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 feel that the design of the Mark of Tzeentch is the least distinct, iconic or memorable out of the four Marks of Chaos. IMHO, the Mark of Khorne is the clear winner when it comes to logo design.

If you could re-design the Mark of Tzeentch for GW officially, what would your logo look like?

What about nurgle? It's a triangle of Os.

Maybe doing something from the infinity sign.

I wouldn't change the logo. I would however change the rules. Mark of Tzeeetch is a mess. There is no way in hell that +1 Inv or re roll inv saves of 1's correlates with it being a mass of ever changing madness and wizardry.

Mark of tzeentch would become a random table of shape changing abilities that you had to roll on every turn and a free random spell.

Maximus Bitch wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 n0t_u wrote:
What about nurgle? It's a triangle of Os.

O's and arrows.

the Tzeentch logo is the worst in my opinion so I'm starting on it first. Feel free to post any sketches you may have on Nurgle though.

Feel free to post any you come up with for Tzeentch as well.

I just disagree. I think the Tzeentch logo is very flavourful and incredibly distinct.

It also isn't 100% set in stone. It's supposed to be a little different from sigil to sigil because... well, Change?

 Purifier wrote:
I just disagree. I think the Tzeentch logo is very flavourful and incredibly distinct.

It also isn't 100% set in stone. It's supposed to be a little different from sigil to sigil because... well, Change?

I can't see it that way, all I see is some vague flame shape. Unlike the Khorne logo which is a distinctive character.

Maybe you could post of an image of a Mark of Tzeentch that you like.

As Purifier said, it is a base of the fires of Tzeentch but it changes from design to design. Here's just a few:




And those are only a few of the countless number of designs out there.

The blue face above reminds me of the old cresent-moon-faced models of old, but I don't think it's a great fit.

Starting from scratch, I think it should be a left-facing cresent moon "clutching" a magical symbol, such as a pentagram; sort of a circle enveloping a (magic) circle to represent Tzeetch's "wheels within wheels" and sorcerous power.

Doesn't it make sense that the Mark of Tzeentch is an indefinite flame design though?

When I think about it, my guess is that the circle in the middle is an oracles crystal ball.

So the sign of Tzeentch is a crystal ball wreathed in the fires of change. IMO that's pretty apt.

Tzeentch symbol is my favourite

I would not change a thing. It evokes fire and change and is just right.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Doesn't it make sense that the Mark of Tzeentch is an indefinite flame design though?

Perhaps, but it doesn't work so well if you wanna put it on a hat or a shirt hahaha

I wouldn't change the tzeench symbol to a pentagram/pentacle
Especially not when those 2 symbols are connected to pagans and we are trying to shake the Hollywood devil worshippers image given to us

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
I wouldn't change the tzeench symbol to a pentagram/pentacle
Especially not when those 2 symbols are connected to pagans and we are trying to shake the Hollywood devil worshippers image given to us

Yeah, but the kind of people who are going to panic about the 'Hollywood devil worshippers image' are going to panic about any vaguely occult symbol.

(The really funny one is the upside-down cross, which somehow got associated with satanism in some peoples' heads despite starting out as St. Peter's trademark.)

 AnomanderRake wrote:

(The really funny one is the upside-down cross, which somehow got associated with satanism in some peoples' heads despite starting out as St. Peter's trademark.)

Some hollywood buff decided it would be cool if a Daemon turned all the crosses upside down in a room that were placed there to ward the Daemon away. Can't remember which movie it was though.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
I wouldn't change the tzeench symbol to a pentagram/pentacle
Especially not when those 2 symbols are connected to pagans and we are trying to shake the Hollywood devil worshippers image given to us

Yeah, but the kind of people who are going to panic about the 'Hollywood devil worshippers image' are going to panic about any vaguely occult symbol.

(The really funny one is the upside-down cross, which somehow got associated with satanism in some peoples' heads despite starting out as St. Peter's trademark.)

Yes but its still wrong. Considering the pentacle actually means power and protection while the pentagram invwicca for example represents the connection between the 4 elements + spirit/aether/divine. Neither symbol makes sense for tzeench. Its called cultural appropriation especially as I doubt gw would dare admit where they copied the symbols from.

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
I wouldn't change the tzeench symbol to a pentagram/pentacle
Especially not when those 2 symbols are connected to pagans and we are trying to shake the Hollywood devil worshippers image given to us

I would like to be an original symbol too.

Maybe a more stylized flame might work

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
I wouldn't change the tzeench symbol to a pentagram/pentacle
Especially not when those 2 symbols are connected to pagans and we are trying to shake the Hollywood devil worshippers image given to us

I would like to be an original symbol too.

Are we sure he isn't a lazy GW artist?

 oldzoggy wrote:
I wouldn't change the logo. I would however change the rules. Mark of Tzeeetch is a mess. There is no way in hell that +1 Inv or re roll inv saves of 1's correlates with it being a mass of ever changing madness and wizardry.

Mark of tzeentch would become a random table of shape changing abilities that you had to roll on every turn and a free random spell.

on the one hand I think the last thing this game needs is more tables I tend to agree on tzeench though I would limit it d3 changes rolled once for ach unit at the start of the game turn plus rerolling saves of a 1 to represent the future seeing/ clever/randomness

Also, if it were to change, this pretty much embodies Tzeentch, seriously or not, the followers of Tzeentch are the biggest trolls of the galaxy.

Until we get self-undulating plastics to make the mark twist, bend and reshape itself, I have no issue it. Sure, it is not as good as Slaanesh's which I think really capture's what (insert Slaanesh's preferred pronoun here) is about. However, I think it is better than Nurgle's which I would have a hard time recognizing, especially out of the game) if someone hadn't pointed out it is a play on the bio-hazard symbol.

I would draw it as a 3-pronged claw shaped like three middle fingers going up.

Because that's what Tzeentch does to you, to your army, to your game, and to your fluff.

 NivlacSupreme wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
I wouldn't change the tzeench symbol to a pentagram/pentacle
Especially not when those 2 symbols are connected to pagans and we are trying to shake the Hollywood devil worshippers image given to us

I would like to be an original symbol too.

Are we sure he isn't a lazy GW artist?

I assure you I don't work for GW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I would draw it as a 3-pronged claw shaped like three middle fingers going up.

Because that's what Tzeentch does to you, to your army, to your game, and to your fluff.

serious question bro

I like it, dont think it needs a change.

Table wrote:
I like it, dont think it needs a change.

I can't tell if your being sincere or if your making a pun...