tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289736121428988411.post6080295619992700760..comments2024-03-07T12:01:16.402+00:00Comments on Death of a Rubricist: + inload: Luggub's Drop Legion and micro-review of Warlord Games' Ruined Farmhouse +apologisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14655902797372187934noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289736121428988411.post-59661235050191407442018-04-04T09:07:30.311+01:002018-04-04T09:07:30.311+01:00Well put. Nowadays I tend to try character driven ...Well put. Nowadays I tend to try character driven stuff with named characters- like Ahriman, as it's very feasible that he was always 9 steps ahead- being removed as a casualty was just the teleporter or warp gate or smokebomb whisking him from imminent capture or death, Saturday morning style.<br /><br />I'm less forgiving with my own characters- though two sergeants famously pummeled a Bloodthirster to death in 3rd ed, that didn't prevent one from being crippled and placed in a dreadnought later in his career. Chapter masters and first Captains tend to get a bit more longevity though.<br /><br />My Imperial guard officers tend to follow a dynastic line- there have been many 'Julius Harm's, named for the original Colonel who defeated an Iron warriors daemon prince in melee. This allows a sense of continuity with the homeworld and the battles that have happened in the past while keeping the expendable assets theme. Most recently (still years ago now) I've tried branching out to make unique looking junior officers- they still haven't managed to earn names, even if their characters are evident through their conversion. RSF_Angelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07613461664620992536noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289736121428988411.post-21954186628246437612018-04-03T15:10:59.366+01:002018-04-03T15:10:59.366+01:00Interesting thoughts; and precisely the reason for...Interesting thoughts; and precisely the reason for 'going retro'. The way I'm doing it here – creating models specifically for a pre-existing set of characters – is effectively a mishmash of two approaches:<br /><br />The first uses your models to represent unique characters and figures in different games – that is, you write a scenario based around the models you have, and then assign existing models names and roles, as though they are actors in a play. This approach is, I understand, quite common in historical gaming, where your figure would variously be 'Field Marshal so and so' in one game, and 'Colonel Whatshisface' in the next. <br /><br />It's different to the approach of following a set character (or characters), such as your army leader/warlord and his lieutenants around, and having them always be the same figure in every game. <br /><br />Where am I going with this? Well, musing aloud really. The former scenario-led approach creates a sense of distance from your figures, as they'll be someone else in the next game; which really gets across the idea that 'Whatever happens, you will not be missed...' that I feel is important to 40k. On the downside, it means that you and your friends don't get to see what's interesting or special about a character.<br /><br />The second character-led approach seems quite distinct to Warhammer. On the good side, it encourages you to gel with and value 'your' character; but when it goes bad, it gets a bit 'Saturday morning cartoon', with no sense of development or danger. <br /><br />Unconsciously, I think I've blended the two approaches in my gaming with the PCRC. For our semi-regular campaigns, I've generally created a character and pursued them through the campaign, then created someone new for the next one, after effectively seeing their arc run through. Some survive, some die, others do something spectacular. <br /><br />In contrast, for my own projects – The Court of the Sun King is probably the best example – I've gone very character-driven.apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14655902797372187934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289736121428988411.post-71094982802378681332018-04-03T14:53:00.390+01:002018-04-03T14:53:00.390+01:00I think that warp was either temporary or a produc...I think that warp was either temporary or a product of the camera zoom – you can see in the third image from the bottom (the group shot of orks and buildings) that it's flat. Part of the reason I use mountcard is that it's pretty resistant to warping. Either way, painting the reverse is a good idea to help correct it – I'll keep it in mind. Thanks :)apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14655902797372187934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289736121428988411.post-45275083501723039162018-04-03T14:41:29.393+01:002018-04-03T14:41:29.393+01:00Love the unique Ork nobs. A problem with Orks for ...Love the unique Ork nobs. A problem with Orks for me is that they can have so much character from Nob to Nob that they cease to be squad leaders and become mini characters. This works for marines and the like- who can be functionally immortal due to recovery, bionics etc but for hordes like guard and orks I need to see the units as interchangeable basic blocks if I'm going to send them off to be butchered by casual enemy attention.<br /><br />I like the idea of individuality in Ork Squadleaders but it would irk me to see them gunned down in casual games to become trophies for some veteran sergeant's belt or a decal on some flyer's nose. Once I start investing headspace into a character I lack the mental separation necessary to use them as a throwaway token and it would break my head-canon narrative for them to die repeatedly at so junior a level and simply be brought back.<br /><br />In other words- I'd need a campaign like the Alien Wars to justify this, and its cool to watch you proceed.RSF_Angelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07613461664620992536noreply@blogger.com