Switch Theme:

What should 40k's tone be?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






The Imperium doesn't know Guilliman was partially revived by Aeldari sorcery though. They were told he was revived due to Cawl and a miracle of the Emperor.
The Inquisition will know, Celestine will know and maybe some Ultramarines saw a weirdly dressed lady who TBH could have just been an Inquisitor for all they know.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/26 12:55:25


 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Gert wrote:
The Imperium doesn't know Guilliman was partially revived by Aeldari sorcery though. They were told he was revived due to Cawl and a miracle of the Emperor.
The Inquisition will know, Celestine will know and maybe some Ultramarines saw a weirdly dressed lady who TBH could have just been an Inquisitor for all they know.


Knowledge doesn't travel widely in the Imperium. Also there is the fact the Custodes let him into the Emperor's throne room for an audience and let him walk out with the Emperor's sword. That implies the Emperor's approval. Similarly Celestine's apparent support and assistance in the whole resurrection would imply the Emperor's approval.

Now I'm not saying it's impossible for the average Imperial person to turn against Guilliman only that it is harder than some people seem to imagine, due to all the ideological and religious baggage. They may not understand or agree with his reforms but they might keep their head down rather than actually rebel or act against his efforts.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/26 13:06:12


 
   
Made in gb
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison





Bristol

 Gert wrote:
The Imperium doesn't know Guilliman was partially revived by Aeldari sorcery though. They were told he was revived due to Cawl and a miracle of the Emperor.
The Inquisition will know, Celestine will know and maybe some Ultramarines saw a weirdly dressed lady who TBH could have just been an Inquisitor for all they know.


If the Inquisition knows, the High Lords know. And the High Lords would not regard such a threat to their own power lightly.

Quite frankly, I think there should have been a civil war upon Guilliman's return. The power structures which had been established would not have had the effectively seamless transition that GW wrote. It would also have served to make the Imperium's situation even more dire.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/26 13:06:39


The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.

Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Disagree. I think the current shadow war is how it should go. Guilliman hasn't made any outright attempts to dismantle the Ecclesiarchy. Even Inquisition members are religious so it's not like the Inquisition as a whole is all anti-Guilliman. There are also the Recongregators within the Inquisition who I'm sure would see Guilliman's latest efforts as vindication of their ideology. Even the Amalathian faction which might be the most opposed to him may not oppose him to the point of wanting to kill him, again due to the aforementioned religious upbringing of virtually everyone in the Imperium. They may oppose in a lesser fashion, perhaps trying to rationalize it to themselves as trying to correct or guide (for his own good) the Primarch who is out of touch with how things are 10,000 years after he went into stasis.

Also it's not like Guilliman has actually made major reforms. He has been kept busy with his crusade. He makes plans then has to shelve them for later, a later that may never come, because there's always another new threat to be put down. He's killed off a few political opponents but he hasn't really overhauled the whole political structure.

I have compared him in the past to a torch, shedding light where he is, but then the shadows return when he goes. Guilliman is moving all around the Imperium and never really staying put in one location long enough to do more than superficial reforms. Maybe he leaves behind a few of his followers but I imagine they would run into a lot of bureaucratic inertia and stalling. It need not even be malicious but simply the result of the ossified bureaucracy.

Guilliman is not really playing to his strengths, which are more in administration and logistics. If he stayed put in one area, he could try to streamline and reform things to something more rational, but he is trying to save the Imperium and in trying to save everything he may end up not saving anything. That may even be the strategy of the Chaos gods. Keep Guilliman busy so he cannot accomplish anything. Some expendable mortal pawns, even a few permanently killed daemons might be a worthwhile price to pay for that. The only unforeseen thing in such a plan might be how Guilliman has apparently wounded Nurgle by burning a swathe of the Garden in the novel Godblight, since Chaos gods are basically one with their daemons and their realm.

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2021/07/26 13:18:41


 
   
Made in at
Regular Dakkanaut




 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 Gert wrote:
The Imperium doesn't know Guilliman was partially revived by Aeldari sorcery though. They were told he was revived due to Cawl and a miracle of the Emperor.
The Inquisition will know, Celestine will know and maybe some Ultramarines saw a weirdly dressed lady who TBH could have just been an Inquisitor for all they know.


If the Inquisition knows, the High Lords know. And the High Lords would not regard such a threat to their own power lightly.

Quite frankly, I think there should have been a civil war upon Guilliman's return. The power structures which had been established would not have had the effectively seamless transition that GW wrote. It would also have served to make the Imperium's situation even more dire.


The second Watchers of the Throne book covers in quite good detail the High Lords reactions. A number of them indeed do not take it lightly, a lot of people die, they attempt a coup, and there is very nearly open conflict.

But it stays at a very top level because no one (on either side) wants to leave themselves too exposed or accused of being disloyal to the Emperor and Guilliman’s supporters eventually manage to manoeuvre a victory and purge their detractors.

It is a pretty good example of a very dangerous political shadow war.
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






 A Town Called Malus wrote:

If the Inquisition knows, the High Lords know. And the High Lords would not regard such a threat to their own power lightly.

Quite frankly, I think there should have been a civil war upon Guilliman's return. The power structures which had been established would not have had the effectively seamless transition that GW wrote. It would also have served to make the Imperium's situation even more dire.

Do the High Lords know all the secrets the Inquisition keeps? No, and the Inquisitorial Representative has no reason to tell them. Guilliman is good for the business of the Inquisition, if he wasn't then the Representative would have joined the Hexarchy. And there already was an attempt at civil war during the Hexarchy Crisis but it was put down because more of the High Lords saw the benefits of Guilliman than the detriments. Who is going to back the High Lords? The Astartes, famed for their independence and whom a huge chunk of are of Guillimans lineage? The Custodes who follow the word of the Emperor who said to follow Guilliman? How many Militarum Regiments or Navy Fleets are going to take direct action against one of the holy Primarchs returned? What about the people of the Imperium? The people who for generations have been told of the Emperor's holy Son's, one of which has now returned to save mankind. Will they take up arms against Guilliman?
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Lord Zarkov wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 Gert wrote:
The Imperium doesn't know Guilliman was partially revived by Aeldari sorcery though. They were told he was revived due to Cawl and a miracle of the Emperor.
The Inquisition will know, Celestine will know and maybe some Ultramarines saw a weirdly dressed lady who TBH could have just been an Inquisitor for all they know.


If the Inquisition knows, the High Lords know. And the High Lords would not regard such a threat to their own power lightly.

Quite frankly, I think there should have been a civil war upon Guilliman's return. The power structures which had been established would not have had the effectively seamless transition that GW wrote. It would also have served to make the Imperium's situation even more dire.


The second Watchers of the Throne book covers in quite good detail the High Lords reactions. A number of them indeed do not take it lightly, a lot of people die, they attempt a coup, and there is very nearly open conflict.

But it stays at a very top level because no one (on either side) wants to leave themselves too exposed or accused of being disloyal to the Emperor and Guilliman’s supporters eventually manage to manoeuvre a victory and purge their detractors.

It is a pretty good example of a very dangerous political shadow war.


I anticipate personally the issue will be less specific individuals than the outcry from the population if Guilliman does try to undertake meaningful large scale reform. People who have been in departments for generations may find themselves destitute as their department gets abolished as superfluous or absorbed by another rival department. I see Guilliman's battle against the bureaucracy as the bigger struggle, albeit less exciting than bolter porn, and he may find himself wading in quicksand. He might make some initial progress but find it gets harder and then stall short of where he would like to go, unable to proceed further as the disruption might then imperil the war effort.

I must admit the whole return of Guilliman as handled and expanded upon in the novels, while not perfect, was better than I had initially feared when they did the whole resurrection. Cawl has been fleshed out a bit more too, though still waiting to see where they take his character.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/26 13:33:49


 
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






I think the biggest misconception about Guilliman's return is that the whole Imperium is now somehow fixed, which is so far from true. It's still split in half guys, you can't really be fixed if half your empire is behind a never-ending wall of hell-space.
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Also we see the seed of doubt sown in Guilliman's mind about whether the Emperor really is now a god. There is a little talk within Godblight between Guilliman and an Eldar Farseer about what is the definition of a god. The Farseer does not claim to know but puts forth several theories. One is that the Emperor might not have been a god but that the worship of so many people over so many years may have changed the Emperor, and maybe also changed his soul/personality/worldview to conform with the beliefs. Then the events of Godblight happen and at the end Guilliman is sufficiently shaken by the events to ask Cawl (strictly speaking Cawl-Inferior who may or may not be an AI or copy of Cawl's mind) whether Cawl believes the Emperor is a god, and whether the Emperor could be revived.

Guilliman keeps making sacrifices for the sake of keeping the peace and avoiding open conflict with the more overtly religious elements of his Crusade. Even the Custodes do this when they allow the religious funeral and interment of one of their number. That could be how Guilliman "falls", not to Chaos, but from his original ideals and beliefs through an endless series of compromises, all for the sake of practicality and avoiding needless friction and conflict.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/26 13:49:12


 
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






 Gert wrote:
I think the biggest misconception about Guilliman's return is that the whole Imperium is now somehow fixed, which is so far from true. It's still split in half guys, you can't really be fixed if half your empire is behind a never-ending wall of hell-space.

It may not be fixed, but the guy in charge is now a heroic demigod with good intentions. And sure, by real world standards he's still a horrible despot and a war criminal, but that's not how it is depicted. I feel this is the culmination of the distasteful direction the 40K fluff has already been heading for a while. The marines and imperial characters are depicted increasingly in heroic and positive light. But making the Imperium a little bit less gakky with somewhat more decent leaders doesn't make the setting come across less as fascism apologia, it makes it more so. The imperium should simply be depicted as evil and dysfunctional, the heroism and decent people merely existing at lower levels, as cogs in a terrible and hateful machine.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/26 13:55:39


   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






 Crimson wrote:

It may not be fixed, but they guy in charge is now heroic demigod with good intentions. And sure, by real world standards he's still a horrible despot and a war criminal, but that's not how it is depicted. I feel this is the culmination of the distasteful direction the 40K fluff has already been heading for a while. The marines and imperial characters are depicted increasingly in heroic and positive light. But making the Imperium a little bit less gakky with somewhat more decent leaders doesn't make the setting come across less as fascism apologia, it makes it more so. The imperium should simply be depicted as evil and dysfunctional, the heroism and decent people merely existing at lower levels, as cogs in a terrible and hateful machine.

How far back are people going with the idea that Space Marines weren't sold as action heroes? Because ever since I've been in the hobby they've been portrayed and sold as the action heroes of 40k.
How do you portray the Imperium as evil when it's your main selling point to the target market of kids and teens? "Hey kids nothing is ever good in this universe and nothing any does can change that! Buy these Space Nazis!".
I wouldn't buy into that as an adult because that's just depressing. I also don't want to sound like a prat but if playing Space Marines or another Imperial faction makes someone think fascism is cool, then it wasn't 40k's fault, there was already an underlying influence on that person.
   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

Tone. The recent Marneus Calgar comic is full of jokes of just how awful the IoM is. You cannot sell a nihilistic dystopia with fascists protagonists if your tone is serious, but you can sell the same thing if your tone is full of dark humor and self-aware irony.
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






 Gert wrote:

How far back are people going with the idea that Space Marines weren't sold as action heroes? Because ever since I've been in the hobby they've been portrayed and sold as the action heroes of 40k.

They of course have always been action heroes. They have just gotten increasingly shiny, heroic and glorified. They started as press-ganged penal legionaries and child-soldiers of a cruel and uncaring regime, now the leader of the Imperium is a giant shiny space marine and the marines are revered and seen as divine. That's kinda massive shift.

How do you portray the Imperium as evil when it's your main selling point to the target market of kids and teens? "Hey kids nothing is ever good in this universe and nothing any does can change that! Buy these Space Nazis!".
I wouldn't buy into that as an adult because that's just depressing.

Definitely preferable to "look this universe in which Space Nazi's are the good guys!" And if you find dystopian satire depressing, that's on you. I don't. I find uncritical glorification of fascism to be hella depressing though!

I also don't want to sound like a prat but if playing Space Marines or another Imperial faction makes someone think fascism is cool, then it wasn't 40k's fault, there was already an underlying influence on that person.

There is non-insignificant section of alt-right 40K fans. They're prominent enough that GW had to publicly rebuke them. And that is not surprising. 40K fluff has lost many of its satirical elements or they've been downplayed in favour of depicting Imperium as heroic. And no, this fiction alone will not make anyone a fascist sympathiser, though as you noted this is also aimed at kids and teenagers, so it might actually have some effect. We are shaped by the media we consume, probably more than we realise.

   
Made in gb
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison





Bristol

 Crimson wrote:
We are shaped by the media we consume, probably more than we realise.


This. If the media we consume had no effect on our views and behaviours, then the companies which produce said media would not have spent decades trying to reduce or fight regulation which prevented them from certain actions. If advertising didn't work, nobody would do it.

The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.

Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
 
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






 Tyran wrote:
Tone. The recent Marneus Calgar comic is full of jokes of just how awful the IoM is. You cannot sell a nihilistic dystopia with fascists protagonists if your tone is serious, but you can sell the same thing if your tone is full of dark humor and self-aware irony.

It had couple of grim dark jokes, but it was super simplistic story where the marine imitation process is grimderp but ultimately the marines are cool and heroic and presented as good guys and the chaos cultists are carboard villains. And yeah, even though it is a Marvel comic, it is actually very representative of the tone of the current 40K lore.

   
Made in us
Brainy Zoanthrope






The shift to focusing on named characters makes up at least of half of what killed the tone of 40k.
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






 Irkjoe wrote:
The shift to focusing on named characters makes up at least of half of what killed the tone of 40k.

You're not wrong.

#primarchs were a mistake

   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

 Crimson wrote:

It had couple of grim dark jokes, but it was super simplistic story where the marine imitation process is grimderp but ultimately the marines are cool and heroic and presented as good guys and the chaos cultists are carboard villains. And yeah, even though it is a Marvel comic, it is actually very representative of the tone of the current 40K lore.

There is no getting around presenting the Marines as cool and heroic, at the very least no if you want to have a marketable product, but you can also present them as fascist and fethed up while you are at it, and the so called "grimderp" is very useful at that.

Horrible protagonists that combine being cool with being horrible people is not new concept.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/26 16:46:12


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Personally, I always found it silly that every faction had biggestest guy somewhere that just happened to be inconvenienced and not available right now, but would totally change everything should he ever return.

IMO the setting with active primarch-level people is better than what was before, but a setting with those things not existing in the first place would have been even better.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in us
Dive-Bombin' Fighta-Bomba Pilot






 Jidmah wrote:
Personally, I always found it silly that every faction had biggestest guy somewhere that just happened to be inconvenienced and not available right now, but would totally change everything should he ever return.

IMO the setting with active primarch-level people is better than what was before, but a setting with those things not existing in the first place would have been even better.


some did, I mean orks we has Ghaz, but he was already there just now buffed. Tau don't have one (probably doesn't work for them), nor do tyranids (or GSC) unless the hive mind becomes manifest? maybe a Norn queen in a dominatrix if FW releases one? Dark eldar also don't have a fitting one. Craftworld eldar maybe level up the Avater, and Harlies if Cegorath (spelling?) takes the field i suppose but as a actual god that seems OP.

I think really only Orks and Necrons qualify now with the Cthan shards for Xenos. That said chaos and Imperium all get the primarch and greater demon equivilants of the "were in the galaxy fiddling their thumbs for the last few thousand years, but totally could have and should have been doing something other than letting The Administratum or Failbaddon the Harmless run things"

10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
 
   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

In the case of Chaos, the Daemon Primarchs are even bigger failures the Failbaddon.

I mean, in the short time Mortarion has been active in the galaxy, he managed to fail so bad he got Nurgle's Garden burned down, so I expect that Nurgle will have a tighter leash around him so he doesn't monumentally feths up again while the other gods are reminded that the reason they have Daemon Primarchs is because each one of them is a monumental man-child.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/26 17:21:44


 
   
Made in us
Dive-Bombin' Fighta-Bomba Pilot






True, GW really has treated the demon primarchs like Saturday morning cartoon villians. I half expect them to ba liek MAD agents and as they get shot away putting thie claws into a fist "I'll get you next time Guilliman"

10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?




Noctis Labyrinthus

 GoldenHorde wrote:

We already went through the allegory of what was claimed as fetishism as being 'poor to females' or whatnot. As I mentioned and another poster agreed, females enjoy fetishism and I found the sentiment of fetishism by default being poor to woman as patronising to women.

and it was because it was a default statement with no nuance at all.


Ah so now you feel qualified to make a claim what females (which ones? All of them?) like fetishism actually? And the one who commented on it being poor representation doesn't count?

I'm glad you've dropped your insane rant that people here are trying to physically force authors to do what they want though. It was a pretty ridiculous and unhinged argument.
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




Tallarook, Victoria, Australia

 Void__Dragon wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

We already went through the allegory of what was claimed as fetishism as being 'poor to females' or whatnot. As I mentioned and another poster agreed, females enjoy fetishism and I found the sentiment of fetishism by default being poor to woman as patronising to women.

and it was because it was a default statement with no nuance at all.


Ah so now you feel qualified to make a claim what females (which ones? All of them?) like fetishism actually? And the one who commented on it being poor representation doesn't count?

I'm glad you've dropped your insane rant that people here are trying to physically force authors to do what they want though. It was a pretty ridiculous and unhinged argument.


You really like attacking a good 'ol strawman don't you?

I was calling out something that is very much patronising to females and males (or any gender for that matter) of our hobby. I don't need your approval.

I never "dropped" anything. I stand by an authors agency not to be abused and dictated by the mob

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/27 11:07:26


Living in a world of make believe
I can hide behind what's real 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 GoldenHorde wrote:
Spoiler:
 Void__Dragon wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

We already went through the allegory of what was claimed as fetishism as being 'poor to females' or whatnot. As I mentioned and another poster agreed, females enjoy fetishism and I found the sentiment of fetishism by default being poor to woman as patronising to women.

and it was because it was a default statement with no nuance at all.


Ah so now you feel qualified to make a claim what females (which ones? All of them?) like fetishism actually? And the one who commented on it being poor representation doesn't count?

I'm glad you've dropped your insane rant that people here are trying to physically force authors to do what they want though. It was a pretty ridiculous and unhinged argument.


You really like attacking a good 'ol strawman don't you?

I was calling out something that is very much patronising to females and males (or any gender for that matter) of our hobby. I don't need your approval.

I never "dropped" anything. I stand by an authors agency not to be abused and dictated by the mob


The authors agency is the changes to tone and style GW are following with. There is no mob, and people here are in the hobby making observation and providing criticism of the product that GW is selling.

Funny enough, GW seems more keen than ever to have my demographic as customers. There are mountains of potential reasons. Without GW weighing in, it’s speculative.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/27 11:40:01


 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




Tallarook, Victoria, Australia

Apple fox wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Spoiler:
 Void__Dragon wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

We already went through the allegory of what was claimed as fetishism as being 'poor to females' or whatnot. As I mentioned and another poster agreed, females enjoy fetishism and I found the sentiment of fetishism by default being poor to woman as patronising to women.

and it was because it was a default statement with no nuance at all.


Ah so now you feel qualified to make a claim what females (which ones? All of them?) like fetishism actually? And the one who commented on it being poor representation doesn't count?

I'm glad you've dropped your insane rant that people here are trying to physically force authors to do what they want though. It was a pretty ridiculous and unhinged argument.


You really like attacking a good 'ol strawman don't you?

I was calling out something that is very much patronising to females and males (or any gender for that matter) of our hobby. I don't need your approval.

I never "dropped" anything. I stand by an authors agency not to be abused and dictated by the mob


The authors agency is the changes to tone and style GW are following with. There is no mob, and people here are in the hobby making observation and providing criticism of the product that GW is selling.

Funny enough, GW seems more keen than ever to have my demographic as customers. There are mountains of potential reasons. Without GW weighing in, it’s speculative.


Good luck pleasing the W-crowd who see racism in everything, complain about everything and then get on authors backs when authors yield to their demands because the recipe that was demanded wasn't to your individual taste eg. I asked for tokenism but got offended by it because it only had 10/11 of the secret herbs and spices.

It's a zero sum game, everyone loses to this nonsense.

I mean just take a look at the poster who has no actual clue about central asian steppe warriors and the diversity of them, getting pissed because their ironically western-based stereotypical image of a mongol wasn't being represented well enough yet ironically screaming it was indeed RAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCIIIIIIST.

and since I have central asian roots, I'll tell you I find it absolutely hilarious as generally this hyper obsession with skin tone is just not a cultural thing, These people constantly speaking on behalf of others is beyond arrogant It needs to be given a break already

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/07/27 11:56:34


Living in a world of make believe
I can hide behind what's real 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 GoldenHorde wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Spoiler:
 Void__Dragon wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

We already went through the allegory of what was claimed as fetishism as being 'poor to females' or whatnot. As I mentioned and another poster agreed, females enjoy fetishism and I found the sentiment of fetishism by default being poor to woman as patronising to women.

and it was because it was a default statement with no nuance at all.


Ah so now you feel qualified to make a claim what females (which ones? All of them?) like fetishism actually? And the one who commented on it being poor representation doesn't count?

I'm glad you've dropped your insane rant that people here are trying to physically force authors to do what they want though. It was a pretty ridiculous and unhinged argument.


You really like attacking a good 'ol strawman don't you?

I was calling out something that is very much patronising to females and males (or any gender for that matter) of our hobby. I don't need your approval.

I never "dropped" anything. I stand by an authors agency not to be abused and dictated by the mob


The authors agency is the changes to tone and style GW are following with. There is no mob, and people here are in the hobby making observation and providing criticism of the product that GW is selling.

Funny enough, GW seems more keen than ever to have my demographic as customers. There are mountains of potential reasons. Without GW weighing in, it’s speculative.


Good luck pleasing the W-crowd who see racism in everything, complain about everything and then get on authors backs when authors yield to their demands.

It's a zero sum game, everyone loses to this nonsense.

I mean just take a look at the poster who has no actual clue about central asian steppe warriors and the diversity of them getting pissed because their western-based stereotypical image of a mongol wasn't being represented well enoguh yet ironically screaming it was RAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCIIIIIIST.

and since I have central asian roots, I'll tell you I find it absolutely hilarious as generally this hyper obsession with skin tone is just not a cultural thing,


Most company have no issue with this and do very well in fact. GW is no different, they are actually getting rather good at taking in criticism I think.
Just not very good at putting out at times. But even then, they are doing very good now as that shift has been made. It’s hard to argue against that now at this point.
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




Tallarook, Victoria, Australia

Apple fox wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Spoiler:
 Void__Dragon wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

We already went through the allegory of what was claimed as fetishism as being 'poor to females' or whatnot. As I mentioned and another poster agreed, females enjoy fetishism and I found the sentiment of fetishism by default being poor to woman as patronising to women.

and it was because it was a default statement with no nuance at all.


Ah so now you feel qualified to make a claim what females (which ones? All of them?) like fetishism actually? And the one who commented on it being poor representation doesn't count?

I'm glad you've dropped your insane rant that people here are trying to physically force authors to do what they want though. It was a pretty ridiculous and unhinged argument.


You really like attacking a good 'ol strawman don't you?

I was calling out something that is very much patronising to females and males (or any gender for that matter) of our hobby. I don't need your approval.

I never "dropped" anything. I stand by an authors agency not to be abused and dictated by the mob


The authors agency is the changes to tone and style GW are following with. There is no mob, and people here are in the hobby making observation and providing criticism of the product that GW is selling.

Funny enough, GW seems more keen than ever to have my demographic as customers. There are mountains of potential reasons. Without GW weighing in, it’s speculative.


Good luck pleasing the W-crowd who see racism in everything, complain about everything and then get on authors backs when authors yield to their demands.

It's a zero sum game, everyone loses to this nonsense.

I mean just take a look at the poster who has no actual clue about central asian steppe warriors and the diversity of them getting pissed because their western-based stereotypical image of a mongol wasn't being represented well enoguh yet ironically screaming it was RAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCIIIIIIST.

and since I have central asian roots, I'll tell you I find it absolutely hilarious as generally this hyper obsession with skin tone is just not a cultural thing,


Most company have no issue with this and do very well in fact. GW is no different, they are actually getting rather good at taking in criticism I think.
Just not very good at putting out at times. But even then, they are doing very good now as that shift has been made. It’s hard to argue against that now at this point.


Haha yes they were forced to write a moronic statement that they do not condone their fictional settings. WELLL DUH
Talk about mindless meaningless corporate fluffery.

Did anyone insist agatha christie to state she does not personally condone murder ? Haha its just absurd meaningless nonsense and I would even say it is anti-intellectualism.

Give me a specific example please. I'm interested, however in general very skeptical of your premise of GW 'being better' (whatever that nebulous term actually means).

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/07/27 12:07:22


Living in a world of make believe
I can hide behind what's real 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 GoldenHorde wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Spoiler:
 Void__Dragon wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

We already went through the allegory of what was claimed as fetishism as being 'poor to females' or whatnot. As I mentioned and another poster agreed, females enjoy fetishism and I found the sentiment of fetishism by default being poor to woman as patronising to women.

and it was because it was a default statement with no nuance at all.


Ah so now you feel qualified to make a claim what females (which ones? All of them?) like fetishism actually? And the one who commented on it being poor representation doesn't count?

I'm glad you've dropped your insane rant that people here are trying to physically force authors to do what they want though. It was a pretty ridiculous and unhinged argument.


You really like attacking a good 'ol strawman don't you?

I was calling out something that is very much patronising to females and males (or any gender for that matter) of our hobby. I don't need your approval.

I never "dropped" anything. I stand by an authors agency not to be abused and dictated by the mob


The authors agency is the changes to tone and style GW are following with. There is no mob, and people here are in the hobby making observation and providing criticism of the product that GW is selling.

Funny enough, GW seems more keen than ever to have my demographic as customers. There are mountains of potential reasons. Without GW weighing in, it’s speculative.


Good luck pleasing the W-crowd who see racism in everything, complain about everything and then get on authors backs when authors yield to their demands.

It's a zero sum game, everyone loses to this nonsense.

I mean just take a look at the poster who has no actual clue about central asian steppe warriors and the diversity of them getting pissed because their western-based stereotypical image of a mongol wasn't being represented well enoguh yet ironically screaming it was RAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCIIIIIIST.

and since I have central asian roots, I'll tell you I find it absolutely hilarious as generally this hyper obsession with skin tone is just not a cultural thing,


Most company have no issue with this and do very well in fact. GW is no different, they are actually getting rather good at taking in criticism I think.
Just not very good at putting out at times. But even then, they are doing very good now as that shift has been made. It’s hard to argue against that now at this point.


Haha yes they were forced to write a moronic statement that they do not condone their fictional settings. WELLL DUH
Talk about mindless meaningless corporate fluffery.

Did anyone insist agatha christie to state she does not personally condone murder ? Haha its just absurd meaningless nonsense and I would even say it is anti-intellectualism.

Give me a specific example please. I'm interested, however in general very skeptical of your premise of GW 'being better' (whatever that nebulous term actually means).


How where they forced? They responded to things happening that they probably thought where nothing but negative to them.

Asking authors about subjects they write about it is common, if there was any reason too. Someone may have asked, it’s only anti-intellectual in the way you are trying to use it now.

GW is adding more women in the settings they own, in a response to players. They wouldn’t be adding them in different ways if they didn’t think there was a market for them in some way.
The written work as well looks like testing the waters quite a lot, with how they use the work depict charecters, not just female. Edit to clarify

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/27 12:23:53


 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




Tallarook, Victoria, Australia

Apple fox wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Spoiler:
 Void__Dragon wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

We already went through the allegory of what was claimed as fetishism as being 'poor to females' or whatnot. As I mentioned and another poster agreed, females enjoy fetishism and I found the sentiment of fetishism by default being poor to woman as patronising to women.

and it was because it was a default statement with no nuance at all.


Ah so now you feel qualified to make a claim what females (which ones? All of them?) like fetishism actually? And the one who commented on it being poor representation doesn't count?

I'm glad you've dropped your insane rant that people here are trying to physically force authors to do what they want though. It was a pretty ridiculous and unhinged argument.


You really like attacking a good 'ol strawman don't you?

I was calling out something that is very much patronising to females and males (or any gender for that matter) of our hobby. I don't need your approval.

I never "dropped" anything. I stand by an authors agency not to be abused and dictated by the mob


The authors agency is the changes to tone and style GW are following with. There is no mob, and people here are in the hobby making observation and providing criticism of the product that GW is selling.

Funny enough, GW seems more keen than ever to have my demographic as customers. There are mountains of potential reasons. Without GW weighing in, it’s speculative.


Good luck pleasing the W-crowd who see racism in everything, complain about everything and then get on authors backs when authors yield to their demands.

It's a zero sum game, everyone loses to this nonsense.

I mean just take a look at the poster who has no actual clue about central asian steppe warriors and the diversity of them getting pissed because their western-based stereotypical image of a mongol wasn't being represented well enoguh yet ironically screaming it was RAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCIIIIIIST.

and since I have central asian roots, I'll tell you I find it absolutely hilarious as generally this hyper obsession with skin tone is just not a cultural thing,


Most company have no issue with this and do very well in fact. GW is no different, they are actually getting rather good at taking in criticism I think.
Just not very good at putting out at times. But even then, they are doing very good now as that shift has been made. It’s hard to argue against that now at this point.


Haha yes they were forced to write a moronic statement that they do not condone their fictional settings. WELLL DUH
Talk about mindless meaningless corporate fluffery.

Did anyone insist agatha christie to state she does not personally condone murder ? Haha its just absurd meaningless nonsense and I would even say it is anti-intellectualism.

Give me a specific example please. I'm interested, however in general very skeptical of your premise of GW 'being better' (whatever that nebulous term actually means).


How where they forced? They responded to things happening that they probably thought where nothing but negative to them.

Asking authors about subjects they write about it is common, if there was any reason too. Someone may have asked, it’s only anti-intellectual in the way you are trying to use it now.

GW is adding more women in the settings they own, in a response to players. They wouldn’t be adding them in different ways if they didn’t think there was a market for them in some way.
The written work as well looks like testing the waters quite a lot, with how they use the work depict charecters, not just female. Edit to clarify


How is GW forced to do anything? $$$
Let's virtue signal for the $.

It's vapid virtue signalling,

Read the annual report which states year after year:

"Donations
Games Workshop does not make any donations to charities or political parties. Notwithstanding this, our employees continue to carry out
fund raising events for their chosen charities, and we are fully supportive of the work our employees do. "

Shallow.

The second line is hilarious.... our employees.... That's some A GRADE machiavellian corporate chauvinism right there

You even said it yourself and I quote:

GW is adding more women in the settings they own, in a response to players. They wouldn’t be adding them in different ways if they didn’t think there was a market for them in some way.


BINGO! They're scoring points with you by doing shallow F all in real life.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/07/27 13:41:09


Living in a world of make believe
I can hide behind what's real 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: