View Full Version : February 2018 White Dwarf Feedback Thread

Lord Damocles
04-02-2018, 12:39
Febuary's issue time. I bought this one.

For more general comments about White Dwarf, there is the General White Dwarf Feedback Thread (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?23972-General-White-Dwarf-Feedback-Thread).

If you post the score you have given to the current White Dwarf in the thread, please explain why as this is useful and interesting for Warseer members and others reading the thread.

Please do not criticise people for posting their score and views about White Dwarf; we are all entitled to voice our opinions without the fear of them being criticised.

Lord Damocles
19-04-2018, 22:23
Yeah, its two months late now and nobody cares anymore, but I don’t mind. I live by my own rules, man. I’m making a post modernist statement about societal pressures or something.
I was too lazy to finish it by March, ok?

As a disclaimer, I only bought this issue for the 40K battle report. I have every previous Necron battle report (including Battlefleet Gothic) in hard-copy, and so... no, it’s not a compulsion, whatever do you mean? I can stop any time I want. Any time!

- Double –page ad for malign Portents –

Editorial – Apparently, basic painting guides (‘Ready for Battle’ stage) are now some great new feature. I think we’re just working our way backwards from ‘Eavy Metal features.

Contents – Pad that space. Ooh yeah.

Planet Warhammer – Effectively renamed ‘News & New Releases’ takes us up to pg.31. There’s no need to have half a page on Codex: Adeptus Custodes, or a third of a page on the basic Custodians box which isn’t even new, or a whole page on the Vertus Praetors etc.

’For the first time, the Adeptus Custodes get their very own codex!’ Not true! Lies! I’m holding my 7th ed. Codex: Adeptus Custodes right now! I remember how cheap and rubbish it is!

Hur hur. Those Varagyr Wolf Guard look like their fur is made of tentacles, and they clearly have no grips on their combi-bolters.

The description of the Eisenhorn model says ‘I picture this Eisenhorn being the one who led the fight against Quixos’. The expanded version (https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/03/02/designer-insights-inquisitor-eisenhorngw-homepage-post-4/) of this boxout (there obviously wasn’t space for it in this issue, again...) notes that the wargear is actually wrong for depicting Eisenhorn at this time – but that isn’t mentioned here. Neither is the artwork which the model is clearly based off (as opposed to the original 54mm model) which is conspicuous by the absence of mention here too.

As an aside, Eisenhorn’s sword is way too small. Barbasisater is described in Malleus as, ‘From the braided grip to the tip of the curved, engraved blade, it measured almost a metre and a half. Long, lean, slender, like the woman who wielded it’. If the model’s weapon is that long, Eisenhorn must be about 4m tall!

I wanted to pick up an Eisenhorn model (to convert into Inquisitor Lichtenstein – now there was a good series of White Dwarf articles!), but nowhere in this issue does it say that the model wasn’t available in store, and so by the time I’d discovered this (that’s ten minutes I’ll never get back) it had sold out online. Hurumf.

- Double-page ad for Necromunda (or at least the half of it which has been released so far...) –

Contact – GW is great; why no undead giants?; GW is great, can we have the Tragedy of McDeath? (no – that would require too much effort); White Dwarf is so great I’m practically French kissing it. Ok, that sounds a bit mean, but Mr Matthews letter is like a bingo card of fawning buzzwords – ’...best White Dwarf [since September 1995]’ - really? How are we defining best exactly..?

Temporal Distort (issue 260) – I mean, lets just read the text here: ’Dark Shadows campaign in full swing... Warmaster and Warhammer Battle Reports... free campaign booklet... background for three new characters for / Inquisitor (Tyrus, Tezla, Cherubael)... two Index Astartes articles (Night Lords and Cursed Founding)... preview of / the Tau’ then there’s the scenery workshop (Pringle can towers), giants fighting each other mini-game, an article on designing Inquisitor boards/campaign settings...
Really Mr Matthews?

Getting Started with Blood Bowl – It’s basically a double page add for Blood Bowl disguised as an article. What would this article even be? It doesn’t really help anyone get started with the game; it just sort of says a load of random things about it and the setting?

Videogame: Hands of the Emperor (Inquisitor: Martyr[/u] – Five pages of advert-article about the game. Essentially the different classes of Inquistor (Crusader/Assassin/Psyker) are just the classic Warrior/Rogue (Ranger)/Wizard. Why is an Inquisitor acting as a sniper anyway? Why does the sniper in the picture have Dark Angel shoes..?
New game mechanics inspired by the 40K setting apparently include a fully destructible environment (lets go for – say – the original X-com: Enemy Unknown), blood and gore (Doom...?), execution kills (the original Dawn of War), Nurglings not dropping power armour (in Skyrim a wolf won’t drop a set of full plate either) Cabals (Guilds), side missions (really?), and a tactical cover system (Dawn of War II). New mechanics everybody!

I’m not sure that there was really any more content in these five pages that there usually is in the single page game previews?

- Full page ad for working in a GW store –

Designers’ Notes: Malign Portents – I suspect that basically all of the information in this article (a bit less than two pages of text if we’re counting) could have been garnered from the Blog. As might be expected, there’s no explanation of why new rules or background are as they are, and only the very slimmest of insight into the Harbringer models.

Black Library: The Pen is Mightier (a potted history of Black Library) – As a very brief history of Black Library it’s ok, I guess. You’d think that there might be some input from various authors here, but there isn’t. Nor is there mention of the pre-Black Library phase (Inquisition War, Space Marine (yes there’s a picture at the bottom of page 51, but nothing beyond that), Beasts in Velvet etc.) which is a bit sad.
There’s not really anything much of interest here. I can help feeling that it starts to turn into an advert-article as it goes on.

- Double page ad for Black Library stuff which was already in New Releases –

Designers’ Notes: A Host of Heroes (Adeptus Custodes) –
- Why is there no mention of Aquilon Terminators in the book? Why are they replaced by Allarus Custodians? It’s implied that the Aquilon art couldn’t be translated into models but Aquilon models literally already exist. Why do the Allarus have the same basic weapon as everyone else in the list? Aquilon have different weapons which makes them visually and thematically more distinct. How come Allarus don’t?
- ’Every Custodian, however, bears a dagger known as a misericordia’ so how come they don’t come as standard equipment? Why are you able to field Custodes without misericordias?
- Why is equipping Custodes with just a Sentinel Blade no longer an option? And don’t give me that ‘no model = no rules’ excuse; because you can totally make shield-less Custodes from the basic kit.
- Why does the Valdor model have a different face and a different weapon to his description in The Emperor’s Legion?
- Custodians wouldn’t have leaders - but they totally did have squad leaders in the previous Codex and still do now – they just can’t join units anymore.
- The misericordia on the annotated picture of the Vertus Praetor is wrongly labelled as his helmet.
- How come between the 30K and 40K rules the Custodes lost all their fancy spear types?
To these questions and more, we’ll never have answers.

Collecting: A Tale of Four Warlords – So one player is advertising the new Chaos Daemons books, one is preparing to advertise the Daughters of Khaine which we totally don’t know is being released next month, one is getting all into Malign Portents, and one has to pick a Destruction army so that they can have the fourth Harbringer I guess.

- Full page ad for local stores –

Battle Report: Mission: Xenopurge (Necrons vs Adeptus Custodes) – ’My plan is to make my army as durable as possible with resurrection orbs and Crypteks near all my infantry units...’ – which is why the actual army list contains only three minimum size Warrior units, a single Cryptek, and a single resurrection orb (which to be fair is more than most Necron armies nowadays)?
Later on in the conclusion: ’My main army strength – the ability to resurrect – I barely got to use. My units were either intact or dead. Funny that, huh?

How could it strike anyone as a good idea to march towards the oncoming Custodes? By turn 3 the Necron army has all but ceased to exist.

The report isn’t good, of course. Each game turn gets a double page, or which only a third of a page is text, the rest of the space being giant pictures. No maps – they obviously wouldn’t suit this game.
Oh who cares? None of this is news anymore.

Match Report: The Swift and the Deadly (Blood Bowl Elven Union vs Chaos Renegades) – I still just don’t think that Blood Bowl reports work that well. There’s twenty four named players who I’ve never heard of before, will never hear of again, and have no reason to be at all invested in, so trying to follow where they’re all running about on the pitch just isn’t going to work.

John Bull has a nice beard though. He looks like a man who drinks real ale and rides a bicycle. This is a weird tangent...

- Double page ad for Black Library stuff which was already in New Releases and the last double page ad for Black Library –

New Rules: Return to Hammerhal (Warhammer Quest adventure) – This article is five pages long, of which only four contain actual content. I don’t really see why all three adventures in the series needed to be spread across three issues. It’s ok looking (I assume that the rules presented actually work, but that might not be a given). If you were wanting to buy White Dwarf for Quest content though, it’s an expensive adventure.

New Rules: The Search For The Stone (Battle Games in Hobbit of the Rings) – Three scenarios for evil battle companies. Hobbit (or Lord of the Rings; to be honest I don’t really understand the difference). Again, I’m not sure that the campaign needs to be spread across three (or more?) issues. It is at least content for GW’s red headed stepchild though.

Gaming: Tactica Hereticus (Thousand Sons tactics) – It’s really more a list of what units and special rules Thousand Sons have access to than a tactical discussion. I suppose ‘take Tzaangors ignore the Marines’ doesn’t read so well.

Of the four page article, the equivalent of about two pages are taken up by unilluminating pictures of models.

New Rules: The Gauntlet (Necromunda scenario) – I can’t wait for my Ratskins to... ohh.

Golden Demon: Classic 2017 – The Blood Angels have the wrong heraldry. *triggered*
It’s a lot of page space for only two categories worth of winners.

Painting and Collecting: Battleforce Challenge – BUY START COLLECTING BOXES!!!
Where did the Dunestalker go from Stu Black’s army?
Is this an ongoing series like Tale of Four Gamers? Do we need effectively two of the same series?

- Double page ad for malign Portents –

Modelling: Realms of Battle – Sticking basing materials sets to plastic terrain, and sticking plastic terrain to other plastic terrain.
There have been so many stick plastic terrain to other plastic terrain modelling articles before. The page of sticking skulls/vines to plastic terrain deserves to be no more than a small boxout alongside a proper article.

Modelling and Painting: Paint Splatter – a Double page on covering various different painting techniques and what all the different paint types GW now sell are. Seems excessive. Then a double page on painting an Orlock ganger. The ‘Ready for Battle’ level is just stopping before doing any highlighting..?

- Double page ad for Warhammer World –

Readers’ Models – I can look at pictures of random peoples’ models in endless supply from any number of other (free) sources. I’m sure these six pages could be used for more actual content.

- Double page ad for all GW’s games –

In the Bunker – Random jumble of words and pictures.

It’s been such a long time since February, I actually eventually got an Eisenhorn model and converted him into Inquisitor Lichtenstein.
'Diary of an Inquisitor' in [I]White Dwarf 258 (US), pg.99

Is anybody going to be coming back to this era of White Dwarf in ten or fifteen years time and thinking that they want to convert up a character featured in these issues? Are there even any characters who could be remembered and returned to?