"What is your favorite Army/Mythos?" Topic

So I sculpted some 15mm models for my own use because I had ideas that I could not find on the market. I then decided to get them cast and did a Kickstarter (shameless plug see them here link ) The question of why does everyone make Orcs, elves, dwarves etc. came up as I searched the web for marketing purposes. My main question is what armies do most players have and why? Does everyone have a Knight order style human army because they like them or because those are the models available? If someone made more unique tropes like say an Avian style or Frogs instead of lizards etc. what do you think the amount of gamers would field them? Just some thoughts on why our worlds are populated with the creatures, is it availability or something else?

Alan Spencer from the Lone Star Historical Miniatures (LSHM) Club of Texas recently wrote up a battle report using his 6mm miniatures and Blucher rules. Here is his report:

Da' Bug!!! All hail the Mighty Bug of TMP!

Okay, back on topic: For myself, I'm a high-fantasy traditionalist, so that's what I look for in fantasy armies. I also prefer a cleaner, realistic look in proportions, armor, weapons, etc.. And I don't like grotesqueries or sexualized females. So those considerations guide my choices more than anything.

I will say that I'd like to find some "exotic" looking human armies that aren't from any immediately obvious historical source— no Knights, Saracens, Samurai, Romans, Vikings, etc.. Something realistic that just looks different. That doesn't mean it can't be a historical army— just not one everybody automatically knows. Hey, the same thing in a fantasy race might be good as well!

Very nice – love Blucher

As a long time fan of Runequest/Glorantha style of none traditional fantasy. Iam for any new settings & Style of fantasy figures. I also like classic fantasy aka Tolkien settings and figures.

Traditional fantasy armies are the overwhelming choice because of the inertia of Tolkien/D&D/GW.

The reason non-traditional armies don't make it is because they are almost always released piece-meal, and can't be added to another army a unit at a time.

If you want to have the best chance for success, release 2 full non-traditional armies that can fight each other, with all poses/command/cavalry from the start. It's obviously horribly expensive to pull that off. Empire of the Petal Throne did it back in the day, but even that was a niche game.

I base my fantasy armies on 1e and 2e AD&D, as well as my own personal fantasy world setting I use for my games. I am both an RPG gamer, and a fantasy mass battles gamer. I often combine the two, basing my mass battles on what is happening in my RPG campaign.

I am focusing on the size ratios based on Gary Gygax's monster/creature sizes he listed in his 1e 1977 AD&D Monster Manual. I want to see the armies the way Gygax saw them, in the 1970's. As far as I can tell, he used 54mm Cave Men figures, for Hill Giants; he further used 60mm Viking figures to represent his Frost Giants. The other Giant races, I cannot figure out what figures he was using to model them. This is all based on 25mm/1 inch being equal to a 5-6 foot tall Human. Doing the simple ratio math, Hill Giants should be 54mm tall, and Frost Giants should be 60mm tall.

I also recognize that as D&D was revised, there was a dramatic creep upwards in size, for most monsters. To me, most monsters became ridiculously over-sized… This is a large part as to why I am focusing on size ratios listed in the original, 1e Monster Manual.

In summary, I think most people buy what is listed in the D&D Monster Manuals, because that is what they play with/need, most often. D&D is very popular, so there is a large audience who need common races such as Orcs, Goblins, Hobgoblins, etc. Cheers!

Agree with all the above comments. I'm partial to mostly human fantasy armies. I'd like to see different style of shields, weapons, armor, uniforms between opposing armies. I like to see more standard/flag bearers.

I have a collection of Mithril 32mm Lord of the Rings figures. I like the realistic proportions and the details. What I don't like is the nonstandard size of 32mm. I also didn't like that both Rohan and Gondor had basically the same round shields, although later releases had different size shields I think.

Almost all of my games have been in skirmish, so I confess I don't own any true armies (yet). But the armies and battles I've always loved most come from the Redwall series of books. I especially love the battle in Mossflower where a horde of sea-faring rats takes on an army of hares lead by a very angry badger.

Unfortunately, Splintered Light's range of "not Redwall" figures are ~20mm tall, which are too big for that kind of battle (for me, anyway). So I can't see myself owning a true army of them any time soon.

Orcs, dwarfs, etc. come with a lot of ready-made associations. You might give your specific variety some USP – good orcs, tall dwarfs, etc. – but you can assume people will fill in the blanks roughly as intended when you don't specify. You'll have to do a lot more work if you want people to have an idea what your ibex-men are like.

Similarly, for fantasy humans "[insert historical culture] with magic" requires much less explanation than something more original would.*

So yeah, I think there's a genuine preference for the instantly relatable. There are, obviously, people who like the original and unusual for its own sake, but I expect the well-known and conventional is always going to attract more customers.

* This assumes, of course, that the historical culture, or at least a theme park version thereof, is reasonably well known to your audience; this is why you keep seeing stuff based on medieval Europe or feudal Japan much more commonly than, say, ancient India.