Last post I mentioned that I painted up three models over the last weekend. Having shown you my fairly rushed wizards it is now time to talk about this perky little chap and ponder a little on the range from which he comes - namely the Fighters Range.
Eagle-eyed readers may well notice this model's paint job is a tribute to the one appearing in the WFB Third Edition rulebook. If you are not aware of the model I am talking about here is a handy little picture.
Having always loved the model (and it's painted version) I felt like I had to do a version of my own. In many ways, the simplicity of older models and their colour schemes can be quite refreshing in this age of super-detail and over complicated design. So many modern models groan under the weight of their trappings that they end up a confused and characterless mess.
This fighter (a prototype Reiksgard?) is a near historical model. The armour and weapons are historically plausible designs and of appropriate scale. Sure the sculpting is a little primitive in places but the models seems to leap across the tabletop in an almost joyous abandon, as if auditioning for The Sound of Music!
"The hills are alive with the sound of CHAOS!"
He was easy to paint. Just a black undercoat (which I rarely employ these days) and a good silver drybrush. This was followed with a good ink wash and a second drybrush again with the silver, but with the brightness dulled with a little black. Final highlights were with the brightest silver in my stash. Then I picked out the surcoat with simple blue layering, worked up the belt (which I switched from silver to gold) and picked out the helmet tassels in red and orange.
I did consider using the Arcane Armorial design on the shield but didn't have access to a decent printer at the time, so I did one of my usual basic shields and ensure that it matched tonally with the surcoat. Then it was a case of highlighting up the horns on the helm and the leather pouch at his side.
Once complete, I had one of those moments of reflection. I wondered why I had spent so many years painting orcs, goblins and other gribbly creatures (chaotic or otherwise) and neglected the common man of the Warhammer World? Not only had the paint brush been used too sparingly, but so had my collecting focus. I mean, I cannot say to having ever searched for any models from the Fighters Range. Nor do I see it used much as a search term on eBay or as a listing catch word on Facebook.
Do we as collectors and enthusiasts deem the Fighters Range not worthy of our interest?
If that is the case, then we are missing out of some characterful and engrossing models.
What do you think?
Orlygg
Does anyone remember the Warriors of Law range? I vaguely recall there being a few minis that were marketed as being an opposing faction of Chaos (borrowing heavily from Michael Moorcock, perhaps?).
ReplyDeletehttp://solegends.com/citboxes2/c2s5knights.jpg
ReplyDeleteAnd here they are. Law is mentioned a fair few times here and there in early Warhammer. Bryan has gone on to say that there would have been a Realm of Chaos style book about them. Oh, and the borrowing from Michael Moorcock was very deliberate and was even commented on by GW writers of the era.
I've got a fighter search saved on my ebay account, and the great thing is that it picks up all the races. But I generally look for humans. I've got a few but shy away from painting them because: a. I'm painting shy; b. I'm averse to large areas of metals.
ReplyDeleteI must say I never search for them but seem to have picked up one or two of them through random purchases. Though, I do have a fair few of the barbarian models thanks to my McDeath projects.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnd have you seen the prices on Citadel fighters? Pretty high across the board these days.
ReplyDeleteThat is pretty true across the board. So many comedy prices on eBay for models that regularly sell at auction for much less. GW's own pricing seems to guide some to charge £8-£12 for a single model as that seems to be the going rate from them now.
DeleteThere's so much goodness in that range. The figure above is one of my favourites (wish I had one) and the paint job is outstanding. :D
ReplyDeleteThank you Christian - I now have the urge to paint all of the others on that page too.
DeleteMy aim was to collect all the AHQ minis, but I couldn't withstand the Fighter and Imperial Dwarf range for additional heroes. Those "additional heroes" could form two warbands, now. The fighter range is a kind of archetype of the citadel range for me. I love them.
ReplyDeleteLooking at the range again, I feel they represent the strength of the Citadel line in the 1980s. They are all just so varied and characterful. So many different ideas have been put into form it makes you wonder why such creativity couldn't be maintained.
Deletethey might get less attention because of their historical flavour. Personally I'm a fan of the range and have painted a few up for my Bretonnian/KoW army. The original dogs of war range is pretty cool too and like the fighter range is based largely on historical armies which I like. Especially the landsknecht inspired figures
ReplyDeleteYou may well have hit the nail with that idea Nathan. Fantasy has become more fantastic as the years have gone by until any semblance of normality has been eroded away. For me, the historical references in so many of the '80s Citadel range is essential to creating a coherent fantasy world. With out a direct link to something tangible- the fantasy just looks a mess. Much like the current Age of Sigmar range if you ask me.
DeleteThe first Citadel Miniatures I ever bought were 2 Fighters and a Thief, I've seen the thief a couple of times on ebay for around £15 but I've never seen the fighters.
ReplyDelete"I wondered why I had spent so many years painting orcs, goblins and other gribbly creatures (chaotic or otherwise) and neglected the common man of the Warhammer World?"
Amen to that brother.
Back in the day I painted swarms of Orcs, armies of Dwarfs, hosts of Elves and every stripe of the hordes of Chaos, bar 60 or so Vikings (Oh Lord deliver us from the fury of the Northmen)
I never bothered with the armies of men. Personally I think it was because men didn’t get proper cultural identity, until the late 80’s early 90’s when the background for The Empire and Bretonian start to emerge. Before then we had heard of The Empire and Bretonian as well as Carthy, Nippon, Araby and Estellia et al but they didn’t have any background fluff, they were just ideas, whereas Elves, Dwarfs etc had Tolken.
As well as the above, the concept of army building didn’t really start until 3rd Ed, and Men suffered badly as a bunch of Orcs, Dwarfs whatever could just be grouped together to form units where it was a difficult to build an army with Men, with the different cultural origins and anachronistic weapons and armour of the figures.
On the bright side though I’ve been painting the armies of Men for the past couple of years, mostly figures for the 90’s and I have rediscovered the pleasure of seeing a unit of nicely painted figures arrayed in their panoply ready for battle.
Fantastic paint job on the figure, that’s what it’s all about.
Cheers
You make some great points here Steve63. To further develop your thoughts, one of the things that has always attracted me to Third Edition is the existence of human societies beyond The Empire and Bretonnia. Once GW were locked in their godawful 'Army Book' cycle the myriad other societies barely got a mention. I would have loved to have seen the armies of Cathay and Araby on the field - though with Warhammer Armies and a little work with the WFB3 rulebook they would both be possible. Still, I would have loved something official in the '80s vibe.
DeleteAwesome paintjob on an outstanding model!
ReplyDeleteAs much as I liked the pseudo-renaissance humans of later editions, the absence of these fighters of law was really a great loss. It would have done Warhammer a lot of good if they had established a worthy opponent for chaos.
I agree with you wholeheartedly with your 'worthy opponent' comment. Chaos developed from the 'spice' of a fantasy world into the main event - a process that weakened the whole, sadly. Awesome forces for 'good' would have been very welcome.
DeleteYes, yes, yes! That's exactly what was the problem. While in the good old days of 3rd edition and WHFRPG there was Chaos like there was Cthulhu in CoC - present but not obvious they quickly showed us the awesome of Choas...but humans, dwarfs and elves (well maybe high elves not so much, but they were ex-Melniboneans so they dont count) remained very much true to their historical archetypes.
DeleteI think one reason why AoS works so much better than WH 8th Ed is that finnally they raised other armies to a pseudo-angelic level in which they can believably battle the forces of Chaos.
The chaos incursions in 3rd edition were a distant memory to the people of the Empire. A memory many chose to disregard. How could such things be naught more than exaggeration. The threat of chaos came from within, not without, and was a subtle yet deadly danger. But 8th edition, massive chaos armies were invading every second Tuesday, the forests were full of murderous trees and the very earth would crack open to reveal layers of skulls. Quite how all those cities, towns and institutions were able to support themselves was beyond me.
DeleteNo wonder it all disappeared up Sigmar's bottom.
But as you, AoS works for many people. And good for them. I love it when I see young gamers (as we once were) getting involved in the game- they couldn't give too hoots about Warhammer's 30+ year history and why should they? Those of us with longer memories are entitled to think very differently about it if we wish.