Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Galas

Members
  • Content Count

    617
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Galas last won the day on April 22 2017

Galas had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

864 Celestant-Prime

1 Follower

About Galas

  • Rank
    Lord Castellant

Recent Profile Visitors

704 profile views
  1. Yeah the imperium is hate-filled and intolerant with every non-human, even slighly different humans like mutants, but not based on sex or human "race". Is the old saying of "When orcs and elfs exist, being brown, white or black became much less relevant" It makes all of the sense to call for more diverse ranges for Imperial Guard and other imperial organizations because that has been their fluff since forever, but it is not represented in miniature form.
  2. You have no idea about 40k lore if you think the Imperium has any kind of general racial or gender based policy. Actually the Inquisition is probably the most diverse of the empire's organization with a ton of female inquisitors since Rogue Trader, the same goes for his army the Imperial Guard, the navy, the Assasins Temples, etc.... The only gender-based organizations of the 40k Imperium are space marines and sisters of battle, Sisters of Silence and Adeptus Custodes. The same goes about race. Why would a 40k human care about the colour of your skins when theres a thousand worlds with all kinds of people coming from everyone and you have actual aliens that want to kill you?
  3. I'm the whitest of whites (Really I cannot be more white even if for many people for being from Spain I'm a latino lol ) and male. And I have always loved playing female characters since I was a boy. And I just enjoy brown and black skins, I find them fun to paint and aesthetically pleasing. Most of my miniatures are painted with brown skins (My dark angels) or dark and black skins (My khorne barbarians and warriors for AoS). And I love things like buffed females in proper armor like the For Honor ladies. I assume someone could come and tell me is some sort of fetishization or something? But is not something like that. I just like how it looks. I'm saying this to give visibilization to a group that I believe is probably the biggest one, and the most silent one: A male dominated customer base that just enjoys other stuff and aesthetics, not only white buffed dudes or mega sexy ladies. Basically the 1º group described by @MaatithoftheBrand Why in MMORPG theres nearly a 50/50 split between male and female characters, but then most female characters are played by male gamers? Because people enjoy things because they find them aesthetically pleasing. A more diverse range is a bonus on itself not because any kind of agenda or representation but just because it looks better. As other poster said, Warhammer Online had things like female Sigmar Priest and Female Imperial Knights and nobody saw that as a bad thing because for a MMORPG that was expected. And even had some classes gender locked like Witch Elves or Chaos Barbarian/Chosen. But I can assure you, if with the Old World they make any kind of female imperial knight miniature a very vocal minority will lose their mind, when in 2009, in another market were that was expected, nobody saw anything wrong with it. And thats the sad thing: Both extremes in this conversation work based in asumptions about what somebody likes or wants based in their race and gender. When Icegoats (Or Aeryenn,etc...) says that warrior females are aisthorical, even being correct, he is assuming (Just as he accusses the other extreme of assuming) that based on their race and gender, white males can't just want female warriors because they think they look cool without any kind of other implication or really caring about historicall plausibility in their fantasy setting.
  4. A more diverse range just looks cooler. I mean, the best stormcasts are the sacrosant ones. Female stormcast are just better proportionated than male ones.
  5. What I have learned about this thread is that theres a ton of people that has never read a piece of lore about how Chaos society both in AoS and in Fantasy worked. Chaos is much more than heavy metal cover-like armies marching south to rape an burn down everything, guys.
  6. I didn't tought today would be the day I saw someone defend Slaanesh pre nerf, but here we are. And because they were "future proofed" just because other insane combos and armies have become after them. Wow. "Future proofed" and GW is just incompatible. They change design philosophies mid edition all the time. The thing with AoS is that everything is broken so nothing is. With the difference that actually 60% of the armies of the game aren't broken. Theres no problem when a Army can make lists that counter specific lists. It becomes a problem when you have armies that totally neuter other armies. Thats very bad design. I have to say that I'm really tired of the typical "git gud" players that comes on the internet after a extremely OP army like Slaanesh or Iron Hands in 40k has been nerfed and says "Do you see guys? You only needed to learn how to counter it to win!" NO! When an army makes 6-7 of 10 places on top 10's month after month and only AFTER it has been nerfed it comes down from that pedestal, is not because people LEARNED how to play agaisnt them. Is because they have been nerfed. Thats a reality nobody has a problem accepting in videogames but for some people it is so hard to understand in warhammer? Why is that? Is people that plays those armies offended because their victories are undervalued for playing an OP army or something?
  7. Whats exactly the problem here? That playtesters play the game and... win games in tournaments?
  8. I don't even undersand why going factionless is an option. I mean what do that option gives , to the game, as a whole? When has been having less rules more exciting than having more rules? "You can have LESS to be able to pick something different". It doesn't sounds good to me. And in my eyes it goes agaisnt what AoS stands for.
  9. In AoS, units are just a stat block. Theres no rule difference between one model with 10 wounds and 10 models with 1 wound. As damage is split, and both degrade, mathematically is nearly the same thing. Is because of that than an army of giants won't have the effect knights had on 40k.
  10. It is just to have more room for variety. They can't reduce things much more without making the armies soo similar.
  11. I believed I knew how this rule works, but after reading this thread I don't even know anymore. What is real? Is this all just a fantasy?
  12. I don't know why not taking a subfaction is even an option Probably because not everybody had one . For me it looks like an arbitrary decision. Just make the subfaction artifacts and traits an extra you can chose and have everyone have a subfaction.
  13. It is intentional guys. Theres no other way around.
  14. Some of the best warhammer books I have read where the least warhammer ones. A murder in mariemburg for example is more of a detective fiction novel and it was great. Riders of Death was nearly a history book than a warhammer one (But that one was much more centered around war).
×
×
  • Create New...