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.

Skippy wrote:

Erasoketa wrote:

killykavekommando wrote:Women are equals as humans

Wow. Just... wow.

You probably want to expand on that statement! (im giving you the benefit of the doubt that you didnt mean quite what you said)

Last time I checked, women were human.

"women are equals as humans" means women and men are equal to me, you saying wow, just...wow to that implies you dont agree.

However obviously we are just interpreting the original statement from killy differently, so no worries.

Rejn wrote:Melissa, how are the Orks not comedic to you? 90% of everything about them is a joke! That is comming from an avid Orc fan in and out of WH.

Because they are the never-ending horde of technobarbarians at the gate, with no desire nor comprehension of peace. They are monstrous berserkers capable of smashing a man's head with their bare hands like a grape, with multiple redundant organs and a robust physiology that exceeds that of the Space Marines, with technology that we likely will never comprehend that is capable of defying the laws of physics. Even if you kill one of them, a dozen more pop up, and they reproduce their entire lives just by living and dying through their spore-based reproductive cycle. They know how to fight like we know how to breathe, meaning that unlike us they don't need a time to train before being as effective as a soldier-- they don't need a boot camp.

And what's worse? They've already conquered most of the galaxy. Orks have basically already won, and everyone else is just fighting over scraps.

Orks are frightening. They make Necrons and Tyranids look pathetic in comparison, and equally rival Chaos in fear factor.

Rejn wrote:how are the Orks not comedic to you? 90% of everything about them is a joke!

There is nothing comedic about the orks in Helsreach or Rynn's World. That's how I like my orks. Nasty fethers! They will kill you, torture you, and eat your children (in no particular order).

They will also think its a good idea to shoot snottlings out of a gun..

Though orks are also really really scary, as Melissia and Kronk stated. I don't know how well GW is able to balance the comic and the grimdark

Sageheart wrote:They will also think its a good idea to shoot snottlings out of a gun.

It's either that or squigs, and the squigs are smart enough to stay away from the machine.

Sure they could do a bomb, but let's face it, teleporting a snotling insdie of a person is much, MUCH scarier than a mere bomb.

You just did to Beany10 what you accused Ascalam of doing, neither is very correct.

That was my point, on purpose, which, as you can see, is really contradictory and hypocritical.

Step into the shoes of those you speak of and it'll be a lot easier to see where I'm coming from.

Offending was not an intention, but an example of asininity.

it is scarier than a bomb, i just can't get over how silly it seems at the same time, and to me i dont know if gw does a good balance of that.

but here i am getting off topic here, i shouldnt derail this thread any more than it prob has in the last 13 pages haha

Skippy wrote:"women are equals as humans" means women and men are equal to me, you saying wow, just...wow to that implies you dont agree.

However obviously we are just interpreting the original statement from killy differently, so no worries.

Yeah, I guess we interpret it different because to me that sentence sounds like if human only refered to men. So when I read the sentence I was like "What are women then? Platypus?".

Why are people so offended about some exposed breasts on the tabletop? Nude models are not all women, and some not even humans at all this model has his bits hanging out (NSFW)



Here is a celtic model with his 'weapon' exposed

Arm.chair.general wrote:Why are people so offended about some exposed breasts on the tabletop? Nude models are not all women, and some not even humans at all this model has his bits hanging out (NSFW)

Spoiler:

Here is a celtic model with his 'weapon' exposed

Spoiler:

They're not really offended by the nudity in of itself; more those that don't make sense in context (or are stupidly "justified"), made for sheer titillation.

All this reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Michelangelo's David comes to Springfield

Arm.chair.general wrote:Why are people so offended

You start your post off with a loaded question and it only goes downhill from there....

Asking :"why are you offended" is like asking "why won't you stop sleeping with your underaged daughter?" It presumes and unproven statement (IE, that you are offended in the former, and that you are sleeping with your underaged daughter in the latter).

It's not about taking offense as much as noting distaste and not liking it. If your definition of taking offense is "not liking it", I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Melissia wrote:

Arm.chair.general wrote:Why are people so offended

You start your post off with a loaded question and it only goes downhill from there....

Asking :"why are you offended" is like asking "why won't you stop sleeping with your underaged daughter?" It presumes and unproven statement (IE, that you are offended in the former, and that you are sleeping with your underaged daughter in the latter).

It's not about taking offense as much as noting distaste and not liking it. If your definition of taking offense is "not liking it", I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.

That's because you have taken it out of context. I originally put why are people so offended of exposed breasts on the tabletop.

In my dictionary: Offended: To cause displeasure, anger, resentment, or wounded feelings in.

Consequently displeasure is: A feeling of annoyance or disapproval

The word offence can be taken in many ways, don't try to pin one meaning on it.

Although I will admit that maybe dislike is a better word to use as it has less meanings to it.

Erasoketa wrote:

Skippy wrote:"women are equals as humans" means women and men are equal to me, you saying wow, just...wow to that implies you dont agree.

However obviously we are just interpreting the original statement from killy differently, so no worries.

Yeah, I guess we interpret it different because to me that sentence sounds like if human only refered to men. So when I read the sentence I was like "What are women then? Platypus?".

I meant to say that men and women are equal, not that men are humans and women are platypus(es?).

Melissia wrote:Because they are the never-ending horde of technobarbarians at the gate, with no desire nor comprehension of peace. They are monstrous berserkers capable of smashing a man's head with their bare hands like a grape, with multiple redundant organs and a robust physiology that exceeds that of the Space Marines, with technology that we likely will never comprehend that is capable of defying the laws of physics. Even if you kill one of them, a dozen more pop up, and they reproduce their entire lives just by living and dying through their spore-based reproductive cycle. They know how to fight like we know how to breathe, meaning that unlike us they don't need a time to train before being as effective as a soldier-- they don't need a boot camp.

And what's worse? They've already conquered most of the galaxy. Orks have basically already won, and everyone else is just fighting over scraps.

Orks are frightening. They make Necrons and Tyranids look pathetic in comparison, and equally rival Chaos in fear factor.

Yes, that is what they would sound like had Matt Ward written the codex.
Luckily though, mr. Kelly has gotten his hands on it and we have an insane Dok because a helper threw up in his brainpan and Meks looking on with paternal pride while their new Kans are being broken in by the driving Gretchin killing all his bullies.
It just reads like grimdark slapstick. You may not like it and choose to ignore it, but you can't with a straight face say that it's not there.

Arm.chair.general wrote:[snip]

You point at me and say "don't pin the word to a single definition!" then you go and do exactly what you say I shouldn't do afterwards...

Be that as it may, just because I find the overwhelming majority of models which are nude to be distasteful doesn't mean that I say all of them are. I thought the daemonette models (the old ones) were pefectly fine, for example-- they fit the theme of the army and all that.

But for an opposing example... that tentacle monster surrounded by nude female sex slaves? That's... definitely tasteless and for the most part pointless. Am I saying "don't buy that model", no, and also no. You can do whatever you want with your money, but it's still a trashy model. If you like that sort of thing, bully for you. But that doesn't mean you should look down on me for not having the same level of enjoyment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TiB wrote:Yes, that is what they would sound like had Matt Ward written the codex

That's what they sound like right now. It has nothing to do with Ward.

Not to sound like a doucher but I kinda wanna see this eldar thing everyone is talking about, cause I have no idea how pieces of fake plastic could turn anyone on, but then again people watch tentacle porn, and that just freaks me the frag out.

azrel9 wrote:Not to sound like a doucher but I kinda wanna see this eldar thing everyone is talking about, cause I have no idea how pieces of fake plastic could turn anyone on, but then again people watch tentacle porn, and that just freaks me the frag out.

There's a spoilered picture of it earlier in the thread, azrel.

Melissia wrote:

Arm.chair.general wrote:[snip]

You point at me and say "don't pin the word to a single definition!" then you go and do exactly what you say I shouldn't do afterwards...

Be that as it may, just because I find the overwhelming majority of models which are nude to be distasteful doesn't mean that I say all of them are. I thought the daemonette models (the old ones) were pefectly fine, for example-- they fit the theme of the army and all that.

But for an opposing example... that tentacle monster surrounded by nude female sex slaves? That's... definitely tasteless and for the most part pointless. Am I saying "don't buy that model", no, and also no. You can do whatever you want with your money, but it's still a trashy model. If you like that sort of thing, bully for you. But that doesn't mean you should look down on me for not having the same level of enjoyment.

I didn't do that afterwards, I just said dislike has less meanings to it. I did not try to pin a meaning to it, I was just simply trying to get across that Dislike may be better because it's more specific, compared to offend which has a range of meanings from displeasure, to stronger emotions like resentful and anger.

I am guessing this is the mini you were talking about? (NSFW)


I agree with you that things like that the monster with slave girls is distasteful, but I theorise that most people would dislike it and find it somewhat disturbing, because in polls and threads on Dakka and elsewhere the general response for nude miniatures is that it's ok as long as it's kept clean (no sex, rape ect...)

I think nude models are unnecessary. It's the chainmail bikini syndrome. They don't fit the setting, thus they become tacky. They'd be acceptable in a tortured slave situation, as with Dark Eldar, and they're acceptable in as so far as Daemonettes go, because they fit there as well. Your commissar should not be topless. Neither should your Inquisitor.

That thing above is utterly appalling, and frankly, I kind of think that's the point. It's not "horray boobies", it's the thing that's been haunting the dreams of the hobo living by the overpass that makes him try to direct traffic on the freeway and crucify squirrels. It's the horrible unspeakable present in Lovecraft. It's something I'd expect to see drawn in a Hellblazer comic. It's evocative of, well, horror, but that in and of itself makes it significant. It's EXACTLY what I would expect a daemon to look like: Horrible mockery of humanity combined with dark perversion of things that would make most people kind of uncomfortable. If anything, it's biggest fault is that it does what it does TOO well. It's too much. It's not fit for a game board because, well, it's just too much. I don't know how to better describe it.

I definitely wouldn't expose the kids at the store to it though.

punkow wrote:(I play DA and Orks... no boobs here) I see nothing wrong in it...

The irony of this comment is priceless. (For anyone for whom that's a little obscure, I'm getting at the "Dark Angels are gay, that's their secret, that's why their wear dresses" malarky...)

Anyway, to comment on-topic, so as to not post something completely irrelevant, I'm neither particularly for it, or offended by it. I haven't bought any nude models, and I've no desire to, but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate the sculpting/painting that somebody else has done to create theirs.

A little nudity is good for people.

There have been lots of posts pro-nudity in miniatures and lots of posts against it. Either way, enjoy it if you'd like or choose not to expose yourself to it if you don't.

"women are equals as humans" -- The guy obviously meant that as humans, women and men are equal. Don't know what people are debating about.

Orks ARE scary, at least in most fantasy/sci-fi mediums. In Warhammer and the Warhammer inspired Warcraft Or(k/c)s are on the silly side.

Melissia wrote:
Be that as it may, just because I find the overwhelming majority of models which are nude to be distasteful doesn't mean that I say all of them are. I thought the daemonette models (the old ones) were pefectly fine, for example-- they fit the theme of the army and all that.

The old daemonettes are pretty inaccurate and looks to me as boobs and chainmail bikinis for the sake of it. I always thought that daemonettes would look more like the body art/painting women, but a little more daemonic and mutated. Slaanesh is about beauty, lust, greed, art and music.
WARNING (NSFW)

Those look NOTHING like a daemonette should....

Daemonettes are as beautiful as they are terrible, for Slaanesh also enjoys revulsion-- his/her daemons are are not just beautiful but also monstrous. It's actually one of the reasons why some slaanesh players use both the new models AND the previous models in unison.

Arm.chair.general wrote:
I am guessing this is the mini you were talking about? (NSFW)

That thing is hilarious! What range is that from?

Skippy wrote:

Arm.chair.general wrote:
I am guessing this is the mini you were talking about? (NSFW)

That thing is hilarious! What range is that from?

That is the Wet Nurse from Kingdom Death.

Dysartes wrote:

That is the Wet Nurse from Kingdom Death.

HR Giger would approve of that game system by the look of the website. Some disturbing stuff there!

The wet nurse model fits perfectly with the other minis.

I don't think it's a game system so much as it's a group of miniatures that are linked by a theme intended for collectors and painters (as opposed to being collected played as a wargame like 40k or Infinity).

Melissia wrote:I don't think it's a game system so much as it's a group of miniatures that are linked by a theme intended for collectors and painters (as opposed to being collected played as a wargame like 40k or Infinity).

Not a game system yet, true...

Apparently they plan on making it a game eventually... according to the little card I got with one of their limited models.