Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

One thing that's kept me away from 40K as a hobby, aside from the larger initial "fee" to get invested into it compared to other Wargames, is there isn't really an army that I feel is "right" for me from a setting standpoint.

Honestly, it's the lack of females. If I want to field female units, my options are either get really good with green stuff, field an army of really expensive, really pissed off, walking fetishes, or be space drow with wild and crazy hair. Neither one of those appeal to me from a fluff standpoint, or a gameplay standpoint. I tend to play the protagonist factions, or at least neutral.

Is it so bad to merely want to run a female IG regiment? To have a female Tau cadre? To really, have -any- female characters aside from the one the Eldar have, the two the Dark Eldar have, the one the Tau have, and the -I'm not going to talk about it- the Space Nuns have?

I feel it's a barrier, one that has no reason to be there, and it's not the only one. Why do we still get things styled after things that stopped being "in" in the 80's? The Daemonetts are an excellent example of both these points. Mohawks and skeletal faces. They both look nothing like fluff portrays them, and have a style hearkening back to a time when Ghost Busters was culturally relevant. GW just seems wholly out of touch with current trends, clinging to what used to work and refusing to add anything new to the setting.

I'd honestly dump all my money into a full out Imperial Guard regiment or Tau Cadre if I had some female options (and know others who would do the same), but I don't, so am putting that money to PP because not only does GW fail at offering variety, they succeed at killing off and utterlly destroying the only female option they had with -anything- they do with the SoB.

It's because the vast majority of wargamers are male nerds with an underdeveloped sense of the female identity, hence the lack of any reasonable female archetypes. Of course, this comes from an Ork player, and Orks are essentially genderless.

warpcrafter wrote:It's because the vast majority of wargamers are male nerds with an underdeveloped sense of the female identity, hence the lack of any reasonable female archetypes. Of course, this comes from an Ork player, and Orks are essentially genderless.

This. One reason why I'm thinking of going DE. Sure, they're dominatrices, but at least it isn't only the women.

warpcrafter wrote:It's because the vast majority of wargamers are male nerds with an underdeveloped sense of the female identity, hence the lack of any reasonable female archetypes. Of course, this comes from an Ork player, and Orks are essentially genderless.

That makes little sense though.

I'm not even asking for empowered females to be used. Just -having- them in the first place, even if in traditional fantasy "skimpy" form would be preferable to not at all. Not to mention that gives little credit to the people who play in the first place, and ignores the fact that the hobby is more and more being picked up by females as being "geeky" is becoming culturally acceptable for females.

It's a bad business move, and is just plain... stupid.

It also comes down to work on behalf of GW. If you have a Cadian guard kit that has 10 men in it, and has for a long time. Why change? The demographic who want female guardsman is probably quite small.
I do agree with you, that in the Guard and Tau it would be nice to see some female models thrown about...but I dont find it necessary exactly.
The other thing is that (in the case of guard) women in flak armour would look alot like men, except for the face, at 28mm scale. Look at the DE women, except lelith, they mostly look like burly men with breasts.

Might I suggest "normal" Eldar?

Howling Banshees are exclusively female - though I've heard there are male ones, but their traditional armor design demands a chest for some reason - and they're quite effective in melee against MEQ. They also have a fairly decent balance of females in their Guardian Squads - though that particular unit is not doing well these days from what I hear. When I first started my Eldar in 2001, Dire Avengers also had some female torsos, but I don't know if that's still the case. Harlequins, which I've also heard are good, have some female models too IIRC.



As for Imperial Guard, if you play Cadians, it's not too hard to say "half my troops are female." and when your opponent looks to see and can't tell which are which, just say, "Well of course you can't tell, with all that body armor and baggy clothing." Real life soldiers and Marines in combat gear look pretty much identical apart from height differences, so it wouldn't be too unrealistic to say such a thing.

Same thing with the Tau. Have you seen Shadowsun? If she didn't have a helmetless version, you'd never know unless you read the fluff.

warpcrafter wrote:It's because the vast majority of wargamers are male nerds with an underdeveloped sense of the female identity, hence the lack of any reasonable female archetypes. Of course, this comes from an Ork player, and Orks are essentially genderless.

Can you actually call orks genderless? Well ya they reproduce by spores, but you would be hard pressed to find a more masculine army then the orks.

You say its a bad business move, but do you really know that? I dont claim to be a business expert, but there is a real possibility that making a mostly female force like an IG regiment or Tau cadre would be a horrible idea financially. They spend x amount of money designing the models, more money producing them, and a bit more on advertising and such. True, more females are picking up the game, but there is a real chance that they would lose money on this, and you know they can't do that.

The best thing they have to go on is SoB sales, which are some of their lowest. Now, you say you and many others dont like the SoB due to their models, themes, whatever. However, for GW it would be a huge risk to put time and effort into something that very realistically might not sell.

That being said, I agree it would be nice if they had that kind of stuff available, and GW makes tons of stupid decisions as a company. Theyre not losing much if anything by not offering these models, though.

Pouncey wrote:Might I suggest "normal" Eldar?

Howling Banshees are exclusively female - though I've heard there are male ones, but their traditional armor design demands a chest for some reason - and they're quite effective in melee against MEQ. They also have a fairly decent balance of females in their Guardian Squads - though that particular unit is not doing well these days from what I hear. When I first started my Eldar in 2001, Dire Avengers also had some female torsos, but I don't know if that's still the case. Harlequins, which I've also heard are good, have some female models too IIRC.



As for Imperial Guard, if you play Cadians, it's not too hard to say "half my troops are female." and when your opponent looks to see and can't tell which are which, just say, "Well of course you can't tell, with all that body armor and baggy clothing." Real life soldiers and Marines in combat gear look pretty much identical apart from height differences, so it wouldn't be too unrealistic to say such a thing.

Same thing with the Tau. Have you seen Shadowsun? If she didn't have a helmetless version, you'd never know unless you read the fluff.

This right here.

The only armies that are 100% male are Space Marines. No one would complain if you just said "all my guardsmen are Guardswomen" or "all my Fire Warriors are Female" Maybe paint the lips a different shade to represent which are male and female if you really felt like you have too.

I usually imagine about 1/2 of my Tau are Female when I picture how the game is going in my head. No one under the age of 16 is going to say "nuh-uh her tits aren't big enough!" and quite frankly, anyone who does prolly isn't worth playing.

I'm not going to get into a drawn-out essay on the nature of humankind in relation to the "male" and "female" gender differences, suffice that to say, I am glad feminism has yet to encroach on GW (:
Any man who thinks there should be more female models is just a pseudo-feminist who think that girls love respectful men

Meh, I kinda agree with you... but then you look at what people produce themselves and call 'female soldier', and you're left thinking "thankfully GW doesn't try to sell me crap like that"... oversized breasts, hips, no thought for armour, clothing or even common sense in the vast majority of cases... as it stands I'm rather happy they don't do it more often, because they're likely to do it the standard way which is to just muck it up horribly. Yeah, I'm grateful they're not trying to market that at me, really.

So yeah, sure, they're lacking a bit... but in all honesty I'm just planning to get a couple of female minis from other ranges for use in my guard, as well as some House Escher Gangers from Necromunda (I, however, totally love the hair from what I've seen you may not ). In particular I am looking forward to getting this rather nice Commissar. Sure, she's got high heels, but it's far, far better than most

P.S. I totally dig the female Dark Eldar... that hair is just epic XD

Edit: Joey, what a wonderfully narrow-minded view you just represented I'm a pseudo-feminist, you say? I thought I just wanted a bit more variety in my Guard that'll show me the error of my ways!

Joey wrote:I'm not going to get into a drawn-out essay on the nature of humankind in relation to the "male" and "female" gender differences, suffice that to say, I am glad feminism has yet to encroach on GW (:
Any man who thinks there should be more female models is just a pseudo-feminist who think that girls love respectful men

Not true at all. I just like plastic boobies.

KilroyKiljoy wrote:
Not true at all. I just like plastic boobies.

Boobies are awesome, plastic boobies non the less awesome. But my problem is...
BOOBIES=female attributes.
WAR/DESTRUCTION/AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH=male attributes.
To mix the two is... sacrilege.

Joey wrote:

KilroyKiljoy wrote:
Not true at all. I just like plastic boobies.

Boobies are awesome, plastic boobies non the less awesome. But my problem is...
BOOBIES=female attributes.
WAR/DESTRUCTION/AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH=male attributes.
To mix the two is... sacrilege.

You mean like how SMs mix female birth giving with male war making. It gets kind of crazy when you think abut it.

Cost reasons? It'd cost more to stick in one or two female Cadians in a shocktrooper boxset than just have them all male as they are now. The Imperial Guard and other 40k armies are based on real world principles, and thus why the lines are made up almost solely of male miniatures (sure there are plenty of female soldiers serving across the world, but they aren't as promiment as their male counterparts). The fluff isn't quite as male centric however, there's female guard regiments, commissars, Inquisitors, etc as well as mixed regiments of males and females (though these are uncommon), so its just down to what's cost effective when it comes down to the actual models (either have a box of men and a few women and have people gripe about having to field female soldiers and screw their army's fluff, or just save cash sculpting and add in another head variant for the existing male body).

There's plenty of female miniatures out there, bother complete and as part of conversion kits. If you really want them they're not hard to pick up if you look. =/

Iur_tae_mont wrote:

Pouncey wrote:Might I suggest "normal" Eldar?

Howling Banshees are exclusively female - though I've heard there are male ones, but their traditional armor design demands a chest for some reason - and they're quite effective in melee against MEQ. They also have a fairly decent balance of females in their Guardian Squads - though that particular unit is not doing well these days from what I hear. When I first started my Eldar in 2001, Dire Avengers also had some female torsos, but I don't know if that's still the case. Harlequins, which I've also heard are good, have some female models too IIRC.



As for Imperial Guard, if you play Cadians, it's not too hard to say "half my troops are female." and when your opponent looks to see and can't tell which are which, just say, "Well of course you can't tell, with all that body armor and baggy clothing." Real life soldiers and Marines in combat gear look pretty much identical apart from height differences, so it wouldn't be too unrealistic to say such a thing.

Same thing with the Tau. Have you seen Shadowsun? If she didn't have a helmetless version, you'd never know unless you read the fluff.

This right here.

The only armies that are 100% male are Space Marines. No one would complain if you just said "all my guardsmen are Guardswomen" or "all my Fire Warriors are Female" Maybe paint the lips a different shade to represent which are male and female if you really felt like you have too.

I usually imagine about 1/2 of my Tau are Female when I picture how the game is going in my head. No one under the age of 16 is going to say "nuh-uh her tits aren't big enough!" and quite frankly, anyone who does prolly isn't worth playing.

Oh please. The SoB don't sell well because it's based on fetishes, is stupidly expensive, has always had bad rules, and has generally ugly models that make people who went through catholic schools cringe in horror.

This isn't a feminism thing.

It's the same as saying "I prefer an Elf army" or "I prefer a Ork army" it's a preference.

As far as going with the models and saying "it's really X" no, not really. The female body, even as soldiers, is noticeably different from a males, and I don't just mean due to chest.

I know people who have quit, or flat out stopped playing GW products due to lack of variety in this department. They've went to other games.

http://chapterhousestudios.com/webshop/component/virtuemart/?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=125&category_id=35

Here something. But i agree with Iur_tae_mont

Sanon wrote:

Iur_tae_mont wrote:

Pouncey wrote:Might I suggest "normal" Eldar?

Howling Banshees are exclusively female - though I've heard there are male ones, but their traditional armor design demands a chest for some reason - and they're quite effective in melee against MEQ. They also have a fairly decent balance of females in their Guardian Squads - though that particular unit is not doing well these days from what I hear. When I first started my Eldar in 2001, Dire Avengers also had some female torsos, but I don't know if that's still the case. Harlequins, which I've also heard are good, have some female models too IIRC.



As for Imperial Guard, if you play Cadians, it's not too hard to say "half my troops are female." and when your opponent looks to see and can't tell which are which, just say, "Well of course you can't tell, with all that body armor and baggy clothing." Real life soldiers and Marines in combat gear look pretty much identical apart from height differences, so it wouldn't be too unrealistic to say such a thing.

Same thing with the Tau. Have you seen Shadowsun? If she didn't have a helmetless version, you'd never know unless you read the fluff.

This right here.

The only armies that are 100% male are Space Marines. No one would complain if you just said "all my guardsmen are Guardswomen" or "all my Fire Warriors are Female" Maybe paint the lips a different shade to represent which are male and female if you really felt like you have too.

I usually imagine about 1/2 of my Tau are Female when I picture how the game is going in my head. No one under the age of 16 is going to say "nuh-uh her tits aren't big enough!" and quite frankly, anyone who does prolly isn't worth playing.

Oh please. The SoB don't sell well because it's based on fetishes, is stupidly expensive, has always had bad rules, and has generally ugly models that make people who went through catholic schools cringe in horror.

This isn't a feminism thing.

It's the same as saying "I prefer an Elf army" or "I prefer a Ork army" it's a preference.

As far as going with the models and saying "it's really X" no, not really. The female body, even as soldiers, is noticeably different from a males, and I don't just mean due to chest.

I know people who have quit, or flat out stopped playing GW products due to lack of variety in this department. They've went to other games.

I thought the Sisters of Battle didn't sell well because of the limited variety of poses and obscene costs of the army - a standard troops choice costs more than a Land Raider, and as much as a Battleforce if you include a Rhino transport, for less than 200 points of stuff. Edit: Okay, I previously read through your post twice before writing my own, looking for mention of the price of SoBs, and didn't see it. I didn't even see it on my next three times reading it after posting, but I did on the fourth time... Disregard this part.

In any case, there's always Eldar. ^_^

Sanon wrote:
Oh please. The SoB don't sell well because it's based on fetishes, is stupidly expensive, has always had bad rules, and has generally ugly models that make people who went through catholic schools cringe in horror.

This isn't a feminism thing.

It's the same as saying "I prefer an Elf army" or "I prefer a Ork army" it's a preference.

As far as going with the models and saying "it's really X" no, not really. The female body, even as soldiers, is noticeably different from a males, and I don't just mean due to chest.

I know people who have quit, or flat out stopped playing GW products due to lack of variety in this department. They've went[sic] to other games.

Presumably the potential revenue lost due to people stopping playing due to lack of female models is less than the cost of developing said models.
Or, lost revenue < cost of development.
Being a vegetarian I understand how it feels to not have your needs catered to due to lack of commercial interest. But that's just the way of the world.

My point from earlier is made by this your link.
At the end of the day, these women at 28mm scale look like thin men at best. At the level of scaling down we are dealing with women in fatigues and body armour are going to be a little thinner and marginally shorter, but otherwise obscured by the details of their kit.

Okay, here's the deal:

You can't tell the gender difference in Tau because of the armor. Same goes for Vostroyan, Valhalan, Tallarn, Death Korps and Steel Legion regiments. Cadians may be under the same category, since their clothes are baggy and their armor could hide the female shape quite well. The only IG regiments that we could say are full male are the Catachans (by the way, I've seen some very good conversions on these) and Mordians. Orks, Necrons and Tyranids are genderless and SM are male-only. About Eldar (both factions) and Sororitas you really can't complain.

Lightcavalier wrote:My point from earlier is made by this your link.
At the end of the day, these women at 28mm scale look like thin men at best. At the level of scaling down we are dealing with women in fatigues and body armour are going to be a little thinner and marginally shorter, but otherwise obscured by the details of their kit.

That's because body armour is naturally "masculine". I'd challenge you to tell at a glace the difference between men and female dressed in full modern combat gear. You can only tell by looking at the face/hair which is detail wayyy too complex for warhammer.

Lightcavalier wrote:My point from earlier is made by this your link.
At the end of the day, these women at 28mm scale look like thin men at best. At the level of scaling down we are dealing with women in fatigues and body armour are going to be a little thinner and marginally shorter, but otherwise obscured by the details of their kit.

Agreed. And the difference for tau wil be even more miniscule since they wear full body aremor, and/or battle suits.

Speaking on the cost, and not wanting to include female miniatures with their varied male.

They have many numerous repeat models in HQ choices, with the only difference being a weapon or two. Not to mention the varied chances to add a female HQ unit.

It wouldn't harm the company to make at least one female choice. A named HQ techpriest so adeptus mechanicus armies could be made, a female commissar lord, a female general etc... but they aren't made, and if they were, they'd sell well on their uniqueness alone.

Pouncey wrote:

In any case, there's always Eldar. ^_^

Kinda, they have one female HQ choice (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440239a&prodId=prod1060034, which has clown feet, and looks like it belongs in a 80's music video), though I could go to WHFB for a farseer conversion. And their only viable none HQ female choice is Howling Banshee.

Sanon wrote:Speaking on the cost, and not wanting to include female miniatures with their varied male.

They have many numerous repeat models in HQ choices, with the only difference being a weapon or two. Not to mention the varied chances to add a female HQ unit.

It wouldn't harm the company to make at least one female choice. A named HQ techpriest so adeptus mechanicus armies could be made, a female commissar lord, a female general etc... but they aren't made, and if they were, they'd sell well on their uniqueness alone.

O'Shasserra, The highest ranking Fire Caste member, Says Hi.

Sanon wrote:Speaking on the cost, and not wanting to include female miniatures with their varied male.

They have many numerous repeat models in HQ choices, with the only difference being a weapon or two. Not to mention the varied chances to add a female HQ unit.

It wouldn't harm the company to make at least one female choice. A named HQ techpriest so adeptus mechanicus armies could be made, a female commissar lord, a female general etc... but they aren't made, and if they were, they'd sell well on their uniqueness alone.

Pouncey wrote:

In any case, there's always Eldar. ^_^

Kinda, they have one female HQ choice (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440239a&prodId=prod1060034, which has clown feet, and looks like it belongs in a 80's music video), though I could go to WHFB for a farseer conversion. And their only viable none HQ female choice is Howling Banshee.

That link brings me to GW's home page, but I assume you mean Jain Zar.

Would it be possible to kitbash Guardian and Dire Avenger torsos to make female Dire Avengers, like they had when I started playing?

Joey wrote:

Lightcavalier wrote:My point from earlier is made by this your link.
At the end of the day, these women at 28mm scale look like thin men at best. At the level of scaling down we are dealing with women in fatigues and body armour are going to be a little thinner and marginally shorter, but otherwise obscured by the details of their kit.

That's because body armour is naturally "masculine". I'd challenge you to tell at a glace the difference between men and female dressed in full modern combat gear. You can only tell by looking at the face/hair which is detail wayyy too complex for warhammer.

I know. That was what I was getting at. On the note of men vs women in full cbt gear, the only way I have found to tell them apart from further than 10 feet is watching them walk or run...which again does not apply to models.

Lightcavalier wrote:

Joey wrote:

Lightcavalier wrote:My point from earlier is made by this your link.
At the end of the day, these women at 28mm scale look like thin men at best. At the level of scaling down we are dealing with women in fatigues and body armour are going to be a little thinner and marginally shorter, but otherwise obscured by the details of their kit.

That's because body armour is naturally "masculine". I'd challenge you to tell at a glace the difference between men and female dressed in full modern combat gear. You can only tell by looking at the face/hair which is detail wayyy too complex for warhammer.

I know. That was what I was getting at. On the note of men vs women in full cbt gear, the only way I have found to tell them apart from further than 10 feet is watching them walk or run...which again does not apply to models.

I'll give you that, still remains that if you're buying Cadian, or any of the none-stormtrooper IG, they're all male faces.

Eldar wear skin tight suits

And Eldar are an alien species which we only have one example of a female to go on, with the other being in a mecha.

I agree it would be cool to have a set of female faces for cadians...and that would actually be a pretty easy sprue upgrade...but again they would need to be helmetless so that you could really distinguish.

nomotog wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:It's because the vast majority of wargamers are male nerds with an underdeveloped sense of the female identity, hence the lack of any reasonable female archetypes. Of course, this comes from an Ork player, and Orks are essentially genderless.

Can you actually call orks genderless? Well ya they reproduce by spores, but you would be hard pressed to find a more masculine army then the orks.

Being masculine doesn't make you male. Orks sound either parthenogenic or asexual.


The suggestion that female cadians would look just like men, umm no, not ideally. Women, even in body armour, are distinguishable from men in that their body shapes are different and it's not all about bewbs. They would have more slight build, have hips and not the massive arms. Which is the with these conversion packs that just swap the bodies and expect you to use male arms and legs to turn them into women.

GW don't make female cadians and others because they don't think the kidz buying their figures will like them. That's why many action figure toy ranges are devoid of female characters. Star Wars is one of the few to make a decent effort and the many of those are being bought by adults.