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.

http://www.hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/
Best example i can find is here, take a gander.

Big lol though... sheer mention of the female form uncovered and everyones 16 years old again

keep the wangs in the closet.

Horst wrote:keep the wangs in the closet.

QFT. I like to keep my wang in as many different closets as I can.

if by closet, you mean forum members mothers, then yes, i agree with you, horst.

"I like to keep my wang in as many different closets as I can"
"hairless maw of destruction"

Bit ambiguous.....

It can be art, but it isn't all art. Some of it is pure hobby craft. There is an amazing set of dungeon victims that are all naked ladies tied to polls and racks and whatever else you call all the furnishings of a dungeon. All of the torturers were women too, in hoods, and some were bare breasted. There was one priest sacrificing someone, too.

My point is, some people are going for realism and some are going for fantasy. Who would say there were no naked people running around a battlefield or a dungeon. Do you think a bunch of hopped up, drunk as hell, blue painted Irishmen (or was it the Scots?) didn't rampage across the field with their willies hanging out and flopping about.

I say do what you want, even if you don't want art.

I see nothing wrong with it. You have blood thirsty warriors clawing each others eyes out and ripping people limb from limb, but a nipple is going to make some people get offended. I see Warhammer as being a game for more mature people, so a few dangly bits or gubbins shouldn't be a problem.

It's not a problem, the question is if it's really necessary. If we're all as mature as you claim then why do we have to model said "dangly bits" in the first place?

Fluff is one thing, but the arguments for nudity in Warhammer armies aren't really that convincing. "It's Slaanesh!" isn't good enough for me. Being what he/she is, I doubt Slaanesh and all of his/her daemons would be so crude as to march off to battle completely in the nude. Sometimes the concealed can be sexier than the revealed.

If you want all the dangly nipples watev please start your own gaming group
but please dont bring it to the actual stores it just furthers the stereotype and makes parents squeel

Nudity is fine, I think completely acceptable.

And definately becomes a sexist issue when most people will complain about exposed male anatomy and not female. (Watchmen is a great example - also 300 was specifially altered for this reason - check out the graphic novel to see what his "vision" was)

But it's mostly common sense, it's your army but if you don't want nasty looks from parents or their horrified children do not bring explicitly nude models to the tabletop. Pretty simple.

* Also someone argued it makes more sense to wear armour into battle (and while I agree with this) it isn't historically accurate. I mean look at the Celts they ran often naked into battle covered only in blue war paint and little else, truly terrifying *

I vote for "other" its their army and they can have a whole army of naked space marines with a third leg or an extra close combat weapon glued to them if you know what I mean for all I care lol.

or you can have a whole army of people making babies too if you like! or a Daemon of Khorne attacking a daemon of slaanesh from behind heck I don't care in fact I would be laughing the whole game prob hahaha.

and who cares about what others think there is more important things to worry about then a small naked piece of plastic and metal on the table down the street from your house. let them cry all they want!

binky wrote:
And definately becomes a sexist issue when most people will complain about exposed male anatomy and not female. (Watchmen is a great example - also 300 was specifially altered for this reason - check out the graphic novel to see what his "vision" was)

Iirc only reason the leather thongs were in the movie was the actors potraying the Spartans said no to the idea of them doing the film nude before filming began.

And definately becomes a sexist issue when most people will complain about exposed male anatomy and not female

In some cases yes, but definitely not mine. I don't discriminate, I'm somewhat opposed to exposed genitalia on wargaming models period, since from all the examples I've ever seen it's rarely tasteful or even justifiable in a fluff sense. "It's Slaanesh!" is more often than not a very poor excuse to sculpt little wangs and pussies on your models and snicker about it like a tit...I've never seen it done "well", except on maybe ONE occasion on another forum and there was an entire thread, with a poll, devoted to the discussion on whether or not modeling a realistic vagina on a greater daemon would be "too much". The result turned out pretty nicely if I recall correctly, but it was just unnecessary in my opinion...

I've seen people argue about them being daemons and saying they obviously wouldn't wear clothes, but it's a fething daemon, a creature from another dimension that the mortal mind can barely fathom, who's to say they would even have genitalia in most cases? Obviously that won't be true in the case of the Porn God's daemons, but nevertheless...

I am, however, willing to accept that Slaanesh is a moody son of a bitch. It's wrong to claim that all of his daemons would go to battle clothed or armored, but it's just as wrong to claim they would all fight naked. I believe it's said in the Daemons codex that Slaanesh's greater daemons differ wildly in appearance because it's dependent on his/her mood at the time of the daemon's creation. Sometimes you'll get one that looks like a slim, sexy daemonette with tentacles for hair, sometimes you'll get a huge muscled beast with a bull's head and crab claws. I imagine their attire would differ wildly as well...some will fight nude, others will be wearing fine silk or leather, etc.

As for Watchmen and 300, yeah, I thought all the whining about his wang was pretty infantile. I think the only reason people bitched so much about it is because they were afraid they would look gay if they didn't say anything. To be fair though I'm pretty sure it wasn't just the men, and that if every Spartan in 300 were fighting naked the girls would probably complain just as much as the guys. Some girls would love it, sure, but there are a lot of women out there who just don't find the male body all that attractive. Too much hair and muscle I guess...well, mostly hair, since not a lot of guys out there are ripped like Leonidas.

But boy if I was...

Sidstyler, you hit the nail right on the head. I couldn't agree with you more.

In theory, i am okay with nudity on miniatures, but i am sure that if i fought an entire army of plaguebearers with penises, i would feel differently.

When it comes to daemonettes, i am okay with them having breasts showing. (No i am not a perv) It just makes sence when you read their backstory etc... But anything more would just seem like a bit too much for a wargaming miniature.

As for 300, i am glad that they decided to wear clothes, i would have been fine with the nudity, but some people would just take it too far and blow it out of purportion. Example: Irresponsible mothers who let their underaged kids go to R rated movies, and then complain that it was inapropriate and petition to shut that movie down.

All and all, my oppinion is, keep it subtle, and keep it tasteful.

pics please

Sidstyler wrote: if every Spartan in 300 were fighting naked the girls would probably complain just as much as the guys.

How about realistic casting? Using actual Greeks fighting in the nude, rather than shaved Baywatch extras?

300 hairy, swarthy guys crouching down would empty the theater in a hurry!

Here Here Lint

Honestly, can someone explain to me why some parents find it difficult to explain nudity to their kids?
It's only natural!

And it can be sooo simple in this context, here's how:

"mommy? why are those female figures with blades and claws instead hands totally nude?"
"well dear, because those blades and claws they have instead of hands make it rather difficult to put on clothes of course!"

or:

"daddy, why do witch elves only wear bikini's?"
"Now son, just look at how pale they are! They just want to get a healthy tan!"


In general, why do some people feel terrified for their kids when nudity is involved? It's not like kids are scared of it of their own accord, it's because their parents act like slow morons when they see nakedness.

Now, porn, that's a different story... but just nakedness? Have a little faith in your kid's intelligence!

I don't care about nudity as long as it doesn't depict sex but yeah don't really lose sleep over it :/


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dedrith wrote:Tauzor, I hardly find that comment necessary. If you want to go around flaming people you can do it somewhere else.

YOU are the one who is telling people that WE should not like whatever GW doesn't like, calling US all immature for not giving a gak about nudity, AND YOU are the one telling people they are flaming you?

I agree with everyone else who has "Flamed" you...


Go be ignorant somewhere else. Grow up.

I really don't think it is a big deal, I mean it is artistic interpretation of the model designers.
I think nearly all the nudity is tasteful and warranted.
Except maybe the anitomically correct OOP Bloodthirster....

Nudity in miniatures is no more abhorrent to me than nudity in other forms of sculpture.

I am more offended by various small-minded religious bigots insisting on chiseling off bits of art, than I am opposed to the depiction of boobies on a 28mm miniature.

I don't mind nudity on miniatures, even anatomically correct stuff goes imo, but it should be done with taste and within the context of a miniature, daemonettes have 2-6 boobs = yes, big floppy penis on a soulgrinder = no. (for those that remember those infamous pics...

Nudity is fine..

The Green Git wrote:As long as it's not truly obscene (like depicting sexual acts or overt arousal, shall we say) then nudity in and of itself is not offensive to me. I say keep it tasteful but that's about it.

binky wrote:Nudity is fine, I think completely acceptable.

And definately becomes a sexist issue when most people will complain about exposed male anatomy and not female. (Watchmen is a great example - also 300 was specifially altered for this reason - check out the graphic novel to see what his "vision" was)

ooh I love the film 300 it's awsome, as for nuditiy, it's a big No no from me because it seems a bit weird painting nude plastic minatures!

Was the obvious and safe poll response "Nudity on miniatures is the same as nudity in any other format or medium" left out because it wouldn't have spawned a six page discussion on the topic of whether nudity itself is okay?

Yeah, needless to say I wouldn't have gone for the same poll options.

i say keep it tasteful it's most commonly parents that buy it for young children so if they don't like it they don't have to buy it.

I dont understand why anyone old enough to understand would have a problem.

Get it out!