Drychnath:
I warn you at the outset that I am going to set the subject, diverge from it whilst explaining motive/ranting, and then return. I also freely admit to bias that could be affecting my position.
My conclusion is this: I do not want Games Workshop to produce a Chaos Dwarfs army book.
I do not want Games Workshop to produce an army book because in the current environment professional attention from them will ruin the army. This is a conclusion that I have drawn after reading through some of the more recently produced army books, and watching the trends generally. My arguments will center around the various Chaos books, both for Fantasy and 40K (the latter for the purposes of demonstrating trends).
My first and greatest gripe has to be the crappy quality of fluff writing. There is no standard by which what is being put into new books now is at the same level it was in years past. The reading level has been reduced; grammatically incorrect colloquialisms are working their way into the narrative text (from a company based in England, a deeply disturbing development in general); hardly any of the vignettes serve any real purpose in terms of exploring the background or nature of the army, and are designed rather as filler; finally, they are in terms of plot and execution, bad. Consider the example of the section titled “The Constantinus Iconoclasm” in the Chaos Marine Codex for 40K. I will summarize it for you:
- Space Marines battle Tyranid infestation.
- Genestealer cult infiltrates government.
- Space Marine purges government. ← Up to this point, par for the course.
- Common people are mad!
- Space Marine throws hissy fit! ← Stupid.
- Now the people follow him! ← Very stupid.
- Space Marine rebels! ← Stupid again.
- Now there’s Chaos! ← Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over.
This sort of garbage is repeated throughout the newest round of army books. Also phrases like a character ‘weighed up his options.’ Dialogue, fine, however you want. Omniscient third person perspective should not include extraneous words. Consider also the example of ‘The Dark Night of Karak Hirn’ in the new Beastmen army book. The shorter summary is a Wargor (a hero-class character) and his herd stumble on a mile long train of Dwarven ale and then go on a ruthless bender where they run far away and burn down everything belonging to a Dwarf hold but the hold itself, all in one night. Apparently this run-of-the-mill herd is some thousands strong. These armies just pop up out of nowhere, the story implies. The risk of letting GW writers tackle Chaos Dwarfs is the dilution of everything we like about them.
The next gripe has to do with how GW treats the armies in general, what they seem to be doing to them now, and what that bodes for Chaos Dwarfs. The most important issue here is that Chaos Dwarfs are a fringe army. I quite probably differ from many posters here in that I like them for being a fringe army. It is the same reason I like Wood Elves, and was the same reason I was so fond of the Beasts of Chaos book. Which brings me to my next argument: GW will ridiculously over-dramatize and warp the position of Chaos Dwarfs in the Warhammer world. Consider, for example, the Beastmen army book (yet again. Bias in action - I have a grudge here). In the old Chaos boxed set, with the conjoined rules for Beastmen, Mortals, and Daemons, the Beastmen were by and large the numerous chaff of the Chaos hordes when they bore south. In the Beasts of Chaos book, they got a flavor of their own as an omni-present internal threat, with the potential for periodic spots on the world stage. With this presentation, they got a couple of unique rules, namely Ambush (my favorite rule in all of Games Workshop’s games), and the chance to organize their units differently. Warhammer: Beastmen, by contrast, does its dead-level best to convince you that civilization hangs by the merest thread and that Beastmen have never known defeat. Which is funny, considering how you never hear about them. Furthermore, the attempts to get creative and bring something new to the army book, particularly vis-a-vis new units (something of a point of interest in almost all our internal development) is in my opinion by and large a failure. The word I would choose for them, by and large, is ‘uninspired.’ Also, not credible. I mean, giants are cool, right? So clearly, we have to one-up the giant. The solution must be a giant four armed cleaver handed frenzied minotaur! Awesome! How do we top that? How about a giant cyclopean gor that can only see wizards and throws magic rocks! That’s like awesome squared!
Really? Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for variety and introducing new concepts, and I’ll even grant that these concepts are interesting - as a one-off, perhaps. But then the army book goes a step further, and throws them into half the stories in the plural, implying that Beastmen always tramp about in huge hordes capable of laying waste to whole nations, and further that these tremendous aberrant monstrosities are lurking behind every damn tree between Tilea and Norsca.
The only things I actually liked about the new army book was that they kept Ambush, the Primal Fury rule was interesting, and the Jabberslythe is a cool idea more in keeping with traditional GW creativity (which is to say, a non-prescriptive literary reference). By way of disclaimer on the subject of Beastmen, it was the army that first drew my attention to Games Workshop games when my friends wanted me to play. That was in 3rd edition. I never did get the army - and with this latest incarnation, I have no interest in them now, beyond the basic concept and the ability to Ambush.
Drawing this rant on other armies and games back into the realm of Chaos Dwarfs, I feel like the current bum-rush for production attitude that GW has would lead to similar errors in producing a CD list. Given the choice between an army book with crappy official fluff and pointless unit additions or no army book at all, I’ll sit tight and wait for the environment to change.
Thoughts?