Actually, not having shoes may be a very sensible choice. Plenty of evidence that fighters through history have preferred fighting barefoot for better grip. It's a choice, not a mark of poverty.
Depending on terrain and if the person is used to going shoeless (or having footwear with thin soles), sure.
Now, I did check pics of the mini and was incorrect - there's no skull(s) on it, so me yapping about it was (and is) a nothingburger, but I still feel like saying I wasn't making correlation of going barefooted with poverty (certainly can be, but as well might not be), but rather giving my opinion on how absurd scene it makes if every tenth trooper is barefooted and carries around a skull. Definitely feels more like something a flagellant would do rather than your regular soldier, but obviously piousness and superstition comes in many forms. Might make a neat unit with backstory for toting around all those skulls, though.
Similarly, carrying skulls around may have been a big thing amongst early Britons, not just those of enemies but also ancestors and colleagues. They may have believed they could tap the power or spirit of the deceased by wearing their skull.
Yes, and this also makes sense in fantasy universe like wfb and sparsely used it can make an interesting detail or unique character, I'm not arguing about that. The problem I have with it is repetition and turning a cool one-off / rare-ish thing into commonplace. Two out of ten empire state troopers GW currently sells are lugging around a skull, and to me that seems like a lot.
Then again this is obviously a 'me issue' for not being into mass battles where minis blend into regiments and rather favouring skirmish styled stuff where each mini looks individual. My approach and things I value in miniatures might very different to average hobbyist.
I tried to find designer notes on how the team came up with ideas on current state troops and these are the best I could find:
All of those points make perfectly sense and I absolutely dig them as details, it's just repetition that makes them jarring.
For me, having one handgunner with a skull and drilling a hole in the back of it to resemble a bullet hole would make an interesting piece with backstory that might get viewer to think what's the deal with it. Backstabbed poor fellow? Bitter enemy of the guy carrying it around as way of mocking his adversary even after death?
Maybe the biggest draw I have for miniatures comes from trying to create stories and individual, unique pieces.
And just in case anyone was curious about that flying little critter with skull mask, it's called 'Cherub pennant':
With no evidence I think skulls changed a bit in "Warhammer" with Wayne England's more stylised skull drawings (think it was Wayne wasn't it?). Then they started to be little inserts everywhere (thinking Talisman (3rd) and so forth).
This is something I thought as well and was going to mention in my first reply how Talisman 3rd edition still gives me nightmares with its art style. Change from 2nd to 3rd was such a downgrade IMO. The board is absolutely cluttered with meaningless skulls everywhere, with inner region/ wizard's tower being the cherry on top...
