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.

 AnomanderRake wrote:


I'm more surprised that there are people that are impressed, somehow.

I don't get how that's a bad model. While I understand how Blanche's art divides the community's opinions, that's a damn fine model, both as a near identical representation of the artwork and as a standalone piece. Heavily stylised, ergo not to everyone's taste? Absolutely. But bad? Hell no.

I do say that as someone who doesn't understand all the hatred towards the Taurox to me though, this is a bad model:



Try getting that one out of your head before Christmas

Yarp, for me its the hair, it just looks more natural on the art mellisa posted, I know in the far future there is some strong ass wax but that bowl head is too much.

 Melissia wrote:
To me, the most iconic image for Sisters is this one.

Agreed. My favorite part is she's in a poster with two guardsmen near her at my FLGS and she's head and shoulders taller than them.

 General Annoyance wrote:
Try getting that one out of your head before Christmas

Why do you hate your fellow posters so much?

Just guessing, butI think people who owned the original codex probably have more affection for the earlier artwork.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Just guessing, butI think people who owned the original codex bought the book because of the shiny front cover art probably have more affection for the earlier artwork.

Fixed that for you.

I don't think the front cover art of C:WH is all that great either, but I still own both C:WH and C:SoB.

Guess it just boils down to art preference, myself im not a huge fan of the Blanche style but obviously respect his influence in Warhammer. Although I do feel that model has turned out well considering the material to work from.

 Melissia wrote:
To me, the most iconic image for Sisters is this one.

That is probabably my #3
This is #2

 Melissia wrote:
Why do you hate your fellow posters so much?

Considering the number of snide and nonconstructive comments we've had on this thread directed at other posters already, I think it was fair game

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Just guessing, butI think people who owned the original codex probably have more affection for the earlier artwork.

I've never owned an SoB Codex; I think the model is cool as an art piece (after all, art doesn't have to be 100% true to what you're portraying), but not really ideal as a style for future Sister models if we are going to get anymore. However, since it was meant as a faithful adaptation of the original artwork, I think it's a job well done.

 Melissia wrote:

terry wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I doubt Sisters will get a board game, but current rumors suggest (heap of salt here) that Sisters will get a codex early next year.

unless gw is playing a joke on us, then plastic sisters of battle are on there way. I can't imagine that they would do that without a new codex

GW's design team has talked about plastic Sisters years ago in the past, yet not delivered. Let's not get ahead of ourselves and get excited over something that has failed to happen in the past.

Yes, but GW also wasn't run by Roundtree back then. We also didn't have Rob, Eddie, Duncan and the other fresh blood that seems to have filled in the ranks at the company.

Making an apples to apples comparison is pants on head silly.

Regardless, what was the last count of all of the nine factions in the book now?

I have...

Inquisition
Psykers
Deathwatch
Grey Knights
Sisters of Battle
Assassins
Ad Mech
Legion of the Damned...

Who was the last one?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Daedalus81 wrote:
Making an apples to apples comparison is pants on head silly.

Getting excited from empty hype when previous experience suggests caution is silly. To repeat a constant theme of this thread-- I'm under no obligation to buy in to your hype train.

I like the model, even if it isn't my favorite piece of art. The real question is what OOP SoB models are coming back?

Belloflostsouls says:

'The full sisters of Battle codex is included in the upcoming Codex Imperial Agents, so you wont have long to wait to have full printed rules to use with the new mini'

Are they just making stuff up?
First I've heard of this.

They're BoLS, I'm pretty sure they're making gak up. That would bloat the book up far beyond its current page count.

 dan2026 wrote:
Belloflostsouls says:

Are they just making stuff up?

You answered your own question in reverse.

 General Annoyance wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


I'm more surprised that there are people that are impressed, somehow.

I don't get how that's a bad model. While I understand how Blanche's art divides the community's opinions, that's a damn fine model, both as a near identical representation of the artwork and as a standalone piece. Heavily stylised, ergo not to everyone's taste? Absolutely. But bad? Hell no.

I do say that as someone who doesn't understand all the hatred towards the Taurox to me though, this is a bad model:

Spoiler:

Try getting that one out of your head before Christmas

Soooo wrong

 BloodGrin wrote:
Soooo wrong

Care to elaborate? Or was that aimed at what was in the spoiler tag that you totally regret opening?

I suppose the "new" sister is great for people who already have a full army and need something that didnt pay any attention to the last 18 years of modeling/design development.

For the rest of us, its pretty much the death of any hope to see meaningful female models in a human faction.
Its a good thing GW has been releasing so many nice models lately, Im quite busy with the actual good ones.

Edit: I see lady gagas pokerface era in this, did she mention inspiration from JB? GW should sue.

 General Annoyance wrote:

 BloodGrin wrote:
Soooo wrong

Care to elaborate? Or was that aimed at what was in the spoiler tag that you totally regret opening?

That picture...so bad and so wrong but now I want one

 pretre wrote:

 dan2026 wrote:
Belloflostsouls says:

Are they just making stuff up?

You answered your own question in reverse.

Better not make fun of BOLS, they'll be quick to ban you from their click-bait-advertisement-echochamber.

I'd like to see it unpainted, the face seems a bit odd. I regret not getting the Blood Angel captain from the 2nd edition wargear cover - so I'll certainly be getting this

Fayric wrote:I suppose the "new" sister is great for people who already have a full army and need something that didnt pay any attention to the last 18 years of modeling/design development.

For the rest of us, its pretty much the death of any hope to see meaningful female models in a human faction.
Its a good thing GW has been releasing so many nice models lately, Im quite busy with the actual good ones.

It was designed to be a faithful representation of the artwork it's based off. That doesn't make it a bad model, nor does it mean that any future SoB release will necessarily have the same art direction.

Can nobody here tell me how this model is actually bad in their opinion outside of the artwork it's based on?

BloodGrin wrote:That picture...so bad and so wrong but now I want one

You sir may be in need of some therapy

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 dan2026 wrote:
Belloflostsouls says:

Are they just making stuff up?

You answered your own question in reverse.

Better not make fun of BOLS, they'll be quick to ban you from their click-bait-advertisement-echochamber.

Been banned for a bit from commenting there.
One of their contributers is local here and has a deep deep rooted hate for me that I can't say I did not enjoy cultivating.

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 dan2026 wrote:
Belloflostsouls says:

Are they just making stuff up?

You answered your own question in reverse.

Better not make fun of BOLS, they'll be quick to ban you from their click-bait-advertisement-echochamber.

No biggie. I just go to their blog to copy the URL and fake rumors for inclusion with the tracker. Not like I interact.

 General Annoyance wrote:

Fayric wrote:I suppose the "new" sister is great for people who already have a full army and need something that didnt pay any attention to the last 18 years of modeling/design development.

For the rest of us, its pretty much the death of any hope to see meaningful female models in a human faction.
Its a good thing GW has been releasing so many nice models lately, Im quite busy with the actual good ones.

It was designed to be a faithful representation of the artwork it's based off. That doesn't make it a bad model, nor does it mean that any future SoB release will necessarily have the same art direction.

Can nobody here tell me how this model is actually bad in their opinion outside of the artwork it's based on?

BloodGrin wrote:That picture...so bad and so wrong but now I want one

You sir may be in need of some therapy

I like the art

but the translation to mini form has given her gw 'human' proportions rather than the long thin legs of the art work resulting in a much less appealing (to me anyway) short stocky canoness (the torso is probably a bit chunky too, but that wouldn't matter if the leg length was closer to the art). It looses the 'strangely inhuman' look of a lot of the blanche art

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I like the art

but the translation to mini form has given her gw 'human' proportions rather than the long thin legs of the art work resulting in a much less appealing (to me anyway) short stocky canoness (the torso is probably a bit chunky too, but that wouldn't matter if the leg length was closer to the art). It looses the 'strangely inhuman' look of a lot of the blanche art

At last, a quantifiable reason why this model could be considered to be sub par. Have an Exalt.

 General Annoyance wrote:
Can nobody here tell me how this model is actually bad in their opinion outside of the artwork it's based on?

IMO, the mini is better than the artwork-- the legs are thicker and give the appearance of actual powered armor, compared to the god-awful jumpsuit look of the artwork, for example.

Looking at the miniature from a perspective disregarding the original art piece,mMy primary complaints about the miniature can be summarized in one word: Posing. The miniature is posed in an awkward, god-awful way that I would not want on any miniature in my army.

I'm surprised this is a marmite model. I think the sculpt is fantastic and is an amazing rendition of Blanche's art in classic Citadel miniature style.

The Sisters art from Dark Heresy is the most iconic to me, probably because it was my first exposure to them. Dawn of War was my intro to 40k as a whole, but I only picked up Soul Storm several years after it released).

 Melissia wrote:
IMO, the mini is better than the artwork-- the legs are thicker and give the appearance of actual powered armor, compared to the god-awful jumpsuit look of the artwork, for example.

Looking at the miniature from a perspective disregarding the original art piece,mMy primary complaints about the miniature can be summarized in one word: Posing. The miniature is posed in an awkward, god-awful way that I would not want on any miniature in my army.

Also some fair critique there; I too dislike that aspect of models like these that GW makes from time to time, as the poses also make them less friendly inside an army to me. However, I will say in its defence that I think the intention of this model is to be a very nice shelf piece, in similar vein to the Anniversary Imperial Marine or the Anniversary Crimson Fist Sergeant before that. That being said, it will be interesting to see if it gets rules like the Imperial Marine did for use in 40k.