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.

GW has the addmitedly tough obstacle of required customization in its model lines. It's hard to make a pack of IG with arms and weapons for male and female models equally. Eldar and Dark eldar get around it by having female only units or by having mixed gender units where the only different is the boob plate on the torso. That doesn't really fly with human models.

 Buzzsaw wrote:


The breadth of options in WM/Hordes is, to the best of my knowledge, unparalleled. Think, you can play everything from a young girl (Kaya of Circle), to an old crone (The Old Witch of Khador), with everything in-between. The only faction I can think of that doesn't have multiple female warcasters/warlocks to chose from would be... Skorne? I think they only have 2 versions of Makeda, and... Rhule? Which, in fairness, is a sub-faction of a faction (and only has 3 casters at all). To be doubly fair, while Skorne are almost all male casters, Legion is almost all females. To top that off there are a huge number of named female characters below the 'caster level.

The best game that I can think of off the top of my head for having female leadership type models, is Malifaux. There is a pretty even mix of male/female leaders, and really none of them are women with "anime" proportions. They all have legitimate, human female proportions and for the most part the whole line of female sculpts is quite amazing.


But yeah, I can see how GW has issues with this. Their solution on the human front is to disinclude them entirely (SM and CSM), give some plot armor excuse (IG/Tau), or have a few codex units, and sculpts (eldar and DE). That leaves the "nuns with guns" as really the last true outlet for having any female models in the game, and they seem to be content with throwing that away.

PresidentOfAsia wrote:Gamesworkshop has the Valkyrie, Vulture gunship and any of the Imperial Guard regiments(especially that of the Elysian Drop troops)

GW wins in model coolness

I think he just won the argument

Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:


The breadth of options in WM/Hordes is, to the best of my knowledge, unparalleled. Think, you can play everything from a young girl (Kaya of Circle), to an old crone (The Old Witch of Khador), with everything in-between. The only faction I can think of that doesn't have multiple female warcasters/warlocks to chose from would be... Skorne? I think they only have 2 versions of Makeda, and... Rhule? Which, in fairness, is a sub-faction of a faction (and only has 3 casters at all). To be doubly fair, while Skorne are almost all male casters, Legion is almost all females. To top that off there are a huge number of named female characters below the 'caster level.

The best game that I can think of off the top of my head for having female leadership type models, is Malifaux. There is a pretty even mix of male/female leaders, and really none of them are women with "anime" proportions. They all have legitimate, human female proportions and for the most part the whole line of female sculpts is quite amazing.

Lady Justice and Lilith are pretty "anime." Good models though.

Another good argument for PP is that there are a higher percentage of female players.

Its probably always hard to sculpt the female anatomy on a model realistically. There are moulding concerns plus the fact that it's mostly nerdy men making the models

 Bat Manuel wrote:
This mini started me playing warmachine. A powerful female character that's not blown out of proportion. Awesome and realistic armor. I didn't even know that she had a robotic arm until much later, because it was so subtly done. GW doesn't and has never produced a female mini as nice as this.
]

Sorry, the Epic Haley fig isn't anymore impressive than the Saint Celestine from SoB. But that is not that high a bar to pass. I'm personally not impressed with most of GW or PP female character figures. It is especially sad for PP because I have been a huge fan of Matt Wilson's art since his days at AEG and Legend of the Five Rings. I felt that none of the sculptors at PP did any justice to Wilson's art for female figs. All the main females have horrible faces.

There are far more impressive lines with female figs. Malifaux and Infinity spring to mind right away. McVey's line as well. Though in PP's defense, they are improving and they have some nice non-character females.

Though I will agree with Buzzsaw. GW is unfortunately very male centric in it's fiction. How many major female characters are there that aren't fem fatals?

In PP fiction they are main characters driving the world. In GW fiction, they are skinned and worn as hats by Grey Knights

Sorry, the Epic Haley fig isn't anymore impressive than the Saint Celestine from SoB.

Y'know, except for Celestines flat, two dimensional pose and manface.

PP players always tell me "Warmachine only takes between 5-15 models, and you've got an army!". But I don't want to play with 5-15 models, I want to play with 100-200 models.

Simple with me.

and 80 bucks for a starter pack (three models) is just piracy.

Well, if you think of it this way:

You're getting one model and 2 Dreadnoughts.

20 pounds (SM dreadnought) + 20 pounds (SM dreadnought) + 12 pounds (plastic Chaos Aspiring Champion) = 52 pounds = NZ$102.235. Ok, you're not getting all the upgrades and stuff you get in the Dreadnought kit, but that's something to consider.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Plus you get everything you need to start playing (quickstart rules and model profiles). Does GW do that with their paint sets or their battleforces?

 Poppabear wrote:
PP players always tell me "Warmachine only takes between 5-15 models, and you've got an army!". But I don't want to play with 5-15 models, I want to play with 100-200 models.

Simple with me.

and 80 bucks for a starter pack (three models) is just piracy.

Then you should be playing Epic..

Or failing that, Warpath or Kings of War.. Especially in your RoW, you could use the money saved to buy something nice for yourself.. like a new car

Warpath isn't a great game. They made it too much like KoW, which a good game on its own, doesn't have the mechanics that lend to sci-fi. Sci-fi is much more special weapon focused and less grunt focused. I think KoW is a fantastic game that is quick to play and loads of fun, but transferring that game to sci-fi doesn't quite work. Do some rules modifications and you potentially have a great game to broadcast alongside the already great KoW.

There's a 2nd edition out imminently that addresses your concerns.

How about RPG's?

For a company that had its roots in roleplaying games their reboot of the Iron Kingdoms RPG is rather weak. The big book is good fun, if you like fluff and basic rules, because it provides little else, other than telling you to buy-buy-buy NQ magazine for stuff like scenarios and enemies for encounters, which the big book either doesn't have in case of scenarios, or just a few pages of baddies. Compare this to Dark Heresy, as done by the now dead and gone Black Industries.. It has everything to run games from the get-go!

 BrookM wrote:
How about RPG's?

For a company that had its roots in roleplaying games their reboot of the Iron Kingdoms RPG is rather weak. The big book is good fun, if you like fluff and basic rules, because it provides little else, other than telling you to buy-buy-buy NQ magazine for stuff like scenarios and enemies for encounters, which the big book either doesn't have in case of scenarios, or just a few pages of baddies. Compare this to Dark Heresy, as done by the now dead and gone Black Industries.. It has everything to run games from the get-go!

The 40K RPG's are actively published by Fantasy Flight, and Rogue Trader is probably one of my favourite games ever, due in no small part to how their sourcebooks give the universe that sense of mystery, bigness and awesome back that I remember from second edition. Though I'm not sure if you can count that as a plus for GW, since I don't know how much input they still have into the FFG writing, if any.

Also, I can't speak for Dark Heresy, but Rogue Trader had a total of one short intro adventure in the corebook, and to get other pre-made ones, you needed to buy pricey hardback books (rather than a magazine). The rest was, well, rules and fluff.

It's not really fair to compare a line of RPGs that came out all of a few weeks ago with one that's been out for years.

Gentlemen, I am comparing starter books: IKRPG and Dark Heresy, not comparing ranges of sourcebooks and whatnots. I should've probably been clearer in this. Dark Heresy had quite a bestiary and quite a starting adventure in the main book, the IKRPG book doesn't.

 ShumaGorath wrote:

Sorry, the Epic Haley fig isn't anymore impressive than the Saint Celestine from SoB.

Y'know, except for Celestines flat, two dimensional pose and manface.

No, quality of the face is the same on both. I have seen very impressive paint jobs on the Celestine that improved it over GW's original, but I haven't seen any that really improved the Epic Haley.

But I already stated that neither fig was that impressive.

If you want to put out a comparison, I personally think the best non-tart female figs put out by either company are Nicia and the Kayazy Eliminators.




Now my favorite fig overall is the Dark Eldar Lhamean, but she falls more under Fem'Fatal catagory.



@BrookM
I wouldn't really compare RPGs. GW abandoned Dark Heresy after the first printing and really being supported by a third party now. GW has a lot of input on the Dark Heresy series and is one of the reasons why material can be slow coming out from FFG at times.
GW did put out one of the best RPGs with the original WHFRPG. The Enemy Within campaign is really one of the best series out there. But again, GW abandoned that line because it didn't help sell miniatures.

 BrookM wrote:
How about RPG's?

For a company that had its roots in roleplaying games their reboot of the Iron Kingdoms RPG is rather weak. The big book is good fun, if you like fluff and basic rules, because it provides little else, other than telling you to buy-buy-buy NQ magazine for stuff like scenarios and enemies for encounters, which the big book either doesn't have in case of scenarios, or just a few pages of baddies. Compare this to Dark Heresy, as done by the now dead and gone Black Industries.. It has everything to run games from the get-go!

For some like me, no scenarios and light on enemies is a big plus. I don't need my hand held to RPG. Now a 1 on 1 tactial game, that needs a soild rule set. One where the people playing don't need to guess what the rule means.

No, quality of the face is the same on both.

Nope.jpeg

Noir wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
How about RPG's?

For a company that had its roots in roleplaying games their reboot of the Iron Kingdoms RPG is rather weak. The big book is good fun, if you like fluff and basic rules, because it provides little else, other than telling you to buy-buy-buy NQ magazine for stuff like scenarios and enemies for encounters, which the big book either doesn't have in case of scenarios, or just a few pages of baddies. Compare this to Dark Heresy, as done by the now dead and gone Black Industries.. It has everything to run games from the get-go!

For some like me, no scenarios and light on enemies is a big plus. I don't need my hand held to RPG. Now a 1 on 1 tactial game, that needs a soild rule set. One where the people playing don't need to guess what the rule means.

There are a good amount of the IKRPG stuff on PP website for free as PDF download too.

 ShumaGorath wrote:

No, quality of the face is the same on both.

Nope.jpeg

Nicely summing up your overall contribution to this thread.

 Alfndrate wrote:


Were you in the middle of your attack when Dice Down was called?

I was not, I had just finished my attacks with Behemoth and was about to declare them with my Destroyer when it was called :(
Had LOS, aiming bonus, 2 focus...it was going to be sweet victory.

Sadly it wasn't Deathclock because I probably would have won with how long he was taking.

 plastictrees wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:

No, quality of the face is the same on both.

Nope.jpeg

Nicely summing up your overall contribution to this thread.

I meet the quality of the posts I respond to. When they use golden demon winning paintjobs as a reason why the sculpt on something isn't demonstrably worse than the competition it doesn't deserve a very lengthy response.

 Bat Manuel wrote:
realistic armor

Ah ah ah, seriously, good joke, good joke.

Don't really like the PP models I've seen so far, that Vlade guy has slowed pauldrons, even compared to Space Marines, gotta say Victoria's alright tho, checking on the PP site leaves me unimpressed, to be honest, don't hate the models, but don't really do anything to me.

 ShumaGorath wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:

No, quality of the face is the same on both.

Nope.jpeg

Nicely summing up your overall contribution to this thread.

I meet the quality of the posts I respond to. When they use golden demon winning paintjobs as a reason why the sculpt on something isn't demonstrably worse than the competition it doesn't deserve a very lengthy response.

Yes because you can't prove me wrong, so you resort to mockery. Trait of a lost argument. Bravo.

Surely you can show a clearer picture to prove me wrong. I have seen both figs in the pewter and made my decision on them being in front of me. Neither fig is that impressive and both have similar quality faces.

As I said both companies have a steady ratio of hit and miss figs... as for girls sculpts PP has a little edge there but not by much, at least they have plenty of girls on their factions that dont look like drags... but neither both companies come close to the sexyness girls of Hasslefree, freebooter and infinity chicks... speaking of freebooters some of the gals on PP are sculpted by them.

And because a thread without pics means nothing check these out...

pp






gw






PP does have more females on their ranges than GW...

 NAVARRO wrote:
As I said both companies have a steady ratio of hit and miss figs... as for girls sculpts PP has a little edge there but not by much, at least they have plenty of girls on their factions that dont look like drags... but neither both companies come close to the sexyness girls of Hasslefree, freebooter and infinity chicks... speaking of freebooters some of the gals on PP are sculpted by them.

And because a thread without pics means nothing check these out...

Lots of awesomness

Navarro, don't disagree with you and wasn't saying that there weren't any good female figures in PP line, let alone no good paint-jobs. But to get dismissive that painting can't contribute to decision is wrong. There are plenty of figs from both lines they looked average, but were improved by a paint job outside the studio. It's almost a given that GW stuido paint jobs don't help sell a fig and even hurt them in more recent cases (plastic Savage Orcs for starters). ShumaGorath can't seem to accept that that a PP fig is average and on par with a GW fig.

A big plus to PP though, they do contract work with the sculptors of those other lines you mention

Heck it was the Hordes Drinking Druid GenCon exclusive that convinced me to back Patrick Keith's Kickstarter

GW unfortunately does not outsource their sculpting to those guys. They have Juan Diaz, but sadly GW doesn't hand many of their female figs over to him. Jes Goodwin complained he makes all his females too sexy

silent25 wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:

No, quality of the face is the same on both.

Nope.jpeg

Nicely summing up your overall contribution to this thread.

I meet the quality of the posts I respond to. When they use golden demon winning paintjobs as a reason why the sculpt on something isn't demonstrably worse than the competition it doesn't deserve a very lengthy response.

Yes because you can't prove me wrong, so you resort to mockery. Trait of a lost argument. Bravo.

Surely you can show a clearer picture to prove me wrong. I have seen both figs in the pewter and made my decision on them being in front of me. Neither fig is that impressive and both have similar quality faces.

You want me to prove you wrong in a purely subjective argument? That involves either coercion or duress, I don't feel like driving today. I can't "lose" this argument, and you're arguing bs. Paintjobs can't improve the sculpt on a model anymore than they can improve the sound from a radio. The totality of the presence of a thing is the sum of it's existence, it's individual traits don't improve upon another, that's not how it works. If the paintjob improved the sculpt that would mean the sculpt would be better, and by that logic would improve the paintjob. If the paintjob was then better it would improve the sculpt. That's a fundamentally broken way to look at the world, and one that you were exhibiting when I thought you were nkelsch.

Hummm, no I disagree.

Any surface can be changed with the very old painters technique (Trompe-l'œil) to create a optimal illusion of something.

If a 2d brick wall can gain dimensions imagine a 3d miniature... heck even photograph fiddling can change miniatures appearance.

As for Jes goodwin comments.... errr he should try that then because so far GW has only rare few examples.

Any surface can be changed with the very old painters technique (Trompe-l'œil) to create a optimal illusion of something.

No one is using Trompe-l'œil on their Celestine model.

 ShumaGorath wrote:

Any surface can be changed with the very old painters technique (Trompe-l'œil) to create a optimal illusion of something.

No one is using Trompe-l'œil on their Celestine model.

No, but you are using these arguments...

Paintjobs can't improve the sculpt on a model

Which I disagree.