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

[Noserenda]

Its out there, i dont have time to trawl old interviews for you though :D 

Its specifically mentioned as a comparison to the Eldar though, who took "Elves in space" and grew a whole new culture that recognisably drew on those elements whilst the original Squats were exactly Dwarves in space, with some bikers, that was their whole identity, and that didnt grab folks as you mention in the JJ quote.

And as Bryan said, if you want more Dwarfy bits, you can make/paint them yourself, or someone else inevitably will :D 

[Bryan Blaire]

40 minutes ago, TheVoidDragon said:

To me this really comes across as missing the point. Of course you can do what you want with the models, they're yours.

40k is a fantasy in Space Setting, with its armies typically being a specific aesthetic or archetypal theme to the extent that it defines them overall. You've got a take on Elves and Dark Elves in Space, Warrior monks/Knights in Space, Battle Nuns in space, Orcs in Space, Egyptian Undead in Space, Dark Age/Gothic humans in space etc. Even to a lesser extent there's Halflings, Ogres and things like Vampires.

But when it comes to the idea of Dwarfs in space? Oh no, we can't have that. Can't have them based on the iconic beloved elements of the Dwarfs much because that would be "cliche".

 

You seem to be missing that they do have some of those classic fantasy Dwarf elements in the Votann - GW has even explained how.

The Necrons don’t seem to be all that much Egyptian Undead in space all things considered about them, and yet you accept them as that - to me they resemble the Tomb Kings very little.  They are a take on the Tomb Kings, just like the Leagues of Votann are a take on Warhammer Dwarfs - they have the elements, but very little overall distribution of them.

Don’t get me wrong - I’d be all for more Dwarf archetypal stuff in the Votann line - it would make my work of converting dwarven servitors for my Techmarine easier - it’s just not what GW made out of them, and we all have to accept that and look for other things to make our models our own, just like I have to look for ways to tone down the GW wolves for my Space Wolves, while upping the amount of knotwork and helm styles I do like.

Edited September 8, 2022 by Bryan Blaire

[TheVoidDragon]

6 minutes ago, Noserenda said:

Its out there, i dont have time to trawl old interviews for you though :D 

Its specifically mentioned as a comparison to the Eldar though, who took "Elves in space" and grew a whole new culture that recognisably drew on those elements whilst the original Squats were exactly Dwarves in space, with some bikers, that was their whole identity, and that didnt grab folks as you mention in the JJ quote.

And as Bryan said, if you want more Dwarfy bits, you can make/paint them yourself, or someone else inevitably will :D 

I'll have to see if i can find it as i've never seen that mentioned anywhere. Making a claim and then refusing to provide proof of that seems like kind of a bad thing to do, though.

Edited September 8, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Dr. Clock]

2 hours ago, TheVoidDragon said:

 But when it comes to the idea the Space Dwarfs embodying the aesthetics of Dwarfs in space? Oh no, we can't have that. Can't have them based on the iconic beloved elements of the Dwarfs very much because that would be "cliche", even though those things are just what make up the idea of Dwarfs in the first place and are what a lot of people like them for.

I don't quite understand how this new line is not sufficiently embodying the aesthetics of 'dwarfs in space', though...

There's certainly more balance between the 'dwarfs' and 'space' angles in this iteration, which I think is very important to distinguishing the Leagues line from... mostly the Kharadron range tbh.

I don't think the problem with the 'dwarf aesthetic' is that it's cliche, it's that it already exists and is available  in other lines.

I think the main thing that's kind of changed between OG Squats and new Votann is that 'what it means to be in space' has changed alot in the intervening 35 (gulp) years of 40k, so that more space tropes and references are available for this 'zany mixture' than there were at the start. Yet on the flip side, the available design space within 40k has narrowed just as much as the 'broader media landscape' has diversified, because now their design language is hemmed in by, primarily, AdMech and T'au.

Personally I really like that this new line has applied the 'in space' lens to pretty much all of the dwarfy tropes individually, instead of just slapping lazer beams on some Fantasy thunderers and calling it done... So it's integrated into 40k in unique ways instead of a whole faction being just 'we're shorter, bearded imperial guard with quilted flak'.

So yes, as always if we want to focus our collection on some aesthetic themes that are closer to Fantasy dwarfs, we can do that by kitbashing, painting or both. Or we can craft counts-as Imperial Guard or AdMech stuff if that fits our interests more. That's not a bug, it's a feature of the hobby that still suggests that before releasing anything, the studio should try to make it distinctive without being too unique so that it's interactive with the largest number of other offerings. That's good business, but it's also good game design and world-building.

I'm still curious: what are the specific aesthetics of dwarfs that you are missing from here? I think they could stand to be even less dwarfy (e.g. more closed helmets like Kharadron, who in my headcanon do not have actual beard, only the ones on their helmets)

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Please take the "themes" discussion back to the LoV subforum.

[TheVoidDragon]

11 minutes ago, Iron Father Ferrum said:

Please take the "themes" discussion back to the LoV subforum.

I'm not trying to argue, but is the news subforum not the place to discuss a new article that's specifically about the design studios approach to making them?

Edited September 8, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Except you're not discussing what the GW employees said; the conversation rapidly went back to the previously-moved back-and-forth about *your* opinions on what constitutes dwarf, dwarf in space, and/or 40K in general.

[TheVoidDragon]

43 minutes ago, Iron Father Ferrum said:

Except you're not discussing what the GW employees said; the conversation rapidly went back to the previously-moved back-and-forth about *your* opinions on what constitutes dwarf, dwarf in space, and/or 40K in general.

Is giving our opinions on the information from that article not relevant to discussing what was said in the article? Maybe i'm just misunderstanding something

Edited September 8, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Dudley Nightshade]

I'm here for rumours, news, and board announcements. What constitutes "dwarfy enough" has been done to death in this forum and is not news.

[TheVoidDragon]

1 hour ago, Brother Yroc said:

I'm here for rumours, news, and board announcements. What constitutes "dwarfy enough" has been done to death in this forum and is not news.

When what's been said in the latest article involves that topic though, I don't see how discussing that isn't discussing the latest news. GW designers have said they didn't want "Fantasy Dwarfs in Space" so that's being talked about is within the context of that.

Edited September 9, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Lord_Ikka]

Jes talking about the runic, or "dwarfy", portions of the models getting more and more prevalent as they rank up was interesting. If you combine that with the industrial/mining setup you really get the full aesthetic of the range so far. Its interesting and make me more intrigued by the faction, as well as the other paintjobs selling the models better than the primary one.

[Dosjetka]

=][= Thread closed for clean-up and pruning. Conversations can continue in the Leagues of Votann subforum. Thank you. =][=

[Brother Tyler]

The topic has been re-opened.

[firestorm40k]

Just spotted this reference in the latest background article (about 5 different Leagues) on WarCom:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/09/13/welcome-to-the-big-leagues-who-are-the-five-biggest-leagues-of-votann/

Regarding the Ymyr Conglomerate:

"Their phenomenal armoury contains so many beam weapons, suits of exo-armour, and Colossus-class war engines that they can equip an entire army with a quantity of elite wargear that other Leagues can only dream of fielding" 

Emphasis mine - really nice to see a nod to the Epic Squat range of the early '90's - maybe Forgeworld will make a Colossus in the not too distant future? 

(For the benefit of those who may be newer to the hobby, this is a Squat Colossus:) 

[Cyrox]

Nice! I missed that reference, need to keep my eyes peeled for any mention of leviathan now 

[SpaceDwalin]

7 hours ago, firestorm40k said:

Just spotted this reference in the latest background article (about 5 different Leagues) on WarCom:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/09/13/welcome-to-the-big-leagues-who-are-the-five-biggest-leagues-of-votann/

Regarding the Ymyr Conglomerate:

"Their phenomenal armoury contains so many beam weapons, suits of exo-armour, and Colossus-class war engines that they can equip an entire army with a quantity of elite wargear that other Leagues can only dream of fielding" 

Emphasis mine - really nice to see a nod to the Epic Squat range of the early '90's - maybe Forgeworld will make a Colossus in the not too distant future? 

(For the benefit of those who may be newer to the hobby, this is a Squat Colossus:) 

Do I remember correctly that this was the Squats version of a Titan/Titan equivalent?

[firestorm40k]

11 hours ago, SpaceDwalin said:

Do I remember correctly that this was the Squats version of a Titan/Titan equivalent?

Kind of, not quite a titan equivalent, but a massive (massive!) tank that was more like a mobile fortress; the Imperials could take a similar War Engine in Epic called a Capitol Imperialis (on the right):

There was also the Leviathan, similar to (but a bit smaller than) a Colossus, but both Imperial and Squat armies could take them in Epic:

Iirc, the background was that these were actually designed and built by the Squats, and they let the Imperium have some (for whatever reason, trade etc.). 

[SpaceDwalin]

2 hours ago, firestorm40k said:

Iirc, the background was that these were actually designed and built by the Squats, and they let the Imperium have some (for whatever reason, trade etc.). 

If I remember the lore correctly the Squats were part of the Empire. There was something about them seeing the Emperor as the grand ancestor. Rogue trader armies could have Squats as an alternative to imperial guard. This was back in the late 80s/very early 90s before I quit 40k for almost as long as the Squats did. 

[Pacific81]

Wondering now whether to save for a new car or however much a new FW Colossus would cost

Those things are great in Epic and add to the overall mighty artillery prowess of the Squats - it also has a gyrocopter on the back which can act as a spotter, which is really cool. The downside is that they don't have a damage chart like titans so one failed save means *boom*. You have to hide them from Gargant Gutbusters which will go straight through their shields and one-shot them.