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.

Dear hobbyists,

It is with a great excitement that we have opened our Kickstarter campaign to raise funds for the production of this amazing miniature. Our intention with this project was to step out of the Fantasy Football world and showcase our concept and modelling skills into a collectors miniature. On top of this, we wanted to offer the miniature a background grip to something we have loved and played for long time ourselves. This is why we got inspired by such strong character from a well-known fictional universe. We think there were many details and elements to explore and represent in the miniature and we hope we have captured at least some of them.

We hope you like this model despite it is only our first step into our new strategy of diversifying our business with a broader range than only Fantasy Football. We also hope this thread can gather your feedback and comments for the future and let it also be a reunion point for all painted models that will start hitting the net when we start shipping this bad boy by the end of June 2018.

USEFUL LINKS
Kickstarter Campaign: www.kickstarter.com/projects/6482328/leon-johnson-the-patriarch-95mm-miniature/description

Txarli Factory website: www.txarlifactory.com

Txarli Factory Facebook: www.facebook.com/txarlifactory

Txarli Factory Blog with information and further insight about our projects, teasers and latest news: www.txarlifactory.com/blog

Txarli Factory Shop: www.txarlifactory.com/shop

Looks good!

I'd love to see your take on all of the Primarchs too, eventually?

I wonder what the point of this is considering GW will be eventually creating their own Lion El Johnson miniature?

 ekwatts wrote:
I wonder what the point of this is considering GW will be eventually creating their own Lion El Johnson miniature?

To leech a bit of money on someone else's IP with a cheeky knock-off.

The paint job is nice, the model itself is a bit dull (that pose is not very interesting or evocative of the character)

It was painted by Angel Giraldez, who has starting doing more commissions for other companies, but made his name with Infinity.

 ekwatts wrote:
I wonder what the point of this is considering GW will be eventually creating their own Lion El Johnson miniature?

Appeal to those who want an unavailable model NOW* as opposed to waiting for when FW releases theirs.




*Now being a relative term since this is a Kickstarter.

 ElvisJuice wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
I wonder what the point of this is considering GW will be eventually creating their own Lion El Johnson miniature?

To leech a bit of money on someone else's IP with a cheeky knock-off.

Yeah, because GW have never done that, right?

The fact that this is in a thread about a counts as Lion El Johnson, Primarch of the Dark Angels, who is totally not named after the poet Lionel Johnson who authored the poem Dark Angel, makes it extra ironic.

People need to get over this weird idea that alt sculpts are a bad thing, how is more choice and an indicator that sales of the market leader are strong enough to support them a bad thing?

Woah this is an interesting model, very original, quite the unusual name. Is it inspired by Starcraft?

It reminds me of Arthas Menethil I.

I prefer adult Lionel with a beard. Without one it looks to me a bit much like Sanguinius.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 ElvisJuice wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
I wonder what the point of this is considering GW will be eventually creating their own Lion El Johnson miniature?

To leech a bit of money on someone else's IP with a cheeky knock-off.

Yeah, because GW have never done that, right?

The fact that this is in a thread about a counts as Lion El Johnson, Primarch of the Dark Angels, who is totally not named after the poet Lionel Johnson who authored the poem Dark Angel, makes it extra ironic.

I can’t tell if you’re being deliberately disingenuous or if you genuinely can’t see that there’s a line that separates inspiration, influence and tribute from barefaced plagiarism.

There's no GW Lion El Johnson model, so what has been plagiarised?

Irrespective of that, anyone criticizing a company for "being inspired" by GW is on shaky ground, given GW's history of doing likewise.

 Azreal13 wrote:
There's no GW Lion El Johnson model, so what has been plagiarized?

Are you actually serious?

Every piece of artwork showing Lion El Johnson.

Edit . Irrespective of that... translation, “I know I’m wrong but...”

Few, if any, of which show a consistent image.

But you're getting bogged down in the example rather than the argument. GW are quite possibly amongst the worst offenders of ripping off other people's ideas and appropriating them for their own purposes, so criticizing others for doing likewise is never going to be a strong moral argument, and rarely a legal one outside of recasting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But do feel free to explain how having more choice is a bad thing, given that if you're a rabid GW fanboy you can simply not buy it and wait for them to produce their own?

 Azreal13 wrote:
Few, if any, of which show a consistent image.

But you're getting bogged down in the example rather than the argument. GW are quite possibly amongst the worst offenders of ripping off other people's ideas and appropriating them for their own purposes, so criticizing others for doing likewise is never going to be a strong moral argument, and rarely a legal one outside of recasting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But do feel free to explain how having more choice is a bad thing, given that if you're a rabid GW fanboy you can simply not buy it and wait for them to produce their own?

I’m not going to either praise or criticise GW. I’m merely taking issue with you equating ripping off what is obviously an element of GW’s IP with them taking inspiration from the name of a poet. Utterly ludicrous false equivalence. And yes, I’m getting bogged down in the example because my argument is with your example.

I hate plagiarism regardless of who is doing it, but understand the difference between plagiarism and influence.

Also Azreal13 you're the only one that launched into a big moral battle about the merits of alternative sculpts, all I did was correctly state what the point of this is - to leech a bit of money using someone else's IP. This "you're getting caught up in the example, not the argument" thing is hilarious - if you want to start a thread about alternative sculpts in general and the merits thereof feel free to do that

Settle down in other words

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Few, if any, of which show a consistent image.

But you're getting bogged down in the example rather than the argument. GW are quite possibly amongst the worst offenders of ripping off other people's ideas and appropriating them for their own purposes, so criticizing others for doing likewise is never going to be a strong moral argument, and rarely a legal one outside of recasting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But do feel free to explain how having more choice is a bad thing, given that if you're a rabid GW fanboy you can simply not buy it and wait for them to produce their own?

I’m not going to either praise or criticise GW. I’m merely taking issue with you equating ripping off what is obviously an element of GW’s IP with them taking inspiration from the name of a poet. Utterly ludicrous false equivalence. And yes, I’m getting bogged down in the example because my argument is with your example.

I hate plagiarism regardless of who is doing it, but understand the difference between plagiarism and influence.

I could have just as easily cited Moorcroft, Heinlen, Giger, the Firewarrior on that album cover from the 70s, all of the incredibly obvious appropriation of myth and literature, the fact that they once tried to claim legal ownership of the term halberd etc etc.

If you understand the argument I'm putting forward and simply don't think I've used the best example, one wonders whether the simplest thing wouldn't have been not to drag the thread off topic for the sake of minutiae?

Yeah, I agree, the simplest thing would've been for you not to have done that.

 ElvisJuice wrote:
Also Azreal13 you're the only one that launched into a big moral battle about the merits of alternative sculpts, all I did was correctly state what the point of this is - to leech a bit of money using someone else's IP. This "you're getting caught up in the example, not the argument" thing is hilarious - if you want to start a thread about alternative sculpts in general and the merits thereof feel free to do that

Settle down in other words

Right, so the word "leech" is totally non emotive and doesn't carry any implications whatsoever?

I've no need to settle down, I'm not in the least worked up, I'm not debating the morality of alt sculpts either, the point was, and remains, criticisms of companies for using elements of GW's IP is a poor argument given the history of GW in that regard.

I'm not denying calling it leeching shows my disdain for it, but I challenge you to call that incorrect.

Also

 Azreal13 wrote:
People need to get over this weird idea that alt sculpts are a bad thing, how is more choice and an indicator that sales of the market leader are strong enough to support them a bad thing?

 Azreal13 wrote:
I'm not debating the morality of alt sculpts either, the point was, and remains, criticisms of companies for using elements of GW's IP is a poor argument given the history of GW in that regard.

Hmm

 Azreal13 wrote:

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Few, if any, of which show a consistent image.

But you're getting bogged down in the example rather than the argument. GW are quite possibly amongst the worst offenders of ripping off other people's ideas and appropriating them for their own purposes, so criticizing others for doing likewise is never going to be a strong moral argument, and rarely a legal one outside of recasting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But do feel free to explain how having more choice is a bad thing, given that if you're a rabid GW fanboy you can simply not buy it and wait for them to produce their own?

I’m not going to either praise or criticise GW. I’m merely taking issue with you equating ripping off what is obviously an element of GW’s IP with them taking inspiration from the name of a poet. Utterly ludicrous false equivalence. And yes, I’m getting bogged down in the example because my argument is with your example.

I hate plagiarism regardless of who is doing it, but understand the difference between plagiarism and influence.

I could have just as easily cited Moorcroft, Heinlen, Giger, the Firewarrior on that album cover from the 70s, all of the incredibly obvious appropriation of myth and literature, the fact that they once tried to claim legal ownership of the term halberd etc etc.

If you understand the argument I'm putting forward and simply don't think I've used the best example, one wonders whether the simplest thing wouldn't have been not to drag the thread off topic for the sake of minutiae?

Like I said, you don’t seem to be making any distinction between inspiration or influence and blatant plagiarism. I think this argument has run its course though. We don’t agree and never will. It would have been easier if you’d just said you don’t have a problem with plagiarism.

 ElvisJuice wrote:
I'm not denying calling it leeching shows my disdain for it, but I challenge you to call that incorrect.

Also

 Azreal13 wrote:
People need to get over this weird idea that alt sculpts are a bad thing, how is more choice and an indicator that sales of the market leader are strong enough to support them a bad thing?

 Azreal13 wrote:
I'm not debating the morality of alt sculpts either, the point was, and remains, criticisms of companies for using elements of GW's IP is a poor argument given the history of GW in that regard.

Hmm

Ok, I've made a statement which kind sorta could go to some sort of morality argument. (Personally I don't think so, but I'll concede I can see what you're saying.)

But it isn't a debate unless somebody comes up with a counter point, which I'm not seeing?

Also, you just see that treating other companies with disdain for making alt sculpts of GW IP is a massive double standard unless you do likewise with GW? And that it is impossible for anyone to leech sales from GW for a model they don't make?

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Few, if any, of which show a consistent image.

But you're getting bogged down in the example rather than the argument. GW are quite possibly amongst the worst offenders of ripping off other people's ideas and appropriating them for their own purposes, so criticizing others for doing likewise is never going to be a strong moral argument, and rarely a legal one outside of recasting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But do feel free to explain how having more choice is a bad thing, given that if you're a rabid GW fanboy you can simply not buy it and wait for them to produce their own?

I’m not going to either praise or criticise GW. I’m merely taking issue with you equating ripping off what is obviously an element of GW’s IP with them taking inspiration from the name of a poet. Utterly ludicrous false equivalence. And yes, I’m getting bogged down in the example because my argument is with your example.

I hate plagiarism regardless of who is doing it, but understand the difference between plagiarism and influence.

I could have just as easily cited Moorcroft, Heinlen, Giger, the Firewarrior on that album cover from the 70s, all of the incredibly obvious appropriation of myth and literature, the fact that they once tried to claim legal ownership of the term halberd etc etc.

If you understand the argument I'm putting forward and simply don't think I've used the best example, one wonders whether the simplest thing wouldn't have been not to drag the thread off topic for the sake of minutiae?

Like I said, you don’t seem to be making any distinction between inspiration or influence and blatant plagiarism. I think this argument has run its course though. We don’t agree and never will. It would have been easier if you’d just said you don’t have a problem with plagiarism.

It's more I don't agree that it's plagiarising, given that "bloke in knightly armour with lion heraldry" is already on shaky ground for being in any way original as a concept. Then you throw in the fact that there is no consistent imagery, and certainly no model, that can be pointed to as a source amongst GW's portfolio, and that in this case the "plagiarisee" is one of the most egregious offenders in this industry, and my attitude is more "turnabout is fair play" and more choice is a good thing for the consumer.

I'm not aware of GW making alternate models for other peoples' IP, is it something they did in the 80s?

This is an interesting debate but please start a new thread on it, either in Dakka Discussions or perhaps even Off Topic. Thanks!

As for the mini itself - details look good, as does the paint job (a bit too grey/not black though), but don't really like the pose or the thickness of the shield though.

All other considerations aside (and I’m not going to continue that argument) the mini is okay. Just okay. If Forgeworld had announced this as their version of the Lion, I’d be really disappointed and think their standards had slipped.

Needs more face.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's also very evocative of one of Scibor's sculpts, which I offer as an observation with neither positive nor negative implications intended.

It's a nice model, but it's also clearly a Dark Angels character knock off. Successfully or not, I expect that GW will be sending out a cease and desist for this Kickstarter.

I can't get over how sad the stone face looks whilst being stepped on.

 Clanan wrote:
I can't get over how sad the stone face looks whilst being stepped on.

A Jokaero's lot in life is fairly dour...

OK model, good paint work, will wait for official model as I prefer to support companies that do more original design.