Comparison shot - Conquistadors and Oathmark humans

  • We were asked how they'd look for a human Oathmark army. Here's a couple quickly glued together and photoed next to an Oathmark human figure: 

  • So excited for these! 

  • They do look really good.

    Someone (me) is about to get knee deep in Lustria: Cities of Gold.

  • @JTam  same here! 

  • Able to do a side by side with GW 5th/6th edition empire troops? I know the conquistadors are def' smaller than the 7th/8th edition plastics. Thanks!

  • Compare with GW FB empire please. 

  • I think Fireforge's Northmen will be a good match with this set, and I seem to recall had the same sculptors? I plan on adding some heroes/ leaders using Northmen, though probably with conquistador heads. 

  • Frostgrave plastic figures mix well with Oathmark figures, so I think they'll both mix-and-match about equally well with the Conquistadors.

    You can tell that the Conquistadors do have more realistic proportions in the photo in the original post, compared to the "heroic" proportions of the Oathmark guy, but it's not that bad - I'd be fine with it in my gaming (your mileage may vary!)  I think you could get away with kitbashing some parts between the two, though for best results, you might want to keep the weapons consistent - realistic weapons tend to look really weird next to heroic ones.

    I don't know about GW's Empire troops, but I think GW's sculpts in my experience tend to have some of the most exaggerated proportions of them all.  I'd still mix-and-match them with historic figures on a desktop and even in kitbashing, with the same caveats about keeping the weapons consistent, but GW Warhammer and 40K sculpts - especially older ones - tend tolook weird, squat, and cartoonish to my eye even by "heroic" standards.  (Again, YMMV.) Warhammer and 40K seem to take over-the-top as a design aesthetic, and run with it!  Big muscles, big hands and feet, big lips and mouths, big eyes, and the biggest weapons of them all!

  • @Yronimos Whateley 

  • The Oathmark guys are a little rounder and more comical than classic GW, But both scale well with Fireforge, So should be fine. 

    Edit::The Oathmark guys... the heads seem very large, even when compared with modern GW. The bodies are not bad,. I will see what they look like with Conquistador heads. 

  • Here is another scale shot. WA irish, Oathmark Human Soldier, GW great sword, WA irish, Fireforge Northman, and Frostgrave female soldier. 

  • Again, honestly I think the Oathmark guy is the only one who looks out of place. 

  • Out of place, but not by very much - at least with the Frostgrave and GW stuff:  those seem to all mix-and-match really well between each other, in my experience. 

    The bodies are a bit small, I think, which makes the head and weapons look big, or at least even bigger than they already are!

    I'm not a huge fan of the Oathmark human infantry, but for quick-and-dirty box of generic fantasy infantry (town guards, mercenaries, henchmen, etc.), and for a bunch of generic, uniform spare bits (plain swords, spears, and bows) to kitbash an army with or upgrade some Reaper Bones noodle-weapons with, they'll do.

    Those conquistadors, on the other hand, are NICE.  I'm definitely going to grab a box or two of those!  

    Wargames Atlantic would be my go-to choice for any fantasy human army now, between the Conquistadors, Irish, Goths, and Afghans.

  • @William Redford 

    Appreciate the comparison pics!

    As you said they all look OK together, with the exception of the Oathmark macrocephaly guy.  That being said a cohesive painting style might make even him fit in.  

Please login to reply this topic!