How much 'GrimDark' is to much?

[Renegade]

So you guys know that I am looking for some models for my friend to add some 'juves' in is army. This has got him some ribbing on some other sites, but nothing bad.

So the question is: How far can one go before the invisible line is crossed?

Your thoughts?

[fuzzbuket]

in the newer 'cheerier fluff' that would be too much but frankly as long as the minis look good and arnt too graphic there should be no problem! remember GW used to have a SOB codex on the self, and that book was awfully grimdark :P and also befor the website update i remember a showcase of a IH dread thats front opened up to show the'pilot' inside :P eww


so if it looks good and isnt overly disturbing why not :D
-fuzz

[doom-kitten]

Truthfully, who cares. Your army is yours to create, if you want to cross some 'line' then go ahead. I'd fight an army regardless of it's intent and what the message behind it is, if it's to much to handle I can easily choose not to play it. Hell, half the Imperial stuff in the artwork has a lot of imagery reminiscent of the Third Reich and of course the Romans. Actually when I first got my army my dad asked my why I was painting futuristic Third Reich women (apparently the word for them is banned), and it was kinda hard to deny it. As long as the owners not doing it to intentionally bother or make crude comments then it should be alright.

[Psychosplodge]

New cheerier fluff? O_o

[Denzark]

What is the invisible line? Am I missing something? Is there a Hitelrjugend type joke about juves or is it a joke about kiddy fiddling?

I admit I don't get either, but neither subject is particularly grimdark - when lined up against intergalactic xenocide...

[Psychosplodge]

To be fair I think I missed it too.

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

Prior to the current Imp Guard codex, Cadian "Conscripts" were child soldiers (Whiteshields), soooo there's precedent.

The typical grimdarkness - intergalatic xenocide, eating 1000s of psykers, is all pretty safely sci-fi. If you bring close parallels for real world tragedies into it (like child soldiers), those close to the issue will likely be hurt/offended.

[Renegade]

What is the invisible line? Am I missing something? Is there a Hitelrjugend type joke about juves or is it a joke about kiddy fiddling?

I admit I don't get either, but neither subject is particularly grimdark - when lined up against intergalactic xenocide...

Because it is all fun and games in till someone thinks your army is crossing the line.

The local GW store once had some passer by complain about how racist the Tallarn army a player was using was... I guess it comes down to what you are sensitive about.

[ElectricPaladin]

I honestly think this is one of those "there's no accounting for taste" situations. You can always offend someone. Do your best to figure out where your line is and then act accordingly - but be prepared to listen to someone else's complaints. Keep an open mind and be willing to change it if someone gets hurt. That's really all you can ever do.

That said, I don't think I'd be offended by someone who had child soldiers in his Imperial Guard army. It's a little bit raw, sure, but this is a dark setting, and this is the sort of thing that happens here.

I suppose a lot of my opinion would also depend on exactly how it was done. Are you creating a few soliders - or perhaps a squad or two - of young-looking soldiers holding guns and trying to look brave? That's not a big deal. Are you greenstuffing footy pyjamas and bloodstained teddy bears onto your troops? Are you painting them to look like they're young teenagers who have wet themselves in terror? That would be too much.

[Psychosplodge]

The most important thing is to remember how you offended, so you can do it again...

[Gotthammer]

This is prerfect level of grimdark for any occasion. (http://grimdark.com/)

[Nabterayl]

Seriously, space marines "recruit" kids at the age of ten for the "honor" of having foreign organs implanted in their bodies, which might kill them from tissue rejection, so they can participate in live-fire training, so they can be used as commandos at fifteen, so they can be initiated into an organization that they can't quit without being branded a heretic - all before their brains are even fully myelinated. And that isn't even old fluff.

Sorry your friend's catching flak for child soldiers, but I agree that's an individual taste thing.

[imperialpower]

At the end of the day everyone can be offended in some way and to try and make a fully P.C army would be impossable make your army how you want and if someone gets offended tough s**t for them if they are childish enough to be offended by a collection of plastic and metal figuers then why would you care what they thought anyway.

[DarkDesigner]

If someone complains about the inclusion of child soldiers in an army, double back and ask them why they are offended by it. It is a reality of war, and just because it bursts someone's bubble and reminds them of the horrifying nature of war I don't see why you should have to apologise for them being too sensitive.

I agree with Electric Paladin that it does depend on how you handle it, if they're included purely for comedy or to be offensive, then that's asking for trouble, but if they're there for variety and to add depth to your armies background, then that's fine. And if someone brings it up, then that's drawing attention to a real life issue and getting people talking about it can only be a good thing, right?

[Durendin]

Personally I don't think you should give an inch to the "professionally offended" whenever they stick their spuriously motivated heads into other people's business, no matter what the occasion.

You make your army the way you want it. It's your money and you're spending it for your own satisfaction, not to cow-tow to someone else's ideas of right and wrong or taste. They don't like it? Offer them some tissues as the world is going to be a rough ride for them if they find how you painted your miniatures upsetting.

[steelrudi]

No matter what you do anymore, you are bound to tweek someones nose. In the world in which we live there are people who riot, kill, and want to start wars over cartoons , movies, religious beliefs, and anything else that gives them an excuse to run amok. Now we get to the meat of the issue. Did you earn the money to buy your chosen models? Yes. Do you have the right of ownership of said models? Yes. As you have purchased, and now own said models, do you have the right of creative expression, to do with said models as you see fit? YES!!!! YOU have the RIGHT to do with your models whatever you desire. If people are offended, listen to their reasons, and calmly let them know your views, of why you created them in the way you have. Remember, this is a game, and hobby for enjoyment, and creativity. In the many years, I have been collecting nad painting models, I have never run across someone who goes out of their way to make a political with toys, on a game board. Not to say someone like that isn't out, there, I just haven't run into them. My two cents. For what it's worth.

[I108]

Don't back down because of someone elses ideas of YOUR army.

Just because mothers cover their childrens eyes when they look at my friend and I's custom armies, doesn't mean there is anything WRONG with them! ;)

[Joe Fixit]

Might be an idea to run your ideas past the store manager where you play 1st, I agree you should do what you wish with your army, but imagine all that effort and then the manager says, no you can't use that army here.
If he gives your idea the green light, go for whatever floats your boat.

[White Tiger88]

Because it is all fun and games in till someone thinks your army is crossing the line.

The local GW store once had some passer by complain about how racist the Tallarn army a player was using was... I guess it comes down to what you are sensitive about.

I am waiting to have someone pissed off i have the Iron Cross on all my guard tanks....... Some people think its racist but in reality it just shows that they don't know there history (And looks cool with death korps of krieg) All in all though its your army who cares if you offend someone?

[Wildeybeast]

GW wrote books and produced models for the Last Chancers which included serial killers. Short of child abuse, I'm not sure there are any crimes worse than that. Lets remember that for all it is marketed at children, the minimum recommended age is 14 years and up for GW games, because they deal with adult themes. Anyone not able to separate adult themes in a fantasy/sci-fi setting from real life is not someone you want to waste your time talking to.

[Durendin]

There's so much political correctness and lefty hand-wringing these days my first instinct is always to run counter to it. If someone is really so sensitive that this sort of thing is too much for them then this world is perhaps proving too cruel for the poor little darlings. I heartily suggest they expedite their departure from it post haste.

Give up an inch and it's gone for good.

[Gotthammer]

Or, you know, they've suffered real discrimination and hatred and don't want to deal with it in a hobby store [/just sayin']

But, on the other hand, your suggestion that they kill themselves is far more sensible than trying to understand their point of view. Why bother when it's clearly their fault for getting upset (https://twitter.com/MalePrivilege/status/252541950505385985) amirite?

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

WOAH.

Guys, let's all chill out for a second here. Durendin, I had a friend who committed suicide because of discrimination. You should be REALLY careful what you say in regards to suicide. It isn't a laughing matter, it isn't about "butthurt", it's a serious issue that is increasing in these desperate times.

This conversation does NOT continue, does everyone understand?

[inquisitorsog]

So you guys know that I am looking for some models for my friend to add some 'juves' in is army. This has got him some ribbing on some other sites, but nothing bad.

So the question is: How far can one go before the invisible line is crossed?

Your thoughts?
You mean cyber cherubs didn't cross any relevant line already?

[Nabterayl]

Along the lines of the mod's point, I think it's only civilized to consider what people are more likely to have personal experience with. If you've had first-hand experience with one of the real-world evils that can be represented in 40K, I think you're more entitled to be sensitive about it. In my mind, there's a big difference between a 12 year old American being offended by a National Socialist-themed army and a concentration camp survivor being offended by the same army, you know what I mean? Similarly, if I had any guys at my club who had been child soldiers and they thought my toy child soldiers were over the line ... I'd be okay with that, honestly. In the real 20th and 21st centuries, child soldiers are not a nice thing.

I agree that sometimes people are too easily offended, and I think a hobbyist needn't feel constrained by those people. But I also think a hobbyist needs to remember that 40K satirizes a lot of stuff that is genuinely horrible in real life, and when somebody is offended by something that is genuinely horrible - even in satire - the civilized hobbyist should at least inquire as to whether the offended party has some reason to find the satire beyond the pale.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

Well said Nabterayl.

[Wildeybeast]

Along the lines of the mod's point, I think it's only civilized to consider what people are more likely to have personal experience with. If you've had first-hand experience with one of the real-world evils that can be represented in 40K, I think you're more entitled to be sensitive about it. In my mind, there's a big difference between a 12 year old American being offended by a National Socialist-themed army and a concentration camp survivor being offended by the same army, you know what I mean? Similarly, if I had any guys at my club who had been child soldiers and they thought my toy child soldiers were over the line ... I'd be okay with that, honestly. In the real 20th and 21st centuries, child soldiers are not a nice thing.

I agree that sometimes people are too easily offended, and I think a hobbyist needn't feel constrained by those people. But I also think a hobbyist needs to remember that 40K satirizes a lot of stuff that is genuinely horrible in real life, and when somebody is offended by something that is genuinely horrible - even in satire - the civilized hobbyist should at least inquire as to whether the offended party has some reason to find the satire beyond the pale.

Whilst I'd agree that there needs to be some consideration given to others feelings and things which are obviously stupidly insensitive (like making the **** Will Burn in Hell Marines) should be avoided, a line needs to be drawn and people need to be able to separate reality from the game. If you spend your whole life thinking about every possible ramification of how things might upset people you will never do anything. The child soldier example is clear example of PC stupidity. The odds of meeting a former child soldier over a game of GW are so slim as to be negligible. Even if you did I would expect them as a reasonable people and like-minded gamers to recognise that you have created an army to represent an in-universe fiction rather than having made them as some bizarre attempt to upset former child soldiers in the very unlikely event you happen to come across one. We just need to use common sense here people and everyone needs to be able to separate reality from the game. Don't make armies designed to offend people, don't take offence at armies where none is clearly intended. I agree that child soldiers are not nice Nabterayl, but neither is war and as unpalatable as it is, children are part of war, either as soldiers or casualties. If we are not including them in a game because the reality makes us uncomfortable, we shouldn't be playing a game about war either.

[ElectricPaladin]

...like making the **** Will Burn in Hell Marines...

Please, please, in the Emperor's name, tell me that this isn't a real thing.

Please.

[Wildeybeast]

I assume not. I was thinking of something suitably offensive and those Westboro Baptist nutters popped into my head. And the slang term for cigarettes is banned as well as the abbreviation for members of the Nationalist Socialist Party, but I can use the word wanker??? What gives forum overlords?

[ElectricPaladin]

I assume not. I was thinking of something suitably offensive and those Westboro Baptist nutters popped into my head. And the slang term for cigarettes is banned as well as the abbreviation for members of the Nationalist Socialist Party, but I can use the word wanker??? What gives forum overlords?

They're probably Americans. We aren't convinced that wanker is a real word, much less an insult. Most of us think it's some kind of food product, made of boiled grain and lard or something.

[Wildeybeast]

Good point. IIRC correctly, that was Joss Whedon's little joke in Buffy, he'd have Spike use English swear words and they'd get past the American censors because they had no idea what they were. Whacks the DVD rating up over here though.

[Kyban]

Along the lines of the mod's point, I think it's only civilized to consider what people are more likely to have personal experience with. If you've had first-hand experience with one of the real-world evils that can be represented in 40K, I think you're more entitled to be sensitive about it. In my mind, there's a big difference between a 12 year old American being offended by a National Socialist-themed army and a concentration camp survivor being offended by the same army, you know what I mean? Similarly, if I had any guys at my club who had been child soldiers and they thought my toy child soldiers were over the line ... I'd be okay with that, honestly. In the real 20th and 21st centuries, child soldiers are not a nice thing.

I agree that sometimes people are too easily offended, and I think a hobbyist needn't feel constrained by those people. But I also think a hobbyist needs to remember that 40K satirizes a lot of stuff that is genuinely horrible in real life, and when somebody is offended by something that is genuinely horrible - even in satire - the civilized hobbyist should at least inquire as to whether the offended party has some reason to find the satire beyond the pale.

I would be more careful than that though, it really depends on who will see your models but personal experience can be broader than that, it may offend a soldier that had encountered child soldiers on a deployment, for example. Though people can be too easily offended, you have to consider their frame of mind, some people are pretty sheltered and are offended by any gore or violence at all (these tend to be the people that don't watch the news).

[Psychosplodge]

**** bollocks **** **** wank bugger arse ******* **** bloody

just checking

[ElectricPaladin]

...bloody


Oh, man. It would be hilarious of "bloody" was blocked.



So, I'm trying to do a really great ****** effect for my Khorne berserkers. Does anyone know which red to use to get a good ****** effect? Are there any particularly good ****** glazes out there? Also, I've heard that for the blood to look realistic, you need to use a brown undercoat - is that true?

[Wildeybeast]

I would be more careful than that though, it really depends on who will see your models but personal experience can be broader than that, it may offend a soldier that had encountered child soldiers on a deployment, for example. Though people can be too easily offended, you have to consider their frame of mind, some people are pretty sheltered and are offended by any gore or violence at all (these tend to be the people that don't watch the news).

If you know someone in your area this applies to then that is fair enough. But to rule it out on the basis that you may one day possibly meet a gamer who might have seen some child soldiers is just silly. British soldiers are not currently deployed in any African warzones (where you almost exclusively find child soldiers) and they virtually never are given that a) The African Union likes to keep matters in house wherever possible and b) the west doesn't give a toss about wars in Africa. And why on earth would someone who is offended by gore and violence be playing a WAR game? We just need to use common sense here people.

[Kyban]

If you know someone in your area this applies to then that is fair enough. But to rule it out on the basis that you may one day possibly meet a gamer who might have seen some child soldiers is just silly. British soldiers are not currently deployed in any African warzones (where you almost exclusively find child soldiers) and they virtually never are given that a) The African Union likes to keep matters in house wherever possible and b) the west doesn't give a toss about wars in Africa. And why on earth would someone who is offended by gore and violence be playing a WAR game? We just need to use common sense here people.

Like I said, it really depends on who will see the models, most likely it won't be an issue but it isn't something i'd personally want to have in my army even if it were meant to portray the reality of war.
There are a lot of child "soldiers" in the middle east as well, more like kids who are given guns and told to shoot at UN troops but might still have a large impact on someone forced to fight them.

[Durendin]

There's a big difference between doing something deliberately to be provocative such as the "Westboro Christian Marines" or using swastikas on your Leman Russes. I don't think anyone here would have difficulty in realizing the motivations of someone who would do as much, but that's not what's getting my grinding my gears on this. It's the assumption that I have to take anyone else's random issues into account while spending my money. That's just hilarious and not in an overly amusing way.

The desire to protect people's feelings if taken too far usually ends up paradoxical eg. "I'm so anxious that I might offend "X" that I don't interact with them just in case so as to ensure no offence is risked!"

Now I'm not digging out my old RT Imperial Guard Suicide Bombers just yet but the models exist as does the official fluff behind them for the 3rd Armageddon War. Out of general politeness of course I'm not using them as proxies for a Demo-Team. However if I ever met anyone at my local games club who dared raise his beliefs as worth more than everyone else's then I'd feel the need to challenge these ideas, not drop to my knees in supplication.

[White Tiger88]

After looking closely at this thread....Do i have the ONLY local Games Workshop store that Encourages the Blood & Guts? My Chaos lord (Sub for Mortarion till he is officially release) has an Ultramarine cut in half on his base with guts spewing out :D

[ElectricPaladin]

There's a big difference between doing something deliberately to be provocative such as the "Westboro Christian Marines" or using swastikas on your Leman Russes. I don't think anyone here would have difficulty in realizing the motivations of someone who would do as much, but that's not what's getting my grinding my gears on this. It's the assumption that I have to take anyone else's random issues into account while spending my money. That's just hilarious and not in an overly amusing way.

The desire to protect people's feelings if taken too far usually ends up paradoxical eg. "I'm so anxious that I might offend "X" that I don't interact with them just in case so as to ensure no offence is risked!"

Now I'm not digging out my old RT Imperial Guard Suicide Bombers just yet but the models exist as does the official fluff behind them for the 3rd Armageddon War. Out of general politeness of course I'm not using them as proxies for a Demo-Team. However if I ever met anyone at my local games club who dared raise his beliefs as worth more than everyone else's then I'd feel the need to challenge these ideas, not drop to my knees in supplication.

I think this is a pretty good attitude. The point of living in a democratic civil society is that everyone has a right to free expression, and a right to feel however they want about it. Ideally, you can play with whatever models you want, and if anyone is bothered by it they can talk to you if they feel like it... or just deal. And if you're bothered by them being bothered, you can deal, too. And then you can all go home and complain to your wives about that jerk-faced someb*tch at the game store. But when dealing with each other, you don't try to make anyone's ideas better or more important than another's - you just present your own opinion and leave it at that.

That said, there is always the matter of what would be in good taste. That's a lot more debatable. To get back to the OP, I think he was asking less "what will get me in trouble? We can all agree that "trouble" is kind of a weird term to apply to this kind of situation. I think he was asking "where is the boundary of good taste." In some ways, that's a more interesting question.

Honestly, I find the whole "HOW DARE YOU DO THAT TASTELESS THING!?!?" vs "HOW DARE YOU NOT TELL ME TO DO THIS TASTELESS THING!?!?" debate pretty meaningless, not to mention being a total - and sometimes intentional - distraction from the core issue. Look, you can model your army however you want. And someone else might take offense, and the store owner might side with you, and you may end up needing to find a new place to play. All of these potentialities are the result of the free choices of individuals living in a free civil society. What should you do? That's a bigger question, but ultimately, a personal question.

Incidentally, I tend to deal with a similar issue whenever I try to talk about the issue of how women are presented in nerd-focused art. I try to say "it isn't that I have a problem with gravity-defying boobs, it's that I think we send a message when we present gravity-defying boobs on one page and perfectly realistic men on the other, and I think creators should think harder about that" but the response I get is "STOP TELLING ME THAT BOOBS ARE BAD!" It gets exhausting. Sometimes people are very quick to assume that you are questioning their rights when, in fact, what you're questioning is their judgement.

For myself, I happen to think that making light of someone else's suffering is probably wrong. Not that it should be illegal, but it's probably a jerky thing to do, and I try to avoid doing jerky things. Now, "making light of" and "talking about it" are different things. For example, as I wrote initially, making a mocking and ridiculous army of child soldiers where the characters have greenstuff footy pyjamas and teddy bears and are painted to look as though they have soiled themselves in terror... that's a pretty jerky thing to do. Even if you don't encounter someone who has been a child soldier, you may encounter someone with strong feelings about the issue, and they are going to be hurt and offended.

Again, I'm not saying that you can't do this. You can do whatever you want to.

On the other hand, modeling some of your troops to look like adolescents in a fantasy setting that is supposed to include such things, that's fine. You aren't making light of anything, you're just including it.

Back to the first example, though. There are a lot of things you can do. You can paint swastikas on every model you own. You can make a Chaos army that would make Slaanesh blush. You can paint your entire force of Salamanders to look like characters from an antebellum minstrel show. The question, though, is should you? Ask yourself: what's the payoff? Why do you want to do this? Are you trying to hurt someone? Are you expressing something meaningful? If it's the latter, what are you trying to say, and might there be a way to say it that won't drown out the content?

[DarkDesigner]

EP, very well said. I pretty much agree with every word.

[Kyban]

I agree, EP put it very well. For the OP it really comes down to whether you feel strongly enough about including that theme in the model and whether you care about how people will react to it. Personally I stay away from issues like that because, while I don't find gore etc offensive, I don't find it particularly tasteful either and view my army as an extension of myself, a reflection of me that someone else will see.

[ElectricPaladin]

...I don't find gore etc offensive, I don't find it particularly tasteful either and view my army as an extension of myself, a reflection of me that someone else will see.

That's an interesting point. I feel the same way, but personally, I don't need to see every army I paint as a reflection of a part of me that I particularly like. For example, my Everblight is pretty twisted and gory, with stains and fresh blood. I don't think it's over the top, but it's definitely pretty intense. I agree that it's part of me, and even though it's not a part of myself that I normally express, I'm comfortable making it part of an army of evil imaginary elves.

[Wildeybeast]

EP, very well said. I pretty much agree with every word.

Agreed entirely. A very intelligent and eloquent summation of the issue EP.