Is it better to have no sexy miniatures or to make your sexy miniatures actually be horribly unsexy?
>>44506369
>they'll never return
>even their god is gone now
>>44506527
Why do they have two tits?
>>44506593
There are ones with one, two, four and six tits in that image.
>>44506593
Don't kinkshame, anon.
>>44506646
I thought they all were suppossed to have one tit after Slaanesh lost his against the Nightbringer.
>>44506716
Sculpts from before Necrons were even an army.
>>44506527
prolly getting removed because GW is trying to attract new blood, and little Timmy's mother is going to see something like that and immediately pull them both out of the store.
>>44506824
Yet they still released that medusa thing years later.
>>44506527
honestly I'm usually pretty asinine about the portrayal of women yada yada but the old ones honestly look way more elegant. It's just topless female demons. The notion that being topless would be inherently problematic is itself arguably problematic. It's the eventual sexualisation of something nonsexual that is a concern. I don't think the old models did any of that.
>>44507268
Those models are sexualized, but I think it would be strange to have demons of lust and desire not be.
>>44506930
Plus the Fiends that came out alongside the plastic Daemonettes were way lewder than the previous ones, just not the kind of lewd that people can get off to.
Well, most people.
>>44506369
Dreadful paintjob, and it's not like I'm a fantastic painter (I've patience for TTQ only) but I can't see evidence of a single wash being used. Might pick some up just to see what I can make of them.
>>44506527
RIP.
>>44507456
I'd argue that since slaanesh is the god of excess specifically, his deamons should be sexy in an extreme /d/ way where they are repulsive to normies.
>>44508356
They should encompass that but not be the totality.
>>44507268
While you're pretty much right, I'm obligated to say "go back to tumblr" because you used the word problematic
>>44507268
>problematic
>organs directly associated with reproduction aren't inherently sexual.
>The sexualisation of naked breasts would be "problematic" even if they weren't already
>>44508356
The point of them is to seduce space normies though, you don't actually have to seduce someone who's already a slannesh worshiper, they are probably DTF 100% of everything always.
>>44508356
>repulsive to normies
>Fiends are unnaturally swift, moving with a strange and scuttling gait as they pursue those who would refuse Slaanesh’s heady embrace. As the daemonic beasts close for the kill, they let out a keening song to each other – a haunting discordance interweaved with melodic riffs and a throbbing, bass beat. This call is not merely sonic, but also psychic, resonating in Warp space all the way back to the Palace of Pleasure. As Slaanesh sprawls across his throne, his mind is caught by these distant hymns and lullabies, his eyes glazed with the disturbing beauty of his Fiends’ music. For mortals, the siren call of the Fiends of Slaanesh is far less pleasurable, for the rapidly shifting scale and pitch can cause eyes to vitrify, noses to bleed and eardrums to burst.
>it's just non-stop REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEing
>>44508356
They also reek of Slaanesh pheromones and sweet musk. You can't tell that from the minis, though.
The Succubi on the OP are really nice. Not hard when you are comparing them to the shitty unsexy crab people that GW refuses to replace. My opinion that if it is sexy, it is OK. You get minis to look Co after all, and if that is one factor then there isn't a problem with it.
>>44509216
>really nice
Are you fucking serious?
>>44508924
Nah see that's not how it works in 40k. Daemons don't really try and convert people, they just show up as manifestations of the attention of the gods. Daemonettes are the footsoldiers and handmaidens of Slaanesh but they aren't Succubi. Like every single description of them has had them be horrifying and 2/3 of their miniatures have had them as vaguely feminine monstrosities.
>>44506527
Got a set of these for christmas, just need the riders and lord now
>>44509477
First rule of Mantic: their painters are awful, never judge their models til you've seen them painted properly
>>44506527
Where do you get those?
>>44508871
>directly associated with reproduction
Breasts don't come into the equation until AFTER the baby is born idiot. You may as well say a mother's hands are sex organs because she uses them to carry and clean the baby.
>>44509684
Not entirely true, breasts are secondary sexual characteristics; they're not involved in procreation directly but they signal maturity, men are attracted to them and they're erogenous.
>>44509602
I've seen the bare sprues of the Mantic succubi and I can confirm this
>>44509736
Almost any part of the body can be erogenous,and not all cultures sexualize breasts to anywhere near the extent western cultures do. Beards and moustaches are a secondary sex characteristic that signal maturity but nobody would call them a sex organ. If you've admitted they're secondary characteristics you've already lost your crusade to put them on the level of dicks and vulvas.
>>44506369
>Is it better to have no sexy miniatures or to make your sexy miniatures actually be horribly unsexy?
I think it's better to game with adults who realize that something can be sexy or racy or cheesy without it meaning that you whip your dick out to it the moment you have privacy.
The generation that grew up with instant porn in their phones and every weirdass fetish available turned into a such a bunch of talibans because they never talk about sex they just indulge in it in a guilty way on their own and hang out way too little with the opposite gender.
There's a fountain on the square in my town with a really great set of tits (for a chick made out of stone) but it's not like we all grab the binoculars and tissues just because it's there. It's just nice and pretty to look at.
>>44506527
I know a Recaster who does these.
I have a squad of 10 sitting on my desk in Resin.
Would there be interest in these?
>>44506369
This is Mantic Painter Syndrome.
>>44509835
You're wrong, I love when she stroke my beard and I made a tiny burqa to cover it in public.
>>44509835
Crusade? I'm not that guy, I'm the guy saying half the problem with mantic is the paint job
>>44509835
The culture that designed the minis and the culture they are meant to be sold to both consider breasts as sex organs.
>>44509477
Not the paint job, but the figures themselves are pretty good. Full poseable arms and heads on hard plastic. They don't really work as Daemonettes though. The best alternative models for them would have to be the ones that Raging Heroes make.
>>44510020
No, they consider them the closest thing to sex organs that they are allowed to use to sell products, to entertain and to flaunt.
If you ban breasts people will just latch on to the next thing in line that's sexy. Like obsess about butts or lips even more.
You must realize this, so you're just some no-sex-allowed wet blanket.
>>44510020
Name one culture that doesn't consider breasts sexual.
>>44510513
A whole bunch of african and Pacific populations.
>>44506824
ebin may-may, bra
Keep saying it and maybe one day it'll be true. But for as long as we got other models with their tits out in the game, your theory is shit.
>>44510629
Sources s'il vous plait.
>>44511244
not him but any photo of one of these tribes, where the women are topless
>>44509855
you bet your ass there is
>>44509684
The only function of the breast is in keeping a baby alive, which is as important as actually giving birth to the thing if you intend to propagate your genes, as in the underlying motivation of our sexuality. This makes them sexual.
Hands, in contrast, are used for quite a lot of shit. You would probably find someone without them less attractive,similar to any mutilation, but they aren't inherently sexual because they have uses other than ones having to do with the making and raising of children.
>>44510629
>>44514226
"Western cultures aren't sexually attracted to the faces of beautiful women because they don't cover them in veils"
Just because they don't cover them doesn't mean it isn't a major part of the sexual attractiveness of a women in those cultures. That would be like assuming we didn't give a shit about women's faces because we're so used to seeing them. It means they are more normalized, but not necessarily more or less sexually appealing.
I depends of the quality and with who do you play with.
>>44509855
It's not just the paintjob. The sculpts are terrible. It's Mantic, you get what you pay for. They're meant to be affordable, not pretty or seam-free.
>>44506527
They're nice models, but outside of the dynamism lack some of the Slaanesh aspect and rather seem to just come off as generic sexy demons. I've also always found it kind of weird that the majority seem to have two breasts when Slaanesh only has one. Having four and six at least has precedence with the Fiends, Steeds, and Keeper of Secrets.
It's also false that they've removed Slaanesh, in fact the AoS painting guide had new art.
>>44506824
No, they likely got removed because GW was going to switch over to plastic. It was also stated in WD that the current sculpts for both the Daemonettes and Bloodletters were based on a pictures done by Blanche.
Further discredited by the fact that they still sell Morathi and that the Bloodwrack Medusae is a relatively recent model.
>>44508356
Exactly, in fact I think this is even backed up in the lore where it's said that Daemonettes use magic to appear incredibly alluring to their prey, despite in reality looking grotesque.
Priestly apparently even stressed that Slaanesh was about more than just sex.
>>44506646
>one
That is a double-titter. For some reason one is covered.
>>44518691
Slaanesh only has one boob in 40k, and those miniatures were meant to be used both in 40k and fantasy. It would be baffling for a fantasy player to field daemonettes with only one boob for no reason other than "in the other game they are like this when not doing their shapeshift into whatever excites my target thing".
>>44506716
Holy shit that's fucking retarded, who wrote that?
>>44518866
I don't know why you'd say Slaanesh only has one breast in 40k when this depiction of him is seemingly for both 40k and Fantasy, and if anything more for the latter.
>>44518958
No one. I'm not sure how somebody could even come to think that was a thing that could happen.
>>44518866
>in 40k
Where does it say he has two in Fantasy?
>>44518973
I heard he lost one to the Deceiver in 40k.
>>44519031
There are no c'tan in fantasy and nowhere is stated he has only one boob.
>Slaanesh takes the form of a bisexual humanoid, male on the left side and female on the right, with an unearthly, unnatural and almost disturbing beauty.
>>44506369
It's better to be reasonably sure that the models you opponent field aren't the same ones he hotglues.
>>44519129
Literally nothing about the half and half thing since like 4th fantasy ed.
Now I know new fluff does not cancel old fluff unless specifically saying something else, but slaanesh in 5th fantasy Realm of Chaos armybook is mentioned has having whatever forms he likes and it is never said he forces one-boobiness on his/her/whatever followers. Conversely there is an actual fluff reason for him in 40k to have one boob only.
>>44519129
I'm pretty sure slannesh appears as whatever gives onlookers the biggest boner.
>>44519197
>Conversely there is an actual fluff reason for him in 40k to have one boob only.
Do tell us. With an actual source.
>>44519215
But just as well their aura makes you want them no matter what form they take. Daemonettes are hideous visages and still alluring and rapturing to behold.
>>44518691
>generic
They look nothing like any other sexy demon I have ever seen beyond being naked demons. GW Daemonettes were very distinctive.
>>44519216
He's that autistic sperg trying to peddle fanfiction about Slaanesh fighting the Nightbringer.
Forgetting of course Slaanesh has never fucking faced the Nightbringer in 40k.
>>44519261
Truth to be told I don't play 40k. >>44518691 implied it does for fluff reasons and I do not think myself so knowledgeable to disprove a 40k player wihout arguments. Mynpoint was only that there is no reason for fantasy daemonettes to have one boob.
>>44519287
There's no reason for them to have 2 or 6 either.
You know, other than >>44519129
>>44519287
Because Slaanesh is the same god in both settings.
He doesn't need a reason any more than Khorne needs a reason to favour axes, yet uses a sword.
>>44519261
Actually, the Liver Chaotica has Khorne facing the Nightbringer after trying to murder foetus Slaanesh.
>>44519317
>yet uses a sword.
He uses the sword not because he likes swords. He uses it because it proves a point.
>>44519237
Depending on the edition. Regardless the current models are shit in comparison to jaun's.
>>44519309
Daemonettes are supposed to shapeshift, though, the count of their boobs has as much sense as counting how many horns a bloodletter has. One boob feels slightly less sexy than two, or even six. About the half and half slaanesh there is nothing about it in the chaos books since then.
>>44519197
>but slaanesh in 5th fantasy Realm of Chaos armybook is mentioned has having whatever forms he likes and it is never said he forces one-boobiness on his/her/whatever followers
That is when he appears to someone, but there is nothing saying he doesn't have a form he takes when just lounging in his palace or when meeting with one of the other gods.
>>44519241
Perhaps, in a way I was referring more to the overall concept. Like Diaz was told to just sculpt a generic sexy demon and not a daemonette.
>>44519287
It only seemed weird to me because of Slaanesh having a half-male and half-female form and you'd figured they'd in someway try to emulate that. Don't recall anything explicitly saying what they look like.
>>44519361
The original Daemonettes models looked pretty ugly too.
Diaz's are the exception, not the rule.
>>44519347
>Liver Chaotica
>>44519427
>That is when he appears to someone, but there is nothing saying he doesn't have a form he takes when just lounging in his palace or when meeting with one of the other gods.
Slaanesh favourite form is a clean limed young man that is beguiling with his innocence
Basically, a Shota.
>>44519505
Ah, I had forgotten they introduced that in the 6th Edition codex.
>>44519505
Shota is not what I think of when I see the word "statuesque".
>>44519361
>Regardless the current models are shit in comparison to jaun's.
Only because you've been spoiled by the models that are the exception to the norm. Go look at the previous iterations of daemonettes. They're not pretty.
>>44519389
No, they use illusions. In reality they're hideous, but through illusions they appear enthralling to their victims, who are both drawn and repulsed by the daemons.
>all these SJW drama for inane 0.5mm tits on a toy soldier
Fucking grow up.
