Griffon sculpt woes

[ExiledinElysium]

Sorry if this has already been discussed, but I just took a good hard look at the Scarsfell Griffon sculpt for the first time, and I'm just so disappointed I have to say something. Why does it look so humanoid? In the Domination cover art, it looks very clearly like a traditional griffon. The model, on the other hand, looks like a person who happens to have eagle parts in a tail. I would have much preferred a more traditional griffon sculpt. For example, why the heck does a griffon have Ryan Reynolds abs and a loincloth? I just...I don't get it.

Thoughts?

[mercury]

I think it looks like a Warpwolf with an eagle head and wings.

It fits with the Circle aesthetic because it is similar in design to the Warpwolves. I'm not so sure that this is a good thing though, as PP could have produced something more unique. It certainly doesn't look like a 'traditional' Griffon.

[Bishop84]

It looks spot on to the art in the actual griffon entry in Domination. That said, I think it fits the Circle aesthetic just fine. Iron Kingdoms is not a traditional fantasy world, and expecting something to match a traditional design is just waiting to be disappointed.

[Bakemono]

I think it is a loser. It looks like some jerk who answered a casting call for the original Thunder Cats cartoon, but Mum-Ra wouldn't even take him. My intention, if I decide I want or need a Griffon is to take the head and extremities to model an original, probably based on any of the many four-legged varieties of light War Beasts. Legion has a good one.

[PG_cheddercaveman]

I'm going to echo what some others have said, if you wanted "traditional" ideas for things, then WarmaHordes and the Iron Kingdoms aren't for you. It shares aesthetics with the warpwolves, which I think makes a lot of sense. It also pretty closely matches the art from both the entry in Domination and the cover. I've also seen the model in person, and I have to tell you that it looks amazing, the wings alone make that model gorgeous. That said, I'm not terribly excited to try to figure out how the hell to transport it, but I'm sure I'll think of something.

[nverbe]

It looks spot on to the art in the actual griffon entry in Domination. That said, I think it fits the Circle aesthetic just fine. Iron Kingdoms is not a traditional fantasy world, and expecting something to match a traditional design is just waiting to be disappointed.

I thought exactly this too, based on the concept art I can't really justify any disappointment.

[Bishop84]

That said, I'm not terribly excited to try to figure out how the hell to transport it, but I'm sure I'll think of something.

It's plastic. You can put it in a box with some tissues and it'll be just fine. Personally I use the pluck foam on everything, so I'll just figure out how deep a foam tray I need and go for it. I've already got room for it in my Warpwolf tray. If it's too tall, I'll just lay it on its back.

[Vicomte Athos]

I'm getting used to being disappointed in PP sculpts these days. Griffon looks weak, the winter argus is just a lazy headswap, and wold wrath looks like a tiefighter bayformer. And that's just for circle, lets not get started on thier other lines. IMO if PP really wants to step up to be a main contender on the minaitures stage and not just be a sideline observer they need to put a lot more effort into their sculpts. Their only strengths right now seem to be the warcasters/warlocks and the odd model here or there.

[PG_cheddercaveman]

Re: Winter Argus I'm not entirely sure what you expected beyond a head swap. I mean, a Charger and a Hunter share the the same chassis as well, and yet they're different models. This is the same with the Argus / Winter Argus.

As far as foam, I don't use pluck because it typically has so much wasted space. Also, yes, its plastic so I'm not worried ... until its painted, and then I'll be plenty concerned as I don't want to expose it to chipping paint if it can be helped.

[Bishop84]

Griffon looks weak, the winter argus is just a lazy headswap, and wold wrath looks like a tiefighter bayformer.

It sounds to me like you're more upset with the concept artists rather than the sculptors. The models all match the artist's designs, and are very crisp and well done.

[ExiledinElysium]

It looks spot on to the art in the actual griffon entry in Domination. That said, I think it fits the Circle aesthetic just fine. Iron Kingdoms is not a traditional fantasy world, and expecting something to match a traditional design is just waiting to be disappointed.

I definitely see your point, and I think it's a valid one, but it brings up a couple issues for me. First, let me say that I don't generally want IK to be 'traditional' fantasy. I like that they do their own thing. That being said, though, I just don't like this 'griffon.' Your argument, which is echoed by several, is that it fits with Circle's other 'beasts like Warpwolves. My problem with this argument is that Warpwolves are something completely different in the mythos. Warpwolves look humanoid because they were in fact once human. It makes sense for them to look like they do. Satyrs also look humanoid, but IK satyrs conform heavily to traditional mythology. Classic Greek satyrs are goat bottom with man top, and usually horns. All PP has done is blurred the lines to make the whole thing a mix between the two, and it both looks excellent and makes sense to appear humanoid.

The griffon is something else entirely. Here's my reasoning.

First, there's nothing in the fluff we're given to suggest that griffons are made from people, or that they have anything like the sentience of satyrs, so it's weird to me that they would have pecs and abs, and wear a loincloth.

Second, while it's true that Circle has a trend of humanoid heavy warbeasts, there is no discernible pattern with the lights. The woldwatcher is humanoid because it's like a smaller warden, but there's also the wyrd which looks entirely alien. The Gorax is humanoid because it, like the warpwolves, is intended to be something "between beast and man" as its description states. The light 'beast that PP treats as a Circle staple is the argus, which is a two-headed dog, and now there are two different versions of the clearly animal quadruped.

Third, the description we do get of the griffon offers language to suggest this creature is much more an animal than a kind of humanoid sentient ally. Let's look at some quotes from Domination:
"...predators that combine the sinewy grace of hunting cats with the ferocity of birds of prey."
"...Circle have long tended griffon fledglings..."
"One particular breed of these peerless hunters..."
"...take solitary roosts..."
This is clearly the description of an animal, specifically of a large raptor. It's not a forest-denizen that they persuade to help them like the satyrs are. It's an animal that they capture at infancy and train it to be a loyal hunter. The obvious allusion from this description is to medieval falconry. It's not even the sculpt per se that bothers me--it's the concept art. Nothing about the profile art resembles the imagery that this description evokes. If I knew nothing about the Scarsfell's fluff and I just saw the art or the model, I would assume griffons in IK are made from an elixir like warpwolves, or otherwise had some kind of near-human intelligence. That thing isn't a griffon--it's a bird-man.

I'd say they got it wrong as early as the concept art. In my ideal world, they would have done with griffons what they did with satyrs. The Greek myth creatures on which they are based are basically two halves of animals stuck together. A satyr is the top of a man and the bottom of a goat, and the griffon is the front of a bird and the back of a cat. PP took satyrs and blended them, so that the whole thing is uniformly goat-man. With griffons, I think they should have blended them to be more uniformly bird-cats. What they came up with just looks entirely wrong to me. It doesn't just look "untraditional" so I'm complaining. It looks wrong even by IK standards.

Do you see my point? If I had any skill at sculpting miniatures, I would make an extended project of sculpting an IK griffon how I think they ought to look. Honestly, I think you'd prefer mine.

[Jables]

The negative is always louder than the positive so I'll weigh in; the Griffin is sick. It's got a certain monster of the week thing going on and I love it. Also, dat wings.

While I'm at it, the Winter Argus looks fine and I can't wait to pick up the Sons of Bragg. Some of the coolest Trolls in the range.

-redacted-

[ExiledinElysium]

Sue me :P

You should be careful throwing that around. I'm a lawyer

You're right, though. The models are amazingly sculpted, don't get me wrong. I don't think the griffon is a bad sculpt--which is in fact how I feel about most of the Legion range--it just doesn't comport with what I think a Circle griffon ought to look like, that's all. For full explanation, see my above post.

[Vicomte Athos]

The thing is there is a very strong disconnect between the art from the entry of the griffon and the cover art. The model and entry art are very man/hawk while the cover has a much stronger lion/hawk. The PP griffon isn't a griffon, it's a man hawk. And you are right I am most likely more upset with the concept artist then the sculptor but that doesn't change that PP is the source of the fail and they need to step up their game.

[Hug a Gorax]

I think he looks alright personally.

But if you are worried he is too anthropomorphic, would a healthy smattering of fur improve matters for you? It's the easiest thing to "greenstuff" bar none!

[Bishop84]

Do you see my point? If I had any skill at sculpting miniatures, I would make an extended project of sculpting an IK griffon how I think they ought to look. Honestly, I think you'd prefer mine.

This presumes that I don't really like the design as is. I do. They kinda remind me of Skeksis. I definitely see your point though, and unfortunately not everyone likes the design. However just because something is humanoid doesn't mean it's not bestial and animalistic with predatory cunning and intelligence.

[Quizboy]

I like the little chap. He reminds me of (by which I mean, basically is) a Garuda from the Bas-Lag books. I actually just wish his rules were better so I wanted one.

They kinda remind me of Skeksis.

Oh seriously if there was a Skeksis-esque sinister bird people faction, I would drop everything and play that in an INSTANT.

[ExiledinElysium]

This presumes that I don't really like the design as is. I do. They kinda remind me of Skeksis. I definitely see your point though, and unfortunately not everyone likes the design. However just because something is humanoid doesn't mean it's not bestial and animalistic with predatory cunning and intelligence.

No I'm not at all presuming you don't like the present design. I'm just so confident in the quality of the vision in my head that I think you'd like mine better

I'm probably wrong, but no worries.

Also, I think making something humanoid definitely does connote a higher intelligence. Saying the griffon has "predatory cunning and intelligence" is not the same as saying it has some measure of sentience. Animals can be smart, but that's not what I mean. I see the griffon as something that is essentially an animal, and I would argue that the designers' description agrees with me. In my mind--and you're welcome to disagree--an animal should not be anthropomorphic. It dilutes the significance of the beasts that do have a more sentient intelligence.

[Bishop84]

In my mind--and you're welcome to disagree--an animal should not be anthropomorphic. It dilutes the significance of the beasts that do have a more sentient intelligence.

Minotaurs are indisputably humanoid, and they are more often than not depicted as feral beasts. Granted, the original Minotaur was somewhat of a cursed individual...

Let's take a look at the Iron Kingdoms design philosophy. You'll notice that there is a great lean towards humanoid in all things, even things that are classically anything but. Basilisks, Titans, Rhinodons, most Dragonspawn to a certain degree but definitely Nephilim, gators, pigs, turtles, etc.

It's just the way PP likes to design things. The griffon fits not only Circle's aesthetic, but the Iron Kingdoms as a whole.

Now don't take my disagreement as anything but friendly banter. I'm sorry you're not happy with it, and I'm not trying to necessary change your mind. Maybe just provide another way to look at it?

[ExiledinElysium]

Ah, a kindred spirit. Don't worry, this is all just scholarly debate. I did competitive debate for eight years before I went to law school, and I'm not saying that to in any way suggest that you'll lose or I'll 'pwn' you or what have you. Rather, it informs the fact that I have no qualms with a spirited argument among friends.

Minotaurs are an interesting counter-example. Yes, the original Minotaur was once a person (though correct me if I'm wrong--it's been a while since I've reviewed my Greek myths), but most modern representations focus on the completely devolved beast he became, and the resemblance to a person became arguably incidental. I would argue that the original Minotaur conforms to my argument just fine, as analogous to warpwolves. More conventional fantasy iterations, however, aren't as easy to place. I can't decide if this is an example I have to concede, or just an outlier I can ignore.

As far as your comments on IK design philosophy, I see your point but I would offer an additional distinction, which is semantic but nonetheless important. The list of creatures you cite makes it clear to me that your use of the word "humanoid" essentially means "bipedal." When I say something is humanoid, I'm referring to more specific physiological characteristics. The thing that makes satyrs and warpwolves humanoid, for me, is that they have human muscle and bone structure. Most significantly, I can identify the abdominal and pectoral muscle groups. If you look through classical Greco-Roman mythological art, you can see that the front torso, with those well-defined abs and pecs, is one of the most consistent visual characteristics of a man. It's also a physical detail that we as a species don't really share with other animals--in a sense, it's uniquely human.

Rhinodons and Carniveans do not share those details. Dire trolls do, but that's because they're modeled after other primates. Nephilim do as well, but they fall into the same category as warpwolves because Everblight made them out of people (specifically Nyss). The PP designers may disagree with me, but I would think the use of such human details ought to be reserved for things that are somehow like humans. Many warpwolves may be completely feral and instinctive, but they were once men. Satyrs are their own species, but they seem to have some degree of near-human intelligence. The description of the Scarsfell Griffon offers no such comparison. The Druids treat these creatures like wild animals to be captured, broken, and trained, not sentient beings to be entreated for help, like the satyrs or dire trolls. Because of that, I think it's a poor design choice to give them such a human form. It makes them seem like something they're not.

[Blaque]

Something I am noticing is the satyr-griffon comparison assuming satyrs are sapient. From what I gather, the IK does have a lot of non-sapient, animal-intelligence humanoids about, like titans, goraxes, rhinodons, and it appears, satyrs. Satyrs are also basically animals captured and trained for the Circle's use. Most of the big warbeasts aren't actually very intelligent save for cyclopses and trolls.

And stuff.

[ExiledinElysium]

Something I am noticing is the satyr-griffon comparison assuming satyrs are sapient. From what I gather, the IK does have a lot of non-sapient, animal-intelligence humanoids about, like titans, goraxes, rhinodons, and it appears, satyrs. Satyrs are also basically animals captured and trained for the Circle's use. Most of the big warbeasts aren't actually very intelligent save for cyclopses and trolls.

And stuff.

I'm welcome to corrections, but I got the impression from the Forces book that the Druids had to go find the satyrs and convince them to join the fight. Am I mixing them up with the dire trolls? :scrambles to find Circle book:

[Blaque]

I'm welcome to corrections, but I got the impression from the Forces book that the Druids had to go find the satyrs and convince them to join the fight. Am I mixing them up with the dire trolls? :scrambles to find Circle book:

Druids protected satyrs from human hunting and seem to keep eyes on groups of them out in the wilds about. They are listed along with goraxes and argi in the part that describes Circle warbeasts as being either wild animals, alchemically-created things liek warpwolves, or constructs. And the fluff seems to describe them more or less as kind of taken up and thrown out. No real convincing or negotiation. The Gnarlhorn one especially comes accross as having a very territorial pet about more then something that you talk to.

And stuff.

[KhisanthMagus]

I probably will not get a Griffon out of protest of the design, because what we have been given is not a Griffon, going by either classical descriptions or even PP's own description of what a griffon is. If someone manages to come up with a conversion that makes it look like, well, a wild bird/cat creature instead of a Warpbird, I may give that a shot.

[ExiledinElysium]

Druids protected satyrs from human hunting and seem to keep eyes on groups of them out in the wilds about. They are listed along with goraxes and argi in the part that describes Circle warbeasts as being either wild animals, alchemically-created things liek warpwolves, or constructs. And the fluff seems to describe them more or less as kind of taken up and thrown out. No real convincing or negotiation. The Gnarlhorn one especially comes accross as having a very territorial pet about more then something that you talk to.

And stuff.

Hmm... I looked at it again last night and I think I'm just inferring to much from the phrase "called out." It says the Druids called out the satyrs. That makes it seem like the satyrs had a choice in the matter. It also doesn't say the Druids train the satyrs to be their guardians, it just says that's what the satyrs want to do. It certainly doesn't denote a "near human intelligence" like I was earlier suggesting, but it feels like something more than a German Shepard.

[PG_knightsbayne]

Minotaurs are an interesting counter-example. Yes, the original Minotaur was once a person (though correct me if I'm wrong--it's been a while since I've reviewed my Greek myths), but most modern representations focus on the completely devolved beast he became, and the resemblance to a person became arguably incidental. I would argue that the original Minotaur conforms to my argument just fine, as analogous to warpwolves. More conventional fantasy iterations, however, aren't as easy to place. I can't decide if this is an example I have to concede, or just an outlier I can ignore.

Close enough. Greek mythology is like Egyptian mythology in that there is no singular, universal myth. However, in every version the Minotaur is the offspring of King Minos of Crete's wife and a godly bull, whether the Cretan bull or Zeus in one of his many animal-offspring-having-adventure forms.

Anyways, the Minotaur was always psycho and ravenous once he left his mother's bosom. But Minos considered the Minotaur his son and couldn't bring himself to kill it and created the Labrynth so he could feed virgins (priestesses? maidens? I don't remember.) to his son without getting his hands messy.

[ExiledinElysium]

I probably will not get a Griffon out of protest of the design, because what we have been given is not a Griffon, going by either classical descriptions or even PP's own description of what a griffon is. If someone manages to come up with a conversion that makes it look like, well, a wild bird/cat creature instead of a Warpbird, I may give that a shot.

If I find the time this fall amidst being a first-year associate, I'm going to try to sculpt what I think it should look like, or at the very least splice the appropriate parts together and sculpt on the Circle armor pieces and cloth cowl. It could take a while, though, since I don't have a lot of practice at it.

[terminal]

I think it is a loser. It looks like some jerk who answered a casting call for the original Thunder Cats cartoon, but Mum-Ra wouldn't even take him. My intention, if I decide I want or need a Griffon is to take the head and extremities to model an original, probably based on any of the many four-legged varieties of light War Beasts. Legion has a good one.

MUM RA that's the baby i first saw the griffon about 2 months back and thought it looked like something but couldn't think what now i remember ty

[FearLord]

I want to convert one to look like Harvey Birdman, attorney at law!

HIPPO!

[CrookyKnows]

Normally, a Scarsfell Griffon goes natural, as it is a beast.

The ones recruited by the Circle Orboros are forced to wear bags over their heads due to their hideous appearance, otherwise they would gain They also have disproportionally gargantuan-sized phallical appendage, so a loin-cloth was deemed to be a minimal requirement. Given the Griffon's friendly disposition and desire for hugs, you can understand the necessity of such things.

[Blaque]

I honestly thought the hood was a falconry reference.

And stuff.

[ucfan34]

... It looks like some jerk who answered a casting call for the original Thunder Cats cartoon, but Mum-Ra wouldn't even take him.

This is funny because I totally agree with it looking like a Thundercats casting call reject, but that what I love about it. I was also born in '85, so it's probably the late 80's early 90's kid in me. Anthropomorphic stuff FTW!

[Hug a Gorax]

They also have disproportionally gargantuan-sized phallical appendage, so a loin-cloth was deemed to be a minimal requirement.

Judging by all the steroids he looks like he has taken, I wouldn't be so sure about that...

[Falcon42]

For all the cat references, I don't see any cat in it. :/

[Quizboy]

They also have disproportionally gargantuan-sized phallical appendage

Daily schedule, Junior Druid 3rd Class

6:00am Loincloth the Griffons

10:00am Loincloth the Warpwolves

2:00pm Loincloth the Satyrs

5:00pm Counselling

[Bishop84]

Judging by all the steroids he looks like he has taken, I wouldn't be so sure about that...

Heh, he's just hiding his steroid induced shame.

[Wishing]

I think the griffon looks right at home among the circle. As pointed out, he looks like a bird-man, just like the satyr looks like a goat-man and the warpwolf like a wolf-man. So he's simply part of the bipedal living warbeasts gang of circle models. When I first saw the name of the beast, I also thought it would be quadrupedal like the argus and traditionally griffonesque, but just because that's what I expected doesn't mean that the bird-man doesn't look great. I really like him.

[the Sugarwolf]

i actually think the griffon looks just fine. the winter argus also it think will look dandy with a better paint job than what they did to him (i didnt even know it was possible to make white look neon). unfortunately for both models, im not really a fan of their rules and i think they are both over costed... as opposed to the woldwrath whose spoilers have him poised to be pretty damn good rules wise and yet and utter turd of a model. seriously, a stone turd. with arms and legs and a pokemon head. *sad SugarWolf is sad*

[txiab]

I am firmly in the "I like it" camp. I think it is a good looking model. It isn't my favorite in the line, but then again there can be only one favorite. I am not looking forward to storing him, but I am certainly looking forward to playing him. I am overall happy with PP's model production as of late with the exception of all the new character bit swap kits (not much character) and the teeny tiny Merc warjack kits.

[ExiledinElysium]

I gotta be honest I'm surprised. Even if I did like the underlying design, I'd still think this sculpt is awful. He doesn't look like a predatory hunter with any sense of grace or power. He just looks like he's trying out for a part in a low-budget movie about Frankenstein's monster. He's so stiff and awkward.