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.

The new WHite Dwarf mentions that a new unit for the Everchosen is coming next week - the Gaunt Summoners. That wizard on the disc that was previewed earlier?

 insaniak wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm a fan of heroic scale models, but does anyone else find that axe to be ludicrously oversized?

[edit] To specify, the one on the sprue.

I dont think dwarfs where ever heroic scale, hell i do not even think GW ever did anything heroic scale maybe the primarchs? Most have big heads and hands lol.

The big heads and hands are exactly what people are talking about by 'heroic scale'... GW's models have always been somewhat chibbied to make them look bulkier and more impressive on the table.



Meanwhile, those Knights are a bit special. Say what you want about the game itself, the model releases have for the most part been superb so far.

But... Heroic scale is being 9 heads tall so that is the wrong direction.

Now sure how to double quote so I will add it here they arnt slayers anymore tho they are fire dwarfs so they build their own stuff not like old wfb"

I can't find any definition for what exactly heroic scale is so I don't think it does mean nine heads tall, people just use it to mean the bigger heads and hands of most GW models (and other manufacturers).

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

migooo wrote:

 Elemental wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
..........and mohawks made of fire?

Sounds like a very defensible direction to take your IP in.

The last people GW want to go up against is wotc

What if it's the other way around though?

You really think GW would have a chance? Wotc has Hasbro backing them gw has gw




Automatically Appended Next Post:

MongooseMatt wrote:
The new WHite Dwarf mentions that a new unit for the Everchosen is coming next week - the Gaunt Summoners. That wizard on the disc that was previewed earlier?

Sounds very interesting

migooo wrote:

You really think GW would have a chance? Wotc has Hasbro backing them gw has gw

Where did I say that I thought that? I was just saying it for some catharsis

Do Guant summoners summon actual Gaunts? Fantasy nids!

Not really a big fan of these new chaos guys.. they just look too busy. Hoping the dwarves will look good but I'm waiting for the official painted pics to judge

 ImAGeek wrote:
I'm not sure the Mohawk even is fire. Just looks like a Mohawk to me. The helmet bit and hair look exactly like the bottom dwarves in the art shown in the first post, and theirs is just hair.

Sorry, the bottom ones here:

 Mymearan wrote:
It's this guy almost

I think you're right.

It's a bit of a shame, because giant red mohawks haven't been edgy since the late 1970s, but a player could always modify and paint it as real flame.

His beard is on fire though!

OgreChubbs wrote:dont think dwarfs where ever heroic scale, hell i do not even think GW ever did anything heroic scale

Blimey.

http://s11.photobucket.com/user/ZeroTwentythree/media/mburg/handgun01.jpg.html
http://www.warseer.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=185686&d=1390217877
http://s814.photobucket.com/user/jonbrooks_photo/media/PB230035.jpg.html
https://scientificromancedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/792_md-comparison-imperial-guard-space-marines-toy-soldier-warhammer-40000.jpg?w=600&h=450

The reason GW dwarfs are butterballs with feet just glued on the bottom is because their humans already had dwarf proportions. There was nowhere else to go.

jah-joshua wrote:
an axe, nor a mohawk, can never be too big, in my opinion...

This is why we can't have nice things.

i love that the minis are like a 3-D comic book image...

EDIT: actually, I'll take the response over here.

The Dwarf looks kinda cool, but a painted pic will help greatly.

As for the new Knights - The feel a little busy but seem to have potential. I think a couple of alternate paint schemes will help move the needle a bit.

 ImAGeek wrote:
I can't find any definition for what exactly heroic scale is so I don't think it does mean nine heads tall, people just use it to mean the bigger heads and hands of most GW models (and other manufacturers).

Here ya go https://www.google.ca/search?q=heroic+scale&rlz=1C9BKJA_enCA611CA611&hl=en-US&prmd=ivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjm3PvYu8LJAhUElIMKHecoAVkQ_AUIBygB#imgrc=bdqvScIZ7aTsLM%3A

Looks like you're confusing heroic proportions in art with 'heroic scale' in gaming miniatures. The latter is most definitely chunky, oversized features.

 Vermis wrote:
Looks like you're confusing heroic proportions in art with 'heroic scale' in gaming miniatures. The latter is most definitely chunky, oversized features.

No it is the same scale used in sculpting trust me three years of school taught me that.

OgreChubbs wrote:

 Vermis wrote:
Looks like you're confusing heroic proportions in art with 'heroic scale' in gaming miniatures. The latter is most definitely chunky, oversized features.

No it is the same scale used in sculpting trust me three years of school taught me that.

In tabletop gaming, "Heroic" scale has been used to describe exaggerated features, such as head and hands, for as long as I can remember..

https://sdtaylor.wordpress.com/2011/12/06/heroic-v-true/

GWs scale in particular has always been described as 28mm "Heroic", for at least the last 15 years or so, due to the fact it is decidedly different from true scale 28mm models.

 Maddermax wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:

 Vermis wrote:
Looks like you're confusing heroic proportions in art with 'heroic scale' in gaming miniatures. The latter is most definitely chunky, oversized features.

No it is the same scale used in sculpting trust me three years of school taught me that.

In tabletop gaming, "Heroic" scale has been used to describe exaggerated features, such as head and hands for as long as I can remember..

https://sdtaylor.wordpress.com/2011/12/06/heroic-v-true/

GWs scale in particular has always been described as 28mm "Heroic", for at least the last 15 years or so, due to the fact it is decidedly different from true scale 28mm models.

But they are wrong..... Bah hate when people use a word or term they do not actually understand. Like irony... Drives me nuts. Guess starting today I will spread the truth and distroy the ignorant.

 Mymearan wrote:
His beard is on fire though!

That... dwarf... is... on... FIRE!! *read in Alicia Keyes song voice*

Slayers were my favorite aspect of fantasy dwarves and the only full unit I ever bought (including the blood bowl deathroller and the warhammer quest plastic guy). The gold standard in plastic so far for me IIRC are the Avatars of War iirc not-slayers (not sure if they're still around) so hopefully they'll beat that without jumping the shark with an over the top flying through the air held up by a part of his beard attached to random terrain on the base overly busy rivets everywhere pose.

http://www.avatars-of-war.com/eng/web/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&prodcode=pl01&prodname=Dwarf+Berserkers+of+Bj%C3%B6rn&id=118&Itemid=143



If anyone is interested in that, don't buy direct from the company as they were in the past very bad with releases and stock levels. Order instead from an instock webstore local to you.

Good thing that words don't have static meaning and words being used as terms with their own definitions is a thing. Note the number of words in the dictionary that have only one definition.

OgreChubbs wrote:

 Maddermax wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:

 Vermis wrote:
Looks like you're confusing heroic proportions in art with 'heroic scale' in gaming miniatures. The latter is most definitely chunky, oversized features.

No it is the same scale used in sculpting trust me three years of school taught me that.

In tabletop gaming, "Heroic" scale has been used to describe exaggerated features, such as head and hands for as long as I can remember..

https://sdtaylor.wordpress.com/2011/12/06/heroic-v-true/

GWs scale in particular has always been described as 28mm "Heroic", for at least the last 15 years or so, due to the fact it is decidedly different from true scale 28mm models.

But they are wrong..... Bah hate when people use a word or term they do not actually understand. Like irony... Drives me nuts. Guess starting today I will spread the truth and distroy the ignorant.

I don't think you can really call a word that's been used for something for 15 years wrong... It just has another meaning now. Heroic scale for models is different to heroic proportions for art/sculpture.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Good thing that words don't have static meaning and words being used as terms with their own definitions is a thing. Note the number of words in the dictionary that have only one definition.

Exactly

OgreChubbs wrote:

 Maddermax wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:

 Vermis wrote:
Looks like you're confusing heroic proportions in art with 'heroic scale' in gaming miniatures. The latter is most definitely chunky, oversized features.

No it is the same scale used in sculpting trust me three years of school taught me that.

In tabletop gaming, "Heroic" scale has been used to describe exaggerated features, such as head and hands for as long as I can remember..

https://sdtaylor.wordpress.com/2011/12/06/heroic-v-true/

GWs scale in particular has always been described as 28mm "Heroic", for at least the last 15 years or so, due to the fact it is decidedly different from true scale 28mm models.

But they are wrong..... Bah hate when people use a word or term they do not actually understand. Like irony... Drives me nuts. Guess starting today I will spread the truth and distroy the ignorant.

They are not wrong, they are using the correct terminology for the subject at hand - specifically the subject of tabletop miniatures/gaming. It's like when we discuss the merits of Resin vs Plastic - a chemist would laugh, as resin models are plastic, but in the realm of tabletop gaming, people know what we are discussing.

This, however, is probably not on topic at all, and is a discussion that should be taken elsewhere if it were to continue.

On topic, the vanguard knights have some excellent detail, but the overall effect when looking at them in the battlefield photos is so busy it's hard to make them out properly. It's like dazzle camouflage, there are so many bits it makes it hard to really get a sense of what they're doing and their pose. Perhaps a different paint job would bring them out better. The Fyreslayers seem fairly nice, but again just so busy.... it will be interested to see them when they are actually up and painted.

Guys feel free to start a thread in Dakka Discussions about the proper use of terms like heroic scale and heroic proportions (interesting topic!) but it's off-topic in this thread and I am going to delete any further posts on the matter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Maddermax wrote:
the overall effect when looking at them in the battlefield photos is so busy it's hard to make them out properly

I think you are correct to cite the paintjob. The current studio style is hard-edge highlighting to white, I guess to emphasize the details of the model in close up photography. I consciously paint my own stuff in a softer, naturalistic way and it looks pretty different.

Did anyone else roll their eyes at the test on the page?


"For enough Ur-Gold..."

Really? They live in a cosmic dwarven utopia, why would they go kill other dwarves for ur-gold?

 Thunderfrog wrote:

Did anyone else roll their eyes at the test on the page?


"For enough Ur-Gold..."

Really? They live in a cosmic dwarven utopia, why would they go kill other dwarves for ur-gold?

Cause it might get boring and they fancied a scrap?

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
I'm not sure the Mohawk even is fire. Just looks like a Mohawk to me. The helmet bit and hair look exactly like the bottom dwarves in the art shown in the first post, and theirs is just hair.

Sorry, the bottom ones here:

 Mymearan wrote:
It's this guy almost

I think you're right.

It's a bit of a shame, because giant red mohawks haven't been edgy since the late 1970s, but a player could always modify and paint it as real flame.

Honestly depends on the other flame dwarfs if I get them. And ill probably do that if I did.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

Did anyone else roll their eyes at the test on the page?


"For enough Ur-Gold..."

Really? They live in a cosmic dwarven utopia, why would they go kill other dwarves for ur-gold?

Guess it depends on Ur-price everyone needs more..

Also are the slayers a stand alone kinda like here is the naked flamers dwarfs. Here are the metal like armour iron dwarfs?

OgreChubbs wrote:

 Thunderfrog wrote:

Did anyone else roll their eyes at the test on the page?


"For enough Ur-Gold..."

Really? They live in a cosmic dwarven utopia, why would they go kill other dwarves for ur-gold?

Guess it depends on Ur-price everyone needs more..

Also are the slayers a stand alone kinda like here is the naked flamers dwarfs. Here are the metal like armour iron dwarfs?

Nobody knows and if they do they keep it so close to their chests its very well guarded.

I think that they would have done better with the 're imaging if they had gone completely elemental.

But we don't know. I'm guessing the battletome might have something...

I think at looking again is that dwarfs legs really far apart?

I dont think but it looks like he always holds that little hammer thing and either the big long pole or the giant axe. No two handed or anything just little hammer plus. So I guess lord or hero choice? Hell is that even a thing still or just hero? Wait nvm he holds the pole and the giant axe lol balance issues much.

The axe and the banner are in different hands.

I wonder if the person who leaked the Fireslayer has gotten fired yet? Awfully risky pic to distribute when your job is at stake no?...

 ImAGeek wrote:
The axe and the banner are in different hands.

I mean it looks like he has to hold both. There is no other hand options.

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Awfully risky pic to distribute when your job is at stake no?...

Happens so regularly now, easy to speculate it is condoned/controlled.