GW News: BIG N' SMALL WAAAGH! COMIN'

So you can condemn the Nighthaunt for lack of originality, but Fyreslayers get a pass because the fantasy Slayers which they were based off of was a somewhat original idea 25-30 years ago?

In terms of the models themselves, the Nighthaunt are more original when compared to their classic WFB counterparts than Fyreslayers are. Fyreslayers are direct copies of fantasy slayers. Zero originality.

This is completely irrelevant. We are discussing the aesthetic value of the models themselves, not their fluff.

So which of the other first edition factions are as monotonous and boring as Fyreslayers. The entire army (other than the very average monster) is pretty much the exact same thing. Nighthaunt have infinitely more depth and range.

The skull faced banshees are just fine. You don't like them, that's fair enough, but they were readily accepted by the community with far more positivity than that crotch monster. You literally have a little boney guy sticking out of the monster's crotch and you're criticizing the face of the banshees!

Also, what is with the extreme obsession with originality? Everything draws inspiration from something else. Your beloved Fyreslayers are copies of fantasy slayers which in turn are a tweak on dwarfs (which is hardly original). There is nothing wrong with an artistic take on a classic aesthetic/theme. Would you condemn all of Bretonnia because they are a rehashed version of knights in shining armor? By the same token, Lizardmen are hardly an original concept.

No, the crotch monster is simply the worst offender. The whole model looks terrible. If it was only something so trivial, I don't think there would be nearly as many complaints as we currently have floating around.

Any model can be made to look good with extensive enough patience, work and greenstuffing skills. We're judging the models as they are, not as they could be after they are painstakingly re-imagined and re-worked.

 

You know how Nagash punishes people who did wrongs in life? This is what happens to people who were dickheads.

 

thank you, always happy to make people laugh. The comment was inspired by the heated debate a few post earlier that reminded me about the nighthaunt lore.

I'm somewhat in the same boat as you about the crotch jockey, he's kinda bad but also kinda good, there is a certain macabre silliness over him that i think is very in tune with the setting.

 

Hahaha. To be honest, it is hardly heated.

 

best post in this thread

To be honest, for macabre siliness they don't really push it far enough. It looks more like a high schooler's attempt at combining skeletons with the joker, than that of professional artists. They can do better than this.

 

I'm sure they'll release something better soon (can't get much worse!).

 

Nighthaunt were direct copies of the Cairn Wraith and Tomb Banshee from Fantasy, which were in turn based off the Grim Reaper idea, that has remained pretty much exactly the same since the 14th Century, and Irish Banshees, that have remained the same for probably even longer, respectively. Fyreslayers at least have the Ur-Gold runes to differ them from the old Slayers, and the idea of the Slayer is still a lot newer than the ideas of Grim Reapers and Banshees.

I certainly wouldn’t say ‘infinitely’. The only ways in which the Nighthaunt infantry units actually differ from each other are slightly different headgear and different weapons, which is pretty much the same way in which the Fyreslayers models differ. GW just gave them more variants of the same thing because they had the fortune of being developed in 2nd Edition rather than 1st Edition, by which time GW had sorted themselves out to make something at least decent. True, they have cavalry as well, but those were ripped off the Hexwraiths which are just mounted Cairn Wraiths.


I’m going to call this debate a draw and leave it here. Neither of us appears to show any sign of backing down, and I’m getting rather tired of it. This is a thread principally to discuss GW new releases, not a thread for hosting yet another sparring match between NIGHTBRINGER and me. You think Ossiarch are bad, that’s fine, that’s your opinion. I think Nighthaunt are bad, that’s fine, that’s my opinion. I do like originality a lot (you know that by now because of the way I advocate the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy and Rogue One), but I’ll admit that ‘Rule of Cool’ also ranks armies like Bretonnia higher in my book than if I was to rate things just by originality alone. You’re right, there’s nothing wrong with basing army concepts on existing aesthetics. I just let my personal opinions get in the way of that for a moment. You’re free to dislike Ossiarch as much as you want, and I’m free to dislike Nighthaunt as much as I like as long as it doesn’t infringe on the others’ opinions and starts potentially never-ending debates like this. Maybe you’re right in that the way Ossiarch turned out was not what I was hoping, but I think they at the very least have the potential to be converted into something better-looking that can still use their rules.

I hope that I have been able to smooth things out with this last paragraph to stop things heating up too much.

Probably the one good thing about this debate is that it has increased my post count by a fair margin

 

That’s a point actually, the Necrosphinx also has a joker grin on the skull face. I always preferred the Pharaoh Death Mask head.

 

Gotrek month! I’ve got his model, book, and next issue of white dwarf ordered (cause it apparently gets you the code for gotrek and Felix in TWWarhammer 2). Audiobook and short novella were alright but lacking in the right feel. Maybe a proper novel will be the way I prefer the old slayer.

 

Wasn't Gotrek and felix supposed to be free in TW? Might be that you get it earlier with the code as it the DLC only releases in october.

 

Ah yes, you are correct. Code in the magazine gets them early, and they will be free for total war warhammer 2 on October 17th. Recruitable for brettonia, dwarves, and the empire.

 

Remember we are talking about Grandma Wendy. It can get a lot worse. They did go from WHFB 8th to AOS

 

I'm not debating you on whether or not you should like Fyreslayers, Nighthaunt or Ossiarch. When it comes to aesthetics, to each their own. I will never debate which army you should like better. That is purely subjective. You could spend your entire net worth on Ossiarch models and tattoo the Ossiarch crotch monster on your face and it would make little difference for me. This entire debate has centered around one criticism you made:

"Nighthaunt are one of the least original and most boring armies GW has ever made for AoS." (emphasis mine)

That left me with the following:

• your attempt to put down Nighthaunt by calling them unoriginal and boring
• you love Fyreslayers
• Fyreslayers are more unoriginal than Nighthaunt (direct copy of WFB slayers + one monster)
• Fyreslayers are more boring than Nighthaunt (less variation across the range)

Consequently I set the trap (Nighthaunt vs. Fyreslayers) and forced you to make a difficult decision:

• abandon the claim that Nighhaunt are "bad" due to being unoriginal and boring
• admit that under your proposed criteria, Fyreslayers are "bad"
• try to rationalize or debate why Fyreslayers are exempt from your classification but Nighthaunt aren't (which is an easy debate for me to win and thus establish the hypocritical nature of your stance... which in turn, breaks down your original analysis of Nighthaunt)
• flee the debate

I hope you aren't suggesting that I meant the term infinitely to be taken literally. I figured that within the context you'd be able to ascertain that infinitely was used to mean significantly, or any other word of similar meaning. And yes, when you look at both of their ranges, the Nighthaunt do have significantly more model variation.

The idea of Dwarfs has been around for a very long while. Slayers are just a tweak on Dwarfs.

So the Cairn Wraith, Tomb Banshees, Hexwraiths and the Black Coach (which alone is already more variation than Fyreslayers have) gave rise to all this and they are the ones that are unoriginal....


Nighthaunt have:

• several units of infantry, a couple of which differ quite significantly from one another
• two types of cavalry (+the character mounted on the winged steed)
• black coach
• Lady Olynder (who model-wise, is far more original looking than anything the Fyreslayers have to offer)
• characters that have greater variance from one another than the Fyreslayers have

In contrast, the Fyreslayers have:

• a bunch of infantry that look nearly identical to one another
• a bunch of characters that have far less variance between them than the Nighthaunt characters have
• one average looking monster

If you still feel that Fyreslayers have equal to or more model variance than Nighthaunt, then I have some magic beans to sell you.


As for the Ur-Gold runes, that is pretty weak argument when trying to establish their originality over their WFB counterparts. The Nighthaunt have significantly more differentiation than a couple of runes sculpted on them.

Once again, I'm not saying which army is "better" or which you should like more, but objectively, when you compare Nighthaunt and Fyreslayers, the Nighthaunt have both a more extensive and varied range, as well as having greater differentiation when compared to its WFB predecessors. This is not a "my opinion" vs "your opinion" situation; this is an observable fact. One quick look on GW's website and your argument falls apart.

Fair enough. Go in peace!

Rest.

 

Touche! Well player sir.

I stand corrected. I admit my folly and retract my previous statement!

 

Love Nighthaunts.

 

Precisely!

This is what I've been trying to tell him for the past couple of posts...

While I do like new and original stuff, I can certainly also agree with this.