Hyperborea-The World of Conan

[Moriarty]

Then don’t use those figures?

[Porsenna]

Of course - but for someone looking for guidance on what is appropriate to field as soldiers for these armies, isn't it better to offer suggestions that better match the descriptions?

[anevilgiraffe]

Considering that Howard's Hyborian Age was a fantasy mythological world that he envisaged around the time of Plato's Atlantis, I've chosen to go for ancient armies rather than a high medieval look.
My version of Aquilonia is a mix of greek and roman styles and my Cimmerians have a sort of celtic barbarian look.

the Conan Exiles video game had armour sets from the various nations, Aquilonia was roman-ish, Argossean was greek-ish with a heavy dose of marine life, picts were almost native American/celtic, Aesir and Vanir were norse, Darfari were zulu-ish, Nemedian were saxon-ish, Turanian were moor-ish, Yamatai were samurai...

[dadlamassu]

 I started out with Hyboria many, many years ago using a mix of the Garrison Sword and Sorcery range as well as various other historical figures. The descriptions (where they exist) are suitably vague to allow your imagination virtually free reign.  Originally inspired by the novels and then by Tony Bath's "Son of Hyboria" campaign.  If you haven't heard of it do an internet search as there an abundance of good stuff including:
https://www.scribd.com/document/555506542/Hyborian-Armies-DBA

https://billinghurst.spalding.gen.nz/Webstuff/hobbies/armatiarmylists.html

https://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Sword_and_Sorcery

And a search here for "Hyboria" or Hyborian" yielded a huge amount of inspiration including:
https://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=126166.0

https://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=135495.0

[Diablo Jon]

Minifigs did a sword and sorcery range that has a bunch of stuff for a Conan setting. Even if you don't won't to use 1980s retro miniatures ( which would be kind of cool if I'm honest) might be worth looking at the miniatures to see what more modern miniatures you could use for the various factions.

Miniature Figurines Production - Catalogue http://www.miniaturefigurines.co.uk/Catalogue.aspx?ScaleID=3&CategoryID=35&SubCategoryID=388

[Rick]

1989? Surely you jest, sir - go on, pull the other one, it's got bells on! 
The Sword and Sorcery range was produced in 1975, around the time of their Valley of the 4 winds and Aureola Rococo figures. All of those ranges are really showing their age; sculpting styles and detailed casting techniques had moved on, even by 1989, leaving these ranges behind.
Buy some as curiosities and cool relics of early sculpts by all means - it'd be very cool to see a display of figures through the ages, but I feel that you'd be disappointed in them as wargames figures.

[dadlamassu]

Buy some as curiosities and cool relics of early sculpts by all means - it'd be very cool to see a display of figures through the ages, but I feel that you'd be disappointed in them as wargames figures.

Oddly enough I still use my 1970s Garrison Sword and Sorcery figures.  They are absolutely fine as wargames figures and are perfectly capable of defeating really expensive, huge modern figures.  They are easier to paint, look great en masse  In the pictures the sharp eyed may see figures from nearly every decade fro the 1970s to the 2020s.

It is a matter of taste (and probably the age of our collections).

[mikedemana]

Argossean was greek-ish with a heavy dose of marine life, picts were almost native American/celtic, Aesir and Vanir were norse, Darfari were zulu-ish, Nemedian were saxon-ish, Turanian were moor-ish, Yamatai were samurai...

What the Giraffe said...! Howard's influences are all over the place, from Ancient to High Medieval. Bossonian archers were inspired by English longbowmen, for example. And Stygia was an evil, Ancient Egypt. Use the figures you want to for your project. No one is wrong using Ancient figures. No one is wrong using Medieval figures. Have fun, by Crom! 

Mike Demana

[Rick]

Oddly enough I still use my 1970s Garrison Sword and Sorcery figures.  They are absolutely fine as wargames figures and are perfectly capable of defeating really expensive, huge modern figures.  They are easier to paint, look great en masse  In the pictures the sharp eyed may see figures from nearly every decade fro the 1970s to the 2020s.

It is a matter of taste (and probably the age of our collections).

But might I humbly contend that the Dick Garrison Sword and Sorcery range is probably not the Miniature Figurines Sword and Sorcery range?

[DalyDR]

1989? Surely you jest, sir - go on, pull the other one, it's got bells on! 
The Sword and Sorcery range was produced in 1975, around the time of their Valley of the 4 winds and Aureola Rococo figures. All of those ranges are really showing their age; sculpting styles and detailed casting techniques had moved on, even by 1989, leaving these ranges behind.
Buy some as curiosities and cool relics of early sculpts by all means - it'd be very cool to see a display of figures through the ages, but I feel that you'd be disappointed in them as wargames figures.

I have 8 or so Aureola Rococo High Elf cavalry that I think are fantastic.  They've got more of an otherworldly feel appearance-wise that makes them just wonderful, and I love the Rodney Matthews' vibe, or more accurately, straight-up source of inspiration (my particular examples are right from his "The People of the Pines" artwork).  I've been putting off repainting them from my lousy 1980-something paintwork because I'm not sure I can do them justice.  I believe what they possess is character, moreso than many of the more modern, cleaner, and more technically accomplished offerings these days.  No jesting at all.

[Rick]

Oh I dunno. I wish I hadn't mentioned the Aureola Rococo range now! 
I see what you're saying and I know what you mean about the A-R range having a certain style to them and I agree; but have a look at what Ral Partha were doing with their figures in 1975 and, even though it's a more pedestrian style, the figures have far more detail and presence. Much the same could be said for the Minifigs classic fantasy range - they have a lovely style to them but just don't have as much detail as ranges from, say, Ral Partha. And then there's the Minifigs Sword and Sorcery range which, frankly, makes the A-R and CF ranges look flawless by comparison.
I guess we'll just have to disagree on this issue I think.

[nickdives]

Just seen this topic, looking for some phots of painted Aureola Rococo figures! Some of my Minifigs chaps get a mention, but I also went slightly mad and bought a few of my favorite Garrison figures!

[Hobgoblin]

The Sword and Sorcery range was produced in 1975, around the time of their Valley of the 4 winds and Aureola Rococo figures. All of those ranges are really showing their age; sculpting styles and detailed casting techniques had moved on, even by 1989, leaving these ranges behind.
Buy some as curiosities and cool relics of early sculpts by all means - it'd be very cool to see a display of figures through the ages, but I feel that you'd be disappointed in them as wargames figures.

In all honesty, if I could only paint one miniature range from now on, it would be Minifigs. Yes, the sculpting style (done with solder!) is very different from modern figures, but there's so much charm and artistry in those figures. And - crucially - there's so much room for artistry on the part of the painter. If time is no object, there's so much scope for freehand on robes and shields and limbs (tattoos or warpaint or whatever). And the figures do have real presence on the table.

I love the things that John Blanche did with Minifigs - so inspirational! Just look at these examples of his work:

[Gibby]

Sculpted with solder? That's crazy - I've never heard of that before! 

[Moriarty]

That were the way, back in the day. Legions of women in dungeon-dark holes, earning a pittance for the privilege of working.