Nice to see these haven't been AoSed and turned into something that is GW high fantasy. Nice to see GW keeping a classic generic fantasy theme and just using their great modelling skills to make them really shine.
I bet they are movement 5-6, health 4, they all have shields, so could be either block or dodge. Dodge would be more fitting. Seeing as they are a small warband, I imagine that their attacks do more damage than the usual Goblin 1-2.
I wonder how many other previews we get to see before Beastgrave goes up for pre-reease?
Whoah. Those are actually nice. Only downside is the sculptor giving the wolves three toes instead of four. Pretty lazy. And it will drive me nuts.
Other than that, this is a very strong release among increasingly zany AOS aesthetics.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: It’s particularly nice that, so far, Beastgrave is all ‘new’. At least to AoS ranges.
Beastmen updated, Wolfboyz updated. Wood Elves with extra growl.
All very, very nice.
This is the kind of stuff I'd prefer the warbands to be. I was hoping we'd get to see some Age of Sigmar style Savage orruks (and they'd obviously fit the theme) but it looks like we'll be getting Brutes. Which is a shame. The Brute kit is nice. I like it a lot. But I don't want more Brutes. Give me reimagined classic models (like when they made newer black orcs in season 1.) If the current range of models isn't great (like fyreslayers), a warband like that is great. But I'm hoping to get some modern crypt ghouls or something else updated, not another version of a nice new model. (If that makes sense.)
Same. I really want to see reimagined free people's (maybe with a Greco-Roman theme, since that seems to.he a main stay of the order factions, and I'd love it) but also Lozardmen, and fi.gers.crossed but not holding my breath... Fimir...
Wow! So, reimagined (barely, they still have the Mongolian style hats), wolf riders, that’s really cool! Hoping to see more classic fantasy tropes from ‘The werld what were’ returning. I dig the sort of updated wood elves too, I wish we saw something fun and new for the beastmen as well, but maybe later. Hoping for a war band like Molog’s Mob, but with a huge minotaur (sorry, Bull Gor...) and a bunch of ungore attendants, or maybe other smaller beastmen beasties, like tuskgors, or a new set of chaos familiars. I find sets like that, or something like the 3 goblin wolfriders, more interesting than just the sort of standard 5-6 humanoid groups. But, I’m definitely happy w beast grave so far.
LunarSol wrote:Sad they're not squig riders :(
Others are sad I’m sure that they aren’t updated spider riders. To each there own. I doubt anyone would care if you converted them to be riding squigs (or spiders) it’s not like LoS plays into this game.
Gallahad wrote:Whoah. Those are actually nice. Only downside is the sculptor giving the wolves three toes instead of four. Pretty lazy. And it will drive me nuts.
Other than that, this is a very strong release among increasingly zany AOS aesthetics.
They’re ‘Snarlfangs’ though, not wolves. Snarlfangs have always (since they were revealed today) had 3 toes!
I feel this might be heralding a new phase for AoS.
From the outset, it’s mostly been about carving out its own visual narrative, and shaking up the common perception of Elves, Dwarfs etc.
With that done, maybe the time is right to revisit classic WHFB stuff, and update it a bit? Wolfboyz are Wolfboyz, and I’m glad they’ve stuck with that. Beastmen likewise. Neither really need an updating for the AoS aesthetic. Wood Elves? I’m good with the fawn look. Elves are capricious. Fawns are capricious. I am not a Capricorn. The look fits, even if the pics make them look awkwardly posed (well, at least one of them).
So, yeah. All for reinterpretations of the classic archetypes. It’s always nice to get Something New. But these give me hope the design studio isn’t hellbent on radical departure for the sake of it.
So far I still think that Underworld isn't previewing armies to come but instead gives GW a handful of models to theme around forces that might be major enough to appear but not big enough to warrant entire armies. Ergo its creative flare within the design team given an outlet.
Ergo they might get one or two units within another army, much like Darkoath got a pair of leaders in Slaves to Darkness; but they won't herald whole armies of their own
wow these guys are great. They are dynamic, unlike some of GW recent knights. It always suprise me that GW seems to have zero quality control for the sculptor.
Its unnacceptable that the bonereapers knights are so rigid and static considering they can sculp beauties such as these
I'm always down for more goblins. At absolute worst, my wolf riders are getting some new champs and character mounts.
As for the other potential goblin cav, I can't see anyone having an issue with three spider riders being plonked down, instead (at least until they come out with them as a separate warband, if that ever happens). Hoppers would function differently enough that it might not be quite so nice a match, but I wouldn't say no to a game.
streetsamurai wrote: wow these guys are great. They are dynamic, unlike some of GW recent knights. It always suprise me that GW seems to have zero quality control for the sculptor.
Its unnacceptable that the bonereapers knights are so rigid and static considering they can sculp beauties such as these
A lot of the very dynamic riders we see tend to be things like outriders, leaders or otherwise scouts. Ergo things that operate on their own. Whilst units like the bonereapers are designed to be more rank and file cavalry. I figure if GW knows its going to be "special" then they set them out to be more dynamic; whilst if they are going to be more "this is rank and file" either GW or the designer approaches it from that angle rather than from a fanciful one. About the only really fanciful cavalry I can think of that were rank and file are the deer riders from the old Woodelves (now Cities of Sigmar)
GaroRobe wrote: If the current range of models isn't great (like fyreslayers), a warband like that is great. But I'm hoping to get some modern crypt ghouls or something else updated, not another version of a nice new model. (If that makes sense.)
Well you are in luck because one of this seasons warbands will be Flesheaters Court (as per art in one if the previewed cards in Becca’s video). Though no guarantees of a crypt ghoul I suppose.
streetsamurai wrote: wow these guys are great. They are dynamic, unlike some of GW recent knights. It always suprise me that GW seems to have zero quality control for the sculptor.
Its unnacceptable that the bonereapers knights are so rigid and static considering they can sculp beauties such as these
To be honest heavy cavalry is rigid and static. If you put your heavy cavalry in crazy galloping poses like those stormcast in the horse-chickens they don't look like they are heavy enough.
streetsamurai wrote: wow these guys are great. They are dynamic, unlike some of GW recent knights. It always suprise me that GW seems to have zero quality control for the sculptor.
Its unnacceptable that the bonereapers knights are so rigid and static considering they can sculp beauties such as these
A lot of the very dynamic riders we see tend to be things like outriders, leaders or otherwise scouts. Ergo things that operate on their own. Whilst units like the bonereapers are designed to be more rank and file cavalry. I figure if GW knows its going to be "special" then they set them out to be more dynamic; whilst if they are going to be more "this is rank and file" either GW or the designer approaches it from that angle rather than from a fanciful one. About the only really fanciful cavalry I can think of that were rank and file are the deer riders from the old Woodelves (now Cities of Sigmar)
I don't buy this ''excuse'' (no offense intended). Might have made sense when the units were ranked, cause it made it easier to rank them,(and even then, boar riders showed that ranked unit could be pretty dynamic), but now that it's a ''skirmish'' game, there is absolutely no need to make static model
streetsamurai wrote: wow these guys are great. They are dynamic, unlike some of GW recent knights. It always suprise me that GW seems to have zero quality control for the sculptor.
Its unnacceptable that the bonereapers knights are so rigid and static considering they can sculp beauties such as these
To be honest heavy cavalry is rigid and static. If you put your heavy cavalry in crazy galloping poses like those stormcast in the horse-chickens they don't look like they are heavy enough.
I agree that heavy cav has to look a bit more stiff than light cav. Stil, they don't need to look like they have a broom up their ass like the bonereaper. even some light cav suffer from this syndrome, as shown by the seekers of slaanesh (which came after the boar riders and are pathetically rigid)
streetsamurai wrote: wow these guys are great. They are dynamic, unlike some of GW recent knights. It always suprise me that GW seems to have zero quality control for the sculptor.
Its unnacceptable that the bonereapers knights are so rigid and static considering they can sculp beauties such as these
A lot of the very dynamic riders we see tend to be things like outriders, leaders or otherwise scouts. Ergo things that operate on their own. Whilst units like the bonereapers are designed to be more rank and file cavalry. I figure if GW knows its going to be "special" then they set them out to be more dynamic; whilst if they are going to be more "this is rank and file" either GW or the designer approaches it from that angle rather than from a fanciful one. About the only really fanciful cavalry I can think of that were rank and file are the deer riders from the old Woodelves (now Cities of Sigmar)
I don't buy this ''excuse'' (no offense intended). Might have made sense when the units were ranked, cause it made it easier to rank them,(and even then, boar riders showed that ranked unit could be pretty dynamic), but now that it's a ''skirmish'' game, there is absolutely no need to make static model
The deer riders were also ranked. Thing is even though the game isn't rank and file people still put the models base to base when they enter close combat; or move them through a tight spot. With the "All within" abilities GW is steadily using more of that also gives good argument to have units moved closer together. In general people complain when models significantly overhang the base - heck Skorne in Warmachine were famous for being a pain in close combat iwth their tusked models and many would magnetize the tusks on their warbeasts so that they could actually get into proper base to base contact.
Another user above also points out the menacing power of a more static pose; suggesting heavier armour on the beast; whilst a more lithe model, like the wolf, which has less armour and is going for that swift dynamic look might be modeled differently.
PS don't take this that I wouldn't want highly dynamic bonereaper mounts, I'd love them (besides probably complaining about them having a 2mm contact point to the base!); I'm just thinking out loud for logical reasoning in variation of sculpts.
It could also just be that GW only has one or two designers who can do really good dynamic poses like that
streetsamurai wrote: wow these guys are great. They are dynamic, unlike some of GW recent knights. It always suprise me that GW seems to have zero quality control for the sculptor.
Its unnacceptable that the bonereapers knights are so rigid and static considering they can sculp beauties such as these
A lot of the very dynamic riders we see tend to be things like outriders, leaders or otherwise scouts. Ergo things that operate on their own. Whilst units like the bonereapers are designed to be more rank and file cavalry. I figure if GW knows its going to be "special" then they set them out to be more dynamic; whilst if they are going to be more "this is rank and file" either GW or the designer approaches it from that angle rather than from a fanciful one. About the only really fanciful cavalry I can think of that were rank and file are the deer riders from the old Woodelves (now Cities of Sigmar)
I don't buy this ''excuse'' (no offense intended). Might have made sense when the units were ranked, cause it made it easier to rank them,(and even then, boar riders showed that ranked unit could be pretty dynamic), but now that it's a ''skirmish'' game, there is absolutely no need to make static model
Sometimes static models look better. Its definitely an art design decision, though very little excuses any of the broader design failures in the Bonewhatevers. But as much as I don't like them, a fairly static pose isn't a bad choice for undead heavy cavalry.
Oh man, wolves that don't look like rats. Yay. Release them as updatet Fenriswolves yesterday. The fur looks a bit weird, but that's GW's style for plastic fur, it always lools weird. The IoB rat ogres and the Stormfiends got it the worst.
Danny76 wrote: I’d imagine the heads are separate looking at them.
I like these two. Again, maybe the one to pull me in to Underworlds (I say this nearly every time).
Do warbands come out in two’s?
Each edition has a core set which features a bunch of universal cards, board, tokens and two warbands from the set. The rest of the warbands are then released on their own - typically there's some themed dice and card backs during teir launch weeks (which run out fast) and then thereafter there's just the warbands on their own.
Most warbands thus far have been sold in two ways - a slightly more expensive pack with the cards for Underworld; and a cheaper one (A few pounds) which is just the models for AoS use (ergo no warband cards).
Right now the first series wave of cards and models are gone from the GW store in their Underworld box (The models on their own are still sold). There is some debate on how GW will move forward from this and if they will rerelease the cards with the models again; since whilst the universal cards from series 1 are removed now; the character/faction cards are not and they are still only within those early packs for those first warbands.
Goblin wolf riders are nice. Hopefully we get a full unit of them for AoS and they aren't too bad to rank up on square bases. Never did get any for my night goblin army (as they weren't technically night goblins) and regret it.
AduroT wrote: Has it been said when this stuff starts dropping?
The book goes on pre-order next weekend so most are assuming the first wave of new Underworlds stuff goes on pre-order next weekend. This would tie very nicely to them previewing the wolf riders today and following it up with the pre-order preview next weekend.
It then becomes the question if its a one or two week release.
The further question is then if we see Cities of Sigmar and/or Orruk Battletomes on pre-view next weekend.
Cast your mind back to a forgotten age, when unwary travellers passing through great forests or across desolate steppes had to be constantly wary, lest they be attacked by vicious little greenskins on even more vicious wolves.
Those days may be long gone, but just as the Waaagh! always comes back, so too have the grots and their murderous mounts – this time to the Warhammer Underworlds! Meet Rippa’s Snarlfangs.
Seems to me this is more of a cute throwback than any change in direction. I doubt they will be much more than a single unit thrown into Gloomspites or maybe the new Ogors, just like I doubt the kurnothi will become an army of their own in AoS proper.
Liking the new gobbos, always been a fan of wolf riders and GW for me have done a good job of modernising the sculpt without ruining it nor making it cartoony. Hope it plays well.
I'm putting myself firmly in the "just a random throwback/whim and nothing more" camp, not because I want that to be true or have any special knowledge that it is, but simply because I'm not allowing myself even a teeny-weeny smidge of hope that these might be indicative of an upcoming Gloomspite-style release where a handful of whacky AoS stuff gets used to justify what are, functionally, updated WHFB sculpts. It was always a shame that only Night Gobbos got a proper revamp before WHFB was murdered, new "common" Gobbos would be brilliant(so would a proper Forest Gobbo range as well of course).
They are very nice models, alas I don't have any use for just three of them.
Three riders would be just enough for when they inevitably get rules in WarCry. Maybe they'll be nice and toss some rules in for Trolls while they're at it.
Shieldwolf is also supposed to have a set of plastic forest goblins coming out in the next year or so if you get impatient waiting for GW to make some.
highlord tamburlaine wrote: Three riders would be just enough for when they inevitably get rules in WarCry. Maybe they'll be nice and toss some rules in for Trolls while they're at it.
Shieldwolf is also supposed to have a set of plastic forest goblins coming out in the next year or so if you get impatient waiting for GW to make some.
Unfortunately Shieldwolf decided to go with size & proportions to match the older giganto-scale models from the first multipart common and night gobbo GW kits, so waiting for GW to get around to doing them in the 7th ed onwards style is my only option(unless I finally git gud with my digital sculpting and just do them myself for 3D printing).
Danny76 wrote: I’d imagine the heads are separate looking at them.
I like these two. Again, maybe the one to pull me in to Underworlds (I say this nearly every time).
Do warbands come out in two’s?
Each edition has a core set which features a bunch of universal cards, board, tokens and two warbands from the set. The rest of the warbands are then released on their own - typically there's some themed dice and card backs during teir launch weeks (which run out fast) and then thereafter there's just the warbands on their own.
Most warbands thus far have been sold in two ways - a slightly more expensive pack with the cards for Underworld; and a cheaper one (A few pounds) which is just the models for AoS use (ergo no warband cards).
Right now the first series wave of cards and models are gone from the GW store in their Underworld box (The models on their own are still sold). There is some debate on how GW will move forward from this and if they will rerelease the cards with the models again; since whilst the universal cards from series 1 are removed now; the character/faction cards are not and they are still only within those early packs for those first warbands.
There's no guarantee that the goblins are going to be released right off the bat.
Hate to remind people of this, but the Dreadfane pairing of Banshees and Sequitors is a known quantity for release. They made it clear that Dreadfane is just an "early release" of it.
Kanluwen wrote: There's no guarantee that the goblins are going to be released right off the bat.
Hate to remind people of this, but the Dreadfane pairing of Banshees and Sequitors is a known quantity for release. They made it clear that Dreadfane is just an "early release" of it.
The last two seasons didn’t have warbands at the same time as the box did they?
That’s why I assumed goblins would come with the 4Th band. Together but later.
Zarbags Gits and Eyes of the Nine got released 3 weeks later (October) then they spread the others over the following year. Mollogs Mob and Godsworn hunt in January and Ylthari’s Guardians and Thundriks profiteers at the end of April.
That scenery looks fantastic! I wonder if the centers are removable to allow models to stand on them, seems like they'd be difficult to use as lethal hexes otherwise? (With the exception of the acid pit)
Beastgrave is one of the most interesting corners of the Mortal Realms we’ve ever had the chance to explore, and it gives us a closer look at the bizarre, deadly and eerily beautiful nature of the savage Realm of Beasts. If you’re looking to bring a bit of Ghurish flair to your games of Warhammer Underworlds the Primal Lair set is ideal, packed with plastic scenery that’s perfect for representing blocked and lethal hexes in cinematic fashion.
Maybe they're just stretching things, as obviously you need to be able to stand on a lethal hex. But it'd be sweet to have official "terrain" for them, as in the new rules it looks like you can actually place lethal hexes at the start of the game (so can't rely on the outlines on the board only).
That said there appears to be a second book in the Beastgrave according to the box photo and both warbands appear to have more models in them whilst the previous had one undersized warband. That said the warbands are all generally kept to the same price no matter if they are 3 or 5 or more models within them.
Binabik15 wrote: Oh man, wolves that don't look like rats. Yay. Release them as updatet Fenriswolves yesterday. The fur looks a bit weird, but that's GW's style for plastic fur, it always lools weird. The IoB rat ogres and the Stormfiends got it the worst.
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: Not sure if this has been posted yet but my Facebook kit supplier has just had the Beastgrave price from the GW rep, £45
Ouch. That's a big jump here in the US, going from $60 to $75.
US and Canadian pricing of the Nightvault boxed set doesn’t use the same exchange formula as other products in the line. If Beastgrave gets an increased base price AND takes on the exchange formula of other products then it will indeed be a significant jump for us.
If it’s more than $65 US, then I can just pick up the easy to build model kits I like. I haven’t gotten in many games and I’d rather just have straight forward no deck building game anyway.
angryboy2k wrote: US and Canadian pricing of the Nightvault boxed set doesn’t use the same exchange formula as other products in the line. If Beastgrave gets an increased base price AND takes on the exchange formula of other products then it will indeed be a significant jump for us.
Nightvault is 40 GBP right now, which lines up with the $60USD tag on Nightvault. Beastgrave, per the reported price, is 45GBP...which would put it at the $75USD price bracket.
For the record, I don't use "exchange formulas". I look up items by price and do a comparison that way. They've been moving a lot of price bands around on the UK side and it's playing havoc with figuring things out. Invictors, for example, are $60USD but 37.50GBP. I used the pricetag on the Skorpius(45GBP) for my $75USD pricetag.
I feel pretty safe saying $75USD for Beastgrave though, as it does look like we're getting more than usual...although if there's a "built-in savings" for us here in North America? I'd go for $65.
The redemptor dreadnought is £40 in the UK and it’s $65 US, $80 Canadian. For whatever it’s worth, Nightvault’s US/CAN pricing ($60/$70) doesn’t line up with whatever fictitious exchange formula GW uses for the majority of their products (in Canada, most items work out at 2:1).
I don’t think we’re getting more than usual from Beastgrave from what I’ve seen so far. The second book is probably just a learn to play pamphlet and the figures are likely to still be on the same number of sprues as all the other figures in the range.
angryboy2k wrote: The redemptor dreadnought is £40 in the UK and it’s $65 US, $80 Canadian. For whatever it’s worth, Nightvault’s US/CAN pricing ($60/$70) doesn’t line up with whatever fictitious exchange formula GW uses for the majority of their products (in Canada, most items work out at 2:1).
The Redemptor's price was set down awhile ago, so that's not really a helpful comparison. Nightvault is 40GBP but $60USD, Intercessors are 35GBP but $60USD and the Invictor is 37.50GBP but $60USD.
Beastgrave €60
Playmat €14.50
Deckbox €6.50
Primal Lair €25
Carrycase €40
Dice €10
Sleeves €10
Counters €12
Beastgrave novel with 3 cards with exclusive artwork €22
That's €10 more expensive than the Nightvault and Shadespire base sets. While I like the look of the Beastman and Wolfrider warbands, I'm out - it's all getting rather too much to collect by this points. Also not really liking even more added mechanics - part of the charm of Shadespire, to me, was the relatively easy-to-learn nature of the game; it was something I could play at home. If this has even more counters and mechanics to deal with I'd rather play a more customizable game.
Still cool to see innovative AOS models, though, and I might pick up a warband in the future if it's still backwards compatible with Nightvault for casual games.
The unboxing indeed shows that we’re getting nothing extra for the extra money. And this season looks like we’re gonna need counters that aren’t in the base box.
The unboxing indeed shows that we’re getting nothing extra for the extra money.
Other than the Warbands themselves, naturally.
Past boxes have had 3 vs 5(Shadespire) and 3 vs 7(Nightvault)
This one is 6(Beastmen) vs 5(Kurnothi)
And this season looks like we’re gonna need counters that aren’t in the base box.
Not too fussed about that. I've already got a few things planned myself. Notable one is the Hunter->Prey Counters, using arrows from a few kits I've had sitting around.
Additionally, the article has a good callout:
A small but significant change in Warhammer Underworlds: Beastgrave is how faction-specific cards work. Starting with the Core Set, every Warhammer Underworlds warband will have a minimum-sized deck’s worth of cards – that’s 10 Upgrades, 10 Gambits and 12 Objectives. This means that building your first deck is super easy, just grab everything that’s specific to your warband and you’re good to go!
The unboxing indeed shows that we’re getting nothing extra for the extra money.
Other than the Warbands themselves, naturally.
Past boxes have had 3 vs 5(Shadespire) and 3 vs 7(Nightvault)
This one is 6(Beastmen) vs 5(Kurnothi)
And this season looks like we’re gonna need counters that aren’t in the base box.
Not too fussed about that. I've already got a few things planned myself. Notable one is the Hunter->Prey Counters, using arrows from a few kits I've had sitting around.
Additionally, the article has a good callout:
A small but significant change in Warhammer Underworlds: Beastgrave is how faction-specific cards work. Starting with the Core Set, every Warhammer Underworlds warband will have a minimum-sized deck’s worth of cards – that’s 10 Upgrades, 10 Gambits and 12 Objectives. This means that building your first deck is super easy, just grab everything that’s specific to your warband and you’re good to go!
Noticed that with Dreadfane and was wondering if it represented a change in season 3.
The warbands are still two warbands, on the same size and number of sprues as usual. I don’t think the number of models in a warband is an indicator of whether you’re getting “more” or “less” for your money.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m excited about this release and I’m in, but goddammit GW - do you have to keep doing this nickel and diming?
The only thing that will stop me jumping on board is saving for Bonereapers right now. However once that's over I'd love to get this core set - though I might trade away the beastmen, I love the style of the Kurnothi!
€60 for the base game is a bit steep, may hold off and buy it next time I am in the UK... the £ is likely to have tanked even more by then, so will get a better exchange rate.
Currently £45 is €50.82.
Still, glad that Warbands now come with enough Faction cards to do a full faction deck. Moving away from a reliance on universal cards will I think help the strength of the game.
The price increase isn't the problem, it's using a completely out-of-whack exchange rate that is
I just finished sorting my season 1 cards today, planning to do the same with my season 2 cards next. I can't imagine any opponent local to me will mind playing me if I'm only using 2 seasons worth of cards - even if it's not the current two seasons. So for myself, planning to pause on purchases for this for a bit as far as cards go, at least (still interested in cool stuff like that sweet terrain, though ).
I don't know if it was brought up before, but the ungor raiders actually have bowstrings. Which is funny, since the two other beastgrave warbands with bows don't have them.
Speaking from experience, it's actually hard to do bowstrings well.
Ungors work as the one has the bow over his arm(giving an attachment point for the 'string') while the other one has an arrow to do the same thing for him. Doesn't help that the elf stuff traditionally has a more 'silken' style string rather than some coarse nonsense.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RiTides wrote: The price increase isn't the problem, it's using a completely out-of-whack exchange rate that is
Then your problem is literally the price increase. Because it's an artifact of the exchange rates they use. The prices were probably set months ago and they don't exactly change them on the fly.
I just finished sorting my season 1 cards today, planning to do the same with my season 2 cards next. I can't imagine any opponent local to me will mind playing me if I'm only using 2 seasons worth of cards - even if it's not the current two seasons. So for myself, planning to pause on purchases for this for a bit as far as cards go, at least (still interested in cool stuff like that sweet terrain, though ).
Highly suggest you go through and note which cards went with which warband, because those are the ones which will be a problem for you in any kind of organized play event.
I finally broke down and bought a Warband (Oruks) and I'm wondering how does one tell what cards are legal at any given time. Is there a master list maintained by GW, or is it entirely up to an event organizer to make this call? Where might one find some guidance on the Underworlds cards?
Kendo wrote: I finally broke down and bought a Warband (Oruks) and I'm wondering how does one tell what cards are legal at any given time. Is there a master list maintained by GW, or is it entirely up to an event organizer to make this call? Where might one find some guidance on the Underworlds cards?
Kendo wrote: I finally broke down and bought a Warband (Oruks) and I'm wondering how does one tell what cards are legal at any given time. Is there a master list maintained by GW, or is it entirely up to an event organizer to make this call? Where might one find some guidance on the Underworlds cards?
As of right now, this is what you need to know: That's the "roadmap" of how things are going to function--although it doesn't have the text caveat that accompanied it, which is "if a Universal Card has been duplicated in a later set" it's still considered legal.
So Faction Cards(in your case, the Orruk glyph in the upper right hand corner)? They don't get 'rotated out', from what we know right now. They might have some be on the Restricted/Banned List(See here for the constantly updated PDF), but they should be otherwise playable. Universal Cards(Skull in the upper right hand corner) will get rotated out after two seasons, unless it is one that has been duplicated in a later set.
Event organizers are, if they're getting any prize support from GW, supposed to be using the Restricted/Banned list.
So since Beastgrave is season 3, all the universal cards from season 1 aren't legal in organized play? Good to know. I don't think I need to worry too much about that for a bit, but if I like this I might see if I can run/ help with a couple events locally.
Edit: I see, that's what the 'X' is about in the roadmap. Gotcha. Thank for the explanation.
FWIW, as far as finding which cards are rotated out, that's what the symbol beside the collector number in the right hand margin is for. Of course, that only applies if the upper right corner symbol is the universal card symbol.
Not "all" the universal cards(it does include Objectives and Gambits/Upgrades though), just the ones which aren't duplicated in later editions.
It's kind of wonky but it's usually going to be in reference to cards that are in the starter sets. Stuff like Great Fortitude, Great Strength, and in general "+1 <insert characteristic here>" cards.
There's a bit you can make out, notably that they're followers of Kurnoth and seem to have a bit of a 'spirit' bend to them. They're on some sort of 'pilgrimage' into the Beastgrave.
Interestingly, they seem to have something akin to the Lamentiri(bellybutton crystal) that the Sylvaneth have.
Kanluwen, you don't need to mark your cards - each has a symbol showing if they are universal or warband specific, and the universals (regardless of what box they came in) won't be allowed from two seasons ago.
Luckily, I'm a filthy causal and only plan to play with friends, so it's irrelevant for me
Edit: To your above post, it still doesn't matter what box they came in, it's card specific. Much easier to sort by the card number than by the set they came in, and much easier to find later if they do duplicate it, too.
RiTides wrote: Kanluwen, you don't need to mark your cards - each has a symbol showing if they are universal or warband specific, and the universals (regardless of what box they came in) won't be allowed from two seasons ago.
Luckily, I'm a filthy causal and only plan to play with friends, so it's irrelevant for me
Edit: To your above post, it still doesn't matter what box they came in, it's card specific. Much easier to sort by the card number than by the set they came in, and much easier to find later if they do duplicate it, too.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying.
My statement of "taking note" wasn't suggesting that you mark cards as Universal or Warband specific. It was to say take note of which boxed set the cards came in, because there's weirdness afoot thanks to things like the Leaders and Echoes of Glory Packs. This post tells you that Universals will be rotated out "every two seasons"...unless they've been reprinted . Reprints have, at the moment, only been in two things:
1) The starter sets 2) Garrek's Reavers and Steelheart's Liberators warband sets.
The latter set came with all new cards, not the ones they came with in the starter set. Reavers and Liberators are the only way, currently, to get the cards that came in the "Echoes of Glory" pack.
My statement of "taking note" wasn't suggesting that you mark cards as Universal or Warband specific. It was to say take note of which boxed set the cards came in, because there's weirdness afoot thanks to things like the Leaders and Echoes of Glory Packs. This post tells you that Universals will be rotated out "every two seasons"...unless they've been reprinted . Reprints have, at the moment, only been in two things:
1) The starter sets 2) Garrek's Reavers and Steelheart's Liberators warband sets.
The latter set came with all new cards, not the ones they came with in the starter set. Reavers and Liberators are the only way, currently, to get the cards that came in the "Echoes of Glory" pack.
The Echoes of Glory cards all have the Nightvault symbol on them and the Nightvault card number. There shouldn't be any confusion when sorting by set because they're identical to the ones in the Garrek/Steelheart warband boxes.
Exactly, angryboy2k! Leaders cards also have their own symbol and set of numbers (1 - 60). By far the easiest way to find anything is to sort cards numerically within the season / cardset they're released in (i.e. by the season symbol and number on the edge of the card).
The reason I don't think what you're saying works in practice, Kan, is that there's no way to track what box a card came from other than physically marking the card/sleeve, memorizing each one, or looking it up using the online deck builder. If you're using that database anyway, it's even easier to find a card if you sort your collection by number. Otherwise, every time you put a card in a deck, you'll have to look up again what "box" to put it back with when you're done with it. Does this make sense? Genuinely asking!
The Echoes of Glory cards all have the Nightvault symbol on them and the Nightvault card number. There shouldn't be any confusion when sorting by set because they're identical to the ones in the Garrek/Steelheart warband boxes.
Did you actually read what I posted, or did you just reply to what you thought I posted?
Reavers and Liberators come with Nightvault cards(the Echoes of Glory set). I haven't refuted that. I even mentioned that Reavers and Liberators are one of the two instances of reprints we have right now.
They did not come with the cards that they came with in the Shadespire Starter Set, instead coming with Echoes of Glory cards split between the two warbands and their Warband cards.
It's why Reavers and Liberators are still available for sale, as they are considered Nightvault sets, not Shadespire sets. It's why I used the term of "weirdness afoot".
It's why Reavers and Liberators are still available for sale, as they are considered Nightvault sets, not Shadespire sets. It's why I used the term of "weirdness afoot".
It’s not even slightly weird. RITides said he’d sorted out his season 1 and season 2 cards. I’m clear on what that means vis-a-vis the universal cards in Echoes of Glory/Garrek and Steelheart’s Nightvault releases.
I’m pretty sure RITides is clear on what that means as well and if he sorted them out by season (going by the symbol on the card) then there isn’t any room for confusion. If, for some reason, he was sorting out the universals by which warband they came with instead of using the symbol on the card, then there’s perhaps room for confusion because then he’d assume the Echoes cards were season one instead of season two.
I’ve read what you wrote several times and still can’t understand what you were advising RITides to do or why. Maybe you can explain more clearly what you meant originally because right now your advice doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
So we have this season :
-beast elves
-beast humans
-Ironjaws brutes
-Grots on wolves
-Daughters of khaine
-Vampire/fleaseaters
-Nurgle with sorcerer and blightkins
-OGOR!!!!!! with sabretooth
-Nude grots???? : /
So we have this season :
-beast elves
-beast humans
-Ironjaws brutes
-Grots on wolves
-Daughters of khaine
-Vampire/fleaseaters
-Nurgle with sorcerer and blightkins
-OGOR!!!!!! with sabretooth
-Nude grots???? : /
From a few months ago on War of Sigmar:
The cards seem to generally match what Hastings reported earlier this year...
I did hear some time back there were maybe 10 warbands this season (although I think 2 are from dreadfane as they were SE & NH), the others were (IIRC) DoK, Ogrurrrs (specifically 1 hunter and 1 or 2 animals), Wanderers, FeC (or might have been free peoples I can't remember), Seraphon, Slaanesh, Nurgle and another skaven. I myself would have liked Idoneth but this is a pretty nice mix of stuff, and at least no more Khorne or excessive SE.
So we have this season :
-beast elves
-beast humans
-Ironjaws brutes
-Grots on wolves
-Daughters of khaine
-Vampire/fleaseaters
-Nurgle with sorcerer and blightkins
-OGOR!!!!!! with sabretooth
-Nude grots???? : /
Pretty sure that the dismounted Grots are with the Ogor, giving him a kind of 'Mollog' style set.
If you look at the one in "Run Down", he has a net draped around his chest while the one on Caltrop doesn't.
zamerion wrote: So we have this season :
-beast elves
-beast humans
-Ironjaws brutes
-Grots on wolves
-Daughters of khaine
-Vampire/fleaseaters
-Nurgle with sorcerer and blightkins
-OGOR!!!!!! with sabretooth
-Nude grots???? : /
From a few months ago on War of Sigmar:
The cards seem to generally match what Hastings reported earlier this year...
I did hear some time back there were maybe 10 warbands this season (although I think 2 are from dreadfane as they were SE & NH), the others were (IIRC) DoK, Ogrurrrs (specifically 1 hunter and 1 or 2 animals), Wanderers, FeC (or might have been free peoples I can't remember), Seraphon, Slaanesh, Nurgle and another skaven. I myself would have liked Idoneth but this is a pretty nice mix of stuff, and at least no more Khorne or excessive SE.
So maybe the 8th is Seraphon?
It looks to me like Hastings missed Beastmen completely, right?
So while he seems to have gotten some things right, he's off on others (no sign of skaven, for example). That's the rumor business, I guess
I think Kan has an interesting theory about the grot being part of the Ogor warband - I'd love that if so, always liked that combination
I like that list. I have a nurgle AoS unit, so looks like another unit for that, and I really, really, want the Ogor. The wolf grots were the ones that got me thinking about this game, so Ill have to get those too.
-beast elves
-beast humans
-Ironjaws brutes
-Grots on wolves
-Daughters of khaine
-Vampire/fleaseaters
-Nurgle with sorcerer and blightkins
-OGOR!!!!!! with sabretooth
-Nude grots???? : /
Looks like a great variety of models and factions.....shocked no Stormcast!
I’d imagine they will (though I wouldn’t say it is foreshadowing, rather than revealing the factions proper. The cards they have just done is the foreshadowing).
Really hoping that Caster on the Eldrich Haze is a new Nurgle/Plague/Maggotkin caster of some sort. It almost looks like it's surrounded by fire, which immediately made me think it might be a Firebelly caster (I know, the old model looks different), since I couldn't specifically see any nurgle symbols on them, and both are fat. Also, are they female? Can't tell exactly from the picture. Would be cool to finally have a 'BlightQueen' model. That 'Great Strength card is definitely a blight king/warrior of some sort.
It makes sense that one group would be a Oghurr hunter, and some sabretusks, as that's the only beastclaw raider models who aren't plastic yet. I'm guessing all the Oghurr will be combined into one faction in their next AoS book though.
Those Greenskins seem to be built more like Goblins, than Gnoblar though. Did Gnoblar not survive the end times? Could just be the artist's interpretation, or perhaps Gnoblars are more muscular, and 'human-like' in AoS? Or Oghurrs just work with Goblins now?
Really digging the look of the new 'Wood Elves' too. I hope they get their own faction in AoS also. And like Morathi, and Alarielle, Orion get's a HUGE model. I like the balance of evil goatmen and Minotaurs vs Satyrs and Centaurs.
Albino Squirrel wrote: It looks like they are:
-Beastmen
-Beast Elves
-Goblins Riders
-Nurgle
-Savage Orcs?
-Ogre with sabretusk/goblins
-Daughters of Khaine
-Flesh Eaters?
When one the cards definitely looks like it had a ghoul on it in the how to play video. It's actually a pretty cool line up, though disappointing Order Humans still have no representation in the game or a new faction in AoS. The only model they even have that was made for AoS is the Warpriest from Silver Tower. GW should just get on with it and squat them so the Stormcast can protect cities full of Stormcast civilians. Also would have been nice to see Slannesh over Nurgle since Nurgle has been done to death by GW the last few years.
Kendo wrote: Oooooh, ghouls. Cool. Would it actually be that there are only 3 models in the set? Do box covers historically accurately reflect the contents?
Not fully. Sometimes, larger warbands only show a few characters, like Zarbag's gitz and the skaven one shows only four models, though it comes with five. I was (and still am) hoping that the FEC band would come with a lot of ghouls, and have a rule like the skaven, allowing you to bring back dead models. Maybe the ghoul king is too powerful to warrant this.
Also, cool to see a female crypt ghoul. I sort of figured we'd get one in the set, given the more diverse range of models that Underworld comes with. It'll be interesting to see the models in the flesh
Kendo wrote: Oooooh, ghouls. Cool. Would it actually be that there are only 3 models in the set? Do box covers historically accurately reflect the contents?
You can kind of make out at least 2 other ghouls in the background of the art. It will probably be more clear in the colored version that will follow shortly. Look around the knees of the two lowered featured ghouls.
So that would make A big dude, the Ghoullette, Club wielding ghoul and the two in the background.
Good call. I wonder if there are two in between the ghouls in the foreground. There looks like a head and a left arm but there is a mass to the left that looks like a stack of ribs/ another figure? I blame it on the lack of coffee and my aging eyes for not picking up the background figures
Was hoping for the leader to be a Ghoul King on foot of some description, so I'm a little disappointed, but a female ghoul is pretty cool. Hopefully GW are prompted into showing the warband now.
highlord tamburlaine wrote: Nothing's stopping us from using the guy in the middle of the artwork as a King. He looks distinct enough.
It's also worth noting that there are "new" types that have been added in via Underworlds that we have yet to see elsewhere.
Ylthari of Ylthari's Guardians, for example, is a "Thornwych". It was important enough to give her it as a keyword in AoS.
The bearded guy might be something new, a leader below a King but above the Courtiers.
Kendo wrote: Good call. I wonder if there are two in between the ghouls in the foreground. There looks like a head and a left arm but there is a mass to the left that looks like a stack of ribs/ another figure? I blame it on the lack of coffee and my aging eyes for not picking up the background figures
Personally, I think I can make out three ghouls in the background. That would put the warband at six models, which seems a good size for a pack of ghouls to me.
The art is pretty clear as to the two background ghouls. The "third" on the left is amorphous. To me it appears nothing like a ghoul, but rather like a frontal of a nude woman. Seems like 5 to me.
Do we think that these will all be ghoul sized models (ie 25mm base) or does the one on the right with the big bone club look like he could be sized like a crypt horror sized beastie?
Sabotage! wrote: Ghouls are looking really cool by the art. I'm looking forward to seeing the models for them.
I hope they're not all hunhed over like the main plastic kit and fewer spine protuberances. I haven't really kept up with AOS fluff as it's not my thing, but ghouls were always feral, degenerate humans who eat dead fleash and the current kit is more humanoid monster than fallen human.
Uuuuuuh, better ghoul models would be ace! The current ones not only have wonky arms and ugly faces (but bad ugly, not *good* ugly, that's why artwork has them look like the plastic ghoul king/Strigoi from the dragon kit) but the MOULD itself is pure garbage. Big mould lines and borderline slippage on stick thin limbs is not a quality product.
Interest in Beastgrave rising, even though I hardly got to play Nightvault compared to Underworlds.
Sabotage! wrote: Ghouls are looking really cool by the art. I'm looking forward to seeing the models for them.
I hope they're not all hunhed over like the main plastic kit and fewer spine protuberances. I haven't really kept up with AOS fluff as it's not my thing, but ghouls were always feral, degenerate humans who eat dead fleash and the current kit is more humanoid monster than fallen human.
The current kit is way older than Age of Sigmar so it's nothing to do with any new fluff. Just a design for.. I want to say 6th edition fantasy? Maybe 7th. Whenever they radically altered the Vampires to be more bestial rather than the 'classic' versions we got previously.
Sabotage! wrote: Ghouls are looking really cool by the art. I'm looking forward to seeing the models for them.
I hope they're not all hunhed over like the main plastic kit and fewer spine protuberances. I haven't really kept up with AOS fluff as it's not my thing, but ghouls were always feral, degenerate humans who eat dead fleash and the current kit is more humanoid monster than fallen human.
The current kit is way older than Age of Sigmar so it's nothing to do with any new fluff. Just a design for.. I want to say 6th edition fantasy? Maybe 7th. Whenever they radically altered the Vampires to be more bestial rather than the 'classic' versions we got previously.
I know the kit pre-dates AOS, but I wondered if the fluff might have changed. The product page on the webstore makes no reference to ghouls previously having been human.
Sabotage! wrote: Ghouls are looking really cool by the art. I'm looking forward to seeing the models for them.
I hope they're not all hunhed over like the main plastic kit and fewer spine protuberances. I haven't really kept up with AOS fluff as it's not my thing, but ghouls were always feral, degenerate humans who eat dead fleash and the current kit is more humanoid monster than fallen human.
The current kit is way older than Age of Sigmar so it's nothing to do with any new fluff. Just a design for.. I want to say 6th edition fantasy? Maybe 7th. Whenever they radically altered the Vampires to be more bestial rather than the 'classic' versions we got previously.
Pretty sure the bestial Strigoi vampire sculpts were introduced when the ghouls were still represented by the metal ghoul models, which were basically human. Only another edition later did they radically change the ghouls to become these twisted abominations.. if I recall correctly, they also became actual undead units at that moment, while they were living beings before. Would welcome a change back to the earlier style, or at least a middle ground between them - and these designs appear to be something along those lines.
Where did you find that pic? The kit looks pretty sweet! (Although I still wish they'd made the "bases" a bit flatter, so you could remove the centerpiece and place figures on it, to use as lethal hexes).
Where did you find that pic? The kit looks pretty sweet! (Although I still wish they'd made the "bases" a bit flatter, so you could remove the centerpiece and place figures on it, to use as lethal hexes).
I do agree on the older fluff for ghouls being better, I much preferred The deranged cannibals. I also prefer the old metal ones (Paul Muller has some great ones from Heresy too). I think the concept for the new ones is pretty decent, and the art looks great, but the models look a bit doofy. I think these Underworlds ones will probably look much better and properly execute what GW is going for.
Sabotage! wrote: I do agree on the older fluff for ghouls being better, I much preferred The deranged cannibals.
Quote from the current AoS 2nd ed. FEC book
"Though every member of a Flesh-eater Court has been affected by the Abhorrent's Curse, and has therefore been instilled with madness born of death magic, mordants themselves are not dead. Their wretched existence can best be described as teetering on the edge of the grave - neither dead, nor undead, but possessed of only the most grotesque semblance of life. As such, they are immune to the power Nagash wields over all dead things."
So... I guess they're still crazy cannibals, but, sort of magical dead-ish beasties?
The Abhorrents are of course vampires, so they're undead, and zombie dragons & terrors of course too. But, I think the others are all 'living' things. In any instance. I love the look of the current Ghouls kit. very beastial, very crazy looking, i love it! I used to use them as the 'Generic demons' for Chaos space marines in the 4th/5th ed. codex. I like the look of these new ones too. I don't know that a female ghoul need to have long hair to tell her apart from the others, but then again, we're basing that off of one picture.
Also, a couple more cards I hadn't seen with other stuff on them. (sorry if they got posted already)
That on Skaeth is going to be hysterical when he's Inspired(he gains Scything, which means that he gains the ability to make attacks against everyone within range of his Hooves attack). It becomes a knockbackapalooza!
Look like the Grymwatch leader is a courtier, look like the background in the Beastgrave booklet only mention the revealed Grot rider and the "leaked" Grymwatch, neat!
So, based on the card art, would we say we know which factions all but 2 of the warbands belong to? I'm hoping for Idoneth to be one for this season, some new critters would make sense in the setting.
Chopstick wrote: Look like the Grymwatch leader is a courtier, look like the background in the Beastgrave booklet only mention the revealed Grot rider and the "leaked" Grymwatch, neat!
Is there no mention of other bands?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
warl0rdb0b wrote: So, based on the card art, would we say we know which factions all but 2 of the warbands belong to? I'm hoping for Idoneth to be one for this season, some new critters would make sense in the setting.
there are already 8 bands revealed by the cards
-beastmen
-beast elves
-fleash eaters
-grot wolf riders
-Nurgle
-Daughter of khaine
-ogor
-Orruk brutes
Had hoped for another Skaven band and to see the new-design Freeguild that were rumoured (so many great things that could be done there), but at least the wolf riders look great, and the Ogre hunter appears promising too.
Besides, now I can continue working on my Skaven Mordheim warbands without holding off due to a soon-to-be-released kit that might contain useful bits.
Chopstick wrote: Look like the Grymwatch leader is a courtier, look like the background in the Beastgrave booklet only mention the revealed Grot rider and the "leaked" Grymwatch, neat!
Is there no mention of other bands?
(
It's from here, mentioning only the 2 revealed warbands in the book is a super nice conincidence
As I suspected, no Ghoul King. Pleased with the lineup overall anyway. Guessing that the Ghouls & Wolf Riders will be the first two new warbands to drop in October if they follow the same schedule they had for Nightvault. Keen to see the Ghouls.
No pre-order bonus for ordering online from GW is a bit of a pain though I have to say. Off to a 3rd party retailer I go!
Stonespeaker people are odd. They don't sound Nurgly, but I can't think of what else they'd be. Unless they're just for fluff and aren't a warband.
Athmora is most likely the Daughters of Khaine.
GaroRobe wrote: Stonespeaker people are odd. They don't sound Nurgly, but I can't think of what else they'd be. Unless they're just for fluff and aren't a warband.
Athmora is most likely the Daughters of Khaine.
GaroRobe wrote: Stonespeaker people are odd. They don't sound Nurgly, but I can't think of what else they'd be. Unless they're just for fluff and aren't a warband.
Athmora is most likely the Daughters of Khaine.
I thought she sounded more like the Ghouls?
I don't think so. The ghoul lore page was already shown. Plus mora sounds like moray. Which is serpentine lol
Aerial bands? Where do you see that kind of thing on the poster? Did I miss something? (If you mean the Kharadons themselves, they already have a warband that has a floater, and doesn't need a flying expansion to justify him)
gilljoy wrote: Anyone know what's going with some of the warbands?
I wanted to grab the last few season 1 warbands I was missing and they're nowhere to be seen on GW's site
Annoyingly GW hasn't said anything save that they are still valid in the game. The models themselves are still up for sale under the army pages in the main AoS page. However they come without any cards so you won't get the character cards to make the warband work. You might still get them form 3rd party stores or a local GW store; but otherwise at present GW aren't selling them. The hope is that GW brings them back repackaged with just the character cards and not the universal ones which have been removed from this cycle. I can't imagine GW making new warbands for every race every 2 cycles nor cycling them out fully from the game every 2 or 3 cycles.
Yeah, they said the warbands will Always be usable.
But it is whether they will always sell them, for Underworlds, that is the question.
Even if they did maybe a card pack that is Season 1. All 8 warbands character bits.
Obviously suck for anyone who only buys one warband, but for GW, it is then only 1 extra product.
That way they’d always have the packs of models, and that’s an AoS product so would never have to disappear once they are out of the ‘two current season’ rota.
Then they’d have just a card bundle, all warbands from seasons one, all from two when the time comes etc, and is just the cards needed to make the warband playable (those people would then have to buy current season packs to get enough cards to sort the deck, so even better on GW’s size..
I'm sure they'll somehow re-release the cards - the issue would be if they only did it digitally. Then again GW has been really odd with cards in that they appear to love them, but at the same time they only ever make one order. They don't even restock warscroll cards from what I've seen. Once gone they are gone until there's a new Battletome/codex.
It's odd to see GW making cards both optional aids and critical game parts, but in the same breath making them one-time products so many times.
They could discontinue them as a Underworlds product perhaps.
But yeah they are in AoS to stay like those random Easy Builds that have names guys in them etc..
So it would be weird to take them out of this, unless the card issue creates too many problems
My unfounded hope is that the currently missing warbands are being repacked into new Beastgrave sets with their own unique cards and some S3 generics. Or possibly as paired sets with two warbands each and just their unique cards, maybe including the ones from the OOP supplementary sets like the Leaders pack.
I would say they for sure areNot being repacked.
Being sold as they are now they can live forever, if they repackage for current, it is on borrowed time..
As I said earlier, for that I could see there being a ‘Season One pack’ that is just all those cards, but not 8 different card sets for older seasons each time..
Chopstick wrote: Older card go out of print, that's normal, they can't just keep reprint old card in addition to new one.
Well, call me crazy if you like, but personally if a product is part of a game system's present edition, I expect the company selling the game to keep it in stock - or at least available in some way, if they stuck all this stuff up on their website when it went OOP that'd be fine - no matter how "old" it is.
I mean, would you be happy if GW would only keep, say, 10 army books in production, and as soon as the 11th book in a cycle was released book 1 would go OOP without any replacement? People talk as if ancillary products like cards or dice or play-aid doodads going out of production after one run is an immutable law of nature, just something unavoidable, but it really isn't, GW have just decided that it's not worth the bother, and there's no reason players have to be OK with that.
Anyway - I've not paid much attention to the release schedules for WHU previously; do we have a rough idea when the boxed game warbands will be out individually? I quite like the beastmen models, but I don't like them 45 quid.
Chopstick wrote: Older card go out of print, that's normal, they can't just keep reprint old card in addition to new one.
Well, call me crazy if you like, but personally if a product is part of a game system's present edition, I expect the company selling the game to keep it in stock - or at least available in some way, if they stuck all this stuff up on their website when it went OOP that'd be fine - no matter how "old" it is.
I mean, would you be happy if GW would only keep, say, 10 army books in production, and as soon as the 11th book in a cycle was released book 1 would go OOP without any replacement? People talk as if ancillary products like cards or dice or play-aid doodads going out of production after one run is an immutable law of nature, just something unavoidable, but it really isn't, GW have just decided that it's not worth the bother, and there's no reason players have to be OK with that.
Army book do exist in epub, so even if they went oop, people usually don't have a problem.
GW staffer yesterday said that the discontinued Shadespire warbands were definitely being re-packed to have updated universal cards etc. Obviously take with salt but fingers crossed this is the case.
JimmyWolf87 wrote: GW staffer yesterday said that the discontinued Shadespire warbands were definitely being re-packed to have updated universal cards etc. Obviously take with salt but fingers crossed this is the case.
Where was that said? Because most forums I’ve seen haven’t posted that and it’s the cause of a lot of angst.
Arbitrator wrote: A repackaging makes sense to me. They'll probably come out alongside the standalone Cursebreakers/Briars.
Supposedly, Nightvault isn't going away as a product. If it doesn't, we probably won't see a standalone Cursebreakers/Briars until S4.
I feel like if GW was planning on truly discontinuing the Shadespire Warbands they'd have just outright done it. They're definitely not averse to it.
Yup. They might change tune in S4, but until then it seems most likely we'll see a repack of the faction cards with the Easy to Build uncolored plastic versions.
Chopstick wrote: Older card go out of print, that's normal, they can't just keep reprint old card in addition to new one.
Well, call me crazy if you like, but personally if a product is part of a game system's present edition, I expect the company selling the game to keep it in stock - or at least available in some way, if they stuck all this stuff up on their website when it went OOP that'd be fine - no matter how "old" it is.
I mean, would you be happy if GW would only keep, say, 10 army books in production, and as soon as the 11th book in a cycle was released book 1 would go OOP without any replacement? People talk as if ancillary products like cards or dice or play-aid doodads going out of production after one run is an immutable law of nature, just something unavoidable, but it really isn't, GW have just decided that it's not worth the bother, and there's no reason players have to be OK with that.
Army book do exist in epub, so even if they went oop, people usually don't have a problem.
So in other words, at present army books are kept available in some way throughout the entire time they're valid rules. My point was that cards and other supplementary materials often aren't, and so I drew the comparison to a hypothetical scenario where army books also aren't in order to illustrate how daft that situation is, because nobody would be blase about the idea of, say, Codex: Imperial Guard just arbitrarily going OOP because GW had chosen not to keep more than X number of books in print at any time, IG was X+1, and you couldn't get it anywhere else. Yet for some reason - maybe because they're still a relatively new thing for GW so people don't give them the same importance yet? - the typical response to people annoyed by card products going OOP is "meh, they're old, whatever".
JimmyWolf87 wrote: GW staffer yesterday said that the discontinued Shadespire warbands were definitely being re-packed to have updated universal cards etc. Obviously take with salt but fingers crossed this is the case.
Where was that said? Because most forums I’ve seen haven’t posted that and it’s the cause of a lot of angst.
JimmyWolf87 wrote: GW staffer yesterday said that the discontinued Shadespire warbands were definitely being re-packed to have updated universal cards etc. Obviously take with salt but fingers crossed this is the case.
Where was that said? Because most forums I’ve seen haven’t posted that and it’s the cause of a lot of angst.
Just a chap working in a UK store.
So.......
The original GW redshirt staff member broke from the company line again.
JimmyWolf87 wrote: GW staffer yesterday said that the discontinued Shadespire warbands were definitely being re-packed to have updated universal cards etc. Obviously take with salt but fingers crossed this is the case.
Where was that said? Because most forums I’ve seen haven’t posted that and it’s the cause of a lot of angst.
Just a chap working in a UK store.
So.......
The original GW redshirt staff member broke from the company line again.
Quite possibly. Don't shoot the messenger, just passing it on. I did mention salt. For context, I was pretty sceptical, he was pretty adamant. Take whatever you care to from that.
I kinda hope the guy with the ribcage back gets a slightly better armor save than the other ghouls.
Does the guy on the far right have the scyles replacing his arms or is he just holding them?
Hmmmmmm... well, I'm certainly not a fan of what I'm seeing there, but then again this was never going to be my warband with so many cool greenskins to choose from
They are better than the current ghouls but they just look very bland maybe I'm just not liking the paint scheme. The bats are a surprise addition. I know I'll get them anyway as they'll double up as a FEC Warcry Warband.
I dig the one with skeletal armor, but they are all looking good. Some perfect models to use for the 'Crypt Ghast Courtier'. Now I don't have to continue digging through all my old stuff to find that old Strigoi model I left somewhere...
I would prefer a more snowy, muscular look. Might just be the paint job but some of those limbs look very average compared to some of the sculpts GW has been knocking out of late.
Looks like six ghouls plus the bats. The bats are a nice surprise, and I am vindicated in thinking the cover showed a full six ghouls! Looking at the middle of the cover, I wondered if there was something strange in the far background. Those must be the bat wings.
Personally, I think the sculpts are a neat addition. I like the more human, but still twisted version of ghouls. I will certainly pick them up for Underworlds and AoS.
RiTides wrote: Even though it's only a day early, I'm feeling a little nostalgia getting to squint at small / low quality pics before GW releases official ones
The sad part is that the individual took screengrabs of the GW video and still managed to potatocam it.
Hmm, I love the standard ghoul models, but these aren't really doing much for me. Maybe it is the very uninspiring flat green skin paint jobs they after sporting?
No, contrast would look much much worse. It looks like it is just a flat coat of whatever green that is.
Maybe stop doing contrast wrong and you won't have such problems?
Anyways, it's not even a green. It's Ionrach Flesh, washed with Athonian Camoshade and picked out with Deepkin Flesh. They've shown the step by steps on it in the past.
They looks pretty cool, particularly the one with bone armor. The paint job looks pretty awful.
That is definitely not contrast, the skin is way too flat. I've painted with a bit of Contrast, and even a single coat of Contrast properly applied looks much better than that skin.
Based on a lot of GW 'eavy metal painting guide (from WD, instagram, and masterclass) they probably don't, they almost always use mixed paint and minimize the use of GW shade or glaze, they usually make their own shade and glaze.
streetsamurai wrote: why is the bone of the wolverine looking ghoul painted in silver?
It's Adamantium.
A fine looking warband. Nothing especially stand out about it though. Of the 3 death related warbands so far, the skeletons still remain the most striking in my eyes.
The large axe the leader is holding is very nice, although it doesn't seem like a very ghoulish weapon to me. The bone, the hooks, sure. Big executioner axe, not so much.
Not quite what I had hoped them to be, but fairly nice overall. Had some of the current plastics fresh on sprue (of which I'm not a fan, but got them in a big lot second hand) which I was planning to incorporate in a Mordheim warband, but some of these might be used instead. The foraging one certainly. At least if the separate warbands won't get a price increase.
Big fan. Leaning much more towards the ghouls prior to the current plastic kit while not abandoning those later design cues.
Not sure what the issue with the paint is? It;s not the most inspiring scheme and it's certainly less high contrast than we might be used to from GW, but I actually prefer the more subtle shading and highlighting on natural material like skin.
Yeah not so much a fan of these. Plus the loincloth on the ghoul with the beard looks waaaay too much like hair to me. So far season 3 has been pretty hit or miss for me.
Those are some of the best looking Ghoul models GW have ever produced. The current range look awful, the previous metal range had a very nice look (well, as much as Ghouls can look nice). They seem to take a lot of inspiration from the Decent film that came out way back in 08'.
The bats really are a surprise, I wonder if the leader can summon a swarm of bats as an action.
Also the Ghoul with the long hair drapped over the face is I am guessing a spell caster.
Beastgrave Warbands so far are shaping up to really look suited to the realm of beasts.
Looks nice. I can find a use for these guys. Can't wait to see them in not green.
I like that they're able to walk upright like the old metals again. Between this and the goblins it's good to see GW offering some classic looks instead of going full AoS on everything.
Sabotage! wrote: Part of my issue with the paint is how clean it looks. Ghouls (eaters of the dead and living alike) should never look that clean.
You won't get anything like that from 'Eavy Metal unfortunately. Their models are specifically painted to highlight every little detail to help sell the models.
I don't much care for that approach as it makes some models/armies look worse than they actually are, but I guess it does have its upsides. I think GW should regularly feature pictures of models painted by their army painting team in preview articles. Unlike 'Eavy Metal those guys seem to be free to catch the mood of a faction in their paint jobs. And it's not like GW has limited space in their community articles, so they can just have both of them side by side.
Anyway, my issue with them is that they're green. But I had that ever since GW started painting their Ghouls green. For whatever reason. Did GW ever remark on why they thought Ghouls needed to be green? I don't think they were prior to the plastic regiment's release.
Kanluwen wrote: The ghouls don't think they're ghouls. They believe themselves to be crusading knights, peasants, etc.
The halberd works perfectly, IMO.
Is that a piece of AOS lore? Because i'm not familiar with that at all to be honest.
Yes, that's the Flesheater Courts background in a nutshell. Ghoul Kings are cursed with an infectious delusion that has them believe they are nobles ruling over a knightly court. Their Ghoul followers share this illusion and form the knights and armsmen of the court. The latest battletome suggests that even their enemies, if subjected long enough to the presence of the Ghoul King if I recall, will start seeing glimpses of the shared delusion.
Yeah it's real cool.
The most interesting is that it isn't a full delusion, they can see their own reflections and dont register them as themselves, always thinking it is a monster.
It's an interresting idea of fluff but to me it really feels tacked on as it's not reflected on the minis who still look like "classic" non-delusional ghouls.
Samko wrote: It's an interresting idea of fluff but to me it really feels tacked on as it's not reflected on the minis who still look like "classic" non-delusional ghouls.
Well, yeah?
The faction is still a bunch of ghouls. They're just crazy. What do you really expect them to do, make them a half/half model?
Samko wrote: It's an interresting idea of fluff but to me it really feels tacked on as it's not reflected on the minis who still look like "classic" non-delusional ghouls.
Well, yeah?
The faction is still a bunch of ghouls. They're just crazy. What do you really expect them to do, make them a half/half model?
This is a visual game, you need to communicate the idea visually somehow. They could have tattered pieces of lively and banners,, great helm ornaments built out of trash and bones, stick-horses etc.
Samko wrote: It's an interresting idea of fluff but to me it really feels tacked on as it's not reflected on the minis who still look like "classic" non-delusional ghouls.
Well, yeah?
The faction is still a bunch of ghouls. They're just crazy. What do you really expect them to do, make them a half/half model?
I would expect them to have a more "civilized" posture and makeshift equipement to represent that they try to act or think they act like knights.
For example the ghoul king could be standing uprigh pointing his weapon forward to inspire the charge of his men, but his sword would just be a big bone with with a smaller one tied on as hand-guard, his cape would be rags crudely sewn together, his breastplate a ribcage and his helmet a beast skull with weaved roots on it as a crown.
Without representation on the minis it feels more like head-canon :
"-My ghouls thinks they are knight who figth monster"
"-Cool ! My stormcast are very devoted so they fight while chanting prayers until their last breath"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crimson wrote: This is a visual game, you need to communicate the idea visually somehow. They could have tattered pieces of lively and banners,, great helm ornaments built out of trash and bones, stick-horses etc.
I'm not a huge fan of them, to be honest.
They're not bad models, but there's nothing super special about them.
They don't look as close to the traditional ghouls as I had expected, which hopefully means they'll get an update. But if we do get new ghouls, I don't think these guys will stand out in an army. They don't even have that great of scenic bases, which is something underworld models usually have done pretty well.
At least it looks like FEC will get bat swarms or something, eventually
Well, to be perfectly honest, it's just a tacked-on fiction to an already existing model line, rather than models designed to convey the fiction.
The latter is where the visuals would really make the army unique, with horrid analogies of banners, armored horses, knightly/men at arms swords and halberds made of bones, etc.
The current Ghoul fiction is some of the most inventive fluff of AoS, applied in the laziest way. Done the right way we could have had a sweet army that is like sadistic version of Brettonians.
Samko wrote: It's an interresting idea of fluff but to me it really feels tacked on as it's not reflected on the minis who still look like "classic" non-delusional ghouls.
Well, yeah?
The faction is still a bunch of ghouls. They're just crazy. What do you really expect them to do, make them a half/half model?
I would expect them to have a more "civilized" posture and makeshift equipement to represent that they try to act or think they act like knights.
For example the ghoul king could be standing uprigh pointing his weapon forward to inspire the charge of his men, but his sword would just be a big bone with with a smaller one tied on as hand-guard, his cape would be rags crudely sewn together, his breastplate a ribcage and his helmet a beast skull with weaved roots on it as a crown.
Without representation on the minis it feels more like head-canon :
"-My ghouls thinks they are knight who figth monster"
"-Cool ! My stormcast are very devoted so they fight while chanting prayers until their last breath"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crimson wrote: This is a visual game, you need to communicate the idea visually somehow. They could have tattered pieces of lively and banners,, great helm ornaments built out of trash and bones, stick-horses etc.
AegisGrimm wrote: Well, to be perfectly honest, it's just a tacked-on fiction to an already existing model line, rather than models designed to convey the fiction.
The latter is where the visuals would really make the army unique, with horrid analogies of banners, armored horses, knightly/men at arms swords and halberds made of bones, etc.
The current Ghoul fiction is some of the most inventive fluff of AoS, applied in the laziest way. Done the right way we could have had a sweet army that is like sadistic version of Brettonians.
Yes, but these are brand new models yet the visuals still aren't there.
Bah. Another bad one for Beastgrave.
Still too much of the mutant orc ghouls in these, and a shocking lack of character or detail for an Underworld warband. These look like Skyrim models when the textures don't pop in.
If it weren't for the goat elves, they'd be the worst one yet.
I'm not sure why everyone want Fec to be less delusional. The whole hook is that they are the exact opposite of what they imagine themselves to be. Adding parodies of knightly armour or weaponry dilutes that effect. I would like to see them lean more on the horror than the comedy.
Chikout wrote: I'm not sure why everyone want Fec to be less delusional. The whole hook is that they are the exact opposite of what they imagine themselves to be. Adding parodies of knightly armour or weaponry dilutes that effect. I would like to see them lean more on the horror than the comedy.
Apparently, it's because fluff has to be represented on the models....or something?
It would be cool, in my mind, to see a few things like that bone-armored ghoul from the warband. Guy probably thinks he's a mighty paladin, leading his fellows into righteous combat...rather than a nutter wearing a skeleton for a hat.
With better pics, I like most of the warband.
Bone armor guy is cool, though his arms make it look like he's gesturing or pleading at someone, not attacking.
Bone guy, the girl, and the champion are probably my least favorite. For a champion, the ghoul leader doesn't stand out at all. I can't even tell what he's on; a pillar, I guess?
Was always pretty obvious that they were going to be the first two sets after the starter given their presence in the rulebook.
I like them more having seen the clearer pictures. Definitely won't be painting them with that greenish tinge though. Very interested in how they're going to play - possibly Skavenesque?
With better pics, I like most of the warband.
Bone armor guy is cool, though his arms make it look like he's gesturing or pleading at someone, not attacking.
Bone guy, the girl, and the champion are probably my least favorite. For a champion, the ghoul leader doesn't stand out at all. I can't even tell what he's on; a pillar, I guess?
Those 3 are my favourites haha. Bone dude does look like he’s saying ‘boo’ to someone though.
With better pics, I like most of the warband.
Bone armor guy is cool, though his arms make it look like he's gesturing or pleading at someone, not attacking.
Bone guy, the girl, and the champion are probably my least favorite. For a champion, the ghoul leader doesn't stand out at all. I can't even tell what he's on; a pillar, I guess?
Those 3 are my favourites haha. Bone dude does look like he’s saying ‘boo’ to someone though.
I should clarify and say that by bone guy, I meant the dude with the big bone, not the cool armored "boo" dude. lol I feel like he'd be great in a conversion, offering his liege a nice piece of meat hes found
Now, is it just me, or are they all randomly sized? The boss looks pretty small, but the dude at the top looks massive by comparison. His arms aren't even that much bigger, its his torso thats huge.
Those ghouls kinda remind me of Garrek's Reaver, but the pose is not as good, Saek had way more expressive and powerful pose than bone club ghoul. I think all of them could use a bit more bone armor like that one ghoul.
Yep, this is...an underwhelming warband. If I can find them cheap I need some ghouls for the dungeon crawl, but I don't know if I'd bother with these. I'm trying to picture them in a better colour/nastier/bloodier. Maaaaaybe? Didn't cost of sets go up? Probably not going to be worth it in the end.
OMG the horse onna stick is amazing. I wish GW had gone that way with these... I don't dislike the ghouls but I think the insanity/delusion isn't as well-shown as it could be.
I’m hearing lots of broken Beastmen Spears in the new Beastgrave box. Saw one and some mentions online, and both of the ones sold here today had the same broken spear. Looks like it wasn’t just a poor design on one component on the sprue.
They have some INTENSE pubic hair. Otherwise I think they look sort of cool. Freaky lady with the long hair is the coolest imo and would look amazing done in a pale flesh colour.
With better pics, I like most of the warband.
Bone armor guy is cool, though his arms make it look like he's gesturing or pleading at someone, not attacking.
Bone guy, the girl, and the champion are probably my least favorite. For a champion, the ghoul leader doesn't stand out at all. I can't even tell what he's on; a pillar, I guess?
Those 3 are my favourites haha. Bone dude does look like he’s saying ‘boo’ to someone though.
I should clarify and say that by bone guy, I meant the dude with the big bone, not the cool armored "boo" dude. lol I feel like he'd be great in a conversion, offering his liege a nice piece of meat hes found
Now, is it just me, or are they all randomly sized? The boss looks pretty small, but the dude at the top looks massive by comparison. His arms aren't even that much bigger, its his torso thats huge.
Except for the big guy (and the girl ghoul, obviously) they adhere to established ghoul anatomy, albeit with more varied poses that don't make my back hurt just from looking at them.
Maybe the sculptor thought it would be good to have a ghoul that's on its way to becoming a Crypt Horror in the set? It's the sort of heavy torso you see on them. I don't recall how they're made in AoS and therefore if that makes sense, but it was the first thing that came to mind.
Chikout wrote: I'm not sure why everyone want Fec to be less delusional. The whole hook is that they are the exact opposite of what they imagine themselves to be. Adding parodies of knightly armour or weaponry dilutes that effect. I would like to see them lean more on the horror than the comedy.
The problem is they don't lean on either. The hook goes nowhere, because they aren't the opposite of their delusion, they're unrelated to it.
They don't sell the idea any better than the 'Freeguild' Griffon does by having 'Karl Franz' written across its chest.
They're very obviously miniatures built for a different and unrelated setting re-used without any changes.
Chikout wrote: I'm not sure why everyone want Fec to be less delusional. The whole hook is that they are the exact opposite of what they imagine themselves to be. Adding parodies of knightly armour or weaponry dilutes that effect. I would like to see them lean more on the horror than the comedy.
The problem is they don't lean on either. The hook goes nowhere, because they aren't the opposite of their delusion, they're unrelated to it.
They don't sell the idea any better than the 'Freeguild' Griffon does by having 'Karl Franz' written across its chest.
They're very obviously miniatures built for a different and unrelated setting re-used without any changes.
It's not so much that they are "re-used" but more that hte lore has changed, but there is no real visual display of the lore linking to the actual models. FEC are an extreme example, but there's nothing in the model designs that speaks of their lore in the least. They don't even really have any "feasting" models or such to represent their great feasts from the lore; nor are there any signs of them giving into their delusion such as carrying ribcages as shields etc... It's a little bit like when you watch a TV series or read a book and the last page when they come to resolve it all ends with. "And then he woke up and it was all a dream." You kinda feel "cheated".
Chikout wrote: I'm not sure why everyone want Fec to be less delusional. The whole hook is that they are the exact opposite of what they imagine themselves to be. Adding parodies of knightly armour or weaponry dilutes that effect. I would like to see them lean more on the horror than the comedy.
The problem is they don't lean on either. The hook goes nowhere, because they aren't the opposite of their delusion, they're unrelated to it.
They don't sell the idea any better than the 'Freeguild' Griffon does by having 'Karl Franz' written across its chest.
They're very obviously miniatures built for a different and unrelated setting re-used without any changes.
Exactly. It would be like using the entire Cadian range unchanged and changing the fluff to have them be from a feudal world where they common guardsman is the equivalent to a Man at Arms, with Kasrkin models representing elite household knights. There is nothing visually linking models to fluff, which could have made Ghouls one of the visually coolest armies of AoS, rather than a small portion of a Vampire Counts army spammed as an entire force.
The ghoul dice are the first dice in a while I've been tempted by. Fun colors.
Haven't made up my mind about the warband yet, but it's almost within impulse price ranges and if I have nay credit at the local store from bringing in figures I'm not using I may just get them anyways.
So the FEC will be like the skaven, and can bring back dead models. Cool. Though, this will probably make most of the models nameless goons. I'm guessing hooky, bone armor, and maybe the female will be the "named ones", while arm-chewer and big bone are just "ghouls" or whatever name they'll all share
Yeah Skaven were the first comparison I thought of as well (hordes, both with a leader armed with a polearm). Perhaps they'll play like Sepulchral Guard with more speed & less resilience. I'm curious as to whether the Crakmarrow will be a wizard or not.
As with most models I don't like, they're slowly growing on me with repeated viewings. I still don't like all of them and I was hoping I'd like them way more, but I was able to come up with a few ideas on how to model them with the arch-regent, so I'll have to pick them up eventually.
Honestly, I think a better paint scheme will do them wonders. I didn't like the new aelves until I saw them with blue hair and a winter theme.
Look like Sepulchral Guard 2.0, but fast, and have auto revive.
More akin to the Eyes of the Nine, in my opinion.
Skeletons could be really quick if you built for it, but they were hampered by being such a high model count and the Warden being the central obligatory "must keeps safe" model, who really wanted to be on the frontlines instead.
Eyes of the Nine, on the flipside of things, had their freebie Horrors that functioned similarly to these.
Grymwatch look like they'll be a hell of a thing to deal with.
Feth me.. the Grymwatch speak to me .. love the irony and delusion.. and think they could fit well into the maps I have if I pass on this season's core box..
GaroRobe wrote: I wish they'd include little fluff blurbs in all of the Warband cards. The lore behind a lot of the characters tends to get overlooked.
Also, know we know the names of at least one of the goblins and one of the DoK. "Rippa Narkbad" and "Morgwaeth the bloodied."
Adeptus Doritos wrote: I'm curious to see if these games will be getting new Slaves to Darkness and Ossiarch Bonestealers or whatever
Anything can happen I suppose, but I doubt it will be in this season of releases. We’ve already seen the artwork on the cards and nothing shows S2D and OBR.
Adeptus Doritos wrote: I'm curious to see if these games will be getting new Slaves to Darkness and Ossiarch Bonestealers or whatever
Anything can happen I suppose, but I doubt it will be in this season of releases. We’ve already seen the artwork on the cards and nothing shows S2D and OBR.
Perhaps next season.
We might get an "in-between" ala Dreadfane again.
Worth mentioning though that we already got the 'new Slaves to Darkness' stuff in Nightvault with the Godsworn Hunt!
ingtaer wrote: Heard tell that Novembers White Dwarf includes a bunch of Underworlds cards, anyone know anything about this?
It comes with some cards, one of which is for Underworlds. The rest are for Aeronautica, Blood Bowl, and Titanicus. Also an art card. See Warhammr Community.
Adeptus Doritos wrote: I'm curious to see if these games will be getting new Slaves to Darkness and Ossiarch Bonestealers or whatever
Anything can happen I suppose, but I doubt it will be in this season of releases. We’ve already seen the artwork on the cards and nothing shows S2D and OBR.
Perhaps next season.
We might get an "in-between" ala Dreadfane again.
Worth mentioning though that we already got the 'new Slaves to Darkness' stuff in Nightvault with the Godsworn Hunt!
Though weren’t the Dreadfane models just ETB kits they ended up not using or something like that?
So they threw them in a little box.
I thought I read something along those lines maybe..
Adeptus Doritos wrote: I'm curious to see if these games will be getting new Slaves to Darkness and Ossiarch Bonestealers or whatever
Anything can happen I suppose, but I doubt it will be in this season of releases. We’ve already seen the artwork on the cards and nothing shows S2D and OBR.
Perhaps next season.
We might get an "in-between" ala Dreadfane again.
Worth mentioning though that we already got the 'new Slaves to Darkness' stuff in Nightvault with the Godsworn Hunt!
Though weren’t the Dreadfane models just ETB kits they ended up not using or something like that?
So they threw them in a little box.
I thought I read something along those lines maybe..
They were ETB kits they had used. They came out with AoS 2.0 and the Soul Wars starter.
Oh, even less likely for them to come between then in my opinion.
The Bone Reapers And StD will be unique sculpts like the rest of Underworlds, so will just be season 4 (or 5/6 etc etc).
I doubt there’d be two brand news, just for a mid season box.
I mean really, I don’t think there’ll be another ‘Dreadfane’ now, just these extras for it every now and then if anything.
Danny76 wrote: Oh, even less likely for them to come between then in my opinion.
The Bone Reapers And StD will be unique sculpts like the rest of Underworlds, so will just be season 4 (or 5/6 etc etc).
What we might see next season is a set of Chaos Warriors as the basis instead of the Darkoath.
And frankly? We've got better things to come for this than Ossiarch and Slave to Darkness.
I doubt there’d be two brand news, just for a mid season box.
I mean really, I don’t think there’ll be another ‘Dreadfane’ now, just these extras for it every now and then if anything.
Dreadfane came after Nightvault finished but before Beastgrave was even announced or hinted at. We knew there would be 'another season', but that was it.
Whether or not we see a similar set to Dreadfane? Don't know. I definitely wouldn't rule it out though, since there's another two Easy to Build Nighthaunt(Glaivewraith Stalkers) and Stormcast(Castigators with Gryph-Hound) sets they could repurpose for it, and that would potentially get us close to another edition's starter set which we could grow out into a season 5 post-script with some more Easy to Build stuff.
To each there own. I doubt anyone would care if you converted them to be riding squigs (or spiders) it’s not like 
. Maybe the heads are separate...
/pic1135050.jpg)
).
