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.

 Altruizine wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
It all comes down to whether or not you want 10 distinct and completely monopose models, or 10 fully customizable models that all look nearly the same per box.

lmao, thank you

The Society for the Preservation of Multiposeability don't get called out enough. They like to think that they were being "creative" when they were deciding whether to rotate a model's pistol arm 10 degrees or 12 degrees above the horizontal plane, or pair that pistol arm with the torso that had two grenades, a pouch, and a fang sculpted on it versus the torso that had two pouches, a knife, and a skull sculpted on it, but really they were wasting their time (or not, if they enjoyed the modelling/decision-making process). But their models were altogether indistinguishable from one another, or from any other player's army that used the same models.

The idea of "variance in a large group of models" being important -- or even identifiable -- is another big lie they tell. The only time they're actually consciously thinking about that is when they're posing the unit of models they don't actually play with for their long stay in the great glass cabinet in the sky (well, basement).

Well if you are incompetent assembler who can't do anything but clone troopers out of multipose models...well get better

Also the gw makes their monoposes in such a silly poses that repeatitions jump out like sore thumb. Too many tactical rocks and silly jumping poses.

tneva82 wrote:

Well if you are incompetent assembler who can't do anything but clone troopers out of multipose models...well get better

nothing funny here as most GW costumers are

as an example, Mantic saves on cost to get stuff done cheaper by not adding printed "guide" to the boxes on how to assembly the models
but parts that need to go together are marked with the same letter on the sprue, Arms with A make a pair, Legs with B make a pair

I am used to make scale models, I get a Mantic vehicle done in 10 minutes, 5 minutes to remove mold lines and sort things out, 5 to glue everything together
Infantry takes longer because there are possibilities and not just one-way to build the "sort things out" part can take up an hour or more until I am habby with a unit

yet you can find reviews on the web were people claim that those models are impossible to build, specially the vehicles and they had to send them back because without a guide they could not assembly them
(and I bought some of those models just to check if this is true because I like challanges and a scale model style SciFi model could be fun to build)

if this are the main costumers GW is dealing with, everything that is more complicated than a puzzle with 9 parts and guide on how to place them is impossible to sell in higher numbers (yet I would say it is the other way around, because everything gets too easy because there might be some complains, people get lazy and complain even more)

 kodos wrote:
what I recall is that GW wants to keep things as easy as possible

And the new insane jigsaw method is easier?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 kodos wrote:
what I recall is that GW wants to keep things as easy as possible

And the new insane jigsaw method is easier?

It's harder to mess up, if the model is designed to only go togather in precisely one way.

I'm puzzled by people defending the monopose direction. I started 40K because I was tired of the monopose models in lotr.
There's nothing "illusory" about putting together models the way you like and I've yet to see a Primaris squad that doesn't look always the same and that looks as diverse as the old tactical squads. Yes, Primaris have better proportions and if you see every pose only one time that's fine, but as soon as you approach army levels they usually look like crappy clone warriors. It's good that there are 28 different plague marines, enough to form an army even if you start your DG army in 8th edition or later. And the Plague marine box isn't as bad as people think as arms and heads are easily swappable. However these models still don't reach the range of different poses I could do with the old CSM as torsos and legs are connected and I'm lucky to have 50 old plague marines converted from various sources to walk alongside the new Plague Marines to prevent the clone look.

I'm building up Orks right now (even Snakebites) but for what I'm planning I feel these new Orks won't be that useful due to monoposes. As soon as GW hints they'll be replacing the old boyz kit I'll buy three of these. Modeling, building and converting is at least half the fun of the hobby for me. If you don't care about that part I understand it if you like monopose.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I'm puzzled by people defending the monopose direction. I started 40K because I was tired of the monopose models in lotr.
There's nothing "illusory" about putting together models the way you like and I've yet to see a Primaris squad that doesn't look always the same and as dynamic as the old tactical squads. Yes, Primaris have better proportions and if you see every pose only one time that's fine, but as soon as you approach army levels they usually look like crappy clone warriors. It's good that there are 28 different plague marines, enough to form an army even if you start your DG army in 8th edition or later. And the Plague marine box isn't as bad as people think as arms and heads are easily swappable. However these models still don't reach the range of different poses I could do with the old CSM as torsos and legs are connected and I'm lucky to have 50 old plague marines converted from various sources to walk alongside the new Plague Marines to prevent the clone look.

I'm building up Orks right now (even Snakebites) but for what I'm planning I feel these new Orks won't be that useful due to monoposes. As soon as GW hints they'll be replacing the old boyz kit I'll buy three of these. Modeling, building and converting is at least half the fun of the hobby for me. If you don't care about that part I understand it if you like monopose.

I absolutely love converting and customising models, so I totally get that aspect. But I just hate the bizarre hyperbolic disinformation based panic here. The primaris models are fine; they are more than fine, they're in fact pretty amazing. How many have you assembled? You can freely mix and match all the arms and the position of the bodies are actually natural looking. That the legs are not separate is not a non-issue; the resulting poses look much better than what the old marines could produce. Same with the sisters of battle, you can easily mix and match the bits.

it depends on the specific box, same with Stormcast

with some you can do a lot of things and they look good, for others you get 3 base models and nothing more

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I'm puzzled by people defending the monopose direction. I started 40K because I was tired of the monopose models in lotr.
There's nothing "illusory" about putting together models the way you like and I've yet to see a Primaris squad that doesn't look always the same and that looks as diverse as the old tactical squads. Yes, Primaris have better proportions and if you see every pose only one time that's fine, but as soon as you approach army levels they usually look like crappy clone warriors. It's good that there are 28 different plague marines, enough to form an army even if you start your DG army in 8th edition or later. And the Plague marine box isn't as bad as people think as arms and heads are easily swappable. However these models still don't reach the range of different poses I could do with the old CSM as torsos and legs are connected and I'm lucky to have 50 old plague marines converted from various sources to walk alongside the new Plague Marines to prevent the clone look.

I'm building up Orks right now (even Snakebites) but for what I'm planning I feel these new Orks won't be that useful due to monoposes. As soon as GW hints they'll be replacing the old boyz kit I'll buy three of these. Modeling, building and converting is at least half the fun of the hobby for me. If you don't care about that part I understand it if you like monopose.

I used to be a big fan of multipose, but after a while I found varying the arm and hip position by a few degrees doesn't actually make models look unique. I can still spot the "axe Ork", or the "chain choppa Ork", or the "furry rim hat Ork" from a mile away.

But we'll see what GW do with this set. Some monopose kits are really awful, others aren't too bad. I reckon a Savage Ork horde looks pretty good given the limited poses, and having creative interchangeability can go a long way.

But yeah, it's always going to be a compromise with Orks because of the exposed muscles. To pose a model in a way that looks decent, the muscles have to be appropriately sculpted, so having multipose models there's compromises that need to be made. I'm sure we've all seen many Orks where the modeller has used too extreme of an angle on the arm and put the deltoids in a completely silly place (in spite of the models having very weird looking delts in the first place to accommodate that motion).

Reminder that in the current Boyz kit, the arms just awkwardly terminate into a flat circle on the side of the torso.

Which I've never heard anyone complain about before...

Man... when this monopose stuff started it was all "You're being crazy! They're not doing that. They're just as posable as they were before".

Now it's "But monopose is better!"

Frickin' wild...

Honestly, having made way too many rifleman armies I think that easy to build monoposes with head options are best.

The Cadians for example seem offer options but really it's an illusion of choice, which version of rifle at chest height will you glue together.

Similarly the more recent GSC models seems to offer a ton of options but not all arms and legs can go with each body and basically it boils down to autogun or shotgun (plus a head choice which I applaud).

The 2010s Chaos Cultists and BSF traitor guard are much better in that respect with more natural poses and easier to build models. With separate heads to differentiate them they would be perfect.

My ideal rifleman type kit would be one or two piece bodies, interchangeable heads and 2 or 3 armless guys per box to make specialists and leaders.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Which I've never heard anyone complain about before...

Man... when this monopose stuff started it was all "You're being crazy! They're not doing that. They're just as posable as they were before".

Now it's "But monopose is better!"

Frickin' wild...

For me, I find some of the “monopose can never ever be converted ever” stuff a bit weird.

Yes, the multi part kits were amazing to work with, especially Marines who got the thick end of it.

But before then, people were converting static metal models, involving all sorts of extra steps.

So the hyperbolic take on it (which is not say all takes on it are hyperbolic) is daft, as plastic is waaaaay easier than what we had to go through.

And pre-multipose conversions weren't that common as not all can do cutting and greenstuff.

So now we are back to world where only those who can cut and sculpt out of greenstuff parts damaged by cutting can do conversions that don't look like gak.

No way you try to mislead that's step backward.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Which I've never heard anyone complain about before...

Man... when this monopose stuff started it was all "You're being crazy! They're not doing that. They're just as posable as they were before".

Now it's "But monopose is better!"

Frickin' wild...

I guess you haven't been paying attention then.

I liked multipose stuff when it first came up, like, 20 years ago or whenever it was. But over the years I've learned to appreciate monopose stuff in certain circumstances. Obviously not ALL circumstances, but a lot of the time I prefer it. Exoskeleton type models don't really benefit from being monopose.

For one, when it produces nicer looking models. For two, when it's a horde of similar-ish enough models that it doesn't look much different whether they're monopose or multipose (like, I prefer the monopose Termagaunts, the monopose WHFB Orc Boyz and I'm 50/50 on the monopose Cadians).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
And pre-multipose conversions weren't that common as not all can do cutting and greenstuff.

So now we are back to world where only those who can cut and sculpt out of greenstuff parts damaged by cutting can do conversions that don't look like gak.

No way you try to mislead that's step backward.

Old school monopose was usually metal, so it's not really comparable to those good old days. Plastic conversions aren't nearly as difficult.

But lets face it, if you're using a monopose kit that looks like gak as your basis, your conversions probably look like gak also

Standards of both model kits and modelling have improved since GW started releasing multipose plastics. Like, back when the multipose plastic Space Marines first came out (3rd edition I think?), I made a whole bunch of conversions that amounted to what I'd consider a pile of junk these days.

tneva82 wrote:
And pre-multipose conversions weren't that common as not all can do cutting and greenstuff.

So now we are back to world where only those who can cut and sculpt out of greenstuff parts damaged by cutting can do conversions that don't look like gak.

No way you try to mislead that's step backward.

Depends how wild you want to go.

A “proper” Frankenstein kit bash was absolutely easier with the old Marine kits. Legs from Kit A, torso from Kit B, Left arm Kit C and so on and so forth. Absolute doddle, and the separate waist with the right arms and legs could get dramatic poses with a minimum of fuss.

Now? Arms and heads are still easily swapped. And there’s an argument the great variety of torso and leg poses has reduced the need for tool assisted repositioning.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

My ideal rifleman type kit would be one or two piece bodies, interchangeable heads and 2 or 3 armless guys per box to make specialists and leaders.

like most historical kits are made

looking at the dismounted French Dragoons from Perry:
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0800/4331/products/FN130ssdis_2048x.jpg

make this a 5 models sprue with 6 guns and 8 heads and it would work (I mean it already works with the 2 models and you can build a full unit by adding the heads and weapons from the mounted Dragoons)

Not surprising the Perry's would get it right

One problem with monopose plastics is that they are not one-piece or even easy to build. It becomes more like building a model kit than anything creative. So all the work of multipart Lego-like plastics, none of the chances for creativity.

Yeah knives, putty, bits, it can be done but for a lot of them you have to build the model, then hack it up for a conversion. I've gotten models where the left foot was a separate part, or where half the model's head was attached to its arm. Not fun to convert!

And if we're not having fun, why are we here?

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Not surprising the Perry's would get it right

One problem with monopose plastics is that they are not one-piece or even easy to build. It becomes more like building a model kit than anything creative. So all the work of multipart Lego-like plastics, none of the chances for creativity.

Yeah knives, putty, bits, it can be done but for a lot of them you have to build the model, then hack it up for a conversion. I've gotten models where the left foot was a separate part, or where half the model's head was attached to its arm. Not fun to convert!

And if we're not having fun, why are we here?

I thought we were here to complain

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Not surprising the Perry's would get it right

One problem with monopose plastics is that they are not one-piece or even easy to build. It becomes more like building a model kit than anything creative. So all the work of multipart Lego-like plastics, none of the chances for creativity.

Yeah knives, putty, bits, it can be done but for a lot of them you have to build the model, then hack it up for a conversion. I've gotten models where the left foot was a separate part, or where half the model's head was attached to its arm. Not fun to convert!

And if we're not having fun, why are we here?

I thought we were here to complain

That's what facebook/reddit are for!

And I think this thread has run its original course by now. New Model Monday is over and done, whatever is being discussed now has strayed well beyond the original purpose of the topic. Kindly take all discussion regarding monopose and whatnot to respective topics of their own.