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.

 Handsomer_Dan wrote:
The models look angry, but what about? At first glance they just look like angry women with big 2h chainswords; I don't see how these models really convey anything beyond that?

I agree. She'd be a lot prettier if she smiled more.


/s

 EnTyme wrote:

 Handsomer_Dan wrote:
The models look angry, but what about? At first glance they just look like angry women with big 2h chainswords; I don't see how these models really convey anything beyond that?

I agree. She'd be a lot prettier if she smiled more. /s

That's really not helpful, and is not really what Handsomer_Dan was asking about. He agreed they conveyed angry warrior women with big chainswords and asked what else they conveyed. I pointed it out. The detail work on the Repentia models does a great deal of effort showing how they are putting themselves in pain and marking themselves in religious iconography to repent for their failures.

For example:



A ring of spikes in the thigh, notice the spikes actually DO penetrate the skin to purposefully cause themselves pain-- you can see the skin rising over them as htey curve downward, but not too deep as to limit their ability to run overmuch. The attention to small details like that adds something to these minis that is really lacking, to me, in the RH minis. I have said before in this thread that I wish GW did more details like this on the Repentia miniatures, and I'll say it again here. But even though they could have more of them, the fact is, they are still there.

 EnTyme wrote:

 Handsomer_Dan wrote:
The models look angry, but what about? At first glance they just look like angry women with big 2h chainswords; I don't see how these models really convey anything beyond that?

I agree. She'd be a lot prettier if she smiled more.


/s

This is one of those comments that sound funny in your head but then when you think about it again you realise the internet has no sense of humour and is just going to result in a bumcj of gak flinging.

Just trying to point out the ridiculousness of critiquing a model for just looking angry in a game where "constipated scowl" is the default expression.

 Melissia wrote:

 Handsomer_Dan wrote:
The models look angry, but what about? At first glance they just look like angry women with big 2h chainswords; I don't see how these models really convey anything beyond that?

Obviously you know the lore, but let's say that you didn't - what part of the model (without prior lore knowledge) would convey that these are fanatic religious zealots, who flagellate themselves, all while desperately charging into battle -all to gain redemption from their sins?

Religious brandings on the forehead. Various kinds of spikes in ceremonial shapes through the skin in the thighs. Religious iconography on the belts and jewelry and their hoods. Scrolls of parchment listing the sins and failures they committed to consign themselves to the role of Repentia.

I wouldn't really connect what they have on the forehead as branding (but that's just the fault of the sculpt not conveying the burn as a raised surface). Everything else you described I can already see on many other models, but they don't have the same motivation as the repentia? More specifically, it's hard to find models at times without loads of iconography - this is 40k after all. But none of that really anwers their ideological motive. Their personal drive for redemption/salvation. They don't look desperate enough, they just look "angry". So my original question was "Angry at what?" The models themselves don't really answer that.

Also, for religious icons, I see the fleur de lis, and the inquisition logo, and I think that's about it? There's a few with 3-4 scrolls, but so many Imperium models have scrolls, so how would you know these specific scrolls are lists of sins and failures, and not just blessings? They look like a cult of some sort, yes, but I think they could have served the main concept better visually. I just personally find the models to be a bit too tame.

I'd preferred them to looked more crazed, than just "angry" honestly.

 Melissia wrote:

For example:



A ring of spikes in the thigh, notice the spikes actually DO penetrate the skin to purposefully cause themselves pain-- you can see the skin rising over them as htey curve downward, but not too deep as to limit their ability to run overmuch. The attention to small details like that adds something to these minis that is really lacking, to me, in the RH minis. I have said before in this thread that I wish GW did more details like this on the Repentia miniatures, and I'll say it again here. But even though they could have more of them, the fact is, they are still there.

After pointing that out, I think it helps me see the detail a bit better. I honestly thought they were just a leg brace/thing. Maybe when they're painted I can see the details better

edit: grammar

I edited the post, giving a more in depth example, Dan.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There's also these here:



The spikes running through the skin and... whatever the HELL happened to her face and head. I can't tell if that's war scars, or self-mutilation, but Jesus.

Um no, I’m not arguing that actual Sisters fans could not like any retcon. My point is that people arguing that Sisters require “fixing” necessarily see Sisters as “broken” — making it hard to believe they are actually fans. In this case, we have the argument that the retcon that Sororitas PA requires surgically implanted interface mechanisms to use it properly makes Sisters more interesting because the retcon makes them more “plausible” — which is stark nonsense. Plausibility is not an issue for 40k, neither here nor anywhere else. Moreover, the implication is that up until how Sisters were less likable because they were i sufficiently plausible. In this way of thinking, all retcons are improvements — which means whatever the original fluff was needed ti be improved. To the contrary, the change does cut against the idea, core to the faction’s established theme and identity, that Sisters are biologically normal humans who are elite because of their pure faith. Sisters did not need to be made more like Space Marines, in any dimension, to any degree.

 Manchu wrote:
My point is that people arguing that Sisters require “fixing” necessarily see Sisters as “broken” — making it hard to believe they are actually fans.

"If you want it changed you must hate it" is a lazy argument. One can love something and want it changed for the better all the same. That you love something doesn't mean you have to see it as perfect. I love my current house. I'd still love to have money to get some improvements to it.

I love Sisters of Battle. But I'd love to see MORE Sisters of Battle, and see improvements to them both in terms of art and gameplay.

 EnTyme wrote:
He's wrong because he's implying that it's impossible for a "true" Sisters fan to like the change because of some arbitrary definition of "fandom" based on how long they've been playing (which also implies that it's impossible for a long-time Sisters player to like a new change). It's the very definition of gatekeeping.

I think I said here a couple years ago that the only thing louder than the complaining from some Sisters fans about a lack of new models will be the complaining from some Sisters fans when the new models arrive.

That comment was tongue-in-cheek and probably unfair, but you could see it coming from a parsec away that there were going to be divisive things about this release. Long-time fans + perceived ownership + headcanon + full line refresh tends to equal what you see here. It's just how hyper-invested fans can behave, and there are countless and constant examples across nerd culture. Most will end up happy, even if they gripe a little. There will be a bitter handful that stomp off because it's not what *THEY* wanted. It is what it is. *shrug*

For someone who complains about being strawmanned, Melissia, you seem pretty willing to do it to everyone else.

To continue your metaphor, the things you want to change about your house are clearly not the same things you love about it. Now imagine “your” house is actually home to several thousand people, some of whom have even lived there longer than you. The stuff you claim is broken might be what makes t home for them. Especially when we are talking about the basic floorplan.

 Melissia wrote:
I edited the post, giving a more in depth example, Dan.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There's also these here:


The spikes running through the skin and... whatever the HELL happened to her face and head. I can't tell if that's war scars, or self-mutilation, but Jesus.

From a distance it looked like it was part of her hair, but now I can see the nail thing through her head. Still can't say I'm a fan of the models, but I'll retract my comment about the lack of flagellation. I can blame myself for not seeing/picking up on some of the stuff, but I'd like if they had some colored concept art or something so I could get a better idea of what their end result is intended to be.

 Manchu wrote:
For someone who complains about being strawmanned, Melissia, you seem pretty willing to do it to everyone else.

Word for word, you said that you find it "hard to believe they are actually fans."

This is not a strawman argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Handsomer_Dan wrote:
From a distance it looked like it was part of her hair, but now I can see the nail thing through her head. Still can't say I'm a fan of the models, but I'll retract my comment about the lack of flagellation. I can blame myself for not seeing/picking up on some of the stuff, but I'd like if they had some colored concept art or something so I could get a better idea of what their end result is intended to be.

No, no no, it's understandable. This is a lot more subtle than we're used to seeing from GW.

But what you (mis)quoted was “if you want it changed then you must hate it.” We, literally you and I, have done this for a decade now. This isn’t our first rodeo. I am never going to agree with your call for a radical redesign of SoB. Where we do agree, however, is that Sisters should have more unit types.

 gorgon wrote:

I think I said here a couple years ago that the only thing louder than the complaining from some Sisters fans about a lack of new models will be the complaining from some Sisters fans when the new models arrive.

That would be hard to measure, my impression is that most of us long time Sister players are just plain happy to have new models. From my perspective significant complaints are a vocal minority.

Yes, I am overall happy with the new models, including the Repentia.

 Manchu wrote:
I am never going to agree with your call for a radical redesign of SoB.

You're gonna drag old post history in to this? Then I'd like to point out that I haven't made such a call for change in this thread. Or... anywhere on Dakka for years, in fact. In fact, I have nothing but raise for the improvements they've made to Sisters, and the painted miniature they showed in the previous Sisters hype-release impressed me. They have made Sisters better simply through higher-quality sculpting without a complete visual redesign of your basic battle sister armor, and I have praised them for it.

But here and now, I, and others, are mostly talking about the new repentia miniature. And again, I like it. It's not how I would have done Repentia per se (the posts showing tabards and such are more to my liking, and I'd like to see more of the little self-flagellation details). But it's good, and frankly, it's a lot better than what we used to have. And I think that the cybernetic plugs are a perfectly fine addition to both the miniature and the lore, helping reinforce visually that they are power armor users, and not just some random cultists with overcompensatingly large swords

Well then I guess we agree so there !

I can't help but think of those plugs the way I think of modern lightsabres and photon torpedoes - a sign that whoever came up with the idea values cool factor over preservation of thematic identity.

 His Master's Voice wrote:
I can't help but think of those plugs the way I think of modern lightsabres

Whew, what a vivid, depressing, and probably accurate metaphor.

Nonsense, lightsabers and photon torpedoes were always about the cool factor.

What's wrong with "modern" lightsabers? Genuinely curious on this one.

 Manchu wrote:
To the contrary, the change does cut against the idea, core to the faction’s established theme and identity, that Sisters are biologically normal humans who are elite because of their pure faith. Sisters did not need to be made more like Space Marines, in any dimension, to any degree.

But they were wearing power armor before and one thing power armor does is enhancing the strength and durability of its wearer. If it's plugged in or activated through some other form of interface doesn't matter that much, does it? It's an augmentation nonetheless. I never got the idea that sisters power their power armor through pure faith. Same would be an augmentic eye against optics integrated into the helmet. I see no difference.

They don’t power their armor through faith. There is nothing about this fictional technology that requires either neural interfaces or magic. The Sisters wear armor because they are an army of Joans of Arc, female religious knights. They wear power armor because they exist in the grim darkness of the far future.

 Handsomer_Dan wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I edited the post, giving a more in depth example, Dan.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There's also these here:


The spikes running through the skin and... whatever the HELL happened to her face and head. I can't tell if that's war scars, or self-mutilation, but Jesus.

From a distance it looked like it was part of her hair, but now I can see the nail thing through her head. Still can't say I'm a fan of the models, but I'll retract my comment about the lack of flagellation. I can blame myself for not seeing/picking up on some of the stuff, but I'd like if they had some colored concept art or something so I could get a better idea of what their end result is intended to be.

My problem with the models isn't what's there in terms of implements of self-harm, but what isn't. The clothing massively gets in the way of portraying the penitent cohesively. The Repentias can stick their head and limbs as much as they like, the torso is fully covered up and therefore disallows the theme to appear on a large part of the body as well as putting up a blank space that separates and isolates the thematic pieces so they can't work in unison. And it's not even a sackcloth rag that you could see as part of the penitent theme. No, it has to be a neat, functional garment that is nothing short of a purpose-made uniform that shares nothing of the penitence theme.

I think the models would be a lot better if there wasn't all this empty space in the middle.

rhavien wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
To the contrary, the change does cut against the idea, core to the faction’s established theme and identity, that Sisters are biologically normal humans who are elite because of their pure faith. Sisters did not need to be made more like Space Marines, in any dimension, to any degree.

But they were wearing power armor before and one thing power armor does is enhancing the strength and durability of its wearer. If it's plugged in or activated through some other form of interface doesn't matter that much, does it? It's an augmentation nonetheless. I never got the idea that sisters power their power armor through pure faith. Same would be an augmentic eye against optics integrated into the helmet. I see no difference.

It enhances their durability and strength in that they have a force field and can hold a heavy weapon unaided. It doesn't make them physically tougher or stronger, which is why their profile is and will always be S3 T3

In mechanics terms, the armor grants them a 3+ and probably in GW's mind the ability to carry a heavy bolter or multi-melta solo.

Bear in mind, Space Marines are S4 both in and out of power armor (though this was not always the case). So power armor clearly doesn't make enough difference in GW's mind to raise the strength score.

In Dark Heresy, wearing power armor gave you the benefit of the Bulging Biceps perk, which allowed you to fire heavy weapons without bracing them, so that fits. I see power armor acting as added structural support for the wearer which would allow them to lift/carry heavier objects and reduce weapon recoil without necessarily increasing their actual strength.

 EnTyme wrote:
What's wrong with "modern" lightsabers? Genuinely curious on this one.

In the OT, lightsabres were just fancy glowing swords in service of a hero's journey narrative - a bit of visual flavour that wasn't really important beyond the wow factor of moment to moment action. They feel fetishised these days to the point where they gain an almost independent existence that overshadows the person using them (Kylo Ren). They also serve as worldbuilding crutches - just add a lightsabre, so that the audience knows they're still watching Star Wars (that one hologram in Rogue One).

The plugs feel like they're there to make sure we know it's 40k, because 40k -> crude bionics, Matrix-like plugs and Black Carapace. They don't add to the SoB narrative, because a faction that can literally believe miracles into existence doesn't need 'sensible explanation as to how their PA operates. It's one of those questions that doesn't need answering, much like no one needs to know where lightsabres come from.

 Manchu wrote:
Um no, I’m not arguing that actual Sisters fans could not like any retcon. My point is that people arguing that Sisters require “fixing” necessarily see Sisters as “broken” — making it hard to believe they are actually fans. In this case, we have the argument that the retcon that Sororitas PA requires surgically implanted interface mechanisms to use it properly makes Sisters more interesting because the retcon makes them more “plausible” — which is stark nonsense. Plausibility is not an issue for 40k, neither here nor anywhere else. Moreover, the implication is that up until how Sisters were less likable because they were i sufficiently plausible. In this way of thinking, all retcons are improvements — which means whatever the original fluff was needed ti be improved. To the contrary, the change does cut against the idea, core to the faction’s established theme and identity, that Sisters are biologically normal humans who are elite because of their pure faith. Sisters did not need to be made more like Space Marines, in any dimension, to any degree.

I really didn't think how Sisters integrate to their armour 'required' a retcon, because I really hadn't given it much thought before this. But seeing the new models which look cool and reading the explanation for the plugs, I thought 'OK, that makes sense.' It is merely an added minor technical detail. I don't think it was ever before really explained how exactly their power armour can follow their movements. Explanation was not something that was sorely needed, but I think it is something that it is nice to have.

It is you who are making a huge deal about this, having a fit about a minor detail and ranting about it for several pages, going so far as accusing people who like this expanded fluff to not be real fans. Get a grip.

@His Master's Voice - Isn't that the purpose of any prop, though? To establish a visual theme that lets the viewer know they're in a specific universe? Same with the ports. They're a detail meant to add a degree of realism to the model while at the same time establishing that the model exists in a sci-fi universe?