"One-pose armies" Topic

No, not the next flame war (hopefully) just curious about others' thoughts.

I have no problem with the "grunts" in any army I use being single pose figures, though I find that many people see this as odd. Two reasons why I feel this way:

1. To me "military miniatures" are, first and foremost, toy soldiers, and I have never had a problem with them looking like toy soldiers. Thus, in this and several other aspects of gaming, I never have had a problem with my armies or terrain looking a little abstract. I like an artistic look, but I can do without the ultra-realism that is so common anymore.

2. It does have a certain practical value as well. If all of the "grunts" are in a single pose, it is easier to pick out individual heroes, officers, player characters, or whatever, without having to resort to oddball paint jobs. The figure with the different pose is Grok the Dwarf Slayer, or Dirk Starblazer, or Private Theophilus Muttonchops, or whoever needs to be a little more individualized.

Note that not all of my armies are built in this manner, but, when it does happen, it's okay by me.

Thoughts?

Each to their own, but I prefer the look of different poses and such like in my armies. To be fair, I only play 6mm, so how much difference this makes is debatable.

I hate one pose armies.

Only makes sense for some units, where they were highly regimented, e.g. well trained ancients, napoleonics, civil war, etc.

Even then, I prefer a bit of individuality.

If it's well painted, I'm fine either way.

I regard the figures first as playing pieces. Where the poses (or lak of them) make a difference to ease of play I will go with what makes play easiest.

In small scale actions when the pieces are moved individually multiply poses makes identifieing idividualls easier (who has moved fired etc). Unit combat where 90% of the men are interchangeable and a number of "heros" are different Identical poses for the mass can help play by making the "heros" stand out.

x42

I tend towards a variety of poses where possible, but honestly I don't really mind for the rank & file. Just so long as that one pose is something that looks reasonably like a regimented movement/stance, and doesn't have the soldier leaping or twisting in some weird way. I'm not too keen on overly dramatic poses in the first place, but a whole unit of guys in one such pose ends up looking like a dance troupe.

one pose for the troop types that this suits, horse and musket foot for example. It also speeds up painting no end.
Varity everywhere else though.

I think my dyslexia software was fighting vista in my last post. I therefore apologise if it was unreadable and request that you let me know if it was understandable or not.

x42

Very much a matter of personal taste – for me I hate the toy soldier look. Most of my Napolonics are AB where even the same figure code offers 3 or 4 different poses often with only a subtle change but it makes for a more normal or natural look. My Seven Years War armies are all Old Glory and the same situation applies.

I guess if I were simulating the Edinburgh Tattoo or the Changing of the Guard at Buckingham Palace I'd want all in the same pose but I'm not, I'm trying for a battlefield look.

Whatever floats your boat though!

I think it can look quite good, many of the old-school, red-period GW armies had legions of the same (often the only) plastic grunt that they'd produced and I think it's a good visual style.

Oh, this brings back memories of my old Minifigs Napoleonic armies. Ah, Minifigs, where "we have every pose you could want – as long as it's marching with the musket at shoulder, or advancing with the musket pointing from the hip"!

Row upon row upon row, all in exactly the same pose. But it wasn't too bad for Napoleonics. In WW2, on the other hand…

x42Brown – It was readily understandable – ok, one or two spelling errors (which we all make) but it was easy to follow what you meant. :-)
Anyway, I'd say Vista rather than your dyslexia is more at fault if it had been un-understandable :-)

Do what you want, its your game.
Personally I think a lot depends on how you base your figures, which manufacturers you like, and what the unit sizes are.

I personally prefer single poses for regular close formation units, some variety for irregular or open order troops. Again, though, it is all a matter of personal choice.

I prefer just a few pose for grunts: firing, marching and maybe standing.

Absolutely dislike monopose armies! If I'm considering a new manufacturer, if they only offer a single pose per troop type, out they go. I am very much into the modeling aspect, and I like to sit back and enjoy the spectacle of the game, as if it were a moving diorama. Monopose figures destroys the "verisimilitude" of the game.

Damon.

Thanks alien BLOODY HELL surfer. If it's understandable I'll leave it. The notebook still has vista on it and on every upgrade I have to adjust things to get my dyslexia software running properly again.

x42

Depends on the sale of the rules.

Like right now, I'm doing Napoleoinc 6mm were each battalion is one base of 24 figs, at this scale there is no point in diffrent poses.

But lets say I'm doing a big battalion game on a divisional level I want diffrent poses.

Basicly if I have a grand tactical game, I want my units to be like chess pieces, you move them like a chess piece, trying to get your other player in check mate. and then it looks better with single pose(march attack)

I use the same pose for elite units, with a more diversified look for the others. Those few veteran units really stand out, even on a large board.

Whatever floats your boat.

Depends.

For regular batallions and formed troops I don't mind the one pose mini. For skirmishers, barbarians, natives and Modern warfare I like a variety of poses.

I prefer multipose figures now and will choose them over single pose if they are both suitable options.However I do like the way the older limited pose figures were easy to rank up on movement trays. Currently have to paint numbers and which rank line underneath for the multipose figures A1-5 B1-5 C1-5 oh poo forgot the musician again.

It just means the troops are well disciplined.

Even with serious "rank & file"-type infantry, some variation is very good to have. Old Glory, Dixon, and Perry Minis spoil me for little differences.

I certainly don't do same-sculpt minis for seriously irregular troops. I remember seeing an old Ral Partha blister at a store a good while back, containing at least a half dozen identical Celtic warriors with Battersea shields. Yeah, I definitely need a warband of those guys.

For my linear warfare troops (ie.; SYW) I don't mind a single pose but as an example would order my Front Rank Tricorne troops but on the odd unit would also order the one one troop figure without the tricorne or possibly a figure with a bandaged head.
Also my Roman Legions I prefere in a single pose.

But in a WWII situation I want all sorts of poses and may create different platoons by different manufacturers in they don't mingle well size wise.
My war bands Celts, Gauls I like a good mixute of poses even though the same poses could be in different colours.

"Thoughts?"

One pose works for me sometimes, depends really. My 15mm Sudanese are all one pose because that is the only pose Essex do….(and a jolly nice pose it is too). I have entire brigade of British lorried infantry in one pose (marching in helmet and greatcoats) because I decided it would be amusing to do. Well, they do spend a lot of time in Italy and the Reichswald in winter….

I try to at least base all my Romans (and some other heavy types) in the same pose on the same base, if not the whole unit, because they look more imposing that way. No ragged Romans for me.

If I ever succumb to the whole Old School toy soldier thing, it is pretty mandatory to have one pose units.

What I really hate are those armies which have bayonets poking in all directions as they are a PITA to get in and out of the boxes.

Well 6mm lends itself to one pose units. Saying that while sitting surrounded by my modes like an odd deformed dragon and studying their minute detail its nice to have a bunch of poses!

Many of my early armies were one pose armies. In some cases we had only one pose to choose from. In others we had maybe 3 poses, and it always worked out that one of the few available poses worked better, so we went with that.

Today, I typically have a little more variety, but one pose or many is always 'ok-fine' by me.

I don't mind one pose horse and musket, especially SYW. Not so keen for Ancients or C20 though.

What I can't really bring myself to like is units with only two or three poses of grunt. Either everyone has to be different, or all the same.

as long as it's marching with the musket at shoulder, or advancing with the musket pointing from the hip

Sounds like "March of the Wooden Soldiers."

I can appreciate both types if they are painted well.

i go for one pose units but not one pose armies

i find it useful in 1/72 WW2 to have each section in one pose so I can quickly recognise them on the field.

At the end of the day, I like the choice of doing on or the other.

Steve
Cavalcade Wargames
cavalcadewargames.com
nycjadie.wordpress.com

I prefer variety. But if the unit is in, say, a marching pose, not much variety is needed.

Ideally I like either firing line or march attack poses with enough variety to avoid the photocopier effect. But as above, to each their own…

I like variety. Often I buy stuff just to change the look of my army. I'm more a collector in some ways.

I remember those one pose plastic GW units. I have an army of Goblins from that era which I'm still trying to finish painting. It looks alright all ranked up but I put a few odd balls in there too and of course the heros at the front.

Multi-piece plastic of course at 28mm and conversions and companies that just make or even trade bits is putting an end to this. I think the scale matters. In epic or 6mm/10mm for the non-GW it is totally cool. Bigger scales it looks odd. It works better if the figures are ranked up. Necron armies look a bit odd sometimes as the figs all have similar poses.

That said anything well painted always looks good.

I like one pose, and identical uniforms – so no units with individual distinctions other than facing colours, which can be painted on – for each arm of service or troop type [Light, Heavy Cavalry] throughout my wargame imagination armies. That way, I can just purchase one basic line infantryman, dragoon, curassier, lancer or guncrew and use it for either army and any unit of that type with the army, simply by changing the paint job. If I want to engage in more varied painting, I can create personal uniforms for generals and their ADC's. This is a deliberately 'toy soldier' approach, because when I war game I'm more interested in the tactical problem/challenge than recreating the visual appearance of particular historical armies.

I don't even like one pose units for my Napoleonics and SYW units.

I like one pose armies for SYW and Napoleonic units of infantry and cavalry. Long lines of regimented troops, well painted and with colorful GMB flags looks very nice.

Other periods lend themselves more to individualism, such as ACW or WW2.

Well most armies spent good time and money to make their troops act as one, some wargaming stands I have seen look like a mob after pub closing time