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.
2018/07/10 22:52:03
Subject: Oathmark- fantasy mass-battles from Osprey and North Star (Human Soldiers pg 9)
One thing that I find interesting about the Wights in Game of Thrones is that they have no distinction between zombies and skeletons- all are just dead bodies in various states of decay.
Meanwhile in most fantasy worlds in which they are depicted, there is a hard distinction between zombies and skeletons. You usually don't find zombies beyond a certain level of decay- they are all recently dead. And you don't find skellies with any flesh on them at all.
A plastic kit that does a similar thing to GoT wights- mixing "zombies" and "skeletons" in various in-between stages of decay in one kit would be very interesting, and unique.
Iron_Captain wrote:
Celtic helmet styles are not derived from the Greeks. Greek helmets are very different from Celtic ones. While the Gauls had marginal contact with the Greeks through their colony at Massalia, and we do have evidence they imported some goods, there is no evidence for the import of Greek helmet styles at any point in the history of Gaul. Celtic helmet types show a clear line of development that stretches back into the bronze age, and there are no Greek parallels that could have served as the 'precursors' of Celtic helmet styles. That is not to say there wasn't any influencing going on at all. Gaulish smiths did at times adopt Etruscan and Greek motifs for decoration, just like Etruscan or Greek smiths sometimes adopted Celtic motifs, and there is also evidence Celtic smiths adopted metalworking techniques from Italian peoples. Despite this, Etruscans, Greeks and Celts all maintained clearly separable styles. The skills of Gaulish metalworkers are also beyond any doubt. Hallstatt and La Tène culture sites often yield very spectacular finds.
Just look at the Agris helmet for example:
Spoiler:
Beyond that, the consistent adoption by the Roman army of Celtic styles of helmets and other equipment clearly indicates the Romans thought highly of Celtic metalworks. The Romans also adopted helmet styles from the Greeks. But the fact that those Greek-inspired helmets were replaced by Celtic-inspired helmets says a lot. Of course, 'better' is a relative concept. Roman smiths were better in other things than their Celtic counterparts. Roman smiths used more advanced technologies and could produce on an almost industrial-level scale in vast factory-like workshops, while Celtic smiths were much smaller operations that produced unique, single items rather than the mass production the Romans favoured.
Also, it is not true the best steel came from the East. The Romans themselves in written sources laud Noricum as one the best sources for steel (which not coincidentally is an important center of the Celtic Hallstat and La Tène cultures). The metalworking skills that were present in Noricum are amply evidenced in the archaeological record.
I had forgotten about this!
My mian issue with your argument is that it takes fairly outdated isolationist view of arms and armor development in Europe, when we KNOW there has been a trade in both since the Aegean bronze age, and a great many of those ancient Aegean designs are either precursors of, or at least anticipate later "celtic" designs. NOTHING exists in a vacuum in arms and armor design.
But more to the point, I think most people look at the 'montefortino' type of helmet as being the point of heaviest gallicisation of Roman equipment, and its not hard to see why- the basic elements of the helmet are the same, and its adopted during the period of Gallic movements in the peninsula. But its important to understand that the design doesn't come in a vacuum, and there are obvious parallels with the attic and chalcidice helmets coming in from Greece, along with the native Italian evolution of the Corinthian helmet, the aptly named "Italo-Corinthian".
But the simplicity of the Montefortino I think IS partially due to Gallic influence of making the pattern widespread, and partially due to how much cheaper it is to produce than the more overtly Greek derived helmets - but not of some inherent benefit of utility.
But again nothing in a vacuum. I see a direct correlation in the expansion of the Republic into Greece and Anatolia and the gradual morphing of its arms and armor to reflect this influence. Its an expansion that begins in the aftermath of the second punic war, and expanding significantly there after in the era of Marius and Sulla (the generation before Caesar, and the heyday of the Montefortino) eventually being consolidated by Caesar and Augustus. And during that period of consolidation you see an interesting morphing of the Montefortino helmet into something that looks more broadly like an Attic helmet- and in art you see actual attic helmets being in use by the Praetorian guard, a choice I've always thought was a form of propaganda in nature.
All of this is just to show the tip of the iceburg in terms of how material culture - arms and armor included- develops. Claiming a single source for just about anything is folly, and I assure you that Greek and Celtic designs were influencing each other just as much as both were influencing the Romans, or the Nordic runes may n fact be Etruscan. It's all connected.
I bough a couple of days ago a box of Oathmark Elves, and... I must say that I got very pleasantly surprised. The minis are beautifully sculpted and look very interesting. I must say that the pictures don't do them justice.
This is the first elf I assembled, some sort of adventuring sort with no regard for personal safety (ie. no helmet ):
And man, they are tiny!
I think they work perfectly for LorT, though, which is well enough, as that was my intention all along:
All in all, a satisfied customer. I can't wait to get the dwarves and the goblins (I'm not that keen on the humies).
2018/09/14 10:56:50
Subject: Oathmark- fantasy mass-battles from Osprey and North Star (Human Soldiers pg 9)
I bought the goblins and they are pretty nice to use as LotR orcs. The figures are quite well detailed, as good as most historical ranges. The problem for me is the poses are a bit wooden, no matter how you assemble them it's hard to get a good natural look.
On the elf, the chest armour just looks like a complete afterthought, really poorly done. There are much better plastic elves around - either GWLotR or Warhammer will serve well.
Huginn wrote: On the elf, the chest armour just looks like a complete afterthought, really poorly done. There are much better plastic elves around - either GWLotR or Warhammer will serve well.
Does it? I thought it looked quite a lot like the kind of pectoral reinforcements you see on a lot of warriors of antiquity, like for example these iberian warriors:
2018/09/14 15:18:27
Subject: Oathmark- fantasy mass-battles from Osprey and North Star (Human Soldiers pg 9)
I think Dragon Rampant will fill any need for Fantasy Battles I have at the moment, but kudos to the smaller, less over the top/out of proportion, models.
Gallahad wrote: I'll never understand why they chose to do Oathmark in 25mm scale.
Yeah, that is a head scratcher. Heck, I'd probably even buy a box of their elves* if the scale weren't so ...delicate. I have the same issue with Frostgrave Barbarians--I'd buy a whole bunch to field with my Shieldmaidens if they didn't look so comical together. They remind me of the short guy I knew in college who exclusively hit on tall, tall women.
*With those pads and that glorious hair they would be my Medieval Times Dinner and Tournament Champions.
Gallahad wrote: I'll never understand why they chose to do Oathmark in 25mm scale.
Aren't they "proper" 28mm like most hard plastic historicals?
They are whatever scale gw's lotr range is in both height and proportion, so slightly smaller and daintier than most plastic historicals, or at the very least, on the smaller end of plastic historicals.
2018/09/14 18:22:41
Subject: Oathmark- fantasy mass-battles from Osprey and North Star (Human Soldiers pg 9)
Yeah, the Oathmark scale is off-putting for sure. I won't mind for goblins and orcs (I have a box of the goblins I haven't opened). But for something that needs to mix in with my large range of board game, Reaper, and Warhammer derived minis...a smaller scale manufacturer won't get much of my money.
It sucks too because I'd buy everything Tre Manor makes too, but the majority of his metals range is significantly smaller than the other figures I use.
2018/09/15 08:00:11
Subject: Oathmark- fantasy mass-battles from Osprey and North Star (Human Soldiers pg 9)
Hopefully it'll remain compatible with their current plastics range if you want some bulked out ladies. I bet some of the cultist hoods and bodies could be nicely swapped.
Poorly lit photos of my ever- growing collection of completely unrelated models!
The Frostgrave plastics are really nice, just a shame the number of weapon options are odd. I understand that it is primarily for Frostgrave Warbands who have a mixture of equipment, but it does limit their potential to be used in other systems. 1 spear per sprue, so 4 in a box, for a Dragon Rampant unit that would mean 3 boxes.
Which would also provide enough for 1 unit of double handed weapons. 1 unit of crossbows, 1 unit of bow troops, and 2 unit of scouts armed with bows. While not too bad, it does mean there is no option to buy 1 box set and get a unit of your choice from that one box, other than bow armed scouts.
Plus it would be a shooting heavy force, which can be a bit unbalanced.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/11 13:25:03
The objective of the game is to win. The point of the game is to have fun. The two should never be confused.
2018/10/11 19:01:39
Subject: Oathmark- fantasy mass-battles from Osprey and North Star (Human Soldiers pg 9)
If you want a more proportional breakout of kit, I suggest Gripping Beast (Late Roman, Dark Age, Viking, and Saxon boxes), Warlord (the old WGF Saxon and Viking boxes), Conquest Games (Norman’s), or Fireforge (Scandinavian, Rus, etc).
Prices are pretty reasonable, lots of weapon variety, and easy to build out several 8-12 man units in a single box.
For Ancients, try Victrix or Warlord’s plastics.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/11 19:02:22
I showed my wife Megan the all female warband deal and she is quite happy with the way they are wearing sensible clothes.
She was mildly upset that I neglected to show her the 'bishonen' wraiths that are among the monsters. (In my defense - I didn't notice that there was a second page on the US version of the Nickstarter.)
Now she is really happy.
The Auld Grump - there's a market for bishonen monsters?
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
2018/10/13 19:12:37
Subject: Re:Oathmark- fantasy mass-battles from Osprey and North Star (Human Soldiers pg 9)
I have long argued in favor of having a pretty boy Slaaneshi model range.
Or just something that can match that Japanese beautiful man aesthetic sculpt wise. Every now and then someone's art department comes close (Anima springs to mind) but the models never do it justice.
At least I've got the Kingdom Death male pinups to look forward to.
Poorly lit photos of my ever- growing collection of completely unrelated models!
I'm confused. I thought they already had dwarves? (Look at the first page of this thread). Also, 23 dwarf heads per 5 bodies seems a bit excessive. But between the two kits you have a ton of weapon options. Nice to see the two handed options in this one. Maybe these are meant to represent heavier armored dwarves?
2019/03/19 15:29:25
Subject: Oathmark- fantasy mass-battles from Osprey and North Star (Dwarves page 10)