Thommy H:
What Halfling models are in the current range?
Hobgoblyn:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1040012&prodId=prod1140135
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1040012&prodId=prod1140026
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1040012&prodId=prod1140052
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1060097&prodId=prod1120061
Granted, it isn’t much… but it is still better than the options for Chaos Dwarfs. And if I were to include those in the 40K and Lord of the Rings lines, I could add even more to this list.
Swissdictator:
You missed my main point… they are still active. Their stars were even included in the 7th edition army book. They didn’t do that on a lark. Drawing your conclusion seems to read way too much into it! Plus existing models can be used in the army list, and thus the cost of redoing them goes down. I’m not talking about the old big hats, I’m talking about Black Orcs, ad Or cs. Goblin stuff (especially wolf riders) can also be easily converted. So the cost is less. Add the Hellcannon to the CD, and there is another model that is already made and available. So 3-4 units of the list are already made and ready to go. As opposed to zero of the Cathay list.
The greenskins might not be “new”, but they’ll still see increased sales.
Thommy H:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1040012&prodId=prod1140135You mean figures in the Collectors section of the online store, originally released for 5th Edition, whose last published rules were in early 6th Edition (contemporary with Ravening Hordes) and occupy the same nebulous area of game-legality as Chaos Dwarfs?
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1040012&prodId=prod1140026
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1040012&prodId=prod1140052
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1060097&prodId=prod1120061
Hobgoblyn
Bit of a stretch to call them part of "the current range", don't you think? Especially compared to the Hellcannon, which is a Rare choice in a current Armies book.
Grimstonefire:
I really don't see the Hellcannon being a strong arguement for creating an entire army of Chaos Dwarfs.I agree with you on that, they would have considered a lot of other things.
Hobgoblyn
If that were the case, we could expect to see a Halfling army before a Chaos Dwarf army because there are more Halfling models in the current range than there are Chaos Dwarf models and Halflings have certainly been around longer and had a more central role in WarHammer games.Central role? When did the halflings ever have any role? I must have missed the part where they were mentioned several times in the last 2 major summer campaigns.
Furthermore, having had models in the past which they no longer produce is also not an arguement in favor of creating Chaos Dwarfs instead of another new army.Actually I disagree with that, there have been GW people quoted (if correctly quoted of course) that their new army will appeal to older players due to nostalgia. Nostalgia creates an instant bond with players, whereas something completely new they have extra work to do.
The record has shown that GW is more likely to try new ideas than trying to ressurrect dead ideas that have failed and been discarded.Instances in the past are not a cast iron guarantee of what will always happen in the future.
And make no mistake, that they have allowed the Ravening Hordes list to be tournament legal for a decade as an apology for having produced a model line and then totally discarded it is not solid proof that they intended to ever start the range again FROM SCRATCH.You are right, it's no proof at all. But then it's no proof of anything really...?
The role that Chaos Dwarfs might be permanently subject to is that of the Hellcannon crew and maybe being crew for other WoC warmachines in the future.'Might'. No chance. Well, they could be crew for something in addition to having their own list actually (like a DoW style rule).
Hobgoblyn:
You presumeyou know too much Thommy, those are NOT 5th edition models, those are Dogs of War models that they are still producing when they dropped the majority of that line.
The important thing to understand is that GW is still making and selling Halfling models. The only Chaos Dwarf models it makes and sells are for a Rare Choice in the Warriors of Chaos book which says nothing more than Chaos Dwarfs are to be relegated to the status of a Rare Choice in the Warriors of Chaos army. Which puts them on equal standing as the Trolls or Treemen.
And you also presume that because you can find a couple staffers at GW or Forgeworld who say that they would like to do Chaos Dwarfs that they are their #1 priority.
Did you ever ask them
“Would you like to create a Cathayan army?”
“Would you like to create an Aquatic/Fishmen army?”
“Would you like to create a Halfling army?”
“Would you like to create an Ind army?”
“Would you like to create a Hobgoblin army?”
“Would you like to create an Araby army?”
“Would you like to create a Nippon army?”
"Would you like to create an updated Kislev army?"
No. I am quite certain you haven’t.
Because you ASSUME that their answer to all of these is "No, I would not want to do that in 10 million years! I have absolutely no ideas about that concept, nor can I imagine what they could possibly look like and I’d really hate to see any company producing models with those themes, especially ours! Furthermore, I say with absolute authority that no one in the world would ever play such an army, so I hereby declare we will never consider putting even half a thought towards any sort of creative venture towards that theme. All we here at GW/Forgeworld care about is Chaos Dwarfs! Ch-aos Dwarfs! Cha-os Dwarfs! Cha-os Dwarfs! We think about it all day every day and have wet dreams about it at night and we are just waiting for any opportunity that is presented to us to jump onto launching this project!"
Show me the replies from the people at GW or Forgeworld in this spirit. Because all the “positive” responses you have gotten from GW and Forgeworld about Chaos Dwarfs has been sort of the vague “Oh, we’d love to do them in the future, we’ve got plenty of ideas and we even have designs for some sculpts but we’ve been so busy…” Which, really, I imagine you’d get roughly the same response if you asked them about ANY of those possibilities.
I’m sure they have doodled sketches of Chaos Dwarfs. They’ve also probably doodled sketches of Chinese warriors facing down Mongolian ogres and hobgoblins. Doesn’t mean a thing if their sales and investors are having them revise the core rules and the same 4 army books every 3-4 years instead of asking them to churn out new products and ideas.
Grimstonefire:
Did you ever ask themI don't know if that was meant for Thommy, but if it's intended for me you asked the wrong person, as I have actually asked Mark Bedford about these ones. :)
"Would you like to create a Cathayan army?"
"Would you like to create an Ind army?"
"Would you like to create a Nippon army?"
No. I am quite certain you haven't.
Hobgoblyn
The reply was basically that they would like to do these at some point, which coming from him is more or less a yes (but still not a guarantee). The cathayans are a given, as I know there are greens already. Just not sure when.
I would say you really need to have some hope Hobgoblyn that they will be coming out. Hoping for any other army in the next 18 months is probably not wise. I'm not going to convince you I know.
Thommy H:
You presumeyou know too much Thommy, those are NOT 5th edition models, those are Dogs of War models that they are still producing when they dropped the majority of that line.Lumpin Croop and his Fighting Cocks were released during 5th Edition. They weren't in the original Dogs of War Armies book (released 1998) but were given rules in a later edition of White Dwarf (230 - the one with the Chaos Space Marine on the front, because their 3rd Edition Codex was released that month. It had a good battle report: Paul Sawyer's White Scars against Graham Davey's Black Legion) and their figures were released the same month. When 6th Edition rolled around, Dogs of War were given rules in White Dwarf 252 (January 2001), which included some for Lumpin Croop and friends. That's the last time they had rules, and the models were never updated. The Hot Pot is even older (last rules in White Dwarf 251, model much older). They might have a claim to being more "current" than the original Chaos Dwarf models, but there's no way in hell they can come close to being on the same level as the Hellcannon which is actually part of a current, fully supported army.
And you also presume that because you can find a couple staffers at GW or Forgeworld who say that they would like to do Chaos Dwarfs that they are their #1 priority.If you'd like to find where I said anything of the sort, I'd be happy to read it. I've never "found a couple of staffers" of anything, nor would I twist whatever they might have said to suggest that Chaos Dwarfs are a "#1 priority". I've never said that, nor do I believe that. I just think your arguments are nonsensical, and based on fallacies and misinformation.
Perhaps you need to step away and re-examine some of what you're saying. Much of your last post was based on distorting the arguments of your opponents into clear absurdities - a classic strawman tactic - and all you're doing is inciting vitriol from the rest of us. If you want an actual debate about whether we're ever likely to see Chaos Dwarfs again then claiming people are saying things they aren't and exaggerating their comments into raging tirades is not the way to do it.
Hobgoblyn:
Well, there you go then. How exactly am I wrong in saying that if GW is going to do another army, Cathayans are equally or more likely to be the one that gets produced than a Chaos Dwarf army?Did you ever ask themI don't know if that was meant for Thommy, but if it's intended for me you asked the wrong person, as I have actually asked Mark Bedford about these ones. :)
"Would you like to create a Cathayan army?"
"Would you like to create an Ind army?"
"Would you like to create a Nippon army?"
No. I am quite certain you haven't.
Hobgoblyn
The reply was basically that they would like to do these at some point, which coming from him is more or less a yes (but still not a guarantee). The cathayans are a given, as I know there are greens already. Just not sure when.
I would say you really need to have some hope Hobgoblyn that they will be coming out. Hoping for any other army in the next 18 months is probably not wise. I'm not going to convince you I know.
Grimstonefire
If they've already sculpted a number of the models, if they are showing real interest, when they actually did a showcase a couple years ago where they showed an entire Cathayan army designed to fit in Brettonian rules... that all shows progress in that direction.
This is why I said there are really only two options
1) You are in favor of WarHammer expanding and you sort of open the flood gates to ideas and eventually CD spills out along with a number of other things
2) You close the floodgates, decide GW has produced too much and begin shrinking the model range.
Because saying that they should add 1 and only 1 army to the game, that army isn't going to be Chaos Dwarfs. They tried them a decade ago, they didn't work out and thus got shifted back in the que behind Dogs of War, Ogre Kingdoms, and likely Cathay and maybe something else too. GW has been kind and left some rules for you to play using old models, perhaps because they know you can buy new models and convert them (which means buying much more than you need now that GW doesn't do Bitz any more).
Right now the only chance there is you'll see more Chaos Dwarfs is that they might add another Chaos Dwarf unit when they revise Warriors of Chaos again in a couple years. But you aren't going to be seeing them as a full-fledged, fully supported army before nor to the exclusion of some of the other ideas that GW has.
Thommy H:
This is why I said there are really only two optionsTau. Ogre Kingdoms. By your logic, neither of those armies could ever have come into existence. You're presenting a false dichotomy: why can't they just pick one of the good ideas? Why is it "use every single good idea" or "use no ideas at all"? If presented with a number of equally valid options, you can just flip a coin or otherwise pick one at random. You don't have to sit there staring at both of them forever.
1) You are in favor of WarHammer expanding and you sort of open the flood gates to ideas and eventually CD spills out along with a number of other things
2) You close the floodgates, decide GW has produced too much and begin shrinking the model range.
Grimstonefire:
Because saying that they should add 1 and only 1 army to the game, that army isn't going to be Chaos Dwarfs.I never actually said that (in this thread at least) but I totally agree with you on that. GW studio imo will stick to the current armies for the foreseeable.
FW will hopefully release Chaos Dwarfs AND Cathay, Kislev, Ind, Nippon etc.
But you aren't going to be seeing them as a full-fledged, fully supported army before nor to the exclusion of some of the other ideas that GW has.Depends which side you are talking about. GW studio you could be right, FW I believe you wrong.
I have not read any rumours posted on forums that 'Chaos Dwarf greens' have been spotted, and I have been keeping a very close eye on things ;). That is not to say they don't exist, simply that it has not been posted either way yet.
Tarrakk Blackhand:
Hobgoblyn,
There are some major points not to be missed about Chaos Dwarfs that none of the other smaller armies had.
First off, CD’s have been a major (Although minor) part of the Warhammer world since 3rd edition. Back then, the figures were more “Random” in apperance. I’m not too sure if they had a rule set, but they were still part of the Warhammer world.
CD’s had a rebirth in 5th edition and subsuquently HAD mini’s and and a “Rule Book” which was a compilation book from numerous White Dwarf publications. This book and those figures made the CD’s into a playable army that had a lasting foundation in the Warhammer world.
Although the CD’s didn’t have an “official” book for 6th edition, the fact that they had a revamped army list in Ravening Hordes brought out the point that they were still valid enough for Games Workshop to keep around.
Did you ever ask themThese armies listed above were never much of a seporate army like the Chaos Dwarfs were. The 20 or so models of Kislev were “Russian” extensions of Empire, as Nippon, Cathay and Araby were to their respective countries. The Halflings were supplimentary warriors for hire that fell somewhere between Dwarfs and Empire, and the Aquamen were just an idea from 3rd that didn’t get anywhere. Each of these sets got some small rules in Ravening Hordes, but they were designed to just add “flavour” to your existing army.
“Would you like to create a Cathayan army?”
“Would you like to create an Aquatic/Fishmen army?”
“Would you like to create a Halfling army?”
“Would you like to create an Ind army?”
“Would you like to create a Hobgoblin army?”
“Would you like to create an Araby army?”
“Would you like to create a Nippon army?”
“Would you like to create an updated Kislev army?”
hobgoblyn
Chaos Dwarfs WERE an army on their own!
With this in mind, Games Workshop brought the Chaos Dwarfs into 7th edition by mentioning them in 3 or 4 rule books AND making the Hellcannon a model for Chaos.
All it would take for GW to bring back CD’s is to take the “Rule Book” fluff from those older White Dwarf articles and the updated RH list and some more models and it would be right out there.
Hobgoblyn, I see your point about an Asian army in today’s world as being popular, but what dynamics could you give them so that they aren’t just an Asian copy of Empire or Britonia? GW would have to start from scratch with design, etc. For CD’s, they already have the foundation, lore and nomenclature to re-release CD’s. In fact, they still want to hold onto them. It’s just a matter of releasing them that’s the question.
Hobgoblyn:
Maybe it is you who do not understand what I am saying.This is why I said there are really only two optionsTau. Ogre Kingdoms. By your logic, neither of those armies could ever have come into existence. You're presenting a false dichotomy: why can't they just pick one of the good ideas? Why is it "use every single good idea" or "use no ideas at all"? If presented with a number of equally valid options, you can just flip a coin or otherwise pick one at random. You don't have to sit there staring at both of them forever.
1) You are in favor of WarHammer expanding and you sort of open the flood gates to ideas and eventually CD spills out along with a number of other things
2) You close the floodgates, decide GW has produced too much and begin shrinking the model range.
Thommy H
If GW was so desperately dying to revisit CDs to the exclusion of all other ideas and absolutely refused to consider any other ideas at all... why does the Ogre Kingdoms book exist?
If they were all so serious about creating CDs again, why did they create a brand new army and model line? They could have kept making their old CD models, released a few new ones and made a new army book. And you seem to be claiming, unless I misunderstand, that Chaos Dwarfs are their #1 priority above and beyond all other ideas.
My arguement is that they tried CDs, didn't like how it turned out and therefore pushed it down the list. The reason you'd have to have all the other ideas is because they are going to be doing other ideas BEFORE they do Chaos Dwarfs.
When Cathay gets released and the CD revision gets "pushed back" again, are you going to cry and scream and rant and rave claiming that you nor anyone else could imaginably have see this coming?
Creating CD at this point means creating a new army from scratch. If GW is going to create a brand new army from scratch they are going to go with the ones that HAVEN'T already been tried with miserably results, they are going to go with the ideas they think can bring in new players-- not the ones that are nostalgic for something that existed over a decade ago and yet have been playing the game perfectly contently since that time.
Chinese Fuedal Warriors? Samurai? Tiger-men, Monkey-men and Snake-people?
Those are likely to bring in new players hooked on EverQuest, WarCraft, Magic: The Gathering and D&D and looking for something new but similar not offered there. Those would actually have half a shot at revitalizing the game.
So if Chaos Dwarfs are going to be done as a unique, supported army again then you need to stand in line behind the ideas that haven't been tried and are likely to sell better. So only once other ideas are out will or should CD be revisited as anything more than expansion units of Warriors of Chaos.
And I'm not saying CD are necessarily at the bottom of the 6-7 ideas I can come up with that are mentioned in the stories, but not fieldable as armies. They are higher than my favorite, I've no problem stating that straight out. And I'm not saying it is a crap idea that no one likes, that's obviously not the case. But GW's goal should be to get new players into the game, so bringing stuff out that would have the highest appeal amongst nonplayers is the winning strategy... I could be greatly mistaken, but I just don't see a huge amount of 'evil dwarf' concept in other places in pop culture that would suggest to me that it is a runaway hit.
So here's the idea when you are in a line-- the faster that line moves, the faster those ahead of you are served, the faster you are served (and subsequently, the faster those behind you are served). But if the line doesn't move, if they close down the line then no one in line gets served-- in fact, they might stop serving the people they are serving right now.
Now, I know you'd prefer that everyone else in line simply go to hell, to immediately be at the front and have no one but you served... or at least cut in line. I don't think there's ever been anyone in a que who hasn't had that thought at one time. But that's not the way one works.
It's not a perfect analogy, but perhaps you can get the idea.
Swissdictator:
Whoah people, let’s relax and not get angry… maybe we should all take a break from this for a bit?
Tarrakk Blackhand:
There’s one idea I’m getting…It’s quite a loud message in fact!
On a different note, is there a web site like ours for Cathay, Hobgoblyn, Aquatic/Fishmen, Halflings, Ind, Fimir, Araby, Nipon or Kislev like there is for CD’s?
Hobgoblyn:
Hobgoblyn, I see your point about an Asian army in today's world as being popular, but what dynamics could you give them so that they aren't just an Asian copy of Empire or Britonia? GW would have to start from scratch with design, etc. For CD's, they already have the foundation, lore and nomenclature to re-release CD's. In fact, they still want to hold onto them. It's just a matter of releasing them that's the question.What's the difference between Ultra Marines, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Black Templar, Gray Knights, and Sisters of Battle?
Tarrakk Blackhand
Aren't those all exactly the same thing (with the minor distinction of the last one being female)?
Yet every single one of those has its own army book and, to some extent, its own army line. And you know what the popular favorite is for the next 40K army? Deathwatch.
Why do you think WarHammer: Fantasy must contain exclusively armies that play massively, dramatically, incomparibly different?
The question is, will it sell? Will it sell better than CD? Are they already underway creating Cathay?
Answer to all of these is "yes".
And maybe people who already play Empire or Brettonia will look at them and say that it doesn't play any different than the one they are playing right now save for a few minor tweaks. In that case we can expect Cathay, Nippon or Araby to "only" be as popular amongst those players as Space Wolves, Black Templars, Gray Knights and Sisters of Battle are amongst vanilla Space Marine players.
And to those who don't play a human army because they don't like either of the two existing ones or who look at WarHammer and don't see an army they like amongst the central Euro-centric theme? Well, now they'd have something.
And you know what the most ludicrously funny part about this arguement against is? If it plays quite similar to Empire and Brettonia, it makes it SO much easier to make a balanced book and for the book to as few random, confusing, contradictory rules as possible.
Saying that you can't have an army that plays remotely like an existing army isn't much different from saying you don't want the game to be balanced. But where does the real sales come from? It comes from selling models and if GW can create a line of hot selling models, why should they pass that up simply because those models would lend themselves to playing similarly to models they already produce?
Grimstonefire:
Ahh, I see
If they were all so serious about creating CDs again, why did they create a brand new army and model line? They could have kept making their old CD models, released a few new ones and made a new army book. And you seem to be claiming, unless I misunderstand, that Chaos Dwarfs are their #1 priority above and beyond all other ideas.You did misunderstand (presuming it was me you were referring to with the priority thing as I think I brought it up).
They were definately not their priority for many years. Infact they were forgotten since RH. They are now FW #1 priority, not GW studio. Yes, above all other ideas. They will not be the last army FW create, that I promise you.
Seeing as I think you are referring to this you might as well reply to me rather than Thommy again
Thommy H:
Before I begin: I’m the first to play devil’s advocate for GW when the “will Chaos Dwarfs get a new book/models?” debate comes up because I genuinely don’t think it’ll happen any time soon and, if it ever does happen, it won’t be because of anything we here do. It’ll be because they perceive a market for a new army, and nothing more. So I’m not sitting here thinking Chaos Dwarfs are definitely going to be done, I’m not even certain they should be done, and I certainly don’t think it should happen at the expense of another army - current or potential - so stop putting words in my mouth.
But I need target practice. This is an exercise in debate. Point by point:
If GW was so desperately dying to revisit CDs to the exclusion of all other ideas and absolutely refused to consider any other ideas at all… why does the Ogre Kingdoms book exist?No one said they were anything of the sort. Quite apart from the fact that Ogre Kingdoms were released some years ago now, so they’re hardly relevant to this debate. I don’t think they’re “desperate to revisit Chaos Dwarfs”, but if they were the existence of an army that is, by now, well established, would be neither here not there.
If they were all so serious about creating CDs again, why did they create a brand new army and model line? They could have kept making their old CD models, released a few new ones and made a new army book. And you seem to be claiming, unless I misunderstand, that Chaos Dwarfs are their #1 priority above and beyond all other ideas.You do misunderstand. Repeatedly. Ad infinitum. Ad neausem. Even though I never said that, and I’ve told you I never said that several times.
My arguement is that they tried CDs, didn’t like how it turned out and therefore pushed it down the list. The reason you’d have to have all the other ideas is because they are going to be doing other ideas BEFORE they do Chaos Dwarfs.You have no evidence for that. It’s just an extrapolation based on a false premise. “Armies are made because they are popular” > “Cathay is more popular than Chaos Dwarfs” > “Therefore, you won’t see Chaos Dwarfs until after you see Cathay.” The first step is fallacious, because there are other factors to consider than sheer popularity (Ogre Kingdoms and Tau were plucked out of the air, for example) and the second step falls down due to lack of evidence.
When Cathay gets released and the CD revision gets “pushed back” again, are you going to cry and scream and rant and rave claiming that you nor anyone else could imaginably have see this coming?I’m not doing that now, and I doubt I’d do it if that incredibly unlikely scenario were to occur. Strawman again.
Creating CD at this point means creating a new army from scratch. If GW is going to create a brand new army from scratch they are going to go with the ones that HAVEN’T already been tried with miserably results, they are going to go with the ideas they think can bring in new players-- not the ones that are nostalgic for something that existed over a decade ago and yet have been playing the game perfectly contently since that time.Why is nostalgia any less valid that novelty? You earlier implied that the only factor worth considering was popularity and potential sales - indeed, your entire argument hinges on that - yet now you seem to be saying that popularity achieved via nostalgia somehow “doesn’t count”. Everything else is just your opinion: there’s no evidence that any of those untried concepts would be more popular than an army that was successful enough to spawn this very forum at least.
Chinese Fuedal Warriors? Samurai? Tiger-men, Monkey-men and Snake-people?
Those are likely to bring in new players hooked on EverQuest, WarCraft, Magic: The Gathering and D&D and looking for something new but similar not offered there. Those would actually have half a shot at revitalizing the game.
So if Chaos Dwarfs are going to be done as a unique, supported army again then you need to stand in line behind the ideas that haven’t been tried and are likely to sell better. So only once other ideas are out will or should CD be revisited as anything more than expansion units of Warriors of Chaos.Again, you have no evidence to suggest that those ideas are even on the drawing board, or that if they were they would necessarily have to be released ahead of Chaos Dwarfs. Once again, you present a false dichotomy: either GW can be creative and make many new armies (of which Chaos Dwarf would be just one), or they can do nothing and sit on their ideas because there’s nothing to chose between any of them. Why can’t they pick one of their good ideas at random, as they did with Ogre Kingdoms and Tau? If they can do that, then Chaos Dwarfs at least have as good a chance as any other of being produced.
Now, I know you’d prefer that everyone else in line simply go to hell, to immediately be at the front and have no one but you servedNo, you don’t know that. Put away your strawman.
It’s not a perfect analogy, but perhaps you can get the idea.Comprehension is not the issue I have with your “argument”.
cornixt:
If they were all so serious about creating CDs again, why did they create a brand new army and model line? They could have kept making their old CD models, released a few new ones and made a new army book. And you seem to be claiming, unless I misunderstand, that Chaos Dwarfs are their #1 priority above and beyond all other ideas.No one has said that.
Hobgoblyn
And still no one has brought up the rumours from last year that were (vaguely) suggested by Harry on Warseer to be loads of new CD models.
Swissdictator:
Again… can we tone it down a bit perhaps? I may have my opinion, but I want it to relax a bit first before I continue…