What ISN'T Oldhammer?

An old, old question rephrased... A terribly lit, out of focus video where I rant a bit about all the stuff that gets labelled 'oldhammer' currently which I don't think is. Probably doesn't clarify my position very well! Hey ho. Feel free to disagree with me.

[@DrBlaxill]

An excellent and articulate analysis. You articulated - with analogies and examples - many points I felt instinctively, but was not able to describe with the clarity I wanted to. I think one way into something inherently historically facing - which old, middle, and oop hammer (as you call it!) are - is to immerse oneself in printed stuff from that time- especially now-focussed stuff like magazines. Old White Dwarfs and Citadel Journals for example are a great way to immerse oneself in the zeitgeist of an era. What aesthetic influences were inspirational at that time, and how the game and hobby elements were conceived. Oldhammer was also all about individual expression through conversions and freehanding banners/sheilds- which was a less corporate and more bottom-up creativity focussed zeitgiest than later periods. For me, there is a certain beautiful idealism and naivety to the primordial soup period up until about 1991 because there is the feeling GW was not exactly thinking commercially and its output was rambling, idiosyncratic, and humorous.

[@oakboundstudio]

Well put. I think you're right. Miniatures aesthetics and the particular focus of the rulesets themselves are the usual focus of 'Oldhammer or not' type discussion but White Dwarf is an excellent example of where and how the philosophy of the company changes.

[@SunburntHands]

I think you're totally right. Classification is not gatekeeping. It is the difference between defining a scotsman and making a 'no true scotsman' fallacy argument. From what little I know of comics collectors, they seem to have a fairly well defined system of eras: golden age, silver age etc., and I think Warhammer would benefit from a similar sharpening of its eras. As you suggest, 1st/2nd/3rd for oldhammer, 4th/5th/6th for middlehammer, and oophammer for 7th/8th. The trouble is that the phrase 'oldhammer' seems to be doing what language does as a user based system and misbehaving, attaching itself for better or worse to the whole run of WFB right up until End Times in 2015. Perhaps that means reclassifying original oldhammer as 'true oldhammer' (although that's probably going to create more harrumphing and gnashing of teeth...)

[@GloriousGrunt]

Sounds fair, I'm into midhammer (late 90's stuff) but feel the same way about playing thematically rather then trying to win lol

[@richarddunstan447]

Really interesting video, and whilst obviously I know that 1-3rd are what Oldhammer classically is, in my mind all the models released during 4th edition and also some of those in 5th have far more in common with the older aesthetic than the more modern 6-8 edition plastic stuff. Especially since lots of armies in the early 90’s would have contained models that were from the 80’s.

[@oakboundstudio]

Absolutely! And the 4th/5th army and rulebooks are full of older models. I'd definitely let 4th/5th ed models (plastic included) slide in to the Oldhammer heading whereas I would be uncomfortable with 6th ed models sitting there. Too much of a style shift.

[@BassBunny_42]

Not out of focus. That lump of modelling clay was perfectly focused :) FWIW, I don't think terminology has to be gatekeepy. If I say that GreenDay write Happy Hardcore music, I'm just wrong. As long as you aren't using the terminology (or lack of knowledge of it) to exclude people then you are good. (You seem to say this later) Nice chat. I'm off to glue some cogs to a tophat ;P

[@oakboundstudio]

I kinda have to focus by waving a hand in front of the camera where I think my face will be whilst pushing the button with my other hand. Sometimes it doesn't work so well and it's had to tell on the little screen! :D

[@kharnifex]

I'll tell you what isn't oldhammer, screaming at the screen as an intro, Reeeargh I'm blubblubhillbolb and welcome to Warhammer bllllahblahblah!!!

[@oakboundstudio]

I like to think I am too dignified to scream, but really I am just too inhibited.

[@fuzonzord9301]

I think categorization is important. Especially on mass sites. Like it's important to be able to find things. As a Wh40k fan I categorize 1st ed as Oldhammer, 2nd ed as Herohammer and 3rd ed as Middlehammer. I consider the release of Imperial Armour Volume One - Imperial Guard & Imperial Navy to be the start of Newhammer. My "native" edition is 3rd, so Middlehammer. ed I only got into Oldhammer in late 00s. I have mixed feelings about Herohammer. IMO the most striking example of what happens when categories aren't respected is Planet28 tag which is full of Wh40k stuff and then some other systems/settings with only a few actual Planet28 posts.

[@aimmoth13]

I would say 2000s Warhammer is very polished, well balanced, harmonic and, most important, NOT WEIRD and not naive. And I like Oldhammer because it can be weird and naive.

[@The_Shadowy_Mr_Evans]

I miss the early days of Oldhammer a lot.

[@dustinzaccaria7644]

So what would playing Warhammer 40k 2nd edition with 2013 tactical marines be. I want to play 2nd edition with my later “Firstborn” (god I hate that term) Space Marines. However, I would hope someone wouldn’t begrudge me using my 2013 Space Marines and my Space Hulk Blood Angels Terminators. I even plan on making scratch built, home made terrain in addition some of the current terrain modified and customised with my own embalishments.

[@oakboundstudio]

Aesthetically newhammer, stylistically middlehammer? I don't think anyone would object to their use, especially as the design of terminator armour didn't really change much until they moved everything up to Primaris scale.

[@dustinzaccaria7644]

@@oakboundstudio the main problem I may find my self facing is the Terminators are on 40mm bases where as everything was on 25’s in 2nd edition. But I suppose that’s something I’d have to negotiate with my opponent. If they said no then we’d both lose out on a potential gaming partner and players who play older editions would be harder to come buy I’d imagine. Anyway thanks for the reply.

[@manicman5961]

I have no problems there ^_^ though I thought I had a copy of the 3ed Rule book.. it don't seam to and the prices are a bit stupid still.. So I'm more 4ed as It was what I more played.. Of course.. we get more complex in.. mm.. I'm not sure if the term is kinda insulting or not 'Toyhammer'.. for the board game spin-offs.. but with some of them.. the differences are minor.. but anyway, no problems with what you said there, though wonder if you have thought about a cheap ring-light to mount on your camera for extra lighting.. but then, too cheap and they run half-wave and get more flicker.. anyway, that bit is pointless comments

[@oakboundstudio]

It's usually ok, but pointing directly at the windows in this case not the best idea. The studio the other side is a bit too chaotic for me to mount the tripod there!

[@broadswordminiatures8008]

Buy you didn't mention the best version of all....Prehammer😄. Also Skinthammer and Dadhammer. I started paying an interest in Oldhammer long after it had been defined as a thing, and was put off initially by a couple of gatekeepers who insisted Oldhammer was only for Citadel figures... which of course is not the Oldhammer ethos at all imo. For me , any figure from any period could appear on an Oldhammer table , and I'd love to see a game with Minifigs and modern GW or Reaper slogging it out. I've got a couple of modern GW kits ready to use ( if I can be arsed to stick them together) in a planned 3rd ed Chaos army. So Oldhammer for me can be any model on the table, but played in a fun narrative driven way. But, yeah, I can see how you are annoyed by continuous valuation requests on new stuff. I think that's just part of the modern helpless culture, where folk just ask for help immediately without bothering do any research themselves.

[@blastvader]

I firmly stick to Oldhammer being a state of mind. The exclusionary grogs on Oldhammer FB groups, who shit a brick if anything that wasn't cast before '89 or whatever turns up (you know who you are), can do one.

[@oakboundstudio]

Totally agree with the state of mind thing. If you have that then most things can be made Oldhammer. If you don't... it's when the clearly not-Oldhammer mindsets dominate the Oldhammer community that there's a problem. So the question is how to define the mindset?

[@jprp999]

7 and 8 "End hammer" ?

[@oakboundstudio]

Lasthammer, Finalhammer... is Old World Rehammer? ;)

[@jprp999]

You don't want to know what i really expect it to be, but in a more printable form let's say "Gouge hammer" or "Abomination Hammer" and not in a good chaos gribbly way. @@oakboundstudio

[@maxkircher4671]

Well since I'm free to I very much do strongly disagree with that take, on grounds of linguistics. Oldhammer is simply any Warhammer 20 years or older. In 2008-2010 that mostly meant 1st-3rd edition, today it also means 6th edition, and in 7 years time or so it will include 8th edition. Using it to describe any form of Warhammer more specific than that just doesn't make sense linguistically, because 'old' is not a fixed attribute but a relative one that changes constantly. What's new today is old tomorrow. The word Oldhammer describes anything that's past a certain threshold of age, and the real question then is what is that threshold? 20 years seems like the best answer to that, because that's the scientific standard for the Nostalgia Zone that overlaps with a fair bit of the Oldhammer movement. If you want to be more specific about specific kinds of Warhammer, which is fair enough, then you really need to be using decades. 80shammer, 90shammer and so on. Because Warhammer aesthetics can generally be broken down fairly easily by decade, and the kind of Warhammer you and a lot of those 2010s blogs are really describing is more accurately labeled as 80shammer than it is Oldhammer, because while other Warhammer flavours might become old, they will never become 80s. That also nicely sidesteps the problems with other labels like Middlehammer, which I will note I find rather insulting and seeing it used greatly dilutes my enjoyment of Warhammer groups.

[@oakboundstudio]

As you can imagine I disagree with you on that too. But this is the point of free speech and linguistics. If you're taking 'old' to mean old rather than as part of a complete term then that's entirely subjective. Is 20 years old? Why not 10? Given the turnover of game 'versions' put out by GW 3-5 years can result in something becoming unsupported/obsolete, is 3 years 'old' if a newer version has appeared? Old Warhammer is not the same thing as Oldhammer which became a badge at a specific time and had particular (of broad and much-discussed) meaning from the time it was adopted as a label.

[@maxkircher4671]

Honestly I'm willing to at least allow the 3-year threshold its fair time in court too. But I would argue that 20 years ought to be considered the benchmark rather than 10 or 3 because current sociological research indicates that cultural and aesthetic nostalgia works on a 20-year cycle, and since the truth is a lot of the Oldhammer project is at least in part connected with nostalgia (it's no coincidence that the 80shammer movement started during a period of strong love for all things 1980s, and it's also no coincidence that 6th edition Warhammer is growing so popular as that love turns to all things 2000s today), it seems like a fair cutoff mark. If future evidence reveals a 10 or 3 year nostalgia cycle, I'm happy to reconsider my stance accordingly. Of course, at the same time I openly look at this with a very inclusive aim, because as much as I might not like Warhammer from the wrong era being lumped in with my main focus I hate seeing people excluded even more because it reminds me of how miserable I've felt when it was happening to me, and I don't want anyone else to ever feel like that. But at the end of the day, it's not really up to either of us to decide what the label Oldhammer means. That will change based on how language and culture changes around it, the same as any other label. If it changes to bring in more people and more importantly changes to make more people happier, I personally am prepared to overlook a few anachronistic Warhammer posts for that sake, since when the chips are down I value having more people to talk Oldhammer with more than semantics over Warhammer periods. I have a hard enough time finding people to talk about Warhammer at all as it is.

[@SomeDudeOnYouTube]

IMHO "Oldhammer" is everything that is not the current version from G'Wullu. You could put numbers to it. Oldhammer 1 would be first edition, Oldhammer 2 would be second edtion and so on.

[@oakboundstudio]

Hmm. I don't agree, although as it's not a hard and fast definition you are, of course. free to use it how you wish. To my eyes Oldhammer has grown beyond that into a very definite set of style, aesthetics and approach to gaming which are fundamentally different to the direction GW's core community has been focussed for the last 25+ years.

[@manicman5961]

can't really do numbers.. gets very VERY confusing when you think alot of Non GW stuff is still Oldhammer.. despite not being connected to Hammer.. (ah, old GW warhammer were even there own staff and photos often showed non-GW products... something you won't see these days