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 being given painting lessons at the Seattle Bunker and having that perspective, I have to say that the Necromance you guys are trashing is really a pretty amazing piece of work. The colors are dark, yes, but not in a "Space Marine in Black Armor" way. The shading and highlighting is done masterfully and way more skillfully than most people on this forum could do. The details on the face, hands, and skulls are really well done given this is such a "simple" model.

As for the complaints of it being a stock model, did nobody notice the skeleton on the base holding the book? Why do people insist on massive conversion work before considering something Slayer worthy? I think the subtleness here is sublime and is certainly worthy of some award. Why not the Slayer Sword?

Terraformer wrote:There are ridiculously good artists and builders out there, people with talent to produce mind-bogglingly detailed pieces from spare parts and putty. But you rarely see that kind of stuff featured on GW's website or magazines, because it isn't necessarily what a company that sells retail products to kids wants to showcase at every opportunity. When you're selling a product like models and miniatures, you want the average joe consumer to look at the promo materials and say "Hey, I could do that!" This sells more paints, more figures and pulls people from different skill levels into the hobby. Sucks for the passionate hobbyist, but like I said, it's their company.

This was really insightful. Seems like the best explanation to me.

Breotan wrote:I'm being given painting lessons at the Seattle Bunker and having that perspective, I have to say that the Necromance you guys are trashing is really a pretty amazing piece of work.

I don't think anyone was trashing it, simply pointing out that it doesn't seem on par with what you'd expect from the best of the best (of the best). There are a great deal of painters here that are better than I, yet not as good as that entry; it's all about where on the scale it is. I agree that it was a very good, 'Eavy Metal level paintjob but it didn't really strike me as a Slayer Sword winner, as well. But perhaps the grots that won are a better illustration of what people are saying than this one.

Eh, maybe. Well, like has been said, we don't really have shots of all the models that it was put up against, either.

Terraformer wrote:you want the average joe consumer to look at the promo materials and say "Hey, I could do that!" This sells more paints, more figures and pulls people from different skill levels into the hobby. Sucks for the passionate hobbyist, but like I said, it's their company.

Did you see across the page in the WD that featured the Necromancer, the rotating music box with the knights quest displayed at multiple stages? I've read an article by Alan Merrit about not awarding prizes to pieces that don't conform to GW's vision of their IP, but Slayer Sword winning pieces have in the past ranged from the plain to the outrageous.

Theres no agenda to promote accesible pieces, or recent releases.

Breotan wrote:Eh, maybe. Well, like has been said, we don't really have shots of all the models that it was put up against, either.

Good point, maybe the other models really were models I could have pulled off