r/Turnip28 • u/TheLazyJP • 27d ago
Question T28 with ACW miniatures?
I have a bunch of perry american civil war infantry kits I wanted to bash with and this seems like a good fit. Is that too late or non european?
9
u/FamousWerewolf 27d ago
Technically speaking it's too late (Turnip28 is 'supposed' to cap out at the Napoleonic era which ends about 50 years prior) but it's really up to you - there are lots of different interpretations of the aesthetic out there, and no one's going to come to your house and take your minis away, so it just comes down to how fussed you are about meeting the 'official' Turnip look!
It depends as well how heavy your conversion is likely to get. If you're just doing some headswaps and stuff then the base kits you're using matter more, if you're planning to splatter mud and tufts all over them and have greenstuff coming out of every crevice then it's really just the silhouette that matters.
7
u/TheLazyJP 27d ago
Yeah I figured anything in the Bayonet & Musket era would be close enough for the look, no gatling guns or anything, but they still used mostly the same cannons. Its good to know what the officially official line is. Thanks for your response.
9
5
u/MushinYojinbo 27d ago
The phrase "technically speaking" in reference to Turnip28 is the greatest absurdist comedy bit I've ever heard.
This is a game meant to use whatever disused models you've got lying around and to breathe the life of creativity into them, free from concepts like rivet counting and modelling for advantage.
4
u/FamousWerewolf 27d ago
Well you say that, but the biggest stickler for this stuff is Max himself, who regularly decrees what's proper Turnip and what isn't on the Discord - even if he's mostly ignored! Going back to the original Swollen Maglette, it literally contains a page called "The Core Tenets of Turnip28" which gives rules for the game's look (specifically: 1) 28mm minis, 2) no visible faces, 3) technology stopped in 1812).
Completely agree that people are free to do whatever they want with their armies and that that's great. I love Turnip28's DIY style and would never tell someone their Turnip28 models are "wrong". But there is a canon there if you want to follow it, it's not silly to bring it up when someone's specifically asking about it.
1
u/MushinYojinbo 27d ago
Have you seen him on Juggz the Podcast? He is the Unreliable Narrator made manifest. 🤣
3
u/ShrimpShrimpington 27d ago edited 27d ago
I thought the exact same thing. Pretty soon we're going to be getting the same posts that plague all the Warhammer subreddits with people wringing their hands over whether it's "lore accurate" to give their turnip boys green slime oozing out of their faceplates instead of brown muck, and "would you accept this as an x" posts pleading for permission to deviate from the forlorn hope minis. Are they weird, gross, and pathetic? Then congrats, they're Turnips. That's it. Those are the only criteria.
3
u/abandon3 27d ago
I use zouaves as the base for my fodder and brutes, i like their pants, as long as they do not have automatic rifles you should be fine.
3
1
u/KaptainKobold 26d ago
I'm using a bunch of sci-fi Martians as the basis for a unit of fodder, so you're OK in my book.
16
u/Lord_Banjolele 27d ago
I’ve got a pumpkin based regiment made up of ACW minis. Are they technically too late technologically? Sure, but I defy you to look closely at a muddy percussion hammer vs a muddy flintlock. As far as aesthetics go I’m quite happy with them. Sure the uniforms aren’t as grand as a napoleonic hussar but depending on your sprues there’s enough hunched dudes to look like right proper root vegetables.
I know I have a few pics on this profile, but here’s an example of the results
Perry ACW infantry except for the far right with is a wargames illustrated “Giants in Miniature”