Last month, our review of White Dwarf, in which we compared February’s issue of White Dwarf with an issue from 1998, sparked a huge controversy. It was debated heatedly not only in our comment section, but on Warseer, Tabletop Gaming News and others. This month we decided to deliver a more conventional look at the latest offering from the White Dwarf team (which doesn’t mean we won’t do such a comparison again 😉 Read on to find out what to expect from March’s issue.
As the White Dwarf’s pattern is pretty much set since the relauch, this time I go through each section and share my thoughts on them.
New Releases Section
As usual, a long section of 42 pages covering the this month’s releases from Games Workshop and Black Library, plus a selection of Forgeworld and licensed games news. I noticed the photography has became a lot nicer and clearer, they still use coloured or painted backdrops but don’t distort the paint jobs with coloured lights. The fold out pages show a huge army shot with the new releases in the centre. I still think they should merge this section with the design studio pages at the back.
Army of the Month
It’s power armour again, just as last month. Did the sales department force the WD team to show more Space Marines? At least it’s a combined force of Lamenters and Grey Knights. The yellow armoured Blood Angels successor army features lots of Forgeworld models including Tartaros pattern Terminators, Deimos pattern Tanks, a Land Raider Prometeus, a Thunderhawk and three (!) Warhound titans.
Jervis Johnson
… talking about why rolling off when facing rules questions is often best.
Battle Report
Adam Troke competes with his collection of Chaos Daemons against Matt Hutson’s Imperial Fists (yellow Marines again). It’s like the last couple of battle reports: focus on trying out new models, no point values, no maps, no narrative, lots of small pictures, no serious outlining of rule changes.
Blanchitsu
Four pages; again a showcase of models not painted by John Blanche himself, plus a short interview with their creator. Imaginative models, but Blanchitsu every month is a bit too much, as it’s always the same style and the same set of themes.
Hall of Heroes
Neil Green nominates Juan Diaz’ Urien Rakarth. Some interesting concept art and insights on the sculpting process, but nothing that hasn’t been told or shown in GW’s blog when Dark Eldar were released.
Parade Ground
As with the last two issues, they continue with their showcase of Golden Demon entries, again from the UK. 16 pages with a lot of cool models and paint jobs, but having the third issue in a row with a majority of the editorial content dedicated to Golden Demon models gets boring. And there will be part four in the next issue…
Kit Bash
… features the Ork Bommers (again) on 6 pages. Granted, the double-decker conversions are cool, but this article essentially shows the same model four times, a bit bland for my taste. Plus I never got the praise this model got from the community. I don’t like its proportions, it could be more ramshackle and the three builds look hardly different.
Battlefield
As last month, more Armies on Parade entries from the UK Games Day 2012. There is an Empire, a Tau, an Space Orks and Imperial Fists (third yellow Space Marine army this month) army, each with a two page feature. Quite nice, but I would have liked more close ups. Also I hope next month we’ll see a cool gaming table again, as this is what this section is actually about.
Paint Splatter
For the first two pages, they show the three new Daemon plastic kits in their ‘Eavy Metal paint job and present a random selection of paints that was apparantly used to paint them, with no further explanation. So it’s of no use at all, it seams the paint lists are even wrong, as for example noone could tell where they used purple on the Screamers that pull the Burning Chariot of Tzeentch, as they appear as blue as the Flamer and the Blue Horrors. Then there are two pages where Adam shows how to paint a lesser daemon for each Chaos god (he basically applies a base colour and adds a wash… seriously?). Followed by one page of painting various details on Chaos Daemons, one page of painting Warriors of Dale for The Hobbit, and two pages where Matt Hutson explains how he paints the yellow and red of his Imperial Fists, with a one page tutorial on using the Citadel Spray Gun to basecoat the yellow areas.
Jeremy Vetock
… talking about awkward hobby moments, like dropping small parts while assembling and never finding them again or accidentally glueing yourself with super glue. I think his writing style is amusing.
– Pages at the back everone skips-
This month in…
The White Dwarf team presents a couple of their nicely painted models (and some really bad looking plague drones by Adam). On the design studio pages, John Blanche talkes in two pages about the imagery of Chaos Daemons – not much new to learn in comparison to his WD article when the first edition of their army book and codex came out. Then there are two pages where the sculptors talk about their inspiration for the new plastic kits. Sadly no concept art. Then there is a single page about John Michelbach’s map of the chaos realm (quite nice), and a single page with more models painted by various people around the studio. Irritatingly, there is no interview with authors Mat Ward and Phil Kelly about the new Daemon codex and army book, where they could have gone into more details about expanded fluff or rules concepts. Closing this section are two pages with (in my opinion) rather bland Forgeworld models, a single page interview with Black Libary writer Ben Counter, who talks about Egrimm van Horstmann, and a single page of models painted by various Black Library people.
Something special this month?
None.
Conclusion
This issue is as entertaining or as dull as the last couple of issues, depending on your point of view. At this point I’m desperately craving for more variety, especially after the third issue mainly consisting of Golden Demon and Armies on Parade showcases (if you don’t count the new releases section ;). How about some articles expanding the background? How about some narrative, some behind the scene looks how the sculptors, ‘Eavy Metal painters and writers work at the studio, interviews with other people than Jervis or Jeremy, painting masterclasses or army workshops. I feel the “new” White Dwarf issues make a good read, but I rarely come back to them once I read them through (mainly because the tutorials are so basic and forgettable). But you can’t say the WD team doesn’t make an effort, so 6/10 for me.
Its all style now and no substance
Sure the photos look nice and its well made
but there are no interesting articles
and the battle reports arent well reported
we dont get a turn by turn report which would be ok if it went for purely narative but they dont do that either
none of the regular monthly personality articles are good
jervis johnson and jeremy vitlock are not interesting.
There is nothing about the real collecting ar regular gaming regular posts like 4 gamers.
I cant of any reason why someone might buy it apart from being new or simply out of routine
I bought a sub to WD shortly before the format changed. i got it just as they switched paint systems over and i honestly was really looking forward to all the new painting guides because you know there's this new system that is designed to be easy for the novice and give a wide amount of choice for the experienced painter so its all gravy right?
well i guess not, now i'm left with a sub to a mag that really is just glossy model pr0n i don't follow the battle reports as i don't really game anymore, i did try but the format is atrocious, it was far easier to follow when they used symbols and detailed accounts.
paint splatter may as well not be there, as mentioned the colours are either wrong or not shown in sufficient detail to make what is written appear to what is shown.
WD over the years has evolved, however i do find that i don't like what it has evolved into, the variety is gone, the hobby and painting articles are gone and we're left with a glossy "look what we've made" magazine, i'm not going to say that was never the case because it clearly was, but doing my own comparison to my old white dwarfs, i'm sorry but the current one is pants, once the sub ends i shan't be renewing.
In regards to Paint Splatter… I can only conclude GW have fired anyone that paints professionally. In all seriousness I know the 'Eavy Metal team is there, but the last few guides have been by the White Dwarf staff themselves; surely GW can get something a bit more detailed? Basecoat wash and done indeed! Even a drybrush and glaze would improve that.
Nice review, I agree with the skip the where you can find us at the back, Demons are not my thing so this issue was a bit over the top for me, so is the lord of the rings mainly because of scale difference, they have some super modles I would have liked to use in warhammer but alas not in this scale. More on how to build for the gaming table would be nice, without using three or four expensive kits.
Also if memory serves me well I can remember WD having adverts in from other companies?
Haven't bought a WD in years because waaay back I found there was hardly anyth inginteresting in it any more…
Reading this I can only conclude it has become even worse!!
I really want to see more about the armies, the behind the scenes development… they have removed the "how to build and play this army" from the new codices, so they should put it in white dwarf. I don't mind the beginner paint classes if they mix in some advanced and 'eavy metal so they appeal to all 3 levels of painters, but it seems they think the only people buying White Dwarf haven't every painted anything before. I also agree that the Vetock, Johnson, and Blanch sections are interesting but would be even better if they weren't every month. I appreciate the review, did really appreciate the controversy over last months comparison, and look forward to more updates although if something doesn't change with White Dwarf, you might be able to just cut and paste each months reviews… which would be sad… c'mon hobby bunker, give us something to talk about!
Main thing I miss from the new WDs is the 'eavy metal painting section. They used to include it for nearly every new army released. The new painting sections are quite bad and even if they are aimed at beginners so that they can paint something up really quickly and get painting, they should not forget about the people who used to use these tutorials to improve their painting skills.
I guess they could release a new eavy metal book like they did a few years ago but that was mainly a collection of WD articles that most people had anyway.
I say bring back the eavy metal section.
I agree. The new painting walkthroughs are appalling. The old ones used to be pretty good. And the person who called Stahly a **** I think thats a little unfair. His article is very nice and he is allowed a opinion. Thats what the whole article is about. Its a personal review. And done very well.
I think it was very unfair and harsh to call Stahly an idiot. After all he took his time to review the new WD and of course that is his opinion on the painting section.
If you dont agree with his opinion, voice your own, but dont put anyone down in saying so.
Elvis C
Melb Australia
This comment has been removed by the author.
Stahly, I don't think you're an idiot. Thanks for taking the time to produce this review. I enjoyed reading your opinions on it.
The article is nicely written and I enjoyed reading. I think all the things you pointed out are accurate.
Having a go at someone else's opinion also makes you a bit of an idiot when they put time and effort into supplying you entertainment.
Stahly I like your article way more than the white dwarf itself… I am pretty disappointed that it is about as interesting as the recycled sawdust it is printed on.
Sorry, I will delete the post, it was wrong and I am sorry. Yes it is your opinion but I wanted to voice mine… The thing of having a go at others skills though, I hate, broadly. I am again voicing an opion but this does not justify what I said. Sorry.
I have had enough of Space Marines they seem to be over marketed and over used, the army of the month and battle report? Please stop. Why not have some more variety, since the start of the new WD the 40k Battle reports have gone like this:
Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels and Chaos Space Marines
Daemons and Space Marines
No Orks, Tau, Tyranids, Eldar, Dark Eldar or Necrons at all. I really wish WD could do what they wanted instead of GW forcing them to push the Space Marines.