Let's talk about monopose...

[DivisMal]

That stuff, however, highlights an issue: if it's going to be monopose, it better be a good monopose.  The goblins are a good example; perfect pose.  Standing, shield, spear, done.

Now imagine if that one pose was jumping on one foot, spear in hand, screaming.  An army of those would look stupid by comparison.  Same could be said for Napoleonics.  A basic soldier marching would be infinitely preferable to a guy running with his bayonet forward, etc.

This is why the monopose plastics from GW in the early days tended to work pretty well- they were "boring" poses, but that's the best one if you only have one choice.  Look at the classic first plastic Space Marines ; bolt gun head at the ready across chest, feet planted.  Great pose if you only get one (well three technically if you include sergeant, devastator and the flamer swap could make four...).

True! That’s why it never took off to just buy a couple of Airfix/Revell etc. 1/72 boxes and build an army from them: most poses were just like your description; nice for a diorama, but comically wrong for a unit!

[Gibby]

I've seen people do amazing armies with fairly monopose figures. I'm a similar age to tikitang so I also got interested in Warhammer during that 90s plastic set era. Units of brightly coloured yet monopose rank and file always have and always will look brilliant to me.

Great points about the pose itself being the key. When I looked into wargaming with those 1/72 plastic sets, I was eventually put off by all the wasted poses (albeit the boxes were cheap, but sometimes the "boring"/sensible poses were in the minority!).

Someone on the LAF has a thread where he's making armies out of the old Battle Masters board game plastics. Those look amazing.

[Onebigriver]

Someone on the LAF has a thread where he's making armies out of the old Battle Masters board game plastics. Those look amazing.

That's not me, but despite me prefering multipose, about ten years ago I put together 4 Hordes of the Things armies using Battle Masters & Heroquest plastics (with a few other bits thrown in). If I'm honest, I was motivated by economic considerations (I got a couple of Ebay bargains), but I'm still happy about how they turned out.

[tikitang]

about ten years ago I put together 4 Hordes of the Things armies using Battle Masters & Heroquest plastics (with a few other bits thrown in).

I tried doing something similar in 2017, but it was for Age of Sigmar. Sadly I had an epic crisis and abandoned the entire project after collecting hundreds of Battle Masters, HeroQuest and other 90s era plastics. It seemed like a great idea at the time though!

[Onebigriver]

I tried doing something similar in 2017, but it was for Age of Sigmar. Sadly I had an epic crisis and abandoned the entire project after collecting hundreds of Battle Masters, HeroQuest and other 90s era plastics. It seemed like a great idea at the time though!

Well fortunately you don't need that many figures for HOTT - I don't blame you for abandoning it!

[eilif]

My KoW Fantasy Varangur (Chaos) army is chock full of Battlemasters monopose figures. Warriors, archers, beastmen and Cav.  All stock except they have 3d emblems on their shields (from old Skaven and Skellie kits) instead of decals.  I love the old-school GW Chaos look and they do nicely and when I got them they were quite affordable.

For a rank-and-flank game I have no problem with monopose identicals.  For small warband skirmish I generally want to mix it up a bit.

[tikitang]

As much as I am fond of the monopose figures from my entry into miniature gaming in the early '90s (Space Hulk...)

Since you mentioned this, that reminds me: I also found Space Hulk to be an entryway into the hobby in the mid-90s. When I first heard about it, it was 2nd Edition (1996), with plastic monopose models used for both the Terminator Space Marines and Genestealers. They were much better quality than those that came with 1st edition (1989), but still monopose.

But when I bought 3rd Edition in (I think) 2011, although the quality of the miniatures was certainly impressive (that was my first look at Games Workshop miniatures since 1997 and boy they had come a long way), I really didn't care for each one being a unique sculpt. I can't quite remember if I actually carried this out, but I may well have made plans to sell the 3rd Edition miniatures at one point and replace them with 2E monopose plastics!

In recent years I have actually grown much colder toward the 90s plastics (the nostalgia effect has largely worn off), but not averse to the use of monopose "mooks" in general. I have a couple of wargame projects on the go just now that will place a small group of heroes against monopose enemies, which are just repeat-purchases of the same metal miniature.

On one level I made this decision because in each case I could only find one miniature which encapsulated the look I wanted for a certain type of enemy monster, but also because it just feels right, due to the reasons I mentioned earlier.

[AdmiralAndy]

I think one of the more modern Monopose that's interesting and broadly it works is the Epic Battles stuff coming out of Warlord.

Very much the example of its monopose but the painting and basing is where it works or fails imo.

[batu]

Some good points have been made here already. So I just put a picture in here...

[Major_Gilbear]

@ batu:

Beautiful! 

[tikitang]

Fantastic!

[Pattus Magnus]

Yeah, batu’a orcs and goblins are a good example of what can be achieved with old monopose plastics and a few metal command packs… beautiful work!

It’s worth looking up his thread in the Workbench section, there are some other excellent units.

[Gibby]

batu, those are amazing. Really proves the point about what (sensible) monopose figures can achieve when it comes to looking like a believable unit of soldiers.

[Daeothar]

I started out in the same era and way you did: Hero Quest and Space Crusade were my gateway. All of those minis were monopose, but I sought variety through making sure the paintjobs on the ork and goblin wardrobes were all different. Because even back then, I was not a fan of carbon copies of miniatures, although I probably would not have minded as much with what has been called 'regulars', such as Imperial Halberdiers, or High Elf Archers.

Same thing with Space Crusade: I painted the marine squads all in camouflage patterns, but made sure that there were  small differences between each and every marine; some I gave a drum magazine, some lost their bayonets, others got some extra gear or a purity seal, etc. All subtle things that still made them just that little bit more individual.

Still; none of the marines from my RTB01 box were posed identical, but they were painted uniformly

I was never able to buy WHFB miniatures back in the day, but the monopose miniatures to me looked like blank canvasses; the standard that could then be improved upon. Because the modeling and painting aspect of the hobby was most important to me; gaming came (literally a decade) later.

So I'd pose that the divide is right there; between modeler and gamer, and whether or not you like monopose or not is probably linked to that distinction.

Gamers generally prefer monopose miniatures: it prevents confusion and makes painting and ranking up miniatures that much faster and easier. Modelers on the other hand prefer to make each and every model unique, both in posing and paintjob.

Of course this is not a black and white situation, and there are as many shades of grey as there are miniature wargamers, but you get the idea

And yes; this firmly puts me into the modelers' camp

[tikitang]

So I'd pose that the divide is right there; between modeler and gamer, and whether or not you like monopose or not is probably linked to that distinction.

That's an interesting thought; hadn't considered it before.

I would have always identified as as gamer first, modeller second. According to your theory, that would explain why I am happy with monopose miniatures as representational playing pieces. I have come to appreciate modelling and painting a lot more as time has gone by (and I've become slightly better at it too), but even so, the purpose for doing so is always with gaming in mind.