Adepta Sororitas- lots of kits no longer available

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.

**Troike**

I think it's a little narrow to say that the design of the Sisters. both armoured and Repentia, is fuelled wholly by some sexist desire to make them sexually appealing.

They are more than an army of women, they're an army that represents the pinnacle of the zealot soldier in this already over the top setting. So over the top gothic design and total zealotry are to be expected. For me, I think that it is far more important for the Sisters to play to their characterisation first and foremost.

Also, it's worth noting, I doubt that so many accusations of sexism/over-sexualisation would be thrown in were the Repentia men instead. Just because they are female characters doesn't mean that them being dressed skimpily is itself pure sexualisation. In the fluff, they have a very good reason to be looking the way that they do.

**barnowl**

MadCowCrazy wrote:
Shandara wrote:

We'll all die of old age before they release those... sooner to see a revamp by GW!

What are you talking about, the pledge manager has been online for about a week now where you can select the stuff you want from your kickstarter funds. We should see most if not all models released before the end of the year. That's about the same number of models made in 1 year that GW puts out and from a company with less than 20 employees.

Heck they even threw in the "Not Arco-Flagellants" that weren't unlocked in the kickstarter but almost were so they added them as well

I want Nephrahydra for an Engineseer. If the model is any wear close the concept piece it will be sweet.

**gigasnail**

Sweet cornfed Jesus those are amazing

**aka_mythos**

While SoB never getting rereleased in finecast points to the strong possibility that they have developed something for the SoB that hasn't necessarily gone into production I don't think there is any implication of an imminent release. The fact SoB products have been withdrawn I think simply has more to do with GW scrapping and selling off metal.

I think its a shame GW hasn't done anything more with SoB, they really deserve something more.

**Ferrum_Sanguinis**

Considering that as with GK, you really only need one kit to make almost every type of unit plus or minus a change in jump packs and/or weapons, I'm really hoping this mean we a plastic sisters box.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Troike wrote:
Also, it's worth noting, I doubt that so many accusations of sexism/over-sexualisation would be thrown in were the Repentia men instead.

How many male miniatures have you seen that you would call sexualized? Female miniatures usually have big boobs (because “heroic proportion”

), and on the repentia models, they are prominently displayed, while male miniatures do not even get nipples (and the linked WHFB flagellants are no exception). Now you are right that even if those WHFB flagellants were sexualized (suppose, say, that most of them had nipple rings or butt windows), the reaction would not be the same. At all. That is a byproduct of more than 95% of the player base being male, and more than 99% of the sexualized miniatures being female.

**Frozen Ocean**

The point is that nobody has any right to care about male privilege until we have an equal society.

Anyway, I really hope this signals more SoB, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

**Ferrum_Sanguinis**

FFS, can we please have just ONE SoB thread that doesn't derail into debate about misogyny and sexism?

**BlaxicanX**

ClockworkZion wrote:

And we all know the only reason we've had it for decades is there have been no new models to change or challenge that asthetic.

Source? Boob-plate isn't uncommon in 40K media, even recently released stuff, so clearly GW isn't uncomfortable with the idea.

Rostere wrote:
I really, really hate it when female warriors are given impractical armour to show off typically female traits, like boob plate for example.

The only reason people are not more upset by this is that they have grown used to it. When we see examples of ridiculous female attire and armour which is overly sexualized just so that the typical miniature gaming consumers can gloat over their bodies, it's shameful and symptomatic of the immature and sexist "boobs or GTFO" attitude which exists in a lot of gamer culture today, and insulting and condescending towards the male gamers who'd rather choose immersion over sexual fantasies. Not to mention the complete suspension of disbelief which occurs when you see male soldiers with armour that could be practical and then women in armour that was obviously created for the male gaze. Ordinary SoBs are great except for the boobplate, while specific units such as the Sisters Repentia are just ridiculous. Female penitent fanatics get to look like they were brought straight from a leather fetish porn movie (with whips and all, and half-exposed breasts!), while male penitent fanatics look like this. Yes, absolutely no subconscious sexism from GWs side there. They are certainly not the worst in this regard, but there's definitely still things to do.

Why is it shameful?

No one cares about Catachans or Space Marines who don't wear helmets, despite their appearances shattering immersion. Rule of Cool isn't the same thing as sexism.

**Frozen Ocean**

BlaxicanX wrote:

Why is it shameful?

No one cares about Catachans or Space Marines who don't wear helmets, despite their appearances shattering immersion. Rule of Cool isn't the same thing as sexism.

I care!

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
FFS, can we please have just ONE SoB thread that doesn't derail into debate about misogyny and sexism?

Yes, we can.

**BlaxicanX**

Frozen Ocean wrote:

I care!

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

BlaxicanX wrote:
Rule of Cool isn't the same thing as sexism.

Yeah, but it is not the same Rule of Sexy either. They only interlap if you think sexy is cool.

**Frozen Ocean**

BlaxicanX wrote:
Frozen Ocean wrote:

I care!

Spoiler:

3+ save against headshots is hardly heresy!

**BlaxicanX**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
BlaxicanX wrote:
Rule of Cool isn't the same thing as sexism.

Yeah, but it is not the same Rule of Sexy either. They only interlap if you think sexy is cool.

Rule of sexy is a sub-trope of rule of cool. Saying they're different is the same line of pedantics as saying that character induced stupidity and plot induced stupidity are different.

**Fayric**

Hm, the empire of 40k is quite on the fascist side, and fascists tend to be sexist.
There is actually nothing saying a setting where we accept whole planets of mining serfs and where people might become lobotomized servitor zombies, should have a equal and non sexist tradition regarding female warriors. Equality is not exactly a thing in the far future of the 41rst milennia.

That said, I would not mind seeing more of non sexist eldar, tau and IG (being more practical and based om individual cultures), and we know GW can do this.
It would also be awsome to see a codex: mechanicum matriarcy in the near future.

Heck, even the daemonettes look pretty decent considering.

**Erasoketa**

I GW were to release a new codex, I'd rather have a standard codex than a limited edition one. Basically because only the rulebook and standard codexes are translated this days.

**sing your life**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
TheAuldGrump wrote:
I have seen the Boob Monster... there is no unseeing it....

Spoiler:

I find that the pink-haired pinup is more disturbing than the wet nurse. Why? Because the wet nurse is supposed to be disturbing, is disturbing, and therefore looks cool. The pinup is supposed to be attractive, but is about as grotesque as the wet nurse, and therefore looks just plain wrong.

I'm thinking the pink haired girl is supposed to be somewhat disturbing, since it seems to be a personification of said boob monster.

**1hadhq**

Erasoketa wrote:
I GW were to release a new codex, I'd rather have a standard codex than a limited edition one. Basically because only the rulebook and standard codexes are translated this days.

Yes, please.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

BlaxicanX wrote:
Rule of sexy is a sub-trope of rule of cool. Saying they're different is the same line of pedantics as saying that character induced stupidity and plot induced stupidity are different.

Okay, let me rephrase it in a non-pedantic way. I am okay with Rule of Cool in general because I want 40k to be filled with cool stuff. I am however not okay with Rule of Sexy because I do not want to see my 40k filled with sexy stuff, and I think trying to make characters sexy impedes on making them cool. Rule of Cool in general is obviously not sexist, but Rule of Sexy in particular can, and usually do, lead to some pretty sexist representations. In the examples you were referring to, the no-helmet policy is there to make individual characters stand out more, to serve the storytelling and the epicness of setting. This is useful, and even though it is not realistic, it does not break immersion that much because it goes along well with the whole atmosphere of the setting. Sexiness does not.

Fayric wrote:
Hm, the empire of 40k is quite on the fascist side, and fascists tend to be sexist.

Picture time!
SS women :

Spoiler:

Fascist women in Britain:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8425252.stm
North Korean women :

Spoiler:

Noticed something? Yeah, they are not dressed in stupid sexy clothing. Actually, from what I read, the North Korean regime is actually quite prude and women there are supposed to be very… modest. Fascists tend to be sexists, but their sexism usually does not express itself this way. Most of the time they tend to be pretty conservative.

**Furyou Miko**

Sigh.

Models being temporarily unavailable is not a sign of the impending apocalypse. Nor is it a sign of an update around the corner.

Nor does it mean that suddenly, the Sisters will have bare midriffs or belly armour so thick you couldn't fry an egg in it.

What's more telling is that several artists have been commissioned to do Sisters art by the company, including box art.

**milkboy**

Wow! That's a good sign!

When I went to the site, many of there were just temporarily unavailable so I didn't put much hopes into an update due to that.

BUt box art is another thing altogether. Would discussing this get the artists into trouble? Wouldn't these things have some non-disclosure thing to prevent leaks?

**ClockworkZion**

Wait, box art? I'm pretty sure GW uses photos on boxes.

**Gymnogyps**

Furyou Miko wrote:
Sigh.

Models being temporarily unavailable is not a sign of the impending apocalypse. Nor is it a sign of an update around the corner.

Nor does it mean that suddenly, the Sisters will have bare midriffs or belly armour so thick you couldn't fry an egg in it.

What's more telling is that several artists have been commissioned to do Sisters art by the company, including box art.

I agree that models going unavailable means nothing more than they are unavailable... But you statement about box art is not quite making sense. GW hasn't been doing traditional art for boxes for a while; instead they have been doing photoshops of the actual models into backgrounds. If you're referring to art, as in drawings/paintings, I find it more likely that it would be for supplements/the 40k rulebook, and therefore have nothing to do with model box art/new release. So, commissions of drawings/paintings do not have anything to do with new models coming, unless you're referring to photoshop work with model photos.

Can you go into your statement about commissioning for box art a little further?

**Shandara**

Furyou Miko wrote:
Sigh.

Models being temporarily unavailable is not a sign of the impending apocalypse. Nor is it a sign of an update around the corner.

Nor does it mean that suddenly, the Sisters will have bare midriffs or belly armour so thick you couldn't fry an egg in it.

What's more telling is that several artists have been commissioned to do Sisters art by the company, including box art.

Given that orders from the website currently come in generic white blisters or brown boxes, this is very heartening!

**Furyou Miko**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Wait, box art? I'm pretty sure GW uses photos on boxes.

Heavily manipulated photos is the current trend, but that still requires artists.

Look, its just a rumour, ok? No, I didn't make it up, and yes, I trust my source, but no, I'm not going to state their identity or anything beyond the fact that they are working on this stuff, on commission - because yes, you're right, that would lose them a lot of future business and potentially their ability to even work in the industry (artists live by their reputation).

Now, it may not go anywhere - I don't know about GW specifically, but companies do commission art for speculative projects from time to time. The last time I got a rumour about box art commissions was for the Centurion release, though, and look how that panned out.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

I do not mean to be rude or anything, but are you not already saying too much? I think in your position, I would have mentioned that I had some rumor that indicate a possible new release for Sisters without giving any specific details on the why and the how, and I would maybe, maybe have said more to people I trusted on PM (and who you trust here is up to you

).
Now of course, I do not know all that you know, so I may be completely wrong

.

**Furyou Miko**

Perhaps... perhaps not.

I don't get to play the mysterious trickster often, so I might be getting a little free with my information. >>

**Troike**

Am intrigued regarding the art commissions. To me, it's just another sign that Sisters are somewhere on GW's future agenda. But, as usual, there's no real sign of just when those plans might come to fruition.

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
How many male miniatures have you seen that you would call sexualized?

I wasn't really saying that there were any. Really, all I was getting at was, as you said, their gender can alter one's perception of the models. It would be nice if the main thing that people took from them was "oh, these people are fanatics", since IMO that's the most important aspect of the Repentia.

**ClockworkZion**

So since we're talking about Repentia, some things I'd like to see done differently for them:

Replace the armoured boots they're wearing with bare feet and/or feet wrapped in strips of cloth. These women only own the rags made from their old robes and their Eviscarator, so they might as well look the part. A more wiry-muscled look (not unlike Lelith) wouldn't be unreasonable either. Additionally ditching the hoods for bald heads (maybe some with makeshift eye patches along with some rags being clearly used as a kind of field dressing) wouldn't be too far out there.

Lastly I'd up the ornateness of the Eviscarator. Maybe incorporating the Aquila into it so the casing looks like a wing, or maybe the Ecclesiarchy symbol, or an ornate casing of some kind (like those panels that come in the Immolator kit). It just strikes me as something that should really be eye catching and possibly come in several different designs as they sound like the sort of things that should look like pieces of art.