Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: What is the current GW view on the Squat.

  1. #1
    Commander corps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    paris
    Posts
    810

    What is the current GW view on the Squat.

    I insist on current. I just bought Necrounda and at least in the french version page 16 that elves and squat use Necromunda. Not used or have used but use like it's still a thing.

    I thought the Squat were dead. They even have a expression named after that. This army have been Squat or about to be Squat like for the Bretonian and Sister Of Battle.

    But then they were rename as the Demiurg.

    So now?

  2. #2
    Inquisitor Lord Damocles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    8,567

    Re: What is the current GW view on the Squat.

    Squats and Demiurg are totally different. Squats are abhumans, while the Demiurg are xenos. Both fill the 'dwarves in spaaace!' niche though.


    The Squats being eaten by Tyranids was never confirmed in an actual background source.

    The introduction to Ian Watson's Draco (at least the version in The Inquisition War omnibus, anyway) has an in-universe character state 'As to the abhuman [Grimm, a Squat], the thread is cut. The accursed hive fleet of the tyranid put paid to that line too long ago'.
    In the introduction to the omninbus, Watson writes, 'For some comic relief, as Shakespeare has a fool in the tragedy of King Lear, so I created Grimm the squat. (Subsequently, I understand that tyranids ate all the squats, which is a shame)'.

    Jervis Johnson supposedly claimed that the Squats were all eaten by Tyranids when explaining why they didn't get a Codex in 2nd edition, although I can't recall ever actually having seen a copy of the claim presented.
    (And not that that explanation makes any sense - there were Squats all over the galaxy (for example on Necromunda, and working with the Adeptus Mechanicus), so even if the Squat homeworlds were eaten by Tyranids, there would still be Squats surviving elsewhere).


    Squats were subsequently mentioned explicitly as existing in the 6th edition Rulebook (pg.405) and White Dwarf Weekly #11 (pg.29) (amongst other places).


    TL;DR - Squats exist in-universe, they just don't get mentioned as much as they used to.


    EDIT:
    This is taken from a post Johnson made regarding Squats on Portent back in the day; in which he references saying that the homeworlds were eaten by Tyranids:

    'In the end (and it took years to really get to the roots of the problem) this led to a realisation that we were going to have to drop the Squats in their 'Squat' form from the 40K background. There was little point having a major race that we weren't willing to make an army book for, and their inclusion in the background meant that people kept asking us when we'd do a Squat Codex. Instead we decided that we'd write the Squats out of the background by saying that their Homworlds had been devoured by a Tyranid Hivefleet. This would give us the option in the future to return to making a race based ont he Squat archetype for 40K. This race was given the name of Demiurg, and a certain amount of preliminary work was done to get a 'feel' for what the race would be like. At present the only hint of the Demiurg in 40K is the Demiurg spaceship for BFG. However, we do have this race 'in our back pocket' as a possible new race for 40K, or an interesting character model in Inquisitor, or whatever. So far the Demiurg have lost out to other projects, and it may be that their time never actually comes, as they will have to win through on their merits, not simply because we once made some Squat models in the past. At present, I have to say that it is more lilely that they *don't* make the cut than do, as there is a certain predudice these days to simply taking races from Warhammer and cross them over to 40K like we did in the early days, so it may be that the Squats/Demiurg end up remaining a footnote in the history of the 40K galaxy. Only time will tell...'
    Last edited by Lord Damocles; 26-11-2017 at 21:34.

  3. #3

    Re: What is the current GW view on the Squat.

    The biggest problem was that the Squats didn't really have a niche to fill in terms of army composition.

    In the fantasy genre, Dwarves are slow-moving but tough and tenacious fighters. They also have a good selection of artillery to offset their lack of manuever elements.

    How does this translate into a sci-fi environment? The Black Codex squats are basically warmed-over Imperial troops. The bonuses they get over humans (WS 4, T4, Ld 8) more than compensate for low movement in a game where shooting is king. Besides, you can put them on bikes and they go plenty fast.

    Squat tanks and artillery thus heavily overlap the Imperial Guard's gear and use the exact same doctrine. Plenty of IG armies use gun lines, so adding beards doesn't really change things much.

    I know this doesn't address the company line, but it explains why they never went anywhere as 2nd ed. progressed. With the coming of the melee-centric 3rd ed, there was even less demand for an army that just stood there and blasted away.

    Whether the Tyranids ate them or not, GW couldn't figure out how to fit them into the game.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  4. #4
    Chapter Master
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    8,296

    Re: What is the current GW view on the Squat.

    In the Space Marine 2nd edition the Squats got a number of vehicles of their own, but those tended to be a bit on the super-heavy side to translate it to 40K. There were at least Overlord airships, land trains, Goliath mega-cannons and Colossus vehicles. With the transition to Epic 40K they got left out from the boxed set army list book, though...
    Who is Griefbringer? Read his poem.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cenyu
    Since World of Warcraft players manage to get themselves killed due to exhaustion, why should Griefbringer not manage to get himself killed with a regiment of table top miniatures. YouŽd be a pioneer.

  5. #5

    Re: What is the current GW view on the Squat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Griefbringer View Post
    In the Space Marine 2nd edition the Squats got a number of vehicles of their own, but those tended to be a bit on the super-heavy side to translate it to 40K. There were at least Overlord airships, land trains, Goliath mega-cannons and Colossus vehicles. With the transition to Epic 40K they got left out from the boxed set army list book, though...
    Yes, they were always more fleshed out in that game, but again the problem was that they mostly duplicated the IG list. The IG already had mammoth, enormously destructive war machines, so what did the squats bring to the table that was any different?

    GW could have tried to use them like Sisters of Battle or Adeptus Arbites - specialist troops with limited options for a particular task, but they just dropped them instead.

    Looking at the scope of the game, I can't argue with that decision.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •