40k New Archon, Lady Malys & Codex: Drukhari

[Scribe]

1 hour ago, ursvamp said:

When Lelith git her previous model, in 2010, people complained about it for not being beutiful enough (her athletic physique was seen as too muscular, and  un-feminine. Her scowling face was manish, and not pretty). When her current model released everyone made jokes about her feet being too big, complained about her being stocky (??) and how her face wasn’t beautiful enough (I guess people want her to smile more?).

 

When you go from the vastly superior Diaz sculpt, to the clear downgrade 'crossfit model' version, people will comment.

1 hour ago, ursvamp said:

 

 

 

Edited September 24 by Scribe

[Mana]

2 hours ago, Nephaston said:

Funny that the model painters managed to paint on some eyebrows this time, something they omit 95% of the time, and thus rendering most of their faces slightly odd, only for the codex artwork to completely omit them.

Yeah i always found that weird, my DE all have eyebrows.

[Alby the Slayer]

6 hours ago, ursvamp said:

And once again, almost every comment about a female Drukhari character is about how she’s not attractive enough for the commenter.

Will this ever change?

 

 

First, of course everyone has his opinion just like you and this is art so I bet you will never find a 100% ratio of everyone who hates or loves the same art.

Second, at leat for me, it's not about only drukhari female artworks. Sometimes the art does not appeal to me.

 

6 hours ago, ursvamp said:

When Lelith git her previous model, in 2010, people complained about it for not being beutiful enough (her athletic physique was seen as too muscular, and  un-feminine. Her scowling face was manish, and not pretty). When her current model released everyone made jokes about her feet being too big, complained about her being stocky (??) and how her face wasn’t beautiful enough (I guess people want her to smile more?).

 

 

I'm not talking about the model here, I'm talking about the artwork. As other Fraters did.

 

6 hours ago, ursvamp said:

When Malys’ model was revealed 80% of the comments were about her face, in different ways.

 

 

Because the painting job on her face is atrocious on this model. Nobody said squat about her physique, I think. Why is has to be something sexually?

 

6 hours ago, ursvamp said:

And now, with this artwork, nearly everything I see is people complaining about how freaky and unnatractive she seems to them.

And I just don’t get it... why is hotness so important to people, in a wargame about the grimey, hellish, churn of death and slaughter?

(Especially in this case, where we have an actually interesting character, who’s main traits has always been her intelligence, social skills, and ambition.)

 

She doesn't look anything like the model first of all. So I don't like the artwork, who's talking about hotness? Who cares about that?

Freaky? Give me freaking all the time, what is freaky about that artwork?

 

  

 

 

 

This for me are better rappresentation of the Drukhari female race. I don't see hotness in here, I see aeldari evil and malice. Depraved and freaky space elves.

 

6 hours ago, ursvamp said:

And, just as an aside; how do people find this artwork -not- hot?

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills! It’s as if people don’t know what actual, real, humans looks like.

Just because an artwork doesn’t resemble a world class fashion model, or some sort of waifish anime waifu, people start throwing around words like ”ugly” and saying she doesn’t look feminine enough (once again…)

 

She looks normal!

like someone you’d meet at a synth- or goth club.

 

ugh… sorry for the rant.

but I just can’t stress enough how this is a thing -every- -single- -time- there are female drukhari reveals.

 

See? Again with the hotness... and who is talking about humans? They are drukhari my friend, not sot female human from your goth or synth club.

 

Give something unsettling, something freaky as you said, something xenos.

 

  

 

And all of these are official GW artworks.

 

You can say wathever you want but on the other side I'm tired too of people who think I/we want waifu and oversexualized figures.

Maybe somebody do and there is market for that. Good for them.

I just want some good drukhari rappresentation.

This lady malys does not look like that. The taurine neck, the too-human size head and the squared shoulders are not Aeldari or even alien at all for me.  

 

So, nothing against the artist, I can never draw like that in million years.

 

The miniature is cool and can be better with a different paint job. The art is nothing to write at home.

 

11 hours ago, Lord Marshal said:

 

 

I think it's a Paul Dainton piece? It certainly looks like his style, and he definitely errs towards 'uncanny alien Eldar/Elves' rather than 'pretty humans with long ears'. 

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

If it is, this piece is far better than the malys one for sure.

[phandaal]

8 hours ago, ursvamp said:

And, just as an aside; how do people find this artwork -not- hot?

 

If I may: people might not find this artwork "hot" because the face in the artwork looks like someone let Simple Jack pick his own Halloween costume.

 

Considering the artist also appears to have illustrated Dr. Frank-N-Furter when his assignment was Morathi, it does seem to be a deliberate style choice.

[Orange Knight]

I understand why people want a representation of the attractive elf archetype. 

They could lean into that, or double down into making them look more alien. They seem to have chosen the latter.

 

On a personal note, I think that there definitely SHOULD be attractive characters in 40k. Why wouldn't there be?

Edited September 24 by Orange Knight

[ursvamp]

9 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

When you go from the vastly superior Diaz sculpt, to the clear downgrade 'crossfit model' version, people will comment.

 

 

As I said, the Diaz sculpt was criticised in basically the same way when it came out; too unfeminine, too muscular, frowning.

basically, it didn’t fit with people’s idea of a ”beautiful elf”, and people compared it to her official artwork in the codex (5th ed.) which was released at the same time as the model.

 

3 hours ago, Alby the Slayer said:

 

First, of course everyone has his opinion just like you and this is art so I bet you will never find a 100% ratio of everyone who hates or loves the same art.

 

Of course people have opinions. And this is a forum; a place for those opinions to be voiced.

I am simply voicing my concern, and frustration, over how attractiveness and femininity suddenly becomes a major priority for people, and seems to dominate the opinions shared, whenever the model/artwork being discussed depicts female characters.

(I am focusing on Drukhari here, but much of the same was being lifted when st Celestine and the geminae got their current models. A lot of talk about how their armor wasn’t form-fitting enough, and how made them look bulky, etc.)

3 hours ago, Alby the Slayer said:

Nobody said squat about her physique, I think.

 

Not in regards to Malys. I’m establishikg the history of discourse necessery to understand my point.

 

3 hours ago, Alby the Slayer said:

Why is has to be something sexually?

 

that’s my question.

 

3 hours ago, Alby the Slayer said:

who's talking about hotness? Who cares about that?

 

A lot of people. Read this thread. Visit other places on the internet.

90% of all comments I’ve seen are about how unnattractive the poster think her face is, in different ways.

 

I really like the artworks you posted, Alby.

I don’t see how this one is supposed to be worse than them, but that’s just my personal opinion.

 

anyway.

cheers

[Evil Eye]

16 hours ago, ursvamp said:

And I just don’t get it... why is hotness so important to people, in a wargame about the grimey, hellish, churn of death and slaughter?

 

Probably because the Dark Eldar are supposed to be incredibly vain, and in Lelith's case in particular (being equal parts warrior and performance artist) having her look ugly is extremely out of character. Though I've never heard anyone complain about 5E Lelith being ugly- she's a typical Juan Diaz sculpt (which is to say, very very good) and IMO at least one of the best female character models GW has ever done and, as the kids would say, "a total baddie". She looks sensual and strong at the same time and perfectly captures the "battle athlete" vibe. The betrousered plastic one, on the other hand...

 

There's also an argument to be made about it being part of a creative-media-industry-wide trend of uglification and not wanting to make female characters look "too attractive" (with a bit of an undercurrent of misogyny, as if the feminine form is offensive to depict somehow) and also the ridiculous double standard of how having attention-seeking murderous theatre kid space elves ripping people's entrails out with a barbed dagger is fine, as long as they're modestly clothed whilst doing so, but I don't want to get into that argument.

 

For what it's worth, I think the Malys model is fantastic, really solid job there by the studio. And the artist- Paul Dainton, was it?- usually does a pretty good job with his elves, his Daughters of Khaine artwork from Age of Sigmar captures the contrast between the beauty of the Elves themselves and the horror of their actions (lovely faces twisted into sadistic grins, notably). But this piece just doesn't quite work for me- the face on Malys here doesn't look like a beautiful but evil Space Elf with a cruel smile, it looks like an unusually short-nosed Gretchin with some stilts looted Malys' wardrobe. "Ey, boss, lookee wot I fownd!" "Dat's very noice, Schnozkut, but I fink you should giv da funny pointy-eared lady her kloves back, she lookz a bit unhappy and dat iz a NASTY lookin' choppa she 'az..."

[Teetengee]

I was looking carefully for holes in the side of the face to show that it was a mask of someone else's face she was wearing. It seems just...too wide for the rest of her from a drukhari build perspective.

[Wolf Guard Dan]

The fifth edition sculpts were amazing and encapsulated everything I expect from a dark Eldar model. Lelith: athletic, fluid, stoic (no I don’t think she should smile more because that isn’t her character; the thong she wears is to revealing for me but it fits her character- can’t touch her why would she need armor). The archon: powerful, eldritch, arrogant. Urien: fits the coven aesthetic well. Not my cup of tea, I prefer the old old Urien model. Were those 5th edition characters all Juan Diaz sculpts?

 

Aesthetically people are allowed to have preferences. The models are art that we collect for our enjoyment. Why are we talking about faces? We’re literally hardwired from infancy to be drawn to faces. Research shows babies even prefer attractive faces.

 

With Malys the artwork didn’t match the model. But it may just be the paint job. My criticism with the recent Lelith model is how they painted the face makes her look angry or exerting. That doesn’t match the stoicism I’m used to. The other thing I don’t like is how the waist is too much like the wych model. It’s not organic looking. If you’ve assembled wyches you know what I mean when you glue the triangle waist into the hips it doesn’t seem organic.

 

tl;dr we’ve all got preferences

 

I also wanted to share someone who did an amazing job painting the current Lelith that really diminished my face critique. 

 

[Scribe]

6 hours ago, ursvamp said:

As I said, the Diaz sculpt was criticised in basically the same way when it came out; too unfeminine, too muscular, frowning.

 

Hmm, I dont remember that, but I'm sure some people had issue.

 

Those people would be wrong, but I cannot help that.

[HeadlessCross]

9 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

I understand why people want a representation of the attractive elf archetype. 

They could lean into that, or double down into making them look more alien. They seem to have chosen the latter.

 

On a personal note, I think that there definitely SHOULD be attractive characters in 40k. Why wouldn't there be?

Just through the matter of principle that everyone is fighting all the time, so nobody should have time for makeup. It's also why Blood Angels are my least favorite of the Loyalist founding chapters since they're all pretty boys in the artwork. 

 

Also the smaller amount of attractive characters, the smaller amount of people that make claim of waifus of them. Those people are degenerates. 

[Evil Eye]

1 hour ago, HeadlessCross said:

Also the smaller amount of attractive characters, the smaller amount of people that make claim of waifus of them. Those people are degenerates. 

"People might be attracted to attractive characters and this offends my delicate sensibilities, ergo every character should be ugly" is certainly a take.

[Jukkiz]

Is it weird that Ladys armor is abit... Too similar to regular archons?

Shouldn´t it be something fancy, yet deadly? Certainly better then just lowly archons?

[ThePenitentOne]

9 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

1. There's also an argument to be made about it being part of a creative-media-industry-wide trend of uglification and not wanting to make female characters look "too attractive" (with a bit of an undercurrent of misogyny, as if the feminine form is offensive to depict somehow) 

 

2. the ridiculous double standard of how having attention-seeking murderous theatre kid space elves ripping people's entrails out with a barbed dagger is fine, as long as they're modestly clothed whilst doing so, but I don't want to get into that argument.

 

 

I added the numbers so I can address both pieces individually- I still haven't figured out how to split a quote block.

 

1. This perspective seems to be from a male point of view. It isn't about wanting to make female characters unattractive- it's about making sure PEOPLE don't feel the need to hold themselves to an unachievable ideal. The fact that you think an "ugly" model is misogyny seems to communicate to me that Lelith was always an object to you, rather than someone you wanted to relate to or aspired to be. Because if you did aspire to BE Diaz Lelith, you would probably come to believe that eating well is a sin and that making yourself sick after a particularly large meal was a good idea... and THAT would be actual misogyny. If you aspired to be modern Lelith, you might be content to just blast five sets of squats until failure three times a week... Neither option is a perfect picture of mental health, but one IS healthier than the other.

 

2. That's not what a double standard is. A double standard is where one group (female) is expected to conform to a different set of norms (ie. standards) than another group. An example would be how nobody cares whether a male model is thick or ugly, but it does tend to be the first thing people notice and/or comment about with a female model. An example where the double standard applies to people is the famous "assertive men are seen as confident and motivated while assertive women are seen as 'bossy'"

 

And look, I don't mean to sound judgmental. Sometimes, we DO talk about how ugly or thick a male model is- we body shamed the heck outta nuCoteaz amIright? And also, some comments are legit (this chin looks weird, etc). And it should also be acknowledged that the unattainable image problem can affect men too; if I had a nickel for every time I felt bad about my own body because I saw a gratuitous six pack on a movie or TV character who a) didn't need to have a six pack or b) didn't need to show off said six pack... Well, let's just say I probably would have been able to afford the Kill Team Tomb World box. 

 

Suffice it to say that, in general terms, objectification is an issue that can arise in discussions of models on forums, and it does so more frequently with female models than their male counterparts. Anyone think the new Archon is fat and ugly? Anyone?

 

Yup. That's about what I thought.

Edited September 24 by ThePenitentOne

[phandaal]

9 hours ago, Wolf Guard Dan said:

 

Crazy how much better this looks than the studio paint job.

[Scribe]

4 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

1. This perspective seems to be from a male point of view. It isn't about wanting to make female characters unattractive- it's about making sure PEOPLE don't feel the need to hold themselves to an unachievable ideal. The fact that you think an "ugly" model is misogyny seems to communicate to me that Lelith was always an object to you, rather than someone you wanted to relate to or aspired to be. Because if you did aspire to BE Diaz Lelith, you would probably come to believe that eating well is a sin and that making yourself sick after a particularly large meal was a good idea... and THAT would be actual misogyny.

 

:cuss: is this?

[HeadlessCross]

11 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

"People might be attracted to attractive characters and this offends my delicate sensibilities, ergo every character should be ugly" is certainly a take.

There's a big difference between someone thinking a fictional character is attractive vs the waifu dudes, and you know that. 

[Evil Eye]

15 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

it's about making sure PEOPLE don't feel the need to hold themselves to an unachievable ideal.

Dark Eldar are not only entirely fictional space elves, but morally repugnant ones who should not be held as any kind of ideal. If you see 5E Lelith and think "This is an unattainable standard for people to aspire to" then 1: good, because nobody should want to be Lelith Hesperax, and 2: you have missed the point. (Also I'm pretty sure there are far more likely causes of young girls having body image issues than tiny plastic/metal/resin elves...)

 

15 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

The fact that you think an "ugly" model is misogyny seems to communicate to me that Lelith was always an object to you, rather than someone you wanted to relate to or aspired to be.

Lelith is quite literally an object. She is a fictional character whose sole IRL representation is a 28mm scale model. Nor is she supposed to be relatable or aspirational- she's evil.

 

15 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

Because if you did aspire to BE Diaz Lelith, you would probably come to believe that eating well is a sin and that making yourself sick after a particularly large meal was a good idea... and THAT would be actual misogyny. I

The only people who SHOULD aspire to be Lelith are cosplayers wanting to dress up as her. And frankly, with that physique, if you do want to have a body fit for the Commoragh arenas, you'd be wanting to hit the gym and go all-in on protein. She's not a rail-thin fairy, she's ripped.

 

15 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

If you aspired to be modern Lelith, you might be content to just blast five sets of squats until failure three times a week... Neither option is a perfect picture of mental health, but one IS healthier than the other.

 

I tell you what's healthier than both, is being able to tell the difference between fantasy and reality. 40K is not real and anyone, male or female, unironically aspiring to match their body shape to a character from it is not well in the head.

 

15 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

2. That's not what a double standard is. A double standard is where one group (female) is expected to conform to a different set of norms (ie. standards) than another group.

Once again you miss the point, or are arguing semantics to avoid addressing the main point (which is that excessive and often grotesque violence is somehow A-OK for depiction in miniature but the slightest hint of attractiveness on a female model is considered a step too far, and this is patently absurd). But I'll bite- women are held to different standards to men because men and women are fundamentally different. What looks good on a woman does not look good on a man and vice versa. Male and female are not the same and are not freely interchangeable in all matters. Frankly, 40K is already incredibly "progressive" in that women are often on the battlefield as actual combatants- something not common in real life due to female psychology and anatomy not being as well-suited to frontline combat as male, and women being universally considered far too precious to subject to the horrors of war (which from women's perspective, realistically, is a good thing because war is hell and doesn't do any good to anyone.) 40K makes it work because it's a science-fantasy cosmic tragedy and departures from reality for the sake of cool/horror/general audience appeal are kind of part of the point. Case in point, the Sisters of Battle are awesome; unshakeably faithful, fearless warrior-women clad in powered armour destroying the enemies of humanity with bolt and fire. If they were real, they'd be one of the most horrific fighting forces to walk the earth, on account of the whole "female orphans raised to be fanatical religious killers and engaging in genocidal pogroms against perceived heresy" thing.

 

19 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

An example would be how nobody cares whether a male model is thick or ugly, but it does tend to be the first thing people notice and/or comment about with a female model

Depends on if the male model is supposed to be ugly or thick. Nobody is going to be expecting a Great Unclean One to be a handsome gigachad. If Sanguinius got a new sculpt based on his appearance later in the Heresy (suppose they did a diorama-kit of the famous Adrian Smith painting of the Emperor's confrontation with Horus) if he looked like a meatball-headed blob of a man, people would be rightly annoyed. Sanguinius is supposed to be the most beautiful and fair-featured Primarch, and even his corpse should be a handsome corpse. Likewise, nobody was complaining about Fecula Flyblown of the Wurmspat for not being a supermodel, what with her being a Nurgle witch and all. If Amberly Vail got a model though, and she looked like a bored chainsmoking school lunch-lady from Birmingham, that would also be inappropriate (unless Ciaphas has a thing for that?).

 

19 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

An example where the double standard applies to people is the famous "assertive men are seen as confident and motivated while assertive women are seen as 'bossy'"

Assertive women can be unfairly judged as bossy, but in my experience at least, most women being called bossy aren't being "assertive", they're being controlling and confrontational- traits that have even less flattering terms when used about men. Notably domineering, control-freak or whatever. Personally I hate bossiness/control-freaking from either sex.

 

19 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

And look, I don't mean to sound judgmental. Sometimes, we DO talk about how ugly or thick a male model is- we body shamed the heck outta nuCoteaz amIright?

And rightfully so, it's an atrocious model and honestly the face alone is so ugly I feel bad for it. It looks more like he has some sort of truly unfortunate developmental disorder than just being ugly, which isn't something I wish to make fun of.

 

19 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

And also, some comments are legit (this chin looks weird, etc). And it should also be acknowledged that the unattainable image problem can affect men too; if I had a nickel for every time I felt bad about my own body because I saw a gratuitous six pack on a movie or TV character who a) didn't need to have a six pack or b) didn't need to show off said six pack... Well, let's just say I probably would have been able to afford the Kill Team Tomb World box. 

Speaking as a man myself whose physique is hardly Blood Angels material (more of a Grom the Paunch), I genuinely don't see the point in getting upset about that. People would rather see a man with chiselled abs than a man with an unremarkable and slightly untoned stomach. It's not complicated and not some conspiracy to sell protein powder. Same as with women; I'm sure if given the choice between a woman with a well-kept, attractive body or a, uh, less well-preserved one to look at, people are going to choose the former, whether they're male or female. It's pretty simple- people like seeing attractive people, even in entirely non-sexual contexts- hence why you don't have to be sexually attracted to women to admire a classical sculpture of a beautiful woman in a museum.

 

19 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

Suffice it to say that, in general terms, objectification is an issue that can arise in discussions of models on forums, and it does so more frequently with female models than their male counterparts. Anyone think the new Archon is fat and ugly? Anyone?

 

Well the new Archon isn't fat or ugly, though I do think the decision to give it a very masculine silhouette and then add female build options in the form of a chestplate and head is a massive mistake, simply because it's going to make any female Archon build look like a crossdresser without significant conversion work. Which if that's your thing is fine I guess? Baffling that they managed to screw that up considering the Kaballite and Wych kits managed to pull off unisex bodies FAR better 15 years ago.

 

As for "objectification" (about literal objects, I might add) being an "issue" about female models, it's simple. GW has made fewer female models than male ones, and a greater proportion of those models are a bit...rough, and are of characters that are supposed to be attractive or at least not ugly. Ironically, the Malys model is superb- it's the ART that sucks!

 

20 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

Yup. That's about what I thought.

Your condescending tone is noted.

 

Here's some food for thought: Of all the issues in the world, if you think artistic renditions of female wargame models being perceived as disappointing due to looking a bit ugly and poorly drawn- in a hobby traditionally pursued by men no less- is anything other than a completely trivial non-issue at absolute most, you need some perspective on things.

[Scribe]

2 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

I tell you what's healthier than both, is being able to tell the difference between fantasy and reality. 40K is not real and anyone, male or female, unironically aspiring to match their body shape to a character from it is not well in the head.

 

That skill is a lost art it seems.

[ThePenitentOne]

So, what I actually WANT to talk about is the new Crusade rules. Before I get there, I'll just respond (briefly) to @Evil Eye:

 

First: I wasn't expressing MY opinion: I was refuting a prior statement that there is a "trend of uglification" - I was explaining that those who are now choosing to create art that doesn't always conform to male standards of female beauty are doing so not because they want to follow an Ugliness trend, but because THEY believe doing so is better for body image, or at the very least because THEY want to be PERCEIVED as being supportive of a promoter of positive body image.

 

My opinion is an entirely different topic.

 

For the record, I agree that a) there are far bigger sources of body image problems, b) that objectification is less of an issue when dealing with drawings and sculpture than it is when dealing with photorealistic depictions of actors or fashion models. And to address your point about depictions of violence being more acceptable than depictions of attractiveness/ sexuality, yes that's a problem in terms of art in general (especially cartoons, movies, comic books, etc) but the thing is, since 40k IS a wargame, depictions of violence are to be expected, whereas depictions of gratuitously clad, women with physiques and facial features designed to evoke male standards of beauty are less expected and necessary. But I would certainly agree that a rom-com Anime with beautiful lead characters who may participate in love scenes should be less objectionable subject matter than an ultra-violent but sex-free Anime, or whatever. 

 

As for aspiring to be Lelith, I was only referring to the physique as a target of inspiration, not her behaviour. I perhaps should have made that a bit more explicit in my post And yes, I think that but the whole post was a response to comment about aesthetics, so I assumed folks would take it for granted that I was talking about aspiring to Diaz Lelith's physique, and not the character Lelith's behaviour. 

 

Finally- Many of your other points are legitimate- yes, Diaz Lelith's physique does have shredded abs... But her overall frame is more slight, she is far closer to naked and her face is more fey and feminine than modern Lelith or the artwork, though I think the Malys model's face is comparable to Diaz Lelith. And yes, people may prefer generally more fit and attractive characters... The question is always about the context, and how gratuitous the display of a character's attractiveness is.

 

So as an example: I love Chicago Med- a show about DOCTORS, and I like the character Ethan Choi- his backstory is cool, he's pretty cool, and intelligent... Pretty 3 dimensional over an 11 season run. And the actor who plays Ethan Choi is generally attractive and generally fit. But there's a scene in season 3 or 4 where we see Choi's morning ab workout... And DAAAMN! I thought I was watching a show about body builders, or boxers or MMA fighters. Dude is ripped!

 

But, like, he's a doctor. So.... Why?

 

And look, the physique IS consistent with his backstory, and the plot does involve his romantic relationships... And so yeah, you CAN argue that the abs of steel workout footage was somewhat relevant... But all of the things that you'd say are conveyed by that scene are already conveyed much more effectively in other scenes that DON'T show you thirst-trap, sweat-sheened, rock hard abs, which kinda renders the workout scene unnecessary.

 

So if I cut it, would you think I was doing it because I want to censor and deprive the world of beauty and hotness as part of a conspiracy to intentionally deprive the world of beauty and hotness... Or would you just agree that in the context of a show about doctors, it's no big deal whether or not we see Ethan Choi's rock hard abs?

 

So onto the Crusade reveal: First off, Drukharimunda is here to stay in 10th! It's also not a direct copy/ paste. It seems territorial acquisition is much more connected to the game itself rather than being confined to the meta-theatre of the progression system- so if your Incubi body guards are still standing at the end of the fight, they can help you fend of an assassination attempt between games.

 

And generating Commorrite rivals is a way to make it feel like Drukharimunda even if you are the only Drukhari player you know- you're still COMPETING against other (NPO) Commorrite Lords who can steal your territory, assassinate you or otherwise make your life miserable. They also offer you Drukhari targets for your spite and treachery. I'm looking really forward to seeing more about Rival Actions and Hostile Takeovers... Which I suspect will have interactions with Agendas and Requisitions.

 

As a result of today's preview, I am now genuinely looking forward to this book despite being bitter about the loss of the Court and Beasts.

[Scribe]

22 minutes ago, ThePenitentOne said:

First: I wasn't expressing MY opinion: I was refuting a prior statement that there is a "trend of uglification" - I was explaining that those who are now choosing to create art that doesn't always conform to male standards of female beauty are doing so not because they want to follow an Ugliness trend, but because THEY believe doing so is better for body image, or at the very least because THEY want to be PERCEIVED as being supportive of a promoter of positive body image.

 

lol if you dont think its a corporate mandate, I dont know what to tell you.

[Wolf Guard Dan]

The Price of Success in the Crusade rules are hilarious.

 

I do worry the codex will feel bland without our finecast models or their replacements. Court and Beast packs especially add a different flavor to the way the army looks and plays. Court would be an excellent Kill Team. Let's manifest it.

[ThePenitentOne]

I will be using the cards from the Index to field mine for the remainder of the edition vs. opponents who are okay with that kinda thing.

 

And yeah, the price of success rule is one that I don't think I'm going to use, but I understand the need to start over once you've conquered everything... So I'd be more likely to just retire my Ascendant Lord, leaving the potential for him and his forces to be used as special guests, NPO's or whatever... And then I'd go with a Lord of a different type for the next Crusade- so if I retired an Archon, my next Lord would be a haemonculus or succubus.

 

 

[ZeroWolf]

5 hours ago, Wolf Guard Dan said:

The Price of Success in the Crusade rules are hilarious.

 

I do worry the codex will feel bland without our finecast models or their replacements. Court and Beast packs especially add a different flavor to the way the army looks and plays. Court would be an excellent Kill Team. Let's manifest it.

I think it'll happen in Kill Team, it just won't be this season. It has been a few years now since the last DE KT

[phandaal]

13 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

lol if you dont think its a corporate mandate, I dont know what to tell you.

 

Casual observation of video games produced in the last decade will confirm this trend. Whether people think it is good or bad, it is an objective fact that it is happening. Only recently has the trend started to reverse, because lo and behold people prefer to put their eyes on pleasant things, and Corpos are starting to remember that they really like money.

 

Just to keep it on-topic: this specific artist seems to draw many of his female GW characters a certain way, which makes it look like a deliberate choice.

 

It is not like he is trying to hide his art or anything... It is right there on promo materials and book covers.