New Product: 1/6 Nightmare Series NS001 COOmodel - Sword Brethren

Coomodel is doing a new series besides their Empire Series and monster file series. This time they are going into even more fantasy/horror with their knights and doing a nightmare series

Three figures were announced. This one is number NS001:

COOMODEL 1/6 NS001 NIGHTMARE SEIRES (DIECAST ALLOY) - SWORD BRETHREN
BARCODE:
The 1/6 Scale Sword Brethren Action Figure Specially Features:
- One (1) head sculpt of zombie
- One (1) zombie body
- Six (6) pieces of interchangeable zombie palms
Costumes:
- One (1) white shirt
- One (1) pair of black short pants
- One (1) pair of leather boots
Armors:
- One (1) head-covering chain armor
- One (1) helmet
- One (1) suit of upper-body chain armor
- One (1) blue gambeson
- One (1) blue sleeveless robe
- One (1) pair of leather belts
Weapons:
- One (1) hooked spear with flag
- One (1) sword with scabbard
- One (1) dagger with scabbard
- One (1) blue shield
Accessories:
- One (1) black figure stand

Very cool. Looks like a D&D lych.

Very creepy! Keep wishing I had room for a 1/6 horror collection, as there's so many figures of that type that keep catching my eye.

These three figures have a Dark Souls vibe going on. If only I had space to build an epic diorama for it...

I like it.

I like this better than the flat helmet version. With a normal head and face it would make for a pretty cool medieval figure. The quality of these sets tends to be quite good, even if they just can't help but throw a lot of fantasy into the mix -- and I'm not just talking about the zombie thing.

I think these only become Coo-l if seen in quantity. I would be lukewarm about singles (or even a set of the 3 they've got coming out) -- but it would be pretty impressive to see a whole"horde" of them going after Sideshow "Evil Dead/Army of Darkness" Ash (or Conan, Vampirella, any of the TBL Barbarian ladies, etc). This is unlike their Coo Model skeleton (whose latest version is running late, come'on Coo, I missed it last time around) where even a single one looks cool by itself.

while this is definately dark souls themed i can also see that body as a fallout ghoul. depending on the price i'll get me a few loose if possible.

I wonder when they specifically say "One (1) zombie body," whether the zombie sculpt continues beyond the visibly exposed parts. Probably not or they would have shown it.

I don't need an anatomically correct zombie or anything, but a bare chest, upper arms or thighs would be nice. But it occurs to me that as these do have zombie forearms and shins, they have more customizing potential than previously eg Sideshow The Dead or DAMToys Nazi Zombies; and as such, they may interest zombie fans who otherwise may have no interest in the medieval aspect. Heck, somebody could even use them not as zombies but if they just wanted dead bodies to make a particularly gory battlefield scene.

Good point with the zombie look of the arms.

Could be a good deal - someone buys it for the zombie kitbash and the medieval fans want only the armor parts and gladly take them

I love both these thinga but might still not buy it...maybe. habe to think about it. The potential of Zombie plus kitbash parts is huge so i might get one

Valiarde wrote:Good point with the zombie look of the arms.

And the lower legs too -- so quite a bit more zombie square footage than any figure previously.  Though there is no clear picture of the lower legs --  if Lord Covenant, Sword Brethren and Dark Raider(s) all have the exactly identical "wound, tear, bleed" pattern on their legs, it may look funny and unconvincing (not visible on Lord Covenant but obvious on the other two).  Many questions -- hopefully will be answered when the in-hand pics show up.

Also wondering if CooModel will do the same 3-pack thing they did for Glory of the Holy City -- $10 cheaper and with bonus item(s).

This is very cool.
Not something I would buy, but it looks great.

I'm strangely drawn to this one, but not sure why.

It's not from a period I've decided to collect, but the older style seems in-keeping because he's been dead a while. lol

That style of nasal helmet was in use up to the mid-thirteenth century.

The five-fold cross was the emblem of the Kingdom of Jerusalem from the 1280s, and became known as the Jerusalem Cross. Prior to that it was apparently already the national flag of Georgia as it was described in a tenth century Georgian text.

The other two in this series don't hold any interest, but I keep coming back to this one. Maybe it's because it evokes old Warhammer gaming figures, or the Army of the Dead from Lord of the Rings.

Well, this one is certainly the most historical looking of the three, although all three sets contain usable elements for the kitbasher. This is indeed the Jerusalem cross, which was indeed used in a heraldic sense, symbolizing the Kingdom of Jerusalem (or Acre, after Jerusalem itself was lost). Georgians may have had the symbol too, but there was not heraldry (in the sense we understand it) there at an earlier period, so I wouldn't put too much faith in that.

GubernatorFan wrote:Georgians may have had the symbol too, but there was not heraldry (in the sense we understand it) there at an earlier period, so I wouldn't put too much faith in that.

It was just that the earliest example of a five-fold cross was as the Georgian national flag, and was recorded as the flag of Tbilisi in the early fifteenth-century.

I couldn't find what Georgians wore in the twelfth to thirteenth centuries, so I wouldn't know where that would lead. lol

CooModel are obviously going for Jerusalem (and the Kingdom of Heaven film) with this trio.

Agreed, but what I meant is that heraldry as we understand it is a pretty western concept, that arose out of western feudal practice. There were certain symbols that might be said to have approached that sense in the east, too (like the Roman/Byzantine eagle, later double-headed eagle), but not quite. The modernity of nations may be an overstated truism, but medieval Georgia was far too divided (into earlier and future ethnic and political units) to talk about anything truly national; perhaps a royal and/or religious symbol then? And 15th century may or may not reflect earlier practice.

GubernatorFan wrote:Agreed, but what I meant is that heraldry as we understand it is a pretty western concept, that arose out of western feudal practice. There were certain symbols that might be said to have approached that sense in the east, too (like the Roman/Byzantine eagle, later double-headed eagle), but not quite. The modernity of nations may be an overstated truism, but medieval Georgia was far too divided (into earlier and future ethnic and political units) to talk about anything truly national; perhaps a royal and/or religious symbol then? And 15th century may or may not reflect earlier practice.

Yes, it would be a huge shot in the dark without a lot of research to assign this figure any significance beyond the Jerusalem/movie connection.