Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Fantasy Adventures => Topic started by: Hobgoblin on April 26, 2016, 01:23:04 PM
-
Looking at sukhe_bator's interesting thread about EM4 dwarves, I was reminded of a thought I've harboured for a while: there's a case to be made that Nick Lund - and by extension whoever mimicked his style for the Fantasy Warriors/EM4 dwarves - is the only sculptor to create plausible Tolkien-style dwarves.
Here's the thing: dwarfs in myths, legends and folk-tales tend to be weaker than humans - they're ugly, stunted creatures that don't have the physical might to stand up to bigger, taller, stronger humans. What they do sometimes have is magical weaponry, magical devices or just magic in general.
But then Tolkien draws on Norse myth to create his dwarves [sic]. And he makes them fairly formidable fighters, as in his description of Dain's dwarf warriors in The Hobbit:
"Dain had come. He had hurried on through the night, and so had come upon them sooner than they had expected. Each one of his folk was clad in a hauberk of steel mail that hung to his knees, and his legs were covered with hose of a fine and flexible metal mesh, the secret of whose making was possessed by Dain’s people. The dwarves are exceedingly strong for their height, but most of these were strong even for dwarves. In battle they wielded heavy two-handed mattocks; but each of them had also a short broad sword at his side and a roundshield slung at his back. Their beards were forked and plaited and thrust into their belts. Their caps were of iron and they were shod with iron, and their faces were grim."
So, dwarves go from the weak creatures of folklore and legend to doughty, tough warriors. And this is continued in The Lord of the Rings through Gimli (who, nevertheless, prefers fighting the Uruk-hai to fighting humans, because the Uruks are shorter - more his size, one can reasonably infer).
And this, of course, is what's carried into RPGs and tabletop wargames: dwarves are tough and strong. Crossbows crept into the mix, somehow.
But there's a problem: most miniatures struggle to convey the supposed hardiness of dwarf warriors. They have stumpy little legs and arms, and don't look like they should pose a physical challenge for humans. The usual way of resolving this is just throwing on vast amounts of muscle, which rarely adds to the quality of the miniatures.
The person who does get it right, I think, is Nick Lund, in the former Grenadier/now Mirliton range. His sculpting's not to everyone's taste, but I think his vision of dwarves works far better than most. These creatures have long arms, genuinely non-human proportions and a convincingly formidable aspect. And, while one might quibble at the size of some of the weapons, at least these dwarves look like they could actually wield a two-handed axe:
http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/?title=Battle_Lords_Box_Sets#1603 (http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/?title=Battle_Lords_Box_Sets#1603)
http://www.mirliton.it/index.php?cName=fantasy-2528mm-dwarfs (http://www.mirliton.it/index.php?cName=fantasy-2528mm-dwarfs)
-
I like the Otherworld Miniatures Dwarves. They seem to have a similar aesthetic, with study (bot not bloated) trunks, short necks and long arms.
(http://myalbum.com/photo/pmdSFU6TfJsX/med.jpg)
-
I like the Otherworld Miniatures Dwarves. They seem to have a similar aesthetic, with study (bot not bloated) trunks, short necks and long arms.
(http://myalbum.com/photo/pmdSFU6TfJsX/med.jpg)
I hadn't seen those - yes, those are tremendous. It looks as if the arms would reach to the knees if hanging straight, which helps to make them both non-human and plausible as fighters.
-
Denizen?
-
Yep, Otherworld get my vote as well, its kind of why I want to use Em4 supplemented by Mirliton metals Nick Lund/Mark Copplestone sculpts, since apart from the GW LoTR dwarves, I've seen nothing really that matches my mind's eye of Tolkien's creations. As for the Snow White-esque rejects of the late 1980s, the least said about them the better...
-
Ah, now the Denizen dwarves are great figures - no doubt about that at all. It's aeons since I saw one in the "flesh", though I may have one - or bits of one - kicking around somewhere.
But I think they illustrate one of my points - they don't look like they should be formidable fighters. They look like they'd be physically inferior to humans (especially, perhaps the ones in full armour, where the stumpy limbs are all too clear).
Given that, I think they'd be really good as the kind of dwarfs you get in some medieval German epics - frail and cowardly - especially once the human hero has divested them of their magical weapons and forced them to do his will.
One of the armoured ones would make a very good Tyrion Lannister, I think.
-
Perhaps but, since I still use my 1970s/1980s figures, I still like these (yes, you have to scroll down!) dwarf figures:
http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Wizards%2C_Warriors_and_Warlocks (http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Wizards%2C_Warriors_and_Warlocks) http://www.stunties.com/wiki/index.php/Wizards,_Warriors,_%26_Warlocks (http://www.stunties.com/wiki/index.php/Wizards,_Warriors,_%26_Warlocks)
http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Fantasy_Collector_Series (http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Fantasy_Collector_Series) http://www.stunties.com/wiki/index.php/02-000_-_Early_Series (http://www.stunties.com/wiki/index.php/02-000_-_Early_Series)
Admittedly, http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Der_Kriegspielers_Fantastiques_%281000%29#1040 (http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Der_Kriegspielers_Fantastiques_%281000%29#1040) are my emotional/nostalgia favorites since they were my first.
Honorable mention:
Asgard (1980s! Not 1970s!) http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Dwarf_Warriors_%28Asgard%29 (http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Dwarf_Warriors_%28Asgard%29)
-
I've just been finishing off a few more of my ongoing Hasslefree dwarf collection - IMO they are exactly right for the look you want. Short, powerful and business like without being cartoony and round.
I'm at work now so can't provide the link, but if you search the Fantasy board you can find some of my previous painted examples under Feudal or Hospitaler Dwarves.
Or check out the multipacks of dwarves with spears, hand weapons and crossbows (and some single minis) here:
http://www.hfminis.co.uk/shop?category=fantasy-%26%0D%0Asteampunk~fantasy-dwarves
-
Now I like the westwind dwarf wars range, admittedly chunky chaps but in a good way
-
Looking at sukhe_bator's interesting thread about EM4 dwarves, I was reminded of a thought I've harboured for a while: there's a case to be made that Nick Lund - and by extension whoever mimicked his style for the Fantasy Warriors/EM4 dwarves - is the only sculptor to create plausible Tolkien-style dwarves.
Correct. No more words needed. Close this thread.
-
Correct. No more words needed. Close this thread.
Ok ok, I agree, Asgard were great. I loved their arquebusier (even though bringing gunpowder into fantasy never sat right with me). And I agree Kev White sculpts some brilliant Norman dwarfs (mainly because he can do the poses in a mirror).
Ok.
Now the conversation is over.
Dwarfs are grim, dour, hard, practical, fearless.
They are not mad, sporting red Mohicans, riding trikes or kneeless. Nor do the believe that a two ton lump of rock on a stick is a war hammer.
-
I really like these. They look like, they mean business.
(http://www.hfminis.co.uk/img_cms/product_images/RBD101%20Brynjar%20Bondi%20(6)%20-%20SCL.jpg)
(http://www.hfminis.co.uk/img_cms/product_images/RBD009%20Gjord.JPG)
-
They're lovely. Who are they by?
-
They're lovely. Who are they by?
Red box games http://red-box-games.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=16
Hasslefree also have some of them http://hfminis.co.uk/shop?product=norse-dwarves-megapack-%287%29~hfdmp1&category=fantasy-%26%0D%0Asteampunk~fantasy-dwarves
-
Cubs, I think they're Red Box Games. I was going to add them to the list of dwarf miniatures that capture a sense of strength and physical toughness, but Kaiser beat me to it. Hasslefree Dwarfs, of any stripe, are also excellent for the same reason - strong and tough-looking, with a sense of physical capability to them, even when they're in repose (something Kev White is excellent at, I think).
[EDIT]: And Brandlin beat me to it too!
-
I like all manner of different Dwarf figures.
Hasslefree's Dwarves are believable, they suit gritty and dark fantasy - same for Red Box Games.
Marauder miniatures made the very best, in terms of character and they were excellent sculpts. Stumpy, but for all the right reasons.
Rackham were a bit over the top. I like them, but they were soooo stocky!
With Panzerfäuste, I have tried to get somewhere in-between Marauder and Hasslefree...
Nick Lund's Dwarves are excellent too, as are the GW LotR ones.
-
I should add that there are a few Reaper Miniatures dwarfs that really capture the idea of them as a strong, tough, physically capable race.
https://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/dwarf/latest/06188 These guys, for example, are great.
https://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/dwarf/latest/06196 These guys are great too.
https://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/dwarf/latest/14422 And finally this guy is very cool too.
There are others in the range that capture the essence of the dwarf being discussed on this thread - good proportions (they have knees!), they don't look like bowling balls in armour, and they have a lot of character. Not much more you can ask for, I think.
-
Black Chapel miniatures (Spain). Dwarves that don't look like blocks with feet (they even have knees !)
(http://blackchapelminiatures.com/180-thickbox_default/ingeniero-mollekyn.jpg)
(http://blackchapelminiatures.com/170-thickbox_default/fanatico-dwalnir-enano.jpg)
-
With respect for my Little People co-workers - we have several that work in the wing - if you want realism in dwarf size than there is this to consider. From http://www.lpaonline.org/faq-
Q: What is the definition of dwarfism?
A: Little People of America (LPA) defines dwarfism as a medical or genetic condition that usually results in an adult height of 4'10" or shorter, among both men and women, although in some cases a person with a dwarfing condition may be slightly taller than that.The average height of an adult with dwarfism is 4’0, but typical heights range from 2’8 to 4’8.
So if you (to pick a number) assume an average * "Human" is from 5' 10" to 6' tall, then (in game terms) a 30 mm human might be accompanied by a 20 to 25mm tall "Dwarf." There is more on the above web site about arm/leg length but since "this is fantasy" I would suggest that limbs should not be too disproportionate but YMMV.
* Sadly, I am no where near 5' 10"
-
I love Nick Lund ( his miniatures, at least lol ), but the best Dwarfs I've ever seen are the Kev Adams Harlequin and Heartbreaker ones. But of course they're not the Tolkien-inspired ones...
-
Black Chapel miniatures (Spain). Dwarves that don't look like blocks with feet (they even have knees !)
(http://blackchapelminiatures.com/170-thickbox_default/fanatico-dwalnir-enano.jpg)
I couldn't disagree more!
Blatant GW aesthetic rip off, right down to the red hair, bare torso twin axes, berserker nonsense. And a nipple ring??? Really?
This is practically the exact opposite of what we have been discussing!
Conquistador - I have no issue with your definition as to dwarfs and dwarfism in reality. However we are discussing Dwarfs (a fantasy race, a different species) and our understanding of what we like and don't like in the miniature representations of them. I think your post is as relevant to the discussion as the definition of a crocodile would be to a debate on troglodytes.
-
I couldn't disagree more!
Blatant GW aesthetic rip off, right down to the red hair, bare torso twin axes, berserker nonsense. And a nipple ring??? Really?
This is practically the exact opposite of what we have been discussing!
Letting aside the berserker thing (THAT it's a ripoff from GW style, I admit it), but I think you've missed my point: At least it isn't a bulky torso or a belly attached to a pair of feet and all vaguely covered with a beard, like many dwarf sculptures out there.
-
Letting aside the berserker thing (THAT it's a ripoff from GW style, I admit it), but I think you've missed my point: At least it isn't a bulky torso or a belly attached to a pair of feet and all vaguely covered with a beard, like many dwarf sculptures out there.
No, I understand. I just disagree.
That possesses none of the grim, dour, practical, stubbornness that I associate with dwarfs. I also don't believe it matches the comments made in the original post by Hobgoblin.
Personally I think it's an appalling cartoon rendition of a comic childish idea.
But that's only my opinion. Yours may vary.
-
I always imagine dwarves as being akin to wolverine from the x-men.
He's 5"3'(a rare case where i am taller than a character from anything) but bulky, which makes him seem shorter and stockier compared to the taller characters around him ,despite him generally just being a normally proportioned man. knock 3 inches off him and he's fundamentally the same, but squatter and bulkier in appearance in relation to his height.
(http://i1350.photobucket.com/albums/p771/Nic-e2/wolverine_zps0cui0x8i.png)
I think hasslefree do the best job of getting that sort of dwarfish image right, especially with their more recent figures such as borax.
-
Red box games http://red-box-games.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=16
Cubs, I think they're Red Box Games.
Thanks both. I thought they had Tre's style about them in some ways, but they also looked a little different somehow. Perhaps it was the larger heads than human subjects that threw me.
-
With respect for my Little People co-workers - we have several that work in the wing - if you want realism in dwarf size than there is this to consider. From http://www.lpaonline.org/faq-
Q: What is the definition of dwarfism?
A: Little People of America (LPA) defines dwarfism as a medical or genetic condition that usually results in an adult height of 4'10" or shorter, among both men and women, although in some cases a person with a dwarfing condition may be slightly taller than that.The average height of an adult with dwarfism is 4’0, but typical heights range from 2’8 to 4’8.
So if you (to pick a number) assume an average * "Human" is from 5' 10" to 6' tall, then (in game terms) a 30 mm human might be accompanied by a 20 to 25mm tall "Dwarf." There is more on the above web site about arm/leg length but since "this is fantasy" I would suggest that limbs should not be too disproportionate but YMMV.
* Sadly, I am no where near 5' 10"
But in fairness, you're describing a Human with dwarfism, not a fantasy race Dwarf. I understand there is obviously going to be an element of crossover, but I don't know how much we can rely on the one to describe the other. What about beards for a start?
PS. I can just about claim 5'10" in thick socks.
-
But in fairness, you're describing a Human with dwarfism, not a fantasy race Dwarf. I understand there is obviously going to be an element of crossover, but I don't know how much we can rely on the one to describe the other. What about beards for a start?
There is, I understand, an ongoing debate in Germanic philological and mythological academic circles as to whether the Norse dvergrwere even meant to be smaller than human size. In the Edda, they seem to be characterised by ugliness, lust, greed, craftsmanship and magical power rather than by anything else. And of course they were born as maggots in the flesh of Ymir.
The shrinkage that dwarfs seem to have experienced in later tales may be the same thing that we see in stories of elves and fairies, who start off human-sized in Norse and Celtic myth, but end up becoming tiny creatures (often with wings).
-
It's going to mean different things to different people, in different settings innit?
Think about the word Elf for example. I this a willowy winsome Cate Blanchette figure? Or a hugely powerful, almost demi-God? A grotesque little sprite? Or something from Ben and Holly's Little Kingdom with a penchant for blowing horns?*
*"Because we're Elves - BA-DAAAAR!"
-
Yes, that's exactly it - and it supports your point about human dwarfs being a very poor guide to the dwarfs of myth, folklore and fantasy.
One of the legacies that Tolkien has bequeathed to gaming is a rigid distinction between different classes of supernatural being. Those distinctions are almost entirely absent in folklore and blurry in mythology. For example, the dwarfs of the Edda seem to be identical to the black elves, who may (or may not) be the same as the dark elves (there's lots of academic debate about that).
And the Edda's famous list of dwarfs includes Gandalfr ("Wand-elf"). That, apparently, was one of the starting points for JRRT in The Hobbit: "What is this Wand-elf doing in a list of dwarf names?" The medieval Norse may not have recognised the distinction as clearly as Tolkien did.
Later on, there's virtually no distinction between dwarfs, kobolds, knockers, goblins and whatnot - all are (or can be) supernatural creatures that haunt mines and hills.
-
Okay, there is a distinction between Human Dwarf and Fantasy (which Fantasy? For our discussion LOTR writings) Dwarf but I do think noticeably disproportionate limbs such as "no knees," excessive beach ball gut girth, and that whole Celtic/Viking Berserker thing do seem out of place with a JRRT Dwarf.
While I find the whole Dwarf as Clown thing in the movies grating there are some good scenes in the movie of "Dwarf Behavior" such as joy of battle/martial expertise against forces of darkness on the walls of Helm's Deep, unshakeable loyalty to goals/values (whether slaying dragons, striving to rescue companions captured buy Orcs, Honor driven opposition to Sauron on a superficially crazy hopeless quest,) and unyielding responsibility to friends, battle companions, or even hirelings (which is where Bilbo starts out.)
Edit: And some of my favorite dwarf figures for gaming are distinctly non-JRRT though his writings obviously have had an effect (multiple personality viewpoints perhaps) but I think many of those values (practical, grim, powerful) are more or at least as much a matter of perception and how the player (battle, skirmish or RPG) has the Dwarf character/Dwarven unit behave. I doubt you can show "practical" as an overt trait in a sculpt that well though impractical can be very clearly shown, such as multiple spikes on the armor that would impede movement or catch on objects.
-
No, I understand. I just disagree.
That possesses none of the grim, dour, practical, stubbornness that I associate with dwarfs. I also don't believe it matches the comments made in the original post by Hobgoblin.
Personally I think it's an appalling cartoon rendition of a comic childish idea.
But that's only my opinion. Yours may vary.
I pretty much agree with that. Is the berserker type dwarf figure a possible Dwarf in another setting. Yes, change the description to a non-JRRT setting and it fits in. I still don't like it. To me I cannot see a unit of those figures in a steady relentless, remorseless advance across a field or an unyielding rear guard in a pass.
Tolkien Dwarf? Never.
-
Looking at sukhe_bator's interesting thread about EM4 dwarves, I was reminded of a thought I've harboured for a while: there's a case to be made that Nick Lund - and by extension whoever mimicked his style for the Fantasy Warriors/EM4 dwarves - is the only sculptor to create plausible Tolkien-style dwarves.
<snip>
But then Tolkien draws on Norse myth to create his dwarves [sic]. And he makes them fairly formidable fighters, as in his description of Dain's dwarf warriors in The Hobbit:
"Dain had come. He had hurried on through the night, and so had come upon them sooner than they had expected. Each one of his folk was clad in a hauberk of steel mail that hung to his knees, and his legs were covered with hose of a fine and flexible metal mesh, the secret of whose making was possessed by Dain’s people. The dwarves are exceedingly strong for their height, but most of these were strong even for dwarves. In battle they wielded heavy two-handed mattocks; but each of them had also a short broad sword at his side and a roundshield slung at his back. Their beards were forked and plaited and thrust into their belts. Their caps were of iron and they were shod with iron, and their faces were grim."
So, dwarves go from the weak creatures of folklore and legend to doughty, tough warriors. And this is continued in The Lord of the Rings through Gimli (who, nevertheless, prefers fighting the Uruk-hai to fighting humans, because the Uruks are shorter - more his size, one can reasonably infer).
And this, of course, is what's carried into RPGs and tabletop wargames: dwarves are tough and strong. Crossbows crept into the mix, somehow.
<snip>
The person who does get it right, I think, is Nick Lund, in the former Grenadier/now Mirliton range. His sculpting's not to everyone's taste, but I think his vision of dwarves works far better than most. These creatures have long arms, genuinely non-human proportions and a convincingly formidable aspect. And, while one might quibble at the size of some of the weapons, at least these dwarves look like they could actually wield a two-handed axe:
http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/?title=Battle_Lords_Box_Sets#1603 (http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/?title=Battle_Lords_Box_Sets#1603)
http://www.mirliton.it/index.php?cName=fantasy-2528mm-dwarfs (http://www.mirliton.it/index.php?cName=fantasy-2528mm-dwarfs)
The more I look at the links, the more I agree that for JRRT Dwarf figures these seem to correctly convey the "Dwarf Factor" of the books. I prefer the first link (I own some of these) but the second link (I believe I actually own none of these surprisingly) has much merit in the sculpts.
The word "Only" is a value judgment that I will withhold currently.
And, yes, where the heck did crossbows come from? Bows (of horn?) I believe they used at the Battle of Five Armies.
Yes that description of Dain's forces is what endeared me to the early Ral Partha dwarves - Dwarf of the Anvil http://stunties.com/wiki/index.php/Wizards,_Warriors,_%26_Warlocks which I can easily see fighting Goblins/Orcs but less likely to be fighting "heroic sized" Humans.
Of course in LOTR the Dwarf forces don't fight humans in the main story line.
-
Conquistador - better pics of the whole nick Lund line from grenadier, now sold by mirliton. You'll see a number of non Lund sculpts have been added to the line over time (I don't think bat riders are canon for example- but even though they are impractical I love the bear riders.)
Click here for Nick Lund Dwarfs (http://www.mirliton.it/index.php?cName=fantasy-2528mm-dwarfs)
This battle set from grenadier is the epitome of the dwarf look to me. I accept that the heads of the double hand axes are somewhat large, however they have a simple functional menace about them.
(http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tpope/sol/grenadier/images/9003.jpg)
I have about 15 sets of these, augmented with others from the range to make up about 200 figures in infantry core units.
As to the crossbows, I think that's an early GW aesthetic. War hammer version 1 had dwarfs listed as using crossbow only. And then their figures followed suit. I believe it was a way to differentiate between dwarfs that were predominantly slow and solid and elf/human longbow men. Crossbows had slower rate of fire but greater punch than longbows, same ranges (from memory).
In some respects crossbows do make some sense, being mechanical, requiring that kind of smithing skill to make rather than wood working. Also you'd get more draw power from a crossbow than a smaller bow that a dwarf could manage.
The Lund sculpts have both short bows (Rangers) and crossbows. And I use both.
(http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tpope/sol/grenadier/images/0935.jpg)(http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tpope/sol/grenadier/images/0934.jpg)(http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tpope/sol/grenadier/images/0937.jpg)
None of the Lund sculpts carry swords, which is a departure from tolkiens description. They are predominantly double handed axes, but include halberds, maces, hammers. There isn't a single sword in my dwarf army other than a couple of later character figures (you can see them on the mirliton page).
There are also few shields as the bulk of the infantry are armed with double handed weapons.
In practical terms, if you imagine the dwarfs fighting in tunnels and mines then a much more sensible arms and armour would be a shield and stabbing weapon such as a spear for the reach.
One of my other views on dwarfs is the round shield. I never got on with the idea of a kite or more traditional heraldic shape (sorry I don't know the term). All m dwarfs are round shieldiums - it just feels right, even though a tower or kite shield would be better defensively in a tunnel... Imagine a Roman phalanx or turtle with bristling spears ina tunnel. Very solid and defensible.
-
I can see shield/spear and long knife or short sword for tunnel fights as particularly effective. Once the shield wall is broken and the "knife fight" begins in tunnels then axes/maces/hammers might be at a disadvantage. Open it up in a hall or room then hand axes plus clubs, maces, swords would come back into play.
It depends a lot on whether you envision Dwarf armies fighting a lot above ground too.
And are the Mountains forested or are the fights above the tree line?
Do the Dwarf forces use 'stay behind' or tunnel connected 'spider holes' like the WW2 Japanese in the Pacific?
The Vikings used round shields in shield wall (or whatever the term might be) formations on more than one occasion, and some dwarf manufacturers like to put a pseudo-Viking tone on the dwarf figures.
IIRC the dwarf armies in LOTR/Hobbit seemed to use masses of infantry with skirmisher bow armed in BoFA, not sure if it gets into detail when the Dale/Dwarf forces are mentioned standing before Erebor.
From Wikipedia o_o -
"... On March 17 of the year 3019 in the Third Age, Sauron sent a host of Easterlings to attack Dale.[1] The combined forces of the Men of Dale under King Brand[2] and the Dwarves of the Lonely Mountain under King Dáin Ironfoot marched out to meet the Easterlings in battle. Sauron's forces were probably more numerous, though the armies of Dale and Erebor would have possessed an advantage due to their superior Dwarven-made weaponry. After three days of heavy close-quarters fighting, Brand and Dáin were forced to retreat to the Lonely Mountain. A few sturdy warriors led by Brand and Dáin fought bravely before the Gate of Erebor, which was not taken. Dáin was killed as he stood defending the body of his ally Brand. The defenders of the Mountain were now under siege.
The forces of Gondor and Rohan defeated the main power of Sauron in the southern theatre on March 25 and this caused the northern Easterling army to lose heart. Seeing the morale of their foes sapped the Army of Dale under the new Kings — Bard II and Thorin III Stonehelm — managed to lift the siege on March 27 and drove the Easterlings out of Dale..."
-
I've written an article about Dwarves miniatures for The Lord of the Rings to be featured in the upcoming issue of Other Minds webzine. I'm afraid I can't unveil much, but Nick Lund's are also my personal pick.
About Red Box Games', word of advice: they're tiny (similar scale to GW LOTR Dwarves). They are much smaller than Nick Lund's. The first ones were bigger (similar to Nick Lund's) and are still available from Hasslefree:
(http://hfminis.co.uk/img_cms/product_images/HFDMP1%20Norse%20Dwarf%20Multi-Pack%20composite.jpg)
Reaper also has some interesting Dwarves:
(http://www.reapermini.com/graphics/gallery/4/03690_w_1.jpg)
-
Sgt Major Dwarves are in the same vein as discussed:
http://www.sgmm.biz/Dwarves_c_66.html (http://www.sgmm.biz/Dwarves_c_66.html)
I always thought that the reason that the GW style 'butterballs' were meant to be so tough and grumpy was because their family jewels dragged along the ground! ;D
Cheers!
Joe Thomlinson
-
Sgt Major Dwarves are in the same vein as discussed:
http://www.sgmm.biz/Dwarves_c_66.html (http://www.sgmm.biz/Dwarves_c_66.html)
Those sergeant major dwarfs are the old vendel dwarfs - the moulds were sold on when vendel closed its doors. They have been mentioned elsewhere in this thread in positive terms.
I always thought that the reason that the GW style 'butterballs' were meant to be so tough and grumpy was because their family jewels dragged along the ground! ;D
See! That's the kind of heightist and speciesist comment that dwarfs have had to put up with since the first song. And you wonder why we lock ourselves in mountains away from others and are often grumpy.
Elfs? pffft. Pixie fiddlers the lot of them!
-
Those sergeant major dwarfs are the old vendel dwarfs - the moulds were sold on when vendel closed its doors. They have been mentioned elsewhere in this thread in positive terms.
Sigh! Mea culpa ...
See! That's the kind of heightist and speciesist comment that dwarfs have had to put up with since the first song. And you wonder why we lock ourselves in mountains away from others and are often grumpy.
Elfs? pffft. Pixie fiddlers the lot of them!
Who said I had a thing for the flower sniffers? I'm a straight up and down monkey man, athough I don't mind a bit of scaley on the side ... ;D
Cheers!
Joe Thomlinson
-
Who said I had a thing for the flower sniffers?
lol I am now changing my official anti-elf insult of choice to "Flower Sniffing Pixie Fiddlers"