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.

 nels1031 wrote:
I believe he's referring to the 2 large stud bolts that hold the 3 pieces together. Its conceivable that they hinge at that point.

Pivoting at those points wouldn't allow the wing to extend, because the fitted cap over the actual joint would hold it in place.

Seems like it does in what little artwork in the book shows of the Stardrakes with wings fully extended, but even that is way in the background, like the artist couldn't conceive how it'd work, if its even possible to work. For instance, most of the other Stardrake arwork doesn't show the actual joint, or its drawn in the exact same pose of the miniature.

I think its a poor design choice, to be clear.

I'm sure it's been discussed to death, but the dragon looks funky.

I get that they wanted the Space Marines to ride dragons that
looked a bit more substantial than your average chinese lion
type, but these just look kind of off to me.

It might be the design of the chestplate. It makes them look boxier
than they otherwise might look. I could be wrong though. I
haven't looked at any of this stuff in a while.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:
Man, those sprues are sweet. Once again incredibly apparent that GW has their top tier sculptors working exclusively on AoS while 40k has been handed off to the unpaid interns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law

Submission for Worst Miniatures Ever Made By Mankind




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 malfred wrote:

I get that they wanted the Space Marines to ride dragons that

was the [MOD] accidentally applied to your name?

 judgedoug wrote:

Submission for Worst Miniatures Ever Made By Mankind

They're certainly silly looking, and I like exaggeration as much as the next fifteen billion people... But those are not even close to being the worst miniatures ever made by the company that brought us the original Lemartes, or Nagash, let alone the worst ever made by anyone.


Meanwhile, I believe the discussion at hand is actually about interdimensional star dragons, not GWs sculpting track record.

It is a small change but I think it makes it look better. Not much you can do about the wings or the pose if those are your hang ups.

 judgedoug wrote:

 malfred wrote:

I get that they wanted the Space Marines to ride dragons that

was the [MOD] accidentally applied to your name?

Was the judge title accidentally applied to your username?

Celestians were rumored to be Space Marines in Warhammer. I
stopped following Warhammer once Age of Sigmar actually
dropped. These dragons (and the other mounts) seem to be
sculpted to accommodate the bulky "Space Marine" esque
armor of the Celestians. I don't think it quite works. I'm
not sure why.

Chikout wrote:
It is a small change but I think it makes it look better. Not much you can do about the wings or the pose if those are your hang ups.

That's exactly what I suggested in the thread on AoS General Discussion. If you scratch those lines to make them smoother and then don't highlight them, it will looks way better.

 insaniak wrote:

 nels1031 wrote:
I believe he's referring to the 2 large stud bolts that hold the 3 pieces together. Its conceivable that they hinge at that point.

Pivoting at those points wouldn't allow the wing to extend, because the fitted cap over the actual joint would hold it in place.

Perhaps they are constructed with the same logic that allow spacemarine shoulder pads to slide and lift when the marine make a mighty sword swing?
Or the same craft that make the saddles of the stardrake and magmadroth reliable constructs.

On a more serious note. Its not inconcievable to imagine the wing armour to raise and follow the wing movement, because of the gap made for the claw. But then again, Im not an engineer and just make some ofhanded amateurish statements around here.

I get what the criticisms are but I don't see it as that bad. Maybe I'm enthralled by its bigness As we all know, a noble spirit embiggens the smallest man.
But I do wonder if this latest SE aesthetic wil give us a new look for Tzeentch. The Guant Sorcerer I really like but more for my the Pan's Labrynth eyes, and the BL fiction match. But I miss the fluid flamers and screamers and hope whatever comes is less...angular, I suppose. Hope that makes sense

It doesn't really look like what I would imagine a Star Dragon would look like. It doesn't stand out when compared with the other smaller dragons and drakes. I agree the wings look off. The armor is built like billboards; The shoulders are fine; The chest plate obstructs the neck - should have been smaller or more u-shaped. One of the worst aspects about GW's new kits are the lack of options. For 120$-ish you shouldn't be forced with a specific aesthetic on all features. The Bloodthirster has options for less, I kinda expect more at a higher price. The less options on the higher end items, the less impressive they will be. I'd say the Dwarves are getting the better end on dragons, less clutter/more detail.

As for the were big-cats: They work. I'm not buying them, but I have no problem with them. Cat-people aren't really that popular in any fantasy setting, so odd choice. They possibly wanted a boost to strength with added agility. Reminds me of Kintaro from Mortal Kombat. Like most achievers, he became immune to jokes after killing a few Shokan. GW already gave wolves to Malignants.

Mohawks are wearing thin.

Wolves are Part of the Deathwealkers fraction.

Am I seriously the only one upset the dragon snapped his leg walking over the rocks that follow GW models? It is bending backwards. Front right wrist is broken the dragon looks like he is screaming in pain. And everyone is worried about the leant forward wings?


GW needs to look at some lizards they do not bend their freakishly long wrist they swing their arms outwords due to their shoulder placement unlike mamals that swing them back and forward.

 VeteranNoob wrote:

But I do wonder if this latest SE aesthetic wil give us a new look for Tzeentch. The Guant Sorcerer I really like but more for my the Pan's Labrynth eyes, and the BL fiction match. But I miss the fluid flamers and screamers and hope whatever comes is less...angular, I suppose. Hope that makes sense

Well, khorne stuf for AoS dont look alot like bloodletters and such.
With tzeench they can really have fun and make flying "chaos warriors" or twisted units with ranged magic attacks.
I really hope the gaunt summoner is a representative look for the "new recruits".
However, "angular" tend to be a theme with AoS design.

OgreChubbs wrote:
Am I seriously the only one upset the dragon snapped his leg walking over the rocks that follow GW models? It is bending backwards. Front right wrist is broken the dragon looks like he is screaming in pain. And everyone is worried about the leant forward wings?


GW needs to look at some lizards they do not bend their freakishly long wrist they swing their arms outwords due to their shoulder placement unlike mamals that swing them back and forward.

No, you aren't the only one, a lot of people have mentioned the leg...

 insaniak wrote:

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
The little metal caps on the wing joint are clearly hinged. I don't think the lightning bolt symbol is actually attached, although it's probably quite dangerous for the animal!

Not sure which pics you're looking at, but there are no visible hinge points on those wings.

Artwork in the book indicates they're hinged, or at least bend out of shape *real* easy.

Just when I am about to get into Age of Sigmar, GW brings out more Sigmarines, and I don't want to get in so much as I did last month.

Not sure what it is, but I am finding Sigmarines to be a big turn off in AoS. Everytime I see a Sigmarine, I just want to buy some Privateer Press or something else.

I really find Sigmairnes, boring, bland, dull and no character at all.

Davor wrote:
Just when I am about to get into Age of Sigmar, GW brings out more Sigmarines, and I don't want to get in so much as I did last month.

Not sure what it is, but I am finding Sigmarines to be a big turn off in AoS. Every time I see a Sigmarine, I just want to buy some Privateer Press or something else.

I really find Sigmarines, boring, bland, dull and no character at all.

*sigh* Yes. We all get that some people don't like Stormcasts. But there's plenty of other models to choose from that I'm sure you'll find more interesting than them. In the meantime, can we change the record and move on, please?

Davor wrote:
I really find Sigmairnes, boring, bland, dull and no character at all.

This small comment was insightful for me in a certain way, in that I have a dual-view of the Stormcast. With most armies I see the army and the fluff as part of a greater whole. For instance, I read a novel talking about what a mutalith does to people and that sticks with me when I see the model, giving it character beyond the (sub-par) sculpt. Vice versa, when the same novel describes an advancing horde of chaos my minds eye can envision those ranks of different warriors in a way that I couldn't do if I hadn't seen the models on the table. Yet for Stormcast there is a disconnect. The fluff (and particularly novels) do a great job of giving them character compared to the overall blandness of the models, to the point where they seem like separate entities. The different models of the army are all so similar that they just blend together into a vaguely armor-shaped blob of gold as compared to armies like warriors of chaos which have a singular style to them yet still have distinct identities within that. And I think it comes down to GW stretching multiple weapon options into multiple units to create a false-diversity that isn't really there. This recent release of a battletome with six different unit entries is really just different loadouts for two unit entries; dracoth cavalry and a star drake. The rest of the army is similar, in my head it's really just these units being stretched out to try and fill up more space;

-Liberators
-Judicators
-Paladins
-Prosectors
-Dracoth Knights

-Character with support ability (Relictor, Castellent, Vexillor, Heraldor)
-Flying Character
-Lord Celestent
-Lord Celestent on Dracoth
-Dragon Character
-Celetant Prime

I didn't even include Gryph-Hounds since I don't ever see them on the table (nor would consider them) anyway, on top of conversion/counts-as basically being a requirement to run more than one. But with the hounds included, that makes for 11 units, which in reality are spread across 23 warscrolls. It may be unfair of me to lump all of the support characters into one slot, but the problem is that I see four choices which feel the same, they all serve a support roll and even do it similarly (some power to buff allies, some power to nerf/damage enemies, slow, resilient, decent melee damage), if anything the setup makes me feel like I need one of each rather than picking out whats best to support what I brought. All of it adds up to a situation where each army feels extremely similar to each other army, on top of the models' visual similarity, creating for me the impression of a big bland blob. If these things were consolidated into less warscrolls than each of those would be more distinct and it would make the army feel less same-ey even if no other changes were made. At least for me. Having seen the extremis releases roll out has just reinforced this picture in my mind rather than working to counter it like I hoped a new unit type would.

 angelofvengeance wrote:

Davor wrote:
Just when I am about to get into Age of Sigmar, GW brings out more Sigmarines, and I don't want to get in so much as I did last month.

Not sure what it is, but I am finding Sigmarines to be a big turn off in AoS. Every time I see a Sigmarine, I just want to buy some Privateer Press or something else.

I really find Sigmarines, boring, bland, dull and no character at all.

*sigh* Yes. We all get that some people don't like Stormcasts. But there's plenty of other models to choose from that I'm sure you'll find more interesting than them. In the meantime, can we change the record and move on, please?

I actually made this comment to be constructive. If anything I have started buying Fantasy products. My money was going to GW end of last year and beginning of this year. Now it has stopped again. This is not a complaint but to show GW why my money is not going there. Will it work? I doubt it, but just trying to give some constructive criticism, not complaining or whining.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Davor wrote:
I really find Sigmairnes, boring, bland, dull and no character at all.

This small comment was insightful for me in a certain way, in that I have a dual-view of the Stormcast. With most armies I see the army and the fluff as part of a greater whole. For instance, I read a novel talking about what a mutalith does to people and that sticks with me when I see the model, giving it character beyond the (sub-par) sculpt. Vice versa, when the same novel describes an advancing horde of chaos my minds eye can envision those ranks of different warriors in a way that I couldn't do if I hadn't seen the models on the table. Yet for Stormcast there is a disconnect. The fluff (and particularly novels) do a great job of giving them character compared to the overall blandness of the models, to the point where they seem like separate entities. The different models of the army are all so similar that they just blend together into a vaguely armor-shaped blob of gold as compared to armies like warriors of chaos which have a singular style to them yet still have distinct identities within that. And I think it comes down to GW stretching multiple weapon options into multiple units to create a false-diversity that isn't really there. This recent release of a battletome with six different unit entries is really just different loadouts for two unit entries; dracoth cavalry and a star drake. The rest of the army is similar, in my head it's really just these units being stretched out to try and fill up more space;

-Liberators
-Judicators
-Paladins
-Prosectors
-Dracoth Knights

-Character with support ability (Relictor, Castellent, Vexillor, Heraldor)
-Flying Character
-Lord Celestent
-Lord Celestent on Dracoth
-Dragon Character
-Celetant Prime

I didn't even include Gryph-Hounds since I don't ever see them on the table (nor would consider them) anyway, on top of conversion/counts-as basically being a requirement to run more than one. But with the hounds included, that makes for 11 units, which in reality are spread across 23 warscrolls. It may be unfair of me to lump all of the support characters into one slot, but the problem is that I see four choices which feel the same, they all serve a support roll and even do it similarly (some power to buff allies, some power to nerf/damage enemies, slow, resilient, decent melee damage), if anything the setup makes me feel like I need one of each rather than picking out whats best to support what I brought. All of it adds up to a situation where each army feels extremely similar to each other army, on top of the models' visual similarity, creating for me the impression of a big bland blob. If these things were consolidated into less warscrolls than each of those would be more distinct and it would make the army feel less same-ey even if no other changes were made. At least for me. Having seen the extremis releases roll out has just reinforced this picture in my mind rather than working to counter it like I hoped a new unit type would.

Very well said. I wish I new how to write like you.

OgreChubbs wrote:
Am I seriously the only one upset the dragon snapped his leg walking over the rocks that follow GW models? It is bending backwards. Front right wrist is broken the dragon looks like he is screaming in pain. And everyone is worried about the leant forward wings?


GW needs to look at some lizards they do not bend their freakishly long wrist they swing their arms outwords due to their shoulder placement unlike mamals that swing them back and forward.

I don't see it backwards at all.

The celestant on dracoth missing the shield bonus was indeed a mistake in the print version and it's been updated now:

Warhammer Age of Sigmar
9 mins ·
The case of the missing Thundershield…
A few of you got in touch over the last few days to ask about the option to equip a Lord Celestant on Dracoth with a Thundershield.
This rule was missing from his original Warscroll, but fear not — we've just updated it online, and in the app.

Edit: Also confirmed legacy scrolls are not going away from the app or site.

I actually want to try my hand at making Stormcast more sinister, with lots of black and very dark metals. Almost like Black Legion or Iron Warriors in 40k.

More of a "you will pledge your undying allegiance to Sigmar, or we will write you off as lost and move on" feeling. Really play up the fact that most of them might not feel particular empathy for humans or other races anymore in the face of fighting what they were made to fight.

Not sure if I ever want to spend a car payment on an Archaon or Star Drake, though. I do like the cavalry though. It's a possible splurge to have two differently posed and equipped models versus the stock pose of the Starter Set version.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I actually want to try my hand at making Stormcast more sinister, with lots of black and very dark metals. Almost like Black Legion or Iron Warriors in 40k.

More of a "you will pledge your undying allegiance to Sigmar, or we will write you off as lost and move on" feeling. Really play up the fact that most of them might not feel particular empathy for humans or other races anymore in the face of fighting what they were made to fight.

That would be cool. Playing them up with that sometimes-used Space Marine concept of compassionless conquerors loyal only to their own cause would make them actually interesting.

 insaniak wrote:

 nels1031 wrote:
I believe he's referring to the 2 large stud bolts that hold the 3 pieces together. Its conceivable that they hinge at that point.

Pivoting at those points wouldn't allow the wing to extend, because the fitted cap over the actual joint would hold it in place.

We don't know what parts are actually attached to the creature, so we have to assume. Since we're assuming, and since there are definitely ways for it to attach that would allow it to hinge there, we can give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that it functions that way. I'm all for pointing out GW's stupidity, but for once, it looks like the designer actually made an effort to make the armour work. Not that the armour itself actually makes much sense, as it's wearing so little (what are those wing-caps meant to achieve?). If it had a full suit more akin to a warhorse, it could have been very cool.

EDIT: "Thundershield"? Totally unrelated to storm shields, just like "boltstorm crossbow" is totally unrelated to the storm bolter. They aren't even trying to make them not Marines.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I actually want to try my hand at making Stormcast more sinister, with lots of black and very dark metals. Almost like Black Legion or Iron Warriors in 40k.

More of a "you will pledge your undying allegiance to Sigmar, or we will write you off as lost and move on" feeling. Really play up the fact that most of them might not feel particular empathy for humans or other races anymore in the face of fighting what they were made to fight.

Not sure if I ever want to spend a car payment on an Archaon or Star Drake, though. I do like the cavalry though. It's a possible splurge to have two differently posed and equipped models versus the stock pose of the Starter Set version.

Yeah, I just finished a Lord Relictor in a dark color scheme and he turned out pretty great, imo. Dark color schemes work quite well for the Stormcast.

~Tim?

Well there is plenty of scope in the background for Stormcasts with that sort of outlook. A quick flick through the(non extreme) Stormcast battle tome has...
The Hallowed Knights. Who are described as "zealously faithful" and on a "holy crusade".
The Celestial vindicators are "as unforgiving as they are unrelenting", and all asked Sigmar to help them get vengeance.
The Astral Templars are described as being merciless and using extreme methods.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I actually want to try my hand at making Stormcast more sinister, with lots of black and very dark metals. Almost like Black Legion or Iron Warriors in 40k.

So basically Chaos Sigmarines then

I'm with the people who say the Star Dragon looks odd. The design is where it falls down; as always with GW the production aspect of it is excellent but it's the way it's front limbs are posed and the impractical armour where it fails in my opinion. The right front leg resting on the stone just doesn't look right at all. It does seem, from looking at the sprues, that with a bit of green stuff it could be built without the armour and reposed a bit?

coldgaming wrote:

Old armies:

1: Settra's story thread was left fairly open in the end times, will we be seeing more of him in Age of Sigmar?"

Plastic releases of The Black Coach and Settra are the kits I'm mainly waiting for.
--

I don't see what people are saying about the dragon's leg. Dragons aren't reptiles, their anatomy is superior to other creatures-usually being the firstborn of creation/closer to perfection. In most settings they predate the other races, and consider the other races and creatures as food, or at best self-sufficient pets that adore them.
These drakes are closer to reptiles but still are dragon-kin. So I wouldn't expect they conform to standard reptilian anatomy. I'm not familiar with the dragons of Warhammer, but don't the true dragons hang with the elves(longer and more serpentine)?

As drakes, it makes sense they are bulky and not graceful flyers. Drakes are a step above wyverns, so a meeting in between the two in anatomy of the legs seems reasonable. More griffon than reptilian( like a wyvern), as they aren't true dragons.

I don't mind the celestials, but they are bland to paint.

JNC wrote:

As drakes, it makes sense they are bulky and not graceful flyers. Drakes are a step above wyverns, so a meeting in between the two in anatomy of the legs seems reasonable. More griffon than reptilian( like a wyvern), as they aren't true dragons.

With knees instead of elbows on the forelegs, it's closer to elephant than griffon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frozen Ocean wrote:

We don't know what parts are actually attached to the creature, so we have to assume. Since we're assuming, and since there are definitely ways for it to attach that would allow it to hinge there, we can give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that it functions that way. I'm all for pointing out GW's stupidity, but for once, it looks like the designer actually made an effort to make the armour work..

I see very little about that armour that suggests that they considered how it would work.


It makes no difference if the side pieces are hinged, so long as there is a solid cap over the actual joint. The only way that hinges at those points would help is if the entire cap piece pops forwards off the wing when it extends.

Which would make sense if it's supposed to be some sort of projectile weapon, but really doesn't otherwise.

 Fayric wrote:

 VeteranNoob wrote:

But I do wonder if this latest SE aesthetic wil give us a new look for Tzeentch. The Guant Sorcerer I really like but more for my the Pan's Labrynth eyes, and the BL fiction match. But I miss the fluid flamers and screamers and hope whatever comes is less...angular, I suppose. Hope that makes sense

Well, khorne stuf for AoS dont look alot like bloodletters and such.
With tzeench they can really have fun and make flying "chaos warriors" or twisted units with ranged magic attacks.
I really hope the gaunt summoner is a representative look for the "new recruits".
However, "angular" tend to be a theme with AoS design.

Oooooooo good stuff
I questioned building my Magmadroth if I should use the set of horns which are exactly the blood letters horns but decided it was best. I look FWd to Tzeentch.