Monster grots!

Yeah, I think Sigmarines and Kruleboyz are getting the same marketing strategy here. Launch box miniatures as an easy buy in to get a core for the armies into people's hands, impressive monsters and war machines as eye catchers to add to that and then the model release around the battletome to fill in any gaps and round off the factions (for now). I think it's a bit premature to judge the appearance of the starter box armies until their battletomes are out.

Im expecting a massive feline creature to go with my Dracoline army!

I’m hoping for some new Ironjawz in the new Orruk Warclans book!

 AduroT wrote:
I’m hoping for some new Ironjawz in the new Orruk Warclans book!

I would prefer this . Right now I have plenty of points of Brutes, Ironjawz and some printed idols of Gork. While I just bought Dominion, I’m not a fan of the Kruleboyz, so if I can trade/sell them off to get some Ironjawz who have learned how to do some ranged attacks on their own, I would be really happy.

I hope any Dragon species that gets released look more intimidating thN the Stormcast Stardrake McDonalds toy.

A human Empire with dragons could be cool though

 Theophony wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I’m hoping for some new Ironjawz in the new Orruk Warclans book!

I would prefer this . Right now I have plenty of points of Brutes, Ironjawz and some printed idols of Gork. While I just bought Dominion, I’m not a fan of the Kruleboyz, so if I can trade/sell them off to get some Ironjawz who have learned how to do some ranged attacks on their own, I would be really happy.

I hope any Dragon species that gets released look more intimidating thN the Stormcast Stardrake McDonalds toy.

A human Empire with dragons could be cool though

If it’s mostly an aesthetic thing, one could always convert up Ardboyz to be equivalent units. Same stats, same rough dimensions, just a different aesthetic.

'Stunning New Warhammer Age of Sigmar Scenery Captures the Dangers of the Dawnbringer Crusades' on Warhammer Community:

As often as not, Dawnbringer Crusades are missions of reclamation rather than discovery. Sites of ancient strongholds from the Age of Myth lay strewn across the Mortal Realms, and powerful geomantic forces converge at these ruins. This is where the foundations of new Dawnbringer settlements are laid.

You can see evidence of these ancient cities in the scenery itself – the pillars on which the nexus syphon stands have been built to different heights to accommodate the ruins upon which the artefact is perched.

At least the Syphon will be available in other sets from the wording. I still expect a Vertigus type set and that might have a unique terrain piece.

AoS 1.0/2.0 ruins
AoS 3.0 rebuilt ruins
AoS 4.0 - we might actually get some buildings that aren't a ruin!


It's kinda crazy to think that Old World had a lot of build structures, but we've lost pretty much all of them in favour of ruins over the course of AoS. It would be neat to have some solid structures that aren't crumbling or half crumbling.

 Overread wrote:
It would be neat to have some solid structures that aren't crumbling or half crumbling.

100% this!

 Overread wrote:
AoS 1.0/2.0 ruins
AoS 3.0 rebuilt ruins
AoS 4.0 - we might actually get some buildings that aren't a ruin!


It's kinda crazy to think that Old World had a lot of build structures, but we've lost pretty much all of them in favour of ruins over the course of AoS. It would be neat to have some solid structures that aren't crumbling or half crumbling.

You know what? You're right. AoS is already a saturday morning cartoon compared to 40K and so they might as well give us a Castle Grayskull for our Stormcasts and Snake Mountain for Kruleboyz.

No game with Abbadon should compare other settings with saturday morning cartoons.

True, apart from the Chaos Fortress have they released many whole buildings for AOS? I have no idea how well that sold either, but SamusDrake has me wanting a Kruleboyz Snake Mountain now!

SamusDrake wrote:


You know what? You're right. AoS is already a saturday morning cartoon compared to 40K and so they might as well give us a Castle Grayskull for our Stormcasts and Snake Mountain for Kruleboyz.

So...a revamped Mighty Fortress and a AOS version of the Ork stockage from GorkaMorka.

I would be interested in a Stormcast (or Slaanesh) fortress...

Saturday morning cartoons are awesome.

AoS1 had that gigantic Chaos castle though right? The Dreadhold? It's only the good guy's stuff that's ruined.

I find most of the AoS terrain pretty awful though. The stuff like the Lizardman temple when compared to the old plastic houses really disappoint.

 Sacredroach wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:


You know what? You're right. AoS is already a saturday morning cartoon compared to 40K and so they might as well give us a Castle Grayskull for our Stormcasts and Snake Mountain for Kruleboyz.

I would be interested in a Stormcast (or Slaanesh) fortress...

That would cost a bloody fortune and then some.

 Theophony wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I’m hoping for some new Ironjawz in the new Orruk Warclans book!

I would prefer this . Right now I have plenty of points of Brutes, Ironjawz and some printed idols of Gork. While I just bought Dominion, I’m not a fan of the Kruleboyz, so if I can trade/sell them off to get some Ironjawz who have learned how to do some ranged attacks on their own, I would be really happy.

I want hammer throwers. Not like carpentry hammers, but the iron balls on chains you whirl around and throw. That kind of hefty show of strength would be fitting for them I think.

Looking at the Syphon... it's not easily identifiable as a race-specific piece of terrain. It's not covered in twin-tailed comets. Yeah... a couple of those dirtied up and covered in this stuff will work perfectly on my Eldar/Death World terrain.

 DaveC wrote:
I still expect a Vertigus type set and that might have a unique terrain piece.

Let us hope so.

 AduroT wrote:

 Theophony wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I’m hoping for some new Ironjawz in the new Orruk Warclans book!

I would prefer this . Right now I have plenty of points of Brutes, Ironjawz and some printed idols of Gork. While I just bought Dominion, I’m not a fan of the Kruleboyz, so if I can trade/sell them off to get some Ironjawz who have learned how to do some ranged attacks on their own, I would be really happy.

I want hammer throwers. Not like carpentry hammers, but the iron balls on chains you whirl around and throw. That kind of hefty show of strength would be fitting for them I think.

Or a fast option of throwing Grots/Squigs at the opponent, One of those Mantic KoW ideas that is just fun. Ties up the opponent trying not to get eaten while the rest of the army advances to smash people into paste.

 Theophony wrote:

 AduroT wrote:

 Theophony wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I’m hoping for some new Ironjawz in the new Orruk Warclans book!

I would prefer this . Right now I have plenty of points of Brutes, Ironjawz and some printed idols of Gork. While I just bought Dominion, I’m not a fan of the Kruleboyz, so if I can trade/sell them off to get some Ironjawz who have learned how to do some ranged attacks on their own, I would be really happy.

I want hammer throwers. Not like carpentry hammers, but the iron balls on chains you whirl around and throw. That kind of hefty show of strength would be fitting for them I think.

Or a fast option of throwing Grots/Squigs at the opponent, One of those Mantic KoW ideas that is just fun. Ties up the opponent trying not to get eaten while the rest of the army advances to smash people into paste.

That sounds like the Squig Gobba from Forge World.

Cronch wrote:
No game with Abbadon should compare other settings with saturday morning cartoons.

Yeah, look AOS is defiantly very super hero-y. No argument. But 40K is so laughable these days that I can't even bring myself to care about 40K lore in general.

"In the grim darkness of the 41st....Abbadon has destroyed Cadia....but all is not as it seems. Instead of fear, Cadia's destruction has made the IOM stronger than it was before, united in Hatred of Abbadon! Take that you Traitor!"

*BEEG YAWN**

 Ghaz wrote:

 Theophony wrote:

 AduroT wrote:

 Theophony wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I’m hoping for some new Ironjawz in the new Orruk Warclans book!

I would prefer this . Right now I have plenty of points of Brutes, Ironjawz and some printed idols of Gork. While I just bought Dominion, I’m not a fan of the Kruleboyz, so if I can trade/sell them off to get some Ironjawz who have learned how to do some ranged attacks on their own, I would be really happy.

I want hammer throwers. Not like carpentry hammers, but the iron balls on chains you whirl around and throw. That kind of hefty show of strength would be fitting for them I think.

Or a fast option of throwing Grots/Squigs at the opponent, One of those Mantic KoW ideas that is just fun. Ties up the opponent trying not to get eaten while the rest of the army advances to smash people into paste.

That sounds like the Squig Gobba from Forge World.

Or, y'know, a Doom Diver. Greenskins having themselves lobbed at the enemy has been a Warhammer thing way longer than Knock Off King Mantic has existed.

I remember writing rules for putting a Doom Diver on a trukk for Gorkamorka. If the grot was fired at a vehicle and survived the landing, he counted as charging.

Greenskins are fun.

Agreed with the others that it seems to be lacking some regulars orcs. Would have like to see some cavalry instead of one of these monsters

Did anyone else noted that Gobsprakk has his own Pot Grot in the back of the seat?

The hand on his staff makes me wonder if its from a troll or something else, because they only have four fingers per hand...

 CMLR wrote:
Did anyone else noted that Gobsprakk has his own Pot Grot in the back of the seat?

The hand on his staff makes me wonder if its from a troll or something else, because they only have four fingers per hand...

It's from a Lord of Change

So great is Gobsprakk’s magical might that the crotchety shaman has bested many sorcerers in the past, including a great Lord of Change.

SamusDrake wrote:
You know what? You're right. AoS is already a saturday morning cartoon compared to 40K and so they might as well give us a Castle Grayskull for our Stormcasts and Snake Mountain for Kruleboyz.

Castle Greyskull you say?



Oh wait, there is already one. Just not for AoS. It's funny how every time people complain about AoS, 9 out of 10 times it's wrong but it applies to WHF 10x more

 Irbis wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:
You know what? You're right. AoS is already a saturday morning cartoon compared to 40K and so they might as well give us a Castle Grayskull for our Stormcasts and Snake Mountain for Kruleboyz.

Castle Greyskull you say?

Spoiler:

Oh wait, there is already one. Just not for AoS. It's funny how every time people complain about AoS, 9 out of 10 times it's wrong but it applies to WHF 10x more

The Skullvane Manse was slightly reworked and released for Age of Sigmar as the Warscryer Citadel during the Malign Portents event.

 AduroT wrote:

 Theophony wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I’m hoping for some new Ironjawz in the new Orruk Warclans book!

I would prefer this . Right now I have plenty of points of Brutes, Ironjawz and some printed idols of Gork. While I just bought Dominion, I’m not a fan of the Kruleboyz, so if I can trade/sell them off to get some Ironjawz who have learned how to do some ranged attacks on their own, I would be really happy.

I want hammer throwers. Not like carpentry hammers, but the iron balls on chains you whirl around and throw. That kind of hefty show of strength would be fitting for them I think.

I'd rather have these guys:

Whelp, that vulture has great potential for tomb king esque conversions

 Sotahullu wrote:

stratigo wrote:
So, it's a bit weird to me that the kruleboy release is mostly monsters. Like I get that its the current push, but, feels a bit much.

Which is why there is probaply more that hasn't been shown yet to round up infantry. Like grots!

Or not. Gw prefers atm monsters and practically forcing players to get those. Lots of monsters, token infantry is hardly unenxpected.


I

In Grimdark Lives latest show they are backing up the rumour that there will be a BoC vs GSG box with a new Scuttleboss, Doombull, Bullgors and Jabberslythe. No new Gors or Beastlords.BoC battle tome possibly in October. With Maggotkin, Ogors and GSG to follow - not necessarily in that order (Grimdark Live reported the Kruleboyz rumours and got them correct)

 DaveC wrote:
In Grimdark Lives latest show they are backing up the rumour that there will be a BoC vs GSG box with a new Scuttleboss, Doombull, Bullgors and Jabberslythe. BoC battle tome possibly in October. With Maggotkin, Ogors and GSG to follow - not necessarily in that order (Grimdark Live reported the Kruleboyz rumours and got them correct)

That rumour sounds bs

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 DaveC wrote:

Spoiler:

In Grimdark Lives latest show they are backing up the rumour that there will be a BoC vs GSG box with a new Scuttleboss, Doombull, Bullgors and Jabberslythe. BoC battle tome possibly in October. With Maggotkin, Ogors and GSG to follow - not necessarily in that order (Grimdark Live reported the Kruleboyz rumours and got them correct)

That rumour sounds bs

Ordinarily I’d agree but Grimdark Live were the first to report the Kruleboyz stuff before the name was even known and they were spot on.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/4650/784170.page#11128015

WarCom also said the next tome will be something Chaos but phrased in a way that definitely didn't hint at any of the Big 4. BoC felt the most likely to me from the way they said it, without any outside info.

I hope this pans out. Apparently I'm one of the few who doesn't have a problem with the current minotaurs, but I won't say no to new ones either. Not the least because I prefer models that don't have poses designed for rank and file formation. Outside of rank and file games, anyway.

What's GSG?

At this point, i don't think we should doubt Grimdarklive. They obviously have a good contact inside GW.

Id like boc to have more love. Always was one of my favorite army. These gors are starting to show their age though

GSG = Gloomspite Gitz - (if an acronym is highlight in yellow you can click on it to see the full word)

Gloomspite Gitz.

I will go nuts if we are getting new 'bulls for Beasts.

Wouldn't surprise me if the new Bullgors were a new unit variant and existed alongside old ones, not replaced them.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
WarCom also said the next tome will be something Chaos but phrased in a way that definitely didn't hint at any of the Big 4. BoC felt the most likely to me from the way they said it, without any outside info.

I think there is a pretty decent chance that some of the rumor engine pics are from re-done marauder horsemen (darkoath cavalry?) so while story wise given the stuff WarCom has been dropping story wise BoC make the most sense, I think there is a decent chance the next chaos chaos release is redone marauders.

Would I put money onthat bet? No.

But I think there are some reasonably things to support the idea.

 DaveC wrote:
GSG = Gloomspite Gitz - (if an acronym is highlight in yellow you can click on it to see the full word)

Except on every tablet and phone I've had. Only works on PC for me.

Carlovonsexron wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
WarCom also said the next tome will be something Chaos but phrased in a way that definitely didn't hint at any of the Big 4. BoC felt the most likely to me from the way they said it, without any outside info.

I think there is a pretty decent chance that some of the rumor engine pics are from re-done marauder horsemen (darkoath cavalry?) so while story wise given the stuff WarCom has been dropping story wise BoC make the most sense, I think there is a decent chance the next chaos chaos release is redone marauders.

Would I put money onthat bet? No.

But I think there are some reasonably things to support the idea.

We can but hope. I'm waiting to see which drops first - new marauders (and marauder cav) or the "AoS box" of 2x Spire Tyrant warbands because I will be perfectly happy using those as generic marauders!

If 3rd edition is to be monsters for everyone then I'd love to see a monster for Nighthaunts. The Mourngul isn't quite my bag...

I had just dusted off my old minotaur force to try new AOS, I'll be over the moon if there is new BOC stuff and bullgors etc.

Does the focus on Beasts of Chaos with a new doombull, minotaurs, and jabberslythes in the next Total Warhammer DLC support or undermine the rumour of updated models for those? Or just a pure coincidence with no meaning whatsoever?

It makes me think it's all or nothing, personally.

But given that GW doesn't have a particularly good track record on capitalizing on physical models realted to the Total War Games (even "The Old World" is probably coming out too late to capitalize off the release of TW3) it actuall ymakes me more skeptical.

HOWEVER! If it turns out that it;s true. and that minis and the the DLC are the same/ similar design, and released in the next month or so, it makes me think the 'The Old World' might be coming alot sooner than I expected... and GW might actually be figuring out this whole 'multi-media' thing.

But I remain skeptical on that.

New Vanguard Hunter warscroll from the rebox (Posted on Reddit)

Continuing the trend of merging melee weapons into 1 stat

There was no point in them being anything else for the Vanguard Hunters. Both choices were trash. The whole unit is poorly designed to boot.

Hopefully the Vigilors are better designed.

Poor Hunters, still being terrible I see :c

Thank goodness they got rend! I've always felt all SCE attacks should have rend by default (with only exceptions like melee attacks with ranged units lacking it) and this gives me hope.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cronch wrote:
Poor Hunters, still being terrible I see :c

We don't know even more than usual, because the strength of hunters was never in the stat line.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DaveC wrote:
Continuing the trend of merging melee weapons into 1 stat

While normally I like options, a lot of the early SCE ones were really pointless. Like choosing between a 4+/3+ or 3+/4+. So happy to see this consolidation.

In my opinion, the "strength of hunters" was in board denial, not actually doing anything for realsies. I tried and tried and tried to make them work, but it just wasn't there.

They suffered from the same issue as Corsairs, but weren't dirt cheap like Corsairs were.

 DaveC wrote:
In Grimdark Lives latest show they are backing up the rumour that there will be a BoC vs GSG box with a new Scuttleboss, Doombull, Bullgors and Jabberslythe. No new Gors or Beastlords.BoC battle tome possibly in October. With Maggotkin, Ogors and GSG to follow - not necessarily in that order (Grimdark Live reported the Kruleboyz rumours and got them correct)

This would mean that of the first 6 books of 3rd Edition, only ONE is Order? Somehow I don't buy that.

I don't think we'll see anything beyond basic overhaul of wording for 3rd ed personally, they seem to have given up on the Vanguards as a concept.

Also, good to know they no longer include full warscrolls in the boxes, instead you just get the statline like in 40k. I love downgrades!

Check the releases for AOS2. There's only one Order book that didn't get an update...and that's Idoneth, a late AOS1 release.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cronch wrote:
I don't think we'll see anything beyond basic overhaul of wording for 3rd ed personally, they seem to have given up on the Vanguards as a concept.

As well they should. The minute they let Stormcast be horde-heavy was the minute they screwed up.

Also, they continually have dropped the ball over Gryph-Hounds. It was downright ridiculous they never put them into the Vanguard Chamber.

Also, good to know they no longer include full warscrolls in the boxes, instead you just get the statline like in 40k. I love downgrades!

Yeah, not a fan of that...but I get why they've changed it. More annoyed about the lack of warscrolls online again.

I also get why they changed it, and the fact that they save money on printing multiple languages and they create more pressure to buy the instantly-obsolete printed material is not good for me as a customer. I am under no obligation to care for GW's bottom line, and hope whoever approved it gets pubic fleas.

The box warscrolls went obsolete once a new battletome hit anyways, and I've never witnessed anyone using them. I'd rather they just save the paper.

 DaveC wrote:
In Grimdark Lives latest show they are backing up the rumour that there will be a BoC vs GSG box with a new Scuttleboss, Doombull, Bullgors and Jabberslythe. No new Gors or Beastlords.BoC battle tome possibly in October. With Maggotkin, Ogors and GSG to follow - not necessarily in that order (Grimdark Live reported the Kruleboyz rumours and got them correct)

Welp. This gives more credibility to the 4chan rumor, as this was exactly what they said. At the very least, Grimdark Live proved to be reliable.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The box warscrolls went obsolete once a new battletome hit anyways, and I've never witnessed anyone using them. I'd rather they just save the paper.

Why have them at all then? Why keep this useless truncated version?

Cronch wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The box warscrolls went obsolete once a new battletome hit anyways, and I've never witnessed anyone using them. I'd rather they just save the paper.

Why have them at all then? Why keep this useless truncated version?

Yeah, that's what I'm saying.

It might just be the Battletome wasn't done, but GW wanted a "complete box" experience so put some cards in anyway. Don't forget a portion of their customers just want to open the box and play. same as why most duel army boxed sets also have a mini-campaign mission in them.

I'm really hoping the new scuttleboss isn't a grot with multiple arms, legs, or eyes. Or if it does have multiple eyes, at least have a mask or something.

Grot scuttlings never took off (except for the "recent" gobbapalooza one) but I like my spider goblins as just grots with a spider fetish, not actually spider-grots

We can't actually say whether or not they took off because they never got released outside of Silver Tower. They were on one of the shared "enemies" sprues.

It would be an ace way to add some new units to the Gloomspite Gitz though. "Spider-Blessed".

Goblin versions of Driders!

 GaroRobe wrote:
I'm really hoping the new scuttleboss isn't a grot with multiple arms, legs, or eyes. Or if it does have multiple eyes, at least have a mask or something.

Grot scuttlings never took off (except for the "recent" gobbapalooza one) but I like my spider goblins as just grots with a spider fetish, not actually spider-grots

I ws going to tell you you're being silly as the Scuttleboss is just the name of a loonboss on spider and he's already in the battletome... but then I looked and his fluff blurb actually talks about him being part spider.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 GaroRobe wrote:
I'm really hoping the new scuttleboss isn't a grot with multiple arms, legs, or eyes. Or if it does have multiple eyes, at least have a mask or something.

Grot scuttlings never took off (except for the "recent" gobbapalooza one) but I like my spider goblins as just grots with a spider fetish, not actually spider-grots

I ws going to tell you you're being silly as the Scuttleboss is just the name of a loonboss on spider and he's already in the battletome... but then I looked and his fluff blurb actually talks about him being part spider.

To be fair, the old forest goblins always did have spider-y tendencies. Like the shaman on arachnarok has four eyes, the leaders have weird multieyed spider masks, etc. But AOS has been cranking up the weirdness when it comes to Gloomspite goblins, both in lore and models. The grots in the latest Gotrek story are crazy; one has one eye (like he's an actual cyclops, not that he lost an eye), one is described as being like a crab (I assume its the scuttling looking dude from the gobapalooza), and so on.

And even if the current model isn't too outlandish, I could see them redesigning the new model to be far more unique, with extra limbs or something even more extreme. It's not guaranteed, though. The new warboss on giant squig could easily fit into the old world (ignoring all the sentient alien fungi on his base). Theres also a small, small chance they make him look more like a night goblin. Spiders have been mixed with classic night goblins a lot lately (grot scuttlings the aforementioned shaman, the goblins with sniffing squigs). It could be that the native American vibe the old models have is too offensive, or if they just want to have a more unified goblin force moving forward. I hope they keep up the arachnarok aesthetic though

Cronch wrote:
Poor Hunters, still being terrible I see :c

10 of these can seriously threaten support characters at least.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cronch wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The box warscrolls went obsolete once a new battletome hit anyways, and I've never witnessed anyone using them. I'd rather they just save the paper.

Why have them at all then? Why keep this useless truncated version?

For kids without battletome.

tneva82 wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Poor Hunters, still being terrible I see :c

10 of these can seriously threaten support characters at least.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cronch wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The box warscrolls went obsolete once a new battletome hit anyways, and I've never witnessed anyone using them. I'd rather they just save the paper.

Why have them at all then? Why keep this useless truncated version?

For kids without battletome.

1) usually an angry hamster is enough to threaten support characters. Or just drop-podding something better than the vanguard hunters. They're the glaivewraith stalkers of SCE.
2) kids without battletome won't be getitng their special rules thanks to this useless version of the statline, so they can't really play anyway.

Spider-Goblins can work. Is just that the ones from silver tower were horrible.

 Galas wrote:
Spider-Goblins can work. Is just that the ones from silver tower were horrible.

They had potential.
I would rather see that on the savage versions than NGs though. Just imagine insect mutated goblins.

 NAVARRO wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Spider-Goblins can work. Is just that the ones from silver tower were horrible.

They had potential.
I would rather see that on the savage versions than NGs though. Just imagine insect mutated goblins.

I didn't like the Silver Tower models on account of the cloaks. Seemed like the designers wanted something different but couldn't be bothered to figure out the anatomy. So I agree, some well done goblin spider hybrids could be cool to have if they don't go out of their way to hide half of the model.

With the caveat that the hybrid model vampires got has really bad composition and it's a recent reminder that GW may not get the "well done" part right. They're capable of making amazing models, but just as capable of making amazing duds.

 Geifer wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Spider-Goblins can work. Is just that the ones from silver tower were horrible.

They had potential.
I would rather see that on the savage versions than NGs though. Just imagine insect mutated goblins.

I didn't like the Silver Tower models on account of the cloaks. Seemed like the designers wanted something different but couldn't be bothered to figure out the anatomy. So I agree, some well done goblin spider hybrids could be cool to have if they don't go out of their way to hide half of the model.

With the caveat that the hybrid model vampires got has really bad composition and it's a recent reminder that GW may not get the "well done" part right. They're capable of making amazing models, but just as capable of making amazing duds.

Indeed. I could live with just a box of 10 normal savage goblins on foot too. That would be such a nice sandbox for conversions.
Silver tower Designers also had the challenge of multi limbs miniature set as a snap fit kit. They probably needed to simplify and covered the bodies with clothes because failing that you would need multipart extra legs or arms on the sprue.

When the 3.0 box was being teased and for a moment the "silent people' was mentioned... I secretly wished for spider/ insect goblins. Now that would be box of dreams or nightmares( for the wallet).

Dragons Are Back, and They’re Going to Change The Mortal Realms Forever on Warhammer Community:

Meh.

The Old World can't come soon enough.

What's the name of the Pixar film these two are in?

Cool story bruh.

Archon makes 8 different plastic Dragons and you can probably buy them all for the price of one of these.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What's the name of the Pixar film these two are in?

Its Mushu daddy from Mulan...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What's the name of the Pixar film these two are in?

Wasn't it an episode of Avatar the Last Airbender?

Never been a big fan of GW Dragons but these are not as bad as normal!

Karazai is awesome, his bro not so much.

AWESOME.

I'm having one!

Bit underwhelming. GW aren't exactly known for great dragons sculpts, I suppose. First impression is that it'll make great conversion fodder for the existing dragon profiles.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What's the name of the Pixar film these two are in?

Frick and Frack.

For $350 U.S. you can take either one home today.

They're both pretty decent, and I like that the pose is something a bit different.

Unfortunately I still don't have Kroak, for my Seraphon, and that's going to be a higher priority (and frankly a far more interesting model, not that these are bad).

Maybe I'm not seeing it -- is there anything indicating the base size or relative size of the model? Something to check scale against? The little bits of ruin on the right are from the ruins set, but they look like they might be a bit in the foreground compared to the dragons.

They remind me of the old Flight of Dragons film for some reason

They're okay for what they are.

Now an Undead Dragon Mortarch please!

The interior membrane texture work on the spread wing does bother me a bit.. the overall cartoony look is not to my taste i'm afraid.

They remember me Spyro the Dragon's dragons specially the blue one.

They are the best dragons GW has ever done. Thats not a very high bar but they are pretty cool specially the scarred one.

I wonder if Krondys sounds like Sean Connery...

I think they are quite nice but unnecessary. Updating large part of Stormcast range already feels like a waste of resources. At least the Dragon can be built without armour this time although the sculpted twin tailed comet at its chest needs to be sculpted over if one wishes to use the Dragon for other purposes.

Those are Insanely cool and I am Super jealous of my Sigmarine friends right now.

Good design, good posing, GW plastic.

Yeah, I like them.

Not too keen on the heads, but that's an easy swap if I want to actually own a dragon model, and I'll probably turn them into demon princes or something anyway.

The heads make them look like renders of some scalie’s OC on Deviantart or Tumblr.

 GrosseSax wrote:

Meh.

The Old World can't come soon enough.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What's the name of the Pixar film these two are in?

I'm dying laughing

The scarred one is not too bad, but the other one is atrocious. Hate his dumb head

More big goofy centerpiece models, just what the game needs. Sigh.

The second one is great, but the Stormcast version's head direction/pose and closed mouth definitely look worse. I wonder how hard it will be to hybrid the two.

Yeah, I'm not vibing with the heads. They're kinda cool and make them look wise (and way too much like Smaug). But a good headswap will do wonders. Armor being optional is a nice touch (the sigmar comet on the chest will need to go, but its not a huge issue)

Two things that surprised me:
GW is okay with calling them dragons sometimes, not star-drakes, draconith, some copyrightable name.
The dragons don't have split tails.

 Ghaz wrote:
I wonder if Krondys sounds like Sean Connery...

First impression too, although I was also reminded of Shere Khan from Jungle Book...

Their best effort at a plastic dragon, though it's disappointing to see since it's a multibuild kit it seemingly doesn't come, without some conversion legwork, with a generic option instead of "Sigmarine dragon or heavily scarred dragon."

Also they seem almost ashamed of their goofy """copyright""" name in the article now.

 TalonZahn wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What's the name of the Pixar film these two are in?

Frick and Frack.

For $350 U.S. you can take either one home today.

Made me google them.

Damn you.

 Ghaz wrote:
I wonder if Krondys sounds like Sean Connery...

There is a video of them.

 AduroT wrote:
Those are Insanely cool and I am Super jealous of my Sigmarine friends right now.

It might be me, but I think the wording of the article implies that they will be allies for all Order, like SoB and Kraggie for Destruction.

 zend wrote:
The heads make them look like renders of some scalie’s OC on Deviantart or Tumblr.

What is it with GW making Dragons with head that make them look utterly utterly baked? First the Stardrake, where the closed-mouth head looks like its been puffing on the devil's lettuce, and now this one.

Had my hopes up for a moment there that this would be a new faction to rival the Sons of Behemat( bit like Imperial vs Chaos knights in 40K ), but still happy they fit into a Stormcast army all the same.

Quite like them. Not terribly inspired, but a lot better than the horrible stardrakes/dracoths and all the old snakey dragons of yesterdecades.

jullevi wrote:
I think they are quite nice but unnecessary. Updating large part of Stormcast range already feels like a waste of resources. At least the Dragon can be built without armour this time although the sculpted twin tailed comet at its chest needs to be sculpted over if one wishes to use the Dragon for other purposes.

My thoughts exactly.

Not too keen on the blue dragons paint job. I am excited to see what other stellar painters (Vince, Duncan etc) could do with it though.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 zend wrote:
The heads make them look like renders of some scalie’s OC on Deviantart or Tumblr.

What is it with GW making Dragons with head that make them look utterly utterly baked? First the Stardrake, where the closed-mouth head looks like its been puffing on the devil's lettuce, and now this one.

I don't know and don't understand it either. I don't believe for a second there are no capable designers concept artists there... I think its more of a case of someone there with some leverage calling the shots that constantly messes up the dragon heads approval...

 CMLR wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
I wonder if Krondys sounds like Sean Connery...

There is a video of them.

I'm referring to the movie Dragonheart where Sean Connery provided the voice for the CGI dragon Draco:

Solid dragons, especially compared to the star drake. A head swap would help the overall look, though. These are somewhat cartoony.

 Ghaz wrote:

 CMLR wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
I wonder if Krondys sounds like Sean Connery...

There is a video of them.

I'm referring to the movie Dragonheart where Sean Connery provided the voice for the CGI dragon Draco:

Ack! I knew I had seen something similar before!

 BertBert wrote:
Solid dragons, especially compared to the star drake. A head swap would help the overall look, though. These are somewhat cartoony.

We've just had the cruelboys, why would you think the dragons would be less cartoony when cartoony is clearly the style they're going for with the game?

Could have done 1 for each grand alliance at least. But no, all toys for Order

Love the big new dragons.

Cronch wrote:

 BertBert wrote:
Solid dragons, especially compared to the star drake. A head swap would help the overall look, though. These are somewhat cartoony.

We've just had the cruelboys, why would you think the dragons would be less cartoony when cartoony is clearly the style they're going for with the game?

I like the expressions but the mouth and eyes in both poses are like classic Disney villians. Haven't seen that in the Kruleboyz so far...

Cronch wrote:

 BertBert wrote:
Solid dragons, especially compared to the star drake. A head swap would help the overall look, though. These are somewhat cartoony.

We've just had the cruelboys, why would you think the dragons would be less cartoony when cartoony is clearly the style they're going for with the game?

It's not about expectations, but about preference.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Could have done 1 for each grand alliance at least. But no, all toys for Order

That would have been pretty swell if they had.

Dragons look ok for Stormcast Heroes

what buffles me is that they were not even able to close the glueing gabs on the wings for the promo models

this kills the models instantly and maybe someone should show the GW studio what Green Stuff ist

Don’t really like these, not gonna lie
Karol Rudyk’s dragons are flexing all overs AoS ones

 kodos wrote:
Dragons look ok for Stormcast Heroes

what buffles me is that they were not even able to close the glueing gabs on the wings for the promo models

this kills the models instantly and maybe someone should show the GW studio what Green Stuff ist

Where are the gaps? I'm not seeing any in the wings. Might be blind?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Cool story bruh.

Archon makes 8 different plastic Dragons and you can probably buy them all for the price of one of these.

Link?

 Ghaz wrote:

 CMLR wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
I wonder if Krondys sounds like Sean Connery...

There is a video of them.

I'm referring to the movie Dragonheart where Sean Connery provided the voice for the CGI dragon Draco:

I watched the movie as a kid. I just pointed out the video for a comparison of a Sean Connery impersonation.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Never been a big fan of GW Dragons but these are not as bad as normal!

Yea I dig them. I loved my Egrimm von Horstman, but that dragon was janky. I'll never play these models, but I will try to find a way to get one and paint it up.

 GrosseSax wrote:

Spoiler:

 Ghaz wrote:
Dragons Are Back, and They’re Going to Change The Mortal Realms Forever on Warhammer Community:

Meh.

The Old World can't come soon enough.

Which is funny considering the old world had the worst dragon sculpts ever put into print.

The high elf dragon, dark elf dragon, and forest dragon are an insult to all creatures capable of visually perceiving shapes.

 GaroRobe wrote:
Yeah, I'm not vibing with the heads. They're kinda cool and make them look wise (and way too much like Smaug). But a good headswap will do wonders. Armor being optional is a nice touch (the sigmar comet on the chest will need to go, but its not a huge issue)

Two things that surprised me:
GW is okay with calling them dragons sometimes, not star-drakes, draconith, some copyrightable name.
The dragons don't have split tails.

The SC head has something about it that I can't quite place. Too aware and not enough beast, I guess? Taking that beard off and changing how the eyes are painted might fix it.

changemod wrote:
Their best effort at a plastic dragon, though it's disappointing to see since it's a multibuild kit it seemingly doesn't come, without some conversion legwork, with a generic option instead of "Sigmarine dragon or heavily scarred dragon."

Also they seem almost ashamed of their goofy """copyright""" name in the article now.

It's now been brought to my attention that the open mouthed head is missing almost half of it's teeth (No wonder I thought it looked a bit off) and that both have the Sigmar birthmark sculpted into their chest.

So yeah, not very interested at this point. I might do a lot of conversion work, but I lack the skill of major resculpting work to the point of mimicking the style of missing teeth to the point it wouldn't be very obvious.

Honestly, I think it's the Snub-nose that bothers me the most.

Short, round, blunt...

I feel like it should be longer or more angular.

Rihgu wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Dragons look ok for Stormcast Heroes

what buffles me is that they were not even able to close the glueing gabs on the wings for the promo models

this kills the models instantly and maybe someone should show the GW studio what Green Stuff ist

Where are the gaps? I'm not seeing any in the wings. Might be blind?

 TalonZahn wrote:
Honestly, I think it's the Snub-nose that bothers me the most.

Short, round, blunt...

I feel like it should be longer or more angular.

Hmm, yeah now that you mention it the stormcast armour one's face is giving me Spyro 1 npc vibes. Not the worst vibes per se, but a little clashing with the rest of the model's art style.

The scarred one's muzzle looks long enough, but the lack of teeth makes him look kinda like a hillbilly or something once I became aware of it.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

The SC head has something about it that I can't quite place. Too aware and not enough beast, I guess? Taking that beard off and changing how the eyes are painted might fix it.

They're not dumb brutes, so it makes sense that they look fairly aware?

Honestly, I'm loving Karazai's backstory. Love the scarring. That'll be the one I go for.

 kodos wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Dragons look ok for Stormcast Heroes

what buffles me is that they were not even able to close the glueing gabs on the wings for the promo models

this kills the models instantly and maybe someone should show the GW studio what Green Stuff ist

Where are the gaps? I'm not seeing any in the wings. Might be blind?

JFC, that's bad...

Well, GW don't sell green stuff any more so I guess they can't use it.

The face immediately made me think of Sarris.

 Grimtuff wrote:

JFC, that's bad...

Well, GW don't sell green stuff any more so I guess they can't use it.

They are not gaps, they are folds and the painter decided to emphasize them for some reason.

 kodos wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Dragons look ok for Stormcast Heroes

what buffles me is that they were not even able to close the glueing gabs on the wings for the promo models

this kills the models instantly and maybe someone should show the GW studio what Green Stuff ist

Where are the gaps? I'm not seeing any in the wings. Might be blind?

The lines that coincidentally cross the joints in the fingers of the wings are not folds... but gaps? Okay

jullevi wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

JFC, that's bad...

Well, GW don't sell green stuff any more so I guess they can't use it.

They are not gaps, they are folds and the painter decided to emphasize them for some reason.

You can see them better in some of the other pics. It's apparently where there are joints in the wings

jullevi wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

JFC, that's bad...

Well, GW don't sell green stuff any more so I guess they can't use it.

They are not gaps, they are folds and the painter decided to emphasize them for some reason.

Yeah, if you look at the top shot of the red dragon's wing, you can see they are folds. Just from a functional stand point, I'm not seeing how they could be separate parts.

Weird design choice for sure, and the paint job does certainly make them pop out.

jullevi wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

JFC, that's bad...

Well, GW don't sell green stuff any more so I guess they can't use it.

They are not gaps, they are folds and the painter decided to emphasize them for some reason.

Think you need to go to Specsavers there mate...

They're gaps. That is obvious. It is super clear when you look at the innermost membrane which you'll note lacks the gaps as it is a single piece (presumably).

To clean those gaps is going to be a major PITA.

Meh. Smaug looks bestest.

They're gaps that are..colored th same way the creases in skin right next to them?

 NAVARRO wrote:
To clean those gaps is going to be a major PITA.

This is your lucky day. Grimtuff is speaking bollocks, the seams are nowhere near the areas he circled. Majority of the wings is one part. If it were a seam, you could see it from the reverse shot. Reverse shot shows a clear fold instead.

Wings are definitely intentional. It's an odd design rather than an assembly flaw, but you're welcome to dislike it all the same.

I absolutely LOVE this dragons, but I already love dragons overall.

Sure, it is not saying much; Old World serpentine dragons were from not bad but nothing to write about (black dragons) to absolute disgraces (metal gak dragons).

But Karazai the Scarred? GOOD STUFF.

 GrosseSax wrote:
Meh.

The Old World can't come soon enough.

Each to their own, but, are you going to compare the gak metal worms? really?

The Old World dragons look cool in TW, but they don't compare at all with the original sculpts, or rather, the original sculpts don't compare at all with the TW models.

 kodos wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Dragons look ok for Stormcast Heroes

what buffles me is that they were not even able to close the glueing gabs on the wings for the promo models

this kills the models instantly and maybe someone should show the GW studio what Green Stuff ist

Where are the gaps? I'm not seeing any in the wings. Might be blind?

Those are folds you'd expect on real membranous wings, you can see that the lines don't appear on the back of the wing...

Of course, you can always wait and see the actual sprue.

 kodos wrote:
Dragons look ok for Stormcast Heroes

what buffles me is that they were not even able to close the glueing gabs on the wings for the promo models

this kills the models instantly and maybe someone should show the GW studio what Green Stuff ist

Eh greenstuff has one issue. It's solid connection.

Gw promo models are generally not glued up fully.

I'm getting major Spyro vibes, both from their backstory as well as their design.

This isn't a bad thing...

 CMLR wrote:

Those are folds you'd expect on real membranous wings, you can see that the lines don't appear on the back of the wing...
Of course, you can always wait and see the actual sprue.

you won't expect them in real wing, whatever animal has such straight lines and the membran in that angel has a problem (membranous wings do not bend in a 45° angle straight across)
and those are also on the back, just not as visible in the middle (otherwise they parts won't be glued together)

but I can be wrong of course so lets wait for the sprue

Once you see the Kangaroo pose you can't really unsee it.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Once you see the Kangaroo pose you can't really unsee it.

I hate you for that

What is with the dopey smile on the green one?

Regarding the wings it's also worth remembering that the the painted models are resin prints and don't necessarily go together in the same way as the final production plastic.

Seems incredibly generic, especially since I'm sure these will be $120-150ish.

When I'd initially heard about dragons I assumed I'd be spending money on new stormcast cavalry, glad I can save some money.

 Olgerth Istaarn wrote:
What is with the dopey smile on the green one?

This one?

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
The face immediately made me think of Sarris.

That's not a draconith.

I can't wait to get this! I might have to get two to build one of each. I'm in the process of building a dragon army for Stormcast, so these will fit in perfectly!

They're definitely the best dragon sculpts GW has ever made, except maybe Smaug. I always hated the funky Fantasy dragons. They looked like a child stuck some toothpicks into silly putty for teeth, with no tooth pointing the same direction as any other tooth.

These guys fit in with the other design elements you see with the Dracoths and Stardrake (horns and the face shape) while expanding upon some of those details and going BIGGER. The wing design is excellent as well, they're not at some weird angle like the Stardrake has.

For the naysayers: Please find another hobby other than pretending like you know how wings work. It took me about three seconds to google 'bat wings' to find similar creases.

The trailer was good fun too; two bros are gonna clean up the mortal realms...Dragon Ninja style?

But seriously, they need their own late 80s coin-op beat-em-up.

They have a strong 1980s animated movie look. Their designs for AoS do have a way of being surprising.

A new, leaner drake for the new, leaner Stormcasts, eh?

GW is really milking these high priced, high margin items that coincidentally are open to being fielded by a wide range of factions.

It's like that oprah meme of, "you get a 200 dollar centerpiece model, and you get a 200 dollar centerpiece model, you all get 200 dollar centrepiece models!"

Gaming outside of the house must take a wheeled dolly these days.

Except these are only for Stormcast

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Cool story bruh.

Archon makes 8 different plastic Dragons and you can probably buy them all for the price of one of these.

Link?

https://www.dungeonsandlasers.com/late-pledge/

Any 7 for €99, translucent ghost dragon is still in tooling

 Overread wrote:
Except these are only for Stormcast

It says they can join the stormcast but it doesn't say they can only join the stormcast. Based on the big centaur guy and the mega giants before them, I think it would be a poor wager to bet against them being open to other good guy factions.

Well, i just registered to comment on these new dragons.

It's the same as with most things GW brings forth for AOS.....some of it is truly awesome; the poses and bodies are great!

The heads are utter garbage though.
The blue one looks like a weird dragon/macaw hybrid that's actually smiling. A slight smirk worked wonders for Smaug in the Hobbit....the weird ear to ear grin here not so much i fear.
The red one looks like Shere Khan from the junglebook disney cartoon, but without its front teeth.

It's much better than the stardrake, especially its body and pose, but i don't think that's a very great accomplishment nor does that qualification by itself make it a good model.

I'm not going to pretend that I love the Kruleboyz (they feel very un-Orcs an Goblins-y to me personally because they've lost a lot of the whimsy that, for me, makes that army awesome), but those previewed models have been great so far. The remade Stormcasts are also mostly outstanding. I'm really not a hater...
...but when i saw these i laughed out loud.

The sad thing is that you can actually see that these could have been awesome. Such a shame.

I also can't wait for Old World.....Fantasy, for all its shortcomings, at least felt like a more cohesive, gritty and plausible setting. AOS not only often feels over the top, stylistically it's an eclectic hodgepodge that, to me, sometimes feels like it's surrendered to the whims of the designers and whatever they feel like disigning in lieu of overarching ideas. If you like it, great! But it's not for me. This old curmudgeon takes the models that he likes from AOS and adds them to his O&G fantasy army. (The mega gargant is great and I'm considering using that shaman on giant vulture as a wyvern stand in because I quite like that model)

Opening up new ways for my City to field my Teclis conversion is a win to me. The official minis look pretty cool but not enough to buy one for me.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Cool story bruh.

Archon makes 8 different plastic Dragons and you can probably buy them all for the price of one of these.

Link?

https://www.dungeonsandlasers.com/late-pledge/

Any 7 for €99, translucent ghost dragon is still in tooling

Those seem quite a bit smaller though?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Cool story bruh.

Archon makes 8 different plastic Dragons and you can probably buy them all for the price of one of these.

Link?

https://www.dungeonsandlasers.com/late-pledge/

Any 7 for €99, translucent ghost dragon is still in tooling

Those seem quite a bit smaller though?

They're also Kickstarter. Vaporware until shipped.

The Archon dragons have been released though.

I just built one the other day in fact and have another one arriving this week. Nice easily built kits.

I'd wager they'll end up significantly smaller than these dragons though.

I like them, but then I've always like dragons.

 CragHack wrote:
Meh. Smaug looks bestest.

Agreed, though these ones are actually six limbed dragons, nearly just as good and will fetch around $200 (canadian) while Smaug retails at $670. Sure Smaug's better, but these ones are very good, better than the okay Stardrakes and about 7 million times better than the Old World dragons which were criminaly bad rendition of Eastern Asian dragons.

Carmine Dragon was a nice sculpt imo

 Overread wrote:
Except these are only for Stormcast

And Stormcast are already allies with pretty much the entirety of Order, so expect them to be Orders answer to Mega-Gargants or Kragnos as super allies.

epronovost wrote:

 CragHack wrote:
Meh. Smaug looks bestest.

Agreed, though these ones are actually six limbed dragons, nearly just as good and will fetch around $200 (canadian) while Smaug retails at $670. Sure Smaug's better, but these ones are very good, better than the okay Stardrakes and about 7 million times better than the Old World dragons which were criminaly bad rendition of Eastern Asian dragons.

6 limbs = drake, 4 limbs = wyvern, including cockatrices. Isn't Smaug a drake?

There is no formal definition. A drake is a dragon is a wyvern is a wyrm is a serpent.

ERJAK wrote:

 GrosseSax wrote:

Spoiler:

 Ghaz wrote:
Dragons Are Back, and They’re Going to Change The Mortal Realms Forever on Warhammer Community:

Meh.

The Old World can't come soon enough.

Which is funny considering the old world had the worst dragon sculpts ever put into print.

The high elf dragon, dark elf dragon, and forest dragon are an insult to all creatures capable of visually perceiving shapes.

this quote wins the internet for the day.

SF

There are conventions, but in general there is no fixed definitions outside of a specific lore/mythology/story/setting.

Same as any fantasy creature there are tropes and conventions and some core concepts, but what makes them what they are is defined within each setting.


As for Smaug most of the early artwork and descriptions of him have him as your very standard fantasy western dragon. 6 limbs with wings, four legs and all. It's really only the Hobbit live action films that had him done as a 4 limbed dragon, which commonly many would consider more of a wyvern design. However its equally known as a wurm design which is often seen as a more classic/older kind of way of describing a dragon.


But in the end the terms jump around, again its only within a setting that the have meaning. Plus language being what it is a drake could equally be a male dragon or a specific breed of dragon.

Cronch wrote:
There is no formal definition. A drake is a dragon is a wyvern is a wyrm is a serpent.

Wyverns are defined by heraldry, in which case those are the two legged, two winged ones.

That's a sufficient standard for people to say "I keep being disappointed when major franchises depict their dragons as wyverns to make them easier to animate" and for people to *basically know what they mean* which should really be sufficient because language is for communicating ideas. Going "Well, every setting uses the terminology differently" isn't actually *relevant* to the complaint being put forward in that situation.

Cronch wrote:
There is no formal definition. A drake is a dragon is a wyvern is a wyrm is a serpent.

A wyrm is a worm, or anything serpentine-like (vermiphorm).

Cronch wrote:
There is no formal definition. A drake is a dragon is a wyvern is a wyrm is a serpent.

It IS fun watching people get bent out of shape over the arbitrary cannon definition they themselves have assigned to 5000 years of constantly-changing mythology


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jojo_monkey_boy wrote:
GW is really milking these high priced, high margin items that coincidentally are open to being fielded by a wide range of factions.

Not much of an evidence-based opinion.

 Eldarain wrote:
Carmine Dragon was a nice sculpt imo

Yes, but the Chaos Dragon was better IMO. They should bring it back.

 Dryaktylus wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Carmine Dragon was a nice sculpt imo

Yes, but the Chaos Dragon was better IMO. They should bring it back.

TOW is coming.

 Dryaktylus wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Carmine Dragon was a nice sculpt imo

Yes, but the Chaos Dragon was better IMO. They should bring it back.

Warpfire dragon was cool too. Wish I had kept mine.

 CMLR wrote:

Cronch wrote:
There is no formal definition. A drake is a dragon is a wyvern is a wyrm is a serpent.

A wyrm is a worm, or anything serpentine-like (vermiphorm).

a wyrm is a dragon, all the old metal dragons GW made would be a Wyrm or Lindwurm in "historical" context while a Wyvern is the heraldic dragon in Britain and the roman/greek dracon is more like a snake

 kodos wrote:

 CMLR wrote:

Cronch wrote:
There is no formal definition. A drake is a dragon is a wyvern is a wyrm is a serpent.

A wyrm is a worm, or anything serpentine-like (vermiphorm).

a wyrm is a dragon, all the old metal dragons GW made would be a Wyrm or Lindwurm in "historical" context while a Wyvern is the heraldic dragon in Britain and the roman/greek dracon is more like a snake

Old scandinavian Linnorms tend to be more "big nasty feral beast, wings, fire and even legs entirely optional", if we're being wildly pedantic for some reason.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'd go so far as to say "Wyvern" is the only dragon subtype that actually is almost universally agreed upon actually. There's rarely any stance other than "A wyvern is a four limbed flying dragonoid" or "I have never heard that word because a dragon is just a dragon to me".

 Overread wrote:

As for Smaug most of the early artwork and descriptions of him have him as your very standard fantasy western dragon. 6 limbs with wings, four legs and all. It's really only the Hobbit live action films that had him done as a 4 limbed dragon, which commonly many would consider more of a wyvern design. However its equally known as a wurm design which is often seen as a more classic/older kind of way of describing a dragon.

Tolkien seems to have used terms interchangeably. AFAIK, he never used the term "wyvern" (which I think is important, since it has a specific heraldic meaning that he presumably was trying to avoid), but he refers to all of his dragons as dragons, drakes, and worms. The only difference appears to be whether or not he included the words "fire" and "winged" in the description. Glaurung, the first dragon, who is specifically noted to not have wings, is called a "fire drake", while Ancalagan the Black is described as the "first winged fire drake".

ERJAK wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Cool story bruh.

Archon makes 8 different plastic Dragons and you can probably buy them all for the price of one of these.

Link?

https://www.dungeonsandlasers.com/late-pledge/

Any 7 for €99, translucent ghost dragon is still in tooling

Those seem quite a bit smaller though?

They're also Kickstarter. Vaporware until shipped.

Speaking out of your bum again? I have the dragons in hand.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Cool story bruh.

Archon makes 8 different plastic Dragons and you can probably buy them all for the price of one of these.

Link?

https://www.dungeonsandlasers.com/late-pledge/

Any 7 for €99, translucent ghost dragon is still in tooling

Those seem quite a bit smaller though?

They're also Kickstarter. Vaporware until shipped.

Speaking out of your bum again? I have the dragons in hand.

Kickstarter has a very good history of not delivering the stuff that was funded on it, not delivering it for years, or delivering it partially and not as described. See: Air Umbrella, Mierce, Iron Harvest, in that order.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Kickstarter has a very good history of not delivering the stuff that was funded on it, not delivering it for years, or delivering it partially and not as described. See: Air Umbrella, Mierce, Iron Harvest, in that order.

I've been on KS since day one, I'm well aware how it goes. It's still asinine to say a product I have in hand is vaporware.

the dragons look a bit like a d&d copper dragon

The more I think about it, the less the heads remind me of a Pixar design and the more they start to resemble something that'd come out of the Jim Henson company.

Other than the heads the rest of the models are fine.

Or perhaps Draco from Dragon Heart

I kinda like it other than the way the arms are hanging in front of him, makes the pose look a bit awkward.

 Overread wrote:
Or perhaps Draco from Dragon Heart

yeah I was thinking of that too........ I'm gonna imagine these dragons sounding like sean connery now.

Dragons! Huzzah these are cool as heck. So far 2021 has been the best hobby year ever for me. What else are they going to release?

BrianDavion wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Or perhaps Draco from Dragon Heart

yeah I was thinking of that too........ I'm gonna imagine these dragons sounding like sean connery now.

Draconith: Have you been watching over me all night?
GW: I've been thinking.
Draconith: Yes? About what?
GW: Many things. Mostly about what to call you. I think I've found you a name.
Draconith: You say that as though you reached up and plucked it from the sky.
GW: I did. Up there. Do you see that group of stars? (points at the Copywrite constellation)
Draconith: I know those stars very well.
GW: Do you see the shape that they make?
Draconith: Mm-hmm, a dragon.
GW: Yes. But we can't call you that, because we can't trademark that word. Instead we'll go with Draconith. It means "dragon", but we can trademark it.
Draconith: (chuckling) So instead of calling me "dragon" in your tongue, you'll call me "dragon" in legalese?
GW: You're right, it's silly.
Draconith: No! No, I would be honoured to be named after a writers attempt to avoid generic terms. I... I truly would. Thank you, GW. "Draconith"...

Speaking of trademarks and IP, Christopher Paolini would like his back!

At this point they probably have a GW name generator. Just plug in generic noun, it spits out something with a copyright-friendly ending tacked right on for you, simple as can be.

No wolves on Fenris wrote:
Speaking of trademarks and IP, Christopher Paolini would like his back!

dragon heart and d&d, which have both been identified as having similer look,s both pre-date eregion by a fair bit really I think this is just convergent evolution. there's only so many ways to make a face both draconic and expressive

After sleeping on this the only way to fix this dragon is a new head sculpt, but looking at the rest of the kit it looks nice! The wings gaps concern me though but again can be sculpted...
Both amends will require time and expertise, not an easy project for sure.
Will this kit break the £100 though. £120 maybe?

Karol, Mierce and CMON had some great designs but big resin wings stress me out, plastic is much more durable.

changemod wrote:

changemod wrote:
Their best effort at a plastic dragon, though it's disappointing to see since it's a multibuild kit it seemingly doesn't come, without some conversion legwork, with a generic option instead of "Sigmarine dragon or heavily scarred dragon."

Also they seem almost ashamed of their goofy """copyright""" name in the article now.

It's now been brought to my attention that the open mouthed head is missing almost half of it's teeth (No wonder I thought it looked a bit off) and that both have the Sigmar birthmark sculpted into their chest.

So yeah, not very interested at this point. I might do a lot of conversion work, but I lack the skill of major resculpting work to the point of mimicking the style of missing teeth to the point it wouldn't be very obvious.

They're part of the stormcast army...so of course they have his mark. I don't think these can be taken in other order armies the way Kragnos can.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Or perhaps Draco from Dragon Heart

yeah I was thinking of that too........ I'm gonna imagine these dragons sounding like sean connery now.

Draconith: Have you been watching over me all night?
GW: I've been thinking.
Draconith: Yes? About what?
GW: Many things. Mostly about what to call you. I think I've found you a name.
Draconith: You say that as though you reached up and plucked it from the sky.
GW: I did. Up there. Do you see that group of stars? (points at the Copywrite constellation)
Draconith: I know those stars very well.
GW: Do you see the shape that they make?
Draconith: Mm-hmm, a dragon.
GW: Yes. But we can't call you that, because we can't trademark that word. Instead we'll go with Draconith. It means "dragon", but we can trademark it.
Draconith: (chuckling) So instead of calling me "dragon" in your tongue, you'll call me "dragon" in legalese?
GW: You're right, it's silly.
Draconith: No! No, I would be honoured to be named after a writers attempt to avoid generic terms. I... I truly would. Thank you, GW. "Draconith"...

Seeing as GW will be calling orcs orcs in TOW, doesn't it kind of invalidate the whole "For copyright purposes" theory of stupid names?

I like the red one, though I'm not entirely sure about the head. It could probably use some minor alterations. But from the looks of things this is the kind of dragon I want. The blue one is a strict downgrade for me with a worse head, slightly worse pose (I prefer the head the other way around like on the red one) and silly Sigmarine bits.

Not a fan of them being named characters, but I guess that's just what GW does these days. What I do like, however, immensely so, is that they are riderless. I want a dragon for the dragon, not the silly little monkey on its back. I was delighted to see AoS finally give me that option with the Zombie Dragon and I am equally delighted to see it here.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I kinda like it other than the way the arms are hanging in front of him, makes the pose look a bit awkward.

There's a shot from the front left at the end of the stupid spinny sequence in the video that has me pretty positive about the body of the dragon. A page or two ago the kangaroo like pose was pointed out (and I would have been cool with that), but I think a side view will give the model an entirely different appearance than the head on one the photographer chose suggests.

Cronch wrote:

Spoiler:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Or perhaps Draco from Dragon Heart

yeah I was thinking of that too........ I'm gonna imagine these dragons sounding like sean connery now.

Draconith: Have you been watching over me all night?
GW: I've been thinking.
Draconith: Yes? About what?
GW: Many things. Mostly about what to call you. I think I've found you a name.
Draconith: You say that as though you reached up and plucked it from the sky.
GW: I did. Up there. Do you see that group of stars? (points at the Copywrite constellation)
Draconith: I know those stars very well.
GW: Do you see the shape that they make?
Draconith: Mm-hmm, a dragon.
GW: Yes. But we can't call you that, because we can't trademark that word. Instead we'll go with Draconith. It means "dragon", but we can trademark it.
Draconith: (chuckling) So instead of calling me "dragon" in your tongue, you'll call me "dragon" in legalese?
GW: You're right, it's silly.
Draconith: No! No, I would be honoured to be named after a writers attempt to avoid generic terms. I... I truly would. Thank you, GW. "Draconith"...

Seeing as GW will be calling orcs orcs in TOW, doesn't it kind of invalidate the whole "For copyright purposes" theory of stupid names?

Why, would you like to go back to drug abuse as the reason?

Cronch wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Or perhaps Draco from Dragon Heart

yeah I was thinking of that too........ I'm gonna imagine these dragons sounding like sean connery now.

Draconith: Have you been watching over me all night?
GW: I've been thinking.
Draconith: Yes? About what?
GW: Many things. Mostly about what to call you. I think I've found you a name.
Draconith: You say that as though you reached up and plucked it from the sky.
GW: I did. Up there. Do you see that group of stars? (points at the Copywrite constellation)
Draconith: I know those stars very well.
GW: Do you see the shape that they make?
Draconith: Mm-hmm, a dragon.
GW: Yes. But we can't call you that, because we can't trademark that word. Instead we'll go with Draconith. It means "dragon", but we can trademark it.
Draconith: (chuckling) So instead of calling me "dragon" in your tongue, you'll call me "dragon" in legalese?
GW: You're right, it's silly.
Draconith: No! No, I would be honoured to be named after a writers attempt to avoid generic terms. I... I truly would. Thank you, GW. "Draconith"...

Seeing as GW will be calling orcs orcs in TOW, doesn't it kind of invalidate the whole "For copyright purposes" theory of stupid names?

Or perhaps GW changed their naming policies a bit and has adapted to copyright. Lets not forget the whole name-change fetish at GW came after they lost Chapterhouse and basically had very poor legal advice on copyright in itself. It was a reactionary move that perhaps has been proven to not really work or work how GW wanted. So perhaps they are more confident going back to original names.

ERJAK wrote:



Meh.

The Old World can't come soon enough.

Which is funny considering the old world had the worst dragon sculpts ever put into print.

The high elf dragon, dark elf dragon, and forest dragon are an insult to all creatures capable of visually perceiving shapes.

After Knights, super-Giants and Kragnos, this feels inevitable, but not exciting. Another pile of special rules and a skew model to deal with. Yay.

 Overread wrote:


Or perhaps GW changed their naming policies a bit and has adapted to copyright. Lets not forget the whole name-change fetish at GW came after they lost Chapterhouse and basically had very poor legal advice on copyright in itself. It was a reactionary move that perhaps has been proven to not really work or work how GW wanted. So perhaps they are more confident going back to original names.

[Pedantic]Names are covered by trademarks not copyrights. Copyrights protect content (ie stories, images, music) rather than mere names. So when GW goes after a sculptor for copying their designs or an animator for using their characters it is a copyright dispute.

Trademarks protect names and other distinguishing features (logos and such). Generic names cannot be trademarked (Apple (r) brand apples) but unrelated names can (Apple (r) brand computers) even if they are preexisting words.

GW for example cannot claim a trademark on Orc or Goblin toys but could claim Night Gobos. Or even Black Orcs. Ultramarine is a preexisting word but not descriptive or generic for superhuman space men so GW could claim a trademark on it for toys and miniatures. Space Marine probably not.

There's also an element of search engine optimization. A search for "Ogre" brings up any number of fantasy images and even a game by a rival company OGRE. Ogors or Ogryn do not.

[/pedantic]

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
There's also an element of search engine optimization. A search for "Ogre" brings up any number of fantasy images and even a game by a rival company OGRE. Ogors or Ogryn do not.

This reasoning seems like a double edged sword to me. You might not get people hitting random competotor minis while searching for Warhams, but you'll also never get people randomly stumbling upon Warhams when searching for generic fantasy stuff.

True, but at the same time you back that up by having a heavy marketing campaign. Having unique names that work on just your stuff means that your investments into marketing work that bit better because now anyone specifically reacting to your marketing has a greater chance of landing on your site.

Meanwhile if you share a marketing term with another brand or a generic brand it becomes more hit and miss.

If I type Ossiarch or Bonereaper into google then GW stuff flies up high in the search results. However if I type Skeleton there's nothing warhammer at all.



Good marketing would not rely on random chance, yes that happens, but you can't rely on it.

'The Realms Aren’t Ready For The Orruk Warclans Battletome’s Dirty Tricks and Stinky Monsters' first preview of the new Orruk Warclans battletome on Warhammer Community

I'm actually a little excited for this book.

 Overread wrote:
True, but at the same time you back that up by having a heavy marketing campaign. Having unique names that work on just your stuff means that your investments into marketing work that bit better because now anyone specifically reacting to your marketing has a greater chance of landing on your site.

Meanwhile if you share a marketing term with another brand or a generic brand it becomes more hit and miss.

If I type Ossiarch or Bonereaper into google then GW stuff flies up high in the search results. However if I type Skeleton there's nothing warhammer at all.



Good marketing would not rely on random chance, yes that happens, but you can't rely on it.

That assumes people know to google Ossiarch. If people already know what you're selling, they're going to know to type in "games workshop skeleton" rather than just "skeleton" the same way as they're going to know to type in "ossiarch". As someone who played WHFB but doesn't play AoS, I don't remember half the names GW uses these days. I had to google "troll" to remember that GW renamed them "Troggoth".

It's even worse when GW do have a well identifiable name and they get rid of it. Now when you google "Night Goblin" you have to hunt to find the actual GW page because they renamed them Gloomspite Stabbas or some crap that I always forget.

I had to google "Age of Sigmar Ogre" to remember they're now "Ogors" so yeah. Definitely a two-edged sword.

WHFB and 40k used generic archetypes because it made it easy to bring people in. When I read an AoS thing my eyes glaze over after the 10th made up word.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
40k used generic archetypes because it made it easy to bring people in. When I read an AoS thing my eyes glaze over after the 10th made up word.

Ogryn, Ratling, Eldar, Squat... And that's before everything was changed to be copyrightable, and we got Aeldari and Drukhari and other bastarding things I can't spell.

Togusa wrote:

changemod wrote:

changemod wrote:
Their best effort at a plastic dragon, though it's disappointing to see since it's a multibuild kit it seemingly doesn't come, without some conversion legwork, with a generic option instead of "Sigmarine dragon or heavily scarred dragon."

Also they seem almost ashamed of their goofy """copyright""" name in the article now.

It's now been brought to my attention that the open mouthed head is missing almost half of it's teeth (No wonder I thought it looked a bit off) and that both have the Sigmar birthmark sculpted into their chest.

So yeah, not very interested at this point. I might do a lot of conversion work, but I lack the skill of major resculpting work to the point of mimicking the style of missing teeth to the point it wouldn't be very obvious.

They're part of the stormcast army...so of course they have his mark. I don't think these can be taken in other order armies the way Kragnos can.

Call me crazy, but especially after they've been so liberal about which armies can use giants, a large high quality/high detail generic dragon seems like a massive potential moneyspinner. Heck, I've thought for years, even pre-aos that it's odd GW doesn't really unambiguously do a fancy collectors piece dragon.

They're getting a bit better for that now with an increased variety of faction "dragons" such as the big chunky frog wyverns orcs use or the wingless slightly eastern looking lava dragon from the nudist dwarves line, I guess.

GW have done fantasy collectors dragons - they just stopped marketing Forgeworld stuf all that much for AoS and have slowly been stripping it.

Anyone know what that is

darthryan wrote:
Anyone know what that is

Breakaboss on Mirebrute Troggoth

darthryan wrote:
Anyone know what that is

Huh, yellow does look good on them:

 Sotahullu wrote:
Huh, yellow does look good on them:

Agreed. Much better than previous red shields.

Man, I almost painted up some last night with yellow shields. Went with the poster boy reds though. I felt yellow would kind of cross into Gloomspite territory with their Bad Moon iconography. And the excessively yellow Ironjawz.

They look sharp in yellow, for sure.

But yellow shields are less sneaky in this case. Angry red faces? The Khornates would never suspect them!

I wonder if it would be a good idea to paint a whole shield like made from bronze? The other idea would be to make them blue to make them ''lucky'' like 40k orks do.

Well I haven't actually got them yet but I am planning on doing the shield as brass with dark metallics. Then as for clothing I am not sure, either black, bright grey or dark blue.


Oh and jungle themed bases. Because I am fething tired on only doing dark & damp bases.

Well, having started AoS by buying the Dominion box and getting extra boltboyz, I planned on having a slightly more ranged Orruk army than my old Orc/Goblin WHFB army.

I loved the red shields with the green skin look so bought into AoS. I then see from this community post that the ranged army is 'yellow'.

"You can improve Kruleboyz shooting even more if you choose to run one of the Kruleboyz’ warclans, like the Big Yellers warclan, notable for their bright yeller shields."

As a new AoS player, are colour schemes expected to be followed? You couldn't turn up to a 40k tournament using Dark Angels rules with a smurfblue painted army. How does this go in AoS?

Dryaktylus wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Carmine Dragon was a nice sculpt imo

Yes, but the Chaos Dragon was better IMO. They should bring it back.

The forgeworld one? IIRC, the mold broke. I had 2 and sold one for over $1000 cause you couldnt get them anymore.

Overread wrote:There are conventions, but in general there is no fixed definitions outside of a specific lore/mythology/story/setting.

As for Smaug most of the early artwork and descriptions of him have him as your very standard fantasy western dragon. 6 limbs with wings, four legs and all. It's really only the Hobbit live action films that had him done as a 4 limbed dragon, which commonly many would consider more of a wyvern design. However its equally known as a wurm design which is often seen as a more classic/older kind of way of describing a dragon.

IIRC, when the first hobbit films released (you can see the clips of the dragon entering the dwarves fortress) it appears smaug had 6 limbs. it was then removed for the last 2 films (and bluray versions updated - the collector series, not sure on regular).

Regards,

SF

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Well, having started AoS by buying the Dominion box and getting extra boltboyz, I planned on having a slightly more ranged Orruk army than my old Orc/Goblin WHFB army.

I loved the red shields with the green skin look so bought into AoS. I then see from this community post that the ranged army is 'yellow'.

"You can improve Kruleboyz shooting even more if you choose to run one of the Kruleboyz’ warclans, like the Big Yellers warclan, notable for their bright yeller shields."

As a new AoS player, are colour schemes expected to be followed? You couldn't turn up to a 40k tournament using Dark Angels rules with a smurfblue painted army. How does this go in AoS?

From my experience, I don't think the AoS community is that strict.

 nels1031 wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Well, having started AoS by buying the Dominion box and getting extra boltboyz, I planned on having a slightly more ranged Orruk army than my old Orc/Goblin WHFB army.

I loved the red shields with the green skin look so bought into AoS. I then see from this community post that the ranged army is 'yellow'.

"You can improve Kruleboyz shooting even more if you choose to run one of the Kruleboyz’ warclans, like the Big Yellers warclan, notable for their bright yeller shields."

As a new AoS player, are colour schemes expected to be followed? You couldn't turn up to a 40k tournament using Dark Angels rules with a smurfblue painted army. How does this go in AoS?

From my experience, I don't think the AoS community is that strict.

There were one or two tournaments that tried ages back.

In general no one cares and even within their own armies most people haven't got a clue about official schemes. Heck the official Daughters of Khaine schemes are almost identical and just different shades of red in key places.

Your army Your choice when it comes to paint. The only requirement is that most events will mandate that you're painted (at least 3 colours); but otherwise go wild!

 Overread wrote:

 nels1031 wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Well, having started AoS by buying the Dominion box and getting extra boltboyz, I planned on having a slightly more ranged Orruk army than my old Orc/Goblin WHFB army.

I loved the red shields with the green skin look so bought into AoS. I then see from this community post that the ranged army is 'yellow'.

"You can improve Kruleboyz shooting even more if you choose to run one of the Kruleboyz’ warclans, like the Big Yellers warclan, notable for their bright yeller shields."

As a new AoS player, are colour schemes expected to be followed? You couldn't turn up to a 40k tournament using Dark Angels rules with a smurfblue painted army. How does this go in AoS?

From my experience, I don't think the AoS community is that strict.

There were one or two tournaments that tried ages back.

In general no one cares and even within their own armies most people haven't got a clue about official schemes. Heck the official Daughters of Khaine schemes are almost identical and just different shades of red in key places.

Your army Your choice when it comes to paint. The only requirement is that most events will mandate that you're painted (at least 3 colours); but otherwise go wild!

It would be ridiculous to have "Rules" of painting when the original "Rules" were so light .

well there are rules for painting, it is just that everyone ignores them

darthryan wrote:
Anyone know what that is

I wanted to make a joke, but that's too easy.

 Sotahullu wrote:
Huh, yellow does look good on them:

It would on a Bad Moon army, but I do prefer squigly angry faces. Yet, I'd like to see which other schemes will the BT come.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
As a new AoS player, are colour schemes expected to be followed? You couldn't turn up to a 40k tournament using Dark Angels rules with a smurfblue painted army. How does this go in AoS?

Nobody I know gives a damn, just stay with your subfaction keywords.

Also, there are factions subfactions without an actual official color (Mega-Gargants, Thunder Lizard), subfactions that have colours but not official rules (almost every single 1E Battletome, and some like Gitz feature them) and even subfactions that don't even have official artwork or the likes (there are Beastclaw Raiders that work for Archaon, use Chaos iconography, yet they are only mentioned in the BTs).

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
As a new AoS player, are colour schemes expected to be followed? You couldn't turn up to a 40k tournament using Dark Angels rules with a smurfblue painted army. How does this go in AoS?

Do you plan on playing at any of the tournaments held at Warhammer World?

I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Sub Faction Abilities in AoS are kind of lesser than in 40K.

So rather than having exclusive units or equipment like Astartes, it’s more you’d be better off fielding certain units.

Provided you don’t go swapping your chosen Sub Faction game to game during a tournament, it really won’t make an ounce of difference.

And there's no way to get multiple subfactions so no need to worry about separation of subfactions

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Well, having started AoS by buying the Dominion box and getting extra boltboyz, I planned on having a slightly more ranged Orruk army than my old Orc/Goblin WHFB army.

I loved the red shields with the green skin look so bought into AoS. I then see from this community post that the ranged army is 'yellow'.

"You can improve Kruleboyz shooting even more if you choose to run one of the Kruleboyz’ warclans, like the Big Yellers warclan, notable for their bright yeller shields."

As a new AoS player, are colour schemes expected to be followed? You couldn't turn up to a 40k tournament using Dark Angels rules with a smurfblue painted army. How does this go in AoS?

Since when? I played Black Salamanders at LVO 2018. I don't think there is any rule that says you have to have blue marines to play ultras and so on.

Recent core rules faq specifically states that if you're not running your subfactions colours then you're running proxies and must have the permission of your opponent to do so. There was a lot of hoo ha in the SCE groups I'm in about the change.

The rule's BS. I've never known anyone to give two hoots. You might have bother at official GW tournies though.

I tried to find the faq but it seems to have momentarily disappeared.

I’m now looking forward to army pics of the Kruelboyz, which is something we don’t seem to have had much or any of.

That way, we can better see how the really quite disparate looks come together. Particularly for the gribblies, so we can see the size differences and that.

Honestly 99.9% of people won't give you any grief over it. Subfactions in battletomes/codex are really just a handful of special rules and no sane person expects you to build 4 or 5 or however subgroups there are up so that you can choose. Esp since many subgroups focus on specific types of model or tactics (Eg one might focus on close combat another on ranged etc...).

even in 40k the stink eye is useally used for marine players. I doubt a majority of 40k players could tell you what the colour scheme for craftworld beil-tan IS.

 lare2 wrote:
Recent core rules faq specifically states that if you're not running your subfactions colours then you're running proxies and must have the permission of your opponent to do so. There was a lot of hoo ha in the SCE groups I'm in about the change.

The rule's BS. I've never known anyone to give two hoots. You might have bother at official GW tournies though.

I tried to find the faq but it seems to have momentarily disappeared.

Dominion hasn't been out for a month yet, so there's no FAQ for the Core Rules as of yet. Here however is a Designers' Commentary from 2018 that has the particular commentary you're referring to:

Q: Is it okay to use ‘proxy’ models to stand in for models that I do not have but want to use in a game? For example, using a Slaughterpriest model to represent a Bloodsecrator, or using Stormcast Eternals models painted in the colours of the Hammers of Sigmar to represent Stormcast Eternals from a different warrior chamber?

A: The use of proxy models is generally frowned upon, because doing so can confuse the other players (and sometimes even yourself), and because it spoils the spectacle and aesthetic of the game. Because of this, you can only use proxy models if you’ve gained your opponent’s permission to do so before the game begins.

BrianDavion wrote:
even in 40k the stink eye is useally used for marine players. I doubt a majority of 40k players could tell you what the colour scheme for craftworld beil-tan IS.

I dunno, maybe the Eldar. But nobody (nobody) follows the Genestealer Cult ones. Not least because most of the ones in the codex were flipping awful.

 The Phazer wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
even in 40k the stink eye is useally used for marine players. I doubt a majority of 40k players could tell you what the colour scheme for craftworld beil-tan IS.

I dunno, maybe the Eldar. But nobody (nobody) follows the Genestealer Cult ones. Not least because most of the ones in the codex were flipping awful.

Personally, outside of Marines, I don't give a hoot what color scheme you use for your sub-faction. I'm a little more 'strict' on Marines just because of how varied they can be and how their rules work. Yellow Ultramarines would weird me out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sotahullu wrote:
Huh, yellow does look good on them:

Only because it's not bright canary yellow like they gave to the Ironjawz.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 The Phazer wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
even in 40k the stink eye is useally used for marine players. I doubt a majority of 40k players could tell you what the colour scheme for craftworld beil-tan IS.

I dunno, maybe the Eldar. But nobody (nobody) follows the Genestealer Cult ones. Not least because most of the ones in the codex were flipping awful.

Personally, outside of Marines, I don't give a hoot what color scheme you use for your sub-faction. I'm a little more 'strict' on Marines just because of how varied they can be and how their rules work. Yellow Ultramarines would weird me out.
.

Liberators say "Hi"

Marines are different because their "subfactions" have unique models, parts and codex of their own and those codex have further subgroups within them. Ultramarines and Blood Angels are basically two different armies.

And within them there's sub-chapters which likely have different paint schemes with slight variations on the core colours "blue with different trim" etc...

 Overread wrote:
Marines are different because their "subfactions" have unique models, parts and codex of their own and those codex have further subgroups within them. Ultramarines and Blood Angels are basically two different armies.

And within them there's sub-chapters which likely have different paint schemes with slight variations on the core colours "blue with different trim" etc...

except, whats the differance between white scars and imperial fists? sure each has a special character but that same level of differance exists between Necrons, or Orks.

the biggest reason is that everyone KNOWS the space marine chapters and the lore behind them, So people more obviously know if you're running imperial fists but painted white scars.


but we're getting off topic

 Ghaz wrote:

 lare2 wrote:
Recent core rules faq specifically states that if you're not running your subfactions colours then you're running proxies and must have the permission of your opponent to do so. There was a lot of hoo ha in the SCE groups I'm in about the change.

The rule's BS. I've never known anyone to give two hoots. You might have bother at official GW tournies though.

I tried to find the faq but it seems to have momentarily disappeared.

Dominion hasn't been out for a month yet, so there's no FAQ for the Core Rules as of yet. Here however is a Designers' Commentary from 2018 that has the particular commentary you're referring to:

Q: Is it okay to use ‘proxy’ models to stand in for models that I do not have but want to use in a game? For example, using a Slaughterpriest model to represent a Bloodsecrator, or using Stormcast Eternals models painted in the colours of the Hammers of Sigmar to represent Stormcast Eternals from a different warrior chamber?

A: The use of proxy models is generally frowned upon, because doing so can confuse the other players (and sometimes even yourself), and because it spoils the spectacle and aesthetic of the game. Because of this, you can only use proxy models if you’ve gained your opponent’s permission to do so before the game begins.

Nice one, thanks! That's the rule I was after.

Could've sworn I was looking at the designer's commentary the other day for the core rules. Hey ho.

Ah, but that technicality can be fought with another; did one use the EXACT same colors to paint the models? Slightly different shade on the edge highlight? Gold trim instead of silver? Different recess shade on the weapon? Alternate color for the belt buckle? Well that is a deviation from the official scheme, thereby it is a custom faction and can be whatever one wants.

If one's opponent is going to be unreasonably picky about RAW, then might as well use unreasonably pedantic arguments to counteract it

Has there been any ideas, rumours or guesses what this Draconith will cost?

Kragnos price? With rules in it's own book?

Apologies if I missed this if posted already.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Has there been any ideas, rumours or guesses what this Draconith will cost?

Kragnos price? With rules in it's own book?

Apologies if I missed this if posted already.

The only place I can find Kragnos in the destruction armies in the pitched battled points costs book for 2021 is in the Orruk Warclans section, where he had a big points cost drop from when first released.
Also he is in the pics in Orruk Warclans promotion on Warhammer community.
I wonder if he will be in that book first and then in subsequent destruction books as they come out?

SamusDrake wrote:
The trailer was good fun too; two bros are gonna clean up the mortal realms...Dragon Ninja style?

But seriously, they need their own late 80s coin-op beat-em-up.

Like... Double Dragon, perhaps?

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
It IS fun watching people get bent out of shape over the arbitrary cannon definition they themselves have assigned to 5000 years of constantly-changing mythology

I'm curious - what does artillery have to do with the dragons? Other than using them for target practice, anyway.

changemod wrote:
Call me crazy, but especially after they've been so liberal about which armies can use giants, a large high quality/high detail generic dragon seems like a massive potential moneyspinner. Heck, I've thought for years, even pre-aos that it's odd GW doesn't really unambiguously do a fancy collectors piece dragon.

[snark]Any idea when they're releasing one?[/snark]

BrianDavion wrote:
even in 40k the stink eye is useally used for marine players. I doubt a majority of 40k players could tell you what the colour scheme for craftworld beil-tan IS.

A, Biel-tan
B, Primary green, secondary white, often seen with a thorns motif on vehicles; if representing the Swordwind, then primarily "whatever colour the Aspect shrines are using this week..."

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Has there been any ideas, rumours or guesses what this Draconith will cost?

Kragnos price? With rules in it's own book?

Apologies if I missed this if posted already.

You mean the dragon? Money? Probably kragnos price or bit more.

And rules will likely be in the new stormcast book. It's new model for stormcast armies so makes sense rules are there.

tneva82 wrote:
And rules will likely be in the new stormcast book. It's new model for stormcast armies so makes sense rules are there.

Bit optimistic to think there won't be a bespoke book just for these two minis

 lord_blackfang wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
And rules will likely be in the new stormcast book. It's new model for stormcast armies so makes sense rules are there.

Bit optimistic to think there won't be a bespoke book just for these two minis

Right before the Sigmarine battletome is released? Hardly. As far as I'm aware GW's current Day 1 DLC push in 40k is for faction rules, Crusade and the like. Not model datasheets/warscrolls. There's currently no good reason to believe a model of a certain army won't be in its faction army book unless that book is already released.

Unless the dragons are more widely available as allies rather than part of Sigmarines, and GW suddenly doesn't feel like previewing expansion books anymore, the assumption should be the rules will be in the upcoming battletome.

As for price, we know nothing at the moment and likely won't until a week before they go on pre-order (was that August or September?), but I wouldn't be shocked if GW gave the giant giant price tag another try. The dragon model seems similar in size and the only reason to go down is if the giant didn't sell anywhere near what GW expected (and GW acknowledges price as the reason if that's the case).

I mean, the WHC not-a-dragon-honest article does finish with this in the last paragraph...

"Check back with Warhammer Community in future as we take a closer look at the Draconith princes and their place in the upcoming Stormcast Eternals battletome."

That would seem to imply they're in the SCE book, though it doesn't rule them out from being elsewhere as well.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
And rules will likely be in the new stormcast book. It's new model for stormcast armies so makes sense rules are there.

Bit optimistic to think there won't be a bespoke book just for these two minis

not really, they're clearly linked to the SCEs, and the 3.0 SCE battletome is coming out

 Dysartes wrote:
I mean, the WHC not-a-dragon-honest article does finish with this in the last paragraph...

"Check back with Warhammer Community in future as we take a closer look at the Draconith princes and their place in the upcoming Stormcast Eternals battletome."

That would seem to imply they're in the SCE book, though it doesn't rule them out from being elsewhere as well.

It also calls them Dragons several times.

Stormcast Battletome Article

Stormkeeps are in:


The two Dragons are said to be able to be brought in by Stormkeep forces.
Teaser of Karazai's special rules:


I'm hoping that the Dragons can be brought in by a Scions of the Storm force as well. I'm fiddling around with the idea of Vigilors and a Knight Judicator following in Karazai's murderous wake.