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.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Are you really going to notice 1 duplicate in every 5 or 10 models when you can make small visual changes with just a little paint?

I think it will probably depend on the exact pose. If the poses are all fairly 'normal' it probably won't be too bad (so long as you don't put any of the clones next to each other ).

The issue will be if you have 6 Orks all dramatically holding up rokket launchers or something.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Personally I'm more irritated by mono-pose characters, given that GW has demonstrated quite clearly that they're perfectly capable of doing non-monopose characters cheaper than monopose characters with the Exalted Sorcerers kit ($60/3 instead of $35/1, and the kit is way better than giving us one mono-pose TS Sorcerer would have been).

Oh man, I love the Exalted Sorcerer kit. I wish other factions had kits like that for their HQs.

That said, it's kinda sad that the box has such a massive wealth of different options and then you look at the actual unit and you've got maybe three options when it comes to wargear.

 vipoid wrote:
Oh man, I love the Exalted Sorcerer kit. I wish other factions had kits like that for their HQs.

The Exalted Sorcerer kit (and the entire 1KSons line at the time) represented the end-point for multi-pose kits filled with options. The very next major release of similar style was Death Guard. The equivalent kit to the Exalted Sorcerer kit was the Deathshroud kit... 3 mono-pose optionless Terminators on tiny character sprues.

And it's been that way ever since...

 vipoid wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Personally I'm more irritated by mono-pose characters, given that GW has demonstrated quite clearly that they're perfectly capable of doing non-monopose characters cheaper than monopose characters with the Exalted Sorcerers kit ($60/3 instead of $35/1, and the kit is way better than giving us one mono-pose TS Sorcerer would have been).

Oh man, I love the Exalted Sorcerer kit. I wish other factions had kits like that for their HQs.

That said, it's kinda sad that the box has such a massive wealth of different options and then you look at the actual unit and you've got maybe three options when it comes to wargear.

I did start writing 40k Necromunda because I was fed up with everything having almost no options, yeah.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Oh man, I love the Exalted Sorcerer kit. I wish other factions had kits like that for their HQs.

The Exalted Sorcerer kit (and the entire 1KSons line at the time) represented the end-point for multi-pose kits filled with options. The very next major release of similar style was Death Guard. The equivalent kit to the Exalted Sorcerer kit was the Deathshroud kit... 3 mono-pose optionless Terminators on tiny character sprues.

And it's been that way ever since...

Yes, and it makes many of us very sad.

funny

over years the main complain for Warmachine/Hordes models was the Monopose of lack of variation in units

the individual model looked more natural/better/etc. but havin duplicates in a unit of 10 was a big no-go for that price because Monopose need be cheaper than Multipose not the other way around

same with historical models, main complain from GW costumers was always the monopose and duplicates although they are cheaper and meant to be used in R&F units
(like how a WW2 Box is worse than Cadians because of the number of duplicates if you make more than 10 models)

and now
people celebrate the more expensive monopose kits because how the unit looks does not matter as long as the individual looks good


this is the same as with the rules
if any other company is doing it, it is bad because GW makes it the other way
and as soon as GW uses it, it is the best thing that ever happend

 kodos wrote:
and now
people celebrate the more expensive monopose kits because how the unit looks does not matter as long as the individual looks good

It's just the cycle of fawning sycophantic fanboyism that GW receives.

When I first pointed it out the usual suspects said I was wrong, I was crazy, and that nothing had changed. Then when it became too obvious to ignore "You're wrong!" became "So what?" with all the usual excuses (ie. "They're not that posable now, so it's not that big a difference!"). Then it moved onto "We like it because they're dynamic!" or "The old ones were bad anyway!". At the moment it's "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!".

Pretty soon the next step is "You should be thankful there are even options at all!".

I've unfortunately seen the same discussion play out if you bring up scale creep. First people deny that it's happening, then they say that it is happening but not much, then they say the new models look better anyway. It's a bit tiring.

I think monopose becomes worse the more dynamic a model is and the more "special" a unit is.

The fact that even 40% of all Guardsmen are holding their lasgun in exactly the same way is not noticable to me.
You don't pay much attention to basic grunts, and there's only so many ways to hold a rifle so it doesn't look out of place.

But when every 5th Banshee is doing the same backflip? Yeah that gets grating.
Banshees are beautiful units that hold a significant place on the tabletop so they draw attention. Similarly, a backflip is a very dynamic pose that looks weird if everyone is doing in perfect sync.

I have to agree with the GW fanboyism.
A while ago I floated the idea with my group of "reactions" in 40k, that got shot down hard.
Now GW has announced reactions in AoS, I pointed to that and now people were much more amicable to the idea. Although until GW does it for 40k, neutral is the best I'm gonna get.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 kodos wrote:
and now
people celebrate the more expensive monopose kits because how the unit looks does not matter as long as the individual looks good

It's just the cycle of fawning sycophantic fanboyism that GW receives.

When I first pointed it out the usual suspects said I was wrong, I was crazy, and that nothing had changed. Then when it became too obvious to ignore "You're wrong!" became "So what?" with all the usual excuses (ie. "They're not that posable now, so it's not that big a difference!"). Then it moved onto "We like it because they're dynamic!" or "The old ones were bad anyway!". At the moment it's "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!".

Pretty soon the next step is "You should be thankful there are even options at all!".

Ain't that the truth

Personally, I don't have much of an issue with feet and torso not being posable, nobz and flash gits have always been that way. My biggest issue is that most modern kits only have one set of arms fitting one body, with little chance of switching stuff around without cutting and modeling. Nobz being mono-pose didn't matter much because you could attach myriads of different wargear from various kits to each one and you had different heads, different variants of the same gun. In comparison, every unit of blightlord terminators has the same guy with the same pose, same shoulder pads and the same helmet holding the flail and the same other guy is holding the autocannon or blight launcher. Plague marines are the same, and the only redeeming thing being that there were 21 mono-posed sculpts of them, though some cost an arm and a leg. Especially plague marine champions each have a very unique look, I'm glad I managed to have four different ones as even a single dublicate sticks out like a sore thumb.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I'll take monopose Orks for more dynamic poses that don't look like they're trying to balance a tea tray across their ass.

Now I want to an the army of Ork-butlers.

What? No french maid Orks?

Also I had to shout out Tabletop Inquirer for summing things up nicely:

The only thing I'm going to mourn is having to painstakingly carve the hand off the shoota if I ever want to have an ork holding a shoota one-handed. After the first box of shoota boyz I ever built, I got sick of them all having the same underslung poses, and most of my shoota boyz are holding them one handed.

I really hope there's a couple one-handed shootas in the box.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Pretty soon the next step is "You should be thankful there are even options at all!".

My guess is that the next step will be "it is good that there are no option in the kit so people don't get confused which wargear to use or wich weapon setup is the best"

 kodos wrote:
funny

over years the main complain for Warmachine/Hordes models was the Monopose of lack of variation in units

the individual model looked more natural/better/etc. but havin duplicates in a unit of 10 was a big no-go for that price because Monopose need be cheaper than Multipose not the other way around

same with historical models, main complain from GW costumers was always the monopose and duplicates although they are cheaper and meant to be used in R&F units
(like how a WW2 Box is worse than Cadians because of the number of duplicates if you make more than 10 models)

and now
people celebrate the more expensive monopose kits because how the unit looks does not matter as long as the individual looks good


this is the same as with the rules
if any other company is doing it, it is bad because GW makes it the other way
and as soon as GW uses it, it is the best thing that ever happend

I've never minded duplicates among my models. Especially among anything that's supposed to be wearing a "uniform" since they're supposed to look, you know, "uniform". Even with Orks there are only so many combinations of poses and wargear that look good and honestly I like the design of the new ones over the old ones. As I've complained in the past: the weird butt jutting for the old models was weird and looked dumb. Seriously, looks like the whole army is twerking.

there is a difference between uniform and duplicates

monopose bodies that just have 1 pair of arms and 5 different heads, but those being free to pose create a uniform look without ever having duplicates

this creates a more natural look within a unit because no model is exactly the same

while with monopose models, although more dynamic you get duplicates within a unit and if every model with a plasma gun is exactly the same, it looks odd

there is a reason why people searched for ways to convert their special weapons in a Guard Army instead of using the 1 metal model 10 times, even if the bits needed were more expensive

and now people say that using the same model 10 times is an advantage we should be happy to have

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 kodos wrote:
and now
people celebrate the more expensive monopose kits because how the unit looks does not matter as long as the individual looks good

It's just the cycle of fawning sycophantic fanboyism that GW receives.

When I first pointed it out the usual suspects said I was wrong, I was crazy, and that nothing had changed. Then when it became too obvious to ignore "You're wrong!" became "So what?" with all the usual excuses (ie. "They're not that posable now, so it's not that big a difference!"). Then it moved onto "We like it because they're dynamic!" or "The old ones were bad anyway!". At the moment it's "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!".

Pretty soon the next step is "You should be thankful there are even options at all!".

I've always liked them because they're more dynamic in general but I've been playing an all pewter army since 5th where I had three troop models and one of each of the special weapon and heavy weapon models to work with across the entire army. I stopped worrying about two people having the same pose and wargear a long time ago. You can do a lot with just a little paint to add some diversity into the models just by varying some skin tones, or the colors of the clothes they're wearing. And yes, twerking Orks were always bad.

I long for the days of the customizability of my metal Adeptus Arbites and Sisters of Battle... Oh wait...

Orks really struggle with this I feel, particularly the vehicles. Although I don't necessarily fault GW for that.
It's hard to suggest an extremely ramshackle look, when you can only produce 1 vehicle kit.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Orks really struggle with this I feel, particularly the vehicles. Although I don't necessarily fault GW for that.
It's hard to suggest an extremely ramshackle look, when you can only produce 1 vehicle kit.

If only there were some way for ork players to introduce variety into their vehicle models through some kind of dark alchemical ritual involving bits of plasticard cut into scrappy triangular shapes, spare ork bitz, and any other vehicle model kit in existence.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Orks really struggle with this I feel, particularly the vehicles. Although I don't necessarily fault GW for that.
It's hard to suggest an extremely ramshackle look, when you can only produce 1 vehicle kit.

They released five completely different vehicles recently, but the army structure tells me that I can only play three of them.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 kodos wrote:
and now
people celebrate the more expensive monopose kits because how the unit looks does not matter as long as the individual looks good

It's just the cycle of fawning sycophantic fanboyism that GW receives.

When I first pointed it out the usual suspects said I was wrong, I was crazy, and that nothing had changed. Then when it became too obvious to ignore "You're wrong!" became "So what?" with all the usual excuses (ie. "They're not that posable now, so it's not that big a difference!"). Then it moved onto "We like it because they're dynamic!" or "The old ones were bad anyway!". At the moment it's "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!".

Pretty soon the next step is "You should be thankful there are even options at all!".

Or maybe people just like new models and have a hard time reconciling your concerns with theirs. Calling it sycophantic fanboyism really doesn't bridge that gap.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Orks really struggle with this I feel, particularly the vehicles. Although I don't necessarily fault GW for that.
It's hard to suggest an extremely ramshackle look, when you can only produce 1 vehicle kit.

As much as I enjoy the ork aesthetic, having multiples of 'unique' looking vehicles has always been off-putting for me. So I've always greatly modified WW II vehicles for my ork army. Now if GW made vehicles more modular, that would be fantastic: pairs of wheels, track sets, frames, possibilities to extend them, plates and bits mostly separate, etc.

I'd be all on board with that!

Regarding monopose models, this is the sort of thing I hate seeing:



I don't know if these actually count as monopose or not but it's the same issue either way. Four of them are fine but look at the plasmagunner - instead of holding his gun normally (like he's about to fire it) he's holding it up in the air and pointing with his off-hand.

This is fine if you've one got one unit but when you start fielding multiples the fact that every plasmagunner is holding his gun in one hand will start to get very noticeable very quickly.

And this, I will remind you, is a unit that can potentially have 4 plasmagunners. There are no variant models with plasmaguns so if you make four then your Command Squad is going to start looking less like elite warriors and more like children on a school trip.

"Sir! Sir! Look over here, sir!"

"No, sir! Please, sir! There's a far more exciting thing over here, sir!"

It's kind of funny, but the plasma gun is the only special weapon in that kit being held like that. Everyone else has their weapon up and at the ready.

That plasma gun is a great example!

I had another problem relating to these poses when I built my Blood Angels Tactical squads.
You can assemble a guy as it he's reloading.
I thought that's awesome! A cool variant pose to break up the squads.
But when got to playing the game, I noticed a problem. He looks like a sergeant. Since he's doing something special, he looks like he's meant to be special. More than once I've removed the actual sergeant by mistake, believing that guy to be the sergeant.

Generic models looking generic actually has a very useful in game benefit.

I've actually started using that reloading guy as the squad no.2, so when I run 2 five man units he's the second sergeant. This is instead of the guy I deliberately built as the second sergeant, who has a fancier helmet and backpack but a more neutral pose.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
It's kind of funny, but the plasma gun is the only special weapon in that kit being held like that. Everyone else has their weapon up and at the ready.

Yeah, it works reasonably well for the Scions because they at least have some posability with their legs and heads, and you can adjust the angle of the arms.

Actual true monopose models on the other hand can get pretty frustrating. I had to put a lot of work into making these four plasma gunners look distinct. It'd be considerably easier if they were plastic, but still a hassle for your average hobbyist.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Or maybe people just like new models and have a hard time reconciling your concerns with theirs. Calling it sycophantic fanboyism really doesn't bridge that gap.

Why should one want to bridge the gap with someone one thinks is a sycophant? That makes no sense, only normal reaction would be either character assasination or ostracization. Possibly both.

That is a good example that helps me understand the concern more. Though isn't this kit fairly flexible ( aside from the gun )? This seems more like a design mistake by GW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Or maybe people just like new models and have a hard time reconciling your concerns with theirs. Calling it sycophantic fanboyism really doesn't bridge that gap.

Why should one want to bridge the gap with someone one thinks is a sycophant? That makes no sense, only normal reaction would be either character assasination or ostracization. Possibly both.

And that's why the world is so gakky right now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:


For me I paint the model to where I can enjoy it up close, but I typically worry very little about duplicates. When I'm playing and the models are 3' away there is just no way for me to worry about them being overly distinct so it becomes hard for me to develop a personal concern.

On some of the larger models I'll do a bit more - like with contemptors, but that's about it.

I think it's great that people put so much care and attention into their models. I do get why you feel the way you do. I just have a hard time having the same reaction to the newer monopose kits.

I can definitely agree there is an issue when you have weird combos like that where you have someone doing something like holding a gun in a pose like that, but when talking about stuff like the new Orks who are just posed like they're firing their guns? It doesn't carry over as much in my head I guess because it feels like something that fits the Orks.

Then again I've always seen Orks as generally ramshackle in their approach to equipment, but not in the camp that everything they own has to be perfectly unique.

Price creep, greed, fast treadmill, ghosting armies...in essence, we got off the treadmill. We are done.

If people want to complain about GW, but continue to buy the product, well, they will not care. Personally, I suspect the bubble will burst for a panoply of reasons.

As to the rules, they are adding more and more bloat, again. AoS 3.0 is where WFB was likely in the fifth to the sixth edition. We are off that treadmill as well.

There are other games, and an alternate ruleset that we find is faster and far more enjoyable to play. And I do not even need to address the fluff, which fits the marketing department. There is no way the DA would have happily accepted Primaris just because...secretive, first and second companies, canon, or what used to be.

So...sooner or later that will change. The bubble will burst...and as far as I am concerned they are a toy company, that makes some neat toys, that are overpriced, with sucky rules.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
That is a good example that helps me understand the concern more. Though isn't this kit fairly flexible ( aside from the gun )? This seems more like a design mistake by GW.

kind of, or they thought it looks cool and no one will ever use more than 1 Plasma Gun in their list

and this is the main problem, the models are designed with only 1 of each is only ever used per army list, and with this in mind the new design works very well and you get much better looking collection than before
yet as soon as you want to include more of the same unit it starts looking odd


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I can definitely agree there is an issue when you have weird combos like that where you have someone doing something like holding a gun in a pose like that, but when talking about stuff like the new Orks who are just posed like they're firing their guns?

we have to see how the kit looks like, but because of the other recent boxes (and rules changes coming with it), I have the feeling that there will be either all Orcs holding their gun the very same way or we got some very unique poses with each boy that start looking strange as soon as there are more than 10 models around

 kodos wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I can definitely agree there is an issue when you have weird combos like that where you have someone doing something like holding a gun in a pose like that, but when talking about stuff like the new Orks who are just posed like they're firing their guns?

we have to see how the kit looks like, but because of the other recent boxes (and rules changes coming with it), I have the feeling that there will be either all Orcs holding their gun the very same way or we got some very unique poses with each boy that start looking strange as soon as there are more than 10 models around

There are only so many ways to shoot a gun, and as goofy as the Orks are they still know how to use a gun properly (even if they enjoy the noise and random carnage said guns cause over careful targeting).