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’m in 100% agreement with albertorious - it doesn’t take much work to really change up the cawdorminis and they will likely be the first ones I get a second set of - in comparison I don’t see me jumping for vansaar as they are just to restrictive

 MangoMadness wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
That leader figure is a great figure...ruined by GW's fething obsession with god damn lit candles...seriously.

It.......waxes and wanes

That was a good one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:

 MangoMadness wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
That leader figure is a great figure...ruined by GW's fething obsession with god damn lit candles...seriously.

It.......waxes and wanes

I'd rather burn it...at both ends.

PS: Yes, I really hate the candles that much. They look stupid on a Space Marine, but at least they're in...armour (and somehow magically preventing them from blowing out the second they go...anywhere). A pile of melting/burning candles carried on the shoulders of a masked individual is...one of the most stupid design decisions I've seen in a miniature. Narrowly edging out rolls of parchment longer than a model's leg - looking at you gak stupid Chaplain Terminator.

What prevents corpus candles going out of action in N17? Plot armour.

From FB:

John French wrote:
I don’t do as much games design as I used to, and when I get a chance to work on something I love as much as Necromunda with people as talented as the Specialist Games folk, it reminds how much I love it.
In this case I did the Dominion Campaign in Necromunda Gang War 4. Huge thanks to Andy Hoare, and J T-Y for the chance and making it all work.

I think I might want to grab a box of the Cawdor Minis to make a Genestealer Cult as well.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
cultural appropriation

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I tole y'all back when N17 started that parody KKK, and parody indians, won't fly in 2017+

Agreed. It doesn't matter what the "I defend my right to offend you" crowd think, cultural appropriation and anything that could be perceived as a KKK mini... yeah, nope. They'll reimagine the Ratskins, if they even do them. Dark Angels already lost the Native American vibe and no-one flipped their lid, so it's entirely possible.

"Cultural appropriation" doesn't exist, it's a nonsense concept that(ironically, considering who typically advocates that it does) depends entirely on a conception of "intellectual property" spun out of the ether over the decades by corporate lobbying. And this isn't about "I defend my right to offend you", it's about whether we allow mob-mentality and personal, subjective perceptions to suppress art and free expression. There is zero intent to offend anyone behind the Redemptionists or the Ratskins, so while people are free to be offended by them, their opinion doesn't grant them some special moral authority.

Also, I'm not sure Dark Angels did "lose" the Native American vibe, the few elements of it that were there still are, it was just a minor element of their pastiche that became comparatively more minor over the years as the already dominant "space monks" aspects were Flanderised to support a bigger miniatures line. Redemptionists and Ratskins, however, are entirely bound up in the concepts and aesthetic that some people are insisting should be abandoned - at which point, why bother doing them at all?

I sincerely hope Forgeworld have the courage to tell the Outrage Merchants where to shove it.

How can we talk about cultural appropiation in the context of a company that makes models based on real world thropes...


You know that GW took dozens of very different real-world cultures... mixed them with dinosaurs without any kind of respect (Tic-Tac-Toc)... and made an awesome faction with it.

You have much more recent examples with the Greek themes of Daugthers of Khaine or Idoneth Deepkin.
Or fething norse Space Wolves.

But I assume americans/english people are more sensible about the native american thing compared with everything else. But you can't have anything without "cultural appropiation" because everything belongs to some culture.

No, but a company that sells its wares internationally should at least be sensitive to iconography/pastiche/imagery that invokes hundreds of years of enslavement, murder, bigotry, and racism that, unfortunately, continues to this day and is still a struggle for many in today's "great" 'ol US of A (intentional or not).

Now, for myself, I know that this is a niche thing (these minis), but its very likely that someone would or could be offended - and this isn't knee-jerk overreaction to every little thing - this is slavery and racism level being offended - such that I wouldn't buy models with pointed hoods and if I did, absolutely would steer far away from white as my color choice.

I also realize that this is particular issue isn't the same for people in the UK, or Australia, or elsewhere in the world, but it is still an issue here. Heavens forbid that a single miniature gets recalled due to feedback. I think we can and should be doing better in 2018 about these things, game or not.

 Yodhrin wrote:
I sincerely hope Forgeworld have the courage to tell the Outrage Merchants where to shove it.

See now I want that to be a Guilder Gang:

Outrage Merchants.

They (a bit like the Vanus Temple of assassins) literally sell outrage and scandle, using it to fuel riots and strikes that hamper one house whilst benefiting another.

That'd be cool.

 Cruentus wrote:
I think we can and should be doing better in 2018 about these things, game or not.

But it's [the current year].

I love those arguments.

 Grot 6 wrote:
I'm on for 2 boxes of Cawdor. One for me, and one for you easily offended types.

I'M EASILY OFFENDED!!! Here's my address...

Cawdor has always been the Inquisition fanboys. Is it time for the Orks are a caricature of African-Americans again?* There's reason we don't get nice things...MERICA

* this is what happens when one culture makes something and a different culture consumes it oblivious to its actual cultural source(s).

I’m very sensitive to the idea that an image, a piece of text etc. can bring up negative connotations. I’m also very respectful of people’s rights to be offended and to express those feels in public. I also think that there is a balance to be struck between one person’s freedom of artistic expression and another person’s ethical sensibilities. That balance can only be found by honest and open dialogue and will always involve some kind of compromise.

Here’s an interesting point though; my partner is black and her reaction to the miniature with the pointy hood was immediately negative. She actually commented that she thought it was a very positive thing that people are now sensitive to these issues. I do agree with her, to a point. Here’s the thing though; my family lost people in WW2. WW2 is the reason my mother grew up without her father. Yet anyone who wants to collect an army of Nazis I’d totally spoilt for choice when it comes to what they can buy. You could tell me, but WW2 is a long time ago, but I know people who still grieve for the people they lost.

I don’t know what conclusions to draw from that, it just is what it is.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I tole y'all back when N17 started that parody KKK, and parody indians, won't fly in 2017+

Agreed. It doesn't matter what the "I defend my right to offend you" crowd think, cultural appropriation and anything that could be perceived as a KKK mini... yeah, nope. They'll reimagine the Ratskins, if they even do them. Dark Angels already lost the Native American vibe and no-one flipped their lid, so it's entirely possible.

"Cultural appropriation" doesn't exist, it's a nonsense concept that(ironically, considering who typically advocates that it does) depends entirely on a conception of "intellectual property" spun out of the ether over the decades by corporate lobbying. And this isn't about "I defend my right to offend you", it's about whether we allow mob-mentality and personal, subjective perceptions to suppress art and free expression. There is zero intent to offend anyone behind the Redemptionists or the Ratskins, so while people are free to be offended by them, their opinion doesn't grant them some special moral authority.

Also, I'm not sure Dark Angels did "lose" the Native American vibe, the few elements of it that were there still are, it was just a minor element of their pastiche that became comparatively more minor over the years as the already dominant "space monks" aspects were Flanderised to support a bigger miniatures line. Redemptionists and Ratskins, however, are entirely bound up in the concepts and aesthetic that some people are insisting should be abandoned - at which point, why bother doing them at all?

I sincerely hope Forgeworld have the courage to tell the Outrage Merchants where to shove it.

...It is also worth noting that you can totally have miniatures with a native american aesthetic without having it be a caricature. Was anyone offended that Avatar Directed By Carl Casian Starring Whitey Mcracker had a very clear native american bent to their alien race? If they did, I've never seen it. Because you're allowed to have a sci fi concept where a culture draws an aesthetic from a particular culture without it being offensive. Sure, if you had Magnus The Red with a big "chief from that one peter pan scene disney doesn't like to admit happened" nose and a dialect where he ends verbs with -um and refers to himself in the third person....yeah, that'd probably be offensive. A culture of mutated humans in an underhive setting with a native american aesthetic? There's nothing inherently wrong with that.

If you get offended at any nonwhite culture being depicted in a scifi setting, you have to be offended at the depiction of Wakanda in Black Panther. And I don't think the "outrage brigade" has started grinding that axe quite yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
I’m very sensitive to the idea that an image, a piece of text etc. can bring up negative connotations. I’m also very respectful of people’s rights to be offended and to express those feels in public. I also think that there is a balance to be struck between one person’s freedom of artistic expression and another person’s ethical sensibilities. That balance can only be found by honest and open dialogue and will always involve some kind of compromise.

Here’s an interesting point though; my partner is black and her reaction to the miniature with the pointy hood was immediately negative. She actually commented that she thought it was a very positive thing that people are now sensitive to these issues. I do agree with her, to a point. Here’s the thing though; my family lost people in WW2. WW2 is the reason my mother grew up without her father. Yet anyone who wants to collect an army of Nazis I’d totally spoilt for choice when it comes to what they can buy. You could tell me, but WW2 is a long time ago, but I know people who still grieve for the people they lost.

I don’t know what conclusions to draw from that, it just is what it is.

I guess the question I'd ask is "where do we determine that a miniature is an *offensive thing*"? You see plenty of miniatures wearing executioners hoods in games, and also plenty of "cultist" miniatures for Cthulhu games or others (see Frostgrave's cultist kit for example) that could just as easily be interpreted as "oh you paint that the right way and it's a klansman".

I can totally see and respect the attitude of "that makes me uncomfortable, I don't want to buy it." Nurgle miniatures make me uncomfortable, I've seen too many nasty diseases and injuries through the course of my research and professional work to want to hold something like that up to my face and paint it. it's where the attitude becomes "that makes me uncomfortable it should not be allowed to be sold" that I start to scratch my head. ESPECIALLY with a miniature where you'd have to paint it a particular way for it to really become a problem. I could take and paint plenty of miniatures in a way that would REALLY make people uncomfortable, but that'd be on me, not on the miniature.

If you took that guy and painted him with a black hood, I guarantee you 99% of the time the reaction to him would be: black hood, axe, executioner.

I think combining the pointy hoods with the nooses is perhaps a step too far.

 Cruentus wrote:
No, but a company that sells its wares internationally should at least be sensitive to iconography/pastiche/imagery that invokes hundreds of years of enslavement, murder, bigotry, and racism that, unfortunately, continues to this day and is still a struggle for many in today's "great" 'ol US of A (intentional or not).

Now, for myself, I know that this is a niche thing (these minis), but its very likely that someone would or could be offended - and this isn't knee-jerk overreaction to every little thing - this is slavery and racism level being offended - such that I wouldn't buy models with pointed hoods and if I did, absolutely would steer far away from white as my color choice.

I also realize that this is particular issue isn't the same for people in the UK, or Australia, or elsewhere in the world, but it is still an issue here. Heavens forbid that a single miniature gets recalled due to feedback. I think we can and should be doing better in 2018 about these things, game or not.

The problem is that plenty of us don't agree that self-censoring works of art because they might cause offence to some people is "doing better". Depiction is not endorsement. Pastiche is not true depiction. If we were to adopt the position you're suggesting, of modifying or eliminating things because they share imagery with real concepts and groups that are bad or because a portion of a cultural group are upset by them, 40K would cease to exist. Fascism, religious intolerance, prejudice based on species, ableism; 40K is riddled with unpleasant concepts and aesthetic cues from awful organisations and movements, why are these specific instances elevated above all the others?

It wasn't that long ago that the presence of Daemons in GW's products was causing genuine outrage and offence in America but not elsewhere, should GW have eliminated them from the setting to placate that group?

There is only one rational and fair way to approach these kinds of things: People create what they want to create. Other people choose whether or not to consume those creations. Anyone who wishes to feel offence can, that's their right, but it is not their right to impose upon anyone else based on that subjective, individual judgement.

By all means, don't buy the Cawdor Executioner, or a Ratskin gang. By all means, use their existence as the subject of lengthy and detailed blogposts about what you perceive as their flaws and their ostensible relationship to real life things. But to suggest that the fact you dislike them for whatever reason means they should be eliminated, or that artists self-censoring to avoid being maligned is a good thing is grotesque, and worse still, counter productive since all it does in the end is provide cover for the "other side" to indulge in exactly the same behaviour but with far more serious consequences.

the_scotsman wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
I’m very sensitive to the idea that an image, a piece of text etc. can bring up negative connotations. I’m also very respectful of people’s rights to be offended and to express those feels in public. I also think that there is a balance to be struck between one person’s freedom of artistic expression and another person’s ethical sensibilities. That balance can only be found by honest and open dialogue and will always involve some kind of compromise.

Here’s an interesting point though; my partner is black and her reaction to the miniature with the pointy hood was immediately negative. She actually commented that she thought it was a very positive thing that people are now sensitive to these issues. I do agree with her, to a point. Here’s the thing though; my family lost people in WW2. WW2 is the reason my mother grew up without her father. Yet anyone who wants to collect an army of Nazis I’d totally spoilt for choice when it comes to what they can buy. You could tell me, but WW2 is a long time ago, but I know people who still grieve for the people they lost.

I don’t know what conclusions to draw from that, it just is what it is.

I guess the question I'd ask is "where do we determine that a miniature is an *offensive thing*"? You see plenty of miniatures wearing executioners hoods in games, and also plenty of "cultist" miniatures for Cthulhu games or others (see Frostgrave's cultist kit for example) that could just as easily be interpreted as "oh you paint that the right way and it's a klansman".

I can totally see and respect the attitude of "that makes me uncomfortable, I don't want to buy it." Nurgle miniatures make me uncomfortable, I've seen too many nasty diseases and injuries through the course of my research and professional work to want to hold something like that up to my face and paint it. it's where the attitude becomes "that makes me uncomfortable it should not be allowed to be sold" that I start to scratch my head. ESPECIALLY with a miniature where you'd have to paint it a particular way for it to really become a problem. I could take and paint plenty of miniatures in a way that would REALLY make people uncomfortable, but that'd be on me, not on the miniature.

If you took that guy and painted him with a black hood, I guarantee you 99% of the time the reaction to him would be: black hood, axe, executioner.

Completely this.

Hoods, even pointy ones, have so many other connotations/historical basis outside the Klan that we can't just stop having them represented at all because someone might be offended by it.

I suck at sculpting, so Ive been eyeing up Frostgrave cultists as a means of doing a couple of executioner figures. Very glad to have the option.

Unless someone is specifically making explicit Klan figures, I don't see the issue and even then I kind of don't. You can buy Islamic Jihadi figures and actual Nazi figures for other systems/rulesets.


Also, what's the statute of limitations something being enough to make someone uncomfortable/offended?


I have some Spanish ancestry and you can buy figures that represent the Moors who pillaged and enslaved their way through the country. You can buy figures of Vikings who likely did the same to my British ancestors.

Hell, the Aztecs brutalised and enslaved most of the people's around them, should Lizardmen not be allowed to have an Aztec-inspired aesthetic for fear of offending someone?


There's been so much brutality and ill treatment meted out by human beings to each other at all points in time, I'm not sure specific examples deserve to be singled out unless the product utilising a group/event is gratuitous in it's representation. Even then, I'm inclined to let the market decide in all but the most extreme cases.

 Yodhrin wrote:
The problem is that plenty of us don't agree that self-censoring works of art because they might cause offence to some people is "doing better".

That's nice and all, but GW is a publicly traded company that is answerable to its shareholders. It wouldn't be the first company to put something out and then realize it may not be interpreted the way intended. Right now they may be trying to figure out what they do, be it release it, release it with a disclaimer or shelf it. This isn't the free-wheeling '80s where you can have Nazi orks anymore, this is a multimillion dollar company that has concerns that can't let one model ruin.

I know what the model is, but I can understand why they got gun-shy when it was interpreted by today's consumer. I'm pretty sure rat skins will not be released looking like dime store injuns.

 Chairman Aeon wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
The problem is that plenty of us don't agree that self-censoring works of art because they might cause offence to some people is "doing better".

That's nice and all, but GW is a publicly traded company that is answerable to its shareholders. It wouldn't be the first company to put something out and then realize it may not be interpreted the way intended. Right now they may be trying to figure out what they do, be it release it, release it with a disclaimer or shelf it. This isn't the free-wheeling '80s where you can have Nazi orks anymore, this is a multimillion dollar company that has concerns that can't let one model ruin.

I know what the model is, but I can understand why they got gun-shy when it was interpreted by today's consumer. I'm pretty sure rat skins will not be released looking like dime store injuns.

Clearly not

https://bitsofwar.com/search?controller=search&orderby=position&orderway=desc&search_query=iron+reich

 Crimson wrote:
I think combining the pointy hoods with the nooses is perhaps a step too far.

Ha, I'll be honest, when I went and gave the figure another look I saw the nooses and said "oh, ok, yeah, people are definitely reading into this one, that is CLEARLY an executioner.

First, the hood isn't all that pointy, and it doesn't have a crease in the center, and it has an uncovered mouth (obscured by the camera angle) and studs in it. Also, you can see that he's not wearing a robe, he's wearing regular clothing with an apron.

Nooses by themselves could have indicated the Klan (particularly if the model were, for example, holding a noose as his weapon) but a noose combined with an axe, that's an executioner.

If his hat didn't have a tiny bit of height to it, he'd look like this guy https://sep.yimg.com/ay/mydivascloset/executioner-halloween-costume-for-men-15.jpg

 Chairman Aeon wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
The problem is that plenty of us don't agree that self-censoring works of art because they might cause offence to some people is "doing better".

That's nice and all, but GW is a publicly traded company that is answerable to its shareholders. It wouldn't be the first company to put something out and then realize it may not be interpreted the way intended. Right now they may be trying to figure out what they do, be it release it, release it with a disclaimer or shelf it. This isn't the free-wheeling '80s where you can have Nazi orks anymore, this is a multimillion dollar company that has concerns that can't let one model ruin.

I know what the model is, but I can understand why they got gun-shy when it was interpreted by today's consumer. I'm pretty sure rat skins will not be released looking like dime store injuns.

I daresay the majority of consumers don't see anything wrong, unfortunately social media allows minority views of any kind to make a dispproportionate amount of noise. A lot GWs market is outside the US and will be far less likely to make any unsavoury associations with the KKK.

 Chairman Aeon wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
The problem is that plenty of us don't agree that self-censoring works of art because they might cause offence to some people is "doing better".

That's nice and all, but GW is a publicly traded company that is answerable to its shareholders. It wouldn't be the first company to put something out and then realize it may not be interpreted the way intended. Right now they may be trying to figure out what they do, be it release it, release it with a disclaimer or shelf it. This isn't the free-wheeling '80s where you can have Nazi orks anymore, this is a multimillion dollar company that has concerns that can't let one model ruin.

I know what the model is, but I can understand why they got gun-shy when it was interpreted by today's consumer. I'm pretty sure rat skins will not be released looking like dime store injuns.

But that's what's utterly ridiculous about this, if indeed it is the reason why the model went walkabout - it's not "today's consumer", it's a fractional minority of people who's level of strident outrage is directly inversely proportional to their actual influence or purchasing power. Only by capitulating to them could GW or their shareholders ever be harmed by their antics, because most people - of any generation - don't give a gak either way, and many of the remainder actively disagree. And if GW's goal is to protect their broader interests, again, we come back to the other part of the question - where does it end? Vast, vast portions of GW's IPs are either demonstrably inspired by offensive things, could plausibly be interpreted as being inspired by offensive things, could be read as being inspired by offensive things by someone with a cynical mindset, or meet the definition of "cultural appropriation" - if they were to give in over this(again, stressing that we don't actually know for sure this stuff is why the pics got pulled), the likely outcome is not that the outrage machine will be placated, the likely outcome is they'll move on to the next thing and then the one after that. Eventually GW would either have to draw a line in the sand or else essentially discard their entire IPs, so they might as well draw it now and tell these folk politely but firmly to either buy or not, but if not to jog right on.

Any "controversy" that would stir up would require a lot less effort for GW to deal with than the amount they've been expending trying to suppress and manage the anger over the recent FW price changes.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Chairman Aeon wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
The problem is that plenty of us don't agree that self-censoring works of art because they might cause offence to some people is "doing better".

That's nice and all, but GW is a publicly traded company that is answerable to its shareholders. It wouldn't be the first company to put something out and then realize it may not be interpreted the way intended. Right now they may be trying to figure out what they do, be it release it, release it with a disclaimer or shelf it. This isn't the free-wheeling '80s where you can have Nazi orks anymore, this is a multimillion dollar company that has concerns that can't let one model ruin.

I know what the model is, but I can understand why they got gun-shy when it was interpreted by today's consumer. I'm pretty sure rat skins will not be released looking like dime store injuns.

But that's what's utterly ridiculous about this, if indeed it is the reason why the model went walkabout - it's not "today's consumer", it's a fractional minority of people who's level of strident outrage is directly inversely proportional to their actual influence or purchasing power. Only by capitulating to them could GW or their shareholders ever be harmed by their antics, because most people - of any generation - don't give a gak either way, and many of the remainder actively disagree. And if GW's goal is to protect their broader interests, again, we come back to the other part of the question - where does it end? Vast, vast portions of GW's IPs are either demonstrably inspired by offensive things, could plausibly be interpreted as being inspired by offensive things, could be read as being inspired by offensive things by someone with a cynical mindset, or meet the definition of "cultural appropriation" - if they were to give in over this(again, stressing that we don't actually know for sure this stuff is why the pics got pulled), the likely outcome is not that the outrage machine will be placated, the likely outcome is they'll move on to the next thing and then the one after that. Eventually GW would either have to draw a line in the sand or else essentially discard their entire IPs, so they might as well draw it now and tell these folk politely but firmly to either buy or not, but if not to jog right on.

Any "controversy" that would stir up would require a lot less effort for GW to deal with than the amount they've been expending trying to suppress and manage the anger over the recent FW price changes.

I have a shiny nickel that says by next week they pull the same thing they did with the GSC aberrants where they handed this model back to the paint studio and said "gimme one with a BLACK hood please."

All the scenarios in Gang War 1 have been reduced to 3d only in the new Leader's accessories pack. Rescue Mission can for example no longer be played on Zone Mortalis. All the scenarios have changed (sometimes random, sometimes improvements). But why did they remove this flexibility?

The quick reference sheets is more than just a quick reference. It's a rules update (stealth FAQ/Errata), for the first time we have things like Toxin not ignoring armour save on paper and updates to how blast weapons work. It also include random (and nonsensical) rule changes like how sentries work.

So, what's coming next after Delaque? Presumably a N17 Outlander expansion? Or a book about one of the other hives? Plastic Enforcers should be among the next from what was said at the Fests.

People were screaming their lungs out for "Le Arbites" so I guess that's next.

That's going to be a 40k release from what I have heard. Enforcers though are a Necromunda plastic kit afaik.

I think a lot of people who haven't been paying attention will be disappointed. They're shouting for "Enforcers" when what I think they mean is "Adeptus Arbites models with Necromunda rules". That's not happening. We'll get some Palatine Hive Enforcers, but what they'll look like, and how they'll be equipped, is anyone's guess. Arbites don't concern themselves with the Underhive - they're more concerned with making sure the planetary governor isn't evading his taxes - and the idea that the Necromunda Enforcers ape the uniforms and equipment of the Arbites looks like something that's going away. I think that was only an excuse because the models they sculpted weren't needed for 40k (a bit like the Ash Waste sniper and the Eldar Farseer).

Warhams-77 wrote:
So, what's coming next after Delaque? Presumably a N17 Outlander expansion? Or a book about one of the other hives? Plastic Enforcers should be among the next from what was said at the Fests.

Probably the old Outlander Gangs. Cover what peeps may have in their cupboards first seems a smart move.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:
So, what's coming next after Delaque? Presumably a N17 Outlander expansion? Or a book about one of the other hives? Plastic Enforcers should be among the next from what was said at the Fests.

Probably the old Outlander Gangs. Cover what peeps may have in their cupboards first seems a smart move.

Dunno like, they were showing off those Guilder concepts pretty early, we might end up getting those prior to/interspersed with the classic Outlanders.

They were showing off nurgle concept art very early for blood bowl, but it didn't realize into finished product until almost 2 years later.

Plus I don't think those Guilder gangs will be plastic releases.