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.

So all we need is an Ultimate Surrender tabletop game and these minis will be completely justified?

Yup, most of the gladiators were dressed for titillation (male or female) and not really effectiveness in combat.

However, I was more referring to Gauls, Celts and the other literal barbarians the Romans and Greeks named such;


Discussed a bit here Lots of early peoples just didn't have a lot of clothing in the first place, and certainly not armor as they had to supply their own gear, a trend which was pretty standard until the semi-professional armies of the middle ages through much of Europe. Going shirtless was pretty normal unless the weather was cold or you had some armor to put over top. The Zulus were still rocking that style in the 1800s, despite having the capability to produce decent leather and steel armor. A big shield and the ability to be highly mobile and organized shock troops was more valuable than a little more body protection.


If you want to grumble about anachronism, female warriors in general are the strange and rare thing, not the lack of armor** or clothing. Given that we expect (and enjoy!) female analogues of every archetype it seems odd to quibble that the female barbarian doesn't have enough clothing and armor, considering her male counterpart is equally bare.


** Note I am not referring to porno-plate style armor, which is certainly silly


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Side note: Is the movie Zulu so little known these days that Google didn't come up with a single image from it when I searched for "Zulu Warrior"? Such a shame, great movie with super young Michael Cain!)

Totally OT but we used to watch Zulu religiously. RELIGIOUSLY. Our non- gaming brother was addicted to it. Probably at least once a week we watched it, if not more.

I can't tell you how many times I've seen that movie. That theme song is forever burned into my brain, made even better by the sad and degrading VHS tape that warbled and distorted the first 20 minutes of the movie or so from having watched it so much.

Yea, I think I saw that probably 30-40 times in the 90s. I found a copy on DVD which made me so happy Great movie on a lot of different levels.

I went ahead and painted up that new Kev White figure. She's a nice little figure. Paints real quick, too.

 Boss Salvage wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Well unless Reaper plans a bit release on Dec 31 this should round out the Reaper 2015 thread. Come back next year for more obscure D&D references, debates on the plausibility of various weapons and barely concealed innuendo!

And a great set to end it on, bountiful 'axe' jokes and all

Seriously... a Dracolisk... for when you've completely run out of ideas for monsters.

Awww, I kind of like the little guy. Look at that face! Who can hate that underbite?

Thanks for the quality reporting Kid, catch you next year.

- Salvage

I just realized the dracolisk has 6 legs, compared to the Baslisk with 8.

For some reason this depresses me.

It's what happens when a dragon (4 legs) mates with a basilisk (8). You get a critter with 1d3+4 legs (to represent magical genetic variation in a random "good enough" manner).

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
It's what happens when a dragon (4 legs) mates with a basilisk (8). You get a critter with 1d3+4 legs (to represent magical genetic variation in a random "good enough" manner).

I know and that's what depresses me!

I mean banging together two monsters is a pretty lazy way to make a new one and then throwing in things like that as if Dracolisks were a 'thing' with their own lore and history just makes me more depressed.

I mean shouldn't it have just one wing? And only one eye that turns people to stone (the other being normal)? Should it just breath 're' or maybe 'fi'? Or maybe a breath weapon of pure oxygen, as long as you don't cause a spark you're safe...

Owlbears are just inherently worse.

Hoo-hoo-ROOAAAAARR

But yes, seems to be that there are more than enough old mythological critters that didn't have to be halfway between existing critters, that Gygax and his buddies shouldn't have invented so many new ones. Or at least, shouldn't have put them in books, where everyone could read about them.

I'm tempted to make an AOS army out of D-lisks now ...

What sized base do you think these things fit on? 60x35mm oval merhaps?



Length seems fine ...



... not sure on width? Looks close? Next oval is 75x46, which is certainly longer than I'd like.

- Salvage

The dracolisk looks awesome to me. It could pull off the alien dragon look with a suitable paint job and even represent a powerful Lensman with some bits from the DFG accessory sprue. He could be Dr. Lazarus's childhood pet that died in a tragic time travel accident.

Merhaps?

 Alpharius wrote:
Merhaps?

I am far more excite about Operationracolisk than that suggests. MiniatureMarket knows what I'm talking about

- Salvage

How many legs does a Merhaps have? Or are all its legs replaced by the fishtail?

 Boss Salvage wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
Merhaps?

I am far more excite about Operationracolisk than that suggests. MiniatureMarket knows what I'm talking about

- Salvage

I want pics!

I also want pics of all the folks who swore they'd be making armies of Caryatid Columns!



Reaper: no monster too obscure!

I wasn't questioning if it was an actual word or not, just that you're using it in 2015.

On the internet.

Merhaps needs to be relegated to the dustbin of history where it belongs - along with methinks.

Methinks.

Right there in the dustbin next to 2015! Even I know what year it is, Alph, although admittedly I didn't for about 40 minutes until my wife informed me.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
It's what happens when a dragon (4 legs) mates with a basilisk (8). You get a critter with 1d3+4 legs (to represent magical genetic variation in a random "good enough" manner).

I know and that's what depresses me!

I mean banging together two monsters is a pretty lazy way to make a new one and then throwing in things like that as if Dracolisks were a 'thing' with their own lore and history just makes me more depressed.

I mean shouldn't it have just one wing? And only one eye that turns people to stone (the other being normal)? Should it just breath 're' or maybe 'fi'? Or maybe a breath weapon of pure oxygen, as long as you don't cause a spark you're safe...

The wings take up the leg spots, obviously. So it still has 8 limbs total.

 Alpharius wrote:
I wasn't questioning if it was an actual word or not ...

Sorry Alph, didn't intend to get all word elitest there. I hadn't heard the word until a few years back, when my brother's now-wife-then-gf replied to something obnoxious he suggested with a "Merrrrrhaps ....."

@ Kid, want to see these column armies too, preferably on round bases. This is what Age of Stuff was made for!!1

- Salvage

 kronk wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
It's what happens when a dragon (4 legs) mates with a basilisk (8). You get a critter with 1d3+4 legs (to represent magical genetic variation in a random "good enough" manner).

I know and that's what depresses me!

I mean banging together two monsters is a pretty lazy way to make a new one and then throwing in things like that as if Dracolisks were a 'thing' with their own lore and history just makes me more depressed.

I mean shouldn't it have just one wing? And only one eye that turns people to stone (the other being normal)? Should it just breath 're' or maybe 'fi'? Or maybe a breath weapon of pure oxygen, as long as you don't cause a spark you're safe...

The wings take up the leg spots, obviously. So it still has 8 limbs total.

Somebody has been schooled in Common Core Math

Speaking of the year, Thread Title?

It is an old tradition to combine parts of differing creatures to create a new one, and Gygax et al were just following that tradition. It would have to be an acid breathing dragon that mated with the basilisk though, since the acid breathers are immune to petrification-- according to nethack anyway. And as any schoolboy knows, dragons will mate with anything and everything. They are the sluts of High Fantasy. Or slovens, for the males.

Even more OT (: but if you don't know the inspiration for other creatures in the D&D-iverse, here you go. Amusingly, the Owlbear was not a mashup of two monsters, but actually "existed"! And you still might be able to get your own original bulette -- who knew it was a "Realistc" dinosaur??

http://diterlizzi.com/home/owlbears-rust-monsters-and-bulettes-oh-my/

If you want to grumble about anachronism

I'm not talking about anachronism, though. I'm aware of gladiators and nekkid celts. I just dispute that they're anywhere near the intent of too many female warrior gaming minis*. Or that the primary occupation for women in a lot of fantasy worlds is as a sexy show fighter.

"This fantasy mini has it's tits out because real people in olden times didn't have many clothes." That's a new one on me, though. Does that let me stamp the top middle square, here?

*That said, I recognise that Reaper is pretty even-handed in this matter.

I never though Owlbears to be some lazy natural occurrence but rather something an insane wizard cooked up coz they were hopped up on magic goofballs.

Could Dracolisks not fall in the same boat as that? Who doesn't want a flying, flame breathing, eye gazing monster guarding their tower?

 Vermis wrote:

If you want to grumble about anachronism

I'm not talking about anachronism, though. I'm aware of gladiators and nekkid celts. I just dispute that they're anywhere near the intent of too many female warrior gaming minis*. Or that the primary occupation for women in a lot of fantasy worlds is as a sexy show fighter.

"This fantasy mini has it's tits out because real people in olden times didn't have many clothes." That's a new one on me, though. Does that let me stamp the top middle square, here?

What is the primary occupation for women in fantasy worlds? In the historic world it was "wife", not fighter, with all the work that has entailed. Then again, the primary occupation for men has not been fighter either. We war gamers tend to get a rather biased sampling of the occupations in our miniature collections.

And for reading comprehension purposes, you will note that you are misquoting me. I wasn't perhaps as super clear as I could have been. People in ancient times didn't have a lot of clothing, so it wasn't unusual to not wear your only set of cloths during an afternoon you were likely to get muddy and bloody. Dispute the intention of female warrior gaming minis if you feel that is helpful, but don't misquote me when I went to all that trouble to find pictures and references for my post.

Not only the bulette,, but also the rust monster were based upon plastic toy "animals" that were available in the late '60's and into the early '70's. Personally, I always thought the rust monster was based in part on the Wetapunga. ( A very large insect from New Zealand)

When I see Reapers first 2016 release (and get around to writing something) I'll start the Reaper 2016 thread.

For now though we're still discussing their 2015 output.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
I want pics!

JULIE GUTHRIE DRAGON FAMILY ARMY GOOOOO


1 Papa 'Red' Dragon, 1 Mama Basilisk, 16 Baby Dracolisks


While I waited for most of the family to arrive, I cleaned up the pup I was able to get locally. It was not as nightmarish an experience as I had feared, but the Bones material is going to prolong the building phase for certain. Left to do is the GS work. Wary cultist dude shown for scale.


I don't really want to give them wings - I guess they take after their mum there - so will have to GS in / re-scale those shoulder holes. This also means I'll have 16 pairs of pretty decent wings if somebody wants to hurl me some PayPal. PM me and we can chat (US preferred because shipping)

Now just waiting on some MDF bases I'm having lasered up. Tempted to pop up a short-lived plog for this crew, but frankly cleaning all that vinyl is going to push updates far apart I fear. Will post a link over to P&M if I decide to go for it!

- Salvage

Very nice! I can't wait to see your inter-species love children come together! Are you going to name them the Guthrie Legion? Guthrie Clan?

If the latter, you should get a tree man and name him "Woody".

Looking good, can't wait to see the custom bases.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Looking good, can't wait to see the custom bases.

Me too ... *taps foot*

I decided the Red Dragon was too wee, so picked up Narthrax at the LGS - also Julie G, so we're all good

- Salvage