The miniature is fine and have a strong and simple aesthetic, and a full length needle drilled and glued into the arm will solve any problems of the fragile sort.
Hobgoblins would be fine, but I guess we’ll have to wait for those as long as we’ll have to wait for the next visit of FW to Chaos Dwarfs. If the sales have been good enough, the curly beards are sure to receive another dose of new releases, probably including some Hobgoblin miniatures or conversion parts.
After all, Chaos Dwarfs have become Forge World’s first own army, and statements of not planning to produce Hobgoblins can see a reverse decision come the future. With some brilliant exceptions, FW products often see limited sales in comparison to the grand sales of main GW. Forge World will, as a niche boutique seller of startlingly expensive yet well sculpted models, not have any financial troubles with one or two releases of rabble horde miniatures, despite the economic disadvantages of collecting resin Hobgoblins.
I propose that FW test the waters for Hobgoblin market demand and a Warhammer world expansion eastwards by releasing one or thee Hobgoblin characters and preferrably also some Hobgoblin wolf riders á la Hobgobbla Khan’s sort. It might be out of the question for most Chaos Dwarf players to buy 20 or more Hobgoblin infantry models from FW, but some new incarnations of the old eastern wolf riders would easily be appealing in smaller numbers to Chaos Dwarf and Orcs and Goblin collectors. There’d also be the usual, scattered sales of wolf riders to old veterans and collectors who just like the looks of it all and the return of a classic. In this way FW would almost certainly guarantee enough sales to make the investment go around and generate some profit whilst scanning the potential market for an expanded range of Hobgoblins. If the heads of the miniatures were made interchangeable or at least came in two styles (the one of mongol fur, the other of Frygian hats akin to the CD-aligned Hobgoblins of 5th edition), the customers might be even more tempted.
Sorry to disappoint I'd forgotten about the original GW use of "Mourngul" I should've added a reference to Monstrous Arcanum in the post title.
Cheers
Vogon
Vogon
You're not to blame, Vogon. The creative guys at FW should have spent a few minutes making up a name for this monster. I am not an expert in making up names, but almost anything else could have been better, such as Barumbagul, Pintirok Spitelrug or Nicolascage.
@Animatone:
Thanks from the info from Monstrous Arcanum. Could you explain Abhorrent, Kinship, etc.?
Am I correct to assume that "Abhorrent" means they would never use it, "Binding Scroll" means they could only use it if forced by magic, and "Kinship" means that it would naturally fit as part of the army?
I am starting to seriously consider buying a Monstrous Arcanum. Is it a good book?
I also want to add that the first time I saw the Mourngul (this one) I didn't like it at all, but now I'm starting to like it.
Monstrous Arcanum is a great book, well worth it in my opinion.
While not as big as the Tamurkhan book it still has plenty in it, scenarios, campaign and of course lots of monster rules.
Some of the monsters are a bit OTT for use in a regular game but are OK in Storm of Magic (ethereal giant armoured dinosaur anyone?) where there’s plenty of other stuff to deal with them.
The lava flow!