Pretty much everyone would agree that more enemies would make a better box. Throw in 10 clanrats and the new Changeling as the boss and you have a pretty compelling selection of minis.
On the other hand the contents of silver tower did not transfer over to Aos very well as the monsters were all in smaller units than you would use in the game. Every mini in the new game is immediately usable in AoS with appropriate unit sizes.
I don't know what the cross section of aos players and warhammer Quest players is, but I guess it is significant.
If it's not significant I'm sure they would prefer it was. This would be the first boxed game in a while which isn't a crazy good value for money if viewew from an AOS standpoint (and I'll be honest I don't count $30-40 "single" plastics as a good deal...they're over-priced like crazy to start with.
Pretty much everyone would agree that more enemies would make a better box.
A better box for what? Using the miniatures for AoS? I guess so. But for the game? It seems it uses the main rule system of Silver Tower (including enemy actions on a random table). You don't really use a lot of miniatures at the same time in Silver Tower. I don't think it would be the same for Shadows Over Hammerhal. Depends of the scenarios, and I'm pretty sure they were designed with these specific miniatures in mind.
Yeah, it's pretty much talking about the obvious, but Game Masters will be quick to make their own scenarios with their own minions/bosses.
Throw in 10 clanrats and the new Changeling as the boss and you have a pretty compelling selection of minis.
I would rather reason in terms of themes. I don't see why the Changeling should be used (come on, he's not the only one able of disguise/plotting/planning), and skavens could easily be used as a main theme themselves. I would say 10 clanrats, 10 stormvermins, a few rat ogres and a grey seer/warlord as boss. Let's make a few scenarios and enjoy the heroes playing Vermin Tide in the catacombs.
Sarouan wrote: A better box for what? Using the miniatures for AoS? I guess so. But for the game? It seems it uses the main rule system of Silver Tower (including enemy actions on a random table). You don't really use a lot of miniatures at the same time in Silver Tower. I don't think it would be the same for Shadows Over Hammerhal. Depends of the scenarios, and I'm pretty sure they were designed with these specific miniatures in mind.
They mean more variety of miniatures, not the quantity.
Marxist artist wrote: I am not fussed about the mini's , they are decent and cheaper than separate purchases, it's the introduction of the gm that's changed it for me as I liked the dice/card controlled gm, as I only play co-op with my wife for the original st , that's personal preference though as it may suit others.
You could play as some lesser characters bound to her will. You play them but she makes all the tactical decisions while you GM.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You could also weave their deaths/betrayals into the narrative.
Sarouan wrote: A better box for what? Using the miniatures for AoS? I guess so. But for the game? It seems it uses the main rule system of Silver Tower (including enemy actions on a random table). You don't really use a lot of miniatures at the same time in Silver Tower. I don't think it would be the same for Shadows Over Hammerhal. Depends of the scenarios, and I'm pretty sure they were designed with these specific miniatures in mind.
They mean more variety of miniatures, not the quantity.
Again, I'm not sure it would be that best for the game - and the scenarios available for it. If you play a "pen and paper" RPG, most theme scenarios don't usually have a lot of wholly different enemies, because they usually have a theme to stick to and having too many different enemies would defeat the purpose of the story.
Here, we have plastic boxes with different options for the miniatures. Blood Reavers sure are quite single-minded, but I expect Acolytes having their scroll and bird option as well as their champion.
It's quite clear there is a narrative behind all those Chaos miniatures. Including others is certainly possible, but most likely left to the Gamemaster's will...and his own collection.
The thing is, that box isn't really that interesting for using miniatures for another game (they sure can, but well...it's not that interesting for the price, IMHO). I don't think it's a trouble in itself.
Hey guys,
It's designed to be played with a Games Master.
You could play without one, but one of your players will have to double up.
what do you mean by double up?
there are a few secret things the games master knows the players don't. Some occasions will call on the Games Master to make Decisions. Much of the time, the enemies activate automaticaly, like they did in Silver Tower.
Hey guys,
It's designed to be played with a Games Master.
You could play without one, but one of your players will have to double up.
what do you mean by double up?
there are a few secret things the games master knows the players don't. Some occasions will call on the Games Master to make Decisions. Much of the time, the enemies activate automaticaly, like they did in Silver Tower.
Sounds like gm'ing this game will be horridly boring
That's what I thought. It sounds like the Game Master will just replace the room cards and random events from Silver Tower's book. And being the narrator.
Keeping the random tables for enemy reactions is a bad idea for a game with a Game Master. But hey, rolling dice is fun!
Chikout wrote: Pretty much everyone would agree that more enemies would make a better box. Throw in 10 clanrats and the new Changeling as the boss and you have a pretty compelling selection of minis.
On the other hand the contents of silver tower did not transfer over to Aos very well as the monsters were all in smaller units than you would use in the game. Every mini in the new game is immediately usable in AoS with appropriate unit sizes.
I don't know what the cross section of aos players and warhammer Quest players is, but I guess it is significant.
Absolutely. If they're not ready to reveal mortal Nurgle worshipped, they could have included a sprue of plague monks, the new Slambo as a mini-boss (and awesome throwback), a demon herald of Khorne, and perhaps even the older style Changeling. Boom, double the amount of enemies, and a campaign with multiple tiers of enemy. That's what I would have done, if forced to repackage older releases.
The joy of GMing old WHQ was that while monster reactions were hardwired in the base system (which was written with the assumption that randomized dungeons with no GM was the default), the GM got to create and populate the dungeon themselves. The GM could also occasionally step in and use their judgement to play a monster contrary to the normal monster action rules, just to add a more interesting encounter.
I also enjoyed having a massive bestiary that - with the example of the expansion monster charts - let me make up my own monster encounter charts styled to the theme of a dungeon and the level of the player characters.
In short, at the point where you became GM in the original WHQ, you were also handed a big toolbox to customize the game and make it your own. The more I hear about this game, the more it sounds like the GM plays the roll of game system AI without any sort of toolbox worth mentioning.
Not for me, I guess. Looks like I'm continuing my own quest for a good, modern-rules, fantasy-setting replacement for the original Quest that scratches my particular itches.
I don't think you'll see Bretonnians back ever - they were almost a pet project of the Perry brothers (and were purchased by hungry historical fans in many cases). Games Workshop is going as far from "generic" fantasy as they can (note how over-styled all of the races/types are now compared to older Warhammer stuff). Bretonnians would be far too easy for players to substitute Fire Forge models for, etc. I just don't think the heavy-historical influenced Bretonnians fit in with GW's increasingly unique aesthetic.
I'd like to be wrong, but really there are so many alternate lines to do Bretonnians I don't think it's a big concern.
The game is backward-compatible with any heroes you have from Warhammer Quest: Silver Tower, or the Arcane or Mighty Heroes expansions for that game. All the many heroes from various races that can be unlocked with the Warhammer Quest: Silver Tower Hero Cards are also available to choose from, letting you use your favourite characters from your Warhammer Age of Sigmar armies in Warhammer Quest games.
Well, that’s the goodies.
Tomorrow, we’ll have another article looking at the villains of the new game – the insidious Chaos followers that dwell beneath the Twin-tailed City…
Ugh, need more info.. Is the leveling up just the same as Silver Tower.. That was not really interesting so Im hoping there is an added element in this expansion.
Chopxsticks wrote: Ugh, need more info.. Is the leveling up just the same as Silver Tower.. That was not really interesting so Im hoping there is an added element in this expansion.
I believe so. They still have the renown wheel thing.
Lord Kragan wrote: No, those are their dudes. You can name whatever you want. Wanna name the pirate guy Eugene Krabb? Go for it.
Whose dudes, precisely?
The online guys? The rulebook's?
Not to be sarcastic...but does it matter? The online guys, the example guys in the rule book, or the emperor of Spain. They are "their dudes". Name em whatever you like.
Pretty sure they tried to go more narrative with it and it's at least been implied that this one revolves around 5 specifically named characters, rather than the summoner and whichever 4 PCs there are.
Clockpunk wrote: Absolutely. If they're not ready to reveal mortal Nurgle worshipped, they could have included a sprue of plague monks, the new Slambo as a mini-boss (and awesome throwback), a demon herald of Khorne, and perhaps even the older style Changeling. Boom, double the amount of enemies, and a campaign with multiple tiers of enemy. That's what I would have done, if forced to repackage older releases.
Slambo is resin, so I don't think so.
Also the general theme here are the mortal worshipers, not daemons.
Now, I would like to see an expansion pack, with a Chaos Lord.
We will be intergrating this into our summer sigmar campaign. I will be playing free peoples. Are there any free peoples heroes such as bretonnia or empire? I'd like to play a knight or ranger.
Might not be up to date, but I believe the only that would really fit are a priest of sigmar (core ST), and a battlemage.
Expanding your proxy options a bit, there's a dwarf engineer, assassin of unspecified race AFAIK, and a number of stormcast that could be anyone with some decent armor, and you can push that further if the only thing you care about is not having the Chaotic trait. It's really easy to just use w/e you want with a reasonable profile. For instance, I'm using a liche priest as a necromancer, a wraith as a wight, and there's not even demon/undead/living/fantasy race traits, so there's not much that would feel wrong applying a given profile to a character that kind of fits.
Most of the Empire range was brought over into AoS as generic human forces called Freeguild. Some heroes made it into Silver Tower form but I don't think there's much for generic humans right now.
spiralingcadaver wrote: Pretty sure they tried to go more narrative with it and it's at least been implied that this one revolves around 5 specifically named characters, rather than the summoner and whichever 4 PCs there are.
So a GM who rolls on AI tables and PC's that have their names and history chosen for them?
Sounds like a blast.
And yes I know you can ignore that last part. I'm not an idiot. I just question why they did it in the first place.
Yeah, I'm super-skeptical, feels like they're falling right into early AOS prescribed fun/forced role stuff in this case. I'm not touching this one until I read at least one review by someone I trust. Fortunately, there's a reviewer who I do trust who's stated he's getting the game quickly.
Honestly I don't think anyone should buy a game this expensive without checking out a few reviews. Boardgamegeek are usually pretty good and unaffected by the bias of GW fans. They seem to be trying to tell story with this one. That could be good but it sounds like it limits replayability.
Honestly, if this game looked like it was a direct expansion/sequel/additional campaign for silver tower, even with all of my reservations about ST (it's far from perfect), my group's had enough fun that I'd have jumped right on in.
Ohhh, now that sounds pretty good. And the tiles look pretty decent. I acutally consider buying it now with models, because you never can have enough...
spiralingcadaver wrote: Pretty sure they tried to go more narrative with it and it's at least been implied that this one revolves around 5 specifically named characters, rather than the summoner and whichever 4 PCs there are.
So a GM who rolls on AI tables and PC's that have their names and history chosen for them?
Sounds like a blast.
And yes I know you can ignore that last part. I'm not an idiot. I just question why they did it in the first place.
I mean, Wizards of the Coast gives you prebuilt campaigns with characters and NPCs for D&D that you can play right out of the box too, and that seems to be a pretty popular game.
Vorian wrote: The GM can decide the monster actions too. I do admire how hard you're working to find things to complain about though!
So if I understand this correctly, the GM can auto decide the monsters' actions, or you can go random actions. Making a GM optional? Does that sound about right? Seems like they're trying to make it appealing to both camps of players.
notprop wrote: A beggar and a Sewerjack/Rat-Catcher; step 1 of the road to an AoS based edition of WHFRP is complete!
I'm intrigued but the card based skill/loot system still concerns me.
Dude after reading that small fluff extract I REALLY want an AOSrpg since I am really enjoying this blend of low and high fantasy. Plus some of the locations in the realm gate wars book would be awesome to adventure in. What's funny is the lord castellant does not like his friends home made ale.
I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?
Also means that once you've played through once, you probably know things that would make a subsequent playthrough much less fun. But I guess that was also true of Silver Tower. These boards games are meant to be played through once, and then you buy the next one.
Albino Squirrel wrote: I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?
Also means that once you've played through once, you probably know things that would make a subsequent playthrough much less fun. But I guess that was also true of Silver Tower. These boards games are meant to be played through once, and then you buy the next one.
The advantage of being a GM you can make your own small events to add into the game. Case example if someone was playing a wight king or necromancer I would make a small event in town of trying to find a way to disguise yourself or having your party members figure out a way for you to use your gold etc.
Albino Squirrel wrote: I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?
Also means that once you've played through once, you probably know things that would make a subsequent playthrough much less fun. But I guess that was also true of Silver Tower. These boards games are meant to be played through once, and then you buy the next one.
You actually can direct the minions on your own, ditching the dice rolls. That or you guys collaborate and "share" the secrets. Or you could do like, you guys get to know a part of the secrets but the other doesn't know THAT part.
Albino Squirrel wrote: I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?
Also means that once you've played through once, you probably know things that would make a subsequent playthrough much less fun. But I guess that was also true of Silver Tower. These boards games are meant to be played through once, and then you buy the next one.
It sounds like quite a step back toward OriginalQuest. The GM (certainly the ones I played with) would actively try to kill the party and ensure they befell whatever heinous traps he had laid. We played again a few months ago and my abiding memories were my character making it back to town with thousands in gold only to be killed by a runaway horse just as I had bought a new horse and the GMs near constant cackles and laughter as the party was killed in a variety of different ways. It was good fun for all.
Albino Squirrel wrote: I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?
That's kind of what GMs are like in any game. GMs are never trying to "win", they're trying to tell a story and facilitate the players' experience. Unless you're evil, I guess.
There's less space for storytelling since it's mostly written for you, but the GM can make decisions to personalize it or can even write their own changes/versions in later playthroughs.
I'm w/ Albino here, GM's in the worst possible place- it sounds like they don't have the resources to be a true adversary/competitive force, but don't have enough storytelling/flexiblity to be a GM since everything I've seen looks very structured.
I can imagine that the notion of a GM might be overwhelming to those that have never needed one, especially in a board game.
Those of us who have GM'd or played with a GM should know that nothing is ever as simple as it being written out for you. Players will always deviate from the path and a good GM will flow with it. I once GM'd a premade Pathfinder campaign that actually ended up in a different premade Pathfinder campaign as my players seemed more interested in going that direction.
I think people will find a way to play this game with or without a GM. That should not be the break point, A poorly written story and lack of options should be the break point. This sounds very much like an introductory into GM'ing.
Umm, in a GW game which from what I can tell has very limited adversaries and prefab characters and maps, with very basic action options, unless they've made a far more robust rules set than anything they've revealed and felt the need to not talk about it, I'm leaning towards this having little meaningful agency.
spiralingcadaver wrote: Umm, in a GW game which from what I can tell has very limited adversaries and prefab characters and maps, with very basic action options, unless they've made a far more robust rules set than anything they've revealed and felt the need to not talk about it, I'm leaning towards this having little meaningful agency.
People like basic.
Look at X-wing's popularity, and the advent and success of DnD next.
People who dismiss 'basic' as inferior are in my experience people I dont want to play with
I think you miss the point of a GM and story telling and that's ok, its not everyone's cup of tea.
The complexity of rules isn't what its about, and prefab is par for the course with pre-build campaigns, with a little time and a few beers you can create what ever you want, there is nothing stopping you but yourself.
This game could have very little substance, we dont know yet, but again that is the joy of GM, they can add more to the story to fill it out, it makes it more fluid and less robotic.
I see the GM as an asset, AI cards can only do so much and they do it the same every time...
Chopxsticks wrote: I think you miss the point of a GM and story telling and that's ok, its not everyone's cup of tea.
The complexity of rules isn't what its about, and prefab is par for the course with pre-build campaigns, with a little time and a few beers you can create what ever you want, there is nothing stopping you but yourself.
This game could have very little substance, we dont know yet, but again that is the joy of GM, they can add more to the story to fill it out, it makes it more fluid and less robotic.
I see the GM as an asset, AI cards can only do so much and they do it the same every time...
Chopxsticks wrote: I think you miss the point of a GM and story telling and that's ok, its not everyone's cup of tea.
The complexity of rules isn't what its about, and prefab is par for the course with pre-build campaigns, with a little time and a few beers you can create what ever you want, there is nothing stopping you but yourself.
This game could have very little substance, we dont know yet, but again that is the joy of GM, they can add more to the story to fill it out, it makes it more fluid and less robotic.
I see the GM as an asset, AI cards can only do so much and they do it the same every time...
Man, I've run like a half-dozen campaigns and probably played in twice that. I get how to GM. What I'm saying is, I don't think this is offering a substantive support for that.
I could hand you three rocks, a piece of binder paper, and a pencil and say "this is your fantasy campaign, improvisation is the joy of being a GM, and if you don't like this awesome campaign, you're just thinking too rigidly, gimme $10." And you could (assuming you're creative enough) make your own awesome campaign, but it wouldn't be because of my awesome structure.
This looks really good to me now, however I still want more info on what enemies are in the basic book.
They could always do white dwarf expansions however IMO that is not a proper expansion in any sense. Because the magazines are limited and produced for one month only. If they had the rules as a 2 dollar PDF I could download and print I would prefer that. I don't really do the digital stuff because I only have a small android phone. I always prefer to have physical rules and gaming elements instead of squinting at small text on a phone.
A small expansion with a new enemy type, one or two new tile sheets and a couple cards could go a long way. Printing stuff in WD looks half arsed to me. Then again...its better than nothing...
I could see myself playing as the GM in every round. My gaming group consists of friends who only do tabletop gaming because I hound them to play.
I do like how they took some of these rather generic sculpts, like the chaos sorcerer and at least tried to make them interesting characters. The implication that the gryph hound has to be found is cool..if it is done well. I will say I still don't care for how the Kairic Acolytes turned out, they look like a blue/bird version of the bloodreavers instead of the wiry and cunning look Blanche came up with. They could have had mutations, three arms..more wacky stuff. Could have had a guy with a claw arm that wounds heroes easily. Considering Tzeentch followers used to always be the most warped of all chaos followers I feel like the execution of the human troops GW did simply didn't work out. Tzeentch also had plenty of female followers, unlike Khorne and Nurgle. So there's another missed opportunity. Eldar have female warriors mixed into all of their units, I don't understand why there wouldn't be female acolytes in Tzeentch forces as well. Even Warhammer Online had them. I'm noticing nothing less than neglect or lack of creativity from GWs sculpting department regarding the acolytes.
spiralingcadaver wrote: I'm w/ Albino here, GM's in the worst possible place- it sounds like they don't have the resources to be a true adversary/competitive force, but don't have enough storytelling/flexiblity to be a GM since everything I've seen looks very structured.
Thank you. That is exactly what I was getting at, but you said it much better.
Then again, it seems like people still aren't getting it. It sounds like the games master isn't going to be in a competitive role in the same way as other 1 vs team games, and they also aren't going to be able to have the same storytelling role as a gm in a roleplaying game would have, since the enemies are so limited, as are the actions that can be taken by the heroes and enemies alike. It's the worst of both worlds.
And I think it's ridiculous to say "well, you can just change the game however you want then!" Okay, or I could just play a different game that's already good so I don't have to make up my own or fix this one. If you need a gamesmaster anyway, why not just play fantasy roleplay? Then your gamesmaster actually has something worthwhile to do.
Sop it sounds like I'll be playing this like I play most games with my kids. Explain the story, play along, guide the game, but still have to do all the book keeping.
Better than being a pure adversarial role I suppose.
Got a box of cheap acolytes to mutate just to keep things interesting for this.
Major thematic feedback from BGG was that they didn't want this LSD stuff. They wanted the generic fantasy of old Warhammer Quest. So, instead of another Chaos God stronghold, I guess GW's going for a more accessible generic Chaos Army.
Recycled sculpts, of course, are okay for the boardgaming audience, who didn't buy AoS figures in the first place. I'm not sure of the lack of variety, though. BGG'ers may interpret it as an unsubtle starter set that requires you to buy more expansions, although, if you have Silver Tower, you *have* an expansion.
The semi-GM I don't know about. BGG's had a long distaste of "one vs. many" games, and prefers coops, although I'm sensing that newer coop games have better AI.
Lemme dig around the BGG WQ:ST forums and see what else is there...!
OMG! Acknowledging Slaanesh exists. How un-GW of this game.
I still don't get why they're named, although it's nice to see all the extra stuff in the rulebook (like expanded rules for being Grievously Wounded, which makes sense for a longer-form game).
H.B.M.C. wrote: OMG! Acknowledging Slaanesh exists. How AOS of this game.
I still don't get why they're named, although it's nice to see all the extra stuff in the rulebook (like expanded rules for being Grievously Wounded, which makes sense for a longer-form game).
FTFY.
Because I think we've got almost as many slaaneshis featuring in these 2 years in AoS than fantasy and 40k combined in the previous decade.
H.B.M.C. wrote: OMG! Acknowledging Slaanesh exists. How AOS of this game.
I still don't get why they're named, although it's nice to see all the extra stuff in the rulebook (like expanded rules for being Grievously Wounded, which makes sense for a longer-form game).
FTFY.
Because I think we've got almost as many slaaneshis featuring in these 2 years in AoS than fantasy and 40k combined in the previous decade.
Pretty much, I do honestly think they are setting up a slaanesh release.
Lord Kragan wrote: Because I think we've got almost as many slaaneshis featuring in these 2 years in AoS than fantasy and 40k combined in the previous decade.
What are you talking about?
What does "... as many slaaneshis featuring..." even mean?
H.B.M.C. wrote: OMG! Acknowledging Slaanesh exists. How AOS of this game.
I still don't get why they're named, although it's nice to see all the extra stuff in the rulebook (like expanded rules for being Grievously Wounded, which makes sense for a longer-form game).
FTFY.
Because I think we've got almost as many slaaneshis featuring in these 2 years in AoS than fantasy and 40k combined in the previous decade.
Pretty much, I do honestly think they are setting up a slaanesh release.
Between this and the talk of a "snake bodied demon" (Fulgrim) leading Noise Marines in 40k, I would say it's safe money to assume we'll see a Slanneshi release this year. Hope they do something different from the 1k Sons and not just give them Slanngors.
H.B.M.C. wrote: OMG! Acknowledging Slaanesh exists. How AOS of this game.
I still don't get why they're named, although it's nice to see all the extra stuff in the rulebook (like expanded rules for being Grievously Wounded, which makes sense for a longer-form game).
FTFY.
Because I think we've got almost as many slaaneshis featuring in these 2 years in AoS than fantasy and 40k combined in the previous decade.
Pretty much, I do honestly think they are setting up a slaanesh release.
Between this and the talk of a "snake bodied demon" (Fulgrim) leading Noise Marines in 40k, I would say it's safe money to assume we'll see a Slanneshi release this year. Hope they do something different from the 1k Sons and not just give them Slanngors.
Well I recall on the grand alliance community there was a rumor that a cult of aelves will be joining up with slaanesh. IF the rumor is true I assume they would take the place of tzaangors for the tzeentch release.
H.B.M.C. wrote: OMG! Acknowledging Slaanesh exists. How AOS of this game.
I still don't get why they're named, although it's nice to see all the extra stuff in the rulebook (like expanded rules for being Grievously Wounded, which makes sense for a longer-form game).
FTFY.
Because I think we've got almost as many slaaneshis featuring in these 2 years in AoS than fantasy and 40k combined in the previous decade.
Pretty much, I do honestly think they are setting up a slaanesh release.
Between this and the talk of a "snake bodied demon" (Fulgrim) leading Noise Marines in 40k, I would say it's safe money to assume we'll see a Slanneshi release this year. Hope they do something different from the 1k Sons and not just give them Slanngors.
Well I recall on the grand alliance community there was a rumor that a cult of aelves will be joining up with slaanesh. IF the rumor is true I assume they would take the place of tzaangors for the tzeentch release.
A nice homage to the cult of pleasure? I would approve. My only concern is a "need" for a 40k crossover unit. If they don't make any crossover units, I don't mind.
I get that GW have for a long time wanted to make sure that they don't homogenise the Warhammer and 40K, in the same way they want each Marine Chapter to be different and not just a different paint job ('cept for Chaos, obviously! )... but when it comes to Chaos I think that they should do it as much as possible.
Think of how much better it'd be if Tzeentch 40K armies could get the other Tzaangor units? If Blight Knights were a thing Chaos Nurgle 40K could get as sort of 'super mutants'?
H.B.M.C. wrote: I get that GW have for a long time wanted to make sure that they don't homogenise the Warhammer and 40K, in the same way they want each Marine Chapter to be different and not just a different paint job ('cept for Chaos, obviously! )... but when it comes to Chaos I think that they should do it as much as possible.
Think of how much better it'd be if Tzeentch 40K armies could get the other Tzaangor units? If Blight Knights were a thing Chaos Nurgle 40K could get as sort of 'super mutants'?[/quote
]
This is exactly what I am doing now
Tzaangor Enlightened make great screamers/flamers
Blight kings make great beasts of nurgle
Etc....
Yeah, but I didn't mean as proxy/counts as miniatures. I mean as actually having rules in the game. It's nice that 1KSons can get Tzaangors, but why not Tzaangor Skyfyryz and Enlightened?
Major thematic feedback from BGG was that they didn't want this LSD stuff. They wanted the generic fantasy of old Warhammer Quest. So, instead of another Chaos God stronghold, I guess GW's going for a more accessible generic Chaos Army.
Recycled sculpts, of course, are okay for the boardgaming audience, who didn't buy AoS figures in the first place. I'm not sure of the lack of variety, though. BGG'ers may interpret it as an unsubtle starter set that requires you to buy more expansions, although, if you have Silver Tower, you *have* an expansion.
The semi-GM I don't know about. BGG's had a long distaste of "one vs. many" games, and prefers coops, although I'm sensing that newer coop games have better AI.
Lemme dig around the BGG WQ:ST forums and see what else is there...!
Maybe they were listening over on EnWorld and RPG.net as well!
Yeah I'm guessing is is a response to the community response and feedback to Silver Tower. They saw it was popular, realised they could put together another one pretty quickly if they bundled existing minis, and James Hewitt along with any other working on this project got the permission to go hogwild with the written material as long as they kept it reasonably accessible and thematic, while also sticking to what I'm guessing was a tight deadline. So they, as lovers of Mordheim and original WHQ just like us, saw the opportunity to set the game in one of the cities created for the summer campaign last year, flesh it out and give it that grimdark character people love, while also re-introducing much loved features from the old games like visits to shops and taverns, a more involved dungeon delving system. etc. Really looking forward to this.
Lord Kragan wrote: Because I think we've got almost as many slaaneshis featuring in these 2 years in AoS than fantasy and 40k combined in the previous decade.
What are you talking about?
What does "... as many slaaneshis featuring..." even mean?
He means the stories and lore featuring them. There's alot of it.
I personally don't think we'll see Slaanesh for AoS until next year but who knows?
Lord Kragan wrote: Because I think we've got almost as many slaaneshis featuring in these 2 years in AoS than fantasy and 40k combined in the previous decade.
What are you talking about?
What does "... as many slaaneshis featuring..." even mean?
He means the stories and lore featuring them. There's alot of it.
I personally don't think we'll see Slaanesh for AoS until next year but who knows?
Nah I disagree I think slaanesh is going to be early to mid summer then late summer and after that I think it's highly likely GW is going to focus on 8th edition 40k. Now death? I think is late this year or the next.
All I need is a random map generator, and random enemy generator and I don't need a GM! Want nothing but co-op cause will be only 2 people playing. Having the behaviour charts is encouraging though.
Turns out I was right. The verbose and space-consuming AoS-style profiles just eat into available page space, leaving no room to include a proper bestiary, just a few extra things if you own them (and Wrathmongers of all things? Can't just put regular Chaos Warriors in?).
H.B.M.C. wrote: Turns out I was right. The verbose and space-consuming AoS-style profiles just eat into available page space, leaving no room to include a proper bestiary, just a few extra things if you own them (and Wrathmongers of all things? Can't just put regular Chaos Warriors in?).
I'm expecting a separate Bestiary Book and App thing to be honest.
Short version... Awesome, frankly. If you liked either the original WQ or Silver Tower, this is the game you have been waiting for...
As an owner of HeroQuest and it's expansions, 1995 Warhammer Quest, and Silver Tower I can say that this appears to be what I had hope Silver Tower was going to be. Very happy I ordered this.
Still quite conflicted on this. I'll probably get it in the end.
Wish it was pure co-op. Then again if I'm playing with the kids I'm already pseudo- GM'ing anyways, so it isn't a huge stretch.
The monster choices are interesting. Why are there profiles for WrathMongers but not Skull Reapers? Odd.
Does make me wish that we see a bestiary book or set of cards to expand our adversaries even more.
I do like the fact that the encounters can be filled with just one box/ unit of said adversaries. I may end up getting some Plaguebearers now, just because.
That paint job they gave it certainly had no bearing on me, no siree.
Yeah, the breadth mentioned is nice, but if I really want to GM my own new content, I'll play an RPG.
The levels look nicely fleshed out, but "you can make complex levels, too!" isn't that much of a selling point to me. Don't have the energy to put that much thought into my light-weight game. This is what my group's been playing when everyone wants to play something but doesn't want to commit to a serious experience.
Albino Squirrel wrote: The review definitely convinced me not to get it. Clearly you can't get around needing a GM, so this isn't at all what I want in a Warhammer Quest.
That's what I thought, shame really , as does look good but i want pure co-op , if they could update via white dwarf so no gm needed I would change my mind.
My other issue is I own all but 3 of the models, so no real incentive, not that I am blaming gw for model choice just bad luck on my part
Please post your review on BGG. I linked it on a thread, but you should get the full credit.
eBay occasionally has flash sales, and you can setup Slickdeals.com alerts to them. I've used eBay to buy miniatures games, and, unlike the OLGS, sellers do post pics and descriptions of what GW products they're selling.
Clanan wrote: Great review, Matt. It moved me from "No thanks" to on the fence. I like the RP focus with a lightweight GM but I wish it had different models.
There is most certainly more to the 'monsters'.
One of the Gamemaster’s chief jobs is to control the adversaries during the game. This is done with a behaviour chart, as with Warhammer Quest: Silver Tower, but for narrative or malicious reasons (depending on temperament) the Gamemaster can choose to override the chart if they feel inclined. They also have the ability to use models to call for reinforcements and are responsible for placing these new adversaries when they appear. They also get their pick of exotic adversaries, when that is called for (more on that tomorrow).
The Gamemaster’s other main role is to guide the heroes through the district of Cinderfall in the city of Hammerhal above. In doing so, they variously play the role of merchant, pit fighter, priest, fortune teller, drunkard and many more*.
I'm surprised for the amount of people that now are less interesed in the game because the GM. I'm actually surprised, I guess they are part from a younger part of the community.
I think some people will still manage to play this without a GM. It was easier to make a GM for ST, but I'm sure this time around it shouldn't be (much) harder to do.
Now, what's weird for me is that you will be able to play Necromancers and Greenskinz heroes here. Seriously why?
I could understand that some Chaos heroes are here because they want something, but how the other two factions can be played here if this games takes place at the depths of an Order bastion?
I also want more enemy variety. The added rules can mean that we will see an expansion pack with enemies later on (5 Wrathmongers, 3 Skyfires, 10 Plaguebearers and hopefully a Chaos Lord).
While ST didn't got an expansion pack for the additional enemies included on the rulebook (although we've got a DoTSC! last month), the four additional heroes were packeted together on the same bundle later, so there is a chance.
People don't want GM's because the market's already bloated with 1-vs-many games, not to mention true RPGs, and ST was full co-op so it seems only reasonable that this one was, too. Not everyone who disagrees is an uncultured young'n.
I don't know why you're surprised. Not only has "But can you play it co-op?" been the number one question asked since any details about the game have come out, but it was one of the major selling points for the last three dungeon crawlers put out by Games Workshop.
Personally I wouldn't consider myself from the younger part of the community. I've DMed more than my fair share of DnD, Star Wars, Shaodwrun, Gurps, and even Dark Heresy campaigns. The thing is when this kind of game comes out it generally falls to one person to play the GM, and that's me. I'm pretty much sick of it at this point, I'd much rather be having the fun of fighting monsters and leveling up my character than pretending to try and beat the players in order to 'facilitate them having a good time'. Quite frankly I think it's poor game design forcing one player to sacrifice their fun for the good of the group. I understand that there are some people who may enjoy taking on that GM role despite the lack of freedom afforded by something more open (like DnD), but it's not the automatic default state for all gamers over a certain age.
Besides, it also means the game isn't soloable, which is a shame considering they finally decided to give us some character progression mechanics.
Edit: I take that back, just read through that review and the character progression mechanics still look garbage. Throwing in a couple of pages of 'activities' to do between adventures does not make a campaign system.
Dunno if it's just me, but as a parent with easily distracted kids, I end up becoming a semi- GM whenever I can convince them to play as it is, because otherwise I'm at the table alone if I can't hook them in.
With that said, this new game isn't a huge stretch for me in regards to its new GM rules. Would I rather it have the same rules system as Silver Tower? Absolutely. I hate always being the one to run the games (as I'm the one who usually purchases them) and never get to partake in the action unless it's a co-op.
Heck, GW could have asked the community prior to committing to this game and I'm sure they'd get a lot of responses arguing in favor of keeping the pure co-op with all the bells and whistles that the Adventure book/ a GM would have provided.
I am encouraged by GWs efforts at making actual games rather than just glorified miniature packs. The boxed games from GW are essentially the only AoS product I've even bothered to look into.
That said, I am rather confused by this and silver tower. I was expecting a high quality dungeon crawler, and in particular with this latest one a real campaign and character progression system. I've been playing frostgrave, mansions of madness 2ed, and descent 2ed (co-op using the app FTW!), so that's what these GW games are up against for my time and money. I just don't see anything compelling about this or silver tower to make me switch. I really don't like the aesthetics of AoS (the miniatures mostly), but I'd be willing to try it if the gameplay, particularly the campaign mechanics and story, were top notch and better than these other games.
It seems like the campaign stuff is still very much an afterthought, someone with the box correct me if I'm wrong on that.
I'm surprised for the amount of people that now are less interesed in the game because the GM. I'm actually surprised, I guess they are part from a younger part of the community.
I think some people will still manage to play this without a GM. It was easier to make a GM for ST, but I'm sure this time around it shouldn't be (much) harder to do.
Now, what's weird for me is that you will be able to play Necromancers and Greenskinz heroes here. Seriously why?
I could understand that some Chaos heroes are here because they want something, but how the other two factions can be played here if this games takes place at the depths of an Order bastion?
I also want more enemy variety. The added rules can mean that we will see an expansion pack with enemies later on (5 Wrathmongers, 3 Skyfires, 10 Plaguebearers and hopefully a Chaos Lord).
While ST didn't got an expansion pack for the additional enemies included on the rulebook (although we've got a DoTSC! last month), the four additional heroes were packeted together on the same bundle later, so there is a chance.
I have been gaming for 23 years so not new or youngish!
Rules might well be adaptable for no gm
Your right about orks sneaking about as heroes don't see the citizens being happy to see them
I am not against the gm in the sense I am glad it makes some people happy, it's just for me personally I liked the pure co-op and wished they had included a deck of random room cards and maybe a adventure book to accommodate co-op as well, but I am not selfish enough to believe every game should be tailored to me.
Now, what's weird for me is that you will be able to play Necromancers and Greenskinz heroes here. Seriously why?
Well necromancers and undead are easy as you can put their background as spies for Nagash who could've infiltrated the city as regular wizards and called upon his help when chaos arrived (and thus turned undead or summoned the heroes).
Greenskins are a bit tougher and could be simply added as part of a traveling warband looking for a fight and heard all the fun screaming and fighting sounds from the city and decided to drop by.
Though a fun narrative would be captives in a Corsair's slave ship/exotic goods ship that busted out. Orruk mercenaries could work too.
CMLR wrote: I'm surprised for the amount of people that now are less interesed in the game because the GM. I'm actually surprised, I guess they are part from a younger part of the community.
I think some people will still manage to play this without a GM. It was easier to make a GM for ST, but I'm sure this time around it shouldn't be (much) harder to do.
I have to agree. A few times, both with original Quest and Silver Tower, I've played the role of the GM, which basically amounted to being the one controlling the monsters (rolling, moving, keeping track of wounds), and doing all the 'game' stuff (keeping track of renown, handing out cards, reading out events, exploration decks, getting the tiles, etc.).
I've done that more than actually playing as a hero in recent times. Now there's a codified set of GM rules. I don't see how that's a bad thing.
CMLR wrote: Now, what's weird for me is that you will be able to play Necromancers and Greenskinz heroes here. Seriously why?
Better yet, you can play as a Chaos Sorcerer going to fight another Chaos Sorcerer, who uses the same miniature.
"If I kill my inferior brother and ruin this invasion of theirs then surely the dark gods will praise my power and put me in charge! It won't be easy for one even as great as I, I'll need peons to die for my superior self..."
I'm selling the miniatures and gonna convert the game into a coop game like Silver Tower. And turning all enemy's into either solo nurgle or solo undead.
spiralingcadaver wrote: People don't want GM's because the market's already bloated with 1-vs-many games, not to mention true RPGs, and ST was full co-op so it seems only reasonable that this one was, too. Not everyone who disagrees is an uncultured young'n.
I never called anyone uncultured.
I've seen far more "veterans" looking for regular RPGs while I've seen more younger players looking for co-ops. Both in forums and irl.
Zethnar wrote: I don't know why you're surprised. Not only has "But can you play it co-op?" been the number one question asked since any details about the game have come out, but it was one of the major selling points for the last three dungeon crawlers put out by Games Workshop.
Personally I wouldn't consider myself from the younger part of the community. I've DMed more than my fair share of DnD, Star Wars, Shaodwrun, Gurps, and even Dark Heresy campaigns. The thing is when this kind of game comes out it generally falls to one person to play the GM, and that's me. I'm pretty much sick of it at this point, I'd much rather be having the fun of fighting monsters and leveling up my character than pretending to try and beat the players in order to 'facilitate them having a good time'. Quite frankly I think it's poor game design forcing one player to sacrifice their fun for the good of the group. I understand that there are some people who may enjoy taking on that GM role despite the lack of freedom afforded by something more open (like DnD), but it's not the automatic default state for all gamers over a certain age.
Yes, but if you have seen far more people asking for a GM on Silver Tower, is natural to expect that that question would be the number one; because there are lots of people actively asking for a GM.
I do get the point of getting tired to play as a GM, but there is still people who rotate themselves to play the role or just don't really mind.
highlord tamburlaine wrote: Dunno if it's just me, but as a parent with easily distracted kids, I end up becoming a semi- GM whenever I can convince them to play as it is, because otherwise I'm at the table alone if I can't hook them in.
With that said, this new game isn't a huge stretch for me in regards to its new GM rules. Would I rather it have the same rules system as Silver Tower? Absolutely. I hate always being the one to run the games (as I'm the one who usually purchases them) and never get to partake in the action unless it's a co-op.
Heck, GW could have asked the community prior to committing to this game and I'm sure they'd get a lot of responses arguing in favor of keeping the pure co-op with all the bells and whistles that the Adventure book/ a GM would have provided.
Well, you could always try to invite some fellas to a poker, I mean, RPG night.
Your right about orks sneaking about as heroes don't see the citizens being happy to see them
I am not against the gm in the sense I am glad it makes some people happy, it's just for me personally I liked the pure co-op and wished they had included a deck of random room cards and maybe a adventure book to accommodate co-op as well, but I am not selfish enough to believe every game should be tailored to me.
Your right on enemy packs they would be great
Still, I've seen a notable inclination from veterans towards regular RPGs, and an inclination towards from younger players towards co-ops.
(Just a little nitpicking here: it's you're, not your. Sorry! )
Baron Klatz wrote: Well necromancers and undead are easy as you can put their background as spies for Nagash who could've infiltrated the city as regular wizards and called upon his help when chaos arrived (and thus turned undead or summoned the heroes).
Greenskins are a bit tougher and could be simply added as part of a traveling warband looking for a fight and heard all the fun screaming and fighting sounds from the city and decided to drop by.
Though a fun narrative would be captives in a Corsair's slave ship/exotic goods ship that busted out. Orruk mercenaries could work too.
I really liked your ideas here.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Better yet, you can play as a Chaos Sorcerer going to fight another Chaos Sorcerer, who uses the same miniature.
That's not crazy at all; you can play as another Slaaneshi CSL to try to get the "party" of a lifetime for you alone.
I don't play AoS, so I wouldnt know, but do the stat lines used on the monsters in Silver Tower line up with the ones in AoS?
If so, then converting any of the monsters/baddies, from warscrolls and the like, should be fairly simple, and it might be fun to write up some behavior tables for them to behave 'in character' with the lore behind them...shambling zombies moaning 'braaiiiins', squigs hopping around randomly, night gobbos running away and taunting the heroes from afar, etc...
That's odd, I saw the circle(pie?) with the three stats as profiles in both games at a glance...so the actual stat names and/or numbers are different between the two games? Is there a pattern to the differences? Maybe we can figure out the conversion formula?
I looked at it superficially, comparing them to their stats with when they released the ST ones for AOS, and it didn't look like anything past using a similar flow. For instance, some models with the same defensive stats in AOS had radically different ones in ST.
I kind of wish they had included rules for daemonettes, bloodletters and nurglings at the very least. If the sorcerer is trying to revive Slaanesh you'd think he'd be able to at least enlist the aid of the daemonettes. But rules for those wouldn't be hard to add via white dwarf. I don't mind the game being set against chaos as the main villain. But I think skaven could still fit in without much trouble. Overall this looks like an exciting game. I might have to trade/sell off some of my other unassembled piles of stuff for it.
Hopefully people add some video playthroughs and tutorials on youtube or something. Seeing the game actually play out would be pretty cool.
Neither rumour, nor a promise. But....asked on the Age of Sigmar FB group regarding a Bestiary so we can populate Dungeons of our own design with Gribblies of our own choosing.
I'm told it's a great idea, and they'll pass it onto the Studio.
Would love for it to happen - and whilst I'm enthused at their response, I'm still not holding my breath,
The potential for cheap-to-produce, book-only supplements is immense. Package each HB tome with a sheet of new board sections. Include a brief new campaign and adversary stats for a faction. Print money...
JohnnyHell wrote: For people who aren't fully-versed in the lore, that's no bad thing. Fluff and crunch, one baddie a page, lots of pages. What's not to love?
Have you seen the adversary pages? It's not a whole page of "[f]luff and crunch". It's mostly formatting and wasted space, with giant chunks of white space between the unit rules and the AI table.
JohnnyHell wrote: For people who aren't fully-versed in the lore, that's no bad thing. Fluff and crunch, one baddie a page, lots of pages. What's not to love?
Have you seen the adversary pages? It's not a whole page of "[f]luff and crunch". It's mostly formatting and wasted space, with giant chunks of white space between the unit rules and the AI table.
Yeah... GW ain't thinking of your budget. Just found out today that they're selling digital packs of ST skill/treasure cards at £3/9 cards. That's .33 per rule.
Pretty sure they could fit two to a page without much squeezing. Precede each section with some pages of fluff for each section - so for Flesh Eater Courts, stuff about them etc.
Treat the Bestiary in much the same way as the Grand Alliance books, using expansion sets as new stuff gets added.
And because Silver Tower introduced so many characters, the Bestiary can include 'goodies' as dungeon denizens as well.
Joyboozer wrote: They hadn't considered a bestiary until it was suggested?
Just what the feth is going on at GW? Have they trademarked tunnaelvision?
You do realize, that the team for social media and the design team are different?
And how is it bad that they are taking on good input idea? This is exactly the opposite of tunnel vision.
The design team is the one that missed something completely obvious. The marketing team is the one surprised things sell well. The social media team is the part listened to at the end instead of the start. Sound correct?
Joyboozer wrote: They hadn't considered a bestiary until it was suggested?
Just what the feth is going on at GW? Have they trademarked tunnaelvision?
You do realize, that the team for social media and the design team are different?
And how is it bad that they are taking on good input idea? This is exactly the opposite of tunnel vision.
The design team is the one that missed something completely obvious. The marketing team is the one surprised things sell well. The social media team is the part listened to at the end instead of the start. Sound correct?
Not really.
Last time Silver tower was released, lots of people were appreciative yet hopeful that a true successor to the original Warhammer Quest would be released.
Before then? Nothing - hardly naught but the scattered whispers of that age old game in the wind. The community didn't ask for it because they thought they would be ignored. GW didn't make it because they thought no one would want it.
Sometimes, in order to read the waves you have to enter the water.
And in any case, look at the track record for this line.
Silver Tower was released, to some hefty applaud.
People asked GW directly for physical cards, rather than an app.
Gw releases physical Cards.
People asked for a Warhammer Quest dungeon diver.
GW releases a Warhammer Quest Dungeon Diver.
They are 2 for 2 with just this line alone, and while HMBC will gladly attest to, it may not be perfect....
But they are listening. Don't expect miracles over night. I personally think Hammerhal has potential, and will sell better in the future (as it is built upon by both the community and GW.)
Hammerhal feels much more like a Questing starting point compared to the more heavily themed Silver Tower, and whilst I've not managed to get a game in yet (herding nerds is well known to be akin to herding cats), the response I've seen online seems to favour Hammerhal over Silver Tower.
Now, I'd be happy with simple expansion sets to be added to Hammerhal, or even miniatureless dungeon floor plan expansions (look at the BB pitches they've done!) so we can expand and vary what our dungeons look like - and whilst there are alternatives out there, I can't see GW turning their nose up at yet another few quid out my wallet.
But if they offered a new Hammerhal type affair every year instead? I guess I could be persuaded to invest.
The Bestiary is a must for me though - and a bit of a money spinner for GW. Book is cheap enough to produce, and it opens up their entire Fantasy range to Dungeoneers.
Get it right*, and they can return Quest to it's right place as the greatest dungeoneering game evar in the history of ever
*Yeah, there's the rub. Did you spot it? Have a cookie!)
Honestly to get me interested in playing WHQ long term, rather than add a bestiary, sidequests etc, they would need to fix the fundamental issues: character progression and combat. It's a great game but there is not enough character progression and combat is too simple to hold up in the long run. Works well enough as a stand-alone board game but not as a platform.
To get me playing long term they'd need to prove they understand why these game were popular in the first place.
If they can recreate all that great stuff and improve on it, everything will be a winner. But, if the design philosophy is anything will sell well because nostalgia, there's not much hope.
A bestiary is a major part of the dungeon bashing experience, I'd find it strange that anyone who grew up playing them would miss. So either it's deliberate DLC, or it's just slap Warhammer Quest on it and hope for the best.
Indeed, their Facebook is more than just a place to read funny posts you know.
I wonder if the other two cities will get this treatment at some point?
Greywater would be great for a Skaven attack seeking more tech while hostile bands of Grots and Sylvaneth add another element of danger to those who journey outside the city and Phoenicium could be a Free-for-all to combine with the other sets as your heroes explore the ancient underground ruins for rare artifacts while running into any manner of enemy who sneaked down their, summoned by the artifacts or released from their amber prisons. (A book detailing rules and fluff for every foe you could randomly meet in the catacombs would sure come in handy...)
Baron Klatz wrote: Indeed, their Facebook is more than just a place to read funny posts you know.
I wonder if the other two cities will get this treatment at some point?
Greywater would be great for a Skaven attack seeking more tech while hostile bands of Grots and Sylvaneth add another element of danger to those who journey outside the city and Phoenicium could be a Free-for-all to combine with the other sets as your heroes explore the ancient underground ruins for rare artifacts while running into any manner of enemy who sneaked down their, summoned by the artifacts or released from their amber prisons. (A book detailing rules and fluff for every foe you could randomly meet in the catacombs would sure come in handy...)
The possibilities are endless for quests in AoS!
Well going by the tzeentch battle tome the Phoenicium is suffering from a tzeentch cultist problem.
At the moment, we don't really know how a suggestion becomes a product in GW Towers.
It could be that RPG book, Bestiary and all the lovely things we crave have been suggested, but financially they're unsure. The more people ask for them, the less likely we are to go without (careful wording there is careful!)
Hit them up on FB. Shoot them an email. Bring it up at Seminars. Carve it onto a messenger pigeon and hope it doesn't bleed out before delivering. Talk to them.
I know many remain cynical, and perhaps not unfairly so - but at least earn your current cynicism by not having your upfront, to GW, not on a forum requests
Have loved the two Warhammer Quest releases, and I'm really hoping that there's a Space Crusade style board game set in the Age of the Emperor (or whatever the AoS style 40k will be) universe after that drops.
judgedoug wrote: Have loved the two Warhammer Quest releases, and I'm really hoping that there's a Space Crusade style board game set in the Age of the Emperor (or whatever the AoS style 40k will be) universe after that drops.
I wouldn't mind a Rogue Trader (characters, not era) themed Spacehulk Spelunking type affair. That's the closest I can think of.
Would also make for a superb Dark Heresy style game.
Oh, it's definitely nice for design and anything like marketing, but if you're presenting information (where the audience is already invested in consuming that information), I think it's far less valuable. Which isn't to say it's irrelevant, but logical flow and emphasis are at least as valuable. I think GW did a pretty terrible job of that in ST, though-- I miss rules so often because they thought it was a good idea to stick two disparate ideas under the same heading.
spiralingcadaver wrote: Oh, it's definitely nice for design and anything like marketing, but if you're presenting information (where the audience is already invested in consuming that information), I think it's far less valuable. Which isn't to say it's irrelevant, but logical flow and emphasis are at least as valuable. I think GW did a pretty terrible job of that in ST, though-- I miss rules so often because they thought it was a good idea to stick two disparate ideas under the same heading.
Whitespace is important any time you're laying out information on a page - not just marketing. I'm not saying the rules are perfectly presented in Shadows Over Hammerhal, but there's very legitimate reasons to use whitespace in all written medium (what is appropriate and useful depends on the use you're making of it).
Interesting articles, and I can certainly see the importance of it in presentation, advertising and marketing. Even from a reading comprehension perspective not cluttering a page with a wall'o'text is usually a good idea.
However I refer to this, this and this. It's too much. It's a single unit entry, plus a bunch of needless white space.
This is why the bestiary section, such as it is, for this book takes up 9 pages... yet only gives us 9 adversaries.
It is better than a wall of text, but I will say there is too much space between the behavior table and the unit rules above.
I hope some folks put some playthroughts up on youtube, i'd like to see the game in action. Plus it looks like these adversaries are going to be a bit tougher than the pushovers in ST. With the blightkings being a near match for an opposing player and the wrathmongers looking like a terror, it'll be interesting.
It's not even just the space between the rules and the table. It's the whole layout. It's a graphic designer's fever dream, with different font sizes, embedded artwork, text overlays, text at different angles, and then scattered rules beneath it. Then the behaviour table.
The only cohesive thing about is that every single unit entry is this bad.
AoS is infested with this stuff, and they have the added awfulness of those half fluff/half-kinda rule paragraphs that somehow attempt to combine unit size, unit leadership and equipment into an 'evocative' paragraph. It's a bad way to write rules and it's an even worse way to present rules.
They're actually succeeded in making things more cluttered. Who knew that when the most recent Ork Codex came out it would start a wave of terribly presented out rulebooks.
Well... I did. I said as much at the time, that removing fluff and going to a simple paragraph of flavour text, a massive photo, and a haphazard set of rules was going to end up looking awful. AoS just magnified it and now nuQuest is suffering from that.
Thargrim wrote: With the blightkings being a near match for an opposing player and the wrathmongers looking like a terror, it'll be interesting.
Nice as that may be, there is a pretty big downside to the Wrathmongers being an adversary type in this game: You have to buy Wrathmongers.
Dumbest Khorne release in a decade. Those derpy hammer flails are just the worst. Give me the brutal looking Blood Warriors any day.
Man, it's like you have some sort of issue with illegible rules. Slowing everything down and making scanning a pain in the ass by incorporating fluff and rules just makes the game more immersive.
Heh, I like the Wrath Monger kit. I like the alternate builds for them a lot more though. I found it odd that they didn't include rules for Skull Reapers as well.
That kit and the Blight Kings are tied for some of my favorites just in terms of how much extra bits they came with. Perfect for conversions!
The bulk of my Bloodbound have all been rearmed with leftovers from the Wrath Monger kits, and I'd do the same with my Acolytes if we ever see a Tzeentchian equivalent!
timetowaste85 wrote: Bought my copy, Dark Elf is miscast. Part of his animal jaw bone neckpiece is non-existent. Time to phone up GW.
That's odd, usually GW plastics don't have any significant miscasts. Sometimes you'll get more flash than usual but to have a part absent is odd. The molds for some of these models may be starting to age though...but that's a wild guess.
As a random thought, I wonder if you'll be able to get the Lord Celestant on Ebay cheaper than the clampack model, much like the Questor from Silver Tower?
It's a lot of fighting acolytes is that the same in the game?
My copy of soh has not arrived yet
I believe the first dungeon is entirely vs acolytes, based on what I heard some dungeons are themed around a particular chaos god or something. Fighting acolytes for the first dungeon might not be a bad idea, while players get their grip on the game. I assume the blightkings and other foes are a lot harder to defeat. Correct me if i'm wrong but I don't think exotic adversaries will pop up too commonly either. They look particularly challenging, but it may not be worth it to collect every single kind because you might not use them too often. I plan on getting plaguebearers in particular, since I can't justify buying all of em. I don't like blowing all my money in one spot especially with GW releasing odd stuff left and right, only reason I haven't got Shadows over Hammerhal yet is cause I spent all my free cash on Blood Bowl.
It's a lot of fighting acolytes is that the same in the game?
My copy of soh has not arrived yet
I believe the first dungeon is entirely vs acolytes, based on what I heard some dungeons are themed around a particular chaos god or something. Fighting acolytes for the first dungeon might not be a bad idea, while players get their grip on the game. I assume the blightkings and other foes are a lot harder to defeat. Correct me if i'm wrong but I don't think exotic adversaries will pop up too commonly either. They look particularly challenging, but it may not be worth it to collect every single kind because you might not use them too often. I plan on getting plaguebearers in particular, since I can't justify buying all of em. I don't like blowing all my money in one spot especially with GW releasing odd stuff left and right, only reason I haven't got Shadows over Hammerhal yet is cause I spent all my free cash on Blood Bowl.
Thanks for response, I bought just the box contents minus miniatures of ebay as have all the models bar the stormcast already, or at least good proxy's for them.
I hope all the quests get co-op cards from the community and applaud the effort so far. Haven't even got bloodbowl yet!
It's a lot of fighting acolytes is that the same in the game?
My copy of soh has not arrived yet
I believe the first dungeon is entirely vs acolytes, based on what I heard some dungeons are themed around a particular chaos god or something. Fighting acolytes for the first dungeon might not be a bad idea, while players get their grip on the game. I assume the blightkings and other foes are a lot harder to defeat. Correct me if i'm wrong but I don't think exotic adversaries will pop up too commonly either. They look particularly challenging, but it may not be worth it to collect every single kind because you might not use them too often. I plan on getting plaguebearers in particular, since I can't justify buying all of em. I don't like blowing all my money in one spot especially with GW releasing odd stuff left and right, only reason I haven't got Shadows over Hammerhal yet is cause I spent all my free cash on Blood Bowl.
I already have a solid Bloodbound force, so won't have any problems fielding the Blood Warriors or Wrathmongers. I'll eventually work on my Tzeentch force and have some Tzaangors to field, and one day, I'll start Nurgle. This really seems like the type of game where GW could make rules for any model in from the tabletop to be used. I'm really excited to see where this goes!
BTW when all dungeons are completed there will be a dungeon reference on the backside of the cards and all room descriptions and secrets will be combined in one long list.
Hi man! First of all a big thank you for your work!I should have the game in april and my biggest complain Was about Who could play like GM.. Now I would understand if Will use your full coop solutions.. Will lose a lot of original experience? And eventually in what Way? Less "surprise" effect? Less narrative? Cut of some parts like GM's questions or minigame?
At the end.. If I Will print them how could avoid to spoiler me some contents reading them accodentally? Some suggests? Thanks!
Anyone know if any company - Battle Foam, Feldherr, etc - are going to be making foam trays for the game? I have Battle Foam's sets for Silver Tower and Deathwatch Overkill and Gorechosen, so I'd very much like a foam set for this too.
judgedoug wrote: Anyone know if any company - Battle Foam, Feldherr, etc - are going to be making foam trays for the game? I have Battle Foam's sets for Silver Tower and Deathwatch Overkill and Gorechosen, so I'd very much like a foam set for this too.
I'm sure they will eventually. The game seems to be a big seller, so Battle Foam will want to get in on it. I'm checking the site once a week, but no luck so far. Still have some time before I get around to assembling/painting SoH, but I'm hoping to have a case for it all before then.
Mhygor wrote: Hi man! First of all a big thank you for your work!I should have the game in april and my biggest complain Was about Who could play like GM.. Now I would understand if Will use your full coop solutions.. Will lose a lot of original experience? And eventually in what Way? Less "surprise" effect? Less narrative? Cut of some parts like GM's questions or minigame?
At the end.. If I Will print them how could avoid to spoiler me some contents reading them accodentally? Some suggests? Thanks!
I kept all suprise effects in. You print the secret guide and all suprises are in there and first start cutting and glue the secret cards. After that do all normal cards.
Mhygor wrote: Hi man! First of all a big thank you for your work!I should have the game in april and my biggest complain Was about Who could play like GM.. Now I would understand if Will use your full coop solutions.. Will lose a lot of original experience? And eventually in what Way? Less "surprise" effect? Less narrative? Cut of some parts like GM's questions or minigame?
At the end.. If I Will print them how could avoid to spoiler me some contents reading them accodentally? Some suggests? Thanks!
I kept all suprise effects in. You print the secret guide and all suprises are in there and first start cutting and glue the secret cards. After that do all normal cards.
And the gameplay is the same? For example the Group is still able. To search?.. Another question because Its not clear to me.. But the dungeon Will be totally randomized every time.. Or Just follow the original quest map scheme?
Mhygor wrote: Hi man! First of all a big thank you for your work!I should have the game in april and my biggest complain Was about Who could play like GM.. Now I would understand if Will use your full coop solutions.. Will lose a lot of original experience? And eventually in what Way? Less "surprise" effect? Less narrative? Cut of some parts like GM's questions or minigame?
At the end.. If I Will print them how could avoid to spoiler me some contents reading them accodentally? Some suggests? Thanks!
I kept all suprise effects in. You print the secret guide and all suprises are in there and first start cutting and glue the secret cards. After that do all normal cards.
And the gameplay is the same? For example the Group is still able. To search?.. Another question because Its not clear to me.. But the dungeon Will be totally randomized every time.. Or Just follow the original quest map scheme?
The gamesplay is the same. You can search with the same outcome as in the original story. It's also follow's the original quest map.
Mhygor wrote: Hi man! First of all a big thank you for your work!I should have the game in april and my biggest complain Was about Who could play like GM.. Now I would understand if Will use your full coop solutions.. Will lose a lot of original experience? And eventually in what Way? Less "surprise" effect? Less narrative? Cut of some parts like GM's questions or minigame?
At the end.. If I Will print them how could avoid to spoiler me some contents reading them accodentally? Some suggests? Thanks!
I kept all suprise effects in. You print the secret guide and all suprises are in there and first start cutting and glue the secret cards. After that do all normal cards.
And the gameplay is the same? For example the Group is still able. To search?.. Another question because Its not clear to me.. But the dungeon Will be totally randomized every time.. Or Just follow the original quest map scheme?
The gamesplay is the same. You can search with the same outcome as in the original story. It's also follow's the original quest map.
I see.. So sorry for a lot of question but before choosing if playing it full coop or not I ve to clear all my doub..so I ve noticed that you ve changed the front of secret cards.. Why? The Group Will know from the begin which room will be the particular one? Isn't a sort of spoiler?
Mhygor wrote: Hi man! First of all a big thank you for your work!I should have the game in april and my biggest complain Was about Who could play like GM.. Now I would understand if Will use your full coop solutions.. Will lose a lot of original experience? And eventually in what Way? Less "surprise" effect? Less narrative? Cut of some parts like GM's questions or minigame?
At the end.. If I Will print them how could avoid to spoiler me some contents reading them accodentally? Some suggests? Thanks!
I kept all suprise effects in. You print the secret guide and all suprises are in there and first start cutting and glue the secret cards. After that do all normal cards.
And the gameplay is the same? For example the Group is still able. To search?.. Another question because Its not clear to me.. But the dungeon Will be totally randomized every time.. Or Just follow the original quest map scheme?
The gamesplay is the same. You can search with the same outcome as in the original story. It's also follow's the original quest map.
I see.. So sorry for a lot of question but before choosing if playing it full coop or not I ve to clear all my doub..so I ve noticed that you ve changed the front of secret cards.. Why? The Group Will know from the begin which room will be the particular one? Isn't a sort of spoiler?
Thanks
In the final version the secret cards make an separate deck with random numbers. So you don't know if a dungeon got secret rooms. The chamber cards you keep also on a stack so you have no overview.
judgedoug wrote: Anyone know if any company - Battle Foam, Feldherr, etc - are going to be making foam trays for the game? I have Battle Foam's sets for Silver Tower and Deathwatch Overkill and Gorechosen, so I'd very much like a foam set for this too.
I'm sure they will eventually. The game seems to be a big seller, so Battle Foam will want to get in on it. I'm checking the site once a week, but no luck so far. Still have some time before I get around to assembling/painting SoH, but I'm hoping to have a case for it all before then.
An update, I sent Battle Foam a message:
"Are you guys gonna release a Warhammer Quest Shadows Over Hammerhal foam set?"
judgedoug wrote: Anyone know if any company - Battle Foam, Feldherr, etc - are going to be making foam trays for the game? I have Battle Foam's sets for Silver Tower and Deathwatch Overkill and Gorechosen, so I'd very much like a foam set for this too.
I'm sure they will eventually. The game seems to be a big seller, so Battle Foam will want to get in on it. I'm checking the site once a week, but no luck so far. Still have some time before I get around to assembling/painting SoH, but I'm hoping to have a case for it all before then.
An update, I sent Battle Foam a message:
"Are you guys gonna release a Warhammer Quest Shadows Over Hammerhal foam set?"
In the final version the secret cards make an separate deck with random numbers. So you don't know if a dungeon got secret rooms. The chamber cards you keep also on a stack so you have no overview.
What do you mean With final version? Are you still working on it?
In the final version the secret cards make an separate deck with random numbers. So you don't know if a dungeon got secret rooms. The chamber cards you keep also on a stack so you have no overview.
What do you mean With final version? Are you still working on it?
No i'm finished..but first the dungeon secrets were added in the dungeon pdf. Now you can combine all secret cards in one deck and there is one secret guide so you can't peek at the next secret becourse i scrambled them.
judgedoug wrote: Anyone know if any company - Battle Foam, Feldherr, etc - are going to be making foam trays for the game? I have Battle Foam's sets for Silver Tower and Deathwatch Overkill and Gorechosen, so I'd very much like a foam set for this too.
I'm sure they will eventually. The game seems to be a big seller, so Battle Foam will want to get in on it. I'm checking the site once a week, but no luck so far. Still have some time before I get around to assembling/painting SoH, but I'm hoping to have a case for it all before then.
An update, I sent Battle Foam a message:
"Are you guys gonna release a Warhammer Quest Shadows Over Hammerhal foam set?"
and the response was:
"Yes next week"
so there we go
It looks like Battlefoam has the SoH tray ready for sale.
Thank you sooooo much Fitz! Me and my mate Urshula enjoyed not having a dungeon master, so we could coop game. We were gutted the sequel didn't have this feature. You are awesome! I had to register an account, to say a mahusive thank you! We have also started playing [SWA], yay for weird box game spinoffs!
We finished up the Hammerhal campaign last weekend!
I give it a solid B+.
Just when the town phase gets a little boring, well, the plotline advances!
As the evil bad guy player, don't forget your enemy's rules. I did, a lot, and often encounters were cakewalks for the players.
Tons of fun. Glad I bought it, glad to have the models and tiles, and now i'm going to write up a campaign for my pals to play in a few months.
Thanks for the review Judge Doug. Glad you guys have been having such a blast with it. We played Silver tower to death, so much fun! I converted a lady Dwarf Cog Smith for it We are currently painting up all the minis before we play.
)... but when it comes to Chaos I think that they should do it as much as possible.
)
