Leagues of Votann Initial 1st April 2022 reveal, new lore & articles discussion

[phandaal]

20 minutes ago, Trysanna said:

You know 40k isn't just a boys club right? There are a whole lot of women that enjoy this game and the setting, and pretending they don't exist just makes them feel alienated from the community. Can't believe I'm seeing this nonsense here in 2022. What's next, girls just don't like video games either?

"0.0002%" should have given away that it was not a serious number, yeah? The actual figure is about 10k times higher.

[phandaal]

24 minutes ago, Trysanna said:

Notice how I didn't bring up the actual number, but your dismissive attitude to women in this space, yeah? Something that is far far too common and that you are parroting as a super funny 'joke' because I guess women being unwelcome and ignored in this space is somehow funny to you.

No, you just took it the worst possible way. Tried to respond politely, but since that does not seem to be in the cards I will leave it at this: Not my problem, not sorry, not gonna derail the thread any more.

Glad to see another Squat Enjoyer. That is my takeaway here.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

=][= Let's stop the bickering.  You can hash out your disagreements via PM. =][=

[SvenIronhand]

Very disappointed with the Votann range as it stands. It feels painfully generic. It's not like they had their own work and years of the competition filling that niche to learn from.

[MithrilForge]

I still like what they're showing and will still be making a Leagues of Votaan army , so what if they look star crafty {shrug} ...still looks cool. 

I'm with Triszin on that Alternate colour scheme (it has a very Titanfall theme to it )

 

Mithril 

[appiah4]

I was very excited for the return of Squats but these look more like Starcraft marines than Squats to me..

[Quantum]

Hate to say it, but I am losing my enthusiasm for the Leagues. The models look fine, but their esthetics are humanity-style clunky power armor and big boxy guns, and promises to be a 3+/2+ elite army.

We already have many of those.

And the lore is potentially interesting, but GW seems to present the Leagues as "Good & decent imperium-esque, without its dark side", which I find uninteresting.   

Edited July 5, 2022 by Quantum

[TheVoidDragon]

I'm losing enthusiasm for them too and I really really like the idea of Space Dwarfs. It's not like they're bad models, they're just boring and generic and that feels worse. There are lots of baffling design decsions that just make them feel like no one had any idea what they're really doing with them.

- models with almost nothing in the way of Dwarf aesthetic despite it being part of their lore

- when the Dwarf aesthetic is there, it feels randomly stuck on. The Theyn banner on the Hearthkin, the runic patterns on the inside of the legs and placed horizontally on the Einhyr.

- The wierd animal decoration stuff but nothing in the way of Votann decoration

- Too close similarities to Imperial Aesthetic even though being STC designs still means they can differ wildly, Necromunda models stand out more than these

- Overall feel very generic sci-fi as if they decided that they'd swap the "Dwarf" theme for "Space Marine". They've lacking a distinct visual identity.

There are all sorts of things they could have done with them to make them feel unique that didn't involve going all-in on the Dwarf theming, my thoughts on these basically come down to "Is that it? That's the best they could think of?".

What makes the whole thing worse is all the Strawmen people keep using of "Dwarf tropes are boring!" or "You just want them to be Fantasy Dwarfs!" that completely miss the point and act as if "generic sci-fi" and "Dwarf themed" are mutually exclusive.

Not only that but like, the tropes are what make Dwarfs the Dwarfs. So what if someone who doesn't like the Dwarf archetype wouldn't like an army based on the Dwarf Archetype? They shouldn't cater to someone who's against the idea in the first place, if this was the reveal of the Eldar you'd get that sort of people going "You want the Eldar to be Fantasy Elfs in Space, boring!". They don't o the Dwarf theming well at all and neither do they do something entirely different. It just feels half-baked in both directions.

Edited July 5, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Guest Triszin]

so I did a quick thing.

 

EXO armor appear to be on same base as marines.

and a "army shot"

The Iron kin repair guy is also on a marine base.

 

- SPECULATION:

- I think this is basically the army starter box, Minus the Broker repair Kin dude, which I think may be the next formal model reveal.

 - and double the base troops to a total count of 20

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by Triszin

[Dumah]

22 hours ago, Valkyrion said:

They look ridiculous and not at all 40k, IMO. 

People said the same thing about Tau, at first. There's room in this setting for some aesthetic variety.

I for one find it refreshing; I can only take so much grim and dark grim grimdarkness (with a side of grim and a pinch of dark) before my eyes roll out of my head.

 

 

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by Dumah
Fat fingers

[TheVoidDragon]

I really don't understand how the Dwarf aesthetic hasn't just been randomly stuck on afterwards when they've got things like this. This and the Theyn Animal banner don't feel natural, they're jarring.

[Lemondish]

Each new reveal gets me more and more excited about this release. I am so glad they aren't leaning too heavily into generic fantasy dwarf aesthetics with this. The flat panels on those Hearthguard are a fantastic canvas for those that do want to lean into it, I imagine. There's some dwarf-like iconography with the unique runes on each, but it's subdued, and I adore that more than the massive bling fest of the original squats. 

Kinda hoping to see more of the rugged prospector vibe the Pioneer was rocking in another unit. 

[TheVoidDragon]

37 minutes ago, Lemondish said:

I am so glad they aren't leaning too heavily into generic fantasy dwarf aesthetics with this.

 

I find that people keep saying things like this just baffling. I totally get wanting them to be a unique take on the Dwarf archetype in the same way as Kharadron Overlords are, but saying that the expected aesthetic would be "generic" just makes no sense to me. The purpose of an archetype is certain characteristics, one of which for the Dwarfs is that style of aesthetic,  Being against that comes across as if saying "I don't like the Dwarf archetype, so don't want the army based on the Dwarf archetype to be Dwarfs" and praising them for not being what they should be.

It's fine to not like the usual Dwarf aesthetic, but I don't see how not meeting the expectations of people who actually like what Dwarfs are meant to involve aesthetically is a good thing. Like if this was the Eldar and people were instead going "They're the generic fantasy Elf aesthetic in Space, they should get rid of that stuff" that would be just absurd as those characteristics are part of the whole point of having something based on the archetype in the first place.

Please don't think i'm directing this at you specifically I just don't get it in general and i've seen so many people say things like it.

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[SpaceDwalin]

17 hours ago, SvenIronhand said:

Very disappointed with the Votann range as it stands. It feels painfully generic. It's not like they had their own work and years of the competition filling that niche to learn from.

Is that guy on the top row a deliberate Sontaran? Where is the miniature from?

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by SpaceDwalin

[Leif Bearclaw]

51 minutes ago, TheVoidDragon said:

I find that people keep saying things like this just baffling. I totally get wanting them to be a unique take on the Dwarf archetype in the same way as Kharadron Overlords are, but saying that the expected aesthetic would be "generic" just makes no sense to me. The purpose of an archetype is certain characteristics, one of which for the Dwarfs is that style of aesthetic,  Being against that comes across as if saying "I don't like the Dwarf archetype, so don't want the army based on the Dwarf archetype to be Dwarfs" and praising them for not being what they should be.

It's fine to not like the usual Dwarf aesthetic, but I don't see how not meeting the expectations of people who actually like what Dwarfs are meant to involve aesthetically is a good thing. Like if this was the Eldar and people were instead going "They're the generic fantasy Elf aesthetic in Space, they should get rid of that stuff" that would be just absurd as those characteristics are part of the whole point of having something based on the archetype in the first place.

Please don't think i'm directing this at you specifically I just don't get it in general and i've seen so many people say things like it.

 

That isn't really what he said though. He's glad that they aren't leaning into 'generic fantasy dwarf' aesthetic too hard. To me it reads like that's an entire package. The idea is that 'Gimli/Thorgrim with a boltgun' would be an unwelcome direction for GW to go down. The goal (which imo they're doing reasonably well with so far) should be 'Sci-fi dwarfs for 40k' not 'Fantasy Dwarfs with guns'. To go back to the Eldar example, their vibe isn't 'generic fantasy Elf aesthetic in Space', it's 'Space Elf'.

 

Regarding the range in general and Hearthguard in particular,  Conversations like this always somewhat confuse me (though I've been guilty of this at time too). What does 'generic' really mean in this context?  How are the new models 'un-dwarfy' (other than lack of universal beards, but that's not all there is to a dwarf)? What even is the '40k aesthetic'? Gratuitous Skulls? That's a meme more than a setting wide rule, Tau and Eldar (for example) tend to be quite light on them. I'm not sure I even get the Starcraft thing tbh, beyond the large round neck ring, but 1 design similarity is a bit light imo. The rest can be boiled down to 'stocky bulky dude in big armour with giant shoulders', which is hardly without precedent in 40k as a whole.

[TheVoidDragon]

29 minutes ago, Leif Bearclaw said:

That isn't really what he said though. He's glad that they aren't leaning into 'generic fantasy dwarf' aesthetic too hard. To me it reads like that's an entire package. The idea is that 'Gimli/Thorgrim with a boltgun' would be an unwelcome direction for GW to go down. The goal (which imo they're doing reasonably well with so far) should be 'Sci-fi dwarfs for 40k' not 'Fantasy Dwarfs with guns'. To go back to the Eldar example, their vibe isn't 'generic fantasy Elf aesthetic in Space', it's 'Space Elf'.

 

The issue is people seem to use "Generic fantasy Dwarf aesthetic" when refering to the "Dwarf archetype" in general, as in the idea that they don't want it to have the aesthetic of runes, nordic designs, beards, geometric patterns and all that stuff you'd find as part of The Dwarfs and that having that would then be "generic"; not wanting "Space Dwarfs" to actually be Space Dwarfs. That doesn't mean literally take the fantasy version and stick then in space, but rather the general aesthetics of a fantasy dwarf and a sci-fi dwarf should be broadly the same, because they're based on the same archetype with the same characteristics. In that same way the tEldar are based around the usual fantasy Elf Aesthetic in space, because they follow the Elf aesthetic of sleek, elegant, slightly ornate curved design style. If they weren't that they then wouldn't be Space Elfs.

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Tyriks]

If the space elf archetype is sleek, elegant and ornate, the space dwarf counterpart would be short, stocky, bulky, durable. Squats don't need to have Norse (ish) runes to count as dwarves anymore than Eldar need to be covered in leaves and stag horns. Now, I think more runes would be great, but you can't compare abstract concepts with concrete details, it's just not the same.

Personally, I'm torn on the Leagues. Some stuff has been really cool, other stuff has been not for me. I do think some stuff has been a bit bland. I won't pick them up, but I hope someone in my group does so I can vicariously get some enjoyment from them.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Nemesor Tyriks

[jaxom]

A lot of this conversation reminds me of the T'au release. The wave (models and lore) for any new faction is going to be broad by default. With time will come specifics and a more focused view on what makes them tick and how they stand out and fit in to the 40k universe. Until then, the empty spaces left by the shallow, but wide, net being cast are easy to fill in with hyperbole and memes. 

The high-technology from the Dark Age has been represented by a generic 1950s aesthetic since the new Adeptus Mechanicus range came out. The new Kin designs reinforce this; turns out the Age of Technology wasn't dystopian cyberpunk or necro-sci-fi. Meanwhile the Pioneer takes that and carries it outward. It reminds me of Firefly, where there would be obvious pieces of core world high-tech that then had a cowboy-looking guy riding it. The Squats were described as high gravity world colonists in the galactic core, which is not near any of the major Imperial fief capitals. They had some who went out into the wider world, including a splinter group on Necromunda (I think of it as the equivalent of those of Lombard descent in Italy compared to Germans). I think, if anything, it's the knotwork and decorative elements which seem only there to create a cross-connection to previous GW dwarf lines.

19 hours ago, SvenIronhand said:

Very disappointed with the Votann range as it stands. It feels painfully generic. It's not like they had their own work and years of the competition filling that niche to learn from.

"Say The First Thing That Comes To Mind," 

Top Row

Gene-stealer cultist from an implantation into a Squat Mining Guild

The new Kin weapons and basic shoulder armor

The new Kin shoulder armor for Theyns, a 2nd edition heavy weapon, and gambson armor from a Warhammer Fantasy Dwarf Ranger

The new Kin basic armor

A rat

Bottom Row

A space pirate-viking dwarf

Imperial Army Squat with a Mordian style uniform

The new Kin shoulder armor for Theyns, a 2nd edition bolter, and gambson armor from a Warhammer Fantasy Dwarf Ranger

Imperial Army Squat with Necromundan style uniform

That one Necromundan bounty hunter

 

 

[TheVoidDragon]

1 hour ago, Nemesor Tyriks said:

If the space elf archetype is sleek, elegant and ornate, the space dwarf counterpart would be short, stocky, bulky, durable. Squats don't need to have Norse (ish) runes to count as dwarves anymore than Eldar need to be covered in leaves and stag horns. Now, I think more runes would be great, but you can't compare abstract concepts with concrete details, it's just not the same.

Personally, I'm torn on the Leagues. Some stuff has been really cool, other stuff has been not for me. I do think some stuff has been a bit bland. I won't pick them up, but I hope someone in my group does so I can vicariously get some enjoyment from them.

It's strange if you're trying to claim that runes, nordic designs, geometric shapes and all that stuff isn't part of the Dwarf archetype.

The Eldar design doesn't involve involve leaves and stag horns, because that's the wood elf aesthetic. The Eldar are based more on the trope of high Elves and their more sleek, elegant, slightly ornate curved styings.

Edited July 5, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Karhedron]

On 7/5/2022 at 12:47 PM, Leif Bearclaw said:

To go back to the Eldar example, their vibe isn't 'generic fantasy Elf aesthetic in Space', it's 'Space Elf'.

To be fair, Eldar designs actually draw as much (if not more) from oriental inspiration such as the styalised face masks, plumes and ribbons. I guess this shows there is room for more than one interpretation of "space elf" and similarly this is just a slightly different interpretation of space dwarf than the one we were expecting.

I still wish there was just a bit more of this going on. 

https://youtu.be/34CZjsEI1yU

 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Brother Tyler
video converted to link

[Petitioner's City]

1 hour ago, TheVoidDragon said:

No, the physical attributes of the race are not the same thing as their culture and aesthetics, you comparing two very different aspects. It's baffling if you're trying to claim that runes, nordic designs, geometric shapes and all that stuff isn't part of the Dwarf archetype.

The Eldar design doesn't involve involve leaves and stag horns, because that's the wood elf aesthetic. The Eldar are based more on the trope of high Elves and their more sleek, elegant, slightly ornate curved styings.

I don't know; I'd say many eldar designs are orientalist in origins, far more than high elves ever were - that seems very evident in the 1990s codex and rogue trader art for the elves, as well as those models from then. And that's a design language that has remained consistent - a japonisme especially that is far removed from high elves, although Lumineth much more touch on that.

Really, dwarves don't need to be "norse" or "celtic" or whatever one uses to describe the tokenistic or fetishistic inclusions on the Voltann - 40K already has one norse faction (the wolves), one of its most popular it sometimes feels, and these touches feel a bit disappointing in that they are both incongruous with the rest of the models, and also very much dull medievalist pastiches. If they wish for historicising motifs, there is a world of visual sources for GW to mine - beyond a few motifs that feel lifted from a trip to the British Museum, NMS sub-levels or the Slottsfjells Museum. It just feels lazy.

I really wish they had looked at the successful eclecticism of production and costume design seen for example in recent works like Dune or Foundation, or even cast their eye at older ecletic works from the 1980s, including Lynch's Dune, to create something much more innovative. These people are the inheritors of the best collection of humanity's knowledge, and they pick knotwork and ceremonial metal work from ideas of Anglo-Saxon, Danish-Norwegian and Pictish art? It's honestly very frustrating in terms of worldbuilding and imagination, especially compared to the frightening awesomeness of some of the art we have seen.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Petitioner's City

[Kastor Krieg]

22 hours ago, TheVoidDragon said:

I really, really don't understand the animal decoration they're put on them. We've seen a wolf, boar, horse and bird backpack banner, as well as what appears to be a Ram-style decoration on the side of a weapon in the datacard stuff a while back....yet we've seen absolutely nothing in the way of Votann-themed decorations. It's obviously a thing for them it's a thing in both their faction icon and even appeared in their architecture with Votann/Dwarf-Faces for walls, so just why would it not be part of the models and they go for Animals instead? It feels out of place. Those banners should have been different faces of the Votann.

yeah, what I also not get is why this "I AM A SHIP NOW, BROTHER" huge totem on top of the armour, shaped as if it was designed to catch any and all branches and pipes and whatever is hanging low. WHY.

[Kastor Krieg]

And now look at the stuff left in focus - arm, elbow pad, shoulder pad base shape, weapon gizmo. Those are all 3D sculpting assets deadass lifted from a Primaris Space Marine.

Did Cawl make their armour? Is their armour Space Marine+, all the while their STC-that-have-already-left-Terra-to-colonize-galactic-core history seems to predate Thunder Warriors, much less Mk1 and further PA?

What the hell is going on here, designers.

[SvenIronhand]

The problem to me is that they want to release yet another power armor faction, with design language similar to other power armor factions. The problem is that doesn't hearken back to the original Squats very well at all. The backbone of the Squat army was their Brotherhood troops, the guys in the padded jackets and flak helmets. You also had Hearthguard, who incorporated a more "dwarfy" aesthetic with things like facemasks similar to Roman equites and medieval-looking helmets. In addition, there were the Engineers' Guild, who had the infamous biker duds. It was all a perfectly fine baseline for a faction, and design language whose niche hasn't really been filled by GW models. 



So, to see these frankly rather characterless "Squats" is disappointing.

[Lemondish]

3 minutes ago, SvenIronhand said:

The problem to me is that they want to release yet another power armor faction, with design language similar to other power armor factions. The problem is that doesn't hearken back to the original Squats very well at all. The backbone of the Squat army was their Brotherhood troops, the guys in the padded jackets and flak helmets. You also had Hearthguard, who incorporated a more "dwarfy" aesthetic with things like facemasks similar to Roman equites and medieval-looking helmets. In addition, there were the Engineers' Guild, who had the infamous biker duds. It was all a perfectly fine baseline for a faction, and design language whose niche hasn't really been filled by GW models. 



So, to see these frankly rather characterless "Squats" is disappointing.

There's something about that picture that just screams "Gretchin but with hair" to me.