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.

Tailessine wrote:
Love their background, but annoyed at how they are so blatantly based on christian imagery: halos, lanterns, wings, gold armour etc. Seems oit of place, especially when there are other concepts e.g. griffons, comets etc to use.

Because no fantasy setting ever has drawn from Christian imagery.

Love the models , but crazy prices. Only still buy cause I get a great discount.

@TheCustomLime, haha, too true!

There's actually a big debate in 9th whether angels and the like should be added to the Kingdom of Equitaine (Bretonnia). As you imagine, most point to that being too high fantasy and mimicking things like HoMM and thd Stormcasts.

hobojebus wrote:

Tailessine wrote:
Love their background, but annoyed at how they are so blatantly based on christian imagery: halos, lanterns, wings, gold armour etc. Seems oit of place, especially when there are other concepts e.g. griffons, comets etc to use.

Especially as young kids are more likely to be atheist these days.

More proof of them being out of touch.

Really? This… this really does not help guys. Who cares if GW are mining Christian mythology/imagery? It’s not like they’re the first to do it, it’s not like they’re the only company in the industry that does it, it’s not like it’s their only source material for AOS (or in general, for that matter) and it’s not like Christianity created those things in the first place.

And you claim it’s an issue that they are ‘mixing’ influences? Really? How small minded. You do realise armies based on a single ‘idea’ end up being a very homogenous, boring and uninteresting caricature lacking design space very quickly, right? I mean, there is a reason other companies base their factions around multiple ideas (Privateer Press’ faction always combine multiple design elements - Khador combined Russian, Prussian, Hunnic and Asian features and eastern folklore, the Viking/northern trope so often seen as a single ‘army’ like chaos or space wolves is instead sprinkled throughout multiple factions -everblight, the nyss, khador, the tharn and trolls. Corvus Belli’s do the same – for example Ariadna is a combination of kilt wearing scots, Russians, gun slinging americans, French, with a dose of added Werewolves and it still works as a faction). But its somehow wrong for GW to make a faction that draws on a number of sources? Really?

And who cares if kids are atheists? All that means is Christianity is a mythology, not a religion (semantics, I know,) and no different to any other mythology. Does that stop them appreciating pretty models, or appreciating what is still a fantasy setting? How does that invalidate the source material? It doesn’t have anything to do with them being out of touch at all. I mean, if drawing on Christian imagery is a bad thing because kids are atheists, privateer press and corvus belli must be evil incarnate with factions Menoth, the Pan-O Military orders and Haqqislam factions. What about drawing on the imagery from other extinct religions and mythology? I mean, none of us believe in the Nordic myths, roman or greek myths, but you have plenty IP’s that draw on them for inspiration too. Is that wrong too? Is a company that draws on other mythologies/religions ‘out of touch’ because that mythology won’t have its believers? But I bet you’ll both be quiet about that, because honestly, all of this is less about being a legitimate gripe about poor source material, and more hysterical theatrics about this is being source material that AOS draws on, and AOS is bad, m’kay, and we must have all the hate on AOS all of the time. because whatever AOS does is something that must be seen as being bad, and evil, and terrible. At the end of the day, the Christian religion, or even the imagery that is so often associated with it is just as legitimate as source material as Greek, Egyptian, Nordic mythology, or even things like Anime or 80s pop culture, if that’s your thing.

Let’s face it- there are a lot of legitimate reasons for not liking, or not being interested in Age of Sigmar.

For example, It’s OK to think the models are boring, clunky, chunky, uninspired, unappealing or even lazy ports of 40k’s Space Marines. I do.

It’s OK to dislike the lore. It is meant to be this epic, endless ‘landscape’ which ends up being a bit patchy, broad strokes approach aplenty, very little world building or the intricate little details that are required to bring a world to life, characters can be one-dimensional and all the ‘epic’all of the time very easily leads into ‘Epic-fatigue’ and ‘Epic-disinterest’ because it can very easily get to the point where you don’t care, because there is no point caring (whole armies don’t die or are just imaginations of a sorcerer…) and because the setting lacks any immediacy or intimacy.

It's ok to find the rules/mechanics lazy, uninspired and boring. I know I do, and I much prefer other games.

Its OK to be outraged by, and disheartened by some of the ridiculous price points the new AOS models have attached to them.

It’s OK to dislike the DIY/creative/narrative game approach that AOS embraces. It’s a shame to not like it – it really is, because this approach is a lot of fun and very enjoyable, but I’ll be honest and say that it’s not suitable, all the time – especially for pugs or tournaments. ’eyeballing’ balance is a learned skill that requires a bit of experience, a bit of cop-on, and good judgement to get right. The approach requires like-minded opponents, it requires time, pre-planning, organisation and co-operation. Lots of hoops. And while it’s worth it in the right circumstances and with the right people, sometimes you just don’t have time for that, or you don’t want to deal with all that fuss and you just want a bloody game to be over and done with in an hour or two without an extended ‘negotiation phase’ – very legitimate reason.

It’s OK to be bitter (still!) because you were a WFB player, and GW pooped on you from an extremely great height, nuked your world, killed your armies, cast you aside and said they weren’t interested, and didn’t want you any more and so on.

But really- hating on AOS because one of its factions draws on Christian imagery, along with other mythological imagery, and because kids are atheist – that’s just hating tor the sake of hating, and is the kind of hysterical nonsense that does nothing but undermine you and whatever arguments you are trying to make and undervalues everything else you say. At the end of the day, there are far better arguments to make if you want to say you don’t like AOS. Let's not take it to the level where Aos haters, dislikers and non interested-ers essentially become a parody of discussion.

I honestly think they are boring. I 've never played with or against them but seen soooooo many bat reps I'm just so bored of them now, same as Khorne.

I hate AoS guts, and I would feel the Stormcast as out of place in the old world, but come on.

Fantasy drags inspiration from many world religions. Even tolkien was a mix of nordic stuff and christianity, like AoS. How in Heavens and Asgard is that a problem, and why should kids care? In high school I was an atheist edgelord but I played DnD in which we had angels, demons and so and I thought were cool. They just belonged to that universe. A friend of mine, a believer, just thought that they were not an issue because they belonged to that universe, again, and had no connection with his faith, were just an inspiration for good/bad guys.

I mean look at Pathfinder. It has fiends from like.. how many religions? Devils are Christians, Demons are kind of universal, Divs are Persian (Zoroastrian I think), Asuras are Buddhist (they are not the Hindu ones, but there are Rakshasa too), Oni are Japanese (not sure if Shinto, folklore or whatever), and there are few more families made up (actually inspired by a movie and by lovercrafitan stuff). Throw in evil titans and Hekatonkheires too! I mean they rebelled Zeus and went into the hades is pretty Fiendish. The Paladin has the hands full! Just stay away from titans. Really, do not even think about it.

(if I made mistakes/misattribution please correct me and not be offended - is out of ignorance).

Sorry for causing an argument- really valid points brought up. I have no real problem with using real world or mythological influences for models- its impossible not to- i just think the stormcasts are overdone, thats all. The recent extremis release has helped somewhat, as the dracoths are fairly original and you can make a pretty flexible army from just that kit

Tailessine wrote:
Sorry for causing an argument

That's not on you, bud. It was a valid opinion/observation!

Tailessine wrote:
Sorry for causing an argument- really valid points brought up. I have no real problem with using real world or mythological influences for models- its impossible not to- i just think the stormcasts are overdone, thats all. The recent extremis release has helped somewhat, as the dracoths are fairly original and you can make a pretty flexible army from just that kit

No argument, just a discussion. And this is a forum. I suppose this is the right place to discuss

I find the "dracoths" (my gods the names - I will never be accustomed to these lawyer-friendly names) stiff. I really do not like them.

Tailessine wrote:
Sorry for causing an argument- really valid points brought up. I have no real problem with using real world or mythological influences for models- its impossible not to- i just think the stormcasts are overdone, thats all. The recent extremis release has helped somewhat, as the dracoths are fairly original and you can make a pretty flexible army from just that kit

Don't apologise! The whole point here is to discuss things. and yes, the stormcasts are certainly not my favourite models either. I prefer more practical and pragmatic designs myself (I love anvil industry's not-marines far more than gw's overly ornate and frequently impractical marines), and the basic stormcasts are fine from a pragmatic perspective (even if the proportions are bloated and too chunky for my liking), but some of the variations I too find to be a bit ott.

I too have grown to like the stormcast. I like the variety that is appearing between the different stormhosts. There is a line from the new book about the hallowed Knights weeping over the devestation of a battle, while the Knights excelsiors are satisfied. The Astral templars going native in the new audio drama is also a fun differentiator.

I like the models too though I feel a few tricks have been missed. The prosecutors would have looked better if they were a touch slimmer, maybe female. (not boobplate but a more elegant shape) The judicators dont work in the same armour as the liberators. If they had changed their armout to be more practical for weilding a bow, or even made them ordinary humans, it would have helped hugely to give the army a little more variety.

Here is my scheme. I am quite happy with it.

And once again you can see why Hallowed knights are my favorites.

Female prosecutors would've been ace, some heavenly valkyries to fell Sigmar's foes in a storm of javelins and arrows.

I get what you mean with the Judicators but I like that they remind me of Dark Soul's knight archers and the heavily armored bow users in "Monster Hunter". (My current build in the game even resembles one)

More focus on the auxiliaries would be cool, though. Nice color-scheme as well.

I despise the design of the basic sigmarine. The face helmet doesn't work in multiples and the body shaped armour makes them look like obese men in golden lycra. Golemish face with spacemariney pauldrons and metal calves, lame design to 11.

That's imo why even for example paladin retributors look 10 times better having a different head and some of the body armour additionaly covered. Head looks a bit like a face in helmet, the face is still part of the helmet which is slowed ofc but an improvement anyway.

 WarbossDakka wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:
I don't understand why anybody wouldn't like the Stormcasts? They're awesome!

I think the people who don't like them are the ones who don't like AOS. They go hand in hand really.

Not true in my case, I don't like AoS to say the least but still really dig at least two chaos minis, one from the starter and the other guy heh. Will probably buy some day, will despise myself probably but still.

If the sigmarine design was good, I would hate them conceptually but could love the look the same time. As it is now, even when I get the fix for AoS esque fantasy and try to let it grow on me, one look at sigmarines ruins it for me.

I think the Stormcast masks are pretty similar to the Persian Immortals from "300", and I quite like that aesthetic. I have about 40 in my army so far.

I have to say I absolutely love the look of Stormcasts. It's almost enough to make me consider AOS. The problem is they suffer from the same thing as Space marines: You have to handwave away Stormcast vs. Stormcast conflicts because they can't really occur in the fluff (the old "it was just a training exercise" excuse gets really lame IMHO). I wish they had put into the lore a reason for different groups of Stormcasts to want different things and as a result be at odds, instead of this Good vs. Evil stuff where it's basically assumed that if you're a Stormcast player, your opponent will be playing Chaos or some other non-good race that you wan fight.

In fact that's something, unless I'm missing it, that doesn't sit well about AOS at all with the alliances. How, exactly, does Order fight Order, if they're on the same side? Chaos vs. Chaos makes sense, Death vs. Death really doesn't, and Destruction vs. Destruction is okay because Orruks gonna Orruk, but it seems like there's no fluff reason other than ignoring it really happened to have Order vs. Order which for someone who cares about the fluff is always going to be an issue because it affects army choice.