Josh Reynolds wrote some of the coolest Beastmen characters in his novels.
Of course, promptly ignored by GW who seem to be both aimless when it comes to AoS and determined to follow the same bad path that led to Fantasy's decline. Its a talent, that much is for sure.
Yeah he was one of the very few good ones, I liked almost all of his 40k / Heresy stories and some of his AoS stuff too, which of his books are Beastmen?
Josh was a huge blow to the AoS end of Black Library - the guy just got the setting so well and he wrote like a machine! Since he's gone I've noticed the novels have weighted heavily back toward 40K again. Heck at the last two Black Library celebrations almost everything is 40K. I think the last one had a few AoS things and the one before almost nothing.
Granted a lot of 40K is fawning over the Horus Heresy series and its associated spin-offs and such; but still BL seems to lack a core of several good authors for fantasy right now. I think all their good big names are all in 40K.
caladancid wrote: Josh Reynolds wrote some of the coolest Beastmen characters in his novels.
Of course, promptly ignored by GW who seem to be both aimless when it comes to AoS and determined to follow the same bad path that led to Fantasy's decline. Its a talent, that much is for sure.
In what way do you consider it aimless? I'm curious.
JWBS wrote: Yeah he was one of the very few good ones, I liked almost all of his 40k / Heresy stories and some of his AoS stuff too, which of his books are Beastmen?
I believe it was Black Pyramid which had a Beastmen perspective character(s*) who was a side protagonist. Ghost Eater I think was the name. He had a peculiar ability (probably a product of being from Shyish) where he could kill a person and absorb their soul, with all of its knowledge/experience. If memory serves, (I read it at release a few years back) he could even call upon the souls he absorbed for advice and talk with them, hence the "character(s*)" above. This led him to be a much more thoughtful/dangerous Beastman and he eventually rose to take over the Beastherd that was attached to the chaos warlord's warband. Again, if memory serves, he got tired of his herd being used as fodder and quit the field, leaving the chaos army severely depleted.
Was hoping to get more from that character, but alas, things didn't work out between JR and BL.
edit: That whole novel had alot of great characters. Even managed to make Mannfred somewhat of a sympathetic character through that series. And of course, I always wanted to see what happened to Tarsus Bullheart after his release from Nagash.
edit 2 : CL Werner's Beastgrave has Beastmen as perspective characters as well, for those interested.
JWBS wrote: Yeah he was one of the very few good ones, I liked almost all of his 40k / Heresy stories and some of his AoS stuff too, which of his books are Beastmen?
I believe it was Black Pyramid which had a Beastmen perspective character(s*) who was a side protagonist. Ghost Eater I think was the name. He had a peculiar ability (probably a product of being from Shyish) where he could kill a person and absorb their soul, with all of its knowledge/experience. If memory serves, (I read it at release a few years back) he could even call upon the souls he absorbed for advice and talk with them, hence the "character(s*)" above. This led him to be a much more thoughtful/dangerous Beastman and he eventually rose to take over the Beastherd that was attached to the chaos warlord's warband. Again, if memory serves, he got tired of his herd being used as fodder and quit the field, leaving the chaos army severely depleted.
Was hoping to get more from that character, but alas, things didn't work out between JR and BL.
edit: That whole novel had alot of great characters. Even managed to make Mannfred somewhat of a sympathetic character through that series. And of course, I always wanted to see what happened to Tarsus Bullheart after his release from Nagash.
edit 2 : CL Werner's Beastgrave has Beastmen as perspective characters as well, for those interested.
Yes it was Black Pyramid. I would say though that almost every JR novel had characters that were so cool I have continually wondered why GW has pursued none of them.
Yes it was Black Pyramid. I would say though that almost every JR novel had characters that were so cool I have continually wondered why GW has pursued none of them.
Endryd Haar got an appearance in an Abnett book! : )
I'm still upset that Josh Reynolds stopped writing for AoS. Not with him of course, but it just sucks to lose such a great writer. The way he wrote Nagash, Mannfred, and Arkhan really gave them additional depth and nuance instead of being 100% bad guys 100% of the time. Like... we have Chaos for that.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I'm still upset that Josh Reynolds stopped writing for AoS. Not with him of course, but it just sucks to lose such a great writer. The way he wrote Nagash, Mannfred, and Arkhan really gave them additional depth and nuance instead of being 100% bad guys 100% of the time. Like... we have Chaos for that.
Seconded - although there are a few that also do some good work.
I see GW still doesn't understand that a 4+ ward save is equivalent to double the wounds characteristic--5 Hzerkers are going to statistically take 20 damage to kill. Vulkites are gunna need to be throwing out some serious offense to make up for being the same durability at significantly greater cost.
Bonereaper players will likely be happy with wd update. While grand strategy is meh as usual(you do this, you also do keep battleline alive by definition but reverse isn't true). 2 heroic actions of which unstoppable spell ought to be good, 2 more commands for rp points and maybe best set of battle tactics factions got. Telling that worst is cavalry unit making charge and ending turn near enemy. Double 1 for charge makes this bit risky turning it to "just" solid option.
Daughter looks exceptionally good, and the tactical rock actually makes sense this time. But yet again locked in the bloody battlebox for the next six months.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: Daughter looks exceptionally good, and the tactical rock actually makes sense this time. But yet again locked in the bloody battlebox for the next six months.
Kind of in the same boat this time for once since the DoK side is only regular kits and the new leader. Although technically I do need SoS, I just don't need any more Doomfires nor Khinerai. That said ebay might well get a good few split kits for the new leader and its great to get some more leaders that aren't bound to the Cauldron kit.
The Daughter model, not so much. What is even happening to her neck?
The head's not glued on. Apparently they do it for ease of photography according to Jay from the Middle-Earth team.
Does save time not having to paint multiple versions of same model at least. Since there's 2 weapons and 2 heads to show painted version of every combo they would need 4 models painted. Now with 1 with 2 alternative parts.
As a huge lover of DoK masks, I like the new whip character.
But she's just a more dynamic sister of slaughter, which we already got from both Underworlds and Warcry.
Kind of surprised the Nighthaunt character is supposed to be a "He." It was giving me scary old lady vibes. Also, is this the first versus box that has easy to build models in it? The banshees are a really cheap unit
GaroRobe wrote: As a huge lover of DoK masks, I like the new whip character.
But she's just a more dynamic sister of slaughter, which we already got from both Underworlds and Warcry.
I really appreciate the whip pose so that its got a sense of having a really long whip, but its far more contained. It's not like the Deamonette riding a Prince where the whip is a massive monstrosity of long lengths of fragile plastic.
That said I do agree that DoK could do with something "fresh" in their lines. Perhaps a cheaper generic cavalry unit; chariots; winged mounts. Spear elves (they've got two on the cauldron); war engines (there's at least two kinds of anti infantry artillery mentioned in stories such as the Morathi expansion book).
Then again I'm almost feeling like GW doesn't quite know what to do with DoK. Or rather what to do with the remains of the Dark Elves. They've pushed them together in the recent book, but DoK are an AoS force built on a specific theme and style of play and style of models. Allying in the old DE army content is fantastic and I'm sure classic fans of the army love it (heck DE are almost all there barring one or two leader models and the Reaper Bolt Thrower). However I do wonder if its something GW experimented with to see how the market reacted with thoughts that if we didn't go wild for it, they'd shelve the DE at some point. Much like the He got shelved and then we got Lumineth; I'd wager we'll see the DE remains shelved as Cities of Sigmar get more fleshed out and as Malarion's forces make an appearance.
The new Nighthaunt. A particularly judgemental Matire D’Hotel.
Monsieur, sil vous plait! Zis afterlife, eet ‘as, ‘ow you say, ze dress code. I cannot possiblee seat your group in zat gaudy armour. Mon dieu! (who ees Nagash)
They've gutted the FW range of models for AoS several times now, models that had no problem and weren't old or anything have been removed in swathes.
That said they've also had glitches on their site for ages that miss-list things as sold out or last chance all the time. It's been there for ages, apparently we only noticed it in a big way in the lats year or so because of covid running stocks down quicker than they can replace them.
I also think that sometimes/many times FW stuff runs out of stock and they have to fight to get it funded for a new mould and approved. So it could be that some of that is the internal workings and politics coming to the fore.
I do think that Vorgaroth has been there before and returned; I'd be surprised as its the second newest AoS model (the newest being the stormcast heads); but its impossible to predict if it is accurate or not.
Note emailing the FW staff is sometimes more reliable than GW staff - the FW email seems to go direct to actual FW staff themselves (not to customer service staff) and they tend to be a touch more aware of things going on the background. General GW customer service staff tend to run on whatever the websites says and don't know/are not allowed to comment on anything going on in the backgorund that might be different from that information. So if you do want the model do consider dropping FW an email - at the very least emails show interest and that can be part of a metric toward helping justify a model getting brought back into print .
Not yet sure what to think of the new Daughter, other than "pants".
Overread wrote: That said I do agree that DoK could do with something "fresh" in their lines. Perhaps a cheaper generic cavalry unit; chariots; winged mounts. Spear elves (they've got two on the cauldron); war engines (there's at least two kinds of anti infantry artillery mentioned in stories such as the Morathi expansion book).
An ultra-light chariot with bladed wheels and Daughters hanging off the sides and slashing with knives would be fun.
Neat stuff, but where are the books? We're still waiting on IDK and Fyreslayers to get their books. I guess this is a good hint that Daughters of Khaine and Nighthaunt are next for the book treatment, but that's if we even get books.
I kind of feel good now that I didn't get the DoK book at launch cause that's a surprisingly soon book for an army that just got one!
Of the four armies announced though I kind of hope that Nighthaunt get very little in new models and that the rest do because NH, not that I hate them, have a lot of good models right now. Fyreslayers freaking need a second wave as do Idonth
I'll be interested to see what GW does with DoK - I kind of feel like we could see the DE stuff rolled into them, but I'm not sure. The cover certainly suggests they are staying pure
Chaos and Order battletomes? Aren't they supposed to be indices or something?
It just means the army is from the GA Chaos and Order like how GW will tease "Xenos". So they could be any un-released army. Eg the Chaos could be Khorne or Slaves to Darkness and the Order could be Cities of Sigmar or such
It just means the army is from the GA Chaos and Order like how GW will tease "Xenos". So they could be any un-released army. Eg the Chaos could be Khorne or Slaves to Darkness and the Order could be Cities of Sigmar or such
Idoneth and DoK are, the other two aren’t weirdly. I really like the new Idoneth one.
Oh the Idoneth one is new! At a glance i just thought it was the same as the old one, because the cover of the old one looks quite similar at a glance.
DoK have had a messy time of Rules - also the red binding on those books makes me wonder if Slaanesh is in the same boat - ergo both armies got 2.5 books which were then added too only a month or so later with the campaign books (which did feature a new model or two) and now another fresh book.
I kind of hope that DoK at least get a few more models than the new leader just to make the book more than a stats update.
I’ve been collecting kits to start my first AoS army, the Idoneth. After seeing the Lumineth releases the other year, I had really hoped they would flesh out the sea elves a little bit more. Hell, I would have just taken swarm units of fish!
That we only got the Thrallmaster and not even any spells is quite disappointing.
I'll be interested to see what GW does with DoK - I kind of feel like we could see the DE stuff rolled into them, but I'm not sure. The cover certainly suggests they are staying pure
Ya, I was hoping that the events of Broken Realms : Morathi was leading to more legacy DE consolidation. If anything to add a bit more substance to the DoK. Its not likely though.
I genuinely hope not. How they are right now is interesting and has a lot of room for development. They don't need to go back to the lol evil dark elf route.
At least the duardin combining rumor was false, unless Dispossessed find themselves into the Fyreslayer book, which at this point would just be a welcome change considering how anemic FS are.
I am not surprised that DoK is out so soon. They were the last of the AoS 1.0 books and the one they got in 2.0 was more like 1.5 than an actual release in my opinion. To be fair I think this book will be a quick release of one model and no more. Nighthaunt will get 2 new models and probably done.
Basically I fear the revealed books are all going to be minor releases with one new hero and then done. Maybe some old WHFB units will be combined into the book, but nothing more. So I wouldn't be expecting any big model releases for fantasy until at least summer.
Regarding the rumored Chaos Book my bet is on Hedonites or Blades. Hedonites because their current book is the epitome of bad rule writing, and Blades of Khorne because Blades of Khorne goes against the core foundation of 3.0, which is no hero buffing. The Order book could be the rumored new CoS book that was hinted at at the release of Dominion.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: I genuinely hope not. How they are right now is interesting and has a lot of room for development. They don't need to go back to the lol evil dark elf route.
They might actually be combined a la Orruk clans at best. The Morathi book does indicate that she ends up taking over a large Dark Elf controlled city and imprisoning the Stormcast.
I'll be interested to see what GW does with DoK - I kind of feel like we could see the DE stuff rolled into them, but I'm not sure. The cover certainly suggests they are staying pure
Ya, I was hoping that the events of Broken Realms : Morathi was leading to more legacy DE consolidation. If anything to add a bit more substance to the DoK. Its not likely though.
I'm really torn on this one
On the one hand Dark Elves are pretty much entirely there as an army. All they lost were a few leader models and their bolt thrower. All their core infantry and models are in the game right now and on sale. So reuniting them would make old DE players very happy and give a very big and diverse army right there and then in an instant.
At the same time I got into DoK for their visual design and their theme as a force and the story behind them. A blood worshipping cult. I think rolling DE back into them would dilute that aspect of them heavily. It could even bloat the range as DoK have been steadily adding models to fill different roles and if you roll DE back together they don't need to add many more roles as its already all there. Instead of perhaps a cheap DoK archer unit, you've got repeater bolt throwers; instead of a common cavalry you've got Dark Riders etc.....
I see it as a battle; one way older players are happy the other newer ones are happy. The other thing is that all of Cities of Sigmar is kind of a big questionmark over what does survive as they update them. It's very much a rescue/dregs battletome right now and its hard to tell what GW will keep and what they will cut away; esp as they are still yet to add Malarion's Aelf force which were the shadowy dark elves of the setting.
It's a tricky one and either way there are winners and loses. Personally I'd "prefer" DoK to remain their own thing
chaos0xomega wrote: I am grateful for Fyreslayers not being merged with Kharadron.
Equal parts grateful to not be rolled into KO, and the other part disappointed that the Flamekeeper is looking to be the sole model release for the army. Room for growth, but not for awhile.
But I think I've said it before that's its probably going to be a pretty muted year for AoS of "1 Character with a Battletome". The Nighthaunt crossbowmen do kind of put that theory to bed, though.
chaos0xomega wrote: I am grateful for Fyreslayers not being merged with Kharadron.
Equal parts grateful to not be rolled into KO, and the other part disappointed that the Flamekeeper is looking to be the sole model release for the army. Room for growth, but not for awhile.
But I think I've said it before that's its probably going to be a pretty muted year for AoS of "1 Character with a Battletome". The Nighthaunt crossbowmen do kind of put that theory to bed, though.
AoS has so many factions that either need a second wave or a big model update (eg skaven and seraphon). Every edition is going to have losers as they settle things down. Heck lets not forget the last two editions had Slaanesh with so few releases (and for so long before that) that people were honestly believing that GW was going to remove Slaanesh. I think the only salt would be if GW started hyper focusing on Stormcast again or doubling down on already diverse armies too much.
At the same time I got into DoK for their visual design and their theme as a force and the story behind them. A blood worshipping cult. I think rolling DE back into them would dilute that aspect of them heavily. It could even bloat the range as DoK have been steadily adding models to fill different roles
I wouldn't go so far as to throw all the DE stuff back into DoK. The Sorceress on foot and on Dragon very much have the DoK look to them. The Executioners could be the male thralls that are bred to just be guards of the temples while the daughters go and get stuff done. I'd leave it there.
The rest of the DE stuff I'd leave to whatever they are doing with Cities of Sigmar's future or however they deal with Malerion's faction.
Eldarsif wrote: At least the duardin combining rumor was false, unless Dispossessed find themselves into the Fyreslayer book, which at this point would just be a welcome change considering how anemic FS are.
I am not surprised that DoK is out so soon. They were the last of the AoS 1.0 books and the one they got in 2.0 was more like 1.5 than an actual release in my opinion. To be fair I think this book will be a quick release of one model and no more. Nighthaunt will get 2 new models and probably done.
Basically I fear the revealed books are all going to be minor releases with one new hero and then done. Maybe some old WHFB units will be combined into the book, but nothing more. So I wouldn't be expecting any big model releases for fantasy until at least summer.
Regarding the rumored Chaos Book my bet is on Hedonites or Blades. Hedonites because their current book is the epitome of bad rule writing, and Blades of Khorne because Blades of Khorne goes against the core foundation of 3.0, which is no hero buffing. The Order book could be the rumored new CoS book that was hinted at at the release of Dominion.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: I genuinely hope not. How they are right now is interesting and has a lot of room for development. They don't need to go back to the lol evil dark elf route.
They might actually be combined a la Orruk clans at best. The Morathi book does indicate that she ends up taking over a large Dark Elf controlled city and imprisoning the Stormcast.
She mind controls them using the sorceresses. The ones that escape it actually end up fighting against her with the various city factions
Eldarsif wrote: At least the duardin combining rumor was false, unless Dispossessed find themselves into the Fyreslayer book, which at this point would just be a welcome change considering how anemic FS are.
I am not surprised that DoK is out so soon. They were the last of the AoS 1.0 books and the one they got in 2.0 was more like 1.5 than an actual release in my opinion. To be fair I think this book will be a quick release of one model and no more. Nighthaunt will get 2 new models and probably done.
Basically I fear the revealed books are all going to be minor releases with one new hero and then done. Maybe some old WHFB units will be combined into the book, but nothing more. So I wouldn't be expecting any big model releases for fantasy until at least summer.
Regarding the rumored Chaos Book my bet is on Hedonites or Blades. Hedonites because their current book is the epitome of bad rule writing, and Blades of Khorne because Blades of Khorne goes against the core foundation of 3.0, which is no hero buffing. The Order book could be the rumored new CoS book that was hinted at at the release of Dominion.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: I genuinely hope not. How they are right now is interesting and has a lot of room for development. They don't need to go back to the lol evil dark elf route.
They might actually be combined a la Orruk clans at best. The Morathi book does indicate that she ends up taking over a large Dark Elf controlled city and imprisoning the Stormcast.
She mind controls them using the sorceresses. The ones that escape it actually end up fighting against her with the various city factions
Which is what I kind of inferred at with her taking over the city.
I don't mind them keeping the two pieces of cover art that they did; it is good art, it doesn't need to be fixed in my eyes. If there is new art I'd want it to be a notable improvement rather than different for the sake of it, like what they did with IDK or... hot dam that new DoK art is so fething badass!
chaos0xomega wrote: I am grateful for Fyreslayers not being merged with Kharadron.
Equal parts grateful to not be rolled into KO, and the other part disappointed that the Flamekeeper is looking to be the sole model release for the army. Room for growth, but not for awhile.
But I think I've said it before that's its probably going to be a pretty muted year for AoS of "1 Character with a Battletome". The Nighthaunt crossbowmen do kind of put that theory to bed, though.
AoS has so many factions that either need a second wave or a big model update (eg skaven and seraphon). Every edition is going to have losers as they settle things down. Heck lets not forget the last two editions had Slaanesh with so few releases (and for so long before that) that people were honestly believing that GW was going to remove Slaanesh. I think the only salt would be if GW started hyper focusing on Stormcast again or doubling down on already diverse armies too much.
And that's an inherent problem with the game. GW, in pursuit of the new, failed to build new coherent factions with a strong identity and chose to splinter old coherent factions into multiple armies. As it stands, a new AOS range will get maybe 1-2 big drops and be abandoned forevermore. Fyreslayers are one of the best examples of this; they were poorly thought-out to begin with. I won't say it's impossible to make an army out of the Slayers, but the way they went about it was gakky.
As it stands, a new AOS range will get maybe 1-2 big drops and be abandoned forevermore
To be fair it depends on the size of the faction range if they need regular additions or not. Lumineth got a big release and Hedonites have been quite fleshed out so I wouldn't mind if they got a pause for the time being as not all factions need to have as many units as Space Marines. Having large roster just creates redundancy if you don't sunset the occasional SKU, something GW wont' be doing.
What GW needs to do is either flesh out the smaller factions now(FS, FEC, others) or just combine them into a larger faction. Hell, I wouldn't mind if my FEC had been included into SGL. At least then I might have extended options instead of buying 4 SC boxes and be done. I would have even been happy if ID and DoK had become one(both armies I play). Just something to change this stale ass release schedule they have going for themselves right now.
The truth is GW just over extended themselves in AoS 0.0 and we get to suffer for it.
The truth is that GW didn't overextend themselves in AoS 0.0--it's that the community didn't react well to what they tried to do.
Also, stay away from my Idoneth with your Daughters of Khaine nonsense. I already had Skitarii get rolled into Cult. I'm not dealing with that trash again.
Given how long the development cycle is, I would expect third edition to be where we start seeing some of the more popular factions with older lines get heavy additions. I am expecting a lot for FEC, and I suspect GSG is taking a while because they are also getting a good chunk of releases. Expecting Seraphon to be full plastic after a new tome.
Fyreslayers though, I wonder to what extent GW understands their lack of popularity is not because the concept is bad but because of the execution.
Idoneth don't have a lot of models but the ones they do have are very nice kits and fill out the army well when all of them are viable. There is room for diversity in the roster they have, it comes down to internal balance.
Skaven releases have always been as erratic as they are so you never know what'll happen there.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Stepping back for a moment, I am really happy to see the roadmap. I hope they keep doing them in the future.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I don't mind them keeping the two pieces of cover art that they did; it is good art, it doesn't need to be fixed in my eyes. If there is new art I'd want it to be a notable improvement rather than different for the sake of it, like what they did with IDK or... hot dam that new DoK art is so fething badass!
While it's not great losing good cover art, I prefer new over recycled art because it makes it easy to tell books from different editions apart.
Yeh. There's been people who bought wrong edition 40k codex because the cover art was same and they didn't spot difference on the edge and realize it's meaning...
Fyreslayers though, I wonder to what extent GW understands their lack of popularity is not because the concept is bad but because of the execution.
Idoneth don't have a lot of models but the ones they do have are very nice kits and fill out the army well when all of them are viable. There is room for diversity in the roster they have, it comes down to internal balance.
Skaven releases have always been as erratic as they are so you never know what'll happen there.
Now I am a proper knife-eared dwarf-hater, but even I feel sorry for Fyreslayers fan and the faction has been treated. Too few kits and the kits are just so similar that it is easy to dismiss it as all one single kit.
Idoneth is in a nice place, but just requires slightly more variety in the roster. I think the new Thrallmaster is an excellent idea and with a new kit I hope they change the warscrolls enough to make the army a bit more flexible than "more eels".
The Skaven problem I feel is a mixed problem. I think they are a faction that has too many sub-factions and for a long time you could even add them to different armies(Maggotkin/Pestilens) which just made the army incohesive in my mind. I do hope that when GW revisits them they do a little clean up and make the army have more synergy with itself. I am not a huge fan of the fact that if I want to run Skryre with Stormfiends as battleline I am more or less just forced into a narrow selection of units.
Yeah, the way the Skaven army/armies are currently structured is not really conducive towards having a good time. Too many subfactions with too restrictive a roster of options and too limited a range of models. GW needs to overhaul it. Honestly, Skaven are a strong enough concept in and of themselves that theres no reason to limit and restrict them so heavily and treat them like 5 different armies/subfactions or whatever it is. Skaven should be left as a cohesive single faction rather than being given the Aelf/Duardin treatment and split into different books, etc.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I don't mind them keeping the two pieces of cover art that they did; it is good art, it doesn't need to be fixed in my eyes. If there is new art I'd want it to be a notable improvement rather than different for the sake of it, like what they did with IDK or... hot dam that new DoK art is so fething badass!
While it's not great losing good cover art, I prefer new over recycled art because it makes it easy to tell books from different editions apart.
At least these have the red border to help a little bit, but yeah. Strange.
tneva82 wrote: Yeh. There's been people who bought wrong edition 40k codex because the cover art was same and they didn't spot difference on the edge and realize it's meaning...
There's also been people who bought the wrong books because they bought it online at a hefty discount...
Idoneth don't have a lot of models but the ones they do have are very nice kits and fill out the army well when all of them are viable. There is room for diversity in the roster they have, it comes down to internal balance.
The sad part is that Idoneth is one of those armies like Flesh-Eater Courts where the bits in a kit could actually be put to use.
Want to add a cheap, summonable unit?
Fish swarm units! The Gloomtide Shipwreck comes with a bunch of them!
Want to add a smaller, "buffing" piece of terrain or something like that? Coral!
Then there's stuff like the Allopex's crab for the base and the lil' eel for the Gloomtide or Reaver units.
tneva82 wrote: Yeh. There's been people who bought wrong edition 40k codex because the cover art was same and they didn't spot difference on the edge and realize it's meaning...
There's also been people who bought the wrong books because they bought it online at a hefty discount...
tneva82 wrote: Yeh. There's been people who bought wrong edition 40k codex because the cover art was same and they didn't spot difference on the edge and realize it's meaning...
There's also been people who bought the wrong books because they bought it online at a hefty discount...
What exactly is your point here?
What's the point of pretending that every instance of the cover art being the same and someone buying it is because they didn't know better?
The point should have been easily figured out though. The cover art probably should have been changed, but there being a "red stripe" on it means there's a tell for someone buying it physically. Or for someone who bothers to do even a cursory check on the GW website to see what is or isn't current.
tneva82 wrote: Yeh. There's been people who bought wrong edition 40k codex because the cover art was same and they didn't spot difference on the edge and realize it's meaning...
There's also been people who bought the wrong books because they bought it online at a hefty discount...
What exactly is your point here?
What's the point of pretending that every instance of the cover art being the same and someone buying it is because they didn't know better?
The point should have been easily figured out though. The cover art probably should have been changed, but there being a "red stripe" on it means there's a tell for someone buying it physically. Or for someone who bothers to do even a cursory check on the GW website to see what is or isn't current.
I didn’t realise ‘thereve been people who have…’ meant ‘every person who have…’, my mistake.
And you'll note that my wording wasn't insisting that it was in fact "every person". Just that sometimes people will try to play off these things to make themselves feel better about messing up by blaming GW for their mistake.
Also, again:
Games Workshop has a website with the listing of current products. Even if you're buying online from somewhere else or buying in-store from your local independent, it costs you nothing but internets to check.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I don't mind them keeping the two pieces of cover art that they did; it is good art, it doesn't need to be fixed in my eyes. If there is new art I'd want it to be a notable improvement rather than different for the sake of it, like what they did with IDK or... hot dam that new DoK art is so fething badass!
While it's not great losing good cover art, I prefer new over recycled art because it makes it easy to tell books from different editions apart.
I've never understood why they can't just put the fething edition denomination on the cover. It really drives me crazy.
I just wonder when Nighthaunt are gonna have a Guardian of Souls mini avalible again.
Because currently you can't get either one. And being their only generic wizard, i'd say it's quite an important thing to just not have access to, at all.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I don't mind them keeping the two pieces of cover art that they did; it is good art, it doesn't need to be fixed in my eyes. If there is new art I'd want it to be a notable improvement rather than different for the sake of it, like what they did with IDK or... hot dam that new DoK art is so fething badass!
While it's not great losing good cover art, I prefer new over recycled art because it makes it easy to tell books from different editions apart.
I've never understood why they can't just put the fething edition denomination on the cover. It really drives me crazy.
At a guess I'd say the way they handle their games is solely focused on the present. There is one game, and it's the current one. The rules you can buy right now are the rules that make up the game. They want people to get into the habit of embracing the current game and to stay current as GW moves the game along.
So they mostly just mention the edition number when they're marketing an edition change, presumably to establish pedigree, but after that it's no longer AoS 3rd ed, it's just AoS. They want you to get into the game, not a version of the game, so they can be confident that you remain in the game that they keep changing and making new products for, rather than remaining in an edition of that game that at some point receives no further product support.
GW is interested in making things timeless. Explicitly naming edition numbers on their products could work against that.
It's also likely because editions and codex/battletomes do NOT always line up. In the past you could skip whole editions with your book (some armies even skipped two whole editions - Dark Eldar and Sisters of Battle come to mind)
Basically when your codex/battletome might not actually come out until the end of an edition, GW don't want people "waiting" for their book. IF they print the number on the front people will directly connect that with the edition number.
Also sometimes a battletome/codex released late in an edition is half that edition half the next edition compatible. So suddenly its not an 8th or 9th edition its sort of an 8.5 edition.
Suffice to say if the codex/battletomes came out on launch day of a new edition it would work; but as it is now, even with their VASTLY improved speed of release, its still not ideal. And GW doesn't want armies that might be years out from getting their new edition book to have people waiting on that books' release.
GW sent a repack notification to a store for Dryads in error for the 23rd of July so the Order Battletome is Sylvaneth. I wonder if the rebox will see them drop to 12 per box rather than 16?
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: Sylvaneth vs Skaven box. Hopefully this alludes to a range redo for Skaven
There better be new Skaven tree rat units or this whole thing will just sounds nuts
Blood Bowl does have Akhorne the squirrel, so maybe Skaven will start using clan Moulder to further "Enhance" the wildlife of the woods with warpstone. Yes Yes.
The Phazer wrote: I wasn't really expecting them to but I still think they should move Skaven to Destruction tbh.
That's very very unlikely to happen considering that skaven got themselves a "not greater demon" model and the Horned Rat became the 5th Chaos God. Though that story hasn't actually gone anywhere in a while so having some focus on it would be good; then again the Great Horned Rat is even less overtly active than the other 4 Gods.
The only chaos army that almost feels like GW want to put it in destruction is Beasts of Chaos because they clearly put the next BoC model into Destruction........... Which was a curious angle. However I don't see it happening. Whilst BoC is visually very much destruction and ghur and would really fit well at giving Destruction another force (esp something other than greenskins); their lore is very much steeped in Chaos and they've so many inter-links with the other Chaos forces (heck Slaanesh has their own Beast style models now) that I don't think it would happen. What will likely happen is whenever GW revises the range design for BoC they might well gain more Chaos style elements to their models.
At the same time GW might use the Kragnos situation to break a group of Beastmen free from the clutches of Chaos. Creating a new force for Destruction that shares some visual elements, but takes things in a new direction.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: Sylvaneth vs Skaven box. Hopefully this alludes to a range redo for Skaven
There better be new Skaven tree rat units or this whole thing will just sounds nuts
Blood Bowl does have Akhorne the squirrel, so maybe Skaven will start using clan Moulder to further "Enhance" the wildlife of the woods with warpstone. Yes Yes.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: Sylvaneth vs Skaven box. Hopefully this alludes to a range redo for Skaven
Oh my, yes this is potentially quite a lovely box. Unlikely to be a range redo though, they usually *dont* put more than a single new character per side in these boxes, rarely you will get a new unit for one of the two sides in there, and I think precisely once there was a new unit for both sides, so the odds aren't particularly good for there being anything more than a new skaven hero or maybe a resculpt of skryre acolytes (more skryre, yes-yes).
The Phazer wrote: I wasn't really expecting them to but I still think they should move Skaven to Destruction tbh.
Agreed, they work better as a destruction type faction and it kinda fits them better lorewise ("gnawing at the roots of civilization" sounds more like destruction than chaos to me) than chaos does. The Great Horned Rat being a chaos god just kinda seems like a crutch, its not like the other chaos gods take the GHR seriously and thematically it overlaps with Nurgle too much. I think Skaven fluff would be more interesting if they were a Destruction faction and the GHR got exiled by the big 4 and was trying to rebuild its power to overthrow them or something. As it stands, Destruction needs more flavor to it beyond small greenskins, big greenskins, in-between greenskins, large humanoids, and giant humanoids.
The only chaos army that almost feels like GW want to put it in destruction is Beasts of Chaos because they clearly put the next BoC model into Destruction........... Which was a curious angle. However I don't see it happening. Whilst BoC is visually very much destruction and ghur and would really fit well at giving Destruction another force (esp something other than greenskins); their lore is very much steeped in Chaos and they've so many inter-links with the other Chaos forces (heck Slaanesh has their own Beast style models now) that I don't think it would happen. What will likely happen is whenever GW revises the range design for BoC they might well gain more Chaos style elements to their models.
At the same time GW might use the Kragnos situation to break a group of Beastmen free from the clutches of Chaos. Creating a new force for Destruction that shares some visual elements, but takes things in a new direction.
Yeah BoC should also be Destruction and with the focus on chaos essentially being 4 god-specific armies + the slaves to darkness as the undivided faction, I don't really think beastmen fit into the chaos grand alliance. Personally I think they should just move the beastmen over the destruction, it wouldn't be hard to rewrite the fluff to justify it (as it stands most of what ties them to chaos is basically just legacy WHFB fluff which can go away). They can take a similar angle to what I suggested for Skaven, "shunned by the chaos gods, they now seek only to destroy all that lays before them" or whatever. Hell, thats basically their fluff now, they are already a borderline destruction faction fluff-wise. The real chaos beasts are already partially present in their respective god specific armies (Slaangors and Tzaangors, missing Pestigors and Khorngors) as well as the ogroids/fomoroids. Minis wise, its worth mentioning that theres surprisingly little chaos iconography on the sculpts, what does exist is limited to a handful of models across a handful of older kits (and are generally so subtle they can be overlooked wholly or can be explained away as trophies taken from defeated enemies, etc.). As far as I can tell, none of the new post end-times beastmen sculpts (which really isn't many) have any sort of chaos iconography on them. Entirely possible that a range refresh of Gors/Ungors/Bestigors/Centigors, etc. breaks those links entirely. I think its entirely possible, using the existing model range, to basically do a chaos beastmen faction and a destruction beastmen faction. Personally I think the way they should go is to do what they are already doing and continue to fold in god-specific gors into the god themed factions (+ maybe more ogroid/fomoroid type things) + more ogroid/fomoroid and maybe undivided gors into slaves to darkness, and then do away with BOC as a standalone chaos faction and make them a destruction faction following Kragnos.
Overread wrote: esp as they are still yet to add Malarion's Aelf force which were the shadowy dark elves of the setting.
Quoted for emphasis.
One of the biggest players in the old setting, and the most important Dark Elf from that era, is still not in the game. We know that he's out there (albeit changed). We know that he's active in some fashion. IMO it would be premature to fold the remaining Druuchi remnants into DoK before we (*finally*, I'll add; we've been waiting far too long for his reintroduction) get Malekith/Malerion.
Overread wrote: esp as they are still yet to add Malarion's Aelf force which were the shadowy dark elves of the setting.
Quoted for emphasis.
One of the biggest players in the old setting, and the most important Dark Elf from that era, is still not in the game. We know that he's out there (albeit changed). We know that he's active in some fashion. IMO it would be premature to fold the remaining Druuchi remnants into DoK before we (*finally*, I'll add; we've been waiting far too long for his reintroduction) get Malekith/Malerion.
The surprise is that the Daughters of Khaine are almost "subfaction" in size and influence in the setting. Malarion has most of the Shadow Realm with his people and forces, he should be a MASSIVE player in the lore and setting with his armies sweeping aside others and doing big things. Instead the tiny subfaction of fanatical witch aelves is doing far far more from the smallest corner of the realm
The only chaos army that almost feels like GW want to put it in destruction is Beasts of Chaos because they clearly put the next BoC model into Destruction........... Which was a curious angle. However I don't see it happening. Whilst BoC is visually very much destruction and ghur and would really fit well at giving Destruction another force (esp something other than greenskins); their lore is very much steeped in Chaos and they've so many inter-links with the other Chaos forces (heck Slaanesh has their own Beast style models now) that I don't think it would happen. What will likely happen is whenever GW revises the range design for BoC they might well gain more Chaos style elements to their models.
At the same time GW might use the Kragnos situation to break a group of Beastmen free from the clutches of Chaos. Creating a new force for Destruction that shares some visual elements, but takes things in a new direction.
Yeah BoC should also be Destruction and with the focus on chaos essentially being 4 god-specific armies + the slaves to darkness as the undivided faction, I don't really think beastmen fit into the chaos grand alliance. Personally I think they should just move the beastmen over the destruction, it wouldn't be hard to rewrite the fluff to justify it (as it stands most of what ties them to chaos is basically just legacy WHFB fluff which can go away). They can take a similar angle to what I suggested for Skaven, "shunned by the chaos gods, they now seek only to destroy all that lays before them" or whatever. Hell, thats basically their fluff now, they are already a borderline destruction faction fluff-wise. The real chaos beasts are already partially present in their respective god specific armies (Slaangors and Tzaangors, missing Pestigors and Khorngors) as well as the ogroids/fomoroids. Minis wise, its worth mentioning that theres surprisingly little chaos iconography on the sculpts, what does exist is limited to a handful of models across a handful of older kits (and are generally so subtle they can be overlooked wholly or can be explained away as trophies taken from defeated enemies, etc.). As far as I can tell, none of the new post end-times beastmen sculpts (which really isn't many) have any sort of chaos iconography on them. Entirely possible that a range refresh of Gors/Ungors/Bestigors/Centigors, etc. breaks those links entirely. I think its entirely possible, using the existing model range, to basically do a chaos beastmen faction and a destruction beastmen faction. Personally I think the way they should go is to do what they are already doing and continue to fold in god-specific gors into the god themed factions (+ maybe more ogroid/fomoroid type things) + more ogroid/fomoroid and maybe undivided gors into slaves to darkness, and then do away with BOC as a standalone chaos faction and make them a destruction faction following Kragnos.
I wonder if GW might find that tough to sell. The time for shuffling things around would have been at launch when Age of Sigmar had no history, other than what was borrowed from Fantasy and could have as easily been discarded. In that regard it's a shame that the game and its background were in such a desolate state in the beginning. Half Bubblehammer, half reanimated carcass of the old game, with precious little direction or vision doesn't make for a compelling setting. They've improved since then, but I'm not sure now that they have six years and three editions of development behind them they'll dare to shake things up like that. AoS Beasts of Chaos may be Grand Alliance Chaos because of their Warhammer Fantasy legacy, but they've been that for the entire duration of AoS. Would be a pretty big change to rewrite that, and ask people that bought into their background for follow.
Seems like Skaven are in a similar boat. The Great Horned Rat as the fifth Chaos god has been one of the few things that set AoS apart. Might not be so desirable for GW to throw that out again.
I'm also not sure if GW even sees Destruction the way normal people do. For all it's the green people and fatties Grand Alliance, people are right to point out the potential for other factions in it. Yet the latest models and newest faction are an offshoot or orcs, so just more of the same. I'm not seeing GW's vision for a Grand Alliance Destruction expanded beyond the usual suspects.
The surprise is that the Daughters of Khaine are almost "subfaction" in size and influence in the setting. Malarion has most of the Shadow Realm with his people and forces, he should be a MASSIVE player in the lore and setting with his armies sweeping aside others and doing big things. Instead the tiny subfaction of fanatical witch aelves is doing far far more from the smallest corner of the realm
The problem is that GW doesn't want to push a faction to prominence before there are models to sell. No models means that his group doesn't get talked about. The question is why we've waited so long, and how much longer we'll need to wait. IMO, the best time to release his group would have been shortly after the release of the Lumineth. This would have created a nice "Light vs Shadow" contrast that GW could have capitalized on. But they didn't do so.
So, we're stuck wondering how much longer GW is going to make us wait.
The surprise is that the Daughters of Khaine are almost "subfaction" in size and influence in the setting. Malarion has most of the Shadow Realm with his people and forces, he should be a MASSIVE player in the lore and setting with his armies sweeping aside others and doing big things. Instead the tiny subfaction of fanatical witch aelves is doing far far more from the smallest corner of the realm
The problem is that GW doesn't want to push a faction to prominence before there are models to sell. No models means that his group doesn't get talked about. The question is why we've waited so long, and how much longer we'll need to wait. IMO, the best time to release his group would have been shortly after the release of the Lumineth. This would have created a nice "Light vs Shadow" contrast that GW could have capitalized on. But they didn't do so.
So, we're stuck wondering how much longer GW is going to make us wait.
Which is why I was surprised when Ossiarchs came out. I love them and want them to get a second wave of models, but at the same time it was really odd to see a totally new factoin that had zero real hints in the story and lore beyond a few vague references in a side game until a few months before they were released. Meanwhile you have the Shadow Aelves almost causing lore and writing issues because a whole realm is sort of "inactive" save for the DoK running around.
Beasts are the original children of Chaos, along with Dragon ogres. Rewriting BoC out of chaos would not only be ludicrous but also seems pretty needless (why would anyone want this, for ingame mechanics or something? No, let's not thx).
JWBS wrote: Beasts are the original children of Chaos, along with Dragon ogres. Rewriting BoC out of chaos would not only be ludicrous but also seems pretty needless (why would anyone want this, for ingame mechanics or something? No, let's not thx).
Some would say AoS is ludicrous and pretty needless, so rewriting Beasts of Chaos would fit right in.
Overread wrote: I think the only reason people want beasts in Destruction is so that GW might do a full animal beast type army
I thought it was more to have Destruction gain some width beyond ogres and orcs, and Kragnos's unexpected appearance there provided plenty of fuel for this change in particular.
Overread wrote: I think the only reason people want beasts in Destruction is so that GW might do a full animal beast type army
I thought it was more to have Destruction gain some width beyond ogres and orcs, and Kragnos's unexpected appearance there provided plenty of fuel for this change in particular.
By that logic then Kurnothi should also go in Destruction because they're half goat and have a centaur, even though they share no thematic traits with Destruction...
Plus every time someone brings up moving BoC to Destruction they conveniently leave out the god marked varieties, or say they don't count, even though they are now in the Battletome and very much linked to the army lore/identity.
Plus GW already gave Fimir to Destruction. And before anyone wants to address the "Fimir in the room" about why they can't come back, remember that both BoC and WoC also have the same issue in earlier Warhammer lore. GW could literally wall paper over that with new lore and most fans wouldn't know the difference.
Skaven are further from Destruction than BoC, StD, or Khorne, and by a fair margin. I think there is just widespread misunderstanding about the faction identity and philosophy of Destruction; BoC have overlap but are still distinctly Chaos in outlook.
Does the whole grand alliance thing even matter anymore from a game perspective? An army's composition is based upon what is in its faction and to a lesser extent any allies allowed. As an example, seems like GW could easily allow Ogors access to BoC units as allies without breaking anything.
Grand Alliances still matter in terms of casual marketing from GW; in helping break up the armies into perhaps a more easily digested presentation of armies for a newbie (instead of 20+ "armies" its 4 Grand Alliances that then splinter down).
There's also general alliances between some armies within Grand Alliances. So that gives osme grounding as to why you can't just ally your Skaven with Daughters of Khaine or such.
Also story wise the GA system works too in giving a general flavour and idea for the forces. It can fall down a bit as people tend to interpret Order as "good" which hits a brick wall when you've factions like the Daughters of Khaine or when Seraphon just don't care about anyone or the Stormcast go on a purge of potentially infected humans.
From a game perspective its mostly alliances and such where it has an impact, otherwise its not really there any more in terms of Grand Alliance Armies (which is honestly a good thing and the rules for AoS really do reinforce taking majority of 1 army rather than messy allied blocks)
Jack Flask wrote: Plus every time someone brings up moving BoC to Destruction they conveniently leave out the god marked varieties, or say they don't count, even though they are now in the Battletome and very much linked to the army lore/identity.
Humans are ostensibly an 'order' race, yet there are those that worship Chaos and are part of that alliance. If Beasts were made into a Destruction faction, the simple fix is that there are those who dedicate themselves to a Chaos god - Slaangor etc. - and transfer across in the same fashion.
Equinox wrote: Does the whole grand alliance thing even matter anymore from a game perspective? An army's composition is based upon what is in its faction and to a lesser extent any allies allowed. As an example, seems like GW could easily allow Ogors access to BoC units as allies without breaking anything.
Yes; there are a number of rules interactions referencing those keywords. Not common but they are there.
Though on a similar note I dislike the move away from keyword-based allegiances and the removal of Grand Alliance allegiances (even if they were narrative only).
Which is why I was surprised when Ossiarchs came out. I love them and want them to get a second wave of models, but at the same time it was really odd to see a totally new factoin that had zero real hints in the story and lore beyond a few vague references in a side game until a few months before they were released. Meanwhile you have the Shadow Aelves almost causing lore and writing issues because a whole realm is sort of "inactive" save for the DoK running around.
Well GW sorted inactive realms by making only one realm active at time
I wonder if GW might find that tough to sell. The time for shuffling things around would have been at launch when Age of Sigmar had no history, other than what was borrowed from Fantasy and could have as easily been discarded. In that regard it's a shame that the game and its background were in such a desolate state in the beginning. Half Bubblehammer, half reanimated carcass of the old game, with precious little direction or vision doesn't make for a compelling setting. They've improved since then, but I'm not sure now that they have six years and three editions of development behind them they'll dare to shake things up like that. AoS Beasts of Chaos may be Grand Alliance Chaos because of their Warhammer Fantasy legacy, but they've been that for the entire duration of AoS. Would be a pretty big change to rewrite that, and ask people that bought into their background for follow.
Seems like Skaven are in a similar boat. The Great Horned Rat as the fifth Chaos god has been one of the few things that set AoS apart. Might not be so desirable for GW to throw that out again.
I'm also not sure if GW even sees Destruction the way normal people do. For all it's the green people and fatties Grand Alliance, people are right to point out the potential for other factions in it. Yet the latest models and newest faction are an offshoot or orcs, so just more of the same. I'm not seeing GW's vision for a Grand Alliance Destruction expanded beyond the usual suspects.
I don't think so, as others noted the Grand Alliances aren't as important as they were in 1st and early 2nd edition. GW has been shuffling things around (mostly within the grand alliances rather than across them) since AoS released and continues to do so though more subtly. It wasn't that long ago that Ogor Mawtribes were split into Gutbusters, Beastclaw Raiders, Firebellies, Maneaters, and there might have been 1-2 other subfactions (each made up of 1-2 units), its only recently that GW consolidated them all as a single faction. Likewise Cities of Sigmar merged something like a dozen different factions together (many of which only had a couple kits at most) in early/mid 2nd. The latest Orruks book semi-preserved 3 different subfactions as distinct but inter-mixable under the auspices of a bigger book, but in the process they basically killed off greenskinz and moved them to legends. The Soulblight Gravelords book killed Legions of Nagash, which in turn killed off Deathlords, Deathmages, Deadwalkers, Deathrattle, etc. Gloomspite Gitz killed off Spiderfang, Moonclan Grots, and Troggoths as being separate factions (though similar to Orruk Warclans you can kinda do them as sub-factions) and legendsized Gitmob Grotz. Etc. etc. etc. GW has been pretty successful at squatting entire factions out of the game without much uproar, and has likewise shifted some stuff around across grand alliances on a more limited basis - Fimir for example jumped to Destruction from Chaos, as did Troggoths (actually IIRC Troggoths jumped back and forth between Chaos and Destruction a couple times depending on the model, iirc Throgg became a generic Destruction Trogg King before being moved back to chaos as a Trogg King and then being legendified).
Fluffwise, I don't think the AoS community is as invested into the fluff as you do, I think for the most part hte fluff is paper thin and few people actually have dug into it very much. The fact that its only 6 years old and constantly changing doesn't help much as various characters/gods/places have been killed, captured, betrayed, destroyed, etc. multiple times since AoS launched to the point that I think most people aren't even really sure whats going on. Its the downside of evolving fluff (particularly in something so new), the lack of stability and consistency in something so new prevents most people from really latching on to it in a manner where they can speak authoritatively on their factions fluff. Hell, we just recently had an entire City of Sigmar destroyed and taken over by the Daughters of Khaine, one of the big ones too. Technically doesn't invalidate anyones army, but if you were collecting an Anvilgard army I suspect that you might not have distinct rules for it anymore in the next Cities of Sigmar book - assuming they don't remake the faction as "Dawnbringer Crusades" like some seem to be suggesting.
I think if the community can survive that, it can survive Skaven and/or Beastmen being rebranded to a Destruction faction.
As it stands, the GHR is currently a non-factor in the fluff anyway. His big thing was that he grew in power enough to force the other gods to admit him into the pantheon in Slaanesh's absence and was occupying Slaanesh's seat as a result - but Slaanesh is back now (and better than ever) and since then theres been nary a mention of the GHR. The fact that he was "admitted" into the chaos pantheon implies he can be removed from it (by force if necessary), and raises the idea that he can become an exile god no longer tied to chaos (as there are plenty of other gods in the setting that aren't chaos).
I would imagine a logical progression of the fluff to be that the GHR vows its revenge and decides to go Malal on chaos, vowing to destroy it because he got exiled from the patheon or whatever. Skaven fluff has always been about them "gnawing at the roots of civilization", whereas the GHR being a 5th chaos god was essentially a recent change rather than a core element of their identity, they were never considered a chaos faction in the WHFB era (except maybe during the end times), and the main drive for them to be treated as such was the result of Slaanesh's disappearance and absence, with the GHR seeing it as an opportunity to grow in power - with Slaanesh back there obviously needs to be an evolution of Skaven fluff of some sort (which doesn't automatically mean a move out of the chaos pantheon, mind you, but it seems a good/interesting avenue to take). Beyond that, the current skaven fluff paints them as destructive - the Great Horned Rat seeks to destroy and ruin the mortal realms as a means of gaining primacy over the other chaos gods - he very specifically wants to destroy the gods worshippers and followers (and anyone who might turn to their service) in an effort to weaken them, so that he himself can then destroy the other chaos gods. He also really enjoys watching the skaven fight amongst themselves too - in fact he makes a point of encouraging the skavens self-destructive behavior. Both of these things are awfully destructive, no?
And as it stands, the Destruction grand alliance is defined by those factions which are "akin in their culture and methods to natural disasters" and which seek to "bring destruction and ruin to all civilization". A plague of rats is certainly a natural disaster (just ask the Australians) - biblical even. I would argue that Skaven fit the definition of Destruction better than any of the actual Destruction factions do. Destruction factions are also described as being "intrinsically anarchic" which is more or less verbatim how the skaven are described in their own battletome. Behavior wise, Skaven are fairly similar to Orruks in terms of infighting, and similar to gitz/grots in terms of their tendency for backstabbing and treachery, and similar to ogors in their ravenous all-consuming hunger.
Beastmen likewise have a lot of the same stuff going for them, their hatred of civilization and desire to destroy it in all its forms being almost intrinsic to their fluff, as is the fact that they exist only to "wreak utter havoc upon everything in their path". Much of the fluff about them being "the original children of chaos" is actually no longer present in AoS, thats just 1 (well, maybe 2-ish) of 3 origin stories attributed to them. In many ways, they are now intrinsically tied to the realm of Ghur (which is, in particular, strongly aligned with forces of Destruction) as per the "legend of the alpha progenitor" origin story which is a legend amongst the beastmen tribes. The other 1.5 stories of them being chaos origin primarily originate from among the factions of order who say they are once normal mortals who have been corrupted and mutated by chaos, and is also heavily tied to some pretty heavy-handed allegory for real world racism, implying that chaos is not actually their original provenance but rather a more or less racist label being applied to them by the forces of order. The most recent fluff also has them making mass-migrations towards syish with rumors of them seeking to turn the black pyramid into a massive herdstone, which ties back to the story of the alpha progenitor and his creation of the herstones and eventual disappearance (hint: possibly seeking to bring back the Gorfather, i.e. their missing god born of Ghur, rather than chaos).
JWBS wrote: Beasts are the original children of Chaos, along with Dragon ogres. Rewriting BoC out of chaos would not only be ludicrous but also seems pretty needless (why would anyone want this, for ingame mechanics or something? No, let's not thx).
Thats mostly WHFB fluff. Beastmen AoS fluff paints their "original children of chaos" bit as being accusations made by order, whereas the beastmen have a different origin story for themselves which *doesn't* involve chaos. As for Dragon Ogors, what little has been said of their fluff is that they are an ancient race which made a pact with the chaos gods long ago granting them eternal life in exchange for something, but hte pact has gone unfulfilled. Not exactly "original children" levels of fluff there.
Overread wrote: I think the only reason people want beasts in Destruction is so that GW might do a full animal beast type army
For me its about theme. Thematically beastmen (and skaven) fit better thematically with Destruction (at least as far as what GW has written about the nature of Destruction and what defines it) than they do chaos. The fluff for both factions alude heavily towards a destructive nature rather than a chaotic one (though admittedly the fact that the GHR used chaos magic to populate the mortal realms with skaven - giving skaven more of a right to the title of "original children of chaos" than beastmen have - does give me some pause in that regard, but theres an out for the GHR from the chaos pantheon as I indicated previously).
Overread wrote: I think the only reason people want beasts in Destruction is so that GW might do a full animal beast type army
I thought it was more to have Destruction gain some width beyond ogres and orcs, and Kragnos's unexpected appearance there provided plenty of fuel for this change in particular.
By that logic then Kurnothi should also go in Destruction because they're half goat and have a centaur, even though they share no thematic traits with Destruction...
Plus every time someone brings up moving BoC to Destruction they conveniently leave out the god marked varieties, or say they don't count, even though they are now in the Battletome and very much linked to the army lore/identity.
Plus GW already gave Fimir to Destruction. And before anyone wants to address the "Fimir in the room" about why they can't come back, remember that both BoC and WoC also have the same issue in earlier Warhammer lore. GW could literally wall paper over that with new lore and most fans wouldn't know the difference.
As far as I am aware, Kurnothi have almost no real traits whatsoever because almost nothing has been written about them. I personally would love destruction elves. If chaos dwarves can exist, then surely destruction elves can too.
As for the godmarked varieties, they can stay in chaos where they are - in disciples of tzeentch and hedonites of slaanesh. Hell, no reason why there can't also be Chaos Bestigors and Chaos Gors in the Slaves to Darkness faction either, but as a full on army of beastmen I think they work better in Destruction instead of being a second-rate, second-fiddle, middling afterthought in chaos as they are now.
decker_cky wrote: Beasts of chaos models are covered in chaos stars. Without a miniature revamp, moving to destruction seems like a non-starter.
Thats a huge stretch. I went through all the BoC minis yesterday looking for them, this is what I found:
*Endless Spells: 0 stars
*Herdstone: 0 stars
Gors: 4 stars on 4 models out of 10 (2 necklaces, 2 gut plates, though technically one of those is only around 1/3rd a star, but i'll allow it.)
Bullgors: 1 star on top of the optional banner.
**Jabberslythe: 0 stars
**Dragon Ogors: 1 star out of 3 models
**Dragon Ogor Shaggoth: 1 star
Ghorgon: 1 star, small, dangling from one of the horns above its head
Cygor: 0 stars, though I suppose an argument can be made that theres a small part of a crudely carved star on the bell hanging from its hip.
**Centigors: 2 stars both on the same 1 model out of 5
**Doombull: 0 stars
Bestigors: I could only find 1 star, on the optional bannerpole top
Tuskgor Chariot: 1 on the spearmans gutplate
*Grashraks Despoilers: 0 stars
Ungors: 0 stars
Ungor Raiders: Also 0 stars
Chaos Warhounds: 0 stars
**Razorgor: 0 stars
**Beastlord: 0 stars
Great Bray-Shaman: 0 stars
**Cockatrice: 0 stars
*New Age of Sigmar/post WHFB kits, none of them have stars and these presumably represent the future of the faction.
**finecast, will need to be resculpted into plastic, at which time removal of stars becomes convenient.
As it stands, most of the range is ancient and needs to be revamped, even then though they are far from "covered" in chaos stars, certainly not enough to stop a move to destruction. The newest kits actually produced for AoS have precisely 0 stars across them, and the last few kits produced for WHFB have none or very few. Even most of the older plastics have a literal handful of stars across the entire model range. For being the original children of chaos they don't seem to show it.
They would be in good company as a number of models in the Destruction range likewise have chaos stars on them as a result of wearing scavenged armor, etc. It woudl fit with the beastmen to do the same given they don't really have any industry of their own. Likewise, theres a few models in Destruction that started out in chaos, such as Fellwater Troggoths.
Jack Flask wrote: Plus every time someone brings up moving BoC to Destruction they conveniently leave out the god marked varieties, or say they don't count, even though they are now in the Battletome and very much linked to the army lore/identity.
Humans are ostensibly an 'order' race, yet there are those that worship Chaos and are part of that alliance. If Beasts were made into a Destruction faction, the simple fix is that there are those who dedicate themselves to a Chaos god - Slaangor etc. - and transfer across in the same fashion.
I wonder if GW might find that tough to sell. The time for shuffling things around would have been at launch when Age of Sigmar had no history, other than what was borrowed from Fantasy and could have as easily been discarded. In that regard it's a shame that the game and its background were in such a desolate state in the beginning. Half Bubblehammer, half reanimated carcass of the old game, with precious little direction or vision doesn't make for a compelling setting. They've improved since then, but I'm not sure now that they have six years and three editions of development behind them they'll dare to shake things up like that. AoS Beasts of Chaos may be Grand Alliance Chaos because of their Warhammer Fantasy legacy, but they've been that for the entire duration of AoS. Would be a pretty big change to rewrite that, and ask people that bought into their background for follow.
Seems like Skaven are in a similar boat. The Great Horned Rat as the fifth Chaos god has been one of the few things that set AoS apart. Might not be so desirable for GW to throw that out again.
I'm also not sure if GW even sees Destruction the way normal people do. For all it's the green people and fatties Grand Alliance, people are right to point out the potential for other factions in it. Yet the latest models and newest faction are an offshoot or orcs, so just more of the same. I'm not seeing GW's vision for a Grand Alliance Destruction expanded beyond the usual suspects.
I don't think so, as others noted the Grand Alliances aren't as important as they were in 1st and early 2nd edition. GW has been shuffling things around (mostly within the grand alliances rather than across them) since AoS released and continues to do so though more subtly. It wasn't that long ago that Ogor Mawtribes were split into Gutbusters, Beastclaw Raiders, Firebellies, Maneaters, and there might have been 1-2 other subfactions (each made up of 1-2 units), its only recently that GW consolidated them all as a single faction. Likewise Cities of Sigmar merged something like a dozen different factions together (many of which only had a couple kits at most) in early/mid 2nd. The latest Orruks book semi-preserved 3 different subfactions as distinct but inter-mixable under the auspices of a bigger book, but in the process they basically killed off greenskinz and moved them to legends. The Soulblight Gravelords book killed Legions of Nagash, which in turn killed off Deathlords, Deathmages, Deadwalkers, Deathrattle, etc. Gloomspite Gitz killed off Spiderfang, Moonclan Grots, and Troggoths as being separate factions (though similar to Orruk Warclans you can kinda do them as sub-factions) and legendsized Gitmob Grotz. Etc. etc. etc. GW has been pretty successful at squatting entire factions out of the game without much uproar, and has likewise shifted some stuff around across grand alliances on a more limited basis - Fimir for example jumped to Destruction from Chaos, as did Troggoths (actually IIRC Troggoths jumped back and forth between Chaos and Destruction a couple times depending on the model, iirc Throgg became a generic Destruction Trogg King before being moved back to chaos as a Trogg King and then being legendified).
Fluffwise, I don't think the AoS community is as invested into the fluff as you do, I think for the most part hte fluff is paper thin and few people actually have dug into it very much. The fact that its only 6 years old and constantly changing doesn't help much as various characters/gods/places have been killed, captured, betrayed, destroyed, etc. multiple times since AoS launched to the point that I think most people aren't even really sure whats going on. Its the downside of evolving fluff (particularly in something so new), the lack of stability and consistency in something so new prevents most people from really latching on to it in a manner where they can speak authoritatively on their factions fluff. Hell, we just recently had an entire City of Sigmar destroyed and taken over by the Daughters of Khaine, one of the big ones too. Technically doesn't invalidate anyones army, but if you were collecting an Anvilgard army I suspect that you might not have distinct rules for it anymore in the next Cities of Sigmar book - assuming they don't remake the faction as "Dawnbringer Crusades" like some seem to be suggesting.
I think if the community can survive that, it can survive Skaven and/or Beastmen being rebranded to a Destruction faction.
As it stands, the GHR is currently a non-factor in the fluff anyway. His big thing was that he grew in power enough to force the other gods to admit him into the pantheon in Slaanesh's absence and was occupying Slaanesh's seat as a result - but Slaanesh is back now (and better than ever) and since then theres been nary a mention of the GHR. The fact that he was "admitted" into the chaos pantheon implies he can be removed from it (by force if necessary), and raises the idea that he can become an exile god no longer tied to chaos (as there are plenty of other gods in the setting that aren't chaos).
I would imagine a logical progression of the fluff to be that the GHR vows its revenge and decides to go Malal on chaos, vowing to destroy it because he got exiled from the patheon or whatever. Skaven fluff has always been about them "gnawing at the roots of civilization", whereas the GHR being a 5th chaos god was essentially a recent change rather than a core element of their identity, they were never considered a chaos faction in the WHFB era (except maybe during the end times), and the main drive for them to be treated as such was the result of Slaanesh's disappearance and absence, with the GHR seeing it as an opportunity to grow in power - with Slaanesh back there obviously needs to be an evolution of Skaven fluff of some sort (which doesn't automatically mean a move out of the chaos pantheon, mind you, but it seems a good/interesting avenue to take). Beyond that, the current skaven fluff paints them as destructive - the Great Horned Rat seeks to destroy and ruin the mortal realms as a means of gaining primacy over the other chaos gods - he very specifically wants to destroy the gods worshippers and followers (and anyone who might turn to their service) in an effort to weaken them, so that he himself can then destroy the other chaos gods. He also really enjoys watching the skaven fight amongst themselves too - in fact he makes a point of encouraging the skavens self-destructive behavior. Both of these things are awfully destructive, no?
And as it stands, the Destruction grand alliance is defined by those factions which are "akin in their culture and methods to natural disasters" and which seek to "bring destruction and ruin to all civilization". A plague of rats is certainly a natural disaster (just ask the Australians) - biblical even. I would argue that Skaven fit the definition of Destruction better than any of the actual Destruction factions do. Destruction factions are also described as being "intrinsically anarchic" which is more or less verbatim how the skaven are described in their own battletome. Behavior wise, Skaven are fairly similar to Orruks in terms of infighting, and similar to gitz/grots in terms of their tendency for backstabbing and treachery, and similar to ogors in their ravenous all-consuming hunger.
Beastmen likewise have a lot of the same stuff going for them, their hatred of civilization and desire to destroy it in all its forms being almost intrinsic to their fluff, as is the fact that they exist only to "wreak utter havoc upon everything in their path". Much of the fluff about them being "the original children of chaos" is actually no longer present in AoS, thats just 1 (well, maybe 2-ish) of 3 origin stories attributed to them. In many ways, they are now intrinsically tied to the realm of Ghur (which is, in particular, strongly aligned with forces of Destruction) as per the "legend of the alpha progenitor" origin story which is a legend amongst the beastmen tribes. The other 1.5 stories of them being chaos origin primarily originate from among the factions of order who say they are once normal mortals who have been corrupted and mutated by chaos, and is also heavily tied to some pretty heavy-handed allegory for real world racism, implying that chaos is not actually their original provenance but rather a more or less racist label being applied to them by the forces of order. The most recent fluff also has them making mass-migrations towards syish with rumors of them seeking to turn the black pyramid into a massive herdstone, which ties back to the story of the alpha progenitor and his creation of the herstones and eventual disappearance (hint: possibly seeking to bring back the Gorfather, i.e. their missing god born of Ghur, rather than chaos).
JWBS wrote: Beasts are the original children of Chaos, along with Dragon ogres. Rewriting BoC out of chaos would not only be ludicrous but also seems pretty needless (why would anyone want this, for ingame mechanics or something? No, let's not thx).
Thats mostly WHFB fluff. Beastmen AoS fluff paints their "original children of chaos" bit as being accusations made by order, whereas the beastmen have a different origin story for themselves which *doesn't* involve chaos. As for Dragon Ogors, what little has been said of their fluff is that they are an ancient race which made a pact with the chaos gods long ago granting them eternal life in exchange for something, but hte pact has gone unfulfilled. Not exactly "original children" levels of fluff there.
Overread wrote: I think the only reason people want beasts in Destruction is so that GW might do a full animal beast type army
For me its about theme. Thematically beastmen (and skaven) fit better thematically with Destruction (at least as far as what GW has written about the nature of Destruction and what defines it) than they do chaos. The fluff for both factions alude heavily towards a destructive nature rather than a chaotic one (though admittedly the fact that the GHR used chaos magic to populate the mortal realms with skaven - giving skaven more of a right to the title of "original children of chaos" than beastmen have - does give me some pause in that regard, but theres an out for the GHR from the chaos pantheon as I indicated previously).
Overread wrote: I think the only reason people want beasts in Destruction is so that GW might do a full animal beast type army
I thought it was more to have Destruction gain some width beyond ogres and orcs, and Kragnos's unexpected appearance there provided plenty of fuel for this change in particular.
By that logic then Kurnothi should also go in Destruction because they're half goat and have a centaur, even though they share no thematic traits with Destruction...
Plus every time someone brings up moving BoC to Destruction they conveniently leave out the god marked varieties, or say they don't count, even though they are now in the Battletome and very much linked to the army lore/identity.
Plus GW already gave Fimir to Destruction. And before anyone wants to address the "Fimir in the room" about why they can't come back, remember that both BoC and WoC also have the same issue in earlier Warhammer lore. GW could literally wall paper over that with new lore and most fans wouldn't know the difference.
As far as I am aware, Kurnothi have almost no real traits whatsoever because almost nothing has been written about them. I personally would love destruction elves. If chaos dwarves can exist, then surely destruction elves can too.
As for the godmarked varieties, they can stay in chaos where they are - in disciples of tzeentch and hedonites of slaanesh. Hell, no reason why there can't also be Chaos Bestigors and Chaos Gors in the Slaves to Darkness faction either, but as a full on army of beastmen I think they work better in Destruction instead of being a second-rate, second-fiddle, middling afterthought in chaos as they are now.
decker_cky wrote: Beasts of chaos models are covered in chaos stars. Without a miniature revamp, moving to destruction seems like a non-starter.
Thats a huge stretch. I went through all the BoC minis yesterday looking for them, this is what I found:
*Endless Spells: 0 stars
*Herdstone: 0 stars
Gors: 4 stars on 4 models out of 10 (2 necklaces, 2 gut plates, though technically one of those is only around 1/3rd a star, but i'll allow it.)
Bullgors: 1 star on top of the optional banner.
**Jabberslythe: 0 stars
**Dragon Ogors: 1 star out of 3 models
**Dragon Ogor Shaggoth: 1 star
Ghorgon: 1 star, small, dangling from one of the horns above its head
Cygor: 0 stars, though I suppose an argument can be made that theres a small part of a crudely carved star on the bell hanging from its hip.
**Centigors: 2 stars both on the same 1 model out of 5
**Doombull: 0 stars
Bestigors: I could only find 1 star, on the optional bannerpole top
Tuskgor Chariot: 1 on the spearmans gutplate
*Grashraks Despoilers: 0 stars
Ungors: 0 stars
Ungor Raiders: Also 0 stars
Chaos Warhounds: 0 stars
**Razorgor: 0 stars
**Beastlord: 0 stars
Great Bray-Shaman: 0 stars
**Cockatrice: 0 stars
*New Age of Sigmar/post WHFB kits, none of them have stars and these presumably represent the future of the faction.
**finecast, will need to be resculpted into plastic, at which time removal of stars becomes convenient.
As it stands, most of the range is ancient and needs to be revamped, even then though they are far from "covered" in chaos stars, certainly not enough to stop a move to destruction. The newest kits actually produced for AoS have precisely 0 stars across them, and the last few kits produced for WHFB have none or very few. Even most of the older plastics have a literal handful of stars across the entire model range. For being the original children of chaos they don't seem to show it.
They would be in good company as a number of models in the Destruction range likewise have chaos stars on them as a result of wearing scavenged armor, etc. It woudl fit with the beastmen to do the same given they don't really have any industry of their own. Likewise, theres a few models in Destruction that started out in chaos, such as Fellwater Troggoths.
Jack Flask wrote: Plus every time someone brings up moving BoC to Destruction they conveniently leave out the god marked varieties, or say they don't count, even though they are now in the Battletome and very much linked to the army lore/identity.
Humans are ostensibly an 'order' race, yet there are those that worship Chaos and are part of that alliance. If Beasts were made into a Destruction faction, the simple fix is that there are those who dedicate themselves to a Chaos god - Slaangor etc. - and transfer across in the same fashion.
This guy gets it.
Nice write-up. Agree with the concept of Destruction Beasts and would welcome it. Their whole concept of anarchy and tearing down the trappings of civilization would make them at home in Destruction. Their Chaos element seems to be more the primordial devolution into a fleshy mass of madness as the ultimate goal. But that can be split. One side embracing their bestial nature and more tearing things down vs the other seeing their ultimate higher form as some fleshy writhing soupy mass. It would be a great idea of Beastmen who "fell" to Destruction. The chaos side of them looking at horror at their brethren who have "lost" their way.
Simply having it that it's sub-faction are either Chaos or Destruction with some units being exclusive to one or the other is an easy concept.
On the other hand, see Skaven as purely Chaos. They seek to overthrow civilization, but also replace it with their own mockery of it. They have too many trapping of "civilization" and technology to be Destruction. The mad scientist/creator aspects of Skyre and Moulder seem to antithetical to the ideas of Destruction.
The odd thing with Chaos, as a faction, it is far more organized and hierarchical than it's faction title would imply.
But also, with Beastmen, looking forward to the WD update for them. While not amazing, it is a solid update. For those that didn't see the leaks. Heardstone now provides table wide additional -1 rend for the army that goes to -2 starting turn 3. BS immunity is gone and now is halve BS loss and rally on +4. This ability has a range that starts at 12" and expands 6" each turn. New monstrous reactions for several BoC monsters. Plus the usual new Grand Strategies and Battle Tactics.
It doesn't address a number of issues with the army, but is better than the slap in the face joke update from the Broken Realms books.
The herdstone is great buff. Battle tactics has solid ones and these alone are huge help in edition of battle tactics. Monstorous actions seems interesting.
chaos0xomega wrote: GHR being a 5th chaos god was essentially a recent change rather than a core element of their identity, they were never considered a chaos faction in the WHFB era
The Horned Rat was the fifth Chaos god in the 'Chaos in the Old World' board game.
Vermin Lord has always been a greater daemon iirc, though I haven't read wfb lore for decades so could be wrong. Skaven weren't ever a chaos faction though.
JWBS wrote: Vermin Lord has always been a greater daemon iirc, though I haven't read wfb lore for decades so could be wrong. Skaven weren't ever a chaos faction though.
My third edition WFB Armies book says, "Skaven are the children and servants of Chaos".
Yeah, as far as I can tell the biggest change for the Skaven between the old world and the Realms was the horned rat being acknowledged explicitly as a fifth god of chaos rather than as a lesser aspect of one or more of the big four. But there were signs of that happening in the old world anyway, not least with the Skaven supplement to chaos in the old world (fantastic board game btw, sadly long OoP).
chaos0xomega wrote: Would have liked to see Allopexes get a battleline option (still possible I suppose), as I recently ended up with 6 of them.
Since Eels are still tied with the Akhelian King for Battleline and Reavers/Thrall are default Battleline...I think you can expect Fuethan to be Allopexes as Battleline.
Eh, I liked it when some armies could do monster battleline. It felt like a fun, thematic thing that was relatively unique and part of the identity of the armies involved. But when it gets handed out left and right the concept gradually starts to feel more and more like a dumb gimmick.
Sorry for the sort of off topic, but just noticed that Miniaturemarket.com got in more of the Christmas bundles for AOS and 40K (Hedonites, Lumineth, Bonereapers, ORK 40K, and Sisters 40K). I was looking for a restock of regular items when I saw that pop up in their restocks for today. Just in case people were still looking for some of those.
Meanwhile, a new ability – called A Merciless Shiver – allows Allopex units with more than one model to remain coherent within 3” of each other, instead of 1”. Sharks value their personal space, and this ability will ensure that these vast and agile predators can stay mobile when facing down foes.
While Allopexes can be commanded by any of the Idoneth factions, these vicious selachian sea-predators are particularly beloved by the Fuethán enclave, who are just as bloodthirsty as their deadly mounts. To reflect this, players who choose the Fuethán enclave will now be able to take Akhelian Allopexes as Battleline units.
Fuethán Allopexes are particularly known for their aggressive skill when hunting in groups – as such, you can also can take three units of single Allopexes in a special formation known as a Bloodthirsty Shiver. These Allopexes are individual units, but you’ll want them swimming together to unleash their full potential.
As expected, sharks are the "Battleline if..." for Fuethán.
That gives me great pleasure. Hopefully you can field multiple Bloodthirsty Shivers(wording of the article implies yes) in an army, because with 6 Allopexes I would be able to field 2 and that ability sounds fantastic.
Meanwhile, a new ability – called A Merciless Shiver – allows Allopex units with more than one model to remain coherent within 3” of each other, instead of 1”.
It's an ability, altering their unit cohesion.
Fuethán gets an additional thing, just with specifically 3 Allopex.
Meanwhile, a new ability – called A Merciless Shiver – allows Allopex units with more than one model to remain coherent within 3” of each other, instead of 1”.
It's an ability, altering their unit cohesion.
Is that to account for physical limitations of the models or to give them an in game benefit?
Meanwhile, a new ability – called A Merciless Shiver – allows Allopex units with more than one model to remain coherent within 3” of each other, instead of 1”.
It's an ability, altering their unit cohesion.
Is that to account for physical limitations of the models or to give them an in game benefit?
Mostly an in-game benefit as it allows them to spread out over a wider area to avoid being overly impacted by certain offensive abilities as well as allowing them to cover a wider area and threaten multiple units, etc. If they had to follow normal coherency rules I don't think anyone would ever field them in units of 2+ models. Frankly though, I'm not sure that there is any real beneft to fielding them in units even with the coherency change as fielding them singularly still provides way more flexibility with no obvious downside I can think of other than maybe some sort of buff efficiency in terms of being able to use a single spell or command ability to buff multiple allopexes simultaneously. Even still though, the only Allopex buff we know about specifically thus far - the Bloodthirsty shiver - is pretty explicit in requiring you to field three units of 1 Allopex each in order to take advantage of it, which would mean that those Allopexes are not taking advantage of the Merciless Shiver rule as they aren't in a unit of more than 1 model.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Eh, I liked it when some armies could do monster battleline. It felt like a fun, thematic thing that was relatively unique and part of the identity of the armies involved. But when it gets handed out left and right the concept gradually starts to feel more and more like a dumb gimmick.
Books. And the 'opportunity' to buy the big lizard thing (again?) outside the start collecting box for the same price as the start collecting box. Zounds! Such unskippable negative value.
Currently if you buy one, they send you the start collecting box. It's been listed like that since that box became available, before the magmadroth kit on it's own was $110.
The Magmadroth on its own was £65 when it came out, before they discounted it by proxy by including it in the start collecting and not making it available separately. Interested to see the price now.
They're both currently on the US store at the same price, so no. No assumption.
From the product description:
Please note – when you purchase this miniature, you’ll receive the Start Collecting! Fyreslayers box. This contains the complete Magmadroth kit, with all the options as described here, as well 10 Vulkite Berzerkers, for the same price!
Not sure how I feel about the book just yet. Alot of preview changes I looked at seemed like straight nerfs, but there are a few changes that are pretty interesting and fun.
I do like this command trait alot:
Leader of the Duardrazhal – This is actually the most interesting to me, by far. While your general is on the table all Duardin allies are treated as having the Fyreslayer keyword for the purposes of the Ur-Gold Runes battle trait. This does not allow non-Fyreslayer heroes to use the new heroic action though, so keep that in mind. Allowing Hammerers, Irondraks, Longbeards, Runelords, and all of the Kharadron Overlords to benefit from the runes is actually huge. The best though is probably Irondrakes being able to deal mortal wounds on 6’s to wound with the Rune of Searing Heat but any of these units gaining the benefit of the other runes is fantastic. What this also means is that Gotrek Gurnisson will be benefiting from your runes, which is huge; extra move early game and extra rend/bonus to hit/mortal wounds later on is nuts on him.
Obvious point of frustration right off the bat :
What’s probably most confusing is that the changes we got in Fury of the Deep box set were temporary as well. The Warscrolls of these units are the same but the points costs very much are not, which is just strange. I’m not sure why they changed them in that box set only to be changed again a month later, probably has to do with printing time scales and I’ll be interested to see which is “correct” but at this time to answer is the book, since it’s the latest printing, and that’s unfortunate.
Kind of agree with the closing statement:
Closing Thoughts
It’s going to take some time, and a lot of gaming, to really find what makes this book “click” now. At the surface level it feels like a lot has been stripped away from the army, and there’s no doubt that the army has changed in how it looks, which is amazing for an army with only 3 units plus heroes! If you were around for first edition you remember the 90-120 Vulkite spam, and then the Hearthguard Berzerker spam that we saw predominantly with the last book. It looks like there’s going to be a mix of the two now and there will probably be some really esoteric builds popping up with various allied Duardin units too with that cool new command trait.
If you want an army that’s immediately and obviously competitive to take to the top tables of events this is not going to be that book, if you want excessively angry, mostly-naked dwarfs, then it definitely is.
Its always been a weird army, given that the roster is so limited and there is alot of overlap in how the rules are written for those units/characters. Hoping this book pans out into something fun at the least.
To be fair AoS 3.0 is changing the look of a LOT of armies by the whole reinforcement system basically removing big infantry block spam as a tactical option. Even at 2K points you can only have 2 full units now, with the rest being minimum strength.
I kind of get the feeling they did it to try and create difference with the approaching Old World game; but also to make middle-weight units carry their weight more so as they stopped having to compete point for point with big infantry blocks. However its also having the flipside effect that big monstrous creatures are more popular - at least in armies that have tricks to the rules that let you exceed the regular limit on them.
I still think AoS needs more divisions - cavalry really should be its own thing not just a "Troop" block that basically has everything from infantry to cavalry to elite style units.
altar reroll prayers instead of +1, buff. Makes enemy miscasts more deadly, makes non-priest heroes able to create invocations while garrisoning.
Army now has 6+ ignore spells which also gives blood tithe.
Couple kill specific unit(unit near altar or wizard) and one your unit needs to kill 8+ models.
Grand strategy is very bad requiring turns 2 onward daemon unit summoned. Don't have 2+ bloodtithe on your turn? Failed. Would be usable IF bloodtithe didn't reset when you use it...But then again pretty much every faction specific grand strategy is inferior to generic ones so no big deal. Can btw lead to situation where opponent in turn 1 might opt to not kill any of your units. He makes you go first, you pray 1 bloodtithe but opponent deployed in way you can't kill anything. He just needs to not kill any unit on his turn(or give CP via new battletrait by casting spell at you) and you fail your grand strategy automatically.
Overall not stellar update but I can find use for that. Just extra blood tithe can be big at right time. Too bad no battle tactic that didn't require killing but guess to be expected for khorne Objective capturing isn't all that khorney...
The WD updates have been nice. While certainly they did not always do enough, they have consistently improved the state of AoS. I'm glad they've been doing them.
Grab your hammers, axes, and bows, and muster your forces for battle – the latest seasonal rules update for Warhammer Age of Sigmar is here!
For those in need of a refresher, Battlescrolls gather rules changes, points changes, and other tweaks into a simple, easy-to-read format, giving you the information you need to balance a close-fought matched play game of Warhammer Age of Sigmar.
This latest Battlescroll is titled The Hunt, and it takes a satisfyingly different approach to balance.
Matt Rose from the Warhammer Studio has some insight into this unique balance update.
“It’s an exciting time for Warhammer Age of Sigmar rules development, with a bunch of battletomes on the way, bringing new rules and points values specifically designed for the latest edition of the game.”
Balancing the game is a task that requires constant attention. For this second Battlescroll, the team are trying something different, providing “a standalone mechanism for us to address balance without invalidating the content of the battletomes you have collected, clashing with points contained in upcoming books, or restricting the use of an army that you may have spent a lot of time collecting and painting”.
To that end, the Predators and Prey rule in the General’s Handbook 2021 is being expanded. This rule provides players with another way of earning victory points – by targeting the biggest threats in the Mortal Realms. Players who choose to pack their roster with dominant units like the Dracothian Guard will surrender precious victory points for each unit lost.
On the other hand, players running factions that aren’t performing as well can earn even more victory points by taking down units at the top of the competitive meta. These bonus points make it possible for many armies to score some big wins, in matchups where they might previously have struggled.
You don’t need to change your army rosters in response to this update – but it might make some lesser-used units and factions rather more appealing.
“The lists of Priority Targets and Prime Hunters have been built based on both feedback from tournament players as well as analysis of data from hundreds of events”, explains Matt.
There’s been “a particular focus on the win rate per warscroll – that is, the percentage of time a faction wins when a certain warscroll is included in the roster.”
This update will go live on the Warhammer Age of Sigmar app in the coming days – you’ll also see that changes from the previous Battlescroll update remain valid, and have been added to the app and the FAQ documents.
“We’re aware that this change will be more effective at addressing certain types of issues than others,” Matt explains. “Keep in mind, this is just one part of a bigger picture. We’ll continue to release updated warscrolls and allegiance abilities in Battletomes and other supplements, and keep rebalancing points values in the General’s Handbooks.”
“It’s important to keep in mind that our regular Battlescroll updates are focused on game balance in matched play, with a particular focus on organised play and events. If you’re new to the game or tend to play more casually, it’s totally up to you and your opponent whether to include this system in your games of Warhammer Age of Sigmar.”
The Studio is keen to hear what you think about these changes – and everything else concerning the Warhammer Age of Sigmar rules. Send your queries and comments to aosfaq@gwplc.com.
“We read every email sent in”, Matt assures us, “and while we don’t reply right away – we’d rather collect feedback and publish any changes publically, so everyone has the same information – we factor your feedback and recommendations into our ongoing work.”
They basically tried to balance the game by designated certain overperforming models as "priority targets" that generate extra VPs (so long as the models destroying them are themselves not also prime targets), and then they designated certain underperforming factions as "prime hunters" which get an extra VP on top of that per priority target killed.
I expect this to become problem. Last week my bonesplitters woucd have got 6vp more by this vs 1st prince. Won game by 1 vp as is. 6vp is silly lot in many scenarios.
I think Legion of the First Prince might become non-viable, and Cities/Stormcast lists will take 1 or the other of Longstrikes/Fulminators instead of both.
I don't think "Oops all stormdrakes!" lists will exist any more but will probably still take 1-3 units if that's your chosen flavor of stormcast. They'll just fill points with other units.
I find this to be such a weird way to balance the game. Feels like they could have just changed points if they weren't so averse to giving "free point updates".
I think rules like this are a big source of feelsbadman for all involved. Basically leads to perceptions that certain people only won games because their army got a handicap out of the bonus VPs. Also leads to people feeling like they can't play certain units without handing the win to their opponent. Like if I'm a Tzeentch daemons player (and I have been for ~15 years now) wtf am I supposed to do about the fact that the unit thats basically my basic troops/battleline choice is now going to hand over bonus VPs to my opponent??
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate the rule, I just wish it was more limited - I think it should have been limited to characters and one-off units that aren't battleline choices (maybe with the exception of Stormcast dragons and mega-gargants), and only come into play vs armies with the prime hunters rule (instead of giving the bonus VP to everyone).
Eldarsif wrote: I find this to be such a weird way to balance the game. Feels like they could have just changed points if they weren't so averse to giving "free point updates".
Wait. So this new update doesn't have point changes ?
I mean this comes from a team who still see the Double Turn as a major beneficial feature of the AoS rules set.
I figure the issue is that for all the money and love AoS clearly gets on the model and creative side; its just not backed up in the rules side of things. Which to be fair is pretty normal for GW.
This rule reminds me of the old depravity rule for Slaanesh as a rule where depending on the two armies, the disparity in experience can be extreme. It's not a totally daft idea to try and introduce more risk to taking powerful models in your army, but I don't know it feels like trying to patch over the problem of the model being powerful as opposed to tackling it
I figure the issue is that for all the money and love AoS clearly gets on the model and creative side; its just not backed up in the rules side of things. Which to be fair is pretty normal for GW.
I'd honestly say that AoS has the better rules side between itself and 40k.
For example, the depravity issue you pointed out - was fixed by making depravity more consistent against enemy armies. There's still a gap between fighting say, Beasts of Chaos which often have 17+ units for you to possibly attack and get depravity from and Sons of Behemat which often only have 4, but it's not as bad as "never depravity from skaven, always lots against stormcast"
In addition, the White Dwarf updates have been fairly solid if not totally game-changing and mostly show a keen understanding of what sort of stopgap buffs armies need to keep chugging along.
"Prime Hunters" should have been a rule added to specific units, with "Priority Target" being a generic thing added to Heroes and Monsters--plus units designated "Prime Hunters".
I don't think that would have achieved nearly the same thing, nor would it even attempt to solve the same problem that this is trying to solve? Maybe the flavorful naming could be a better fit but for rules designed to
1) hamper spamming good units/add more interesting list building decisions
2) give more opportunities to lower tier factions
These work fairly well at a glance. We'll see the actual impact after a few tournaments, though.
Don't feel strongly about it either way. Anecdotal, but the AoS Maryland FB page seems to be positive about it, and they will integrate it in a big tourney this weekend.
Initial impression is that it certainly beats out another round of points changes, or nerfing/remaking warscrolls.
This is heaps and bounds better than changing rules/points.
At least your casual list doesn't get invalidated because someone at a tournament on the other side of the world managed to find a way to break people's toys with your list.
This is a change which is aimed at top tier lists and affects only them.
Uh right the 2x5 blood stalker list that has no way to shoot hero phase is problem enough it needs to be under huge drawback. Basically winrate is going to drop a ton.
This hurts the casual players more. And raptors/dragons still same. They table enemy or lose. Now just lose by more vp's but not relevant on gap
That's actually worst part of this. The lists that spam these either table enemy or if opponent can deal with them loses anyway. This does very little anyway. If you kill mega gargant a turn you win. If you kill just 2 you lose. This doesn't change that. Just makes win win bigger which is irrelevant.
tneva82 wrote: Uh right the 2x5 blood stalker list that has no way to shoot hero phase is problem enough it needs to be under huge drawback. Basically winrate is going to drop a ton.
This hurts the casual players more. And raptors/dragons still same. They table enemy or lose. Now just lose by more vp's but not relevant on gap
That's actually worst part of this. The lists that spam these either table enemy or if opponent can deal with them loses anyway. This does very little anyway. If you kill mega gargant a turn you win. If you kill just 2 you lose. This doesn't change that. Just makes win win bigger which is irrelevant.
Casual players aren't really showing up to tournaments expecting to win anyways, and if they're really casual why are they playing the bloated, tournament focused mess that is Pitched Battles 2021 instead of like, Contest of Generals? Which is still Matched Play but isn't the hardcore grinder tournament format explicitly designed to make tournament play more interesting.
tneva82 wrote: Uh right the 2x5 blood stalker list that has no way to shoot hero phase is problem enough it needs to be under huge drawback. Basically winrate is going to drop a ton.
This hurts the casual players more. And raptors/dragons still same. They table enemy or lose. Now just lose by more vp's but not relevant on gap
That's actually worst part of this. The lists that spam these either table enemy or if opponent can deal with them loses anyway. This does very little anyway. If you kill mega gargant a turn you win. If you kill just 2 you lose. This doesn't change that. Just makes win win bigger which is irrelevant.
Casual players aren't really showing up to tournaments expecting to win anyways, and if they're really casual why are they playing the bloated, tournament focused mess that is Pitched Battles 2021 instead of like, Contest of Generals? Which is still Matched Play but isn't the hardcore grinder tournament format explicitly designed to make tournament play more interesting.
Because people tend to use same mission pack outside tournaments. It's also 12 scenarios instead of 3 with no real difference of complexity. Contest of generals isnv any less bloated. The scenarios aren't any simpler. There's just less variations. (seriously if you think scenarios are somehow hardcore...lol. checkers your idea of complicated rules?)
And if you think casual players don't want to win any games..lol what on earth you are smoking to have such a delusion?
Fixing problem over random bandaid is ALWAYS preferable
tneva82 wrote: Uh right the 2x5 blood stalker list that has no way to shoot hero phase is problem enough it needs to be under huge drawback. Basically winrate is going to drop a ton.
This hurts the casual players more. And raptors/dragons still same. They table enemy or lose. Now just lose by more vp's but not relevant on gap
That's actually worst part of this. The lists that spam these either table enemy or if opponent can deal with them loses anyway. This does very little anyway. If you kill mega gargant a turn you win. If you kill just 2 you lose. This doesn't change that. Just makes win win bigger which is irrelevant.
Casual players aren't really showing up to tournaments expecting to win anyways, and if they're really casual why are they playing the bloated, tournament focused mess that is Pitched Battles 2021 instead of like, Contest of Generals? Which is still Matched Play but isn't the hardcore grinder tournament format explicitly designed to make tournament play more interesting.
Because people tend to use same mission pack outside tournaments. It's also 12 scenarios instead of 3 with no real difference of complexity. Contest of generals isnv any less bloated. The scenarios aren't any simpler. There's just less variations. (seriously if you think scenarios are somehow hardcore...lol. checkers your idea of complicated rules?)
And if you think casual players don't want to win any games..lol what on earth you are smoking to have such a delusion?
Fixing problem over random bandaid is ALWAYS preferable
The people showing up to tournaments to play casually may want to win games but are under no such delusions that their bad or silly lists and loose gameplay are going to get them anywhere but 0-5 or 1-4 if they play another among their number.
Contest of generals isnv any less bloated.
Categorically untrue and easily proven false. No Realm Rules, which means no Realm Spell, Command Ability, Battle Tactics, Grand Strategies or extra Core Battalions with special add-on rule that THESE Core Battalions can only be taken once per army unlike REGULAR Core Battalions. Now there are also no Priority Targets/Prime Hunters to worry about.
I mean, yea, if casual players are going to get sad because they're playing the mode with extra rules and restrictions, I can't really blame anybody except for the players who didn't read the label on the tin? When I play with my friends, we're not going to play by these rules because none of us play at a level where this will add anything to our games. The Sylvaneth, Bonereapers, and Fyreslayers are top dogs around here. Playing extra tournament rules that give them bonuses to make them even more top dog? No thanks! ESPECIALLY when the Ironjawz player who just plops 2+ maw-krushas on the table and rushes them forward into combat with no thought of preservation or objectives who never wins anyways (and is fine with that, too!) is going to bleed 5+ points to people who are already beating him by like 10 points every game.
When I go to play an actual tournament? Yes, I'll play the tournament rules. Not for my casual games with my non-tournament-playing friends, though.
The people showing up to tournaments to play casually may want to win games but are under no such delusions that their bad or silly lists and loose gameplay are going to get them anywhere but 0-5 or 1-4 if they play another among their number.
You're missing the point of what tneva was saying, which is that in most casual settings tourney related stuff ends up taking over because it's all that gets talked about online. People seem to think it's the de facto standard but don't know why it has that distinction.
The people showing up to tournaments to play casually may want to win games but are under no such delusions that their bad or silly lists and loose gameplay are going to get them anywhere but 0-5 or 1-4 if they play another among their number.
You're missing the point of what tneva was saying, which is that in most casual settings tourney related stuff ends up taking over because it's all that gets talked about online. People seem to think it's the de facto standard but don't know why it has that distinction.
I get the point that tneva and you are making but for these groups of players who are playing tournament-mode-but-casually, I'm not sure if they're going to notice a difference? They already play Pitched Battles 2021 which in general is going to punish their style of playing. Maybe the guy playing 2x5 blood sisters or whatever might notice he loses slightly more games or the games he loses are by a slightly bigger lead. Is he going to up his game? I feel like he would've upped his game already if he cared.
I think it is an interesting idea. I am happy to see GW bending their creativity towards matched play and trying something out of the box. It may not work, but I respect the attempt and keen to see how it plays out.
What I dislike about this artificial limiting of units(like Blood Stalkers) is the fact that AoS factions don't really have the same roster as many 40k factions, which tends to limit what you can actually do with the armies.
Prime Hunters is such a backhanded way to say joke faction.
The penalty is basically comp and hamfisted but probably somewhat effective. The boost is... not gonna work. First you have to assume these factions only struggle against these specific units, then you have to assume that they're able to take down these units effectively, which, if they could.... probably wouldn't leave them underpowered.
This is the answer to lists spamming overpowered units, I guess.
I get it, but I'm not really fond of that way. It feels like ripping victory conditions from set scenarios to "punish" people (ab)using the most optimized units in their build.
Frankly, that they still haven't seemed to realize Vanguard Raptors are always going to be a problem since it's basically just an "autotake" for anyone is ridiculous.
They should have locked them to Vanguard Chamber only from the outset.
nels1031 wrote: Don't feel strongly about it either way. Anecdotal, but the AoS Maryland FB page seems to be positive about it, and they will integrate it in a big tourney this weekend.
...whatever happened to events requiring a lead time of n days/weeks before new material was in effect for an event?
LunarSol wrote: Prime Hunters is such a backhanded way to say joke faction.
The penalty is basically comp and hamfisted but probably somewhat effective. The boost is... not gonna work. First you have to assume these factions only struggle against these specific units, then you have to assume that they're able to take down these units effectively, which, if they could.... probably wouldn't leave them underpowered.
Overread wrote: It's not a totally daft idea to try and introduce more risk to taking powerful models in your army, but I don't know it feels like trying to patch over the problem of the model being powerful as opposed to tackling it
Well yeah, it is a patch to help things until the next GHB where the points ARE updated. The rule they are adding these adjustments to only exists in the context of the current season. I am guessing they got feedback from people not liking that they needed to change their lists, that the point values in their printed materials became invalid, etc. Such complaints have certainly cropped up on Dakka numerous times in the past.
Overread wrote: It's not a totally daft idea to try and introduce more risk to taking powerful models in your army, but I don't know it feels like trying to patch over the problem of the model being powerful as opposed to tackling it
Well yeah, it is a patch to help things until the next GHB where the points ARE updated. The rule they are adding these adjustments to only exists in the context of the current season. I am guessing they got feedback from people not liking that they needed to change their lists, that the point values in their printed materials became invalid, etc. Such complaints have certainly cropped up on Dakka numerous times in the past.
From the article on WHC:
Matt Rose from the Warhammer Studio has some insight into this unique balance update.
“It’s an exciting time for Warhammer Age of Sigmar rules development, with a bunch of battletomes on the way, bringing new rules and points values specifically designed for the latest edition of the game. Balancing the game is a task that requires constant attention. For this second Battlescroll, the team are trying something different, providing “a standalone mechanism for us to address balance without invalidating the content of the battletomes you have collected, clashing with points contained in upcoming books, or restricting the use of an army that you may have spent a lot of time collecting and painting”.
And all for win more system. Seeing it's irrelevant do you win by 1 vp or 10 vp doesn't matter.
Problem is this doesn't matter for the problem cases but does for non problem use.
15 blood stalkers double firing is oppressive. But that doesn't actually care about this. You either win anyway or you just lose by bigger margin(which is 100% irrelevant). 2x5 without shooting twice? Is that really such a problem it needs up to 4 vp handicap?
3 longstrike raptors without double shoot isn't problem. 6 with double shoot doesn't care about this change. You either win as before or you lose by bigger vp margin...which again is irrelevant.
Geifer wrote: What's the problem for which this is supposed to be the solution anyway?
Stuff like 6 raptors with shoot twice, 15 snake bows shooting twice, dragons, mega gargants etc dominating the game. They are too good for the points.
Problem is rather than fix the problem they went for this which hurts more of non problem using while not doing anything of note vs problems. Local 1st prince went "yey" as this "nerf" to his army doesn't actually matter. If he loses those units he's losing game anyway...
Geifer wrote: What's the problem for which this is supposed to be the solution anyway?
Stuff like 6 raptors with shoot twice, 15 snake bows shooting twice, dragons, mega gargants etc dominating the game. They are too good for the points.
Problem is rather than fix the problem they went for this which hurts more of non problem using while not doing anything of note vs problems. Local 1st prince went "yey" as this "nerf" to his army doesn't actually matter. If he loses those units he's losing game anyway...
It also does nothing to fix the INTERNAL problems that help push these skew/single unit lists.
Morathi+15 BloodStalkers is and has been the ONLY viable competitive build in Daughters of Khaine. This is partially because that interaction is way too good and partially because every other unit in the Daughters of Khaine roster is either just an objective camper/chaff (khinerai, shadow stalkers, witch aelves) or incredibly subpar compared to other army's melee options (Sisters of Slaughter, Blood Sisters, Avatar's of Khaine, Cauldrons, Ironscale, etc).
So either this change isn't successful in significantly impacting Morathi+15 BloodStalker, at which point it's pointless OR it IS successful at significantly impacting Morathi+15 BloodStalkers and DoK drops off the map. Because there's nothing in the army to pivot to if the 'crutch build' takes a hit, nerfs to those units don't result in other units seeing MORE play, they result in the faction seeing LESS play.
Rihgu wrote: Unless another viable build pops up because the other factions' viable builds have changed.
Except this doesn't always happen, because sometimes the faction just gets dumped by the "top table" players that some of those people copypaste lists from.
Eldarain wrote: Which is my problem with it. "We know what's wrong, here's a mini game instead of attempts to modernize our approach and fix it"
Ok, I'll bite. How do you propose to ""fix points"" of unit relying on outside ability? Every time unit double shots, controlling player has to pay points for that? Maybe the unit giving the ability should get massive points hike, making it trash and completely nonexistent for anyone who doesn't plop 15 archer unit on the table? Opponent gets special ability to punch in the face anyone trying to use that combo?
I really like how dakka always say FiX pOiNtS when how much unit is worth depends massively on context (lascannons are certainly not worth 25 pts when opponent only brings gaunts, etc) and the only way to 'fix' the points would be to have an AI generate them on the fly based on both lists and the table picture...
Rihgu wrote: Unless another viable build pops up because the other factions' viable builds have changed.
Except this doesn't always happen, because sometimes the faction just gets dumped by the "top table" players that some of those people copypaste lists from.
Right. These changes are too far-reaching and honestly subtle to see the real effect of until the tournaments start actually rolling with them. Maybe somebody who is better at analysis/with wider access to AoS stats can make the call right now, but I think it's too early to tell whether these changes succeed at their goal, make no change, or swing things too hard, or some combination of the above across factions.
Sons of Behemat, First Prince, and DoK I can see being dumped. GSG going 5-0 more often looks like it'll happen. Stormcast lists will probably stop taking 4 fulminators and 6 longstrikes, and just go 1 of each. Or maybe they won't, actually, because nothing can kill them so it doesn't matter! Soon we'll see.
LunarSol wrote: Prime Hunters is such a backhanded way to say joke faction.
The penalty is basically comp and hamfisted but probably somewhat effective. The boost is... not gonna work. First you have to assume these factions only struggle against these specific units, then you have to assume that they're able to take down these units effectively, which, if they could.... probably wouldn't leave them underpowered.
What do you mean when you say "work" here?
It is not going to meaningfully improve the competitive chances of underperforming factions.
The situation isn't binary; often these units DO die and the controlling player wins anyways because they have already done their job. The games where they live to the end tend to be the runaways that weren't close to begin with. Yes, this change obviously does not affect such cases when it ideally would it is clear GW feels it is more appropriate to wait for a proper book release to enact more dramatic changes. I think people are forgetting that this is not a replacement for the balance methods they were already doing, it is in ADDITION to the methods they are already doing. The very nature of the update is admitting it's an imperfect fix designed not to ruffle feathers but to take the edge off the problem until a proper fix can be enacted. It isn't going to turn 5-0 armies into 2-3 ones, but it could very much turn them into 4-1s or occasionally 3-2s and that widens the competitive scene significantly. This is particularly true in a tournament scene where the armies showing up tend to be diverse but the units being run by those armies are not.
Now this still may not be effective, that is where we will have to wait and see. GW are also still fully capable of screwing up the more significant changes, and a good chunk (if not the majority) of these problems should have been recognized and dealt with before the books ever saw print. But those are matters outside the context of this specific change.
LunarSol wrote: Prime Hunters is such a backhanded way to say joke faction.
The penalty is basically comp and hamfisted but probably somewhat effective. The boost is... not gonna work. First you have to assume these factions only struggle against these specific units, then you have to assume that they're able to take down these units effectively, which, if they could.... probably wouldn't leave them underpowered.
What do you mean when you say "work" here?
It is not going to meaningfully improve the competitive chances of underperforming factions.
I suppose I don't disagree if the context is limited that way. But the extra boost to underdog factions is a side-benefit to the main feature which affects everyone.
Scriptor Mortis x 1
Craven Throne Guard x 4
Spectral Standard Bearer x 1
Bladegheist Revenants x 10
Spirit Torment x 1
Chainghasts x 2
Myrmourn Banshees x 4
High Gladiatrix x 1
Doomfire Warlocks x 5
Witch Aelves/Sisters of Slaughter x 10
Khinerai Lifetakers/Heartrenders x 5
If it's the same price as fury of the deep, it's actually going to be a very good box. But next weekend pre-order then if they're doing the previews now?
I wish the DoK were getting a new infantry/cavalry unit along with the new hero. This is one set I'll likely have to hunt on ebay for the character on her own or just wait till she goes on sale. I just don't need more khinerai nor doombolt riders. Sisters of Slaughter I could do with (I've enough witches), but with khinerai and riders I don't need, any price saving is moot on this set.
Still very glad to see DoK hanging in there and getting new kits and it is nice to have a range of heroes now that are outside of the Cauldron set.
Ignore LoS and cover, but on a 12" range to keep it from being oppressive, good stuff. My concern is that profile is rather weak for a unit that doesn't look particularly swarmy, which makes me wonder if they have some MW kn 6s to hit ability that AoS does NOT need more of.
Overread wrote: I wish the DoK were getting a new infantry/cavalry unit along with the new hero. This is one set I'll likely have to hunt on ebay for the character on her own or just wait till she goes on sale. I just don't need more khinerai nor doombolt riders. Sisters of Slaughter I could do with (I've enough witches), but with khinerai and riders I don't need, any price saving is moot on this set.
Still very glad to see DoK hanging in there and getting new kits and it is nice to have a range of heroes now that are outside of the Cauldron set.
Could ask around if people want those? Riders you can sell to cos players(that's where mine will go) as well.
Overread wrote: I wish the DoK were getting a new infantry/cavalry unit along with the new hero. This is one set I'll likely have to hunt on ebay for the character on her own or just wait till she goes on sale. I just don't need more khinerai nor doombolt riders. Sisters of Slaughter I could do with (I've enough witches), but with khinerai and riders I don't need, any price saving is moot on this set.
Still very glad to see DoK hanging in there and getting new kits and it is nice to have a range of heroes now that are outside of the Cauldron set.
Could ask around if people want those? Riders you can sell to cos players(that's where mine will go) as well.
Oh true you can trade stuff away. But I don't really want to buy a whole boxed set just to trade everything away barring one or two models from it. I know its financially sound, but eh it just feels "scalper" kinda wrong to me. Generally when it comes to duel sets I either, rarely, want both halves or a full one half to make it worth getting - then I can often swap the half I don't want for the a mirror of the one I do.
tneva82 wrote: Here it's common to split boxes even for one model. Halves easier but all works. Win-win for both as everybody saves on cash
Oh very true and if I were in a big enough active local club chances are I would. Right now its mostly reliant on online sales and its just sometimes more hassle finding people and putting things in boxes (and finding a box the right size and packing material etc))
As a side note, it seems like the kit will actually have some options, rather rare for Nighthaunt... or they've already made two different kits, because for the life of me i can't see where the guy from the article fits into the group shot.
It could be like the chainrasp kit, where you can either make the bloke with the candelabra or in the stockade where the back half of the body is the same, but the front half is different. IF that's the case then I'd think the mystery Crossboo (Thanks DaveC, great name!) is possibly the banner bearer.
I dig the Incarnate, minus the floaty skull thing in the center. Loved most of the Incarnates that were released by Warhammer Forge years ago and I’m pleased to see a return to that concept. Hope we don’t have to wait years for all of the realms to get an Incarnate though.
Nighthaunt character was pretty neat. Puts at least 2 rumor engine pics down.
I like most of the terrain, though I still can’t get into the “mid construction” buildings.
I am not fan of the Incarnate but I like the new terrain pieces. Big beast skeleton should look nice next to BloodBowl Ogre Field or, as someone pointed out, in Necromunda Ash Wastes. I haven't dipped into recent AoS terrain yet because I have been waiting for a big boxed set. This could be it.
I can also imagine using this terrain in Warhammer the Old World in few years time. Not Old World per se, but previously unexplored areas such as Border Princes.
Incarnates? So they're going back to what FW did initially a few years back? Scenery box is nice, but would have been nicer if it was all new and not half a repack. Ferryman is cool, nice for the Nighthaunt. But this definitely feels like a 40K year. Especially as it looks like even more bloody space marines.
Is this Season of War book the first one for AoS?
(They are already doing something similar for 40k, or is it here it’s already started?)
Keeping up is hard with all these books and campaign story things.. A concise list somewhere for both systems would be great really, like a books release order list etc.
This is the first for AoS, yeah. There's really not that many. 2nd ed only had the Archaeon one and the 4 for Broken Realms. This is the first for 3rd.
Which is surprising in a way because 3rd was supposed to be heavy destruction focus not more Death. And interestingly more Nighthaunt who got a lot of stuff early in 2.0. Darn it GW if you're going to add bones and do Death do OSSIARCHS
I do worry that this book needs more than terrain and the ghost ship model, a little more just to round it out. Esp as with Nighthaunt getting 3 new models likely means that there's a new Battletome for them right around the corner.
Kind of wish the Incarnate was an actual model not a terrain quality model and in a terrain pack. It's not the worst thing, but GW's terrain isn't as high detail and their history of supporting it is spotty - things on the terrain list vanish overnight sometimes without warning.
Overread wrote: I do worry that this book needs more than terrain and the ghost ship model, a little more just to round it out. Esp as with Nighthaunt getting 3 new models likely means that there's a new Battletome for them right around the corner.
No kidding. GW already like month or so ago confirmed DoK and Nighthaunt as the 2 spring battletomes
Overread wrote: I do worry that this book needs more than terrain and the ghost ship model, a little more just to round it out. Esp as with Nighthaunt getting 3 new models likely means that there's a new Battletome for them right around the corner.
No kidding. GW already like month or so ago confirmed DoK and Nighthaunt as the 2 spring battletomes
I forgot about that update
But yep and DoK was a surprise in that because they only just got a new book at the start (just before). So that reminds me its a double surprise for them that they are only getting a character (unless GW is really holding things back)
I really like the new nighthaunt models. The crossbow dudes are kinda cool, the scribor mortis is creepy (not sure why it needs candles on its back if its holding up a lantern), and the ferryman is really cool. Looks like he's part of the prow, as he's got some creepy snake/spine skeleton bones going up his back.
If his rules are good, I can see some people just proxying the old endless spell model instead. Not that the new model isn't great, but I don't know how many skeleton boats people want. Plus the skeleton's oar actually looks pretty lethal, no offense Awlrach
