Tuesday, 30 June 2015

Are Pre-slotta Minatures Crap?


A rather rushed snapsnot of my entire (bar the painted pieces) pre-slotta Citadel collection. But is the stuff WORTH collecting?
Good evening (well, it is as I type) and welcome back to the Realm of Chaos 80s blog. Services have been erratic at best over the last two months for a variety of reasons. By and large, the pressures of my job (its been really tough) have left me with little or no time to Oldhammer. 

Thankfully, the end is now very much in sight and my weekends are once again my own. The miniature desk has lain in dormancy and is little more than a dust-covered shell of its former self. But soon (Saturday morning I hope) paint will once again splash across the leaded brilliance of old school miniatures. And with just a month to go to BOYL 3 (or the Oldhammer Weekend 3 if you are that way inclined) I better pull my finger out if I am going to get the first stage of my McDeath project completed. 

My first ever pre-slotta model. A troglodyte if memory serves and a bugger to paint. It wasn't an experience that raised my appreciation of them in any way.
In the short term, I want to discuss pre-slotta. This post has been remained rather embryonic for a while and was initially inspired by two things. The first was a fellow collector who is conversation stated that 'pre-slotta was all crap and not worth collecting' and the second was the few pre-slotta pieces that I bought as part of my McDeath project. If honesty is the best policy, I will point out here that in the not too distant past I would have heartily agreed with that collector. Even before the Oldhammer Era, I would pass over pre-slotta miniatures as a matter of fact when cruising eBay for classic figures. They were cheap, they were cheerful and they were naff...

Of course, I was aware that there were passionate collectors out there. But my heart told me they were fools and that the Realm of Chaos era stuff was the best Citadel ever put out. 

But time mellows the fire, and I have found my opinions have changed. Pre-slotta is not something to be dismissed as an irrelevance and chucked out once torn from the brown paper package. There are undiscovered gems among their ranks, as the following miniature illustrates perfectly.

The perfect paint-job? I think so.
My interest in pre-slotta took a u-turn once I had this model in my collection. To begin with, I wasn't much impressed. The lump of lead I held in my hand was just as indistinct as the image to be found of the model on the McDeath handout from 1986, its features a hazy mash of nearly thirty years of grime. But within an hour of its immersion within the miraculous Dettol, a revelation was brought forth on the end of a bent fork. For with a little light brushwork, and a squirt of Fairy Liquid, the incredible character of the model was brought back into the light. After all, no really clear image of the model was available online for me to ponder before, so the sight of so much detail was a real boon. 

I like to think it was that joy of discovery that inspired my hand to produce such a great paint-job and I have said before that Brooben is some of my finest work to date.

So what are your feelings about the range? Of course, I appreciate that there will be fans of these models out there. Nostalgia will always play a big part in scenes such as ours, and those half-forgotten emotions of yesteryear return quickly as we handle models we knew in our youth. My friend Stuart is one such collector, and being slightly older to me, really appreciates our solid based friends as being of 'his era.'

But are there any other fans of the pre-slotta out there? Or does the slotta based miniature hold dominance over the Oldhammer Community? Are these solid based figures really as crap as some believe?

Of course, it is largely all a matter of opinion, isn't it?. A 'good miniature' is going to vary from wargamer to wargamer. One man's Nagash is another man's Striking Scorpion after all. But do pre-slotta miniatures deserve their reputation for being squat, poorly made and lacking in detail ?

Before you answer this question, I will leave you with a couple of images in regards to pre-slotta models. Perhaps they will help you consider?





54 comments:

  1. http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7iwzh0BUQ1r1g40zo1_500.jpg

    http://thecitadelcollector.co.uk/zen/cache/john-blanche/asgard/Image-049_595.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah yes, Steve Casey's photographs of some classic Blanche stuff. These models are iconic - especially when you consider they were painted with enamels- and can be studied for hours. I have been lucky enough to handle some of John's early miniatures and they are bizarre (in a good way) and almost unearthly. I feel that appreciation of his impact on miniature painting and fantasy wargaming generally has been lost in recent decades. Love or loath his style, he is a giant and we all tread in his footsteps.

      Delete
  2. As you have mentioned I think there are some real gems in the Pre-slotta world and if you look for them they will be well worth the hunt. But in general I have no need to start collecting a new set of figures so they are very low on my priority list...and as I like slotta bases...for the few minis that made the transition I would much rather have the slotta version than the Pre-. But as you have said it all come down to ones own opinion.

    Good to have you back in the blogosphere!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice to see you here again Blue.

      As you say, pre-slotta is an opinion thing. Any wargaming figure is an opinion thing, but I think its important to consider models on an individual basis rather than a knee-jerk 'its too old' or 'its too new' approach. By and large, I collect what I like and also what I need for the games I play and what to play in the future. I focus on Citadel, so select my pieces from its length history. But I don't quibble other players if they want to use a model from a different range or manufacturer. Its idiotic! Now, if we were talking metal vs plastic - I may have some stronger opinions! (;

      Delete
  3. I'm generally of the opinion that the quality control threshold for most of the preslotta era was *far* lower than after the change to slottabases. There is some absolute chod out there, that I've genuinely thought 'what the hell is that even meant to *be*?' before binning it, as it was less hassle than wasting a trip to the post office for a 99p sale on eBay.

    Having said that, there are some diamonds amongst the turds. I recently picked up the complete Amazons range, for example, but preslotta is generally a step too far back in time for me, personally.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I have said, I dabble in the pre-slotta stuff as 'my era' was more 1987-91. You are quite right to talk diamonds and turds but you could say that of some of the slotta ranges. I have bought some chaos warriors in my time that I just cannot paint, largely due to the symptom you describe - 'what is that lump supposed to be?' Some classic figures also have this affect on me, I mean what on earth is supposed to be on the top of Een McWrecker's hat?

      Nice to hear from you Evo, as always.

      Delete
  4. I am collecting some pre-slotta Citadel figures for my project. I am planning to have som battles between Undeads, Dark Elves, Men and Dwarfs. Maybe a force of Ogres and some Trolls too. So far I have been just, collecting. I think I have about 16 Ogres and they are all worth the pain of tracking them down. Also the Dark Elves but then the early Dwars are scarse and sometimes not so great shape.
    Well, I was thinking of just having pre-slotta ranges but I thnk I have to bring in some slotta based figures too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The more I get to know the pre-slotta range the more I realise that they have a very different feel to the later '80s stuff. They seem more bulky and historical (at least to me) but I like the meaness of the orcs and goblins. They have a gangly evil that is at odds of the more comic look we see post WFB3. I like both representations if I am honest, as these goblinoids here show considerable character beyond a muscular green thug of more modern times. I am surprised that you have managed to amass 16 ogres! I would love to see that painted as a unit and on the table.

      Delete
  5. Not a fan of Pre-slotta other then the HobGoblins, Half Orcs & Chaos Gobbos i'm afraid and I tend to avoid them as they come with problems

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ahhh,could you be referring to the 'lead-rot'? As I look back at the post, I am surprised I didn't mention it before. I have never suffered from it directly. I saved one of Stuart's dragons that exhibited some dodgy looking corruption by cutting out the diseased lead, restoring the detail with green stuff and coating in paint. That was nearly a year ago I haven't seen a problem yet! Time will tell here I suspect.

      Chaos gobbos look fantastic to me, though I have never managed to get my hands on any.

      Delete
  6. Interesting post , as I only really collect pre-slotta stuff. For me Citadel took a serious downward turn when it converted to the C series with more than one figure per code so it was impossible to order specific miniatures. This was then followed by a change in style to grotesque cartoony faces and plastic bases. I did persevere and collect the Elric figures, but after that most of the offerings did not appeal. So late 1983 is about the cut off date for my collecting (the Lord of the Rings range sucked). There are still masses of manufacturers to choose from, many of which I had never heard off back in the day so it's still a voyage of discovery, added to which there is less demand for them so they work out cheap. By the way the cow there is from Irregular Miniatures and still in production, and the Troglodyte is by Tom Meir and about to come back into production with Iron Wind re-releasing of loads of pre-slotta 1970's Ral Partha sculpts soon...bliss.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the information about the cow. I was wondering where it actually came from. The chap I got it from was certain it was Citadel, but wasn't so sure. She will be appearing in my McDeath game so look out for her in a future scenario report. Have you got a link for the Iron Wind range that you describe - I'd like more of those lizard creatures?

      Delete
    2. Here we are Orlygg. I think a lot of this very interesting discussion is nostalgia driven. I'm 47, started with D&D, and then gaping at tiny black and white pictures of Joe Dever's pre-Warhammer battles in WD wishing I could afford all those figures with the fiver I got for a paper round. By the time slotta-bases and style changes were coming in with Citadel I was starting to think about ale and wenches so had less interest in the (lead) figures. Ral Partha/Iron wind are re-launching some of the CS series elves and goblins and I challenge any anti-solid baser to find much at fault with these 1979 sculpts. Link to the funded kickstarter here
      https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1050509756/ral-parthas-chaos-wars
      . The elves and goblins are coming first , but I hear tell they are going to re-release the troglodytes Tom sculpted for Citadel. With luck they might release the Fantasy Tribe trolls!

      Delete
    3. Its clear that there is a growing (albeit, niche) market for 'old style' miniatures and re-releases of old favourites. Crowdfunding certainly helps in this regard too. I am pleased to see those old models back and you are quite right when you state that, though they are from 1979, they are still decent sculpts. As has been said elsewhere. The age or period of the model is by and large, irrelevant - its the 'feel' that holding (or in some cases, gazing at rather crappy black and white shots of them) instill in us on a personal level that counts.

      Thank you for those links.

      Delete
    4. Getting more like a forum here. I seem to remember many odd characters in the fluff of out Prehammer games (used to use WRG Renaissance rules) , and the figures were injected with just as much personality and legend as newer sculpts. I'm only buying pre-1983 stuff now unless the figures are really cheap for use in my Skinthammer armies. It's all good fun whatever.

      Delete
  7. Love, love, love pre-slotta figures. I am collecting the Fiend Factory range 99p at a time.

    Had an interesting chat with Bryan Ansell about the production of them and the almost infinite varieties that would have been pumped out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Jelly....any FF bods you are missing...I may have some duplicates.

      Delete
    2. Fiend Factory? Until recently, I couldn't have told you a thing about them. Researching the ranges now have left me with a feeling that I 'wished I was there' when those models were first introduced to the world. They are weird, wacky and wonderful but rather crude. A bit like me, so says the wife!

      Delete
    3. Check out the short lived Weird Fantasy range if you don't know it.... overladen adventurers, spaced out druids and aardvarks.

      Delete
    4. Ah, yes the Aardvarks. We have Tim 'Robin Hood' Pollard to thank for them. Or was that the armadillos?

      Delete
    5. I love researching and collecting the stranger and more obscure ranges like Fiend Factory and Weird Fantasy. It appeals to the archaeological side of me!

      Springinsfeld - yes I am. You can contact me at Robert dot Arcangeli at gmail dot com

      Delete
    6. A ha! Another acheaologist! I have found through my travels in Oldhammer that we seem to fit into a select few occupations. Archaeologist, teacher or historian. Funnily enough, I have been all of these in my life so far! As you have said, many of those passions can be applied to the world of 1980s (and 70s) fantasy table top gaming, and indeed, this blog exists because research and aquisition are part of my nature!

      Delete
    7. (I need to put my anorak on before I write this): Robert, the "infinite varieties" that Bryan mentioned would have referred to the Fantasy Tribes ranges, not the Fiend Factory. Even if Bryan specifically said "Fiend Factory", he was mistaken... :-)

      Delete
    8. Whoops I did mean to say varieties in the Tribes range! My slip there :)

      Delete
  8. I have mostly slotta's in my collection (esp. 3rd edition era), but did pick up a few pre-slotta's (monsters, such as the Balrog and Elementals shown) during that era as well. I perhaps have less than a dozen, with the occasional Runequest figures thrown in.

    I do think there's a difference in appeal if you make abstraction form the personal nostalgia value. In my mind, pre-slotta still is very tied in to fantasy roleplaying (AD&D, the Ral Partha figures sold by Citadel etc.), while slotta figures are mostly associated with the mass battle game. Hence, the background and intended purpose for these figures was quite different, and that might also spill over to present day collectors.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Phil's comment here gets to the heart of the matter for Citadel especially. The Fantasy Tribe orcs and hobgoblins in particular were much more "every day" - they could be defending their village, out on a hunting party, or whatever, much more suitable for roleplaying, warbands, or whatever. Later ones, while often having stacks of personality, were really only usable as warriors in a battle - you'd no longer see them in cloaks, carrying packs, or in fact anything other than quivers, weapons and shields.

      Equally the beastmen became very samey, while becoming much higher quality as sculpts (with some of the pre-slottas you really have to work when painting them to decide what a particular blob is meant to be).

      There's also definite nostalgia at play - I used to own the same Balrog as shown in your photo. Part of me wants to get my hands on one again one day, part of me acknowledges that it's actually a very flat, boring figure and there are lots of better options available should I ever need a fire demon.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for highlighting this Phil and Paul. You know, it wasn't something that I noticed until you mentioned it. The early Citadel stuff is very character based and 'roleplayingy' to coin a word. There is much more of a rank and file approach to the slotta stuff in their production style - but they are still right buggers to actually line up!! I shall certainly look at many of the pre-slotta models in a different light for now on!

      Delete
  9. depends on the range really. Some of the pre slotta demon figures are great as are the hobgoblins, samurai and half orcs. But others are pretty average. The scale (especially hands, feet heads and weapons) differs too which appeals to some (fans of a more realistic scale) and not others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I strongly dislike the overblown scale of some of the later, Marauder style stuff. Big hands, big heads and silly weapons. One of the appeals of the pre-slotta models, for me at least, is that they tie in with my own opinion of what a 'good fantasy Warhammer figure' should look like. Basically, for fantasy to 'work' its fantastical elements need to be rooted in reality. With their essence on 'character' aka in a roleplay game (thanks again Phil and Paul) rather than trooper in an army they somehow seem more realistic. Kinda hard for me to put into words, and I hope you catch my drift.

      Delete
    2. I would agree that it is range dependent. I particularly like the Nick Lund Hobgoblins and Ogres that Citadel produced once they had bought the Chronicle line which I think look pretty decent to this day and have a lot of "heft". Having said that, the Black Orcs and Kobbolds looked pretty crude as does quite a lot of Citadel's earlier stuff, although again some of the early rather generic chaos warriors together with some of their dwarves, undead and FRPG "characters" are still worth getting. I suspect that Grenadier and Ral Partha models of the same era are better overall and many of these appear still to be available.

      Delete
    3. I really like Nick Lund's Chronicle/Citadel wolfriders. They're not *technically* excellent, sculpting-wise, but the poses of the wolves and the overall look is terrific. They have a terrific Tolkienesque aspect, and while the detailing is fairly crude, the "vision" - the stance, the dynamics - is brilliant.

      The kobolds are crude, but they have a lot of charm. The "mutant goblin" from the Death Commandos box set shows what could have been if D&D-style kobolds had made it into Warhammer ...

      Delete
    4. Martin and JC, after reading through your thoughts here I got thinking about how miniatures can be interpreted - by that I mean both slotta and pre-slotta. Could they be considered art? If so (and I really do believe they can be) then they can also be evaluated more seriously, beyond 'look at them toy soldiers'. For me, satisfying an aesthetic requirement in essential for anything be deemed 'art' and (at least for me) many of the single sculpted minis from the '80s, inlcuding the pre-slotta stuff do this in spades. Ultimately, they were designed as a single casting by a skilled artisan (who many or may not be defined as an artist) who created the character we all appreciate to this day. I feel that this sense of character, of form, pose and shape is utterly lacking in a plastic kit. So despite being crude in their sculpting, as you describe the kobolds JC, or the 'heft' of the Chronicle hobgoblins Martin, they are still much more worthy than the souless plastic pieces available today.

      Delete
  10. I generally prefer pre-slotta miniatures. It's worth noting that in many cases, the quality is identical - some figures were converted to slotta bases, and others spanned the divide: the McDeath-era orcs mix seamlessly with the C15 armoured orcs, for example, and share the occasional head or body. And the same is true for Aly Morrison's hobgoblins and half-orcs. It's those early slotta-base figures that I like; thereafter, they become much too cartoony and steroidal. Paul Brown makes a very good point above on how much more character the solid-based Citadel figures had.

    One point on "quality": it seems to me that there are several subdivisions to this. One is "crispness of detail". The slotta figures often win out here; it's usually easy to tell what's what. On the other hand, their detail is often less interesting: compare and contrast pre-slotta (Meier and Perry) trolls with those of the slotta era. There are fewer pigs, human captives and the like among the latter!

    Another is "vision": the overall design of the figure, which could be conveyed in a quick sketch - and in particular its stance. What I mean by this is perhaps best conveyed by looking at a figure like Nick Lund's pointing, masked Chronicle hobgoblin shaman. It's a brilliant design, and that more than makes up for any technical deficiencies in the sculpting. I think pre-slotta figures are often better here: they're bolder and less generic. I'd take Lund or Morrison's hobgoblin shamans over any number of Kev Adams' slottabase orc shamans (the ones with one arm held high and one low). I do like a lot of Kev Adam's stuff, but I think he is or was weaker in this regard than his predecessors (or perhaps just constrained by GW's requirements).

    The third element would be "sculptural quality": less about detail or dynamics, but simply how naturalistically and convincingly the miniatures are put together. And here, I think Perry and Morrison pre-slotta sculpts thrash the opposition soundly (excluding, of course, their own early slotta efforts). Take the likes of Kremlo the Slann or the original Grom: everything that comes after suffers in comparison. Or the armoured orc archer I hastily painted up here:

    http://www.lead-adventure.de/index.php?topic=77384.90

    I think the quality of the Perry sculpt really shows up that of the two slotta-era orcs in the background.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello JC!

      You make some really good points here. Should quality always = 'crispness of detail'? Is this what we want from our models? Personally, I'd exchange a crisp modern model from many manufacturers for a rather battered Asgard or Citadel piece, if those models inspired me to work them up, and later display them or use them in game. I recently picked up some recent plastic kits from GW and a couple of other companies. The 'feeling' just wasn't there for me. Personally, plastic doesn't help. I need the reassurance of the weight of metal in mt hand to give me the sense that what I am holding is substantial and 'real'. This is more so with large creatures - such as my Spined Dragon.

      Delete
  11. And one more example: chaos warriors. None - and I mean none - of the slottabase chaos warriors have surpassed the two great boxed sets of the early 80s. These guys (the second, 1983 set):

    http://solegends.com/citboxes/c2s1chaosw.htm

    And these fellows:

    http://solegends.com/citboxes/c2s3chaosk.htm

    The first slotta-based chaos warriors were OK, if a bit weaker. Thereafter, they become armoured caricatures - OK in their way, but lacking both the sculptural quality and the wonderful Moorcockian variety of the boxed sets.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As others have said, these models are perhaps 'individuals' rather than troopers on the field. The design philosophy of the single cast solid base method also has an impact on how they look. You say Moorcockian and that is a very apt term. I feel that they positively waft of the 1980s. I can see He-Man and Labyrinth in there too. Its a fantasy vibe that was kicking around back then and is evident in other places. The fantasy vibe these days is too influence by computer games I think. I work with children and I have been constantly shocked by so called 'experts'' views (ie salespeople and product designers) about what children want and what they can understand. Yet, they can appreciate Monty on the Run on the C64 and my collection of mid 80s miniatures in a way that those who seek to entertain them in the modern age cannot. Sad.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for those links JC! Just discovered I have a handful of those classics and can now put literal names to them!

      Delete
  12. I've been a fan of the pre-slotta stuff since 1984. I've heard some people describe them as fishing sinkers. I must admit I don't like all of them, though even in the very early FA range there's some great stuff. The old WotR range (later C26 men at arms) by the Perry's are still some of the nicest historical late C15th Europeans you can buy, 33-odd years after they were sculpted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are correct there, and they look wonderful in their present guise as 'solid based' models in the Wargames Foundry. I hope to do a whole human style Imperial army in a year or two using these models.

      Delete
  13. Well I imagine you can guess my view ... whilst as most people would agree there are some un-inspiring lumps of lead out there ... there are also so absolute beauties. If you cherry pick the best handful of the FA, FAC, FF and FT ranges you will end up with a lovely collection of minis ... well worth the time and trouble. Some of them are also a decent size to sit next to some of the later stuff on the table and not look tiny ...so you get to play with them too. :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Harry, its great to see you hear on the blogosphere once again! Your 'Blast from the Past' thread on Warseer is recommended viewing regarding painted pre-slotta. You are, as always, correct about the series you list. And as has been said, there tend to be a few turds in every range.

      Check this out if you haven't seen it before. Beware - its BIG!

      http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?162784-A-blast-from-the-past/page28

      Delete
  14. On the Tom Meier troglodyte: I think these (and his smaller lizardmen) are as good as any lizardmen ever produced. But they (and many of his figures) are a challenge to paint, because the detail is so fine and so easily clogged with paint. But with their sinuous forms and convincingly reptilian aspect, they look marvellous on the tabletop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Convincing aspect needs to be put their by a skilled sculptor. Sadly, many modern figures seem a lot less convincing - though whether this is due to the designers or their respective companies wishes is unknown.

      Delete
  15. Apart from lead rot, dubious quality control, primitive sculpting (yes even the Perrys' early FA range!); high lead content resulting in easily broken and squashed extremities??

    One word, BROO! and all is forgiven.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Broo! Broo! They are truly wonderful things. I was lucky enough to have a close look at some of Bryan Ansell's recently. You can see them in this post if you look closely.

      http://realmofchaos80s.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/the-albion-adventures-oldhammer-at.html

      Delete
  16. I only have a small number of pre-slotta Citadel figures. They weren't as accessible to me as a kid in the US, other than what was available through Ral Partha. I've got mixed opinions and feel that there was a great range of quality and style. I do love the elemental and Meier lizard/trog ranges shown in your photos above!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let us not forget that availability is also a factor here. And as others have already said, pre-slotta is much lesser understood than the 'high-vis' models of the later '80s, though some classics do bleed through. You mention the famous elementals, which were available to relatively recently on the GW website, and they were pre-slotta but I wonder how much of the original range made it to the USA?

      Delete
  17. I wonder how much the fact that there are very few pictures of pre-slottas out there to influence/obsess the average collector affects the popularity and opinion of pre-slotta miniatures? Imagine if White Dwarf regularly included full-coulour, multi-page spreads of beautifully painted pre-slottas in the early and mid-80's? Or if First Edition Warhammer was full of lavish action photos made up of the miniatures from that time period? I think we would be seeing a very different take on "Oldhammer" if that was the case. But that is okay. I love my pre-slottas and I find that whole era very exciting and inspiring.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is a very good point private w. There isn't a huge amount of visual material out there for much of the pre-slotta range beyond a few grainy shots from the early days, the odd colour photo and the old line drawn illustrations of them. When I was researching the colour scheme for Brooben I couldn't even find a decent picture of the miniature itself - let alone one that had been painted! Perhaps, pre-slotta are the secret pleasure of many Oldhammerers?

      Delete
    2. Is that a fanzine I here coming?

      Delete
  18. Well, this post certainly brought us all out of the woodwork didn't it. Clearly there's an interest in pre-slotta which I for one share with you guys. I recently started painting a few of the old C15/16 Orcs and can whole heartedly recommend many of the sculpts. Sure one or two are frankly as you put it, a bit crap, but then how many miniature ranges have an all-star cast? What I find interesting though is that how, with the longer I spend on this hobby the more styles and miniatures I come to appreciate (even where I actively disliked them in the past).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How funny, I had just been gazing over that range as I noticed your comment. I too like the c15/16 orcs, and for me their look best exemplifies the orc of the McDeath era, especially in the artwork. Not that I have managed to score any yet, but as the years go by I certainly shall build up my pre-slotta collection of them. Not in any great amounts, as I am far more likely to cherry pick what I need.

      Delete
  19. Dwarf Kings Court! there were some amazing pre-slotta figures. The ogre gladiator? what about the LizardWarriors boxed set : http://www.solegends.com/citboxes/cp4lizards.htm. The great Spined Dragon, The Chaos Battering Ram.

    Personally I prefer the strangeness of some of the old figures. The miniatures were designed in their own right and were not solely for Warhammer. This meant they had a strange variety to them. Check out some of the awesome pirates among the pre-slotta thieves ranges.

    ReplyDelete