Let's Read: Warhammer Fantasy: End Times

Do you prefer the current slow, detailed method or would you like a quicker, less detailed one?

  • Status Quo

    Votes: 28 66.7%
  • Quicker and less detailed

    Votes: 14 33.3%

  • Total voters
    42
The problem with Araby is that unlike Tilea, Bretonnia, or even Norsca they get the barest of scraps in the novels, Army books, RPG sourcebooks and so on and then when those scraps are bad it creates an impression.

Viscount de Chegny is a tyrant to the peasants who have the misfortune to live on his estates and a conniving weasel who has invaded the Empire repeatedly because "My estates should be bigger" but he's balanced out by any number of Bretonnian characters who may not be saints but many rise to "pretty good for the Old World."

Meanwhile there's Sultan Jafar, there's that one Dogs of War unit that's a riff on Lawrence of Arabia, there's the...Arabean slavers and the drug lord in the Brummer the Bounty Hunter novels, and the...conniving scheming weapons merchant in the first Florence & Lorenzo novel.

It's not great.
 
I sometimes hear that Old Warhammer was satirical, and a lot of its things was them making fun of a particular group and maybe there is a message behind all the 'funny' jokes and comedic jabs.
By the time Tome of Salvation was written, it definitely was no longer satire. It's not a bad thing regardless of what some people keep saying, and I prefer the modern take, but it does results in this kind of bad writing.

And the thing is, even if Old-Old Warhammer was a satire... a lot of them are still cringey and problematic as hell. Pygmies are already mentioned, and here's Nippon lore:

warhammerfantasy.fandom.com

Nippon

Nippon, also named Niipon, is a vast, island empire of Men located eastwards of Grand Cathay in the Far Sea of the Far East.[2a][3c][4b][14a] It is an independent state of tough, sea-going peasantry and stern feudal warrior overlords known as samurai.[2a] Long time ago, primitive groups of Men...

Those are all from REALLY old Warhammer Fantasy editions. And it's basically a bunch of Japanese cars and British popular drink refs dressed in Mikado-esque clothing.

Meanwhile there's Sultan Jafar, there's that one Dogs of War unit that's a riff on Lawrence of Arabia, there's the...Arabean slavers and the drug lord in the Brummer the Bounty Hunter novels, and the...conniving scheming weapons merchant in the first Florence & Lorenzo novel.

And things like this:

warhammerfantasy.fandom.com

Mameluk

Mamelukes are the lowly slave-warriors of Araby. Slavery is rife in Araby and indeed the slave markets of Al-Haikk or Lashiek are testament to this. Many Old Worlders look upon the Arabyans with a great deal of contempt and see them as nothing more than barbarians. The Nomads of the desert look...
warhammerfantasy.fandom.com

Prophet of Law

The Prophet of Law is a religious figure who recently arose among the Arabyans, preaching a message against nonhumans.[1a] Recently in Araby a fanatic who called himself the "Prophet of Law" is stirring up the natives to cleanse their land of evil, and his definition of evil included anyone who...
 
Last edited:
The problem with Araby is that unlike Tilea, Bretonnia, or even Norsca they get the barest of scraps in the novels, Army books, RPG sourcebooks and so on and then when those scraps are bad it creates an impression.

Viscount de Chegny is a tyrant to the peasants who have the misfortune to live on his estates and a conniving weasel who has invaded the Empire repeatedly because "My estates should be bigger" but he's balanced out by any number of Bretonnian characters who may not be saints but many rise to "pretty good for the Old World."

Meanwhile there's Sultan Jafar, there's that one Dogs of War unit that's a riff on Lawrence of Arabia, there's the...Arabean slavers and the drug lord in the Brummer the Bounty Hunter novels, and the...conniving scheming weapons merchant in the first Florence & Lorenzo novel.

It's not great.
Al Muktar's Desert Dogs are an atrocity. They named the blind beggar boy that carries the standard banner "Ibn". Ibn means "son". In Arabic you use that as an honorific to refer to someone by sayin "Son of [BLANK]". For example, a boy who has a father named Khalid is refered to as "Ibn Khalid" or "Bin Khalid" both of which means son of Khalid.

The guy holding the standard is just Ibn. The day I read Dogs of War my palm met my face several times. I have no idea what kind of joke or satire they were trying to make and what the target audience for it even was.
 
I think I have a skewed perception. Ibn sounds incredibly weird to me as a name. Can you tell that it's weird without any prior knowledge of Arabic? I was pretty sure people could tell that it sounds off.
At least in my opinion, I think it wouldn't be weird for someone to mistake Ibn as a name if they don't know Arabic. Especially if you are always presented with shortened versions/patronymics of their name instead of full ones (e.g. Ibn Sina instead of Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥusayn bin ʿAbdullāh ibn al-Ḥasan bin ʿAlī bin Sīnā al-Balkhi al-Bukhari), which frequently happen in, say, school history books.

But this was made by people who certainly knew better, or could have found out more with relative ease, even back then.
 
Last edited:
warhammerfantasy.fandom.com

Mameluk

Mamelukes are the lowly slave-warriors of Araby. Slavery is rife in Araby and indeed the slave markets of Al-Haikk or Lashiek are testament to this. Many Old Worlders look upon the Arabyans with a great deal of contempt and see them as nothing more than barbarians. The Nomads of the desert look...

THAT'S NOT HOW THE MAMELUKS WORKED, THAT'S NOT HOW ANYTHING
WORKS! YOU TOO, GEORGE RR MARTIN AND YOUR UNSULLIED, I SEE YOU OVER THERE!

Ahem.

That is to say, the real world Mameluks were a highly valued elite snappers of necks and cashers of checks force who wound up running the whole show in fairly short order, a problem often encountered by rulers who built an elite force intended to have no ties of loyalty except to their own comrades in arms.

See the Ottoman jannisaries, "What's that sir? You're very sorry you tried to build up non jannisary military forces, so sorry you're giving all the jannisaries a raise and abdicating in favor of your nephew? All right boys, I think we can let him out of these chains."

Or the Roman Praetorian Guard, "Imperial throne, slightly used, just like new, one thousand denari, one Thousand! Do I hear two thousand, two thousand! Do I hear I three thousand, three!"
 
Yeah if the Crusades had been introduced in the 80s and quietly sidelined along with stuff like Nippon and the Pygmies I would be more forgiving.

...huh, now I'm wondering if my own fantasy setting's pastiche of the Crusades (the Chivalric Wars) is insensitive or not.
 
Yeah if the Crusades had been introduced in the 80s and quietly sidelined along with stuff like Nippon and the Pygmies I would be more forgiving.

...huh, now I'm wondering if my own fantasy setting's pastiche of the Crusades (the Chivalric Wars) is insensitive or not.
When making satire, the questions should always be:

What is the target?
What is the purpose?
Is it clear what the target and purpose is?
Is it necessary?

If you can answer those four questions with confidence, then it's good satire. Whether something is culturally insensitive or not becomes complicated because it turns case specific.
 
Funny thing is despite my misgivings over them, I still chose to include them in my home brew of the setting, though significantly overhauled in my attempt to beat the events into some semblance of sense. Now I am contemplating wetter or to continue including them going forward.
 
I'm not posting a story update today. Sorry about that. Kinda tired. I have read a little of the next section and thinking of how to approach it though. At least they're keeping things fresh by mixing things up with the battles I suppose.
 
When making satire, the questions should always be:

What is the target?
What is the purpose?
Is it clear what the target and purpose is?
Is it necessary?

If you can answer those four questions with confidence, then it's good satire. Whether something is culturally insensitive or not becomes complicated because it turns case specific.

I don't know if I'd call it satire as much as it takes elements both from the medieval image of the Crusades (the romantic version with Saladin and Richard the Lionheart) and the actual historical role of the Crusades.

Basically like, Armoria needs a war to win glory and prestige, declares war on their wealthy and sophistucated neighbors the Dar-al-Kitab, the wars rage back and forth as the Armorians refuse to admit defeat, actually win some victories, then both sides retire to deal with the loss of prestige and cost of the wars.

The war actually lives up to his name with lots of ceasefires, honorable treatment of prisoners, pausing during a battle to render treatment to a fallen enemy, and torrid affairs across enemy lines. This didn't really accomplish much because a bunch of people still died for no long-term gains, but in the background there's a bunch of trade ties being forged and art and culture being exchanged - bits of Armoria are actually conquered and while retaken the culture there is still quite different.
 
I don't know if I'd call it satire as much as it takes elements both from the medieval image of the Crusades (the romantic version with Saladin and Richard the Lionheart) and the actual historical role of the Crusades.

Basically like, Armoria needs a war to win glory and prestige, declares war on their wealthy and sophistucated neighbors the Dar-al-Kitab, the wars rage back and forth as the Armorians refuse to admit defeat, actually win some victories, then both sides retire to deal with the loss of prestige and cost of the wars.

The war actually lives up to his name with lots of ceasefires, honorable treatment of prisoners, pausing during a battle to render treatment to a fallen enemy, and torrid affairs across enemy lines. This didn't really accomplish much because a bunch of people still died for no long-term gains, but in the background there's a bunch of trade ties being forged and art and culture being exchanged - bits of Armoria are actually conquered and while retaken the culture there is still quite different.
If you hadn't said that it was a pastiche of the Crusades then I wouldn't have guessed it. Sounds like your average war.
 
I don't know if I'd call it satire as much as it takes elements both from the medieval image of the Crusades (the romantic version with Saladin and Richard the Lionheart) and the actual historical role of the Crusades.

Basically like, Armoria needs a war to win glory and prestige, declares war on their wealthy and sophistucated neighbors the Dar-al-Kitab, the wars rage back and forth as the Armorians refuse to admit defeat, actually win some victories, then both sides retire to deal with the loss of prestige and cost of the wars.

The war actually lives up to his name with lots of ceasefires, honorable treatment of prisoners, pausing during a battle to render treatment to a fallen enemy, and torrid affairs across enemy lines. This didn't really accomplish much because a bunch of people still died for no long-term gains, but in the background there's a bunch of trade ties being forged and art and culture being exchanged - bits of Armoria are actually conquered and while retaken the culture there is still quite different.
If you hadn't said that it was a pastiche of the Crusades then I wouldn't have guessed it. Sounds like your average war.

For real. The crusades were one of humanity's biggest fiascoes, to the point they would be humorous if they weren't so tragic.

This sounded much closer to something like... a "friendly" medieval war. (using quotations because no war is truly friendly.) I think there were quite a few like that between neighbours.
 
I sometimes hear that Old Warhammer was satirical, and a lot of its things was them making fun of a particular group and maybe there is a message behind all the 'funny' jokes and comedic jabs.

This is something that I've seen mentioned before, often in relation to warhammer or other British stuff from the 80s and 90s, and it's something that is... true, technically, but also loses a lot of nuance and context. So I'm going to take a moment to talk about it, because I like nerding out about this sort of thing.

So! Warhammer, along with a lot of other material from the period such as Judge Dredd etc, was definitely made to be satirical. The issue is that British Satire is a strain of humour that leans very heavily on gallows humour and bleak amusement rather than more conventional comedy, which is a detail often lost when we talk about it in a wider context. If anything it overlaps with British Horror more than comedy, which itself is kind of centred around feelings of apathy and despair rather than sheer terror - whereas an American slasher fic might focus the horror on the unstoppable murderous serial killer chasing you, the British horror will be when you scream for help and the people in the house nearby just roll over in bed or turn up the volume on their TV. It's a satirical depiction of the general indifference of our society to the life and happiness of others, and how incredibly easy it is to fall through the cracks or be failed by the institutions that should be there for you, rather than "making fun" in the way its normally understood.

Warhammer Fantasy, then, was extremely satirical, especially in the early days. The land is ruled by aristocrats with curled wigs and perfumed hair and triple-barrelled names who are all comedically incompetent and self-absorbed... and if you disrespect them, you'll get tortured to death. The Ulricans use throwing up the horns as a holy symbol and the Sigmarites chant about how they need a piss in not!latin because they don't understand the dwarvish words in their prayer books... and if you were born looking wrong, they'll burn you at the stake. The vile ratmen lurk beneath every street and building, eating babies and spreading plague and pestilence... and if you go to the authorities for help, they'll have you committed to an asylum rather than admit there could be a problem.

There's often an assumption, when people say "oh it was meant to be satirical", that this means you shouldn't take it seriously, its just a joke, lighten up. But Warhammer is a British product born out of the Thatcherite years and all their misery and inequality, and when it uses satire, it isn't meant to be light-hearted in the slightest.

Now don't get me wrong, the Crusades as presented in the game are still kinda shit, largely because of the issues you mentioned wrt just treating the natives as accessories or props in the story of the Crusaders, not caring about them as people in their own right (and also being hella racist). The satire is found in all the peripheral stuff that the authors did care about - the adventuring lords who decided to go tomb robbing and got murdered by grumpy Nehekharans, the Knights Panther who were so obsessed with their new status symbol they hunted the big cats to near-extinction, the Estalians who embraced this grand unifying moment against an external foe and then promptly fell apart into bickering and strife a few years later.

The Knights of Magritta are a 2e organisation, for example, that highlights this - they're a secret society spread throughout the Old World whose founding purpose in the aftermath of the Crusades was to agitate for finishing the job, conquering the land entirely as the only way to protect the land's "soft southern underbelly" from the Arabyan scourge. They're an old relic by this point, cut adrift and struggling to find their new path forwards, because as it turns out friendly diplomacy, trade ties and cultural exchange did more for protecting the Old World from Araby than a hundred Crusades could ever hope to manage. So now the Knights are nominally opposed to Araby and Arabyan influence wherever they can find it, but none of the leaders actually believe in or want a new crusade any more, they just want to keep agitating against the perfidious arab as a way to line their own pockets and maintain relevance in a world that has left them behind.
 
For real. The crusades were one of humanity's biggest fiascoes, to the point they would be humorous if they weren't so tragic.
The First Crusade was actually fairly successful, and managed to give back a lot of its territory to the Eastern Roman Empire. And on the whole, they're hardly one of humanity ´s biggest fiasco, except the Fourth. Imo, colonisation is much more worthy of that title than the Crusades.
 
...they really gave Kislev a send-off that amounts to 'yeah, we're doomed, don't bother trying to help us LOL'?

They do the same with the dwarves and wood elves, an actual playable faction. It fucking sucked as a dwarf player when, in like a page "Oh yeah all your named characters get assassinated and only humans and elves get to be magic juiced"

There's a few members in the GW creative staff who REALLY REALLY like elves and keep lavishing them with attention. There isn't half the passion for dwarves, and I feel sorry for fyreslayer players in AoS cause GW can barely remember they exist. At least KO have an amazing ascetic that draws players


I'd call it a golden space marine (and let me tell you, "Space marine" is not a value neutral word from me, I left GW behind mostly because of too much Space marines), perched on the ashes of the best thing GW ever did. Suffice to say, my opinion of AoS is... prejudiced, and I doubt I'm the only one with this view. (And yes, the Sigmarines are still pretty much Space Marines, especially from story wise point of views. Only thing missing is massive butt plugs plunging down from the skies (or should that be High Azyr?) to deposit them)

For all of my opinions of it, I'd actually appreciate such a view. I've looked a bit at it recently, and I feel like there could be some useful kernels in there, if you cut away the infected fat.

Also, sorry if I come across as excessively vitriolic, as I'm writing this I realize that I'm still angry about how it all was done. (Which is also why I'm not commenting overly much so far, I'm uncertain how much reasonable I have to contribute)

Stormcast aren't space marines. Ascetically they are, and GW wants them to occupy the brand place that space marines do, but they lack a lot of factors that make space marines space marines. Importantly they ARE NOT the central force of the brand and have failed to BE the brand juggernaught that space marines are, allowing everything else room to breathe.

Most importantly though, they are not fascist death squads (except the knights excelsior cause GW gotta GW). That's a pretty big breathe of fresh air

Stormcast get a lot of books and models yes, but they're ironically not a great faction competetively so you don't see many people playing them, and they're actually hard to play and complex so despite marketing for beginners they're actually not noob friendly. "Too many Stormcast Eternals" is not an actual complaint that modern AoS players even have. In the beginning they released a lot of books for them as they got their bearing, but there are currently 23 factions (Gloomspite Gitz, Orruk Warclans, Ogor Mawtribes, Sons of Behemat, Nighthaunt, Soulblight Gravelords, Flesh Eater Courts, Ossiarch Bonereapers, Blades of Khorne, Disciples of Tzeentch, Hedonites of Slaanesh, Maggotkin of Nurgle, Beasts of Chaos, Slaves to Darkness, Skaven, Seraphon, Cities of Sigmar, Daughters of Khaine, Kharadron Overlords, Fyreslayers, Lumineth Realmlords, Sylvaneth and Idoneth Deepkin) that aren't Stormcast Eternals.

The most overwhelming thing about Age of Sigmar coming into it in 2022? There is so much.

They are actually probably in the top 5 competitive factions right now because GW can't write rules and gave all the rules to their dragon riders who are super oppressive and unfun to play. Way too pushed too.
You can, and people do, put tons of fancontent up on youtube without a C&D. Only two people stopped making Warhammer content after GW started paying the top fan creators for their talents, one who was bullied by the community for taking the paycheck until he quit the hobby due to the trauma and the TTS guy who cited both the overblown and false hysteria and his own burn-out and wish to pursue original content.

All that said I'm looking forward to your read through @Codex. I read all of these bar Archeon at the time so it will be interesting to see where our oppinions differ.

They absorbed several animations into WH+. Which is a bad product.
I sometimes hear that Old Warhammer was satirical, and a lot of its things was them making fun of a particular group and maybe there is a message behind all the 'funny' jokes and comedic jabs.

If the Crusades of Araby were supposed to be a Satire to prove how stupid and pointless the Crusades were, then it failed absolutely horribly. It's universally portrayed in the Warhammer Fantasy setting as a good thing, and as background for various Knightly Orders and Bretonnia's Errantry Wars. It brings to mind this image:
Except I don't think it was satire. The way it's written in modern lore very much strikes me as if they wanted this event to be a totally serious thing despite the villain being Jafar from Aladdin. At least in Aladdin an Arab was the one who defeated him and was the hero of the story. In Warhammer's crusades, it's the Bretonnians who kill Jafar.

There might have been potential to do something with the Crusades, as distasteful as I find the idea of bringing over a real historical event. It's just that the way Warhammer did it was not it.

So, the early warhammer days were dominated by punks, as in the dudes writing it were all super into punk culture, which was a countermovement to the dominant mainstream thatcherism of the 80s.

They were, however, still white british males without a particular specialty in history and living in an archly conservative period. They absorbed negative stereotypes and even hating thatcher had no tools to even know what they were absorbing about places like the middle east WERE untruthful.

Here's the thing. I'm not sure if even the writer realised the implications of what he's writing. People have a lot of unconcious biases. Even if a person does not conciously set out to create a racist piece of fiction or a story with unfortunate/problematic implications, they can sometimes stumble upon it completely unintentionally because this isn't a conscious thing. Particularly if your society primed you to hold particular biases, opinions or points of view. Divorcing yourself from your cultural perspective is extremely hard, and this is why it's vital to hire sensitivity consultants and people from the cultures that you are portraying to either read through and help you edit or actually write the sections. So you don't get those unfortunate, unintended implications.

Fanfiction authors don't necessarily have to do this, that's a labour of love and effort. But if you're a company that can hire writers, you can hire consultants and editors instead of having a boardroom of white guys creating "exotic" cultures.

The crusades are lore fluff from before GW was that big and they hired out for that. It is definately a legacy of, like, andy chambers and his buddies writing in a dilapidated flat.
Yeah if the Crusades had been introduced in the 80s and quietly sidelined along with stuff like Nippon and the Pygmies I would be more forgiving.

...huh, now I'm wondering if my own fantasy setting's pastiche of the Crusades (the Chivalric Wars) is insensitive or not.

The crusades were introduced in the 80s and were sidelined. They just lingered like a bad smell for far longer then they should have.
The First Crusade was actually fairly successful, and managed to give back a lot of its territory to the Eastern Roman Empire. And on the whole, they're hardly one of humanity ´s biggest fiasco, except the Fourth. Imo, colonisation is much more worthy of that title than the Crusades.

The crusaders ate a town. Like literally, marched into a town, killed everyone, and ate them
 
The crusaders ate a town. Like literally, marched into a town, killed everyone, and ate them
They hardly ate the whole town (which admittedly doesn't make it good). It wasn't for the hell of it, they were starving. And I never said atrocities weren't committed. During the First Crusade, the entire population of Jerusalem was slaughtered. But that's hardly one of humanity ´s biggest fiascos, nor the only war where atrocities were committed. And doesn't change the fact that the First Crusade actually accomplished its goals.

Edit:
They also wiped out several Jewish communities on their way to conquer Jerusalem, then wiped out more once they got there.
That was the Peasant's Crusades who attacked Jewish communities in Europe. Those never went further than Anatolia, where they were easily crushed by the Turks (being made mostly of badly trained and leaded peasants). In fact, the ease with which they were destroyed made the Turkish sultan react too late when the actual Crusade arrived (the one led by actual military leaders and with actual knights).

It was that second Crusade (the true First Crusade) that arrived in Jerusalem, and when there didn't specifically targeted Jews: they just killed everyone, including the local Christians.
 
Last edited:
They do the same with the dwarves and wood elves, an actual playable faction. It fucking sucked as a dwarf player when, in like a page "Oh yeah all your named characters get assassinated and only humans and elves get to be magic juiced"

There's a few members in the GW creative staff who REALLY REALLY like elves and keep lavishing them with attention. There isn't half the passion for dwarves, and I feel sorry for fyreslayer players in AoS cause GW can barely remember they exist. At least KO have an amazing ascetic that draws players
In the context of the end times specifically, favoritism for non-chaos factions got a bit weird. Being a less favored faction meant an unceremonious end offscreen, while the factions in the spotlight got more moments of greatness but also some onscreen things which were quite annoying.

Would I have preferred the elves dying off screen to what happened with Malekith and Teclis in the end times? I'm really not sure.
 
Would I have preferred the elves dying off screen to what happened with Malekith and Teclis in the end times? I'm really not sure.
Frankly, yes. One of the worst monster on this world being retconned as having been right all along (and the incohérences that it brings) and vaillants defenders of the world becoming short-sighted morons was too much for me.
 
They hardly ate the whole town (which admittedly doesn't make it good). It wasn't for the hell of it, they were starving. And I never said atrocities weren't committed. During the First Crusade, the entire population of Jerusalem was slaughtered. But that's hardly one of humanity ´s biggest fiascos, nor the only war where atrocities were committed. And doesn't change the fact that the First Crusade actually accomplished its goals.

Edit:

That was the Peasant's Crusades who attacked Jewish communities in Europe. Those never went further than Anatolia, where they were easily crushed by the Turks (being made mostly of badly trained and leaded peasants). In fact, the ease with which they were destroyed made the Turkish sultan react too late when the actual Crusade arrived (the one led by actual military leaders and with actual knights).

It was that second Crusade (the true First Crusade) that arrived in Jerusalem, and when there didn't specifically targeted Jews: they just killed everyone, including the local Christians.

Look, sliding into a thread to go "Yeah, this terrible historic thing wasn't the WORST thing ever to happen though really" when, uh, no one made that claim, is ALWAYS a terrible look. It looks like you decided, on your own initiative, to go "Well the crusades weren't that bad".

Just don't do this. The crusades were awful. No one here invited an awful off comparison to other awful historic events.
 
This probably isn't the best place to compare atrocities. Let's just move on to something else.

@stratigo I'm very interested in what you're saying. You look like you know a lot, and you seem in tune with Age of Sigmar which I like. I'm still a newbie to the game, and I only heard that Stormcast were pretty bad back in 2E. I know they got a 3E book very recently, but I haven't read it and I haven't seen an analysis of it.
 
Back
Top