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.

As someone who is colourblind, the GW naming method is infuriating. The sheer number of them that don’t even mention a colour, but just names lifted from the lore. Tells me absolutely nothing, and I can't always see which colour it is.

Part of the reason why I have jumped over to Army Painter as my go to, at least they use colour names.

 stonehorse wrote:
As someone who is colourblind, the GW naming method is infuriating. The sheer number of them that don’t even mention a colour, but just names lifted from the lore. Tells me absolutely nothing, and I can't always see which colour it is.

Part of the reason why I have jumped over to Army Painter as my go to, at least they use colour names.

C'mon, are you telling me that it's difficult to figure out what colour Retributor Armour is supposed to be from the name alone? P-uh-lease!

Next you'll tell me Steel Legion Drab, Leadbelcher, Bugman's Glow, Screaming Bell and/or The Fang are non-descript names too!/s

Yeah, I have no idea what GW thought they were doing when they started slapping copyright names on their paints - was it really that important that Terracotta Armour be trademarked?

Wait, which one is supposed to be Terracotta?

I thought they just dropped that particular paint.

 Mangod wrote:
Yeah, I have no idea what GW thought they were doing when they started slapping copyright names on their paints...

They were thinking one thing: Chapterhouse Studios.

I uh, am largely apathetic to the names.

I still use Imperial Guard, but I'm not offended by something like Intercessor or Sloppity Bilepiper.

Really, GW has used silly names for quite some time. After all, names like Bloodcrusher aren't new, and are equally silly. I don't think there's a particularly strong distinction in the names given to units between before and after the renaming of Imperial Guard.


I only really require that the name be coherently pronouceable and sufficiently distinct that I'm not perpetually confused.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
After all, names like Bloodcrusher aren't new, and are equally silly.

Are they though? As has been made pretty clear throughout this thread, it is the additional superfluous names that are causing the most consternation.

Bloodcrusher is fine. If they were suddenly renamed Skullfist Bloodcrushers, then you'd see people being annoyed.

Bilepiper is fine. Sloppity Bilepiper is stupid.

If you think 'Bloodcrusher' isn't silly, then can you please explain how one would go about crushing blood?

Not really what I was getting at...

I have no preference, but there isn't an option for that.

Like others in this thread I don't understand the reasoning behind some of the new naming conventions but they aren't a deal breaker.

There are more naming conventions in the novels and short stories for non sentient items that I find more irksome.

Voss wrote:
Wait, which one is supposed to be Terracotta?

I thought they just dropped that particular paint.

Yes, they did.

*shakes fist angrily at GW*

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Mangod wrote:
Yeah, I have no idea what GW thought they were doing when they started slapping copyright names on their paints...

They were thinking one thing: Chapterhouse Studios.

Which Citadel paints at the time of the Chapterhouse case had generic names shared with other brands?

Who else was making Boltgun Metal or Bad Moon Yellow? Why is Ironbreaker any more copyrightable than Chainmail?

How does naming a paint Bugman's Glow stop any other company from making the same colour with a different name (it doesn't - in the same way that 'copyrightable names' don't (and didn't) stop anybody from making their own Not-Space-Marine models).

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Which Citadel paints at the time of the Chapterhouse case had generic names shared with other brands?

Citadel paints have always had lore-flavoured names, but they were still colours. Some of them were twists on existing things, such as boltgun metal being gunmetal (obviously).

The change after the CHS debacle is when we got such descriptive names as XV-88, Necron Compound and The Fang.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The change after the CHS debacle is when we got such descriptive names as XV-88, Necron Compound and The Fang.

Which aren't any more copyrightable [trademarkable] than Desert Yellow, Mithril Silver, or Space Wolves Grey...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Mangod wrote:
Yeah, I have no idea what GW thought they were doing when they started slapping copyright names on their paints...

They were thinking one thing: Chapterhouse Studios.

Literally no one else who makes paints has this issue that you're alluding to though.

Grabbing 3 different brands of paint pots that I have sitting directly in front of me:

Vallejo Model Color: 70.957 Flat Red, next to it is 70.953 Flat Yellow

Tamiya: X-14 Sky Blue, also XF-16 Flat Aluminum

Lifecolor: Italian Gloss Dark Green, UA 110/ PS 1407/ 1006


Paints and paint colors should not be dealt with like they are some super special thing. The thing that gets copyrighted in the companies I have sat in front of me is their organizing systems. Copyrighted names for paints are, quite frankly, stupid, even if its how GW has always done it.

I don't think anyone is suggesting the decision or reasoning was rational. This was late-stage Kirby era GW. The worst excesses of modern GW today were pretty much the standard.

 Duskweaver wrote:
If you think 'Bloodcrusher' isn't silly, then can you please explain how one would go about crushing blood?

That's not really the point. Yes, on the surface "Bloodcrusher" is nonsensical but it fit with the other units in the army: Bloodletter, Bloodthirster. It was also somewhat descriptive, kind of. It's a big heavy cavalry unit so the "crusher" part of the name sort of fits. It's also perfectly fine as a single word name for a unit. Where it gets silly is when you add extra words to describe it that aren't needed. Firstly because it doubles down on the silliness and secondly because it implies there may be other types of this unit when there never are. If you can have a Sloppity Bilepiper, for example, that implies there should be Bilepipers that aren't sloppity.

As for the paints, it's just yet another stupid decision from GW that shows they don't understand how market position works. If you're GW you're the company least likely to be affected by using more generic names for your paint. Yes, Goblin Green was pretty generic but if anyone mentions Goblin Green (even today, more than a decade after that paint stopped existing) the vast majority of painters will think of the Citadel paint. If you're GW, you can actually leverage that popularity since you're likely the first paint brand many painters think of. That's why, in all the years it existed, we never saw another Goblin Green from another company. Firstly, it's needlessly confusing, and secondly it'll likely lose you sales to GW when your customers tell their friends they used Goblin Green for their models. Now we have the genius of Knarloc (or is it Gnarloc) Hide and my personal favourite XV-88. The idiot who decided to remove any semblance of a clue about the actual colour of the paint from the name needs drowning in a vat of Screaming Bell.

 Duskweaver wrote:
If you think 'Bloodcrusher' isn't silly, then can you please explain how one would go about crushing blood?

Bahaha! That's pretty hilarious, I hadn't even thought about the meaning of it until now. At least "Skullcrusher" makes some sort of sense.

I think the Death Guard / AOS Nurgle names take the prize for lacking subtlety. Can you picture other heratic Astartes taking someone seriously who introduces themselves as "Nauseous Rotbone" or "Gutrot Spume." "Just tell theim your real name, Timmy"

Yeah! Get a sensible name like Obsidius Mallex!
Wait, no...

Slipspace wrote:

 Duskweaver wrote:
If you think 'Bloodcrusher' isn't silly, then can you please explain how one would go about crushing blood?

That's not really the point. Yes, on the surface "Bloodcrusher" is nonsensical but it fit with the other units in the army: Bloodletter, Bloodthirster. It was also somewhat descriptive, kind of. It's a big heavy cavalry unit so the "crusher" part of the name sort of fits. It's also perfectly fine as a single word name for a unit. Where it gets silly is when you add extra words to describe it that aren't needed. Firstly because it doubles down on the silliness and secondly because it implies there may be other types of this unit when there never are. If you can have a Sloppity Bilepiper, for example, that implies there should be Bilepipers that aren't sloppity.

I think CMoN's ASoI&F-game provides a great counterpoint, actually. Most units in the game are named after their allegiance to a particular noble house or armed organization, with the factions in the game consisting of several houses working together. So for example, the Stark faction breaks down into the subfactions of House Stark, House Umber, House Tully and the Crannogmen.



With these, names like Umber Berserkers tells you two things; it's a unit of Berserkers, and they're members of/sworn to House Umber. If we use GW's Lumineth, we get something similar, with three different Vanari units (Dawnriders, Sentinels and Wardens) and three Alarith units (Stoneguard, Stonemage and Spirit of the Mountain). Alarith and Vanari then provides a unifying element to the army.

But Sloppity, Putrid, Pusgoyle, Feculent, Dyspeptic, Spoilpox - these are just noise, providing nothing except a wordier name for a single model; the only unifying factor between them being the implication that the army needs a bath.

Flappity Flappers of Tzeentch!

Sometime I think people forgets that many of the names of GW units are purposefully ridiculous and is one of the last remain of Warhammer being a edgy pardody. When they called a demon of Nurle Sloppity Bilepiper, they were completely aware it sounded over the top and ridiculous and that's probably why they decided to name it like that. They wanted something that sounds revoltingly dirty and ridiculous as a joke.

GW sells a universe and with that a product range to support said universe. It is Disney meets Hasbro on coke.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Yeah! Get a sensible name like Obsidius Mallex!
Wait, no...

No no no. . . a sensible name, like Obiwan Sherlock Clouseau

 jeff white wrote:
GW sells a universe and with that a product range to support said universe. It is Disney meets Hasbro on coke.

a very apt description.

 Slipspace wrote:

As for the paints, it's just yet another stupid decision from GW that shows they don't understand how market position works. If you're GW you're the company least likely to be affected by using more generic names for your paint. Yes, Goblin Green was pretty generic but if anyone mentions Goblin Green (even today, more than a decade after that paint stopped existing) the vast majority of painters will think of the Citadel paint. If you're GW, you can actually leverage that popularity since you're likely the first paint brand many painters think of. That's why, in all the years it existed, we never saw another Goblin Green from another company. Firstly, it's needlessly confusing, and secondly it'll likely lose you sales to GW when your customers tell their friends they used Goblin Green for their models. Now we have the genius of Knarloc (or is it Gnarloc) Hide and my personal favourite XV-88. The idiot who decided to remove any semblance of a clue about the actual colour of the paint from the name needs drowning in a vat of Screaming Bell.

Coat D'arms still do a Goblin Green. Though, to be fair at one point GW paints were simply their paints repackaged.

 thegreatchimp wrote:


I think the Death Guard / AOS Nurgle names take the prize for lacking subtlety. Can you picture other heratic Astartes taking someone seriously who introduces themselves as "Nauseous Rotbone" or "Gutrot Spume." "Just tell theim your real name, Timmy"

Except "Gutrot Spume" makes sense. Gutrot is a typically "Nurgle-esq" name we've seen many times over the years. "Spume" is another name for sea foam. Gutrot Spume is a Nurgle pirate, so the name fits.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 thegreatchimp wrote:


I think the Death Guard / AOS Nurgle names take the prize for lacking subtlety. Can you picture other heratic Astartes taking someone seriously who introduces themselves as "Nauseous Rotbone" or "Gutrot Spume." "Just tell theim your real name, Timmy"

Except "Gutrot Spume" makes sense. Gutrot is a typically "Nurgle-esq" name we've seen many times over the years. "Spume" is another name for sea foam. Gutrot Spume is a Nurgle pirate, so the name fits.

I agree with Grimtuff. This is very much inline with Warhammer naming conventions. Subtlety in Warhammer is something like the Primarch of the Raven Guard being Corvus Corax. Chaos Space Marines in particular like to have cartoon villain names and titles like: Despoiler, Betrayer, Typhus, Blackheart, Slaughterborn, Soulflayer, etc. I happen to have though that Burblespue Halescourge from Vermintide 2 as a pretty good name for a Nurglelord. So much so that I named my Death Guard Lord of Contagion Gurglespew (I know, gross right?).

I think kinda cheezy, pun-tastic or sci-fi/fantasy referential names are part of the charm of GW games. I mean even my Dakka username is one: Saturmorn Carvilli --> Saturday Morning Cartoon Villain, eh? Pretty cleverly stupid right? I am kinda surprised a GW writer hadn't already snatched it up for a character as I think it fits the naming conventions of their settings perfectly sounding serious but completely cheezy when explained.

Sigmar renaming at first really bothered the hell out of me. Then, as I saw the lore and such develop, I actually started to like it. I still think the name "Orruks" is dumb as hell, but I actually think Orcs as they were in WHFB should be squatted and re-imagined in a newer AOS inspired style. Take the new High Elves, reborn as Luminath Realm Lords. The LRL aren't the old high elves (yet are very clearly and obviously inspired from them), and they make sense in the context of the Sigmar universe in a way that the old High Elves really didn't. But that I suppose is off topic.

Names like Sloppity Bilepiper are hilariously stupid. In the modern super serious po faced 40K that we have today, these names are about all that is left of the dark humor that 40K used to have. So, I don't know... I suppose it depends on where you are coming from. If you only ever knew 40K as a "serious" setting, then they stick out and likely chafe. If you remember all the goofy stuff from back in the day, you probably won't mind.

 Grimtuff wrote:


Except "Gutrot Spume" makes sense. Gutrot is a typically "Nurgle-esq" name we've seen many times over the years. "Spume" is another name for sea foam. Gutrot Spume is a Nurgle pirate, so the name fits.

Fair enough, I'll leave poor Gutrot alone. But there's no way Nauseous Rotbone is getting off the hook!

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 thegreatchimp wrote:


I think the Death Guard / AOS Nurgle names take the prize for lacking subtlety. Can you picture other heratic Astartes taking someone seriously who introduces themselves as "Nauseous Rotbone" or "Gutrot Spume." "Just tell theim your real name, Timmy"

Except "Gutrot Spume" makes sense. Gutrot is a typically "Nurgle-esq" name we've seen many times over the years. "Spume" is another name for sea foam. Gutrot Spume is a Nurgle pirate, so the name fits.

I agree with Grimtuff. This is very much inline with Warhammer naming conventions. Subtlety in Warhammer is something like the Primarch of the Raven Guard being Corvus Corax. Chaos Space Marines in particular like to have cartoon villain names and titles like: Despoiler, Betrayer, Typhus, Blackheart, Slaughterborn, Soulflayer, etc. I happen to have though that Burblespue Halescourge from Vermintide 2 as a pretty good name for a Nurglelord. So much so that I named my Death Guard Lord of Contagion Gurglespew (I know, gross right?).

I think kinda cheezy, pun-tastic or sci-fi/fantasy referential names are part of the charm of GW games. I mean even my Dakka username is one: Saturmorn Carvilli --> Saturday Morning Cartoon Villain, eh? Pretty cleverly stupid right? I am kinda surprised a GW writer hadn't already snatched it up for a character as I think it fits the naming conventions of their settings perfectly sounding serious but completely cheezy when explained.

First, Saturmorn Carvilli is a f-ing sweet name, and I will definitely steal it at some point.

Secondly, while I don't mind characters having such names (Malus Darkblade, Huron Blackheart, Morbidex Twiceborn, Sly Marbo, etc), that naming structure doesn't really work for a generic character or -unit. Some character named "Sloppit, the Bileous Piper" might have worked as a Pied Piper pastiche/parody, but Sloppity Bilepiper as a generic, descriptive name of a model? It's not exactly Barber Surgeon - Sloppity adds nothing that BILEpiper didn't already tell us.

I'd like to thank GW for the new gawd-awful unit names. That and changing all the paint names (and colours) pushed me away from GW and into a world full of much better games.