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.

I don't think the terminator lord needs to be replaced. mostly because we're NOT going to like the result

Yeah, I actually like the kit and would lament a newer style character(while looking "good") with weird restrictions.

 Gert wrote:
The stupidity of that post is hurting my brain.

The stupidity of saying "that post" instead of quoting it for clarity is hurting mine.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I get what he means, but he's missed Kommisar's actual point.

Pretty sure I got that they liked the weirdness of RT era Chaos models. I just also pointed out the double standard of the "everything is monopose" point.

ccs wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
You know, you got me wondering if I could use an old dinobot model as a maulerfiend or forgefiend. Has anyone seen/tried this?

I haven't seen it, but I assume someone has.... Do it. And post pics.

Can someone tell me the hieght, width and, length of either model? I found my old Grimlock and want to see if he would be approximately the correct demensions. Grimlock is about 6" nose to tail, 3" side to side and just short of 5" tall.

About the Terminator lord, I think that the next special model for the 40k streaming app is going to be a World Eaters Terminator lord. Just clip off the Khornate markings and weapons and add new ones and you're good to go.

I think it is safe to say the range was designed by committee.

Also, GW seem to purge more models and options from the range with each subsrquent codex.

There is a reason why 3.5 codex was looked on so favourably and crops up in every CSM whinge thread - almost unrestricted customisability, especially where Lords and Champions were concerned.

Also, where is the same flavour these days where if you wanted to summon a Greater Daemon you had to sacrifice an Aspiring Champion - if he was in a transport his squad booted him out before he blew up into a 15ft rage machine.

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
I think it is safe to say the range was designed by committee.

Possibly, I felt like it was designed at gunpoint since nobody in GW seems to want to do anything with the faction.