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.

I hope for the option to have full helmeted squads or full bare heads squads (With minimun 50% of bobcuts!) like the new primaris boxes have.

I can't wistand units without helmets but for SoB i'll make an exception.

 Cothonian wrote:

Wait wait wait wait wait wait

That means female Imperial Guard! *excite*

Escher heads are currently compatible with IG.

The bob cut is absolutely iconic. I love it. I also love their sallet helmets. Having enough on the sprue to make full squads of both would be amazing.

Its.... Its actually happening....

 Manchu wrote:
The bob cut is absolutely iconic. I love it. I also love their sallet helmets. Having enough on the sprue to make full squads of both would be amazing.

I think this is one thing we can all agree with.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Its.... Its actually happening....

The Emperor protects.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Its.... Its actually happening....

"Emperor willing."

Bloodmaster wrote:
There won't be radical changes in SoB design, but nevertheless, guys, what would be so bad about a slight change of, for example, the boob-cup-rockets to a monoplate as seen for example with the female stormcasts?! Would solve some issuse, that boile down to "oversexulising" as well as giving the range more "realism" the devided boob-plate is risk for your sternum ;-).

OK, to illustrate why people have an issue with this particular thing, I'll ask a counter-question - should GW remove all the codpieces from Empire/Free Peoples models? They emphasise a physical sexual characteristic, and are useless ornamentation that may even be a hindrance in a "realistic" analysis. Because despite what some people keep asserting, "boob plates" in the Sisters' case has nothing to do with "sexualisation", over or otherwise, they are an aesthetic element with the same purpose as codpieces - associating warrior prowess with a gender stereotype.

Now obviously, from a "realistic" perspective that's silly and pointless, just as knights wandering around in full-plate armour with a big oversized metal willy sticking out the front of it was silly and pointless, but 40K isn't realistic, intentionally so, and the overtly female aesthetic design of Sisters has a specific intent that has nothing to do with making them objects of desire. Compromising that aesthetic thematically dilutes the faction not for any good reason, but to placate people who're either incapable of or unwilling to recognise that difference(note: I'm by no means saying you cannot personally prefer the appearance of a Stormcast-style monoplate, just that it's no more than that, a preference).

So yeah, what would be so bad about it? Probably nothing, I'm sure you could make some very nice looking female space warriors with gothic overtones in that style, there's just no actual reason to make the change, and it gets elevated to "bad" because people who like the present aesthetic get annoyed when others who don't understand(willfully or otherwise) the present aesthetic pretend their preference has some grand moral basis that makes them right.

 Yodhrin wrote:
there's just no actual reason to make the change, and it gets elevated to "bad" because people who like the present aesthetic get annoyed when others who don't understand(willfully or otherwise) the present aesthetic pretend their preference has some grand moral basis that makes them right.

That's very well put and I will just add that it's also irritating when people claim "I am a fan of X" but most of what they say about X is why X is badwrong and must be changed. This is the number one source of criticism of Sisters of Battle and of all the things for GW to ignore this is the type of thing GW should absolutely be ignoring.

I am afraid for my wallet.
I figured I was safe.
I am big on getting "fanatic" 40k groups like Black Templar, Inquisition.
It was originally to be a counterpoint to my CSM.
I looked at Sisters and thought it was getting old and pretty darn expensive.
Now they will come out in plastic and no other faction can quite keep up in the fanatical department.

As to the look of them, sure they take their devotion seriously so we may see something like the BT chains, but they also take their fighting really seriously.
Ornate but functional, metal bikini will not be in the design discussion one would hope.
I was just thinking if they do get some whips, I could call a SOB and BT team-up as "Whips and Chains!"... but I digress.

All I can say is for those who have "kept the faith" this long, I fear for GW, the expectations will be through the roof.
GW has been doing well lately, please oh please may they not feth this one up!

You can't compare Empire codpieces with SoB boobplate, that's a fallacy for the following reason:

Empire fashion has always been based on early 16th century fashion. The miniatures designed by the Perry twins in the '90s are particularly faithful to their historical sources.

Empire codpieces has nothing to do with emphasising "a physical sexual characteristic, and are useless ornamentation that may even be a hindrance in a "realistic" analysis"; Empire soldiers wear them for one reason only; because the miniatures emulates 16th century fashion, and they would be incomplete without the codpieces. If you remove the codpieces, you'd also have to abandon the slashed sleeves and the big, floppy hats.

Furthermore, codpieces did serve a practical purpose originally, as it covered the gap left between the two separate trouser legs, called hose, which were supported from a belt worn around the waist.

Sisters of Battle on the other hand, aren't closely based on one particular source, their armour has no particular, real life precedent. There's no question that boobplate is a sexualised design choice.

 Manchu wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
there's just no actual reason to make the change, and it gets elevated to "bad" because people who like the present aesthetic get annoyed when others who don't understand(willfully or otherwise) the present aesthetic pretend their preference has some grand moral basis that makes them right.

That's very well put and I will just add that it's also irritating when people claim "I am a fan of X" but most of what they say about X is why X is badwrong and must be changed. This is the number one source of criticism of Sisters of Battle and of all the things for GW to ignore this is the type of thing GW should absolutely be ignoring.

Agree on all points. Many of these comments involve high heels and gratuitous boob plate. Veridyan was the first Sister model wth heels, the Mistress of Repentance is the only Sister model with an oversized chest, the Canoness the only one with boob plate that comes to a point. I believe there is only the one repentia that actually has an exposed breast. The rest are all wearing as much if not more than wych elves.

Its highly possible scale creep will make the new models heads taller than the old ones. I get twitchy when it looks like I have 15mm models scattered amongst my 28mm models that are supposed to be the same race and relative size. It would definitely be a deal breaker for me, one way or the other and I don't see myself as likely to toss over what I already have to go completely with the new.

I'm more interested in the possibility of new units. GW could be aiming just to bring the existing units to the table but it doesn't seem likely. My biggest regret would be if they just toss in a bunch of like-marine units. Sister Terminators, Sisters on Bikes and light armor scout Sisters are three of the biggest offenders IMO. They need to be different, but still fit within the existing aesthetic and theme of the army.







Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zingraff wrote:
Sisters of Battle on the other hand, aren't closely based on one particular source, their armour has no particular, real life precedent. There's no question that boobplate is a sexualised design choice.

Which has everything to do with demonstrating adherence to the Decree Passive and nothing to do with making the Sororitas seem like pin up girls. Most of the models have the girls clutching a godwyn-deaz to their chest which covers easily 50% of the boobplate. There is no exposed cleavage, no super model posing or duck lips. The boob plate allows them to easily demonstrate they are of the female persuasion in compliance with the Decree Passive, not to objectify them as sex objects.

I don't really have strong feelings on the bob haircuts. I mean, they are clearly an iconic element of Sisters, but I usually try to avoid non-helmeted heads on my minis as much as possible as a default setting, and when the Sisters have amazing and easy-to-paint helmets, then it's really not even a question for me.

Assuming the sprues supported it, I'd go 100% helmeted except for characters.

So far as boobplate vs monoplate, similarly non-fussed. I can't imagine GWS is going to do anything wildly differently than they did with the Seraphim that came with Celestine, and those looked amazing. So long as there is that classic tabard\corset\high collar silhouette I'm not sure it even really matters what the exact top 1/3rd of the chest armor looks like. I'm sure they'll do a great job.

 Zingraff wrote:
You can't compare Empire codpieces with SoB boobplate, that's a fallacy for the following reason:

Empire fashion has always been based on early 16th century fashion. The miniatures designed by the Perry twins in the '90s are particularly faithful to their historical sources.

Empire codpieces has nothing to do with emphasising "a physical sexual characteristic, and are useless ornamentation that may even be a hindrance in a "realistic" analysis"; Empire soldiers wear them for one reason only; because the miniatures emulates 16th century fashion, and they would be incomplete without the codpieces. If you remove the codpieces, you'd also have to abandon the slashed sleeves and the big, floppy hats.

Err, and for what reason were codpieces part of 16th century fashion again? Oh yes, to emphasise a physical sexual characteristic, particularly in the context of martial prowess.

Furthermore, codpieces did serve a practical purpose originally, as it covered the gap left between the two separate trouser legs, called hose, which were supported from a belt worn around the waist.

As would a breastplate, later evolving in purpose to have more than just a practical use.

Sisters of Battle on the other hand, aren't closely based on one particular source, their armour has no particular, real life precedent. There's no question that boobplate is a sexualised design choice.

Utter, unmitigated, unabashed, undiluted nonsense on toast. If everything in sci-fantasy fiction had to have a real life precedent, there wouldn't be any such thing as sci-fantasy fiction.

Let me see if I can break this down for you.

Codpieces originally had only a practical purpose. That purpose was supplemented over time with additional aesthetic embellishments with specific thematic intent, ie emphasising the in that time presumed link between overt masculinity and martial prowess.

Breastplates originally had only a practical purpose. That purpose was supplemented over time with additional aesthetic embellishments with specific thematic intent, ie emphasising the femininity of the wearer in a martial context to demonstrate compliance with the Decree Passive.

The fact that the latter reasoning is fictional(I mean, you could argue the reasoning in the first case is "fictional" as well, people just actually believed otherwise at one time) does not negate the fact that reasoning exists, and said reasoning has nothing to do with titillation.

Intent matters, context matters, there are distinctions and nuances in art and fiction that go beyond your simplistic "it has bewbs, therefore ebil" nonsense - life drawing and cam shows both have nudey people in them, does that mean life drawing is pornography(which is not to imply there's anything wrong with that providing everyone involved is a consenting adult)? Of course not, because the intent and the context are completely different.

You're simply wrong.

So do you fellers think you can keep this up until 2019....?

Assuming you can I’m thinking of starting a book, either how many pages or how many locks until release.

All proceeds going to deprived Ork players.

 notprop wrote:
So do you fellers think you can keep this up until 2019....?

Assuming you can I’m thinking of starting a book, either how many pages or how many locks until release.

All proceeds going to deprived Ork players.

I can keep discussing something for at least as long as people can complain about others discussing something, yeah.

The mods already said chill with the thematic complaints here, please listen to our benevolent overlords.

 notprop wrote:
So do you fellers think you can keep this up until 2019....?

Assuming you can I’m thinking of starting a book, either how many pages or how many locks until release.

All proceeds going to deprived Ork players.

I feel for you Ork players. Hopefully you will get yours before SoB do, considering that GW is just now picking us up.

Though I think you have missed the point that SoB players have been defending their aesthetic from OMG Bewbplate needs to go for almost as long as there have been SoB. So yeah, you bet.

 pretre wrote:

 Cothonian wrote:

Wait wait wait wait wait wait

That means female Imperial Guard! *excite*

Escher heads are currently compatible with IG.

Though I'm not sure I would use them, personally.

Oh i just cant Wait!!!

 Melissia wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Cothonian wrote:

Wait wait wait wait wait wait

That means female Imperial Guard! *excite*

Escher heads are currently compatible with IG.

Though I'm not sure I would use them, personally.

I feel like the Escher heads would look reaaaaally weird on Cadian bodies... It's a completely different aesthetic.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Cothonian wrote:

Wait wait wait wait wait wait

That means female Imperial Guard! *excite*

Escher heads are currently compatible with IG.

Though I'm not sure I would use them, personally.

I feel like the Escher heads would look reaaaaally weird on Cadian bodies... It's a completely different aesthetic.

Statuesque Miniatures makes a great variety of female heads.

Or Victoria Miniatures:
https://victoriaminiatures.com/collections/female-squads-and-bits

Oh yeah, there are plenty of great options for 3rd party women. Most of them look better than the actual models, lol. If I played Guard I would definitely get my army from Victoria Miniatures.

I do hope whatever kits come out have enough helmeted heads to do a whole squad. Not saying I don't like the iconic haircut that Sisters have, but the helmets do look awesome. I also want Celestians to be somewhat heavier looking, almost as if their Power Armour is reinforced in some way. Far more ornate and 'meaner' looking helmets. Really set them apart from regular Sisters beyond "They just have more special weapons and a better stat line". Make them visually stand out.

 Galas wrote:
Guys this MadCowCrazy guy is the one that posted images of anatomic studies of Celestine saying she was fat, and called everyone a SJW (even HMBC!) when they told him that was nonsense.

I am loathe to drag up even that topic, but how could anyone in their right mind call those miniatures 'fat'? I mean... I just cannot compute that!

For once, I agree with part of HBMC's post-- I love the Sisters of Battle helmets, they are extremely pleasing visually.

Same here - tbh I think the Sisters of Battle have the best (ie most appealing) helmets in the entirety of 40k. It'll be really hard for me to assemble models with the iconic bob cut or whatever other heads they include.

Sisters of battle helmets are the best design of helmet that exists in 40k, I agree. (For me at least)

And I agree too that Celestian should have a fancier version of that helmet.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
I feel like the Escher heads would look reaaaaally weird on Cadian bodies... It's a completely different aesthetic.

Um, not really:

 Galas wrote:
Sisters of battle helmets are the best design of helmet that exists in 40k, I agree. (For me at least)

And I agree too that Celestian should have a fancier version of that helmet.

Yes, 100%. Would love to see enough heads to have a full squad of helmet or no helmet option.