I love this stage of miniature painting...

... when you finally get to the shading / highlighting bit.

My painting's going very slowly at the moment, mainly due to real life commitments, and I've pretty much resigned myself to not getting the miniatures I want painted done by the time BOYL 2014 comes around.

However I did realise while painting my last batch of orcs that I struggle with enthusiasm at the base coating stage, so this time around I tried changing from my normal routine. Rather than basecoat everything then shade and highlight second, I tried with a couple of chaos warriors doing each main area fully from basecoat to finished, then moving on to the next. It does seem to help with the motivation side of things, even though I'm not sure it makes me any faster. So I think I'll stick with that approach for a while.

I'm not 100% happy with the way these two ended up. The shields especially I think are rather weak, after thinking with my last batch I had done a decent job on shields. And the green armoured guy has a rather heavy handed shading wash, amongst other things.

Other than doing the bases I need to move on to the next pieces now though. I'll come back these along with others of my recent efforts once I can field a useful amount of painted figures. Meanwhile the lesson learned is (surprise) preparation is key - although I'm loath to chop at the figure the green chap needs to lose his shield boss to give me a flat area to work on, whereas his compatriot needs some work to flatten out the join between his shield and the figure.

I've a battle looming in less than a week though, and at least 3 more figures (ideally 5) to get done by then...

More orcs, finally

Hectic real life and occasional lack of motivation have slowed my painting speed to a crawl in recent months, but my next batch of orcs is finally ready (for basing), including the first few of Erny's generous donation.

Their standard bearer isn't done yet (still in The Jar) and I've another 8 to add another day once I've been sidetracked onto some other units.

Amongst the many things I've learned from the Oldhammer forum is that it's OK to have irregular troops still have a unit identity. Hence these chaps are all painted in a variety of muted brows with the occasional touch of reds, and all have the same shield device (although they didn't all get the memo about the white background). The chaps at the left and right ends of the rear rank have kept their original 1980s paint job, except for new sheilds, hence the significantly different skin tones. There's reasonable variation even within the new batch though, so no harm there.

 

Originally my main Boyz unit was the classic Bad Moon tribe with red shield devices, but since this lot have an unhealthy association with a bunch of chaos followers, and with Morrslieb being green like them, I figured a slight colour change was appropriate. They're hence now the Mad Moon tribe (it'll end in tears...).

There's still plenty of room for improvement with my freehand sheilds, but they're getting better. 

Random parenting insight into my hobbies

Inspired by Snicket's vaguely related post about younger relatives and gaming I've finally dusted this off my draft pile... Posts on consecutive days? Whatever next?!

Being somewhat older now than I was when I started playing RPGs, and Warhammer Fantasy Battle a few years after that, I now have children who are themselves (independently) showing an interest in these hobbies. And it's enlightening to consider my own reaction to their interests.

A few years ago (before I'd discovered the Oldhammer movement, perhaps before it even recognisably existed) our eldest boy got into Warhammer 40k. I vaguely mentioned I'd played myself in my youth, and my wife and I saw it as a convenience in terms of buying Christmas presents, but otherwise I didn't express much interest. In hindsight I should have at least involved myself in the painting side of things but was held back by a couple of factors, partly not wanting to encroach on the hobby he shared with his friends but also coloured by my own rejection of the Games Workshop of 20+ years ago. Anyway, after a year or so his interest waned and that was that.

Then several weeks ago our number 3 son (counting in age order only, I hasten to add!) very hesitantly explained that he wanted to play Dungeons and Dragons with his friends, and seemed a bit nonplussed at our casual acceptance of this.

The point (I'm getting to it, honest!) is that, if he'd wanted to play Warhammer rather than D&D, my reaction would be more complex and probably in many ways less supportive. My reason - I'm betting the current edition doesn't contain anything along the lines of "Of course, there is nothing to stop you developing your own world background, or of adapting the background from any book you have read to form the basis for your games" (WFB 3rd edition, Introduction, p9).

Warhammer has always been a sales tool for a miniatures manufacturer, but from what I've seen (although this could be me confirming my own prejudices) modern Warhammer is proscriptive rather than creative, whereas a role playing game can't help but be about creation and imagination.

In the hypothetical scenario where he did want to play Warhammer I could of course espouse the virtues of Oldhammer, but it'd be my eccentricities versus what his peers are playing and the marketing budget of the 800lb gorilla. And (again, from what I've seen) modern Warhammer doesn't even give you the tools to make it up for yourself - for example number 1 son's version of the 40K rulebook is only a third of a rulebook by 2nd edition standards (Combat only, no Battle Magic or Battle Bestiary, and with the points values section of Combat removed).

Hopefully I'd be able to create a small bubble of enlightenment amongst him and his friends, but I'm guessing that (for example) giving gifts of non-GW figures would lead to the same expression of contained disappointment as when, in years gone by, a relative bought him the big console game of the season - but for the wrong console.

Signs you're not painting quickly enough, and some '87 trivia

I finally finished the first 4 troopers of my Boyz regiment for my orc / chaos / hobgoblin / moving-goalposts army (finished in the special sense of no bases or shields yet) and moved on to the next batch. These were undercoated at the same time as the first 4, and now need dusting before they can be painted! I may need to up my pace a bit, as I'm hoping to get these ready for BOYL '14 in August...

Apropos of this, while searching through a pile of semi-discarded RPG stuff I came across a promo flyer for the release of Ravening Hordes in 1987. The offer is for 5 different 2500pt armies: Orcs and goblins, Dwarves, Dark elves, Elves and Norse. The total models involved are -

• Orcs and goblins: 274
• Dwarves: 141
• Dark elves: 123
• Elves: 139
• Norse: 147

I may have chosen poorly!

It's also mildly interesting to me that chaos, which is so closely identified with WFB these days, doesn't merit a mention. Or perhaps they just didn't need promotions to sell chaos figures.

Brand new hobgoblins (sort of)

I'm a big fan of Whiskey Priest's how to Oldhammer initiative which has been taken up enthusiastically by the community on the forum.

While I still covet a fair number of Citadel miniatures that were successfully marketed to me in the late 80s I think it's important to emphasise the gaming as much as the collecting, and to support current manufacturers making some great miniatures at sensible prices. I also like the mindset of finding a miniature you like then working out what rules should represent it on the table, which seems diametrically opposed to the GW marketing message of the last 20-some years of selling the model by making the unit it represents desireable or required.

So, inspired by Aiteal's hobgoblins and zoggin-eck's 'back to the source' approach I took a second look at a number of figures that I'd previously rejected as suitable orcs but which I realised would make fantastic hobgoblins, at least in my view of them (heavily influenced by the 2nd edition Bestiary): scrawnier than orcs, with a distinct eastern / Mongol horde vibe and head hair.

So, over the last couple of weeks I've taken delivery of a number of packages of brand new models - a mixture of Armalion Red Moon orcs (via Ral Partha Europe) and old Grenadier Nihon orcs, eastern hobgoblins and goblins:

And here they are ranked up, with Harboth and a C36 Hobgoblin for size reference:

The Red Moon orcs are a great fit for the older Citadel hobgoblins. I'm not so keen on their hairy arms and legs, so I'm trying to work out how to represent that as furs instead (easy on the arms, might need a bit more work around the feet).

The Nihon orcs are slightly taller and bulkier than I'd have liked, but I'm sure their mates will be glad of some big lads to push to the front rows! The great thing about goblinoids in general is that a bit of size variation is to be expected, so the overall impression is fine. I wouldn't want too many of these in the unit though.

The eastern hobgoblins and goblins are just perfect. Unfortunately, although there are other variations in the range, those are a bit hunched for my taste (a bit of a Nick Lund trademark) so I've limited myself to just three of them.

I'm really looking forward to starting painting these. I need to get the orcs that are front of my queue finished first, then we'll see if my painting can do justice to the models.

Thank you Whiskey Priest for helping me broaden my horizons a little!

Reikland versus reality

I managed to pick up a copy of Death on the Reik last week in decent condition for a very reasonable price, but with one downside. As seems to be common, it was missing the A3 Reikland / Castle Wittgenstein map, which is obviously not ideal.

On the plus side it did make me think rather more about how Reikland should look than I otherwise would have (and perhaps more than is healthy!). It also made me more conscious of an insightful post I read on G+ recently about how geek fans (that'll be me) sometimes loose sight of theme because of over-emphasis on facts. You'll see what I mean in a minute...

Back to the maps - there are lots of useful Reikland maps on the internet, and Gitzman's Gallery collects some of the best ones together. There's a wide variation in what they portray, which is fair enough for a pseudo-16th century setting, but the detail which is bothering me is how densely populated they should be.

Exactly where point A is in relation to point B is fairly irrelevant to the characters on the ground, but what is relevant is if you leave (for example) Bögenhafen on the road to Altdorf and travel for most of the day, how many settlements do you pass? As it gets later do you press on in reasonable expectation of getting to the next town or village?

Going by the map in Shadows Over Bögenhafen (Hogshead version) there are 3 coaching inns and a village between Bögenhafen and Heiligen on the outskirts of Altdorf. The detailed map in Gitzman's Gallery (which I believe is by Andy Law, who knows his WFRP) has 4 coaching inns, two villages and a town on the same route.

This may seem like I'm being pedantic, but hopefully that's not it. The Warhammer Old World, and especially the Empire, is fun because its a bit more modern than the usual fantasy setting, and can give rise to themes that wouldn't work in a more traditional medieval setting. To support the scheming nobles and growing merchant class that we all all know and love you need a certain scale and level of advancement to the place. But that same scale and modernity act against the lonely wildness of parts of the Empire, with beastmen (and worse) lurking in every stretch of forest.

Even the more densely populated maps have plenty of wildness for such things to roam, but I think I rather prefer the "points of light" approach of the older maps, where every settlement of any size in Reikland (Harke, population: 25) can be listed on two sides of A4.

Old world / real world empires

My official excuse for buying dwarves on eBay is to put together the entire forces of the Blood on the Snow scenario from White Dwarf 91. It occured to me that, given reasonably priced old school dwarves are hard to come by (but plenty of manufacturers make compatible humans), my non-orc force could be the human elements from that scenario plus (initially) a few of the dwarves.

I thought I'd look a bit into which period of European history most closely relates to the Warhammer 3rd edition Empire, so as to be able to interpret historical figure manufacturers' catalogues. It's commonly known that Brettonian armies are early medieval and Empire armies are late medieval / renaissance, but what does this mean in terms of dates (or, more importantly, historical wars and hence figure ranges)?
There is clearly some hand-waving involved, however taking Warhammer Armies* as a reference point my guidelines were -

• The dominant infantry weapons are the halberd and crossbow
• Pikes and spears are also in use
• Arquebuses are used but unreliable

According to Wikipedia -

Arquebuses were first used in any significant numbers by the Black Army of Hungary (1458–1494) but this was unusual for the time. They started to come to the fore when pike and shot formations were developed by the Spanish following their defeat at the Battle of Seminara (1495), with the first notable success of this tactic being the Battle of Cerignola (1503). By the Italian War of 1521 these formations were starting to dominate the battlefield. Battles such as the Battle of Ceresole (1544) still have a Warhammer 3rd ed level of technology, but it seems to be that the Empire is earlier than this.

Halberds were a primary infantry weapon during the Burgundian Wars (1474–1477) and Wars of the Roses (1455–1485) - though the English used bills. Pike regiments at the time also incorporated halberds or zweihanders when fighting other infantry but when the role of pikes became primarily protection for gunners the role of halberds declined. The English retained the bill (in conjunction with the longbow) for some time after the pike and arquebus were adopted on the continent, with the Battle of Flodden (1513) being notable amongst other things for being a contest between the two systems.

So where does this leave me? It seems somewhere between about 1470-ish and 1521; perhaps if I had to go for a specific date then 1493, the start of the reign of Maximilian I as Holy Roman Emperor.

I could have reached a very similar conclusion by noting that Wargames Foundry sell their ex-Citadel Empire figures as Wars of the Roses, and that the Perrys have similar ranges both for WotR and European Armies, 1450-1500. However I wouldn't have learned so much in the process, for example why historical Burgandian armies are also a good reference, or why Foundry's gendarmes seem as appropriate as their Renaissance knights as Empire substitutes.

As an interesting aside I came across a useful Brief History of WFRP Time in my search which states that Sigmar's real world equivalent (except without the godhood, obviously) is from around 714-814, which might be an interesting campaign one day.

* For extra old school appeal I could have used Ravening Hordes and the results would have basically been the same. WA is handy though because of the additional illustrations