Oldhammer Observation on Later Decades of Codex Threadmill

[Karak Norn Clansman]

The 1980s were characterized by a wild plethora of all manner of miniature releases, many of which were niche to boot, and which has later been mined for inspiration or reintroduction by studio people. A whole slew of fantasy Regiments of Renown and 40k figures (and background) such as Administratum, Mechanicus personnel, Genestealer Cults and Ambulls, serve as but a few examples.

Games Workshop since the 1980s has seen a growth of army book straitjacket, or codex threadmill, and a loss of freewheeling creativity. The format of producing extensive and growing army ranges made it harder for the studio to follow their fancy and jump on odd one-off releases where a couple of handful of sculpts in some cheap metal moulds sufficed to call it a day. Increasingly, the miniature releases turned ever more rigid into catering to the codex threadmill. The transition into full plastic ranges only exacerbated the army book straitjacket, since hard plastic moulds are so expensive.

This trend has been something the studio has always fought back against, as if they wish to recapture the freewheeling creativity of the 1980s. The 1990s saw a healthy number of Regiments of Renown, petering out with new iterations of Mengil Manhide's Manflayers and Ruglud's Armoured Orcs after 2000. Niched vignette pieces (e.g. animosity Orcs), summer campaign releases and things like Specialist Games and Dreadfleet all stand as proof of attempts to have an outlet for freewheeling creativity in niche areas. As do Forgeworld itself.

Yet the army book straitjacket was inevitable. To sell well, most releases had to cater to existing armies, or had to introduce whole new armies with extensive ranges (Tomb Kings, Ogre Kingdoms, Necrons, Tau, Dark Eldar). More exploratory half-sized new armies were repeatedly attempted up to the early 2000s, with everything from Sisters of Battle, 1990s Chaos Dwarfs, Kislev and Daemonhunters, many of which turned out to be neglected one-offs in the long-term codex threadmill.*

Gone were the days when Citadel could release a Nipponese rocket launcher with crew and call it a day. Things had to increasingly fit the big army books.

The 40k Imperial Guard range serve as one example of how GW's freewheeling creativity was stymied over time (though it is not an example of peak freewheeling creativity in the 1980s):

The 1980s Imperial Army was standardized, all Necromundan if you so like. Plastic and metal.

The 1990s Imperial Guard sported plastic Catachans and metal Cadians, Mordians, Pretorians, Tallarns, Valhallans and Steel Legion in 2000. Lots of different regiments to hint at a vast setting with infinite variety.

The 2000s Imperial Guard sported plastic Cadians and a brilliant spasm of metal Vostroyans. There was no shortage in the early 2000s of new alternative Guard regiment descriptions and artwork, yet without models. FW also produced Elysians and Death Korps of Krieg.

The 2010s Astra Militarum was all plastic Cadians and Catachans. No White Dwarf exploration of other aesthetics without miniatures, since that could throw third party manufacturers a bone (IP mania is destructive for creativity).

Likewise, it may be noted that recent plastic kits' inclusion of funky details like silly Nurgling minions, fly mutant Terminators or a scorched heretic for the Sisters of Battle is a way to do some fun niche stuff within the constraints of all plastic ranges. As is the tendency to more carefully (and less freely) pose plastic miniatures like you would a metal model, but previously not a multipart plastic mini.

As such, when you see funky old models making a return in Necromunda or niche box games, remember that the army book straitjacket was something the design studio always tried to break free from, seemingly to recapture some of the exploratory and freewheeling creativity that was a hallmark of Games Workshop in the 1980s.

It should also be remembered that while ranges of primarily metal or resin sculpts allow more creative freedom for the sculptors, ranges of multipart plastic allow more creative freedom for the hobbyists. It's a trade-off, and no kit has ever struck a perfect balance between the two. The plastics released around 2000 were the peak of convertibility, but their poses were not as naturalistic as those of better metal models. The current trend of virtually pre-posed plastic kits is clearly an attempt to recapture some of the sculpting quality lost when moving from metal to multipart plastic. Yet it occurs at the loss of Lego-like customizability for the hobbyist.

Just some observations on GW creativity through the decades. The spark has never died through all the natural style shifts, but the constraints have increased. That is one reason as to why the 1980s was such an outstanding creative rollercoaster. :)

Cheers

___________
* Several newer half-sized armies in 40k and Age of Sigmar seem to have pulled off this stunt with more success, such as Harlequins and Custodes. Plastic sticks better. Change in CEO aside, this is one viable way for freewheeling crativity to explore niches of the setting with miniatures. It's still an army, but the required work and investment is more limited than entirely new fully fledged armies require.

[Firedrake Cordova]

I really liked the old metal Cadian models. Should've bought some, in hindsight   Didn't we also have the Praetorian XXIV models?

 

I somewhat miss when GW did mini-codexes (the Assassins one around 3rd Edition, Codex:Armadeddon), and Chapter Approved in White Dwarf for random stuff (although I suppose they're starting to do that now with the new chapters that are cropping up in the Crusade articles).

[phandaal]

 

I somewhat miss when GW did mini-codexes (the Assassins one around 3rd Edition, Codex:Armadeddon), and Chapter Approved in White Dwarf for random stuff (although I suppose they're starting to do that now with the new chapters that are cropping up in the Crusade articles).

 

Still have a copy of Citadel Journal 39 locked away somewhere. Those Harlequins rules were very cool.

[gideon stargreave]

Nice write up there. I got into GW just before the lizardmen came out in an edition change, and into 40k when they sold me the 2nd Ed box, dark millennium and every single codex for 30 quid when 3rs Ed came out. Metal was all I knew of you didn't want literal army wide monopose. They still did a bits service then, so you could go pretty wild with conversions and proxying. Then came multipart plastic and everything changed.

Now I don't know. A couple of different upgrade sprues and you already have far more options for conversions and beautiful unique miniatures than the glory days of mail order trolls.

But

Only within anl specific army.

Its much harder to make something new nowadays, especially a unique character. To make a rogue trader let's say, you might need five different kits and a character model from a specialist game.

 

Now of course most of us have plenty of kits and don't mind more, and buts sites exist. I just can't help feeling that now a specific individual project, like a single exodite, would require a lot of purchasing and waste.

 

All I really know is that nothing will ever be as bad as painting static, flat, monopose gretchine.

 

Interesting thoughts about how plastic ranges of niche armies tend to stick better. The price can't have helped. Even in 1999 five metal models could easily cost 30 quid, hardly different to today's price for a customizable plastic kit with plenty of weird creative things in it

[MegaVolt87]

Nice write up there. I got into GW just before the lizardmen came out in an edition change, and into 40k when they sold me the 2nd Ed box, dark millennium and every single codex for 30 quid when 3rs Ed came out. Metal was all I knew of you didn't want literal army wide monopose. They still did a bits service then, so you could go pretty wild with conversions and proxying. Then came multipart plastic and everything changed.

Now I don't know. A couple of different upgrade sprues and you already have far more options for conversions and beautiful unique miniatures than the glory days of mail order trolls.

But

Only within anl specific army.

Its much harder to make something new nowadays, especially a unique character. To make a rogue trader let's say, you might need five different kits and a character model from a specialist game.

 

Now of course most of us have plenty of kits and don't mind more, and buts sites exist. I just can't help feeling that now a specific individual project, like a single exodite, would require a lot of purchasing and waste.

 

All I really know is that nothing will ever be as bad as painting static, flat, monopose gretchine.

 

Interesting thoughts about how plastic ranges of niche armies tend to stick better. The price can't have helped. Even in 1999 five metal models could easily cost 30 quid, hardly different to today's price for a customizable plastic kit with plenty of weird creative things in it

 

Would you believe me if you wanted to make a bespoke, one off character piece you could just walk into a GW store and the manager would pull out bits boxes from the back room for you to go nuts with at no charge or restriction in what you grabbed? I was there Gandalf, 3,000 years ago.... 

Edited November 10, 2021 by MegaVolt87

[Angry Banana]

 

Would you believe me if you wanted to make a bespoke, one off character piece you could just walk into a GW store and the manager would pull out bits boxes from the back room for you to go nuts with at no charge or restriction in what you grabbed? I was there Gandalf, 3,000 years ago.... 

 

I remember those days, and the big discount sales that the stores used to have on birthdays and on old model lines that were going out of production.

[Slave to Darkness]

Was reading WD issue 5 (feb/mar 78) the other day and the editorial at the start made me laugh, they were talking about how a lot of the Middle Earth mini ranges and games were being choked out due to extreme licencing restrictions and how no one will gain from this strict enforcement, and us the hobbyist will be the only ones suffering. Funny how a company can change, I know in the 90s it became a publicly traded company etc and shareholders blah blah blah, just funny reading that and now we have GW and Chapterhouse, GW and animators...

 

Kinda off topic a bit but this trip down memory lane just reminded me of what I read.

[Warhead01]

Was reading WD issue 5 (feb/mar 78) the other day and the editorial at the start made me laugh, they were talking about how a lot of the Middle Earth mini ranges and games were being choked out due to extreme licencing restrictions and how no one will gain from this strict enforcement, and us the hobbyist will be the only ones suffering. Funny how a company can change, I know in the 90s it became a publicly traded company etc and shareholders blah blah blah, just funny reading that and now we have GW and Chapterhouse, GW and animators...

 

Kinda off topic a bit but this trip down memory lane just reminded me of what I read.

A bit related to that, I remember but no longer have a statement from the WD in which GW said using any third party miniature for Imperial Guard was fine. this would have been some time between 99' and 00'. About the time the Warzone second edition boxed set was released. And I remember that box had something like 90 miniatures in it. 

 

[Charlo]

I think in recent times we still have these niche and "cool" products, they just tie into a larger release.

 

Look at all the crazy stuff we got in Blackstone Fortress, or Cursed City? The revival and reinvention of the Genestealer Cults, hell, PRIMARIS MARINES! (controversial I know!)

 

Sister Novitiates, Krieg and expanded Kommandos through Kill-Team too!

 

The creativity is there and I don't think it's constrained by any sort of army book schedule (after all, the minis are made first!)

[Xenith]

Bear in mind the conversion from metal to plastic, and the lego-like interchangeable nature of the MPK's meant that designers couldn't really go nuts with designs, as the MO was cross-kit compatibility. I think GW seen the success of dynamic, monoposed plastic miniatures in sets like Dark vengeance, which by all means was a massive seller, with beautiful models, and seen that it was something the community wanted. 

 

I guess the throw something at the wall and see if it sticks approach to model release in the 80's had to be done away with in order to appeal to shareholders under the (mis)management of Kirby. Now that you mention it, his absolutism 'people dont care about the game, they just want to collect the models' was at odds with the release patterns you say. If they thought customers were primarily collectors, then why not release bespoke interesting models. If they thought the game was only a small part of the hobby, why only release models that fit neatly into the game in some way?

 

I guess these are some possible reasons for the failing/flatlining/internal cannibalism of the company from 2000 - 2015.

 

Glad you've mentioned the new releases. We are definitely in a golden age of 40k and Warhammer in general, where we see these bespoke, odd releases where the designers are running wild in things like Necromunda, Blood Bowl, etc, but also releasing special 40k models like the chaplain, librarian, then the artwork inspired Black Templars. I guess you could say the whole, new Black Templar line was made to satisfy the customers, as they seemed to be on the back burner since 4th ed or so. 

[Rik Lightstar]

Bear in mind the conversion from metal to plastic, and the lego-like interchangeable nature of the MPK's meant that designers couldn't really go nuts with designs, as the MO was cross-kit compatibility. I think GW seen the success of dynamic, monoposed plastic miniatures in sets like Dark vengeance, which by all means was a massive seller, with beautiful models, and seen that it was something the community wanted. 

 

I guess the throw something at the wall and see if it sticks approach to model release in the 80's had to be done away with in order to appeal to shareholders under the (mis)management of Kirby. Now that you mention it, his absolutism 'people dont care about the game, they just want to collect the models' was at odds with the release patterns you say. If they thought customers were primarily collectors, then why not release bespoke interesting models. If they thought the game was only a small part of the hobby, why only release models that fit neatly into the game in some way?

 

I guess these are some possible reasons for the failing/flatlining/internal cannibalism of the company from 2000 - 2015.

 

Glad you've mentioned the new releases. We are definitely in a golden age of 40k and Warhammer in general, where we see these bespoke, odd releases where the designers are running wild in things like Necromunda, Blood Bowl, etc, but also releasing special 40k models like the chaplain, librarian, then the artwork inspired Black Templars. I guess you could say the whole, new Black Templar line was made to satisfy the customers, as they seemed to be on the back burner since 4th ed or so. 

 

I'm no great fan of Tom Kirby and a lot of the displeasure towards him and specifically his perceptions of and attitude towards hobbyists/customers is entirely justified.

 

However I think it's also easy to gloss over what was achieved under his watch which arguably started in 1991.

 

Including, but not limited to:

• Move to Lenton
• Opening of Warhammer World
• "Video Game" licensing
• All plastic miniature production done in house
• Creation of Black Library and Forgeworld
• Global Campaigns

The biggest thing however was getting the Lord of the Rings license and the collaboration with De'Agostini for the associated part-work magazine I worked in the retail side during the LotR boom and for a while after and the impact on the customer count of those two things was huge. Without those it's doubtful the company would be anywhere near the size it is now.

 

It is totally valid to say that he likely wasn't responsible for the idea of most of those, but they certainly couldn't have happened without his approval.

 

Just wanted to provide a little balance to the Tom Kirby discussion.

 

Rik

[Xenith]

 

 

Just wanted to provide a little balance to the Tom Kirby discussion.

 

 

Perhaps I treated him a little harshly. All valid points, and things like the global campaigns were great - before the 2005 - 2015 stagnation, I remember a massive jump in GW share price around the time of 3rd ed/Eye of Terror campaign - there was definitely some vision there - I guess for me it was overshadowed with the company MO maybe post 2008?

[Rik Lightstar]

 

 

Perhaps I treated him a little harshly. All valid points, and things like the global campaigns were great - before the 2005 - 2015 stagnation, I remember a massive jump in GW share price around the time of 3rd ed/Eye of Terror campaign - there was definitely some vision there - I guess for me it was overshadowed with the company MO maybe post 2008?

 

 

Internally the 2005 onwards slowdown was expected, there was never going to be a fourth Lord of the Rings film and his job was very much to stabilise the business and ensure that it remained viable through the required restructuring.

 

He was definitely there too long though, by about 10 years to my mind. GW was in a reasonable position again by 2010 and could have been a little less cautious.

 

Rik

[Charlo]

 

Glad you've mentioned the new releases. We are definitely in a golden age of 40k and Warhammer in general, where we see these bespoke, odd releases where the designers are running wild in things like Necromunda, Blood Bowl, etc, but also releasing special 40k models like the chaplain, librarian, then the artwork inspired Black Templars. I guess you could say the whole, new Black Templar line was made to satisfy the customers, as they seemed to be on the back burner since 4th ed or so. 

 

To be honest the Templars were just sculpted and painted by two guys who utterly love them and it really shows.

[Firedrake Cordova]

The biggest thing however was getting the Lord of the Rings license and the collaboration with De'Agostini for the associated part-work magazine ... Without those it's doubtful the company would be anywhere near the size it is now.

Rather unbelievably, senior management had to be convinced that trying to get the Lord of the Rings licence was a good idea

[Rik Lightstar]

 

 

The biggest thing however was getting the Lord of the Rings license and the collaboration with De'Agostini for the associated part-work magazine ... Without those it's doubtful the company would be anywhere near the size it is now.

Rather unbelievably, senior management had to be convinced that trying to get the Lord of the Rings licence was a good idea

They did indeed, I think there were genuine and legitimate concerns that there would be a bigger crash after or that they'd end up getting bought by Warner Bros or one of the big toy companies.

 

Rik

[Firedrake Cordova]

They did indeed, I think there were genuine and legitimate concerns that there would be a bigger crash after or that they'd end up getting bought by Warner Bros or one of the big toy companies.

I thought Rick P went into more detail than he did (still a really interesting interview - whilst it's about LoTR, the start is also about 40K, and the latter part is about how LoTR's success was a problem for GW, and also some of the internal issues circa 2010 )

Edited November 23, 2021 by Firedrake Cordova