Jump to content

Deepkin

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    283

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Deepkin

    The Rumour Thread

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    Interesting. Well, different strokes eh? To me they look a lot like the old Ian Miller art, which I love. Overbuilt baroque ****** with leering faces and random bits and bobs is my favorite aesthetic though, so perhaps I am predisposed towards being the perfect audience for these minis lol

    • Like 7
    • LOVE IT! 1

    The Rumour Thread

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    Love the warcry terrain. Warbands are alright, just wish Hashut ones were chorfs man. 

    Witch Hunter warband is so so. Not nearly enough crazy religious paraphernalia IMO. I like the bomb crossbow and the pups the best. Will get it for them alone. Have a million witch Hunter models I can proxy for everyone else.

    • Like 1

    The "mortals redesign" Discussion

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    36 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:

    If the lore changes in a way that feels like a retcon to how a faction was specifically introduced, people are allowed to be upset about it. If it's bad enough, yea people will just leave. And making that decision to leave the largest, penultimate wargaming system in the world still hurts even if you're finally, legitimately done with GW's decisions/models/lore etc. There are really no true alternatives to Warhammer that are not a literal gamble with your money; non-GW scenes that do exist have died very quickly when unwanted or poorly received updates happened. 

    You're certainly allowed to be upset. I was upset when they introduced Primaris, when they made Custodes into Marines +1, when they killed the Old World, when Josh Reynolds left BL, etc. 

    Either you adjust to the new lore and make something of it, or you leave. I have been told that holding onto the old lore and complaining when it's changed is a certified Bad Thing. But hey, I get it. It sucks when something you like gets changed into something you don't like. I sympathize. 

    • Like 1

    The "mortals redesign" Discussion

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    13 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:

    Sure it is, however, when your own army's lore clashes enough with the company's evolving canon it can really deflate motivation to participate in the universe as a whole. Again, the worry is that established GW lore for COS will be changed--the didacticism that GW itself has canonized.

    If the lore changes and you do not want to change with it, then what can be done? Such is progress.

    The "mortals redesign" Discussion

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    You can always make your own background. Isn't that one of the joys of the Warhammer universe? If you think the current background is morally reprehensible, write your own that contains the level of moral didacticism you deem appropriate. Who knows? Write it well enough, and perhaps GW will incorporate it in their own. 

    The "mortals redesign" Discussion

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    Yeah the Empire is just a moderately exaggerated Holy Roman (Holy Sigmarites?) Empire. Honestly, parts of it are probably toned down from real life (women have far more agency in the Empire than they did in real life at that time and place, for example. And it's explicitly polytheistic rather than the aggressive monotheism of real life). Still grimdark, but not as pitch black as the Imperium. 

    The "mortals redesign" Discussion

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted · Edited by Deepkin

    12 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

    I can't, I have cat paralysis. I can touch cat, is that okay?

    I'm not saying they use 40k to do fascist propaganda, but the combination of a fascist Imperium and 40k protagonists being mostly from said Imperium doesn't give the writers much room to do anything else.

    The imperium isn't fascist, it's a theocratic feudal society in space. Still a monstrous society, but not fascist. 

    That there are protagonists from this society doesn't make it propaganda. Or is Game of Thrones propaganda for pseudo-medieval feudalism as well? Is Gideon the Ninth propaganda for interstellar necromantic theocracy? Etc. 

    Depiction isn't endorsement. The Imperium is widely depicted (still) as the worst regime imaginable. It's so terribly conservative and dogmatic, it's starships use slave gangs to load weapons instead of autoloaders (a technology we have now). It stacks person on person into cancer-ridden, horror-mountains and calls them "hive cities." It works planets to death and then uses their corpses as mulch for farming. It births children, kills them and resurrects their corpses as flying servitors for...aesthetic reasons? It takes little boys, pumps them full of hormones and literal hypnotic indoctrination, tells them they're gods Angels of death and then unleashes them upon the galaxy...who then routinely go mad and betray their Imperium and become it's direst foes. Even when they don't, they routinely genocide their own populations, etc. 

    All this stuff is still in the background. Foregrounded, even. If you think any of that is meant to make you identify with the faction, then I don't know what to say. I think the background still does what it always did: takes the hellish results of absolute conservatism and faith to their obvious, awful conclusions. That there are still sympathetic characters heightens the irony and tragedy. Their individual morality changes nothing: they work within a doomed system, doomed from it's inception by the hubris of it's founder.

    • Like 7
    • LOVE IT! 1

    The "mortals redesign" Discussion

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted · Edited by Deepkin

    5 hours ago, zilberfrid said:

    Maybe Warhammer isn't for me. I generally like stories where I can understand the reasoning the protagonist as well as the antagonist, not stories where both protagonist and antagonists view are utterly incomparable to mine. I hate grimderp.

    There is a difference between Adeptus Mechanicus, who view the flesh as weak and are weird with machines and taking the worst dregs of humanity and positioning them as the good guys.

    Considering GW has lost its satire in most writing and is mostly rehashing fascist propaganda for the Imperium while still painting them as the good guys and thinks that's good to base their AoS humans on (except with added conquistador and crusade, as if fascists were not enough), as well as being poised to force a god onto Kharadron... At least Votann looks good.

    Edit: too aggressive in tone, my apologies. Nonetheless, I disagree 40k constitutes fascist propaganda.

    • Like 2

    The Rumour Thread

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Garrac said:

    Everything an author does with the tools given to them represents their views

    No. Not even close. The idea that an author's work represents that authors views IRL is ridiculous and myopic. Authors write things to make a reader feel something. Not to replicate their worldview. If that were so, then every GW author would be a genocidal maniac. And that's just not the case. 

    some authors might write something that is a replication of their worldview, some of the time. But trying to draw a 1:1 link between what a FICTION author creates in their art, and what they truly believe, is generally a fool's errand.

    Depiction is not endorsement. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 8
    • Confused 1

    The Rumour Thread

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    3 hours ago, zilberfrid said:

    This is exactly the problem. In the beginning, Space Marines were the bluntest implements of fanatical, fascist and xenophobic empire. 

    Now, they are portrayed as heroic and perceived as cool, but that original depiction from back when 40k was satire still remains. This means that GW is in an awkward spot where they want their washed space marines to be the good guys, but that just doesn't work without also glorifying that original fanatical, fascist and xenophobic empire, because it is still the same empire.

    The only bit of writing that seems to keep that satire is the Regimental Standard, and it's the only bit of 40k writing I enjoy.

     

    Do you think depictions of medieval knights also need to stress their negative characteristics? What about depictions of war in general? Depictions of revolution? What about depictions of organized religion, or depictions of state-enforced atheism?

    In other words: does depiction equal endorsement? 

    Also: does something being cool mean it's endorsed? Darth Vader looks cool and is cool, but is still the villain. Chaos looks cool in all its incarnation, yet still the villain. Dwarfs look cool, and yet veer between arch-conservative patriarchies fueled by racism and culturally-lauded hatreds who proudly genocide their enemies based on oft-spurious slights to steampunk mega-capitalists. And they're still good guys. Do you find them as terrible as space Marines?

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 5
    • Confused 3
    • LOVE IT! 1

    The Rumour Thread

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    2 hours ago, zilberfrid said:

    It's good that they reminded themselves and their players Space Marines are also supposed to be satire. That isn't in the recent depictions of them, making them just a glorification of space fascists.

    As for the kitbash, one model is never a problem, it's doing that 40 times.

    I dunno. Space Marines are cool. You can write a book about cool space monk knights being cool and it's not a glorification of space fascists. It's a book about cool space monk knights. 

    The Rumour Thread

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    5 hours ago, Holy_Diver said:

    Yeah, they need to push it more aggressively. 2022 will be its 3rth birthday, so new edish in summer, like Killteam?
    Anyone knows something about the competitive scene of warcry UK or America?

    There is basically no comp Warcry scene. Majority of warbands are relatively balanced but the outlier warbands (skaven, basically) are so good it makes the game trivial. Also a lot of warbands basically play the same, with 1-3 heavy hitters and 10+ chaff models. 

    Many of the also make no sense for certain warbands and you basically auto lose with certain set ups. 

    No one has yet devised a comp ruleset is the main issue. Probably wouldn't be too hard, but the game has relatively low playerbase and tends toward casual players already. 

    It's pretty fun even without the comp stuff. So long as you don't do something like play skaven against iron golems, it's generally fun.

    The Rumour Thread

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    It was the same last year. They want a 500 word sample of the actual story to evaluate your prose, and a 100 word elevator pitch of the plot to evaluate that. If they like that, then they ask for a 250 word summary of the entire story and a 1000 word sample of more writing. 

    That's as far as I got. Presumably if they like that, then you send them the whole story and go from there. 

    It's a lot of steps for what amounts to a call for submissions to an anthology, but if it works for them, I suppose 

    • Like 3

    Unpopular opinion thread

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    10 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

    I so want to make a FEC army now where the "Arch-regent" is actually Denis the Executive Officer of the Week. But every time he uses a command ability, its use has to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting, by a simple majority in the case of using a command ability on a FEC unit, but by a two-thirds majority in the case of using it

    Bloody peasant!

    Unpopular opinion thread

    in Age of Sigmar Discussions

    Posted

    44 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:

    I don't think that's an unpopular opinion so much that people are resistant to change and neither 40k/Fantasy/AoS have had AA, meaning the vast majority of wargamers have never played a game with AA - people simply don't know any better.

    I'd say it's telling that you pretty much never, ever see a new IGOUGO system these days. Even GW's newer systems are all some form of AA at their core. It feels like some part of GW's designers do want to make a move to AA, but they're also mortified at doing such a massive uplifting of their game. I think we'd see it in AoS before 40k for that reason.

    True. Loved alternating activation in Warcry. It does contribute to balance favoring lots of chaff though. Have played with alternate activation in mordheim and liked that a lot too. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...