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.

can be found here fatkatgames.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php

Love the model, hate the sword.

Sweet!

Lovely. Especially if they don't poof it up and give her hair. Rawr! Hawt. As to the sword, it's a bit short for me, but it's still a serviceable katana for eviscerating ones foes.

Love the DA stuff. I have a bunch of Skaard minis that double as Slaaneshi cultists/slaves for my CSMs. I check ed out the DA Quick Start rules and they're way too vague and seemingly unwieldy though.

Airbender!!

V'ger!

This is a beautiful sculpt and a very nice mini. But I gotta say something. I have been surfing around looking for some GW figure alternatives and I keep finding these barely covered buxom women with a sword/huge gun/giant spear minis. I dont mean to sound like a hyper-conservative, I appreciate a good scuplt as much as the next person but holy crap! Looking at Confrontation minis yesterday, that game looks like a skirmish combat game set in the gritty harsh fantasy world of a cheap strip club. What gives? Do female minis have to be bust'in out all over? Just a thought...

Yes.

Posted By ancientsociety on 02/01/2007 8:59 AM
Do female minis have to be bust'in out all over?

Yes.

Just like Spring!

Flippantry aside, I do agree with Smoke3. Some of the female sculpts out there are way OTT. Some of Rackham's new female sculpts have gone well beyond the point of "fantastical sexiness", almost as if they are getting custome designs from the latest fetish porno studio.

Case in point - Dirz's Crimson Servant. The fluff reads like a Penthouse letter:

"They only live to suffer and obedience is carved into their genes. Most faithful keep them at home, some take them to war...the crimson servants sooth and heal, obeying the best they can to their genetically programmed instincts...They ignore that it is the result of the same malfunction: these crimson servants were impregnated."

I love Dirz, especially the fluff. But the thinly veiled sexual innuendo, coupled with the pregnancy thing, plus their outfit....just a little too much for my tastes (and I'm a pretty liberal guy).



Seriously? You're going to do battle with a leather strap shoved in your nether-regions? I don;t think so....

thats what makes them angry enough to fight besides hormones....

Ugh. Why must these threads always devolve into some sort of morality police proselytization? Were talking about games where the figures are used to eviscerate, disembowel, decapitate, maim and/or otherwise kill their opponent's figures (and are frequently depicted doing so), and this is ok, but god forbid a figure be scantily clad! Oh noes! There is bare flesh on that figure holding the entrails of it's opponent! And here, the original figure is fully clothed, showing only some cleavage.

It would be one thing if we were talking about Pegaso or other mfgr's cheesecake figures, but what is so wrong with feminine figures? It's not like the vast majority of these figures are in compromising positions, much less pornographic ones (cheesecake figs aside). Of course, nobody complains either when it's some bare chested male figure (re: barbarians, Chaos Marauders, etc..) with leather straps. How homoerotic is that? But women are dainty creatures that should always be modestly attired! Aieeee!!

I wasn't trying to play morality police. Like I said, I love Dirz. I love female figs. I love the Skaard Toxic Mistresses. Scantily-clad female figs are generally pretty cool. I was simply pointing out that there's a point where figs go from scantily-clad to blatant, OTT silliness.

I prefer my miniatures games to be miniature games, and my porno to be porno, not vice versa.

Let's hear it for porno!

What were we talking about?

Posted By ancientsociety on 02/01/2007 10:42 AM

I wasn't trying to play morality police. Like I said, I love Dirz. I love female figs. I love the Skaard Toxic Mistresses. Scantily-clad female figs are generally pretty cool. I was simply pointing out that there's a point where figs go from scantily-clad to blatant, OTT silliness.

I prefer my miniatures games to be miniature games, and my porno to be porno, not vice versa.

That's cool. My apologies if I came off a bit harsh towards you or Smoke3 (praBob!), it's just one of my (many?) pet peeves that people often are quick to condemn scantily clad female figures while exulting violence laden and/or scantily clad male figures. Especially when the figure in the OP is fully clothed. It like committing acts of violence is acceptable but the natural human form isn't.

The only problem I have with the leather strap chicks you posed has to do with their unusually bland poses rather than the lack of cover. But then I roll like that. Hah, not really! (made you flinch!)

Hey no problem man, I too think its a goofy double standard and in both cases, men and women figures, its just nudity for nudities sake. Which dosent really make sense to me. Does that make sense to anyone else?
The topic figure is obviously meant to be a part of a fantasy combat team, but she is not fully clothed like you said. She's wearing her Sgt. Pepper lonely Hearts club band jacket and some skin tight pants and thats all. Ive never been in a really desperate knife fight with anyone but I would think an outfit that dosent chafe your nipples off would be ideal. But to each their own I guess.

Posted By nyarlathotep667 on 02/01/2007 3:07 PM

That's cool. My apologies if I came off a bit harsh towards you or Smoke3 (praBob!), it's just one of my (many?) pet peeves that people often are quick to condemn scantily clad female figures while exulting violence laden and/or scantily clad male figures. Especially when the figure in the OP is fully clothed. It like committing acts of violence is acceptable but the natural human form isn't.

That's the American way.

As to the other posters comments about the rules (quickstart ones that is) yeah, the quickstart rules are a bit strange, but get into a game with the actual ruleset and it is far from ungainly.  It's very very fast and very very brutal with no HeroHammer anywhere in the game...everyone can and will die.

Hmmm...how many models does a typical game need?

I'm thinkig of Skaard (since I already own some)...

Well the models have to sell. I think only Jester and I would buy a male figure with
an open breasted Sgt. Pepper outfit with a banana hammock.

I would probably buy two.

Did someone say banana hammock?

malfred, youre such a tease....

In all fairness, in a wargame, brutality and bloodshed are to be expected. Nipples, not so much. Grouse all you want about the psychological implications, but realize that the audience is already leaning towards depictions of violence. To continue the cheesecake reference and flip it a bit, would people really like depictions of violence in their pinup models? So why try to sneak sex into warfare?

Arguably some of it has to do with the genre (what would pulp fantasy be without muscular barbarians and chesty vixens, after all?), but, seriously, S&M doms with razor claws? I would actually have expected it from Brom's line, but in a pseudo medieval fantasy setup it is absurd (and not in the clever, self-mocking way). So alot of it is context- screaming daemonettes showing skin makes sense. Wood elves in g-strings, not really.

Nipples are like skulls, but for girls.