Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MGibster" data-source="post: 8029914" data-attributes="member: 4534">For those of you unfamiliar with Warhammer beyond what you likely see at your local game store, I think we need to put GW's statement in context.  Historically speaking, Warhammer was a game developed in Great Britain with their target demographic of adolescent middle class whites.  And you can really see that reflected in old photos where just about every painted miniature is a white male.  Over the last few years, GW has sought to expand their market by, among other things, increasing the diversity of the characters in their fiction and games.  They introduced a series of books for younger readers called Warhammer Adventures, they released new plastic sculpts for Sisters of Battle (largely female force), and more recently a new book titled features a black Ultramarine on the cover.  [ATTACH=full]123450[/ATTACH]In case you're unfamiliar, the Ultramarines are the poster children for the entire game.  Here are what some very prominent Youtubers have been saying about this over the last few years.  I won't name them specifically because I don't want to give them any traffic.  I stumbled across them because they have many videos where they go over the lore, miniatures, game strategy, etc., etc. so you can watch several of their videos before they show their ugly side.Warhammer Adventures:  There were some legitimate complaints of the series, namely that perhaps the Warhammer 40k setting wasn't really appropriate for children, but they moved on to criticize the characters in the book partially based on what they looked like.  There are three adolescents on the cover of  Attack of the Necrons, audio version read by David Tennant, one of which is your standard issue white male, a black female (I think, I honestly have trouble telling with some art), and a white male with a malformed arm who created his own cybernetic brace so he could still use it.  There were several snide comments made about forced diversity at Games Workshop, how of course the leader had to be a woman of color because white men are evil, etc., etc.  It was just ugly.  For the Sisters of Battle release, if you go to the GW website, you will see that they made a concerted effort to paint some of their models with skin tones that weren't just just a bunch of pale people from Northumberland.  Some of these Youtubers mocked the inclusion of people of color because, "hur, hur, diversity bad,"and complained that the models weren't sexy enough.  There's a new fiction release called Avenging Son which has on it's cover a black Ultramarine, a bunch of other Ultramarines, and a regular human woman (I don't know who any of them are).  There are actual videos from these people seriously debating whether or not black Ultramarines is canon.  I mean, sure, they both come to the conclusion of yes.  Though one of them says it doesn't make sense for them to have African features, but I guess a yes is progress.  But why the hell is that even up for debate?  If I were a black adolescent looking at getting into Warhammer and watching videos on Youtube on how to model, select my army, how to play, learn about the lore, etc., etc., how would I feel about people, prominent people in the Youtube Warhammer video sphere, debating whether or not someone who looks like me should even be represented in the game?  People like that make the hobby look bad, and, by extension, they make Games Workshop look bad.  In addition to Black Lives Matter and everything else going on right now, this is the context in which GW released that statement.  I actually wished GW had ended their message with "You will be missed" rather than "You will not be missed."  And here's the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YgVb4a0bUw&t=1s" target="_blank">Bob Ross</a> of miniature painting talking about how important it is to say that Warhammer is for everyone.</blockquote>

Verification