Leagues of Votann - Range Compilation

[Captain Coolpants]

I wonder how they will handle the characters? I'm hoping one has a big beard and hammer or axe. 

 

[Kelborn]

Something tells me a big mining drill those wrist blades will be a thing paired with a heavy gun.

Perhaps one character in an exo skeleton type of armour.

As their theme seems to be about exploring the wider galaxy, something related to that will probably be the case.

[MithrilForge]

48 minutes ago, Captain Coolpants said:

I wonder how they will handle the characters? I'm hoping one has a big beard and hammer or axe. 

 

I said somewhere i was hoping for a Character on a Hover shield with a big power axe, kind of like a Hi-Tech Dwarf lord being carried by two shield bearers 

Mithril

[Lord Marshal]

Somebody on DakkaDakka raised the hilarious point that reactions to the League have been an equal mixture of "They look like generic fantasy dwarfs in space, boring!" and "They don't look like fantasy dwarfs in space enough!" and it's true.

 

Edited July 20, 2022 by Lord Marshal

[phandaal]

2 hours ago, Lord Marshal said:

Somebody on DakkaDakka raised the hilarious point that reactions to the League have been an equal mixture of "They look like generic fantasy dwarfs in space, boring!" and "They don't look like fantasy dwarfs in space enough!" and it's true.

 

DakkaDakka is a wretched hive of scum and villainy. Throwing shade at the reaction of a fan base of which one is a part is a common pastime. 

Reactions have been a pretty even split so far. "Not for me," "I love them," "Not Dwarfy enough and that is not a good thing," "not Dwarfy and that is a good thing," and so on.

Because it is a matter of opinion, the arguments go on and on. That is the nature of any fandom... We nitpick and argue about things because we are passionate about our hobbies.

[SvenIronhand]

Having seen them as a range, I like them a lot more as their own thing. However, I'm wondering how they would look in a Baneblade Brown/orange color scheme, similar to the Mantic studio models.

[Trokair]

I am wondering if there will be enough Ironkin options to potentialy make an all robot force.

[Lord_Ikka]

I don't know if I will get them, but I'm actually glad they don't look like the old Squats. I never liked the old "Dwarfs in Space" style look, it just felt silly to me. This, while not looking very similar to any Imperial design, feels like a way to do dwarves without having the silliness. To me they have a sleeker, more modern sci-fi aesthetic that isn't as quite as futuristic as the T'au manga-inspired battlemechs, but they don't feel out of place or wrong. I'm interested to see their heavier vehicles/flyers, as well as any HQ/"hero" characters to see what sort of ornamentation they will have.

[TheVoidDragon]

On 7/20/2022 at 12:38 PM, phandaal said:

Reactions have been a pretty even split so far. "Not for me," "I love them," "Not Dwarfy enough and that is not a good thing," "not Dwarfy and that is a good thing," and so on.

 

I think it emphasizes things that I don't think i've seen much of a reaction saying that they are a good "Dwarfy" look, other than from people who don't like the idea of "Space Dwarfs" in the first place and thus want that side all but gone. Praise for them has just been "I like the high-tech sci-fi astronaut direction" in itself, which is fine and I like that too - but that doesn't mean it's a "Dwarfy" look or is an update to the Squats that doesn't lose what they were.

It's either been "not enough Dwarf", or being happy at the near total lack of "Dwarf".

Edited July 21, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[phandaal]

15 minutes ago, TheVoidDragon said:

I think it emphasizes things that I don't think i've seen much of a reaction saying that they are a good "Dwarfy" look, other than from people who don't like the idea of "Space Dwarfs" in the first place and thus want that side all but gone. Praise for them has just been "I like the high-tech sci-fi astronaut direction" in itself, which is fine and I like that too - but that doesn't mean it's a "Dwarfy" look or is an update to the Squats that doesn't lose what they were.

It's either been "not enough Dwarf", or being happy at the near total lack of "Dwarf".

Do not forget the handful of people saying Dopey and Grumpy are the classic Fantasy Dwarf Archetype, so really we cannot even say whether Squats are Dwarfy or not. 

Mainly though, the reaction is not at all what DakkaDakka's esteemed residents are making it out to be.

[TheVoidDragon]

37 minutes ago, phandaal said:

Do not forget the handful of people saying Dopey and Grumpy are the classic Fantasy Dwarf Archetype, so really we cannot even say whether Squats are Dwarfy or not. 

Mainly though, the reaction is not at all what DakkaDakka's esteemed residents are making it out to be.

I've seen quite a few people trying to say that sort of thing, i's it's just absurd and comes across as obtuse. Using the mythological version of Dwarfs or old artwork from before it became fully established as a character archetype to try and make out that there is no typical, iconic style and aesthetic to how the Dwarf Archetype is now.

Has peoples reactions to them elsewhere been divisive too? I haven't really been following the discussion in too many places.

Edited July 21, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Lemondish]

47 minutes ago, TheVoidDragon said:

Has peoples reactions to them elsewhere been divisive too? I haven't really been following the discussion in too many places.

From what I've seen, it's pretty similar to here. Most of the discussion is driven by the passion of few, but since it drives the topic it brings everybody in to share. 

It's just that dakkadakka has a certain...tone that can best be described as "offensively grating". 

[AenarIT]

I honestly like all what I have seen so far. They strike a good balance between the dwarf aesthetic and a more generic sci-fi one.

I still think that a more weathered look and a different colour palette would improve them a lot. Something like warmer/natural tones painted with the classic streaking grime + mineral spirits dabbing technique. 

[TheVoidDragon]

6 hours ago, Lemondish said:

It's just that dakkadakka has a certain...tone that can best be described as "offensively grating". 

What do you mean by this specifically?

[phandaal]

9 minutes ago, TheVoidDragon said:

What do you mean by this specifically?

Imagine any argument or disagreement you have had on this forum. Amp it up by about 200%, make it a lot more personal and a lot less rational. You will be close to the usual level of conversation there.

[TheVoidDragon]

16 minutes ago, phandaal said:

Imagine any argument or disagreement you have had on this forum. Amp it up by about 200%, make it a lot more personal and a lot less rational. You will be close to the usual level of conversation there.

Ah, didn't realize Dakka was that much worse than usual, I had noticed a few things like that now that you mention it but just assumed it would be like that everywhere. The discussion about the Squats over there seems to have become lots of misconstruing and ignoring what's been said rather than respectfully discussing peoples criticism of them.

[Mechanicus Tech-Support]

16 hours ago, phandaal said:

Do not forget the handful of people saying Dopey and Grumpy are the classic Fantasy Dwarf Archetype, so really we cannot even say whether Squats are Dwarfy or not. 

Mainly though, the reaction is not at all what DakkaDakka's esteemed residents are making it out to be.

 I didnt say that Dopey and Grumpy are the classic fantasy dwarf archtype
I brought up my boardgame group as the majority are disney adults and look at lotr and scifi the same way I look at disney and if I asked them to draw me a dwarf they would draw the disney dwarves (I know this from several drawful games). 
The emphasis was more to be that different people could have different views on what is and isnt classic dwarf 

[phandaal]

7 hours ago, Mechanicus Tech-Support said:

 I didnt say that Dopey and Grumpy are the classic fantasy dwarf archtype
I brought up my boardgame group as the majority are disney adults and look at lotr and scifi the same way I look at disney and if I asked them to draw me a dwarf they would draw the disney dwarves (I know this from several drawful games). 
The emphasis was more to be that different people could have different views on what is and isnt classic dwarf 

Honestly, I had no idea you had even said anything about this stuff. My post was not directed towards you.

There certainly are people like Disney Adults for whom the Snow White type of Dwarf would be the classic look.

However, among fans of fantasy, "fantasy sci-fi" like 40k, tabletop miniatures games, RPGs, and video games based around all that, there most certainly is a sense of what a Dwarf would look like. We all know this. I think it is silly for anyone here to take the position that this is not the case, especially when it is done to win arguments with people who they would probably agree with 99% of the time outside of one single thread (again, not directed at you).

Personally I like all of the Squats models so far, except for the flying street sweeper, and my dislike of that model is due to its general style rather than any Dwarfyness or perceived lack thereof.

Edited July 22, 2022 by phandaal

[SpaceDwalin]

On 7/20/2022 at 6:28 PM, Trokair said:

I am wondering if there will be enough Ironkin options to potentialy make an all robot force.

This is a very cool idea. The Hearthguard article doesn't mention Ironkin Hearthguard, but it doesn't mention that there aren't any. So I'm hoping for Ironkin Hearthguard options.

[Lord Marshal]

I just hope we get enough helmet options for the full squad, whether they're Kin or Ironkin. A lot of the heads we've seen don't impress me, whereas the helmets (even with visors up) look great.

[TheVoidDragon]

2 hours ago, Lord Marshal said:

I just hope we get enough helmet options for the full squad, whether they're Kin or Ironkin. A lot of the heads we've seen don't impress me, whereas the helmets (even with visors up) look great.

Wouldn't 20 heads for the Hearthkin be a bit much, though? So Far We've seen 7 helmeted, 3 helmeted an 1 Ironkin. I get the impression they're going for un-helmeted heads as the primary option with helmets as a secondary concern, when most other armies its the other way around.

[sitnam]

On 7/26/2022 at 5:38 AM, TheVoidDragon said:

Wouldn't 20 heads for the Hearthkin be a bit much, though? So Far We've seen 7 helmeted, 3 helmeted an 1 Ironkin. I get the impression they're going for un-helmeted heads as the primary option with helmets as a secondary concern, when most other armies its the other way around.

The Battle Sisters kit comes with enough like 25-30 heads, enough for full helmet or bare headed squads. It even has enough for 5 celestians iirc.

[MithrilForge]

Lately GW in their kits has been giving enough options for either head choice... although i hope they're not like the Necromunda heads where you joined two parts to make a head...thus giving you zero extra heads from the kit (that might have been one of several points that turned me of NM  ) 

be cool to make a whole unit helmeted and one bare headed... for unit identification during CC fighting etc.

 

Mithril 

[JaM_TW]

I like the models, apart from the scrubber. 

Looks like those washing up bristles/heads on wich you can add batteries and a small motor to get them moving around the table. 

And that model has 3 of them.

[phandaal]

12 hours ago, JaM_naf#6121 said:

I like the models, apart from the scrubber. 

Looks like those washing up bristles/heads on wich you can add batteries and a small motor to get them moving around the table. 

And that model has 3 of them.

 

Also, Norelco electric shaver.