium.
The higher contrast between the lights and darks on the model's face turn the subtly scarred cheek into a distracting mangle and age up the face considerably. The pose is equally awkward in both renders, but the title-wave of skulls in the art provides a stylistic context while the little pile in the model looks like some heretical shrine or fetish she's stomping out. (Maybe a staircase scenic base would look good?)
Also, typical of GW's painters, they dotted her eye with a micron laser, which I also find distracting.
Thommy H wrote: It's literally copied from the artwork, so any criticisms of the design (and paint job, which is also replicated) should really be directed at John Blanche twenty-odd years ago.
Which people are doing plenty of too, but you know...
I'll be trying to get this model anyway, I think. The art is iconic, although I'll paint her to fit in with my army.
False equivalency. That's akin to saying the design faults of a Chinese knock off should be directed against the basis of the knock off. The faults of the model are failures to adapt the design.
Right. I actually think it's better than the art, because it does not carry the ugly, "why wear power armor when instead you oculd wear a jumpsuit" style that the art had. I still don't particularly care for it, but IMO the translation from art to mini actually went rather well, and the mini is better than the art.
Thargrim wrote: I prefer the art over the model, the model simply looks stubby and less long and lithe like the art. I can see why people don't like Blanches art...but for me IMO its that gritty stylized look that was the genesis of 40k as something unique in the first place as a high tech medieval gothic look. That look has been watered down significantly over the years and a return to that look with this model makes it look very retro compared to the sisters of silence in the prospero set.
I'm in the opposite camp. In the original she seems scrawny and weak.
Hate the feet on the model, though...does she have Tau hooves under those boots?
Without wanting to start a fight, all the peaple who dislike the model... what do you want sisters of battle to look like, if not like that iconic John Blanche image. To me... that picture *is* the touchstone for Sisters of Battle....
Not wanting to upset anyone, but given that John Blanche is the art director for the entire setting... if you don't like his style...dosent that spoil your enjoyment of the game?
Not wanting to upset anyone, but given that John Blanche is the art director for the entire setting... if you don't like his style...dosent that spoil your enjoyment of the game?
.
No, because others have taken what he has put forth (and some of it is good) and improved upon it.
If the rumoured plastics are of a similar quality I will be rebuying a sisters army. Always regretted selling my metals. Deffo picking up any made to order inquisition stuff as well.
Unless they produced more than I imagine they did, it'll probably go out of stock very quickly. I mean, someone mentioned five per store, two per LGS. So take care and check constantly on the day of release.
One to go with my order of the Valorous Heart kill team , and another for the noble occasion when sororitas finally get plastics and I come up with a new colour scheme.
Everything I would change about this I can change.
I like it, but not enough to camp the site or bug the store. If there's a limited edition thing I need to get into trouble over, it's probably coming out of the Kingdom Death 2 kickstarter.
I'm pretty sure most are already spoken for. There is nothing to stop a store for taking pre-orders on it, and of the dozens they will get, they can chose the 5 people they like most (i.e. employees, the employee's shadow buyers, or the ebay sellers with the best bribes.)
A few normal people may get one, but I think most will be disappointed.
Regardless of the mini, if the codex is actually what it's been said to be-- a way to include small amounts of the various units in it in other armies as small detachments-- I think it'll be a fine addition to the game. If it's still valid when I start Guard back up, I'll probably use it to include my Sisters in my Guard army.
So I hate the art the mini is based on but imo the miniature itself is actually salvagable to my aesthetic... The biggest problems are the feet which are easy to replace... And the position of the right leg which can be fixed with a knife and green stuff... That said I will not be going out if my way to get it... If it's available when I preorder the codex I will order it as well but if it's sold out I won't be heartbroken
I need it. Please don't order one other U.K. people. It's that or 30k weapons and i'd prefer the lady with the skull bra to some guns I have to individually scrub.
I have to agree that one at least looks like the artist had seen a woman or a human being, Blanche's stuff not so much. But one man's stylistic choice is anothers lack of talent.
I'm more surprised that there are people that are impressed, somehow.
I don't get how that's a bad model. While I understand how Blanche's art divides the community's opinions, that's a damn fine model, both as a near identical representation of the artwork and as a standalone piece. Heavily stylised, ergo not to everyone's taste? Absolutely. But bad? Hell no.
I do say that as someone who doesn't understand all the hatred towards the Taurox to me though, this is a bad model:
Spoiler:
Try getting that one out of your head before Christmas
Yarp, for me its the hair, it just looks more natural on the art mellisa posted, I know in the far future there is some strong ass wax but that bowl head is too much.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Just guessing, butI think people who owned the original codexbought the book because of the shiny front cover art probably have more affection for the earlier artwork.
Fixed that for you.
I don't think the front cover art of C:WH is all that great either, but I still own both C:WH and C:SoB.
Guess it just boils down to art preference, myself im not a huge fan of the Blanche style but obviously respect his influence in Warhammer. Although I do feel that model has turned out well considering the material to work from.
Melissia wrote: Why do you hate your fellow posters so much?
Considering the number of snide and nonconstructive comments we've had on this thread directed at other posters already, I think it was fair game
Howard A Treesong wrote: Just guessing, butI think people who owned the original codex probably have more affection for the earlier artwork.
I've never owned an SoB Codex; I think the model is cool as an art piece (after all, art doesn't have to be 100% true to what you're portraying), but not really ideal as a style for future Sister models if we are going to get anymore. However, since it was meant as a faithful adaptation of the original artwork, I think it's a job well done.
Melissia wrote: I doubt Sisters will get a board game, but current rumors suggest (heap of salt here) that Sisters will get a codex early next year.
unless gw is playing a joke on us, then plastic sisters of battle are on there way. I can't imagine that they would do that without a new codex
GW's design team has talked about plastic Sisters years ago in the past, yet not delivered. Let's not get ahead of ourselves and get excited over something that has failed to happen in the past.
Yes, but GW also wasn't run by Roundtree back then. We also didn't have Rob, Eddie, Duncan and the other fresh blood that seems to have filled in the ranks at the company.
Making an apples to apples comparison is pants on head silly.
Regardless, what was the last count of all of the nine factions in the book now?
I have...
Inquisition
Psykers
Deathwatch
Grey Knights
Sisters of Battle
Assassins
Ad Mech
Legion of the Damned...
Who was the last one?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Daedalus81 wrote: Making an apples to apples comparison is pants on head silly.
Getting excited from empty hype when previous experience suggests caution is silly. To repeat a constant theme of this thread-- I'm under no obligation to buy in to your hype train.
'The full sisters of Battle codex is included in the upcoming Codex Imperial Agents, so you wont have long to wait to have full printed rules to use with the new mini'
Are they just making stuff up?
First I've heard of this.
I'm more surprised that there are people that are impressed, somehow.
I don't get how that's a bad model. While I understand how Blanche's art divides the community's opinions, that's a damn fine model, both as a near identical representation of the artwork and as a standalone piece. Heavily stylised, ergo not to everyone's taste? Absolutely. But bad? Hell no.
I do say that as someone who doesn't understand all the hatred towards the Taurox to me though, this is a bad model:
Spoiler:
Try getting that one out of your head before Christmas
I suppose the "new" sister is great for people who already have a full army and need something that didnt pay any attention to the last 18 years of modeling/design development.
For the rest of us, its pretty much the death of any hope to see meaningful female models in a human faction.
Its a good thing GW has been releasing so many nice models lately, Im quite busy with the actual good ones.
Edit: I see lady gagas pokerface era in this, did she mention inspiration from JB? GW should sue.
I'd like to see it unpainted, the face seems a bit odd. I regret not getting the Blood Angel captain from the 2nd edition wargear cover - so I'll certainly be getting this
Fayric wrote:I suppose the "new" sister is great for people who already have a full army and need something that didnt pay any attention to the last 18 years of modeling/design development.
For the rest of us, its pretty much the death of any hope to see meaningful female models in a human faction.
Its a good thing GW has been releasing so many nice models lately, Im quite busy with the actual good ones.
It was designed to be a faithful representation of the artwork it's based off. That doesn't make it a bad model, nor does it mean that any future SoB release will necessarily have the same art direction.
Can nobody here tell me how this model is actually bad in their opinion outside of the artwork it's based on?
BloodGrin wrote:That picture...so bad and so wrong but now I want one
Better not make fun of BOLS, they'll be quick to ban you from their click-bait-advertisement-echochamber.
Been banned for a bit from commenting there.
One of their contributers is local here and has a deep deep rooted hate for me that I can't say I did not enjoy cultivating.
Fayric wrote:I suppose the "new" sister is great for people who already have a full army and need something that didnt pay any attention to the last 18 years of modeling/design development.
For the rest of us, its pretty much the death of any hope to see meaningful female models in a human faction.
Its a good thing GW has been releasing so many nice models lately, Im quite busy with the actual good ones.
It was designed to be a faithful representation of the artwork it's based off. That doesn't make it a bad model, nor does it mean that any future SoB release will necessarily have the same art direction.
Can nobody here tell me how this model is actually bad in their opinion outside of the artwork it's based on?
BloodGrin wrote:That picture...so bad and so wrong but now I want one
You sir may be in need of some therapy
I like the art
but the translation to mini form has given her gw 'human' proportions rather than the long thin legs of the art work resulting in a much less appealing (to me anyway) short stocky canoness (the torso is probably a bit chunky too, but that wouldn't matter if the leg length was closer to the art). It looses the 'strangely inhuman' look of a lot of the blanche art
but the translation to mini form has given her gw 'human' proportions rather than the long thin legs of the art work resulting in a much less appealing (to me anyway) short stocky canoness (the torso is probably a bit chunky too, but that wouldn't matter if the leg length was closer to the art). It looses the 'strangely inhuman' look of a lot of the blanche art
At last, a quantifiable reason why this model could be considered to be sub par. Have an Exalt.
General Annoyance wrote: Can nobody here tell me how this model is actually bad in their opinion outside of the artwork it's based on?
IMO, the mini is better than the artwork-- the legs are thicker and give the appearance of actual powered armor, compared to the god-awful jumpsuit look of the artwork, for example.
Looking at the miniature from a perspective disregarding the original art piece,mMy primary complaints about the miniature can be summarized in one word: Posing. The miniature is posed in an awkward, god-awful way that I would not want on any miniature in my army.
I'm surprised this is a marmite model. I think the sculpt is fantastic and is an amazing rendition of Blanche's art in classic Citadel miniature style.
The Sisters art from Dark Heresy is the most iconic to me, probably because it was my first exposure to them. Dawn of War was my intro to 40k as a whole, but I only picked up Soul Storm several years after it released).
Melissia wrote: IMO, the mini is better than the artwork-- the legs are thicker and give the appearance of actual powered armor, compared to the god-awful jumpsuit look of the artwork, for example.
Looking at the miniature from a perspective disregarding the original art piece,mMy primary complaints about the miniature can be summarized in one word: Posing. The miniature is posed in an awkward, god-awful way that I would not want on any miniature in my army.
Also some fair critique there; I too dislike that aspect of models like these that GW makes from time to time, as the poses also make them less friendly inside an army to me. However, I will say in its defence that I think the intention of this model is to be a very nice shelf piece, in similar vein to the Anniversary Imperial Marine or the Anniversary Crimson Fist Sergeant before that. That being said, it will be interesting to see if it gets rules like the Imperial Marine did for use in 40k.
I'm a big fan of John Blanche's art and that piece is one of my favourites. It's not photorealistic by a long shot, it's not meant to be. It is meant to evoke an atmosphere and does it admirably. Elements of it look a little dated now perhaps, it's very much of its day, but it is still better than 90% of the soulless, digital crap that serves to take up space in recent GW books.
As for the miniature, I'm in two minds. GW has always struggled with female miniatures due to the conflict between designing a feminine looking miniature and making something which looks like it belongs to the same range as their "heroic" men. That's why their best female minis are all elves and Eldar.
I may try to buy one of the minis, or I might put the money towards buying a print of the original art. Haven't decided yet.
Melissia wrote:I wouldn't buy it as a shelf piece when I could instead buy and modify Celestine, a far more visually impressive miniature.
I think this piece will be bought based on the nostalgia value - it clearly isn't a practical model. Of course, if you aren't a fan on Blanche's artwork, or the miniature on its own, then I don't see much more reason behind getting one as opposed to doing something along the lines you suggested.
Captain Joystick wrote:I thought I had made a clear and concise point two pages ago. Frankly I think it's a paint problem more than anything.
My apologies, I must've missed that among the other posts on that page. Also a fair point, but I believe that, while this is the only version of the model we can see right now, we should do our best to keep the sculpt and the paintjob separate, as they are certainly two different aspects to making a good model; one makes the model good (or bad) before it even gets primed, the other has the potential to make a bad model look good or make a good model look bad.
She needs a few tweaks, bring the bangs away from her eyes and maybe tip her forward a bit. The paint job is not helping the model much. She does look more like an older more experienced Sister than a sexy vamp, a change I actually like. The heels are pretty silly, but I'll make it work. Can't wait to see if the rules are any good, about time we get a new Sororitas special character!
I'll get one… if there are still some available. I won't rush to get one before everyone else, though. I agree with Melissia on how the proportions are better than on the original artwork, I don't like the battle heels.
Davor wrote: Just wanted to say because someone felt it was an issue to break it up so it's Imperial Agents only, but how ironic instead it turned into a Sisters of Battle thread which he should have asked in the first place and now he is quiet since no Imperial Agent talk is being talked about.
1) I don't spend all my time on Dakka, as shocking as that revelation may be. 2) Sisters of Battle ARE Imperial Agents, ergo we are talking about SOME Imperial Agents. If you want to separate the thread between Sisters and Other Imperial Agent, go bug a moderator, not me. I think this is a stupid idea but I'm not the one you have to convince and I am fine with you trying.
Forgot to mention: we had a new model release, so ofc that means Chaos Space Marines are now officially the most neglected army. The poor, poor little things!
I have called about twenty game stores in my home state, the answer I have gotten from everyone of them is that they will be getting two or less. Quite a few aren't expecting to get any. I will be hawking the website for sure, but its anybody's guess if they will be available. The note to call before taking pre-orders night have something to do with this.
I find it interesting that they are bringing back a bunch of long OOP sisters models through made to order just weeks before the supposedly "confirmed" release of plastic sisters in what, January?
Now, Do i Blow my Money on Dark Eldar Female Kabalites (to convert into SoB, I Saw a Guide online)
Or do i Hope (and wait) for Plastic Sisters?...
Decisions Decisions...
dracpanzer wrote: I have called about twenty game stores in my home state, the answer I have gotten from everyone of them is that they will be getting two or less. Quite a few aren't expecting to get any. I will be hawking the website for sure, but its anybody's guess if they will be available. The note to call before taking pre-orders night have something to do with this.
I find it interesting that they are bringing back a bunch of long OOP sisters models through made to order just weeks before the supposedly "confirmed" release of plastic sisters in what, January?
GW, look at you all clever trolling.......
You've spent too much time on BOLS and Faiet. Made to order sororitas metals mean literally nothing either way. The idea that some gakky old metal models would qualify as 'competition' for a plastic sisters release is pure fan spank for anti-sob people.
That said, a full Sisters release won't be confirmed until Atia gives us a final pre-game rundown. (I understand some are even more skeptical than that but for me Atia's word is Law.)
Could be January-Feb, could be after 8th, coukd be never, but 'made to order' will NOT be a determinant of that.
Honestly Karl Kopinskis take on them is the direction I would want them to go in if they were to go plastic. It looks inspired by the stylized blanche look, while going for more realism and function. Still feminine, while also looking like a warrior. If they do go plastic I hope the fleur de lis as an emblem stays.
dracpanzer wrote: I have called about twenty game stores in my home state, the answer I have gotten from everyone of them is that they will be getting two or less. Quite a few aren't expecting to get any. I will be hawking the website for sure, but its anybody's guess if they will be available. The note to call before taking pre-orders night have something to do with this.
I find it interesting that they are bringing back a bunch of long OOP sisters models through made to order just weeks before the supposedly "confirmed" release of plastic sisters in what, January?
GW, look at you all clever trolling.......
You've spent too much time on BOLS and Faiet. Made to order sororitas metals mean literally nothing either way. The idea that some gakky old metal models would qualify as 'competition' for a plastic sisters release is pure fan spank for anti-sob people.
That said, a full Sisters release won't be confirmed until Atia gives us a final pre-game rundown. (I understand some are even more skeptical than that but for me Atia's word is Law.)
Could be January-Feb, could be after 8th, coukd be never, but 'made to order' will NOT be a determinant of that.
I dont go to Faeit or BOLS so I'm not sure what you are getting at. I personally have less faith than most. I have been waiting a long time for some of the choicier OOP metal models to fill the small gaps in my collection. It is interesting to me that now at the supposed end of the metal line, they are bringing back some of the models that Sisters players have so lamented the loss of.
Is GW trolling the long abused Sisters player? Probably. Are they trolling the wannabe but only if in plastic Sisters player? Just as likely in my mind.
ERJAK wrote: Those things are not mutually exclusive.
This kinda sucks.
They're mutually exclusive.
Would've been nice to get a full Codex, but if this means I can use my Sisters in anger again I don't really care.
EDIT: I've just noticed the high heels. Boob armour and high heels. For feth's sake.
Can we not, please?
2 things, one that quote must be from 15 pages ago, I honestly don't even remember wth I was saying and don't care enough to go check and 2; it's a direct reproduction of the sister on the cover of the second ed book, it has very little bearing on what the final SoB asthetic will be.
Her face is awful, in my opinion. Not sure if it is the paint job or the sculpt but the face of the model looks nothing like the artwork. They didn't even get the design of the eyepiece right and the painter forgot the fleur-de-lis under her eye.
The scarring on the right side (her left) of the face is way too raised up which, combined with the paintjob, makes it look like she's had an allergic reaction to a space-bee sting.
ERJAK wrote: 2 things, one that quote must be from 15 pages ago, I honestly don't even remember wth I was saying and don't care enough to go check and 2; it's a direct reproduction of the sister on the cover of the second ed book, it has very little bearing on what the final SoB asthetic will be.
Yeah, I didn't even notice the thread had gotten to 35 pages before I hit the button. Oops.
I pray you're right about the last bit though. I mean, we're already grown adults playing with toy soldiers - no need to go full "repressed manchild dominatrix fantasy" with the sculpts, is there?
I always hated John Blanche's art too. All of it, not just that particular piece. It's Liefeldian in its ridiculousness.
Whew that was a slog through 35 pages. Especially after the other thread closed in General. I've already pre-ordered a copy with my FLGS as well as two of the Canonesses. Now, we know the book is 136 pages, correct? Has anyone tried to break down how many of those pages per faction and see what that would leave Sisters with? Since we don't think the whole e-codex could be in the book, aside from the one rumor from BOLS, then how many pages could SoB have and what could be in them?
A Town Called Malus wrote: Her face is awful, in my opinion. Not sure if it is the paint job or the sculpt but the face of the model looks nothing like the artwork. They didn't even get the design of the eyepiece right and the painter forgot the fleur-de-lis under her eye.
The scarring on the right side (her left) of the face is way too raised up which, combined with the paintjob, makes it look like she's had an allergic reaction to a space-bee sting.
First thing that popped into my head when I saw the mini was "JOWLS!".
Restrictions - All units in this Formation which can take a Dedicated Transport must do so.
Rules:
"Ow my nails!" - All ranged weapons in this Formation have the "Gets Hot!" special rule.
Women Drivers - All vehicles in this formation may move either 2" or 18" per turn in the Movement phase - no more, no less - and cannot pivot. Any enemy unit contacted by a vehicle from this formation which moves 18" counts as having been tank Shocked and automatically fails the Morale check.
"Eeek, a Lictor! Save me!" - All units in this formation have Ld3 unless a big strong Space Marine is within 6" of them.
BBAP wrote: Judging by GW's enthusiasm for the faction I'd guess there'll be 2 pages. You get rules for Canoness Veridyan, and a single formation, outlined below:
BBAP wrote: Judging by GW's enthusiasm for the faction I'd guess there'll be 2 pages. You get rules for Canoness Veridyan, and a single formation, outlined below:
I see you are trying to be funny, but this is pretty horrible taste of you
I thought it was pretty funny and well thought out, using several tropes and puns. I laughed even though I'm a sisters player and therefore should feel insulted
Thargrim wrote: Honestly Karl Kopinskis take on them is the direction I would want them to go in if they were to go plastic.
I am alone in my dedication to the wondertastic Andrea Uderzo sisters. I shall weep a lone, very manly tear that will trickle from my manly eye down to my manly jaw. .
MadCowCrazy wrote: I thought it was pretty funny and well thought out, using several tropes and puns. I laughed even though I'm a sisters player and therefore should feel insulted
I'm a Sisters player too. At least I used to be. Now I'm a Sisters collector. The post wasn't a jab at the Sisters; it was an ironic reflection on how Sisters have changed over time as GW tries to cater to the "deplorable virgin manchild" demographic. The Sisters used to be Space Fanatics who did a nice line in Big Damn Hero bad-assery and were so pious their belief could do magic tricks. Now they wear skull-bras and high heels to war.
If that's not how the final sculpts turn out then I'll happily apologise for being a cynical arse.
If.
All that said I'll probably still buy one, just because it's the first new Sisters model in, like, 15 years, and the more they sell they more likely they are to release new ones more frequently in future.
BBAP wrote: I mean, we're already grown adults playing with toy soldiers - no need to go full "repressed manchild dominatrix fantasy" with the sculpts, is there?
Imagine a Dominatrix whipping a bunch of half-naked girls wielding giant swords.
BBAP wrote: Judging by GW's enthusiasm for the faction (...).
Or a flying Angel with a dove in her hand and flowers on her sword.
------
I like the model. She has the blanchesque weirdness but better proportions - she actually looks like she has thighs and not just the femur with some skin inside the power armour. She looks quite menacing, too. And that she isn't the blueprint for a possible new release should be kinda obvious.
Dryaktylus wrote: Imagine a Dominatrix whipping a bunch of half-naked girls wielding giant swords.
They were clever with the Repentia, though. They suck so hard that nobody takes them.
Or a flying Angel with a dove in her hand and flowers on her sword.
I always saw Celestine as representative of the "cheesy Protestant baroque" aspect of the aesthetic rather than "lol gurls hurpdurp".
I like the model. She has the blanchesque weirdness but better proportions - she actually looks like she has thighs and not just the femur with some skin inside the power armour. She looks quite menacing, too.
I mean, she's alright, if you ignore the Aeon Flux brothel-hoppers and skull-boobs. And the cocked leg. Why is she standing like that? Even in the picture it makes no sense - it's like she walked out in front of a mob of fanatics to pose with her hoof-foot on a skull.
I'm hoping I can do a leg-swap. That way I'll be able to field her without feeling bad.
And that she isn't the blueprint for a possible new release should be kinda obvious.
How do you figure? You think GW would be the first or only design firm to send their female warriors to war in platform heels?
BBAP wrote: The post wasn't a jab at the Sisters; it was an ironic reflection on how Sisters have changed over time as GW tries to cater to the "deplorable virgin manchild" demographic.
Please stop that. Please stop that right now and never do it again.
MadCowCrazy wrote: I thought it was pretty funny and well thought out, using several tropes and puns. I laughed even though I'm a sisters player and therefore should feel insulted
I'm a Sisters player too. At least I used to be. Now I'm a Sisters collector. The post wasn't a jab at the Sisters; it was an ironic reflection on how Sisters have changed over time as GW tries to cater to the "deplorable virgin manchild" demographic. The Sisters used to be Space Fanatics who did a nice line in Big Damn Hero bad-assery and were so pious their belief could do magic tricks. Now they wear skull-bras and high heels to war.
If that's not how the final sculpts turn out then I'll happily apologise for being a cynical arse.
If.
All that said I'll probably still buy one, just because it's the first new Sisters model in, like, 15 years, and the more they sell they more likely they are to release new ones more frequently in future.
Considering the edition that this art came from, and much of the other art from the time I dare say Sisters have not changed, people just chose to ignore .
People want to fanfic Sisters into something else, that is well and good but reality is reality and I love what they are doing
I mean, she's alright, if you ignore the Aeon Flux brothel-hoppers and skull-boobs. And the cocked leg. Why is she standing like that? Even in the picture it makes no sense - it's like she walked out in front of a mob of fanatics to pose with her hoof-foot on a skull.
They wanted to depict the artwork. The artwork from a codex. With a stern sister looking at you. BUY. ME. NOW!
How do you figure? You think GW would be the first or only design firm to send their female warriors to war in platform heels?
None of the SoB models (or even other artwork) actually looked like that. Not in 2nd edition nor in 3rd. Do you really thi...
I'm a Sisters player too. At least I used to be. Now I'm a Sisters collector. The post wasn't a jab at the Sisters; it was an ironic reflection on how Sisters have changed over time as GW tries to cater to the "deplorable virgin manchild" demographic. The Sisters used to be Space Fanatics who did a nice line in Big Damn Hero bad-assery and were so pious their belief could do magic tricks. Now they wear skull-bras and high heels to war.
She's on their first ever codex, dressed exactly like that. So unless you're talking about the period before that, they've always had aspects of that and GW's not really changed a thing.
While I do want this model, since it looks pretty awesome, and I will need a Canoness anyway, I really won't be heartbroken if I don't get one. I prefer regular plastic, and when the new Sisters of Battle kits hit, I am sure a nice plastic Canoness will be available then too.
So it's based on the Blanche piece and I think it did a fine job of meshing gw proportions with the originals details... Even uf it's missing the fleur de lis tat... That said I don't think if plastics exist they will look like this at all... Yes this is an iconic piece but as a sisters player who started with witch hunters I will say I think both Karl and Andrea's art are better proportioned and capture the spirit of the army better... Blanche's art depicts them as pseudosexual fashion models... Just look at that pose she is pushing that skull away with her foot and pouting... Andrea's art shows the sisters as baroque warriors while Karl's usually shows a kind of mournful stoiscm both of which communicate the fact that these are soldiers much more than Blanche's
BBAP wrote: ... as GW tries to cater to the "deplorable virgin manchild" demographic.
What? You're saying that unironically? Come on...
BBAP wrote: The Sisters used to be Space Fanatics who did a nice line in Big Damn Hero bad-assery and were so pious their belief could do magic tricks. Now they wear skull-bras and high heels to war.
Sisters haven't changed in 20+ years. Most of their minis are still the same ones released in 2nd Ed. This thing you're complaining about is pointless, because that piece of artwork is over 20 years old. It's nothing new. It's a single model based on a piece of artwork.
Stop overreacting to nothing like a... well... like a Sisters player!
The model is well made even if I don't like the style. I guess this all but confirms plastic sisters are on the way now. Please GW answer the Kroot fans we've been wanting Kroot Mercenaries/Army book for awhile now. Hit it out of the park please.
I personally like the high heels and goth boots. I was in fact disappointed in the sisters of silence when I realized they didn't take enough influence from the silver clad sam wood art from HH visions. Not enough leather, straps or goth boots. 40k is far fetched as is, always been a style over practicality kind of ordeal. Thats why I liked it in the first place.
I still have this empty feeling though, as this model really gives me little hope of a serious SoB revamp. Yeah its been rumored they might get a couple kits, but they have been rolled into another codex. Leaving little room for fluff, art, anything exciting in particular. Because now they have to share space with all the other subgroups. I remain highly skeptical for now. Besides, I think everyone thought this new model would be plastic and be a preview of an impending new range of models. That is basically debunked if you ask me.
The Deathwatch and Grey Knights aren't going anywhere despite having formations/being included in this codex. I'm pretty sure this is the same thing. This represents an Inquisitorial force and not any of these individual factions alone.
I know Sisters Codex is coming I can feel it in my bones. It might be a mid sized release at first though to test the waters again.
The GW team was also apparently considering doing a Kroot Merc codex a long time ago.
H.B.M.C. wrote: What? You're saying that unironically? Come on...
Oooh, snarky. Hit a nerve?
Moving on.
Sisters haven't changed in 20+ years. Most of their minis are still the same ones released in 2nd Ed.
Except this new one, which is the thing I'm complaining about. Canoness Montana isn't a bad sculpt at all - she's just got hooker-hooves, a hooker pose, and weird goth lapdancer boob ornaments. I don't like what that portends.
Still gonna buy one, just gonna fix that nonsense with her legs and boobs.
This thing you're complaining about is pointless, because that piece of artwork is over 20 years old. It's nothing new. It's a single model based on a piece of artwork.
Yes, the piece of artwork is 20 years old. It's about as iconic as lollipop-headed Tyranid Warriors, Orks in Mongolian helmets wielding broadswords, or the Crimson Fists. It's probably the only official image in which a Sister of Battle is in any way sexualised - and it's the one they chose to sculpt for the refresh. Not the ass-kicking, mace-swinging, Empra-praising Space Nuns. The chick with the heels and the waist.
Praxedes is dead - long live Canoness Montana!
Stop overreacting to nothing like a... well... like a Sisters player!
Hurr durr more insults.
ok
Thargrim wrote: I personally like the high heels and goth boots. I was in fact disappointed in the sisters of silence when I realized they didn't take enough influence from the silver clad sam wood art from HH visions. Not enough leather, straps or goth boots. 40k is far fetched as is, always been a style over practicality kind of ordeal. Thats why I liked it in the first place.
People like sex and have it in weird ways. Is this really worthy of news. There's nothing wrong with it. It's not like anything else in 40k is realistic and it's not like this is going to draw in more girl players since this is ultimately minature wargaming and just seems to not appeal to them. Even among women there are those who love looking good and sexy all the time and those who are okay not being like that and then all the other average ones in between.
A Town Called Malus wrote: Her face is awful, in my opinion. Not sure if it is the paint job or the sculpt but the face of the model looks nothing like the artwork. They didn't even get the design of the eyepiece right and the painter forgot the fleur-de-lis under her eye.
The scarring on the right side (her left) of the face is way too raised up which, combined with the paintjob, makes it look like she's had an allergic reaction to a space-bee sting.
The expectations in this thread are off the chart.
That image is ~10x15 inches. Now reduce that in size to 1/5. Then try to pick out small details. You're asking for the most intricate of details to be placed on a canvas a tiny fraction of the size of the artwork.
Gamgee wrote: People like sex and have it in weird ways. Is this really worthy of news. There's nothing wrong with it. It's not like anything else in 40k is realistic and it's not like this is going to draw in more girl players since this is ultimately minature wargaming and just seems to not appeal to them. Even among women there are those who love looking good and sexy all the time and those who are okay not being like that and then all the other average ones in between.
Wouldn't it be better to make some female Slaaneshi Cultist models, or more Dark Eldar models rather than putting those traits onto the ultra pious Sisters?
I mean, you want creepy dominatrix with a whip? Nothing fits better than Slaanesh. You want crazy psyco girl with gigantic sword? Female model for Incubi. These tropes are best solved by other factions, not by the Sisters of Battle.
I can't speak for everyone but I'm not complaining that there are sexualized models... Hell I Kickstarted raging heroes and those are pin-upy beyond belief. What I am saying is that sisters of battle typically aren't portrayed that way and it is slightly disappointing the first model in over a decade is based on a very pin up piece of art. And I would go further and say even when I look for that type of model this one would not be my first choice as the posing is just odd.
MadCowCrazy wrote: I thought it was pretty funny and well thought out, using several tropes and puns. I laughed even though I'm a sisters player and therefore should feel insulted
I'm a Sisters player too. At least I used to be. Now I'm a Sisters collector. The post wasn't a jab at the Sisters; it was an ironic reflection on how Sisters have changed over time as GW tries to cater to the "deplorable virgin manchild" demographic. The Sisters used to be Space Fanatics who did a nice line in Big Damn Hero bad-assery and were so pious their belief could do magic tricks. Now they wear skull-bras and high heels to war.
If that's not how the final sculpts turn out then I'll happily apologise for being a cynical arse.
If.
All that said I'll probably still buy one, just because it's the first new Sisters model in, like, 15 years, and the more they sell they more likely they are to release new ones more frequently in future.
Except my horrible taste comment had nothing to do with sisters of battle, it was your sexism towards women that you decided to post, thinking it was funny, when its idiotic. Comments such as "women drivers" "eeek save me big strong man" etc don't have a place here. Your posting the same crap others have posted about sisters and gotten countless topics locked because of the same comments. Like the model or don't like it. thanks fine, leave the rest off here.
Gamgee wrote: People like sex and have it in weird ways. Is this really worthy of news. There's nothing wrong with it. It's not like anything else in 40k is realistic and it's not like this is going to draw in more girl players since this is ultimately minature wargaming and just seems to not appeal to them. Even among women there are those who love looking good and sexy all the time and those who are okay not being like that and then all the other average ones in between.
but the translation to mini form has given her gw 'human' proportions rather than the long thin legs of the art work resulting in a much less appealing (to me anyway) short stocky canoness (the torso is probably a bit chunky too, but that wouldn't matter if the leg length was closer to the art). It looses the 'strangely inhuman' look of a lot of the blanche art
At last, a quantifiable reason why this model could be considered to be sub par. Have an Exalt.
Here is a comparison pic with both figs the same height. My issue is that all of the detail is much larger on the sculpt than it is in the illustration: knee guards, bolter, boob skulls, shoulder pad winged skull, all of the sword detail, corset detail, etc. Sculptor also missed the great flare and point of the outer edge of the shoulder pad. All of it is oversize and drastically changes the look of the fig. May well be that the sculptor was not able to do the smaller detail, but still... Do we have any idea who the sculptor was? I suspect that it was not Jes.
There have been cults of sexuality through the ages believe it or not. I really don't care. It's the barest minimum of "sexualizing".
The slaaneshi stuff is usually way more sexualized even magnus is with his big ass horn nipples lol. The Dark Eldar could use some more here and there sure but not just the physical and visual aspects of the DE themselves. Would be a very dark eldar to have an updated raider upgraded with torture racks of just captured people being electrocuted as the DE are zooming around. The DE themselves don't have to be the only ones sexualized.
A kid looks at it and just sees torture, but the adults get the sexual undertones. As a Dark Eldar fan I would be cool with all of this.
Kid Kyoto what makes it a dumpster fire of a thread? I'm just conversing politely.
I've already said this, but feel like reiterating-- ultimately, I think it's actually better than the art, though granted that's a low standard (it's pretty trash-tier art). The miniature's legs actually look like power armor rather than a jumpsuit, the miniature's face has more personality rather than being a boring bland fake pornstar pout, the angle of the miniature's feet is a little less stupid, her miniature's is more confident in how she's holding the weapon rather than having it pulled back behind her as if she's not sure how to hold it, and so on.
I mean, the pose is still trash, but as far as adaptations go, it took a bad piece of art and made an okay miniature out of it, so kudos to the sculptor.
str00dles1 wrote: Except my horrible taste comment had nothing to do with sisters of battle, it was your sexism towards women that you decided to post, thinking it was funny, when its idiotic
My comment had everything to do with Sisters of Battle though. I explained why I said what I said, and I'm not going to rehash it for your benefit. If you think it's actionable even in context, report it. We'll see if it has a place here.
If you don't like it because it rustles your Jimmies... I dunno what to tell you. Can't please everyone, I guess.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gamgee wrote: There have been cults of sexuality through the ages believe it or not. I really don't care. It's the barest minimum of "sexualizing".
The slaaneshi stuff is usually way more sexualized even magnus is with his big ass horn nipples lol. The Dark Eldar could use some more here and there sure but not just the physical and visual aspects of the DE themselves. Would be a very dark eldar to have an updated raider upgraded with torture racks of just captured people being electrocuted as the DE are zooming around. The DE themselves don't have to be the only ones sexualized.
A kid looks at it and just sees torture, but the adults get the sexual undertones. As a Dark Eldar fan I would be cool with all of this.
Kid Kyoto what makes it a dumpster fire of a thread? I'm just conversing politely.
but the translation to mini form has given her gw 'human' proportions rather than the long thin legs of the art work resulting in a much less appealing (to me anyway) short stocky canoness (the torso is probably a bit chunky too, but that wouldn't matter if the leg length was closer to the art). It looses the 'strangely inhuman' look of a lot of the blanche art
At last, a quantifiable reason why this model could be considered to be sub par. Have an Exalt.
Here is a comparison pic with both figs the same height. My issue is that all of the detail is much larger on the sculpt than it is in the illustration: knee guards, bolter, boob skulls, shoulder pad winged skull, all of the sword detail, corset detail, etc. Sculptor also missed the great flare and point of the outer edge of the shoulder pad. All of it is oversize and drastically changes the look of the fig. May well be that the sculptor was not able to do the smaller detail, but still... Do we have any idea who the sculptor was? I suspect that it was not Jes.
This isn't really a good comparison, because the cover art figure what what, 6 inches tall, and the mini is at most 1 1/2. If you put the cover art on the table along side the mini the mini details would be much smaller.
I wonder if GW has determined a minimum size for skulls on models and used that. Anything else would probably be unrecognizable.
Also... if those are human skulls (in the artwork) they are probably from infants. Perhaps the cannoness isn't all there, if you know what I mean.
My issue is that all of the detail is much larger on the sculpt than it is in the illustration: knee guards, bolter, boob skulls, shoulder pad winged skull, all of the sword detail, corset detail, etc. Sculptor also missed the great flare and point of the outer edge of the shoulder pad. All of it is oversize and drastically changes the look of the fig. May well be that the sculptor was not able to do the smaller detail, but still... Do we have any idea who the sculptor was? I suspect that it was not Jes.
I think the detail kinda has to be this way for it not to be uberfragile in 28mm. It might be doable at 54mm, but definitely at 100mm. It is a good likeness for what it is.
That said, my biggest issue with the sculpt is that it misses the point of the original artwork. The original is pure fetlife: latex bodysuit, waist-cinching corset, and fetish heels. It is pure bondage wear. The sculpt looks like it might be armor of some sort. So it's a clear failure in capturing the artist's intent.
So here's an interesting experiment try to put yourself in that pose... Now I'm not the most graceful person in the world but I tried it (with my right foot on a very stable table instead of a precarious skull) I could maintain that for about 5 seconds
My issue is that all of the detail is much larger on the sculpt than it is in the illustration: knee guards, bolter, boob skulls, shoulder pad winged skull, all of the sword detail, corset detail, etc. Sculptor also missed the great flare and point of the outer edge of the shoulder pad. All of it is oversize and drastically changes the look of the fig. May well be that the sculptor was not able to do the smaller detail, but still... Do we have any idea who the sculptor was? I suspect that it was not Jes.
I think the detail kinda has to be this way for it not to be uberfragile in 28mm. It might be doable at 54mm, but definitely at 100mm. It is a good likeness for what it is.
That said, my biggest issue with the sculpt is that it misses the point of the original artwork. The original is pure fetlife: latex bodysuit, waist-cinching corset, and fetish heels. It is pure bondage wear. The sculpt looks like it might be armor of some sort. So it's a clear failure in capturing the artist's intent.
Wereaardvark wrote: So here's an interesting experiment try to put yourself in that pose... Now I'm not the most graceful person in the world but I tried it (with my right foot on a very stable table instead of a precarious skull) I could maintain that for about 5 seconds
Just did it for 30 seconds. How old are people in this forum again? Also I am fat. Not like mega fat but fat. Perhaps my bands of blubber were acting like wings to balance me? Hahaha.
Wereaardvark wrote: So here's an interesting experiment try to put yourself in that pose... Now I'm not the most graceful person in the world but I tried it (with my right foot on a very stable table instead of a precarious skull) I could maintain that for about 5 seconds
Just did it for 30 seconds. How old are people in this forum again? Also I am fat. Not like mega fat but fat. Perhaps my bands of blubber were acting like wings to balance me? Hahaha.
Exalted.
I was also doing that pose whilst reading this thread. And scratching myself.
The mini is fine, though I think if I were to buy one I'd adjust the left leg, it's too high.
IMO I would have preferred the pout over the what we got. The first thing that came to mind was ms swan from madtv. Blanche has done more fetishistic stuff than this....
Gamgee wrote: The model is well made even if I don't like the style. I guess this all but confirms plastic sisters are on the way now. Please GW answer the Kroot fans we've been wanting Kroot Mercenaries/Army book for awhile now. Hit it out of the park please.
You can have your kroot stuff so long as I'm not forced to take the things in my Tau army.
Never cared for them, don't intend to ever use any.
Wereaardvark wrote: So here's an interesting experiment try to put yourself in that pose... Now I'm not the most graceful person in the world but I tried it (with my right foot on a very stable table instead of a precarious skull) I could maintain that for about 5 seconds
Just did it for 30 seconds. How old are people in this forum again? Also I am fat. Not like mega fat but fat. Perhaps my bands of blubber were acting like wings to balance me? Hahaha.
After reading your posts I decided to try this myself, but I took it to the next level. I actually wore thick heeled cowboy boots, used a life-sized skull replica sitting on my coffee table, while holding my 4-foot sword and machine pistol. Held pose for 1 minute.
Looking at them side by side it is an interesting translation. Pretty bang on with the details as well. I mean, I still don't like it, but that's because I've never liked the original artwork. Gimme awesomelookingsisters with their cool helmets any day of the week.
pretre wrote: I find myself praying for the release so that this thread will be put out of its misery and we can all move on.
Move on? Sisters players?
I really should clarify: When I said before that I wasn't trying to antagonise Sisters players, I was telling the truth. You don't need to try to antagonise them.
I think it's one of the best models I've seen this year. One of my GW favorites this year as well.
I like the sculptors work: she does look like she's in armor, not in leather suit (which I would be fine with as well- it would make her sleek, more feminine), and it would be odd, if she was the only sister not in power plate.
As it comes to the source material: I love it as well, but it would be nearly impossible to do it 1:1 in 28 mm.
The painter did great work imho- red reflections, tones, the way the sword is done.the only thing that's fluffed is the base- it wouldn't take much effort for them to sculp all of it, not just under the right heel.
Maybe a little hair trim will take us a long way in enhancing the mini.
The amount of bizarre over-analysis of the sculpt of this miniature, the nature of sexuality, what is and is not appropriate or sexist (boob armor, etc) is kind of mind boggling. I don't see this level of obsession with other model releases, and it makes me wonder if this is one of the reasons it's taken so long for us to see another Sisters release. Can we just appreciate that something is being made at all, and that it is trying to emulate a classic piece of 40k art (disregarding the nature, intent of the art)? Can we just keep our ears to the ground and hope for a full release?
Honestly, the thing I always liked about that art was rather the weirdo ecclesiarchy fellas in the back rather than the sororitas. Dunno, always found those kind of strange, ugly, haggard fanatics decked out in archaic garments and esoteric sybols (engraved bones, golden icons etc.)to be really intriguing whereas SoB have never really done anything for me. Would love to see some models in that vein some time down the line and- oh, I hope they bring back Kyrinov for the made to order release, he's another one I wish I picked up at the time...
Honestly it's GW's fault. They decided that the only female models they'd make would be nuns, amazons or bondage freaks (or y'know, all 3).
If there were more ordinary women among the IG and Space Marine lines their one dedicated female line wouldn't be subjected to this level of... I can't even call it discussion can I?
I think its a really nice model, its really the angle of it that makes it look so awkward.
The base should have a larger sloping pile of stuff for her to stand on so she is tilting more forward rather then in the backwards, super high leg pose she is in in the example pic.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Looking at them side by side it is an interesting translation. Pretty bang on with the details as well. I mean, I still don't like it, but that's because I've never liked the original artwork. Gimme awesomelookingsisters with their cool helmets any day of the week.
pretre wrote: I find myself praying for the release so that this thread will be put out of its misery and we can all move on.
Move on? Sisters players?
I really should clarify: When I said before that I wasn't trying to antagonise Sisters players, I was telling the truth. You don't need to try to antagonise them.
It is tiresome to listen to 14-55 year old white men (statistically) Argue ad nauseum about modern feminist theory as it relates to boobplates, stripper heels, and latex dominatrix outfits on miniature toy soldiers but then I just remind myself that hey, at least they're not Chaos players. Seriously, those guys complain about PLASTIC KITS, like, the absolute definition of first world problems.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Honestly it's GW's fault. They decided that the only female models they'd make would be nuns, amazons or bondage freaks (or y'know, all 3).
If there were more ordinary women among the IG and Space Marine lines their one dedicated female line wouldn't be subjected to this level of... I can't even call it discussion can I?
So to make extrodinary stuff one needs to fill in the ordinary mandatory slot?
It seems to be fine over the Kingdom death thread, where not a single female miniature is without boobs. Oh, and there are VAGINAS AND PENISES as well, but the demographic seems to be more adult about the subject.
If SoB as an army will lose their oddness and wickedness, we will be left with sterile, characterless, mainstream crap. If an artist tries to appeal to everyone by trying not to stand out in a way some people might be displeased about, he`s not much of an artist, and his work will lack any taste. Same thing with sculpting miniatures.
Cephalobeard wrote: Such a terrible looking model. It's a real shame. We've seen such gems out of GW from sculpts recently. This looks as old and poorly detailed as the old metal sisters. I guess in that respect it will fit in.
timd wrote: Do we have any idea who the sculptor was? I suspect that it was not Jes.
If only people would check the article..
This book isn’t accompanying a new range of miniature, but we couldn’t let the release of a new book containing so many awesome sub-factions under the Imperial aegis pass without some sort of model to mark the occasion. So, our Studio Team set sculptor Martin Footit the task of creating an iconic miniature to accompany the book – and he didn’t disappoint.
When I asked my GW rep he said I could order 5 Canonesses and I don't run a GW store. Unless I misunderstood him, waiting for his reply to my order request.
You will also be able to order it from GWs website according to him, expect it to sell out in 2min though...
Why are people complaining about the heels? Suddenly 40k has to be "realistic"? Nobodys complaining that thhe Imperial Fists go into battle wearing pee yellow.
Gamgee wrote: The model is well made even if I don't like the style. I guess this all but confirms plastic sisters are on the way now. Please GW answer the Kroot fans we've been wanting Kroot Mercenaries/Army book for awhile now. Hit it out of the park please.
You can have your kroot stuff so long as I'm not forced to take the things in my Tau army.
Never cared for them, don't intend to ever use any.
I'll take Kroot mercs. Tau are over saturated with suits now. How about more auxiliaries and vehicles, like a heavy tank or flier that looks dangerous.
I also think I am going to buy this model just to have. I traded off the 50odd metal sisters I had and have no interest in starting a new sisters army, but this model and maybe a squad in the Imperial agents book I can see doing.
BBAP wrote: I'm a Sisters player too. At least I used to be. Now I'm a Sisters collector. The post wasn't a jab at the Sisters; it was an ironic reflection on how Sisters have changed over time as GW tries to cater to the "deplorable virgin manchild" demographic. The Sisters used to be Space Fanatics who did a nice line in Big Damn Hero bad-assery and were so pious their belief could do magic tricks. Now they wear skull-bras and high heels to war.
Seeing the model is direct copy of 2nd ed codex art one could say new model brings sisters right back to how they used to be...
If there's been change away from what they were originally then this is change back right to what they were from the get-go.
Gamgee wrote: The model is well made even if I don't like the style. I guess this all but confirms plastic sisters are on the way now. Please GW answer the Kroot fans we've been wanting Kroot Mercenaries/Army book for awhile now. Hit it out of the park please.
You can have your kroot stuff so long as I'm not forced to take the things in my Tau army.
Never cared for them, don't intend to ever use any.
I'll take Kroot mercs. Tau are over saturated with suits now. How about more auxiliaries and vehicles, like a heavy tank or flier that looks dangerous.
I also think I am going to buy this model just to have. I traded off the 50odd metal sisters I had and have no interest in starting a new sisters army, but this model and maybe a squad in the Imperial agents book I can see doing.
There are two ways I see them possibly going about this. First they could make the Kroot/Vespid/X Auxiliary into their own army. Probably the Kroot stand the most chance of this. If GW decides for some reason not do this then they could possibly do a Tau Auxiliaries Codex or if the sales of the new plastic sisters really makes them balk then we can hope for new models for them in the next Tau update and maybe a new aux unit. Also I too would love to see more Tau vehicles and a hovering stealth spaceship/aircraft that acts like the Deathwatch Corvus Blackstar mixed with a Comanche Helicopter Gunship and offers aerial fire support and stays on the battlefield by hovering (but can fly like a jet if needed). It would be cool to see a next generation crisis suit as well just to see a smaller suit release again. The next generation suit would incorporate experimental technology accrued over the course of the last few release and make them standard (and likely very pricey suits). This would represent a next generation crisis suit meant to entirely replace them in the far future and not simply a model update of the crisis. The F-15 Eagle has had many design variations and improvements over its lifetime but it slowly being superseded by newer better aircraft that fill its roll like the F-22 (just as an example).
Stunning sculpt. I haven't played 40K for years but I'm tempted to buy this just to have painted and sat on the shelf. Such an iconic piece of art, and brilliantly realised. Would be very happy if the new Sisters went back to the original concept as this one has; huge shoulderpads and high heels FTW. Well played, GW.
cuda1179 wrote: I have a case of over 100 metal Sisters that I have had for over 10 years, unpainted, sitting in my basement. I'd love to see them on the tabletop.
And what was stopping you ten years ago? You clearly ain't that interested in the army if its sat there for all that time unpainted.
cuda1179 wrote: I have a case of over 100 metal Sisters that I have had for over 10 years, unpainted, sitting in my basement. I'd love to see them on the tabletop.
And what was stopping you ten years ago? You clearly ain't that interested in the army if its sat there for all that time unpainted.
Life got in the way. I got married, bought a house, bought a business, had two kids, and I have a backlog of over 1500 miniatures to paint ( I have like 17 40k armies). With super-bad rules and a non-printed codex Sisters have been on the back-burner for a while. (I hate not having a physical book).
JohnnyHell wrote: I see since I went to sleep last night that some the criticisms moved into real-world fat-shaming and straight-up sexism. Stay classy, mandolly fans.
I'm not 100% sure i followed what mad cow is trying to imply with his post, but im not taking it as meaning anything nice towords that poor cosplayer lady...
JohnnyHell wrote: I see since I went to sleep last night that some the criticisms moved into real-world fat-shaming and straight-up sexism. Stay classy, mandolly fans.
So true.
As for the "zipper" bits on the model... that's the cabling a la Astartes
NivlacSupreme wrote: Why are people complaining about the heels? Suddenly 40k has to be "realistic"? Nobodys complaining that thhe Imperial Fists go into battle wearing pee yellow.
It's not a question of realism, but of coherency (probably Ive misswritten that). I mean: sisters of battle are NUNS! They doesn't wabt to seduce, but to purge! So i could understand a "flamer boot" but not a "heels boot".
NivlacSupreme wrote: Why are people complaining about the heels? Suddenly 40k has to be "realistic"? Nobodys complaining that thhe Imperial Fists go into battle wearing pee yellow.
It's not a question of realism, but of coherency (probably Ive misswritten that). I mean: sisters of battle are NUNS! They doesn't wabt to seduce, but to purge! So i could understand a "flamer boot" but not a "heels boot".
I could say no, no they are not nuns, they are part of a fictional religious order in a fictional universe set in a fictional future and bear only the most passing resemblance to female religious orders in the real world.
I could also say that they are warrior nuns, and intimidation is a fair tactic so heels might in some odd sense be rational. Moreover, one imagines that SoBs, like most people have several sets of clothes which may well include a 'combat' set of armor with flat boots and a rational chest plate as well as a ceremonial/intimidating set with heels for additional height and other impractical but cool details.
I could.
But then I'd be adding fuel to this dumpster fire of a thread.
NivlacSupreme wrote: Why are people complaining about the heels? Suddenly 40k has to be "realistic"? Nobodys complaining that thhe Imperial Fists go into battle wearing pee yellow.
It's not a question of realism, but of coherency (probably Ive misswritten that). I mean: sisters of battle are NUNS! They doesn't wabt to seduce, but to purge! So i could understand a "flamer boot" but not a "heels boot".
It's their style, that's it. It's meant to underline that they're women and not men at arms, which is the whole reason for their existance. See, there's your reasoning. Sure, it's totally "lets make up some bs to justify the boots and looks overall". But it's part of what SoB are. They're not just nuns.
But to answer the original question: Probably because the same people shouted at RH - infamous for cheesecakey female miniatures - for having heels on their not-sisters, stating that having heels on a miniature would be the same as sending them the miniature completely destroyed by a blender or something similar.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Looking at them side by side it is an interesting translation. Pretty bang on with the details as well. I mean, I still don't like it, but that's because I've never liked the original artwork. Gimme awesomelookingsisters with their cool helmets any day of the week.
pretre wrote: I find myself praying for the release so that this thread will be put out of its misery and we can all move on.
Move on? Sisters players?
I really should clarify: When I said before that I wasn't trying to antagonise Sisters players, I was telling the truth. You don't need to try to antagonise them.
It is tiresome to listen to 14-55 year old white men (statistically) Argue ad nauseum about modern feminist theory as it relates to boobplates, stripper heels, and latex dominatrix outfits on miniature toy soldiers but then I just remind myself that hey, at least they're not Chaos players. Seriously, those guys complain about PLASTIC KITS, like, the absolute definition of first world problems.
That's a nice ad-homniem, but it turns out that it doesn't matter who's making the point or claim - all that matters is the substance of the problem. So the 'muh white males' point is meaningless and isn't an argument. And no matter how much one degrades the problem, people have a right to complain especially.
And we even get a jab at Chaos Players, how original. Amazingly the poster isn't lazy and doesn't just to reduce them to whiners (often the easier route, as if someone is complaining, no matter the content of their point they're obviously whiners) but instead goes for a somewhat more complex point of "but you received something, but you still complain" fallacy.
It's not a question of realism, but of coherency (probably Ive misswritten that). I mean: sisters of battle are NUNS! They doesn't wabt to seduce, but to purge! So i could understand a "flamer boot" but not a "heels boot".
It's their style, that's it. It's meant to underline that they're women and not men at arms, which is the whole reason for their existance. See, there's your reasoning. Sure, it's totally "lets make up some bs to justify the boots and looks overall". But it's part of what SoB are. They're not just nuns.
And thats why they have boobplates: femminility but not seduction. SoB should rappresent purity, a purity so strong that they will purge everything, a purity so strong that, even their god is NOT a god, they do miracles anyway. They should not be space-domimatrix-sluts, for that there is Slaanesh.
But to answer the original question: Probably because the same people shouted at RH - infamous for cheesecakey female miniatures - for having heels on their not-sisters, stating that having heels on a miniature would be the same as sending them the miniature completely destroyed by a blender or something similar.
This is the same Imperium of man which sends space marines into battle with bright shining armor and giant flagpoles on there back - and imperial guard regiments regularly go into battle in full dress uniform complete with gold braid?
I get that some peaple would like to see sensible female miniatures in the style of the cadians and catachans. That would be cool, I really hope that when GW redo imperial guard we get mixed gender squads.
However, this is not what sisters of battle are for. Sisters of battle have always been, aesthetically, full on grimdark silliness. They are the female equivalent of the Black Templars, Blood Angels or Dark Angels rather then the Cadians or Elysians or Catachans.
I think this model is -amazing- all at once lampooning fascist iconography and religious iconography. It ticks the box of what the imperium is about. The only way this model could scream 40k harder is if she had a bright green Mohawk to boot.
Wanting realistic fighting women with sensible uniforms and tactics is a fine aim, but that's never what sisters of battle are or should be about. What you want are female cadians. Which I agree, should exist.
Serious question:
Who wants to see a sisters of battle full army list in the agents of the imperium book?
On the one hand it would be new rules faster.
On the other hand, we would be the only one of the three Chambers Millitant not to get our own proper codex...
I don't know why people are bitching so much over what's obviously a display piece over a gaming piece. Something that's almost a 1-2-1 match of a 20+ year piece of artwork. It's obviously not going to come with any options, so why all the whining? If and when the new codex and models come, they're going to be based on the newer aesthetic seen is the shield of baal supplement over this.
The only real problem I've seen with it is the paintjob on the face. But I've already seen an excellent Photoshop that's given her softer features and made it look infinitely better.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: I don't know why people are bitching so much over what's obviously a display piece over a gaming piece. Something that's almost a 1-2-1 match of a 20+ year piece of artwork. It's obviously not going to come with any options, so why all the whining? If and when the new codex and models come, they're going to be based on the newer aesthetic seen is the shield of baal supplement over this.
The only real problem I've seen with it is the paintjob on the face. But I've already seen an excellent Photoshop that's given her softer features and made it look infinitely better.
This is 100% Correct.
I feel that IF sisters come the thread will divide into those who crow Sexism, those who insult other people and don't get called on it, and finally some who like them.
Honestly when we don't get new sisters stuff because of the knee jerk reaction of GW to pull them. Because of those who want to control everything with their own preconception, that and I quote from perhaps the most influential person in (modern) video games " everything is sexist, Everything is racist. And you have to point it out ".
We only have ourselves to blame. But hey at least we will get more Stormhosts and Space Marines right?..
Calling people Manchildren, or blaming white males for everything, or writing insane sexist posts is not going to help anyone. This is a hobby, it's supposed to be fun. Then again people have to stick their oar in and make sure we follow the correct narrative.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: I don't know why people are bitching so much over what's obviously a display piece over a gaming piece. Something that's almost a 1-2-1 match of a 20+ year piece of artwork. It's obviously not going to come with any options, so why all the whining? If and when the new codex and models come, they're going to be based on the newer aesthetic seen is the shield of baal supplement over this.
Exactly, it's just like the 30th anniversary marine. You can stick it in your regular army but it's going to look a bit off. Most the elements people have an issue with are down to it being an homage, and on that level it works very well.
Hideously bad model. Heels, Skullbreasts, Corset armour, bob haircut. This is John Blanche's fetish. Here's a chance for a Dark Eldar style re-envisioning, a chance to drop the campy, BDSM style mid-90's look and do something original. And instead you get this rather naff tired look.
I can't get over those heels... Presumably, they're chunky because she keeps twisting her ankle in battle.
zedmeister wrote: Hideously bad model. Heels, Skullbreasts, Corset armour, bob haircut. This is John Blanche's fetish. Here's a chance for a Dark Eldar style re-envisioning, a chance to drop the campy, BDSM style mid-90's look and do something original.
The point of this model is not to reimagine the sisters or show the future direction of the range. It is meant to resemble a specific older model or art-piece, just done with modern technology and materials. No different than the design process that went into Ahriman, Kharn, Eldrad, or the Imperial Space Marine.
zedmeister wrote: Hideously bad model. Heels, Skullbreasts, Corset armour, bob haircut. This is John Blanche's fetish. Here's a chance for a Dark Eldar style re-envisioning, a chance to drop the campy, BDSM style mid-90's look and do something original. And instead you get this rather naff tired look.
I can't get over those heels... Presumably, they're chunky because she keeps twisting her ankle in battle.
You want the model modelled after a mid 90s picture to drop the mid 90s picture look that its modelled after? They've recreated the art, that's all. It could just be a 20th anniversary collectors model and not indicative of the range at all. May not even be an indicator of the range being released soon.
I really wish they'd dropped the chunky mid 90s modelling on this marine. Ruined it
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: But I've already seen an excellent Photoshop that's given her softer features and made it look infinitely better.
Could you please provide a link to said photo?
It's on /tg/ on 4chan. I don't have access at the moment, but i'll see if I can find it again tonight.
Couldn't find it, looked in all 5 threads about the model and found nothing :(
Hm, the thread must have fallen off the board since last night. But the softer paint scheme really helped the face. It's a typical Eavy Metal can't do soft skin tones.
It's not a question of realism, but of coherency (probably Ive misswritten that). I mean: sisters of battle are NUNS! They doesn't wabt to seduce, but to purge! So i could understand a "flamer boot" but not a "heels boot".
It's their style, that's it. It's meant to underline that they're women and not men at arms, which is the whole reason for their existance. See, there's your reasoning. Sure, it's totally "lets make up some bs to justify the boots and looks overall". But it's part of what SoB are. They're not just nuns.
And thats why they have boobplates: femminility but not seduction. SoB should rappresent purity, a purity so strong that they will purge everything, a purity so strong that, even their god is NOT a god, they do miracles anyway. They should not be space-domimatrix-sluts, for that there is Slaanesh.
But to answer the original question: Probably because the same people shouted at RH - infamous for cheesecakey female miniatures - for having heels on their not-sisters, stating that having heels on a miniature would be the same as sending them the miniature completely destroyed by a blender or something similar.
Wait - so boobplate is fine but heels arent when using the very same reason to justify them? And how exactly does a boobplate represent purity of all things? I mean, the boobs are prominently shaped and put on display by it, but the HEELS are too impure? I mean they're not even stilettos or something but really thick and sturdy.
And have you ever seen the actual repentia squads? "should not be space-dominatrix"? GW clearly thinks otherwise. If you don't like the style and fluff of Sisters that's fine, but it's still there and it's what Sisters of Battle are. So all you're saying is "I don't like the style of that army", which is totally fine. Don't buy them.
Not sure how relevant it is, but basic Battle Sisters are now "No longer available", at least on the UK webstore. Since some of the range will be Made To Order this weekend, it could be that they'll be included in that and so are being wound down in preparation for a new kit.
Either way, it seems odd to promote a new Codex and a new collectors' miniature for a range they're not selling. Perhaps the first batches of MTO were a test run for putting whole ranges into that category rather than just letting them disappear from the webstore?
UGH..... it double posted then undid itself after I edited the duplicate.
Lets derail the Sister armor design train and return to the supplement please (its been done to death and the Canoness is clearly a show piece remake of some art work and not indicative of the current vision for Sisters).
So I wonder what sort of new formations or detachments the Inq will have at their disposal. Astra Telepathica is probably going to be some formation of Psykers and those tend to be major game changers if the rules are good. The Aeronautica Imperialis seems interesting as I assume that's the air force (Valks, maybe Vendettas?). Sadly no Scions but hopefully they will get some love when IG gets updated to 7th (with chaos starting their 13th black crusade again the guard are going to need to play a major role).
Thommy H wrote: Not sure how relevant it is, but basic Battle Sisters are now "No longer available", at least on the UK webstore. Since some of the range will be Made To Order this weekend, it could be that they'll be included in that and so are being wound down in preparation for a new kit.
Either way, it seems odd to promote a new Codex and a new collectors' miniature for a range they're not selling. Perhaps the first batches of MTO were a test run for putting whole ranges into that category rather than just letting them disappear from the webstore?
Same for the German webstore. Basic Bolter Sisters are out of stock, everything else is still available.
Chikout wrote: Here are this weekends made to order minis.
Oh cool, nothing I actually need. So I can just focus on the canoness. I notice they're still missing the third variation on the inquisitor. Sweet, that means mine is still rare.
Chikout wrote: Here are this weekends made to order minis.
What is the top right suppose to be? Some sort of Assassin? Kinda looks like a Vindicare yet far from it. First version of the Eversor?
It's the original Imperial assassin model. It predates the temples fluff.
Edit: Bah, beaten. I'll add that they used to be pretty funny back in the early days of 2nd ed. You could load them out any way you wanted, so you could have one in terminator armour, riding around on a bike. They eventually had to clarify that if you gave an assassin polymorphine it couldn't also be carrying all that funky stuff along with it. Where would that humble eldar guardian have been hiding it all!
tneva82 wrote: Seeing the model is direct copy of 2nd ed codex art one could say new model brings sisters right back to how they used to be...
Sisters were never like this. One picture of them was. First new model in 15 years and it's based on that picture. Woohoo, "iconic"!
If there's been change away from what they were originally then this is change back right to what they were from the get-go.
no
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chikout wrote: Here are this weekends made to order minis.
Was kinda hoping for Immolators. This is... disappointing.
Can we just drop the argument now? It's a one off, limited edition display piece that will most likely sell out within the first hour. It's really not important and will not be the basis of how they look in the future. It's just an homage to a famous piece of artwork.
Argh I really wanted one of those female Witch Hunter models until, like, a year ago when I just bought something else from Hasslefree to serve instead...
Still might get one. And the priests I don't already have. Can never have too many weird looking religious-types running around.
Glad about the upcoming release of Inquisition stuff
Upset about the lack of scions in the supplement
Enthused about the prospect of a sisters of battle update
Indifferent about the limited sister model personally, but may buy for a friend.
All in all, glad to see games workshop handing out some goodies for the people!
I hope that Sisters of Battle get more than plastic character, I want to turn one into an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor. Those Made-To-Order models make me kind of want to order one to use in the mean time.
Crazyterran wrote: It's not a thread about an imperial release without 20 pages of gak posting from Sisters players.
And your contribution by this post to the thread is - apart from just whining? You do realsie this is a thread about the new Imperial Agents Codex which includes Sisters and the flagship model is - oh year a Sister of Battle. Pardon everyone for discussing the topic rather than just the lastest version of a slightly differnt coloured Marine.
Anyway back to the actual thread topic.
Some of the OOP models look very tempting as missing a couple of them. The Formations will be important - espeically for all those who have thus far been ignored.
Crazyterran wrote: It's not a thread about an imperial release without 20 pages of gak posting from Sisters players.
And your contribution by this post to the thread is - apart from just whining? You do realsie this is a thread about the new Imperial Agents Codex which includes Sisters and the flagship model is - oh year a Sister of Battle. Pardon everyone for discussing the topic rather than just the lastest version of a slightly differnt coloured Marine.
Anyway back to the actual thread topic.
Some of the OOP models look very tempting as missing a couple of them. The Formations will be important - espeically for all those who have thus far been ignored.
It is hard to say that the flagship model is a Sister of Battle when she is limited to less than five per store. Agreed on the formations though. It sounds like they are going to be individualized, which is great.
I am hoping for a reason to get another Rhino or two(for Sisters of Battle), and possibly a Chimera.
So, our Studio Team set sculptor Martin Footit the task of creating an iconic miniature to accompany the book
According to GW anyway
Sure, but the last five pages have literally been Sisters players whining about the model, with a few people (one, maybe two) defending it. So it has been a good number of pages of sisters players whining and gak posting, when one post stating your discontent isn't enough. Instead people are getting defensive and telling other people they are wrong for liking it.
So, typical sister gak posting. Why are you getting so defensive and upset?
This book isn't the updated Sisters codex, it's the updated Inquisition codex with a new name. Take an inquisitor of a specific Ordo, a battle Sisters squad/deathwatch squad/grey knight squad with your henchmen, maybe throw in an assassin, and send them off with your guard/marine/sisters/knight army.
As long as we can still take servo skulls, can still take single assassins, and some of the older rules get clarified and updated, this release will be fine. Hopefully they don't get rid of flavourful things like hellrifles and Daemon blades, since they don't make models for those.
For those that play ITC, maybe this will shrink the amount of detachments that imperials take so you can squeeze in another one. That would be nice...
Oh wait, there's two different marine armies being represented, I guess this is more of a marine release than a Sisters one. Lol.
Sigh - same question - what did your specific post say apart from trying to be provactive and Trollish? How did it help?
So when another faction has a new model they don't discuss i - did anyone discuss the new appearance of Magnus the red - hmm I think maybe they did?
So, our Studio Team set sculptor Martin Footit the task of creating an iconic miniature to accompany the book
According to GW anyway
Sure, but the last five pages have literally been Sisters players whining about the model, with a few people (one, maybe two) defending it. So it has been a good number of pages of sisters players whining and gak posting, when one post stating your discontent isn't enough. Instead people are getting defensive and telling other people they are wrong for liking it.
So, typical sister gak posting. Why are you getting so defensive and upset?
This book isn't the updated Sisters codex, it's the updated Inquisition codex with a new name. Take an inquisitor of a specific Ordo, a battle Sisters squad/deathwatch squad/grey knight squad with your henchmen, maybe throw in an assassin, and send them off with your guard/marine/sisters/knight army.
As long as we can still take servo skulls, can still take single assassins, and some of the older rules get clarified and updated, this release will be fine. Hopefully they don't get rid of flavourful things like hellrifles and Daemon blades, since they don't make models for those.
For those that play ITC, maybe this will shrink the amount of detachments that imperials take so you can squeeze in another one. That would be nice...
Oh wait, there's two different marine armies being represented, I guess this is more of a marine release than a Sisters one. Lol.
Sigh - same question - what did your specific post say apart from trying to be provactive and Trollish? How did it help?
So when another faction has a new model they don't discuss i - did anyone discuss the new appearance of Magnus the red - hmm I think maybe they did?
Sure, but attacking people for liking it?
Well, probably, since Sisters and Chaos players tend to be never happy in that regard, and must try to ruin anyone else's enjoyment of it.
The fact that you are getting so defensive must mean you realize you are gak posting. You could always not do that, and not attempt to ruin other people's enjoyment of the model?
OK We get it your a scary Troll on the internet, we are all afraid - can we now move on and actually discuss the codex and related models?
Pugnacious_Cee wrote: So for those of us that DO really like this Sister model... what time should we set our alarm clock so that we can try to buy one?
10am is the usual time things get updated on the page I believe.
And i'll be getting two if I can.
Ahaha, ant they called me a troll Chill, there are 5 models available to order for every retailer. That's A LOT, compared to Thousand Sons dice which were available 1 pack per retailer. As for the sister, I think she's pretty AF :>
And the =I=s and some preachers. Oh my. Poor wallet. I said I wouldn't buy more minis :/ Those female Inquisitors are sooo good, though. And would be a great fit to lead the Kasrkin I didn't buy.
A Town Called Malus wrote: Her face is awful, in my opinion. Not sure if it is the paint job or the sculpt but the face of the model looks nothing like the artwork. They didn't even get the design of the eyepiece right and the painter forgot the fleur-de-lis under her eye.
The scarring on the right side (her left) of the face is way too raised up which, combined with the paintjob, makes it look like she's had an allergic reaction to a space-bee sting.
The expectations in this thread are off the chart.
That image is ~10x15 inches. Now reduce that in size to 1/5. Then try to pick out small details. You're asking for the most intricate of details to be placed on a canvas a tiny fraction of the size of the artwork.
If GW want to charge over a tenner for a single human-sized model then you're damn right I expect them to not make it look like someone with half their face blown up from an allergic reaction. If the scarring in the image was too delicate to translate, then it shouldn't have been taken over on to the mini rather than blow it up to the point of disfiguring her face. People could add their own scars with a sharp craft knife if they wanted.
Does anyone have a better picture of the model in the top left? Looks really interesting as yet another Inquisitor in my armies.
Spoiler:
BTW: whining about [MOD EDIT - Language - Alpharius] REALLY doesn't help a thread. report and move on instead of ADDING to the [MOD EDIT - Language - Alpharius] by complaining about it, please.
Ah, I have given up trying to say a given army is not mine so I will look away and not buy them.
Sisters of Battle being rolled into some Inquisition rules will give me every reason to get a few of them.
Seeing Sisters in plastic could be just what is needed to get a few. I meant "made in plastic" not dressed in plastic...
This can't be quoted enough, until this thread gets locked
It's embarrassing.
FWIW, I think the mini will look really good at the right scale. It's the super closeup that draws attention to the distortions they put into every miniature.
This can't be quoted enough, until this thread gets locked
It's embarrassing.
FWIW, I think the mini will look really good at the right scale. It's the super closeup that draws attention to the distortions they put into every miniature.
I think the mini is fine, the leg pose seems a bit off. but honestly its a great Homage to the picture.
if you really dont like it, just get one of the metal canoness that they have still.
StupidYellow wrote: if you really dont like it, just get one of the metal canoness that they have still.
I already have one, and I still think Canoness Montana looks strange and silly from the waist down (also the skull-boobs). It's not a great model. Not "Nemesis baby-carrier"-bad, but not great either.
Hopefully, she won't have crazy stats like the 30th Anniversary Space Marine. A Strength 5, AP2, Rapid Fire and Instant Death combi-weapon is a bit much.
Probably one of those lady Inquisitors too. Back in the day I was really put off by the beehive hair, but now I'm confident I could do a smart hat like in DoW2.
The cannoness is a great model if you ask me. Of course they have to change the proportions and upscale it. If they didn't it would look like a Malifaux model among all the GW models. GW upscales things to fit with their proportions and so detail is not obscured. Looks like any other sisters model if you ask me. Of course the hair/boots/skullboobs are silly, the picture itself is silly. 40k is silly. Grimdark doesn't mean practical. There's nothing practical about how anyone fights in the 41st millennium.
And it won't be in the imperial agents book. You can quote me on that and make me eat my words if its false. But have any collectors/anniversary/limited print models ever been in codexes? They only put in models you can actively buy so you want to you know...buy them.
And it won't be in the imperial agents book. You can quote me on that and make me eat my words if its false. But have any collectors/anniversary/limited print models ever been in codexes? They only put in models you can actively buy so you want to you know...buy them.
I don't think anyone here expects the LE Cannoness model to be in the Imperial Agents codex.
Someone mentioned seeing a Photoshop job that altered the face, I was skeptical but ended up finding it:
Spoiler:
That's more or less in line with what I'm thinking (there's a guide out there to painting better sororitas faces that achieve similar results compared to GW's examples. The underlying structure is still there.
As for the rules, did the imperial space marine end up in any printed material? I seem to recall seeing him in a book somewhere.
AndrewGPaul wrote: A pity there's no Argo-flagellants amongst that lot, but I've been after a daemonhost for ages.
I wonder if this means there'll be stats for Redemptor Kyrinov? He's not in the current Codex: Adepta Sororitas.
In US store at least. Had to check all of these in search function in webstore https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Grey-Knights-Arco-flagellants so looks like everything is in store or being brought back on demand for a brief time.
Agree, I loved the wacky carrot-top guy.
ERJAK wrote: It is tiresome to listen to 14-55 year old white men (statistically) Argue ad nauseum about modern feminist theory as it relates to boobplates, stripper heels, and latex dominatrix outfits on miniature toy soldiers ...
Point of clarification, but those are NOT the ordinary "stripper heels" that you'd see on the girls working the local Deja Vu. They are fetish heels, like what you'd find in a BDSM dungeon. Fetish heels turn heels to eleven, where the foot is nearly enpointe. That hyperfeminine look is what the artwork depicts for the footwear.
It has nothing to do with modern feminist theory, as far as I'm aware.
ERJAK wrote: It is tiresome to listen to 14-55 year old white men (statistically) Argue ad nauseum about modern feminist theory as it relates to boobplates, stripper heels, and latex dominatrix outfits on miniature toy soldiers ...
Point of clarification, but those are NOT the ordinary "stripper heels" that you'd see on the girls working the local Deja Vu. They are fetish heels, like what you'd find in a BDSM dungeon. Fetish heels turn heels to eleven, where the foot is nearly enpointe. That hyperfeminine look is what the artwork depicts for the footwear.
It has nothing to do with modern feminist theory, as far as I'm aware.
Depending on who you would ask. Some feminist theory considers any kind of fetish wrong. It certainly has a very Latexrotica look about it, personally I like that.
ERJAK wrote: It is tiresome to listen to 14-55 year old white men (statistically) Argue ad nauseum about modern feminist theory as it relates to boobplates, stripper heels, and latex dominatrix outfits on miniature toy soldiers ...
Point of clarification, but those are NOT the ordinary "stripper heels" that you'd see on the girls working the local Deja Vu. They are fetish heels, like what you'd find in a BDSM dungeon. Fetish heels turn heels to eleven, where the foot is nearly enpointe. That hyperfeminine look is what the artwork depicts for the footwear.
It has nothing to do with modern feminist theory, as far as I'm aware.
Depending on who you would ask some feminist theory considers any kind of fetish wrong. It certainly has a very Latexrotica look about it, personally I like that.
S.Y.
OK, fair enough. The original is definitely full fetish latex suit.
£15 my store manager told me. I'm preordering can't wait! I don't have a sisters army but she will make a fine addition for Inquisimunda style games :-)
to me though, this is a bad model:
.
This model is a recreation of a famous piece of art, it gets cart blanche (heh) to be as ridiculous as it needs to be to match the original.
