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.

 Geifer wrote:
I hope that one stop shop they're talking about will get more than we've seen for the last year, quickly. Whole thing is pretty meh to me until I see Repentias.

 Commodus Leitdorf wrote:
Yeah I hope the base size they will be on is confirmed soon. I have a box of sisters I want to paint but I want to make sure I won't have to rebase them anytime soon.

The Sister render they showed last year was on 32mm (including base filling scenic topper) as well. While it's not confirmation just yet, I know which way I'd lean if I had to guess GW's intent.

Alternatively you'll just have to choose the option that annoys me the most, as GW does. There's your confirmation that it'll be 32mm bases...

50mm square bases is what I heard. You'll have to ebay them though, they won't come in the box.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
SW are an interesting case (as are Necrons). They underwent a series of releases that took their established aesthetic in a markedly different direction than previously. And some people have complained that this is the wrong direction, in their opinion. They already liked SW; they consider dramatically changing the faction focus to emphasize some kind of cartoonish werewolf theme as a negative. I certainly sympathize with people who like SW less because of the changes. I symapthize with people who would like to see development BACK to the previous direction.

With the Woofs it was a clear case of Flanderisation.

They went from wolf-themed Vikings to Wolfy "The Wolf" McWolf, riding a wolf, using Wolf Claws, protected by a Wolf Helm, bringing the power of the Wolftime with his Wolfkin and Jesus just make it stop!!!

Technically, "maximum wolf" has gone down since seventh edition. When I used to run my space wolves occasionally I'd always have my warlord be "maximum wolf" and you could do the following:

Wolf lord of the wolf on a wolf with a wolftooth necklance, mark of the wolfen and a wolf talisman wolf claws with two wolves.

In seventh, the maximum wolf shifted a bit requiring the use of relics, so you had

wolf lord on a wolf with a wolf claw and the fangsword of the deathwolf (or the wolfenstone) with two wolves as part of a Heralds of the Greatwolf formation in a Wolf Claw Strikeforce.

Optional variant was "in a stormwolf" which was acceptable though you could not have him both on a wolf and in a wolf because the stormwolf could not carry big wolves only small wolves.

I believe in 8th though I don't play them anymore I did check the current levels of maximum wolf, and we're now at

Wolf lord on a wolf of the wolf with wolf claws and the wolfenstone accompanied by two wolves.

So, TECHNICALLY we reached peak wolf in 7th because of formations and decurions, but since seventh and thanks to the staunch wolf of envirwolfmentalists we have reduced levels of wolf emissions by over 25%.

Yeah, at the end of the day I just hope they find SOME way to keep the core of the army "the actual freakin' sisters of battle" and keeping all the elements people have nostalgia for, while also not trying too hard to build something new into a design space that's about as fresh and unexplored as 10,000 year old bread.

That being a power armored army with the imperial weapon set and no variations on it.

There is absolutely nothing you can do with melta guns, flamers, bolters, heavy bolters and power swords strapped to power armored bodies and rhinos that hasn't been done to death by the 1,293,344,234,215 space marine subfactions.

 Chairman Aeon wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
... they see it as excuses for ... objectification.

The thing is, there not wrong on this point, they just don't get the reasons why and assume it's either A). inherently bad and B). somehow only directed at women. The design of lots of medieval armour types were meant to enhance the areas of the male body that were seen as desirable (again, codpiece!).

You can bet that had women entered into combat in any significant number that we would have seen similar aesthetic emphasis on their armour.

Why do you and Yodhrin keep mistaking Dakka for 4chan? You know the "they" you speak of are here--in this thread right. <- Note the lack of question mark.

- 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< -

I have long maintained that all the minis are in universe fictional representations of their actual units as viewed through the lens of the Imperium, much like the Codexes and such. You're not playing Space Marices but the Imperium Cinematic Universe version of Marines, Guard and Sisters.

I think realistically from a PR standpoint the perfect opportunity for GW to score free Attention Points is to do something to piss off the 4chan react-o-sphere.

I'm guessing that'll be redesigned repentia from a model that's basically a "naughty nuns" joke to a super badass strong independent repentia that dont need no man. All they need to do is mention a Drastic Redesign and they'll get plenty of free publicity, and that unit is the obvious choice.

Though I am amused that the effects of living in the harsh wilderness of the imperium as a hermit if you're a man is this: https://i.redd.it/f5nlqah0da511.jpg

And if you're a lady it makes you this: https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/d/d1/Three_Sisters_Repentia.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120427221038

(You can tell she's been starving in the wilderness for weeks because there's a scratch on her thigh!

 Geifer wrote:
OK, I think I'm not following this discussion anymore. Are you saying a lone shotgun preacher and a penitent mob should have the same visual design even though there is no functional overlap between the two? I'm confused as to the point you're trying to make.

Yep, definitely. That is 100% my point - all lone shotgun preachers should have the same visual design as all penitent mobs! I'm certainly not noting that the way companies have been purposefully poking the people who make a living reacting publicly to redesigns that reduce the bewbage for free publicity, and saying they'll probably pick Repentia as the unit to do that with. Because their current design is exactly as lazy as the 3rd ed DE mandrakes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Geifer wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Dark ronin elf demons are just phenomenal, and I trust GW to do something amazing with Repentia wathever they chose to do.

I don't.

They'll feth it up.

Not even a question.

Psst. The fact that you've already formed an opinion on how Bad the Thing will be before you even know what it is or even if it actually exists is probably why companies have gone from marketing to your demographic to just mining your outrage for free publicity.

 Yodhrin wrote:
I've still got my fingers crossed for Ecclesiarchy stuff. I know that would annoy some of the Sisters purists, and it's not likely given how GW have been breaking everything up into microfactions of late, but "generic raggedy cultists" is right up there with "basic human-size servitors" in the Why Haven't GW Done This Obvious Thing Yet sweepstakes.

There's only so many variations on "Sisters in armour" and "Sisters not in armour" you can do - especially without just cloning Marines - and most have been done. Beyond a specific box for Celestians, a melee variant of Seraphim, a non-melee variant of Repentia, a shooty or heavy version of the Penitent Engine, I'm not sure there's much they can really satisfyingly do with Sisters without dipping into the broader Ecclesiarchy.

All that said, my expectations for the release are that they'll give us the existing options in plastic, plus a smattering of new character models, and maybe one new kit and/or a couple of the existing units would dual-build as something else. Better to keep expectations minimal and be happily surprised.

EDIT: Also, recall that GSC got all those things in two distinct waves a fair wee while apart.

I'm guessing we see most of the new stuff as dual kits - a new set of weapons for seraphim, a new tank that's a slightly different exorcist, a new weapon for penitent engines.

Given we ate almost guaranteed a penitent engine kit, ecclesiarchy will probably exist in at least some fashion, buy beyond a mini storm priest in plastic I'd be surprised.

I'll take cawdor cultists for 200, Alex.

Cronch wrote:
There's enough male-only armies in 40k, do we really need to bring them into the one army that isn't 100% sausagefest?

IIRC the Penitent Engine has been officially a "Ministorum unit" since its release, the larger analogue of the arco-flagellant. I would definitely be surprised if they released any new ministorum units, but I would be amazed if the Engine didn't make a return in plastic, considering they mention it basically every time Sisters gets mentioned.

Also, dunno why ministorum units are assumed to be exclusively male. Of their units currently, you've got:

-Priest, Jacobus (All the models for these have been male IIRC)
-Arco-flagellant: N/A?
-Death Cult Assassin: All the models have been ladies
-Crusaders: Person wearing huge armor, so, your guess is as good as mine.
-Penitent Engine: Current ancient model has male and female variants.

I don't think there's a reason we couldn't have a female ministorum priest, or Crusaders, or arco-flagellants ( more female representation in body horror torso monsters!)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

A.T. wrote:

Cronch wrote:
There's enough male-only armies in 40k, do we really need to bring them into the one army that isn't 100% sausagefest?

Returning them to the codex you mean. Zealots and the priestly delegations were among those cut when the sisters were shoehorned in with the inquisition, but were one of those things that helped the sisters be something other than T3 marines with most of the units missing.

But even if they do stay out, functionally speaking what's the difference if you buy some boxes of Cawdor gangers and run them as Catachan guardsmen with flamers, a lord commissar, and some ministorum priests?

True, that'd be great. ...But I doubt it'd happen. GW definitely seems loathe to make things that aren't distinctive, probably because it makes it more difficult for someone to use something like, I dunno, Maelstrom's Edge Broken models instead of signifciantly more expensive GW official models for that purpose.

We don't even have an actual multipart plastic chaos cultist kit. It's been 2 full editions. Of course, if you dont' mind not having autoguns Chaos Cultists are one of the easiest kits ever to kitbash - mine are all egyptian styled cultists from their AOS oilchest birdmaskfellows kit because I play thousand sons. And 20 for 50 is a surprisingly good deal on a new GW kit.

Cronch wrote:

 Souleater wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
I've still got my fingers crossed for Ecclesiarchy stuff. I know that would annoy some of the Sisters purists...
.

Sisters of Battle had Ecclesiastical units from the get go.

And as you say, GW is quite likely to add female priests in this time around.

Is it? If it were AoS, I'd be reasonably expecting a mix of female and male models, but 40k seems to be, modelwise, holdout of Boys Only club, even excluding marines, which "have to" be male.

I fully expect the logic to be "The Sisters are female, so the militia and priests have to be male so they stand out". Just like the initial fratris militia from 2nd ed were. Ladies apparently can only wear power armor (SoB) or fetish gear (death cult assasins, penitents/pentient engines).

Pretty sure the lady sculpt on the penitent engine is wearing like a full body white robe and hood, isn't she?

In terms of recent 40k model releases, we haven't had a ton of humans in a while. We had the recent Genestealer Cult releases (which all had women in the more human kits and where we got an alternate sculpt female magus), the new specialist games rogue trader boxes like Arena and Blackstone fortress, all of which had female humanoids. The only weirdly sexualized models in those releases were the ninja lady in Rogue Trader and the eldar pathfinder in BSF, whose pose I can only describe in "That one Beyonce picture from the superbowl a couple years back". The female genestealer cultists and renegade guard, the female rogue trader and medical officer, the female commissar and female necromunda gangers have all been relatively tasteful IMO. At least, I gauge that based on whether people whine about them being too ugly, anyway.

But like...there's just a much smaller fraction of the factions where you actually can put humanoid females in in 40k. Only big one that's still lacking is guard, and I can't really fault them that hard when they haven't had a model release since like...the start of 7th, and their basic troop kit is one of the most ancient plastic kits still in use.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Overread wrote:
I'm really liking the poses they've given them! It might cut down some on the alternate builds, but at the same time they really look outstanding. Full of motion and energy and when they stand to pose they are choosing some really iconic poses for them to hold.

There's arn't warriors just standing around or on parade they are marching and charging into battle bolters firing!

See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.

Other than legs, I had a pretty good time customizing my eschers. I also thought the faces and hair being separate was a pretty neat touch.

There were a couple paired arms but for the most part they were one hand holds, so I could make some creative cuts to make weapons that didn't come in the box.

Only thing that annoyed me with the necro boxes was the 2x duplicate sprue thing.

Alright, someone update the photoshop battle between Abbadon and Guilliman playing tennis with Sister Serena Williams up there.

I'm guessing you can probably use some of the warcry cultists if you want a super emaciated body-horror type repentia, or even just elements from that. Personally, I'm just glad with how non-grimdark the new space marine units have gotten that we're finally getting a little more Chainsword back into 40k.

Sure, they're de-sexified like we all knew they would be and sure, someone just gave them clothes by selecting areas of the cad model and hitting "Extrude 2mm" rather than doing any kind of creative robe/habit or whatever, but I give them an A for fun combat poses, cool head sculpts and cool weapons.

Now I shall sit back and continue to chuckle every time someone who apparently hasn't ever seen an athletic woman in their entire life complain about how manly they are.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Are the old models really considered all that sexy?
Ok, they're quite top-heavy, but I'm more inclined to think that was because they're just not very well sculpted than because the sculpter was giggling about boobies while working on them.

The artwork from Codex: Witch Hunters certainly isn't what I'd consider sexy...

....It never ceases to amaze me when people bring out the willful ignorance.

What could POSSIBLY be considered sexual about ladies with barely covered breasts and full face masks led by a lady wearing a domino mask, Madonna cone bustier and holding a pair of whips.

WHAT.

COULD THEY HAVE POSSIBLY.

BEEN GOING FOR THERE?

The unit concept, aside from maybe the phrasing of "Mistress of Repentance" and the idea of her having whips....yeah, I guess there's nothing inherenty sexual about that? Certainly when someone posed it to that concept artist, that's not where their brain was. But if the model designer wasn't going for a BDSM sex joke, then Fifty Shades was an innocent rom-com that people took entirely the wrong way!

TiamatRoar wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Are the old models really considered all that sexy?
Ok, they're quite top-heavy, but I'm more inclined to think that was because they're just not very well sculpted than because the sculpter was giggling about boobies while working on them.

The artwork from Codex: Witch Hunters certainly isn't what I'd consider sexy...

....It never ceases to amaze me when people bring out the willful ignorance.

What could POSSIBLY be considered sexual about ladies with barely covered breasts and full face masks led by a lady wearing a domino mask, Madonna cone bustier and holding a pair of whips.

WHAT.

COULD THEY HAVE POSSIBLY.

BEEN GOING FOR THERE?

The unit concept, aside from maybe the phrasing of "Mistress of Repentance" and the idea of her having whips....yeah, I guess there's nothing inherenty sexual about that? Certainly when someone posed it to that concept artist, that's not where their brain was. But if the model designer wasn't going for a BDSM sex joke, then Fifty Shades was an innocent rom-com that people took entirely the wrong way!

Just about everyone here who dislikes the model has said that they wanted models closer to Kopinski's art. If you find that attractive then I don't ever want to be in the same room as you when you watch Hellraiser.

Not the person that they were replying to, though. If you read the quote that the poster you're replying to quoted, it's "Are the old models really considered all that sexy?
Ok, they're quite top-heavy, but I'm more inclined to think that was because they're just not very well sculpted than because the sculpter was giggling about boobies while working on them."


I actually DO think the sculpter was probably "giggling about boobies while working on them", just not in the "I like boobies!" context so much as because the old original models were clearly a purposeful parody of BDSM sexuality. ...at least, I hope they were meant to be a tongue in cheek parody but maybe someone really did have a bondage fetish and was just really bad at sculpting them in a sexy manner.

Old dark eldar stuff, old ork cheerleaders, etc...all the lazy, one dimensional sex joke models are pretty much gone, and have been for 15 years. The Repentia were just a weird little decade old relic of gws olden days.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
[
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sim-Life wrote:
It makes sense that we won't see amy new units if they exist because they won't want 3rd party manufacturers releasing models for them before they do.

If GW show off sisters in terminator armor or something you can be 100% sure companies like Raging Heroes would start the process of making alt sculpts for them asap and likely get them out around the same time.

Raging Heroes already has them.

https://www.ragingheroes.com/collections/soem-sf/products/knights-chalice-tr-s-sf

I didn't literally mean Sisters in terminator armour. That was just an example.

Fine. How about "if GW previews a covert Sisters unit with sniper rifles that use melta rounds." Does Raging Heroes do them?

No, but if GW ever previews a unit of Sisters WetTShirtia with twin-linked lasbadonkadonks, Raging heroes has them beat. to. the. punch.

Just out of curiosity I went to see what RH does have to offer for Repentia. And I guess forehead branding, piercings, blindfolds and poses of flinging themselves wildly into battle are obviously un-fluffy non-grimdark tennis players. But a bunch of hooded anime protagonists with fully power armored limbs and a Lara Croft t-shirt striking "lady on a comic book cover trying to convey she is a strong woman but also bewbs" poses is super true to repentia fluff.

Like seriously what? https://www.ragingheroes.com/collections/soem-sf/products/davidians-cgtr-sf Who thinks this is a better representation of Repentia? Ignore the sexualization entirely, just block it out, what about ANY of these figures outfits, posing, or expression shows them to be "fanatical warriors obsessed with redemption through combat?"

 His Master's Voice wrote:
I can't help but think of those plugs the way I think of modern lightsabres and photon torpedoes - a sign that whoever came up with the idea values cool factor over preservation of thematic identity.

You mean something that was originally created as an afterthought and endowed with a ludicrous amount of post-hoc justification by overinvested fans and later, creatively bankrupt original creators?

I would agree.

FWIW, I asked a friend of mine who is a national-level broadsword competitor about the posing for these models. According to him they're uncommonly good two-handed sword poses. The main distinction between them and something like Tennis is how the user has to brace themselves against the weight versus simply swinging something light as hard as possible.

 EnTyme wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
FWIW, I asked a friend of mine who is a national-level broadsword competitor . . .

I must have missed that booth at my high school's career day.

I mean...it's not his day job. Not a ton of openings in that field since 1500AD or so.

A.T. wrote:
but honestly what is the point.

Hear hear.

We have two canonical miniature examples where a regular unaided guy is carrying a heavy bolter.

The idea that a lady wearing a suit of power armor now needs to have a special brace to hold one earns an official yikes from me.

That's a super-static mini. Looks fine, but just seems like an excuse to charge like 45 bucks for a single 28mm mini lol.

Note the total lack of boobplate on the fallen sister.

Also, LOL - an alternate right hand and face are included if you want to have...two identically clothed hospitalliers with identical doves flying purity seals holding identical books in identical poses over identical dying sisters dying from the same wounds.

SO CUSTOMIZABLE AND UNIQUE!

Ignispacium wrote:
It does look like the Hospitaler is able to be separated from the scenic base.

"You can put her on anything - an underwater dreadnought! A giant desert. Standing on a warlord titan head!

Just as long as she's got a base the size of a dreadnought's base, you're good baby."

 warboss wrote:

 Sentionaut wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Not a fan of the veil/head scarf, and becoming tired of birds with scrolls.

I think I would have been happier if they showed the hospitallar actually being a medic, rather than praying, as they're supposed to be some of the best actual doctors in the imperrium.

...what other birds with scrolls have there even been in the Games Workshop range?

It's apparently a theme with SOB. Not technically birds *WITH* scrolls but rather birds and scrolls... close enough IMO though.

*Adjusts glasses* ACKSHULLY celestine's birds are coming out of a scroll, so it is a theme.

Celestine is a stage magician new lore canon 2019.

A.T. wrote:
It has been noted that there is a fair bit of pose duplication going on - only three distinct seraphim body/leg sculpts, three? bolter poses, same with the repentia.

Note that, to use Shadowspear as an example, there is a lot of pose duplication in the recent box sets that then isn't an issue in the completed MPPKs.

I'm painting the marines from Shadowspear right now for a commission, and there are three totally identical in....filtrators? The bolter lads, and 2 sculpts each for the snipers and cartoon fire hydrant boys.

The completed kits do not have those duplicates. If this box set follows the formula from shadowspear, these sisters would be monopose and then the eventual kit would have a bit more swappability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
We need some good screenshots from the new trailer. Some very nice minis in there.

Whatever you say bro, whatever you say .

Spoiler:

Are those good enough for you?

A bit bummed about still no new units or vehicles, but we know not everything is revealed yet because they teased a new version of the rhino.
According to one of the screenshot from the video we will get a ten sisters squad.
What base size do you see?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Damn, I was beaten to it.

Also, GW continues the long tradition of Sisters of Battle release having more male miniatures in them than the whole entire number of female release for all the space marines factions imperial and chaotic combined, lol.

*nasally ben shapiro voice*

heh, TECHNICALLY there are two female renegade guardsmen from the blackstone fortress set, so the models revealed from the new sisters of battle have 100% fewer male sculpts than the entire SM/CSM range has female sculpts.

(Also, come on. You know this is a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't. If they're going for the whole "Tortured pilot" shtick and they defaulted to a female pilot the exact same segment of the internet that complains about boys in SOB having cooties would call them creepy sex perverts.)

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
*nasally ben shapiro voice*

heh, TECHNICALLY there are two female renegade guardsmen from the blackstone fortress set, so the models revealed from the new sisters of battle have 100% fewer male sculpts than the entire SM/CSM range has female sculpts.

The SoB had male models in the range and in their codex in literally every edition. Most of the time they even had more male special characters than females one in their codex.

the_scotsman wrote:
(Also, come on. You know this is a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't. If they're going for the whole "Tortured pilot" shtick and they defaulted to a female pilot the exact same segment of the internet that complains about boys in SOB having cooties would call them creepy sex perverts.)

Well old penitent engine had both and noone complained either way!

...This was a joke. Also, people definitely complain about the old penitent engine sculpt female pilot being exploitative and underdressed. Also also, you are making an assumption based on a single image that there will be no alternative pilot when...I dunno, he doesn't seem super integral to the model to me? I'd be real surprised if the full MPPK released and there were no options at all for the penitent engine, you know they'll at least throw in a new option or two to get people who already own the old sculpt to buy it. It'll have "Electro-whips" or "melta shmazers" or somesuch, I can't recall a kit being released recently that existed before and didn't add some kind of new option.

Bdrone wrote:
to anyone still hoping for a jump pack cannoness... id say forget it at this point. not in today's release cycle.

Nova's info actually let me down because i keep thinking about the effects of Warhammer Legends on certain 40k lines. all orky bikes may be a "retired" option (along with the cheapest KFF meks...), so don't expect a jump pack when Speed Freek bikes are out.

But as for the Sisters info, im actually kinda happy with this. we got a date for the models, and a glimpse of the plastic Mistress of Repentence and a bunch of Penitent Engine.

The engine.. looks great. something does feel off about it, but considering how often i heard of that thing being trouble for others, a plastic one is much appreciated, and at a glance it seems to have been carried over okay. wish it had both feet planted, but these days that's not as hip anymore...

as for the Mistress... So, THATS where they hid the Fire back Braziers?! she looks cool, even if i worry about the amount of space used up on the whips. i..flat out like this model. why did they hide it until now!

the Canoness actually looks even worse to me painted. i will not even comment about the Repentia. i wonder how the rules will hold up.

The Mistress of Repentance is absolutely the most likely source of outrage coming from left wing sources for the new sisters of battle release, along with claims of fetishization involving the female penitent engine pilot.

The post about the Repentia absolutely had to highlight the repentia as strong/badass to provoke mild moralistic outrage from the right and omit the mistress to prevent moralistic outrage from the left. The mistress is definitely going to be slipped in as a background character and not overly highlighted in the sisters release. If they follow the recent trend in the big bundle box sets of including monopose minis then coming out with the MPPKs later with more options, I almost guarantee that's the PR decision behind making the monopose PE locked into a male pilot sculpt.

They might go as far as to having only male pilot sculpts in the full release, go the route of the ork buggies and the little DG daemon engine thingy of having a slightly lower price point and having the kit be totally monpose, but I doubt it. Sisters will probably be pitched as more of a Premium/Collector range like GSC and Admech where they receive somewhat more options and have higher price points.

I wonder if the SOB army box is going to be entirely sisters, something like a Start Collecting set on steroids. That's an interesting release strategy - makes sense, because they probably figure most of the target demo is going to own absolutely 0 sisters models to start and they want to give a cheap buy-in bundle to get people started.

If so, my fingers are crossed that Burning Corpse Flamer Sister is a thing that will only appear in the limited box run, and not every sister with a flamer will be required to have a corpsebuddy.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
The post about the Repentia absolutely had to highlight the repentia as strong/badass to provoke mild moralistic outrage from the right and omit the mistress to prevent moralistic outrage from the left.

Woah, GW is trying to provoke moral outrage on the right and avoid it on the left, how very political of them !

the_scotsman wrote:
If so, my fingers are crossed that Burning Corpse Flamer Sister is a thing that will only appear in the limited box run, and not every sister with a flamer will be required to have a corpsebuddy.

Same.

The existence of the outrage mill and companies carefully crafting PR to spin it in their favor rather than blundering into it randomly is an unavoidable fact of modern advertising.

 Crimson wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

The Mistress of Repentance is absolutely the most likely source of outrage coming from left wing sources for the new sisters of battle release, along with claims of fetishization involving the female penitent engine pilot.

The post about the Repentia absolutely had to highlight the repentia as strong/badass to provoke mild moralistic outrage from the right and omit the mistress to prevent moralistic outrage from the left. The mistress is definitely going to be slipped in as a background character and not overly highlighted in the sisters release. If they follow the recent trend in the big bundle box sets of including monopose minis then coming out with the MPPKs later with more options, I almost guarantee that's the PR decision behind making the monopose PE locked into a male pilot sculpt.

If so, my fingers are crossed that Burning Corpse Flamer Sister is a thing that will only appear in the limited box run, and not every sister with a flamer will be required to have a corpsebuddy.

The amount of people on Dakka who do not know that hobby knives exist worries me.

Having the only available sculpt for a flamer, a weapon you can have....IIRC...four of, in a five-woman squad, be a monopose figure with a very distinct pose standing on top of something would be a pretty silly decision, regardless of players' ability to take a hobby knife to the miniature and change it up.

Sure, it'd be easy for her to be standing on a rock, or a low hill, or a pile of skulls, maybe a bucket or something, but it would still look fairly silly and could be entirely avoided by just..giving players flamers as a bit and letting them put the flamer on whatever mini they want.

I fully expect this to be the case in the full kit, since we've seen these kinds of monopose-then-full-release box sets with

-Chaos Marines
-Shadowspear Primaris
-Death Guard
-Regular Primaris
-Deathwatch
-Genestealer Cult

You know, pretty much every time they release a whole faction using a new box set.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Casbyness wrote:
Couple of serious questions:

- Are there melta guns on the sister squad sprues? GW knows we need like 4 of that single gun alone for each five-sister Dominion squad, right?
- Are there Celestian options/accessories on any sprues?

Still not sold on the Repentia at all, but might be worth buying a sprue of 5 just for the accessories, so they can be added to other models in the range.

Will consider the Penitent Engine if there's an alternative female pilot.

Current plan has switched to buying and converting multiple copies of the Mistress into a Canoness and Celestian Squad. Totally agree the official Canoness is garbage, I'd sooner use the original Nagash model to lead my Sisters army than her.

My dog that works at GW says there are no melta guns in any of the sisters kits, and GW will be personally coming to the houses of people who own the current sculpts and burning them.

 Crimson wrote:
So there is no actual issue then? The multipart kits will indeed most likely let you put the special weapons on any model.

And even on monopose models swapping a bolter and flamer around on duplicate models wouldn't be exactly hard.

Yeah, the original post you replied snarkily to like I didn't know how to convert models for some reason was "I hope the monoposed-with-a-corpse flamer model is only in the box set and not in the final multipart kit"

So yeah, if that will be the case, then there will be no issue, but unfortunately my dog that works at gw didn't tell me about that like yours did.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Just to ask - where is this idea that the models in the box won't be the "proper" kits coming from? Is it just the idea that previous pre-main-release boxed sets have tended to have bespoke and often less-flexible models in them, or has there been some specific indication?

Because I don't think it's safe to make any assumptions about this box based on previous ones, given how different it is. In fact other than maybe the Cannoness which it's been suggested might be limited to that box and event attendees, I fully expect it to have the full and complete new kits in it - it's a special edition codex with a Start Collecting tacked on for a no doubt extremely premium price("as a reward" lul), not the usual affairs intended to hype interest for a new army(the year of previews has already done that in this case) or to shift a bunch of old stock by bundling them with temporarily-exclusive newshiny models.

Mostly just a guess based on the fact they did that for Primaris Waves 2 and 1 CSM Deathwatch GSC etc. The initial box comes out monopose with several units having repeated poses, and the final kits are (a little bit) more flexible and come with different weapons. The last time they released new armies without that style of box release was...Harlequins/Admech in early 7th?

The characters will be the final character sprues that eventually come in clampacks, but the units may be a limited pose version of what the troops will eventually be.

 Geifer wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
IIf there is no real Inquisition element to things, I won't be fielding a SoB army, but I'm really happy for everyone who has waited a long time for all of this.

There won't be (unfortunately, in a way) because these days GW will write a codex even for the tiniest niche faction, so there's really no reason to have the Inquisition in an Ecclesiarchy codex.

Of course there's also that little problem with the current designers apparently thinking Inquisition has no place in 40k. Something like that might get in the way a little bit, too.

I've been meaning to convert a new Inquisitor for ages, but it's just so damn hard to guess the exact combination of exotic wargear every single Inquisitor in the galaxy will use once GW does get around to giving the Inquisition some love.

I wouldn't object to getting baldy from the Psychic Awakening video. I like her. Well, her look anyway. She's a bit hysterical there. Just because there's this little Chaos incursion going on way over there in the background, hardly in sight of anyone. Kind of points to a lack of faith in the Emperor.

You see that? People like that have no place in a Sisters book. Come on! Lack. Of. Faith. That's just not a good fit.

Gw's current designers:

Things that belong in 40k
-Wulfen
-Logan Grimnar on Stormrider
-Centurions
-Cut Xenos Into Pieces, This is my Lightning Claw Shrike
-Call of Duty: Modern Space Marine VII
-GK Baby Carrier
-Noblebright Bananalads on golden spacebikes
-Maurice the Space Cowboy who can oneshot dudes in power armor with contemptuous ease

Things that don't belong in 40k

-The inquisition.

I mean, think about it. It's so silly, right? The inquisition. Who came up with that. What are they doing on the battlefield? They should be inquisiting.

 Irbis wrote:
Yeah, it's not like they released anything for them, such as Eisenhorn and Greyfax recently... Oh wait

I will not rest until I have a 10-man multipart jokaero kit, so that I might build my ultimate APEpocalypse army made up only of joakaero.

until then I shall smugly sneer every time GW releases something and says everyone has a reason to be excited.

"Everyone, heh, so you're saying we apocalypse only Jokaero players have something to be excited for?"

Also, on a slightly more serious side-note, the release of Inquisitor Grayfax...that was an edition ago at this point, yeah? And it's not like as a whole, the models from those little triumvirate boxes have done particularly great usability wise.

All the Ynnari have been shuffled, shunted, nerfed, noodled, and seem to have been filed away in a drawer labeled "our worst idea ever" to rot.

Grayfax is similarly just chilling in an index-only faction with no other plastic buddies to play with and no easy way to fit her in any army.

Cypher is...well...samesies there.

Random Gray Knight Duder...whatever his name was, does he even still have rules?

Belligerent Carl, Celestine and Guilliman are the only three out of the 9 models from those box sets at the end of 7th that really found a place in the game. As a way to introduce characters to the game, I can't call the triumvirates a success at all.