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.

 Fayric wrote:
Personally I dont have a problem with the plastic wulfen. With a dark paintjob, irl they look fine. I think its those kind of models that suffer from "official paintjob" and 2d pictures.

I'm not a SW player, so this is probably a heretical take, but my issue with Wulfen is that I detest the 'wolf-man' look.

I understand why it's used when films/movies don't have the budget for a proper werewolf, but seeing it used on models (which do not need to worry about the effects budget) is just jarring.

One feels GW needs to pick a side - either make them berserkers who just have wolf-themed outfits/gear, or go all in on making them actual werewolves:

The old, metal 13th company Wolfen were wolf-man and they were decent. The plastics, not so much. I agree that Wolfen should either be roid-raging exposed muscle guys with beards, OR go all in like the PopGoestheMonkey sculpts

Full on werewolves in power armour just looks ridiculous - not even actual beastmen are that far gone.

The blend of man and beast makes far more sense for "space wolf" space marines who've spent far too much time in the warp saturated Eye of Terror and started to pick up a mutation to too. Though it obviously goes without saying that the old metals are much better than the new plastics.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Yup. And they represent the end state of the frost weapon baloney too.
In 2e there was Frostfang, Ragnar’s personal weapon, a unique named chainsword with a power field that it could support because it had teeth from an ice kraken. Then suddenly everyone could take frost weapons which were just power weapons +1 but still described as chainblades. Then, completely out of left field, frost weapons became literal ice blades somehow.

Like Dante and 'his' Inferno pistol, the only tiny melta in the galaxy! Now every Inquisitor has one, and a seraphim squad can pack four!

Feels like Wulfen used to be just the 13th company that was lost in the eye of terror and came back as mutated beastmen (the beloved metal wulfen).
These days wulfen is a flaw in the astartes process for SW (the canis helix), and manifest as mutations triggered by raw fury.
The 13th was supposedly just mutated by the stress of beeing lost in the eye for a couple of thousand years.

Probably lore from 5th edition when wulfen was just a unit upgrade that granted a guy an extra d6 attacks, if memmory serves.

OK...I may have to go all in on the "werewolves-in-power-armor" for my Wulfen. I have several of the old metals and a half chewed box of the trash resins so I have deliberately avoided the question for years...

But that combines Confrontation Wulfen with 40K Marine Armor...my kind of aesthetic.

See, when it comes to werewolves, I'm a World of Darkness guy, so I'm all about the five forms:

Human
Near man- think hairy ogre
Wolfman- the most powerful form
Near Wolf- think Direwolf
Wolf

If I was fielding a unit of werewolves, I'd want a mix of forms. There was a lot of other cool werewolf traits related to the five forms- like for example you could have a flaw that denied you access to one of the five forms, or a merit that gave a bonus to one of the forms.

Werewolf mating customs were also weird- a werewolf could have been born and grown to maturity as either a human or a wolf... But they could mate with humans or wolves regardless of their birth form.

Two werewolves mating with each other though, would produce a mutated offspring which would born somewhere on the spectrum between wolf and man, and they would be aware that they were a lycanthrope from their earliest memories... Shunned by both wolves and men and often forced to live in exile and isolation due to the scarcity of fellow lycanthropes to support them through the difficult and dangerous early years.

If you like werewolves and you've never played this game, you gotta check it out. It's been decades since I played, so I don't even know if the game still exists or how closely it resembles the game I remember... But I have found all other werewolf fiction/mythology to inferior to what the World of Darkness has to offer.

Sorry for the tangent...

How soon do we expect the Marine Characters?

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Yup. And they represent the end state of the frost weapon baloney too.
In 2e there was Frostfang, Ragnar’s personal weapon, a unique named chainsword with a power field that it could support because it had teeth from an ice kraken. Then suddenly everyone could take frost weapons which were just power weapons +1 but still described as chainblades. Then, completely out of left field, frost weapons became literal ice blades somehow.

Like Dante and 'his' Inferno pistol, the only tiny melta in the galaxy! Now every Inquisitor has one, and a seraphim squad can pack four!

Sisters of Battle have had Inferno Pistols since at least the Witch Hunters Codex back in 3rd. I suspect Inquistors have had them since at least Daemon Hunter's Codex.

On the other hand, Dante's Perdition Pistol used to be effectively a Meltagun that was also a Pistol. Now it is a Pistol and a Meltagun with Sustained Hits D3 to boot!

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
How soon do we expect the Marine Characters?

 Fayric wrote:
Feels like Wulfen used to be just the 13th company that was lost in the eye of terror and came back as mutated beastmen (the beloved metal wulfen).
These days wulfen is a flaw in the astartes process for SW (the canis helix), and manifest as mutations triggered by raw fury.
The 13th was supposedly just mutated by the stress of beeing lost in the eye for a couple of thousand years.

Probably lore from 5th edition when wulfen was just a unit upgrade that granted a guy an extra d6 attacks, if memmory serves.

Canis Helix was in the original SW dex I think that's why 13th company exiled themselves.

Wulfen were 2 things, one being the 13th company who were changed because of 10.000 years hunting Thousand Sons in the Warp

The other being a SW who spilled brothers blood while in rage

Both existing at the same time and in the original lore, 5th Edi Codex only had rules for the 2nd version as 13th was still lost (as the Storm of Chaos was retconned) and didn't return until 9th Edi Codex

 alextroy wrote:
Sisters of Battle have had Inferno Pistols since at least the Witch Hunters Codex back in 3rd. I suspect Inquistors have had them since at least Daemon Hunter's Codex.

On the other hand, Dante's Perdition Pistol used to be effectively a Meltagun that was also a Pistol. Now it is a Pistol and a Meltagun with Sustained Hits D3 to boot!

'Perdition' Pistol doesn't even have any special association for the name Dante! Why they couldn't just make the later Ecclesiarchy armaments 'melta pistols' and leave the old man his special gun name I don't know.

It was not just an Inferno Pistol it was Dante's Inferno. As in the classical literature.

They should of just called other melta-pistols melta-pistols and kept Inferno for Dante.

Tygre wrote:
It was not just an Inferno Pistol it was Dante's Inferno. As in the classical literature.

They should of just called other melta-pistols melta-pistols and kept Inferno for Dante.

I studied litterature at university, and didnt make the connection untill now Good catch.

Inferno was the name of the book, but in it, Dante walked through all nine rings of Hell and was witness to every form of Perdition...

So while it isn't as obvious as Inferno pistol, there absolutely IS a connection between Dante and Perdition- and some would argue a greater connection: fire was only one of the forms of perdition which Dante witness, passed through and survived on his journey through Hell.

Also, "Inferno Pistol" doesn't sound like a name; it's a generic noun with a modifier.
Perdition sounds like a name.

What some of us are getting at is that originally, when he was first introduced in 2nd Edition, Dante didn't have AN Inferno Pistol, he had THE Inferno Pistol. As in one, singular. There was one and only one Inferno Pistol, and it belonged to Dante. This should never have been changed. They could call everybody else's a melta-pistol or something. When you take something unique about an important character and start handing it out to anybody with a pulse, it cheapens the setting.

Bob Lorgar wrote:
What some of us are getting at is that originally, when he was first introduced in 2nd Edition, Dante didn't have AN Inferno Pistol, he had THE Inferno Pistol. As in one, singular. There was one and only one Inferno Pistol, and it belonged to Dante. This should never have been changed. They could call everybody else's a melta-pistol or something. When you take something unique about an important character and start handing it out to anybody with a pulse, it cheapens the setting.

I mean, it's not even just the name... when Dante was released, the fact that it was the only melta pistol was precisely what made the Inferno Pistol unique.

 insaniak wrote:

Bob Lorgar wrote:
What some of us are getting at is that originally, when he was first introduced in 2nd Edition, Dante didn't have AN Inferno Pistol, he had THE Inferno Pistol. As in one, singular. There was one and only one Inferno Pistol, and it belonged to Dante. This should never have been changed. They could call everybody else's a melta-pistol or something. When you take something unique about an important character and start handing it out to anybody with a pulse, it cheapens the setting.

I mean, it's not even just the name... when Dante was released, the fact that it was the only melta pistol was precisely what made the Inferno Pistol unique.

Eh. It is just a small meltagun and meltaguns are everywhere. It makes little sense that it would be rare technology.

Kinda same with jetbikes. Anti-grav tech is commonly used, servo-skulls are everywhere and land-speeders are not super rare, so there is really no reason jetbikes would be either.

I mean before Dante was released, there was no inferno pistol. So did releasing Dante also cheapen the fluff?

Why is the retcon from zero to 1 inferno no issue, but the retcon from 1 to more than one sacrilege?

Seems arbitrary

The problem with the lore is that people want the lore to remain static and the same whilst at the same time advance and change.

It doesn't help that the lore isn't perfectly linear in how its presented and engaged with; and that many times things are simply not shown to us because there isn't a model of it.
So you get a lot of "this thing that's a brand new model was actually always around in the lore, just never mentioned until the model arrived"

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I mean before Dante was released, there was no inferno pistol. So did releasing Dante also cheapen the fluff?

Why is the retcon from zero to 1 inferno no issue, but the retcon from 1 to more than one sacrilege?

Seems arbitrary

There was never any lore stating the existence of zero inferno pistols.

Issue is, static o.g. 40K lore is fething wild.

Marines are basically Starcraft-style criminals pressed into service. Calgar an escaped GSC patriarch (sex?) slave. Ultramarines just a random successor farming desert shrimp. Half Eldar marines. Etc..

People usually want to lore to be "static" to some random, arbitrary point in time where "changes before X" are cool and "changes after X" are the devil's work, but X just being different for everyone.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

People usually want to lore to be "static" to some random, arbitrary point in time where "changes before X" are cool and "changes after X" are the devil's work, but X just being different for everyone.

The static point is normally around when they either first get into Warhammer; or when they first start to properly engage with the lore. But it can also vary a lot; eg some want Necrons as they were presented in their first codex even if they joined the game way later.

JWBS wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I mean before Dante was released, there was no inferno pistol. So did releasing Dante also cheapen the fluff?

Why is the retcon from zero to 1 inferno no issue, but the retcon from 1 to more than one sacrilege?

Seems arbitrary

There was never any lore stating the existence of zero inferno pistols.

Sure. There was never any lore stating the existence of zero Xenos-armies made of sentient furry sex dolls in 40K either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Overread wrote:

The static point is normally around when they either first get into Warhammer; or when they first start to properly engage with the lore. But it can also vary a lot; eg some want Necrons as they were presented in their first codex even if they joined the game way later.

Sure. O.g. Custodes as guardsmen are a million times cooler and hardcore than the stupid Banana bois in my personal opinion. I also don't mind the Ultrarmarine's chief librarian being a half-Eldar instead of the bland guy they have now.

But it's not that hard for people who managed to graduate kindergarden to get some basic self-reflection going to notice that this is subjective to their own age, perferences, 40K-history, social enviornment, whatever and cannot have an objective validity over anyone elses personal preference.

Lore changes constantly and dramatically...its not always little tweaks look at Votann... squatted, eaten by nids as a joke argument, revived and now even the joke turned into a character half devoured by nids... I mean is there even a X moment?

Sunny Side Up wrote:


Sure. There was never any lore stating the existence of zero Xenos-armies made of sentient furry sex dolls in 40K either.

You probably think that's a counterargument but it's not.

JWBS wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:


Sure. There was never any lore stating the existence of zero Xenos-armies made of sentient furry sex dolls in 40K either.

You probably think that's a counterargument but it's not.

It cannot be a counter-argument, as there is no argument why 40K-lore should be randomly frozen at Dante's 2nd Edition release to begin with.

There is a difference between static lore that does not advance and ever changing lore

40k is static and everything has always be the same, so retcons are the only way to add anything new

But this also means the lore itself is limited to the codex books as anything else is outdated and obsolete the moment a new codex with new units is released

The opposite would be with Battletech where the timeline advances and a new edition is also a new time period

The setting of 40k is "nicer" for those who start fresh and don't stay long, which is GWs preferred audience, while BT works better for those who joined early and stayed because retcons every 3 year just to see the very same but different again gets boring after a while

 kodos wrote:
There is a difference between static lore that does not advance and ever changing lore

40k is static and everything has always be the same, so retcons are the only way to add anything new

But this also means the lore itself is limited to the codex books as anything else is outdated and obsolete the moment a new codex with new units is released

The opposite would be with Battletech where the timeline advances and a new edition is also a new time period

The setting of 40k is "nicer" for those who start fresh and don't stay long, which is GWs preferred audience, while BT works better for those who joined early and stayed because retcons every 3 year just to see the very same but different again gets boring after a while

Fair.

But if you wanna adopt the position of "40K retcons = bad ... should be the original", you're looking at 1987.

Going with "retcons before 1991 or 2001 or 2021 or whatever are cool, but those after date X are dumb", is neither here nor there and 100% arbitrary, subjective bias without any objective or logical foundation or any claim to validity over any other random date you pick as "your 40K" (including future versions of somebody picking 2031 or 2041 as "their definitive" version of 40K).