Herald of Nurgle

The plastic plaguebearer range is terrific for the long time Nurgle affectionados like me. Not only is a plaguebearer troops based army entirely feasible (if a little odd and shambling!), but one can also create HQ choices from them as well. Specifically: Heralds of Nurgle.

The image shows one of my plastic heralds, assembled but unpainted. The ease to create such impressive looking miniatures is incredible. For those of us that have been in this hobby for the long haul, you may recall heralds that look like the ones below (all metal; top is from Marauder and the bottom is the 1990's citadel version).

The difference is sculpts is rather stark. The earlier models, whilst certainly Nurglesque in appearance are distinctly not as detailed. But there are certain characteristics that have carried over from them. Notice the triple horn of the Marauder miniature. And the triple skull motif on the citadel one, replicated from the stomach to the death heads in the plastics. Its pleasing to see such ideas remain constant over the years.

Moreover, the new plastic miniature is slightly larger than the old Marauder one (more "heroic scale" if I can use that term), like the citadel one.  That said, the citadel one is pretty much a solid piece of metal. The new plastics are much easier to carry around and result in a more pleasant play style than having to (sometimes) balance a metal miniature on an uneven terrain feature.

Overall, I'm impressed with the new plastics and remain a Nurgle fanboy. It might take some time to get around to painting this one up (got a few other projects on the go at the moment). Am tempted to move away from the greens that are typically seen on the plaguebearers and try something new (perhaps a pastel / frozen frostbitten blue or necrotic grey). I think thats one of the "beauties" of collecting a Nurgle army: so much choice and variation in possible and viable painting schemes!

CSM: Maulerfiend vs Helbrute/Dreadnought

This is one that has had me a trifle puzzled of late.  Which is better: a Maulerfiend or a Helbrute (i.e. Dreadnought) for Chaos Space Marines?

To do a fair comparison, let me firstly note that a helbrute with a pair of powerfists costs 20 points less than a maulerfiend with its pair of powerfists.  They both have the same number of attacks, but the dreadnought has strictly the superior stat line, with +1 WS BS and I compared to the maulerfiend.

The extra points for the maulerfiend go toward several aspects: it will not die, siegecrawler, daemonic possession, daemonforge, move through cover, daemon, fleet.  By comparison, the helbrute has its crazed rule.  That said, the helbrute can be a superior firepower base: the maulerfiend simply doesn't use ranged weapons!  The ability to have a built in heavy flamer in the powerfists of the dreadnought is very nice indeed: the maulerfiend suffers by comparison.

But I think that's where the story ends.  The speed of the maulerfiend is terrific and a much welcome addition to the (usually) slow Chaos Space Marine army.  That, coupled with the survivability of the maulerfiend give it the edge for me.  And if that weren't enough, one in 6 basic missions in the rulebook will result in the maulerfiend being a scoring unit (i.e. Big Guns Never Tire), which the helbrute will never have access to.  So I think I'm convinced: the maulerfiend has the edge and is well worth the extra points even if it does compete with land raiders and the like for heavy support slots of the force organization chart. 

White Dwarf Evolution or Revolution?

Inspired by the new format White Dwarf this month, in this post I examine the contents of White Dwarf (WD) through the years.  To do this, I take four WDs:

(1) October 2012 -- i.e. this month's "re-launch" or "re-boot";
(2) August 2010 (WD368) -- representative of both fantasy and 40k since it launched daemons;
(3) June 2007 (WD330) -- the 30th anniversary edition and therefore probably broadly representative;
(4) February 1990 (WD122) -- an old White Dwarf from a different era that may not be totally representative of the era.

I wanted to include earlier ones still, but couldn't locate them, so these will have to suffice for my little experiments to consider how WD has evolved.

Here's the experimental aim: to categorize and find the percentages of the content of each magazine in to several different bins:

(a) Adverts (including not only Citadel, but Marauder, etc., in the case of WD122).
(b) Battle Reports (whether 40k, fantasy, LoTR, or otherwise).
(c) Rules (mostly new rules that don't appear elsewhere ... unless its WD122 which includes what is was re-printed in Realms of Chaos, etc.; I note that WD330 included Blood Angels codex for instance), also scenarios (e.g. new Space Hulk missions).
(d) Painting (by whoever, of whatever, including showcases of armies), and conversions / conversion ideas.
(e) Editorials about miniatures and their abilities, background fluff and details about the Warhammer (and 40k) Universe / flavour text, gaming, design notes, etc. This overlaps somewhat with adverts.  Therefore to distinguish between the two, "Adverts" must show the price of the product, editorials about them don't contain the price.
(f) Contents pages, news, filler, tournament adverts, retailer locations, gaming clubs, general artwork, and other things that I couldn't easily put in to other categories!

The uncertainties on each category should be taken as at least a few per cent, possibly up to 5% -- this isn't a totally scientific experiment!  Let me also declare that there's also plenty of subjectivity involved as well, clearly.  And the new WD is at least 1 cm shorter than the old ones in height (hence less room for text, pictures, etc.).  Here's the results.

1. WD Oct 2012:

N(pages) = 153.

(a): 7%

(b): 11%

(c): 0%

(d): 16%

(e): 50%

(f): 20%

2. WD 368:

N(pages) = 121.

(a): 11%

(b): 18%

(c): 0%

(d): 7%

(e): 45%

(f): 21%

3. WD 330:

N(pages) = 129.

(a): 20%

(b): 9%

(c): 11%

(d): 10%

(e): 37%

(f): 13%

4. WD122:
N(pages) = 81.
(a): 21%
(b): 0%
(c): 58%
(d): 7%
(e): 4%
(f): 14%

So, what has happened over the years?  WD has moved away from presenting plenty of new rules and ideas and, perhaps surprisingly, advert content (as many people proclaim that recent era WDs are mostly adverts).  Instead, they've moved toward blending together their miniatures and fluff using editorials and writing about how cool the miniatures are.  This is supplemented with battle reports and tactica.  Painting articles have also increased in percentage terms.  Seen in this light, the new WD is not so much a revolution, as much a part of a continual evolution wherein we see much more detailed text surrounding the miniatures.  The lack of new rules and scenarios is the clearly demarkation between the old format and the new, and I think ultimately, that is where the new format WD needs to pick up the baton once more if it is to appeal to subscribers again.  Just an opinion.

Scribor: Review of Ruins Bases

Scribor monstrous miniatures sells a range of resin cast miniatures for both fantasy and sci-fi (most being of 28mm scale, but some larger ones too).  Many of the pieces have obvious resonances with warhammer and warhammer 40,000 and can complement bits from either range.  I intend to make a few conversions from their pieces in the coming weeks, but that's a tale for later.

Recently, I purchased a number of bits from them, including a few scenic bases in the style of "ruins".  These are a pair of 40mm circular bases suitable for use with 40k.  The level of detail in the pieces is clear from the image below.

In terms of quality, the resin casts are superior to games workshop's finecast; no two ways about that.  However, they're not quite at the same level as Quantum Gothic ... but they are very very close!  Let me emphasize that the quality of Scibor is great -- its just that I feel Quantum Gothic is fantastic.  

The two bases above have some very fine detail, ranging from the small writing on the (broken) paving slabs, to the creeping vines that come out of the ground.  Such detail is certainly worth paying the price for, and I think, is superior to Back-2-Basix (another company that I thoroughly recommend).

So overall, I'm very impressed with the quality and level of detail.  I would certainly go back to them. And for those of you who are thinking that purchasing from Poland might be an issue -- I got my bits to Australia in a very short amount of time and the customer service from Scribor was excellent.

Drach'nyen: evolution between codex editions

Abaddon the despoiler's daemon blade is known as Drach'nyen, and was discovered below the crypts in the tower of silence on the world of Uralan duing the first black crusade.  It is variously noted as having the ability to "tear reality apart". 

Today, I wanted to quickly compare its abilities between the 2002 and 2007 codex editions.

In 2002, Drach'nyen was able to automatically penetrate any vehicle on hitting, gave Abaddon an extra attack, ignored armour and caused instant death.

In 2007, the new codex saw Drach'nyen give Abaddon an extra 1d6 attacks, and when combined with the Talon of Horus, allows re-rolls to wound and doubles his strength to 8.  The downside is that Drach'nyen shares the bad bits of its counter-parts: a roll of a 1 on the 1d6 for the extra attacks means that the daemon blade is playing up and decides to inflict pain on Abaddon.

The change from a leadership test for mastery of the blade to a 1d6 test is severe: the chance of failure went from 3 in 36 (=0.083) to 1 in 6 (=0.167).  I would very much like to see Abaddon not have to take this test: surely if anyone has mastery over chaos, it is Abaddon himself.  I also think that the automatic penetration of vehicles was a good thing for a reality tearing blade to possess -- its loss is missed by old timers like myself!

Pink Horror Evolution

Back in the Realms of Chaos days, pink and blue horrors had their own individual miniatures. The pink horrors were noticeably happier, chuckling and downright devious looking. On the other hand, the blue horrors were more morose, glum and miserable looking with a wicked depressed violence brewing under the surface. They were also slightly smaller than their pink brethren. Their dynamic was invariably a pair of raised hand and a maw of teeth surrounded by an expressive pair of eyes and a tail.

Fast forward to the early 2000's, and the miniatures got a long needed update. I liked this era of Tzeentch miniatures very much. The horrors became a whirling mass of arms, tails, mouths, teeth, eyes, and flames. Moreover, they also featured horrors-within-horrors. This type of miniature is one that I very much liked. As can be seen in my other posts, a number of them look like the inner blue horror is trying to get out of the pink one.

The modern era plastic pink horror (pictured) is a compromise of the previous iterations, with a few new touches added in. More noticeable than previous examples is the abundance of accessories such as bracelets, bangles, gemstones and feathers. This is not a bad thing, but I did have a preference for "naked" horrors. I suspect that the accessories are a throwback to the old mark of Tzeentch that granted followers a random magical item. I like the multiple arms, but on the other hand, I really miss the blue-in-pink aspect of the mid-2000's metal horrors. The new horrors are also larger than their earlier counterparts. Again, not a bad thing (unless trying to hide / get better cover saves).

Overall, their evolution seems to be a subtle blend of old and new. Some things added, and still some things blue :-)

Plaguebearer Evolution

Over the years, the not so humble plaguebearer has undergone a minor evolution. Below is a picture of several plaguebearer models over the past 2 and a bit decades.Going from the left, the first two models are both from the golden rogue trader / realms of chaos era. The leftmost is "Maggotgut" (see solegends) and shows an almost hunched over and diminutive plaguebearer with a nurgling close to its right foot. The second realms of chaos one is "Wormrot". Both of these two show a different variety of plaguesword: one that is somewhat ornate, but decaying and the second that is fairly plain and smooth, albeit with a slight curve.

The next two along are the marauder style plaguebearers. These are readily picked out by the swirls featured on their blades. I'm not entirely sure why they were cast this way as the blades certainly don't fit in with the regular theme of rust (etc.). Regardless, I do like these plaguebearers a lot -- the "herald" in the middle is one of my favourite sculpts simply due to the animal horns that are growing out of the sides of his head in addition to the traditional central horn that all plaguebearers feature.

The next one is a more modern era plaguebearer. By now, it is possible to see that the plaguebearer has grown in both stature and bulk since the realms of chaos era (although I do admit that this point is accentuated by having maggotgut hunched over at the far left). Although there are a few skinnier models of plaguebearer still around, I have mixed feelings about the heroically proportioned plaguebearer. I like some of the models to be bulky, but I think I miss a lot of the more traditional open sores on the newer models.

Finally on the right hand side there is the new herald of Nurgle that is sold along with the icon bearer and the instrument player in the command boxed set. He is by far the largest plaguebearer (apart from Epidemius) that I've seen in recent times. He's easily picked out (more so than the marauder version) on the battlefield and looks highly intimidating and dynamic.

Bloodletters of Khorne in the 1980's

Way back in the Rogue Trader & Slaves to Darkness days, bloodletters of Khorne were a little bit different.

Comparison.
The depicted bloodletters are all metal models that came in two parts: the body and the head (with arms attached to the head part) with the requisite lolling, poisonous tongue. Since purchasing them, some of the arms have become bent out of place (they have been repeatedly re-assembled, stripped, re-based in both fantasy and W40k bases and re-painted over the years), but the squad is still identifiably a squad of bloodletters. The painted colours of red, black and brass certainly invoke the atmosphere of Khorne's foot soldiers.

Assembly of these pieces was tricky. In the end, I pinned the head sections to the body sections as inevitably they tended to come off during transport or gaming. They remain rather delicate pieces of my collection today. Their last outing was at Grand Tournament 2007, but I don't intend to take them to any further tournaments or local games at this stage (despite the hugely positive response that I know they are liable to invoke, from experience). Apart from their now delicate nature, I believe that the 2008 plastic range of bloodletters is an excellent throw-back to the spirit of these models and their depiction in Slaves to Darkness.

What are the differences between the old and the new? The first thing that I noticed was their relative sizes: the old bloodletters are significantly smaller than their 2008 plastic counterparts. This, however, is very much inline with many other comparisons of older Games Workshop miniatures to newer ones. The newer ones tend to be more "heroically proportioned" whereas the older ones were more realistically proportioned.

The older models exhibit a metal band around their head which is not seen in the newer models -- at first glance a missed opportunity to re-connect with Slaves to Darkness perhaps. Then again, if interpreted as collars of Khorne, then these circlets are out of place on the bloodletters and their omission from the modern model is a good thing. The hellblades are also much smaller and less serrated on the older models. I prefer the new model's hellblades in all honesty. What has been retained is the lean and spindly quintessential nature of the bloodletters.

I've over-looked the 1990's / 2001-ish(?) version of bloodletters in this brief discourse -- the ones that have a passing resemblance to beastmen. My like for that range is much lower than my like for the Rogue Trader era and the modern era bloodletters. I do strongly think that the 1990's miniature still has its place as a herald, or champion within a squad of bloodletters; much in the same way that my earlier post on a Nurgle herald used an older, slightly different model.

Given their differences, I don't believe the old and new bloodletters mix very well. I would be willing to make a concession and mix a single 1990's version in together with the newer models. But the Rogue Trader 1980's models simply look too out-of-date and ill placed next to the plastic 2008 range. They'd be better off fielded on their own, in their own unit (if at all), to fit in with a whole army.

Space Hulk Genestealers

Although my main W40k interest certainly lies in the various forces of chaos, I remember fondly the days of Space Hulk. My wife and I played a few games of Space Hulk a couple of months ago (which I lost pitifully, for the record), at which point I dusted off the old genestealer models and re-evaluated them.

Comparison.
The old genestealer model is pictured here side by side with the newer version; both unpainted. Ignoring the different plastic technologies, it is readily clear that the newer version is much more dynamic and can be posed in a varitey of ways. The sculpts are also subtly different: the new version's exoskeleton appears stronger with fewer weak-spots compared to the older counterpart that (for example) has exposed flesh in the centre of the back.

The new model's rending claws are also better looking, but the more human, rear pair of hands are broadly similar. I might go as far as to say that the older genestealer's human-like hands are preferable given their dynamic look; the newer one can appear like it is about to slip on a pair of mitten gloves before venturing out in to the dank, chilly service tunnels of the Space Hulk.

The odd older model genestealer can provide variety within a brood of genestealers on the tabletop, but I don't think it looks as good as mixing in a Rogue Trader era plaguebearer with modern counterparts: older genestealers simply look out of place and ... less evolved. Moreover, I think making any biomorphs look consistent between the older and newer models would be very tough to do. But how about an entire brood of older models?

Pictured here are two broods, a ten strong brood in classic Space Hulk colours (Hive Fleet Behemoth vanguards?) and a five strong brood (non-viable in the current codex since they're below the minimum brood size) in green exoskeletons and purple flesh. These models are over 15 years old now and my painting style has evolved a long way since they were painted. A painting scheme will not be provided for them because of that reason, but perhaps their look might inspire a new paint scheme?
Looking back, they are certainly dated and not as well painted as my newer miniatures, but I wouldn't be too ashamed to field them on a tabletop despite the uniformity of their pose (apart from one model which used a hybrid's arm set, if you look closely).