VS LAB Alpha Name discussion

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • New

    Eldan wrote:

    On what basis do you assume the entire community hates the Roman names? I like it, most review videos I've seen like it, all my friends like it, quite a lot.

    And the thing to keep in mind, which every piece of fluff emphasizes strongly is that the Vermin are not Roman. They are post-Roman. They are the barbarian horde that has destroyed Rome and are now using the names without understanding them, to make themselves sound important. The announcement fluff article is very clear on that, as is the main rulebook and the world hymn. They are the Lombards calling themselves Rex Romanorum or the Franks and Seljuks appropriating the title Kaiser, not actual Romans.

    Also, several of the names you propose get the fluff and mechanics of those units. Yes, I think the whispering bell is not very mechanically interesting currently, but with the effect it has and the spell it casts, it's very clear it has a silencing effect, it doesn't squeak.

    And reusing any GW name like rat ogre is a no-go.

    Also, several of the names you translates are categories. YOu can't translate House Prefect as Rakachit Mechanist. It also includes Prefects of other houses. Unless you want the Stygians and Fetthis also be part of House Rakachit. The Rakachit Mechanist is right there. Same for hte Swarm Priest. Swarm priests aren't just plague prophets. They include orthodox priests too, along with the heterodox ones of the plague cult. It also includes what used to be the normal prophet. Former plague prophets are now priests of Errahman, which I think is a much better name than just Plague Priest: it gives the god and religion a name and immediately puts them in a place in the world. The name tells you that this is a priesthood worshipping a different god from the rest of vermin society, and it tells you that god comes from a different culture, in the far east. "Plague" could be anything. "Errahman" immediately tells you that it is Persian and Indian inspired.

    Also, Ive anything, I'm sad we seem to have lost House Sicara. That was a good name.
    I do not say from the name of all T9 community, just that 20-30 people we usually play.
    Sorry if my "all" confused you.

    Just today we discussed new VS book and lucky you dont speak Russian, you would be badly surprised the reaction...
    95% I could say no good words for Roman idea and Historical reference at all.
    Most our community think need keep fantasy back idea. Thats the fact, sorry, bro..

    About word Vermin Ogre. Let me remind word "Ogre" have no link with GW.
    Its definitely old word. So I strongly suggest use Vermin Ogre.

    AND THE MAIN
    If you want people like your naming ideas you must have real Literate Books, stories published and popular.
    Unit that time ANY naming ideas would be just worrisome noise for many players.
    Just add your Errahman name to the Army book will not make people like it. Trust me.
    And the most important this have no link if name idea good or bed, just not that method to make it popular between players.
    My IMHO for sure, but I live many years :)))

    People still love Skaven, Skarsnik, Zigmar, but not because this good name idea.
    No only this reason. If I heard this names first time may be I also think this bull#hit. You see?
  • New

    Sigmar is directly out of Germanic mythology, though. Just as much as Errahman is Zoroastrian.

    As for Skarsnik... meh. I'm more of a Tretch Craventail guy. Or the nameless scribe from the Vortex campaign. But you can't compare unit names to character names . The Vermin background isn't out yet. Of course they can't have named characters so far. Yes, people like Skarsnik or Queek headtaker. But does anyone really have strong feelings about the name "clanrat"?

    As for many years, I played Warhammer Fantasy for 20 years now. I know a lot of players too. Most of the ones I know like it.

    (Also, just so there's no mistakes here: I don't name any units. I'm not part of any team that has worked on this book. My job is cataloguing models and translating fluff texts, I don't write anything. I'm just a fan.)
  • New

    Eldan wrote:

    I wouldn't say Japan fits especially well? I mean, maybe the Sengoku Jidai, but clearly not the Shogunate era. Far too peaceful. Too much politics from the top, too, not from the bottom.

    Rome has the advantage of having a gigantic, constantly starving, unemployed urban population that makes a perfect model for Vermin society. As do client politics. And theatrics. Romans loved their thatrical politics to impress the plebs.
    Even before the Sengoku period. At least we would not have to have a senator as a character... but can have a military leader as a king. The Sengoku can highlight the schism between religion and warfare, sort of monks and rulers and then play between the plague and not plague units. But even before would be better. I feel that legacy models also very much look like from this period already and the fighting style of the troops fit to my vision of this period. Models and modeling should be left to the particular modelers heart.

    Names should be more fantasy then what the book is. Allow each gamer to go for his own Rome/Japan/Avalon/Atlantis. Don't shoehorn people by forcing names. Some will like Rome and they can go hard, others might not. No reason to do anything with names that restricts options.

    Make it fantasy and subtle to leave players more freedom of models.
  • New

    Eldan wrote:

    Sigmar is directly out of Germanic mythology, though. Just as much as Errahman is Zoroastrian.

    As for Skarsnik... meh. I'm more of a Tretch Craventail guy. Or the nameless scribe from the Vortex campaign. But you can't compare unit names to character names . The Vermin background isn't out yet. Of course they can't have named characters so far. Yes, people like Skarsnik or Queek headtaker. But does anyone really have strong feelings about the name "clanrat"?
    OMG, thats names just as a sample :D :D :D
    but the fact most OLD players and YOUNG players (say thanks Total War) like old GW naming

    I do not suggest keep them, its clearly can not be done
    but some common unit ideas (like Vermin Ogre) I think need still keep
  • New

    I mean, you can still go anywhere you want? My Vermin Swarm army will be Dieselpunk with mostly German-inspired military uniforms, since I'm building a Lubart Army. The Empire of Sigmar had German names too, that didn't stop people from building Japanese armies with those rules.

    Rulebooks are suggestions. You play your own game with them.
  • New

    Alkasar wrote:

    Eldan wrote:

    Sigmar is directly out of Germanic mythology, though. Just as much as Errahman is Zoroastrian.

    As for Skarsnik... meh. I'm more of a Tretch Craventail guy. Or the nameless scribe from the Vortex campaign. But you can't compare unit names to character names . The Vermin background isn't out yet. Of course they can't have named characters so far. Yes, people like Skarsnik or Queek headtaker. But does anyone really have strong feelings about the name "clanrat"?
    OMG, thats names just as a sample :D :D :D but the fact most OLD players and YOUNG players (say thanks Total War) like old GW naming

    I do not suggest keep them, its clearly can not be done
    but some common unit ideas (like Vermin Ogre) I think need still keep
    The specific name is not the point. What I'm saying is you can't complain that the old named characters were cool and the new unit names aren't as cool as the old named characters, because a) We can never use named characters from GW properties. We'd be sued into the ground and b) We don't have named characters yet. We will have some when the books come out. You can't compare unit names to character names.

    I mean, is it a valid complaint to say that we don't have named characters and we should have them? Oh, you bet. I complain like three times a week that this game needs more named, heroic, famous characters with backstories and that we don't have any for most armies. It's one of the things I miss most in the game as it currently stands and I'm very vocal about it. But that's entirely disconnected from the reality of the unit names.

    The fact is, we have bottlenecks in art and layouting, so the background is massively delayed. I hate it, you hate it, almost everyone hates it, but that's what it is. It sucks that we don't have finished books for 80% of the armies. If you want to help us get more named characters and inspired background out, join those teams.
  • New

    Eldan wrote:

    I mean, you can still go anywhere you want? My Vermin Swarm army will be Dieselpunk with mostly German-inspired military uniforms, since I'm building a Lubart Army. The Empire of Sigmar had German names too, that didn't stop people from building Japanese armies with those rules.

    Rulebooks are suggestions. You play your own game with them.
    Not when it screams Rome at you.... just should be more subtle that is all. I agree that Rome is everywhere and boring for me really. In fact you do know that Romans were very patriotic and wanted this to show in their actions and deeds. I would like a more selfish approach to my vermin.

    I don't think Rome is a good inspiration. But for inspiration sake, it does not matter. Real world should stay out of fantasy anyway.
  • New

    Eldan wrote:

    I mean, you can still go anywhere you want? My Vermin Swarm army will be Dieselpunk with mostly German-inspired military uniforms, since I'm building a Lubart Army. The Empire of Sigmar had German names too, that didn't stop people from building Japanese armies with those rules.

    Rulebooks are suggestions. You play your own game with them.
    for sure, but dont think just for yourself
    there are still HUGE number of players who want have Classic rat Army, so why not help them a bit?

    I am really sorry to hear some my friends not want check T9 just because classic Army ideas changed.. I mean changing game idea from Fantasy to some strange Historic-like...
    that's just unwise to repel many players, don't you think so?
  • New

    Alkasar wrote:

    Eldan wrote:

    I mean, you can still go anywhere you want? My Vermin Swarm army will be Dieselpunk with mostly German-inspired military uniforms, since I'm building a Lubart Army. The Empire of Sigmar had German names too, that didn't stop people from building Japanese armies with those rules.

    Rulebooks are suggestions. You play your own game with them.
    for sure, but dont think just for yourselfthere are still HUGE number of players who want have Classic rat Army, so why not help them a bit?

    I am really sorry to hear some my friends not want check T9 just because classic Army ideas changed.. I mean changing game idea from Fantasy to some strange Historic-like...
    that's just unwise to repel many players, don't you think so?
    I'd say it attracts just as many players. Most of my friends and the people in my club were entirely uninterested in Ninth Age before some fluff came out, but I managed to recruit two people just by showing them the translated Epic of Kibotesh. One of them spent a solid ten minutes laughing about the Mauss Cannon and didn't care one bit about the "fan edition of Warhammer" before.

    So yeah, I'm super happy with this entire thing. It finally gives a bit of character to our army, which was super boring before.

    I mean, it could be so much better, they still managed to make the bell uninteresting, the mishaps on the artillery are far too random and the backfire effects not interesting enough, and I really could go on, but the idea of having a vandal army with some latinate imitation on top is, I think, a grand start.
  • New

    Alkasar wrote:

    95% I could say no good words for Roman idea and Historical reference at all.

    Most our community think need keep fantasy back idea.
    Here's the thing: everything is derivative. You cannot reach into the void and come up with a wholly new and original concept, that's just not how the human mind works. We draw inspiration from what we already know and change or build upon it to make something new.

    Sure, we could try to start from scratch and make an original culture. Like, draw some lines to arrive at faction iconography or art style draw some buildings or clothes... inevitably though, they'd end up resembling something that's already been done in the real world, and much better and more cohesive.

    The real world is full of examples of great civilizations with their own fantastic culture, means of writing, politics and armies, more fantastic than we could make (truth is stranger than fiction, after all). The fastest and best way to create 16 unique armies + 32 supplement armies is to draw inspirations from the real world. That doesn't mean that "VS = Romans" as Eldan has explained multiple times. But if you want a summary of what VS are in less than three words, then "roman inspired" is a fair generalisation.

    I made a comparison earlier to UD being egypt-inspired. Do the 95% of the people you talk to dislike UD for being egypt-inspired? Do you also dislike some WHFB armies like Kislev for being Russian-inspired? It's okay if you do so but I'm mainly asking to see if you dislike all obvious historical inspiration or if you just dislike Rome, specifically.


    I also wanted to compare T9A to other fantasy settings. You can look at - say - LotR and conclude "well these are not historically referenced at all". Obviously you'd be quite wrong as any history buff would be able to tell you - but they're definitely less explicitly so than our setting, to be fair. Now, LotR has a huge advantage in that it only features a handful of prominent and culturally unique factions, so you can quite reliably make some less derivative stuff for those factions. But if LotR had 16 factions (or 48), you'd soon run out of "originality". Sci-fi and high fantasy settings like AoS is a bit easier to deal with because you're not usually restricted by geography and environments which are the foundations of a culture.

    So for VS, the environment is a fallen Rome, now full of psychopathic rats. What kind of unique culture could that build? You'll see some hints in the names and game mechanics in the alpha. For the whole story, stay tuned for the full LAB, coming... at some point :whistling:
  • New

    Eldan wrote:

    Hombre de Mundo wrote:

    "roman inspired" is a fair generalisation.
    I'd say Roman-Imitating. They don't even have the legitimation of Translatio Imperii like the Franks did.
    I was moreso talking about the design decisions that went into creating the theme for VS. But sure, Roman-imitating works just fine and is more accurate in-setting :)
  • New

    Let's forget the argument that vermin can be based on roman society for a while. Let's assume the Lore is inspired by romans and the fluff as well. Why do we have to use those unit names? Can't we have Both? Use parts of romans history as inspiration (GW and others all do this) and drop the name reference? The roman names on rats seem unnecessary, no matter what side of the argument you are on.
  • New

    Hombre de Mundo wrote:

    Here's the thing: everything is derivative. You cannot reach into the void and come up with a wholly new and original concept, that's just not how the human mind works. We draw inspiration from what we already know and change or build upon it to make something new.
    Sure, we could try to start from scratch and make an original culture. Like, draw some lines to arrive at faction iconography or art style draw some buildings or clothes... inevitably though, they'd end up resembling something that's already been done in the real world, and much better and more cohesive.

    The real world is full of examples of great civilizations with their own fantastic culture, means of writing, politics and armies, more fantastic than we could make (truth is stranger than fiction, after all). The fastest and best way to create 16 unique armies + 32 supplement armies is to draw inspirations from the real world. That doesn't mean that "VS = Romans" as Eldan has explained multiple times. But if you want a summary of what VS are in less than three words, then "roman inspired" is a fair generalisation.

    I made a comparison earlier to UD being egypt-inspired. Do the 95% of the people you talk to dislike UD for being egypt-inspired? Do you also dislike some WHFB armies like Kislev for being Russian-inspired? It's okay if you do so but I'm mainly asking to see if you dislike all obvious historical inspiration or if you just dislike Rome, specifically
    I feel here could be mistake at the start of T9 (which probably still could be fixed).
    There were 16 Races at GW world, BUT they are not GW own idea. And here is the point.
    Cause if they were GW licence you may say "we need change them totally to protect our project".
    But they NOT original. Their names original (also not all).

    So why just not change a bit all this Elves, Orcs and Rats?
    Why not to keep same fantasy races idea, just change them a bit? You may make your Elves Empire new name and give them nice new back.
    But why need link history??? There are ENOUGH fantasy ideas you may use.

    Finally what I could see is many players mixed and confused. Really.
    I mean personally I like many things T9 team do, but about historical reference - I hate it. So many my fellows do.

    And about Kislev. That's great GW fail, this most dislike project for me.
    They don't understand how RU naming works, they mix different (also some opposite) culture symbols. So for many RU players their ideas looks stupid and even sometimes unpolite. And all this just because they dont think well before launching Kislev.
    Easy to say GW were not good at that, trust me, bro :)
  • New

    Hombre de Mundo wrote:

    Now, LotR has a huge advantage in that it only features a handful of prominent and culturally unique factions, so you can quite reliably make some less derivative stuff for those factions. But if LotR had 16 factions (or 48), you'd soon run out of "originality".
    Excuse me, not derrivative? Tolkien made Lord of the Rings derrivative on purpose. It was supposed to be history-inspired from the start. "Westu Théoden hal" isn't even well-disguised Anglo-Saxon, the Eorlingas are straight-up lifted from history.
  • New

    Alkasar wrote:

    And about Kislev. That's great GW fail, this most dislike project for me.
    They don't understand how RU naming works, they mix different (also some opposite) culture symbols. So for many RU players their ideas looks stupid and even sometimes unpolite. And all this just because they dont think well before launching Kislev.
    Easy to say GW were not good at that, trust me, bro :)
    Personally, I thought the really really bad German names of anything in the Empire was one of the best things about Warhammer Fantasy. It wa hilariously bad and I didn't know a single German-speaking player who didn't love laughing about the names of various characters.

    And since we have a few slavic-speakers on the theme, plus a few actual linguists, I think Volskaja is already doing better than Kislev. And hey, our most famous Warrior character is from there.