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.

To be fair, soulblight/vamps of old have always been hat-lite.

Crazy hair? Yes. But not so much with the hats.

 Geifer wrote:
I certainly look forward to seeing how modern GW envisions Chaos Dwarfs. Are we expecting them this year?

Well we got the teaser last preview. But the intial rumour said anytime during 4th. So, maybe? Have GW done two big army launches in the same year recently? What with EC being in the nearish future.

Oh, right. I completely forgot about the LVO teaser.

 Nevelon wrote:
To be fair, soulblight/vamps of old have always been hat-lite.

Crazy hair? Yes. But not so much with the hats.

They have every right to eschew hats, but they sure aren't going to win any hat-based competitions like that. Their choice, their loss.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
That was unexpected, a new Cado and friends:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/6i1kglij/the-blades-of-the-hollow-king-are-ready-to-draw-blood-for-the-soulblight-gravelords/

Pretty lame sculpts. Isabellas miniature had more character and details looked 3 times sharper, and that model came out ages ago. Bad examples of CAD design imho

You're the first one who's said anything negatively of any of those sculpts that i've seen.

Isabella? You mean the finecast panty flasher?

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
You're the first one who's said anything negatively of any of those sculpts that i've seen.

Isabella? You mean the finecast panty flasher?

So what? If a lot of people like the sculpts - good for them. I find those vamps to be quite uninspiring.

No, I mean Isabella. If you remember her as panty flasher, and that detail is the thing that stood out for you the most - you do you, mate

I’ve got to say, even if you don’t like the Isabellas design choices, it’s hard to argue that the the vampire gang we are talking about here, has a serious detail sharpness downgrade. Like plastic primarch vs forgeworld. the comparison makes the new minis look a bit too toy like. In good CAD design, the lower fidelity in plastic compared to resin is nicely hidden away (the paint job helps as well). Ad Mech or Cursed city minis are way better quality, than what we see here.

 Overread wrote:
Soulblight will be a legion of special named characters!

ALSO they forgot his dragon!!!

Also I think that's our first actual human (who isn't dead) release for the Soulblight as the Soulblight, not one carried over from the Old World.

Does the necromancer from Underworld's count? The one in love with a wolf-man.

I guess Cursed City also had a necromancer too

Having finally read the article, I'm in agreement with Garorobe about the limitations that this RoR has in that only Death factions can use him. Unless something happens in his second novel(I haven't read it yet) or an upcoming novel that sours his view of helping humans*, I'm bewildered that Cities of Sigmar can't take him.

* And if that happens, 90% of what makes him special is gone, imo.

SnotlingPimpWagon wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
You're the first one who's said anything negatively of any of those sculpts that i've seen.

Isabella? You mean the finecast panty flasher?

So what? If a lot of people like the sculpts - good for them. I find those vamps to be quite uninspiring.

No, I mean Isabella. If you remember her as panty flasher, and that detail is the thing that stood out for you the most - you do you, mate

I’ve got to say, even if you don’t like the Isabellas design choices, it’s hard to argue that the the vampire gang we are talking about here, has a serious detail sharpness downgrade. Like plastic primarch vs forgeworld. the comparison makes the new minis look a bit too toy like. In good CAD design, the lower fidelity in plastic compared to resin is nicely hidden away (the paint job helps as well). Ad Mech or Cursed city minis are way better quality, than what we see here.

It sticks in the mind because it's such an awful design choice. She looked terrible for being on a battlefied.

SnotlingPimpWagon wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
You're the first one who's said anything negatively of any of those sculpts that i've seen.

Isabella? You mean the finecast panty flasher?

So what? If a lot of people like the sculpts - good for them. I find those vamps to be quite uninspiring.

No, I mean Isabella. If you remember her as panty flasher, and that detail is the thing that stood out for you the most - you do you, mate

I’ve got to say, even if you don’t like the Isabellas design choices, it’s hard to argue that the the vampire gang we are talking about here, has a serious detail sharpness downgrade. Like plastic primarch vs forgeworld. the comparison makes the new minis look a bit too toy like. In good CAD design, the lower fidelity in plastic compared to resin is nicely hidden away (the paint job helps as well). Ad Mech or Cursed city minis are way better quality, than what we see here.

Exalted.

Plastic characters just can't match the detail of resin. Also, I find that a lot of CAD sculpts are lacking in "character" for want of a better term. A bit soulless, no pun intended

 nels1031 wrote:
Having finally read the article, I'm in agreement with Garorobe about the limitations that this RoR has in that only Death factions can use him. Unless something happens in his second novel(I haven't read it yet) or an upcoming novel that sours his view of helping humans*, I'm bewildered that Cities of Sigmar can't take him.

* And if that happens, 90% of what makes him special is gone, imo.

I listened to the audiobook (and it's pretty decent) but this whole thing feels off. The ghost makes sense, since she's his chief advisor, but giving her weapons feels dumb. There are other ghosts they could have included that would have fit better. Including Aurelius is weird too. Like he plays a role in the second novel, but it's just for a one-off mission and both vampires don't like him (or are outright hostile to him.) He's not gonna travel with them after the book, so it's like including Elrond in a Fellowship RoR. The first book features Bonereapers, but it's not like Cado is allying with them. No reason for him to help FEC or nighthaunt, so only soulblight are fluffy allies that make sense.

Also, Cado is missing his rings on his hands (which may be inspired by some plot points from the book series) but his other model has them and they're the reason he can have his ghost friends.

SamusDrake wrote:
Just thinking they'd make an excellent addition to the Crimson Court, as a full vampire-themed warband for other games.

I'd prefer the twin-headed snake and mage to be separate though, with the latter being converted.

A lot of the Soulblight and FEC stuff gives me FOMO on options for a potential future Mordheim reboot, which is a struggle. I can't really be buying these expensive models for a game that doesn't exist.

 Undead_Love-Machine wrote:

SnotlingPimpWagon wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
You're the first one who's said anything negatively of any of those sculpts that i've seen.

Isabella? You mean the finecast panty flasher?

So what? If a lot of people like the sculpts - good for them. I find those vamps to be quite uninspiring.

No, I mean Isabella. If you remember her as panty flasher, and that detail is the thing that stood out for you the most - you do you, mate

I’ve got to say, even if you don’t like the Isabellas design choices, it’s hard to argue that the the vampire gang we are talking about here, has a serious detail sharpness downgrade. Like plastic primarch vs forgeworld. the comparison makes the new minis look a bit too toy like. In good CAD design, the lower fidelity in plastic compared to resin is nicely hidden away (the paint job helps as well). Ad Mech or Cursed city minis are way better quality, than what we see here.

Exalted.

Plastic characters just can't match the detail of resin. Also, I find that a lot of CAD sculpts are lacking in "character" for want of a better term. A bit soulless, no pun intended

Yeah, man, it’s not even funny. Just judging on the portraits of the two lady vampires alone- “It’s a human-like shouty face” vs “face has disctinct feminine features and conveys emotion”. 12 lumps of hair vs approx. 30 strands of hair on somewhat similar haircuts. To illustrate my point:

Yeah, when you put the pictures together like that the difference is night and day, which genuinely saddens me.

That turban-esque black hair on the new plastic mini is horrendous, I'm not even certain that it's supposed to be hair.

But to be fair, the GW painter probably went through 50 blisters of that model before he found a perfect cast. The plastic one will always come out like the picture.

if the GW painter gets a plastic cast and not a 3d printed pre-production model years in advance anyway

Turban hair vampire is almost certainly a 3d print. If it was plastic, she'd have a straight sword.

 Undead_Love-Machine wrote:
Yeah, when you put the pictures together like that the difference is night and day, which genuinely saddens me.

That turban-esque black hair on the new plastic mini is horrendous, I'm not even certain that it's supposed to be hair.

It's hair. This is one of those times where GW painters' style really downgrades the model's appearance since it's meant to show the detail present on the model rather than mimic a real object. Which in case of many a hairstyle on GW's plastic models is not much at all. I frequently find hair the most underwhelming part of a GW miniature, even if it isn't sporting an outlandish hairdo like Space Wolves or AoS vampires so often do.

GW models are usually good at providing reasonably densely covered surfaces with deep detail that make picking out and painting detail really easy. You can get decent results with simple techniques and not much painting experience. But that quality hardly ever seems to extend to hair.

 Geifer wrote:
I certainly look forward to seeing how modern GW envisions Chaos Dwarfs. Are we expecting them this year?

the BB team is probably a good place to start for imagining how they'll look

 Geifer wrote:

GW models are usually good at providing reasonably densely covered surfaces with deep detail that make picking out and painting detail really easy. You can get decent results with simple techniques and not much painting experience. But that quality hardly ever seems to extend to hair.

It's partly because of the limitations of plastic (no undercuts with HIPS). It's also presumably why Turban-Hair has a wide jawline, or maybe that was just the designer's intent, who knows at this point.

Realistic looking hair and fur is also far more difficult to achieve in CAD than with traditional sculpting.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
Well your wishes for big hats may well be fulfilled sooner rather than later.

Did we get another teaser or are you just referring to the one from LVO?

From TGA forums. A reliable rumor-source (username "Whitefang back me up") regarding Fyreslayers:

Fyreslayers will not get a battletome.

I’m sorry I don’t have more info to tell about it, but as I’m aware its as simple as BS or BoC leaving.

For the uninitiated, BS (Bonesplittaz) and BoC(Beasts of Chaos) were killed off at the start of 4th edition. So looks like Fyreslayers may well be getting squatted.

Shame, as I played them for 2-ish editions and their Warcry warband were pretty stellar sculpts and I was hoping they'd be the start of a rework for the entire faction.

They were pretty integral to some of the events in AoS, so it'd be pretty wild if they do get squatted. A rebrand and a "soup" book with KO and whatever is still left of Dispossesed(anything?) would be more welcome.

I'd be fairly amazed considering all they've done with Gotrek being a Fyreslayer in all but name for a good long while in the books. At the same time naked/kilt wearing dwarves never quite seemed to get the attention that other forms of dwarf did.

Bonesplittaz wasn't a huge shock to me since at the time Orks had 3 separate models lines in AoS and each one was basically copy-catting the same unit slots and types - at some point something had to change on that front.

Beasts of Chaos got pulled from one game to another probably purely from internal political/management elements.
They aren't lost just moving.


Fyreslayers don't really have any chance to move to the Old World; so squatting could be on the cards. However I'd rather hope that GW might follow through on that whole "Gotrek doing SOMETHING with restoring the Dwarves on ground/mines" in AoS. Perhaps Fyreslayers go back to being an elite unit in a Dwarven army rather than being removed entirely.

I kind of honestly hoped that AoS had got over its removal fetish with the exception of the Dark Elves which have just lived in a constant limbo state for ages.


I do wonder if that's an issue for Fyreslayer sales - they've been in limbo with nothing but hero models for ages. When you've 1 monster (that's a hero choice as well}) and 2 troop options and then a bunch of heroes it kind of leaves you in a weak/less exciting spot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nels1031 wrote:
whatever is still left of Dispossesed(anything?) would be more welcome.

There's nothing of their model range left - its all in Old World now. So if GW wanted to do them it means an entire new line of dwarf models.

GW should do the Dwarves what they did with the Orcs - put both factions in the same book. Besides, it's not like there's a whole lot of design space for half-naked Dwarves with Big Axes That Shoot Fyre.

 BorderCountess wrote:
GW should do the Dwarves what they did with the Orcs - put both factions in the same book. Besides, it's not like there's a whole lot of design space for half-naked Dwarves with Big Axes That Shoot Fyre.

Eh Fyreslayers and Khadorans are really different. I can see pushing them into one book to cut down on factions; but at the same time it feels rough to do so.

They don't really draw on any similar core models and even their design language is really different. The only thing they really share is being dwarves.

By all means its better than losing the race and models entirely if that's what's on the cards, but it would feel wonky.
Even more so than the two variations of Ork that are currently mashed together and yet feel like two entirely different styles of model, design and lore

 nels1031 wrote:
From TGA forums. A reliable rumor-source (username "Whitefang back me up") regarding Fyreslayers:

Fyreslayers will not get a battletome.

I’m sorry I don’t have more info to tell about it, but as I’m aware its as simple as BS or BoC leaving.

For the uninitiated, BS (Bonesplittaz) and BoC(Beasts of Chaos) were killed off at the start of 4th edition. So looks like Fyreslayers may well be getting squatted.

Shame, as I played them for 2-ish editions and their Warcry warband were pretty stellar sculpts and I was hoping they'd be the start of a rework for the entire faction.

They were pretty integral to some of the events in AoS, so it'd be pretty wild if they do get squatted. A rebrand and a "soup" book with KO and whatever is still left of Dispossesed(anything?) would be more welcome.

It would suck for the players, for sure, if Fireslayers went the way of the dodo. I’m still salty about savage orcs, as I have an itch to do a savage/forest gobbos army for old world.
But wouldn’t be surprised if fireslayers got cut - probably the least popular army, that provides very low profits - their whole range is horrendous (corporate design written all over it), and it managed to suck the awesomeness of slayers which is no small feat. And as mentioned above - where do you really go with them to expand the range? Grot hewer of fyre? Fyre pony cavalry?

Not getting a book for an edition isn't really that big of a thing. It's more surprising when GW actually does manage to update every book in one ed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SnotlingPimpWagon wrote:

 nels1031 wrote:
From TGA forums. A reliable rumor-source (username "Whitefang back me up") regarding Fyreslayers:

Fyreslayers will not get a battletome.

I’m sorry I don’t have more info to tell about it, but as I’m aware its as simple as BS or BoC leaving.

For the uninitiated, BS (Bonesplittaz) and BoC(Beasts of Chaos) were killed off at the start of 4th edition. So looks like Fyreslayers may well be getting squatted.

Shame, as I played them for 2-ish editions and their Warcry warband were pretty stellar sculpts and I was hoping they'd be the start of a rework for the entire faction.

They were pretty integral to some of the events in AoS, so it'd be pretty wild if they do get squatted. A rebrand and a "soup" book with KO and whatever is still left of Dispossesed(anything?) would be more welcome.

It would suck for the players, for sure, if Fireslayers went the way of the dodo. I’m still salty about savage orcs, as I have an itch to do a savage/forest gobbos army for old world.
But wouldn’t be surprised if fireslayers got cut - probably the least popular army, that provides very low profits - their whole range is horrendous (corporate design written all over it), and it managed to suck the awesomeness of slayers which is no small feat. And as mentioned above - where do you really go with them to expand the range? Grot hewer of fyre? Fyre pony cavalry?

Oh they're very easy to expand. Initially, you redo the troops to bring them more in line with the Warcry warband, which were extremely well recieved. Then you give them a smaller cavalry. Young Droth's or some sort of other, smaller creature they've tamed. Then you lean more into their invocations side. Give them more elemental control over fire, lean into the magical side over the Kharadrons technological side. Make them two sides of the same coin.

 Overread wrote:

Even more so than the two variations of Ork that are currently mashed together and yet feel like two entirely different styles of model, design and lore

What about the underground 'shroom-sniffin' goblins and the nitro-wolf-chariot-ridin' goblins that share a book?

Oof. Not crazy about Malenth's head. The similarly posed Sissendra is league better

I feel this is more down to the paintjob than the actual head. Whoever did it has give her crazy eye and the scars are far too harsh.

Wonder if GW sees only one spot for "dwarves, but on fire" on the roster and they chose to hand it over to Chaos Dwarves.