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.

 ImAGeek wrote:
They've already said they aren't changing the aesthetic:

The classic gothic design of the Sisters of Battle is, to be frank, awesome, and with the new range, the design studio hasn’t been trying to change that – instead, we’ve gone back to the original art and looked at how we can truly bring it to life using cutting edge design technology. The first model of the new generation of Sisters of Battle is based – almost detail-for-detail – on some of the most iconic Sisters of Battle art ever made, and you can expect the rest of the army to follow the classic design cues you know and love.

Bolded the keywords here.

They are not going to be indentikit versions of the current metal models. They're going to be proportioned and styled slightly differently, using the same design cues. That means the core concepts remain the same, but it'll be the difference between two artists painting a space marine: We all know what they look like, but sit two artists down to paint one and they're going to come out looking different in execution, every time.

To think that there will be no changes is foolish, minor though they might be.

The point about the Genestealer cultists is spot-on. Miniatures that look modern and yet fit seamlessly with their forebears, and yet are noticeably executed differently.

Saint Celestine was obviously a Battle Sister. And yet, obviously a more modern figure than any other Battle Sister in the catalogue up to that point.

 ekwatts wrote:
To think that there will be no changes is foolish, minor though they might be.

I don't think anyone (seriously) expected a direct metal to plastic port.

 Geifer wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
To think that there will be no changes is foolish, minor though they might be.

I don't think anyone (seriously) expected a direct metal to plastic port.

Yeah, no one is saying the models will be identical, but plastic - just that the aesthetic isn't changing.

A squintillion social media posts debating the "fatness" of the new Saint Celestine suggests that whatever minor changes are made will be REEEEEEE'd about for 12 months, though. So I'd prefer it if they took the opportunity to REALLY go to town on the range and throw in all kinds of up-armoured badasses, new uniforms and armour patterns, etc. Keeping them "the same" is cowardly and boring.

 ekwatts wrote:
A squintillion social media posts debating the "fatness" of the new Saint Celestine suggests that whatever minor changes are made will be REEEEEEE'd about for 12 months, though. So I'd prefer it if they took the opportunity to REALLY go to town on the range and throw in all kinds of up-armoured badasses, new uniforms and armour patterns, etc. Keeping them "the same" is cowardly and boring.

I see your point and I'm with you. You know all those armors that cover the arms and legs but leave the fun bits visible? I think GW should really go to town on Sisters and do that. Keeping silly "body armor" is cowardly and boring.

 Geifer wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
A squintillion social media posts debating the "fatness" of the new Saint Celestine suggests that whatever minor changes are made will be REEEEEEE'd about for 12 months, though. So I'd prefer it if they took the opportunity to REALLY go to town on the range and throw in all kinds of up-armoured badasses, new uniforms and armour patterns, etc. Keeping them "the same" is cowardly and boring.

I see your point and I'm with you. You know all those armors that cover the arms and legs but leave the fun bits visible? I think GW should really go to town on Sisters and do that. Keeping silly "body armor" is cowardly and boring.

How you managed to pull the assumption that I was somehow asking for "more revealing costumes" or something in a post in which I directly criticised the childish, sexist, alt-right-tinged whining about the possible circumference of Celestine's unarmoured thighs is beyond me.

When I said "up-armoured" I was using it in the sense that... well, the way EVERYONE uses that term; suggesting MORE HEAVILY ARMOURED variants, varying the troops and possible builds a little more than the existing codex.

You either didn't really read my post properly or... no, no, that almost definitely is the issue.

Take a breather and then come back to the conversation at some point, you'll thank yourself.

Why would the modern copyright/trademark-conscious GW even try changing what is an already good design, but one that is also the most easy to CR/TM due to its distinct looks and lack of notable competition in the Fantasy Sci-Fi Nuns with Guns niche?

 ekwatts wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
A squintillion social media posts debating the "fatness" of the new Saint Celestine suggests that whatever minor changes are made will be REEEEEEE'd about for 12 months, though. So I'd prefer it if they took the opportunity to REALLY go to town on the range and throw in all kinds of up-armoured badasses, new uniforms and armour patterns, etc. Keeping them "the same" is cowardly and boring.

I see your point and I'm with you. You know all those armors that cover the arms and legs but leave the fun bits visible? I think GW should really go to town on Sisters and do that. Keeping silly "body armor" is cowardly and boring.

How you managed to pull the assumption that I was somehow asking for "more revealing costumes" or something in a post in which I directly criticised the childish, sexist, alt-right-tinged whining about the possible circumference of Celestine's unarmoured thighs is beyond me.

When I said "up-armoured" I was using it in the sense that... well, the way EVERYONE uses that term; suggesting MORE HEAVILY ARMOURED variants, varying the troops and possible builds a little more than the existing codex.

You either didn't really read my post properly or... no, no, that almost definitely is the issue.

Take a breather and then come back to the conversation at some point, you'll thank yourself.

Don't worry. I read and understood your post fine. My suggestion was based on yours only in form, not content.

As has earlier been pointed out in GW's own words, GW seems determined to go the route you find cowardly and boring, and seems to believe they're going where the money is. I'm not sure if you find that lamentable because it doesn't fit your vision of a Sisters redo (not a fun situation for you, no doubt - I like to think we've all been there with one model range or another and it never ceases to suck) or if you are just worried about the reaction of a portion of the (potential) customers. In the latter case, maybe cowardly and boring isn't the worst case scenario, Sure, you'll get nutters that take exception in the silliest possible way, but if GW is on the money with their choice (and from everything I've read they are), that's just going to be background noise and won't affect us happy Sisters players with out new shiny plastic models in the trusty old aesthetic one bit.

You might just focus on all the unreasonable complaints that validate your opinion that GW should have gone in a different direction, and I don't think you'll be happier for it considering you'll neither be able to get rid of those opinions nor get GW to change their course.

That said, we have too little information about the release to actually know what's going to happen. There's still the possibility that us dullards get our minimal change update and not just you but we all get new, up-armored and fashionable Sisters on top of that.

*Realises his mistake: Posting in a Sisters-related thread*

But srsly, whatever you do or say, maybe hold off on the insinuation that I'm a sexist in future, yeah?

 ekwatts wrote:
*Realises his mistake: Posting in a Sisters-related thread*

But srsly, whatever you do or say, maybe hold off on the insinuation that I'm a sexist in future, yeah?

You're the one who keeps going on about sexism. What you are or aren't is of no consequence to me.

 ekwatts wrote:
But srsly, whatever you do or say, maybe hold off on the insinuation that I'm a sexist in future, yeah?

Don't worry. I can confirm it was quite obvious that what was happening was him trolling you, not you calling for skimpy armor Sisters.

Also yeah new units with more armor!!! Celestians need a 2+ and models, just saying .

Yeah, down with things people like! Novelty is the only thing of value!

Well, then I want purple Orks, with human proportions, who value diplomacy, erudite discourse, and the calm, measured consumption of a nice relaxing cup of tea. It's different to how they are now so it must be good, right?

 Yodhrin wrote:
Yeah, down with things people like! Novelty is the only thing of value!

You don't want new units to go with your old units? I mean, Sisters aren't Marines where every new release is either a catastrophe from a model standpoint or from a lore standpoint because they are severely over-saturated, they certainly still have room for new units.

it's sad to notice some dismiss the possibility the new design can't be possible

 aracersss wrote:
it's sad to notice some dismiss the possibility the new design can't be possible

Sadly the fantasy/sci-fi community tends to spawn some of the most rigid and close minded mindsets. Back when I was interested in Pathfinder, I remember the backlash from many when Paizo decided to add guns into their system. "Guns don't belong in fantasy" they'd cry. You could point out that that was their version of fantasy, that the tech level presented in base players guides of D&D and PF was from a time guns would have existed, or even that original D&D adventures had robots and lasers. They would usually come back with that they shouldn't have to spend money on content they won't use. If it didn't happen in LotR then it's not fantasy.

Am I surprised that an artist making a SoB with the boob armor (something I've been told would be very uncomfortable to fight in by women who put on metal armor and fight, as an aside) but fails to make the augmenting body armor look like a corset is causing people problems? Not one bit.

 aracersss wrote:
it's sad to notice some dismiss the possibility the new design can't be possible

Too many negations I am lost and not sure what you mean .

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Yeah, down with things people like! Novelty is the only thing of value!

You don't want new units to go with your old units? I mean, Sisters aren't Marines where every new release is either a catastrophe from a model standpoint or from a lore standpoint because they are severely over-saturated, they certainly still have room for new units.

Do they need new units, is the question? Or, more accurately, do they need new units that are just slight variations on existing units, when there are so many more interesting places they could go with the Ecclesiarchy aspect? I mean sure, they could do Sisters-but-the-corset-is-segmented-plating-now, or Sisters-but-with-more-armour, or Sisters-but-with-rollerskates, but I'd prefer they did Frateris Militia, or new weird cults, or some other thing I can't even imagine yet because I'm not A: John Blanche or B: tripping on acid in a cathedral.

I like Sisters. I like their design, I like their style of warfare in the fiction and I like the idea of how that should, if done well, play out on the tabletop, and the thing is there aren't really any big gaping holes in it that need filled. They could create plastic versions of the existing metal range, write the rules well, and they would be a pretty much complete army - if they decide they want to expand how they play, I'd prefer they did it with non-Sisters Ecclesiarchy units.

Skaorn wrote:

 aracersss wrote:
it's sad to notice some dismiss the possibility the new design can't be possible

Sadly the fantasy/sci-fi community tends to spawn some of the most rigid and close minded mindsets. Back when I was interested in Pathfinder, I remember the backlash from many when Paizo decided to add guns into their system. "Guns don't belong in fantasy" they'd cry. You could point out that that was their version of fantasy, that the tech level presented in base players guides of D&D and PF was from a time guns would have existed, or even that original D&D adventures had robots and lasers. They would usually come back with that they shouldn't have to spend money on content they won't use. If it didn't happen in LotR then it's not fantasy.

Am I surprised that an artist making a SoB with the boob armor (something I've been told would be very uncomfortable to fight in by women who put on metal armor and fight, as an aside) but fails to make the augmenting body armor look like a corset is causing people problems? Not one bit.

Ah yes, because not wanting change for the sake of change, and preferring things you like not become things you don't like, are exactly equivalent to being rigid and closed-minded. Also - take your boob-plate bait elsewhere, it's been done to death.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Do they need new units, is the question?

They need new units like I need new models. I don't literally require new units to function, but I like having new models. Same for Sisters .

 Yodhrin wrote:
I mean sure, they could do Sisters-but-the-corset-is-segmented-plating-now, or Sisters-but-with-more-armour, or Sisters-but-with-rollerskates, but I'd prefer they did Frateris Militia, or new weird cults, or some other thing I can't even imagine yet because I'm not A: John Blanche or B: tripping on acid in a cathedral.

{whynotboth.gif}

 Yodhrin wrote:
I like Sisters. I like their design, I like their style of warfare in the fiction and I like the idea of how that should, if done well, play out on the tabletop, and the thing is there aren't really any big gaping holes in it that need filled.

Antiair

 Yodhrin wrote:

Ah yes, because not wanting change for the sake of change, and preferring things you like not become things you don't like, are exactly equivalent to being rigid and closed-minded. Also - take your boob-plate bait elsewhere, it's been done to death.

Oh noes, armies going through style changes! Whatever will we do? Gee, the same thing other armies do. I can tell you that Chaos has gone through several changes over the years. Some of them not so great, but others were awesome. My favorite daemonettes were the naughty ones (gasp) because they frankly look better then earlier or later ones and does a much better job threading the uncanny valley. If I wanted to get more Slaanesh though, I'd probably get the plastic ones that look like Eschers having a bad day because they'd be easier to get, probably cheaper, and have got to be easier to put the freaking things together. They also still convey what Slaanesh is all about.

The piece of third party artwork that people are getting into a twist about hits the high notes of a SoB.
Hair cut, check
Boob plate, check
Iconography, check
Bolter, check
Are you telling me heavy armor that looks like lingerie is also one of them? Do you want them to have the stiletto heels too? I get why GW is keeping boob plate and didn't expect them to change but it still doesn't make it any less impractical. Seriously, you don't need to go to an SCA event or really any combat LARP to learn that, just consider the sports bra. Daemonettes on the other hand aren't material beings and don't have to worry about things like that. Also lingerie is definitely more a Slaanesh thing an Ecclesiarchy thing.

IMO the RPG version looks better, but GW will likely stick with the rendered model they produced.so people getting bent out of shape about it is pointless. It doesn't change the idea that nothing should be changed or added in a completely fictional setting to be any less silly.

There is also a third option- having both in the same squad. A Marine squad can have as many as 7 (technically 8) different patterns of power armour in one unit, and it looks good. I can easily see some torsos being a slightly different pattern of power armour (the laminar approach really is a minor change).

I don't think that laminar style will show up, but the two options are far from mutually exclusive.

Are you suggesting they add something NEW?! Heresy.

The powerarmor of the sororitas is sacred, as is their bolter. Its written on the fluff! They don't change it! Never! And they only use melta, flamer and bolter! (Please ignore the fact that their lore has remained unchanged for nearly 20 years, only changing how many sororitas are in the galaxy in a circular way)

Sororitas are absolutely completed. Theres no human way to expand them without adding bloat. Is physically impossible. Ask Stephen Hawk... oh crap. Better ignore that.

If GW wants to expand Sororitas they should made it by adding non-sororitas units to the Sororitas army.

(By the way, hyperbole aside, I, as Hybrid, would prefer if they add both. Crazy eclesiarchy units and new proper sororitas units. Just like as I want new Tau units, I want too new xenos auxiliary units)

I'm going to ignore the trolling buffoons and reply to the reasonable version of what you're trying to say. The rest of you should feel free to try restating your points without being petulant if you'd like an actual response.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Do they need new units, is the question?

They need new units like I need new models. I don't literally require new units to function, but I like having new models. Same for Sisters .

OK, you like the "GW approach", models-first, that's fine. I prefer the "FW approach" - coherent fiction that the models allow me to interact with, and models that are conceived in a more collaborative way rather than incepted and then crammed in wherever they might vaguely fit. If there's no actual gaps between the model range and the fiction, then additions should be sparing and careful, or else you do eventually end up with pre-Primaris-reset Space Marines, where an army with a specific set of purposes bloats beyond any recognition. I mean, do we really want to find out what the Sisters equivalent of the Chibihawks or Centurions or Baby Carriers would be? And the reason it's not just a case of "only play the stuff you like then", which is typically the next argument that comes up, is because that's not how GW work - whether they succeed in the end or not, the intent when GW write an army list is to get you to buy as much of it as possible, so trying to ignore the additions you dislike just puts you at a disadvantage. Look at fliers.

 Yodhrin wrote:
I mean sure, they could do Sisters-but-the-corset-is-segmented-plating-now, or Sisters-but-with-more-armour, or Sisters-but-with-rollerskates, but I'd prefer they did Frateris Militia, or new weird cults, or some other thing I can't even imagine yet because I'm not A: John Blanche or B: tripping on acid in a cathedral.

{whynotboth.gif}

youknowfinewell.jpg

Production time. They have a limited allocation for each release, so no matter which things they choose to do, that means other things aren't done. A Sisters/Celestians/specials/heavies box, a Seraphim/maybe alt build box, Repentia, Celestian and Preacher(or updated Jacobus), Rhino/Immolator, Exorcist/inevitable AA alt build, and Penitent Engine is already a big chunk of allocation especially considering their rumoured capacity woes at the moment. Now, throw in a flier(because of course there has to be one of those - best case scenario is someone at the studio has actually read the Imperial Armour books and they do a plastic version of the Avenger), and you're already at three infantry boxes, two clampacks, three vehicle boxes, and a flier box. If we're *extremely* lucky, the initial release will have maybe one additional infantry box and some additional characters, then in a couple of years assuming the line does well we'll get an expansion wave with a couple more boxes of infantry, a couple more characters, and an additional vehicle - I'd much rather they use those to give us all the weirdy-beardy Ecclesiarchy stuff the Sisters march to war with than Sisters in slightly different armour, or not-Terminator Sisters, or Sisters with slightly different guns, etc because while those are all "new"(and thus, apparently, good by default), they're also IMO pretty dull, they're the stuff the studio does years down the line when they've run out of interesting ideas.

 Yodhrin wrote:
I like Sisters. I like their design, I like their style of warfare in the fiction and I like the idea of how that should, if done well, play out on the tabletop, and the thing is there aren't really any big gaping holes in it that need filled.

Antiair

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Yeah, down with things people like! Novelty is the only thing of value!

You don't want new units to go with your old units? I mean, Sisters aren't Marines where every new release is either a catastrophe from a model standpoint or from a lore standpoint because they are severely over-saturated, they certainly still have room for new units.

Do they need new units, is the question? Or, more accurately, do they need new units that are just slight variations on existing units, when there are so many more interesting places they could go with the Ecclesiarchy aspect? I mean sure, they could do Sisters-but-the-corset-is-segmented-plating-now, or Sisters-but-with-more-armour, or Sisters-but-with-rollerskates, but I'd prefer they did Frateris Militia, or new weird cults, or some other thing I can't even imagine yet because I'm not A: John Blanche or B: tripping on acid in a cathedral.

I like Sisters. I like their design, I like their style of warfare in the fiction and I like the idea of how that should, if done well, play out on the tabletop, and the thing is there aren't really any big gaping holes in it that need filled. They could create plastic versions of the existing metal range, write the rules well, and they would be a pretty much complete army - if they decide they want to expand how they play, I'd prefer they did it with non-Sisters Ecclesiarchy units.

Skaorn wrote:

 aracersss wrote:
it's sad to notice some dismiss the possibility the new design can't be possible

Sadly the fantasy/sci-fi community tends to spawn some of the most rigid and close minded mindsets. Back when I was interested in Pathfinder, I remember the backlash from many when Paizo decided to add guns into their system. "Guns don't belong in fantasy" they'd cry. You could point out that that was their version of fantasy, that the tech level presented in base players guides of D&D and PF was from a time guns would have existed, or even that original D&D adventures had robots and lasers. They would usually come back with that they shouldn't have to spend money on content they won't use. If it didn't happen in LotR then it's not fantasy.

Am I surprised that an artist making a SoB with the boob armor (something I've been told would be very uncomfortable to fight in by women who put on metal armor and fight, as an aside) but fails to make the augmenting body armor look like a corset is causing people problems? Not one bit.

Ah yes, because not wanting change for the sake of change, and preferring things you like not become things you don't like, are exactly equivalent to being rigid and closed-minded. Also - take your boob-plate bait elsewhere, it's been done to death.

A. Yes they need new units. If you've ever built an SoB army list that becomes obvious pretty quick. ESPECIALLY with how stupid the rule of 3 ended up being.

B. Crazy ecclesiarchy stuff sounds cool, but then people always ruin it with boring suggestions like 'frateris militia'. Oh good, recut cultist models that totally replace standard battle sisters in any army that actually intends to win games. GRAND. You wanna get crazy, get crazy. Just have an actual SoB involved in the unit somewhere. Do like...a High gothic version of Deputy Director Bullock's hover throne from America Dad. Or something even nuttier, the sky's the limit! Just something more interesting than 'cultists but with less spikes and more sads'.

C. Why are you doing other cults in the Sisters of Battle book? Shouldn't you be doing Sisters of Battle in a Sisters of Battle book? Were there a lot of Blood Angels players looking at their codex and going 'I like it...but it needs more Cadians.' when that book dropped?

D. Have you ever actually looked at what models the Sisters of Battle have? You could do every single infantry unit in two boxes with room for a second seraphim build. You could do every single vehicle in 1 box by adding an exorcist/repressor sprue(You wouldn't seperate the Exorcist and the Immolator if you could avoid it, the exorcist builds out of an immolator, not a rhino.) To get even a 2 week release window you're already adding ministorum units.

E. There's no model gaps between the SoB line and fiction(outside of a ton of characters) because there's barely any fiction out there for the army. If you took every word written about sisters of battle, tossed out the 40% that only had them there to act as semi-elite cannon fodder and the 15-20% where they didn't get to do anything meaningful, and you wouldn't have enough material left to match the amount of lore written about Dawn of War 1.

Considering that the only Space Marines nowadays with a 2+ save wear TDA or are part of the Honour Guard wearing gear that dates back to when the Emperor walked around, I wouldnt hold out too much hope for 2+ save Sisters.

Hopefully they do a basic sisters squad, a jump pack multi box, a retributor box, a celestian/dominion box, a tank, repentia and a penintence engine. Not to mention characters.

Thats already a lot for a release, so might have to temper expectations a bit...

 Crazyterran wrote:
Considering that the only Space Marines nowadays with a 2+ save wear TDA or are part of the Honour Guard wearing gear that dates back to when the Emperor walked around, I wouldnt hold out too much hope for 2+ save Sisters.

Hopefully they do a basic sisters squad, a jump pack multi box, a retributor box, a celestian/dominion box, a tank, repentia and a penintence engine. Not to mention characters.

Thats already a lot for a release, so might have to temper expectations a bit...

Artificer armour is not that rare and is still produced plus there is new armour for the new millennium so its certainly possible and should at least be an option for Canoness.

Space Marine Captains dont have it as an option anymore, literally models that have had the option for decades, why would a Canoness?

Back then the Canoness could only get it through a relic, the Cloak of St. Aspira IIRC?

 Crazyterran wrote:
Space Marine Captains dont have it as an option anymore, literally models that have had the option for decades, why would a Canoness?

It's just that the idea of "artificer armour" being something that needs representation in the rules has gone away again - like purity seals and wolf-tooth necklaces. I mean, it's clearly still a thing in the setting - that wolf-head helmet on the Space Wolves upgrade sprue, all the unique armour components in the various Space Wolves, Blood Angels and Dark Angels squad box sets, etc, are all artificer armour, in that they've been customised in some way.

I'm going to wait and see what they come up with before passing any judgments.

I'm liking the one 3D up that they've done thus far, but one figure does not a faction make - we'll see where it all goes in the fall or spring.

 Yodhrin wrote:
I prefer the "FW approach" - coherent fiction that the models allow me to interact with, and models that are conceived in a more collaborative way rather than incepted and then crammed in wherever they might vaguely fit.

But apparently what you want isn't some new lore and models to be conceived in a collaborative way, you clearly believe that the Sisters of Battle lore is already written and done and nothing new should be added to it.
Beside, in the already written lore, there is already room for better, more advanced and protective armor for the Celestians, especially given how different Sororitas armor can look on various illustrations, starting all the way to 2nd ed codex!

 Yodhrin wrote:
or else you do eventually end up with pre-Primaris-reset Space Marines, where an army with a specific set of purposes bloats beyond any recognition.

Post-primaris, marines are still bloated.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Production time.

What if instead of cutting Sororitas stuff to make room for Ecclesiarchal stuff, we instead cut some Marine stuff to make room for some Sororitas and Ecclesiarchal stuff? Seems nice to me.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Rhino/Immolator

Really no reason to remake that kit, especially when considering that the marine rhino that's older and looks significantly worse, while being available in a dozen codex, hasn't been redone.

 Yodhrin wrote:
best case scenario is someone at the studio has actually read the Imperial Armour books and they do a plastic version of the Avenger

The connection between the Avenger and Sisters of Battle is literally just a throw-away line saying it was often requested by the Ecclesiarchy. It is definitely not a case of lore and model "who are conceived in a more collaborative way". If you would rather have a plastic Avenger than a new ad hoc flyer with accompanying lore, it seems to me to be more about you being conservative (not in the political sense) and not liking new stuff being introduced.