Its been a few months and yet I still want to gouge my eyes out at what AoS is. I spent roughly 500 on Chaos Dwarfs from FW and roughly 200 on Bretonnians so that I could hop in on the endtimes. Now im sitting here with an empty wallet and two half assembled armies that I cant bring myself to even look at. I tried AoS and quit halfway through my fith or sixth game and havent looked back.
Tried watching a lets play of Mordheim on youtube and got the same blues.
Is there any chance GW might bring back WFB? Like actual blocks of infantry?
Is there any chance GW might bring back WFB? Like actual blocks of infantry?
I very much doubt it. AoS is supposed to be an 'easier' game to get into - rank and flank is actually a pretty complicated concept compared to moving individual models - although physically moving then is easier...
It also creates the barrier of entry - it was very rare that a single box of infantry made a viable in-game unit, whereas in 40k 1 box made a unit in most cases.
Eldarain wrote: Have you tried Kings of War? They are writing lists to accommodate orphaned rank and flank fans
This. If rank and file is what you're after in a game, I think KoW is your only long term option; Legacy 8th will die out, and I have my suspicions that 9th age will implode at some point.
This. If rank and file is what you're after in a game, I think KoW is your only long term option; Legacy 8th will die out, and I have my suspicions that 9th age will implode at some point.
Why? It's bigger every day.
Every release brings more people (going by website traffic), and events routinely sell out.
If 9th age can defeat "officialdom" mentality wherein rules have to be written by an official company or else be ignored, they will have accomplished something historic.
This. If rank and file is what you're after in a game, I think KoW is your only long term option; Legacy 8th will die out, and I have my suspicions that 9th age will implode at some point.
Why? It's bigger every day.
Every release brings more people (going by website traffic), and events routinely sell out.
Because eventually, the amateurs (by true definition) giving up their time to produce/test it will get fed up of being screamed at on the internet for doing it wrong. Which *will* happen.
I'm currently finishing 12 Fantasy armies and 3 tables for my house. And then It's done, I can play 8th whenever I want and at least have some cool armies and some awesome scenery to boot.
It hurts to see something you love being killed, and something terrible take it's place.
It's like how great music struggles to be found and played, and gak pop music takes over the radio all for the sake of simplicity. Because the majority always looks for rock bottom. The lowest common denominator.
8th will die out. It has no official support and the competitive scene almost fully switched to KoW / 9th with the former having received a big increase in support.
My wife and I pulled all competitive support for WHFB a while ago and fully transitioned to KoW, receiving huge positive support and a steady increase in participants for our tournaments - we went from ~30 participants in our major bi-annual tournaments to ~42 and received a big amount of newer players, praising our decision as it's much, much easier to get into KoW than it is to get into WHFB.
I'm not so much saddened by the change of game as much as the change of universe. There was so much there that was just abandoned. I liked the idea of End Times a lot, but they took it too far. The world should have been reshaped with some new threats replacing old, and some heroes and villains slain, but instead they blew up the whole thing. So I, too, am still sad about the loss of WFB.
I'm currently finishing 12 Fantasy armies and 3 tables for my house. And then It's done, I can play 8th whenever I want and at least have some cool armies and some awesome scenery to boot.
It hurts to see something you love being killed, and something terrible take it's place.
It's like how great music struggles to be found and played, and gak pop music takes over the radio all for the sake of simplicity. Because the majority always looks for rock bottom. The lowest common denominator.
Preaching to the choir about that spammed pop music.
No pun intended.
I'm pretty bummed about the loss of the model kits. However, my first fantasy love (Bretonnia) was on life support for a long time before AoS - so i can't blame their decline on that.
I would not plan on GW reviving the WFB ruleset...But that certainly does not mean you can't keep it alive on your table.
I have a 2000pt Chaos force that I will be adding AoS stuff to and just rebasing them. I also have 3000pts of goblins that are being used for 8th and plan on getting a load of Perry's war of the roses dudes to use as Empire
The one thing that does annoy me is why could they not at lease keep the square bases going? AoS even says bases do not matter so why make them round at all.
The one thing that does annoy me is why could they not at lease keep the square bases going? AoS even says bases do not matter so why make them round at all.
One reason is practical - square/rectangular bases scream out to be ranked up. Which in turn requires the miniatures on them to tesselate properly, because if they don't then people get annoyed, because they expect them to match up, because they're on square bases.
Second, because round bases usually look better (if you have zero consideration for rules taken into account). My group have been steadily rebasing onto round, and it really is surprising how much better minis look on them.
I'm enjoying AoS now, although I'll admit I didn't when it came out. There's a good foundation to build on there, but that's not really on topic.
Yeah, I'm still miffed about the End Times, too.
There really wasn't a need to do what they did, which is to blow up the world we'd all spent so much time playing in and developing our own characters and cities and armies and so on and so forth for. It's akin to WotC saying, 'Hey guys, all your D&D characters are dead now, as we've made it canon that Krynn was sucked into a black hole.' Regardless of the story that accompanied it (and I'm not that crazy about the End Times narrative, either), no one's happy when a company pulls the sandbox it gave you to play in away and kicks over all the sandcastles you made.
We still have our models, and to some extent, we still have our stories (if headcanon'd into an alternate universe where End Times didn't happen), but we don't have access to the security of knowing there will be players in the foreseeable future, or knowing that the models we want to buy will be there in the future. And that's a shame.
What's the most frustrating to me is that AoS could have so easily existed alongside it; they could have had their cake and eaten it, too. But it is what it is.
It's been said countless times but the best thing to do is play whatever system you can get games in as long as you enjoy it at least a little. Personally I don't really get AoS and rebasing is not on my to-do list at all so I'm all aboard the 9th age train. And yes, I also agree that it's going to be a hard slog to get it off the ground but things are looking brighter what with some miniatures companies openly stating they want to sculpt models for T9A, including one exclusively. And I have to say the vast majority of traffic on T9A website is very civil for wargaming standards, mainly because people enjoy the interaction at every level of the design process and don't get too frustrated about things, which is in stark contrast to a company who disables comments on their YouTube videos...
This. If rank and file is what you're after in a game, I think KoW is your only long term option; Legacy 8th will die out, and I have my suspicions that 9th age will implode at some point.
Why? It's bigger every day.
Every release brings more people (going by website traffic), and events routinely sell out.
Because eventually, the amateurs (by true definition) giving up their time to produce/test it will get fed up of being screamed at on the internet for doing it wrong. Which *will* happen.
You're probably not aware on the scale that 9th age is working then.
There's a good 150-200 people working in there and while there have been some drop outs, there's new people to pick up after them. No miniature company could hope to employ this many people in rules development/support and still turn a profit.
Eternal flitter wrote: It's been said countless times but the best thing to do is play whatever system you can get games in as long as you enjoy it at least a little. Personally I don't really get AoS and rebasing is not on my to-do list at all so I'm all aboard the 9th age train. And yes, I also agree that it's going to be a hard slog to get it off the ground but things are looking brighter what with some miniatures companies openly stating they want to sculpt models for T9A, including one exclusively. And I have to say the vast majority of traffic on T9A website is very civil for wargaming standards, mainly because people enjoy the interaction at every level of the design process and don't get too frustrated about things, which is in stark contrast to a company who disables comments on their YouTube videos...
It's very civil because people who don't care about it don't spend their days trashing their forums. Unlike here.
You're probably not aware on the scale that 9th age is working then.
There's a good 150-200 people working in there and while there have been some drop outs, there's new people to pick up after them. No miniature company could hope to employ this many people in rules development/support and still turn a profit.
You're probably not aware on the scale that 9th age is working then.
There's a good 150-200 people working in there and while there have been some drop outs, there's new people to pick up after them. No miniature company could hope to employ this many people in rules development/support and still turn a profit.
I'm not suggesting 9th age is bad or half-assed. It's just the internet is the internet.
And we've had our share of that.
If you ask any player they will tell its their army that's been nerfed the worst (the HE thread was like 20 pages long after a few hours).
But people are still on board.
This is not a one-man (or few-men) team like, say, Furion's excellent reworking of warhammer. In some regards it was better than 9th age, but dropped because it was basically a one-man drive. If someone burns out or has a case of real life, someone else steps in or is promoted.
Eternal flitter wrote:And yes, I also agree that it's going to be a hard slog to get it off the ground but things are looking brighter what with some miniatures companies openly stating they want to sculpt models for T9A, including one exclusively. And I have to say the vast majority of traffic on T9A website is very civil for wargaming standards, mainly because people enjoy the interaction at every level of the design process and don't get too frustrated about things, which is in stark contrast to a company who disables comments on their YouTube videos...
No surprise. This all happened before with SGs. Contrary to popular thought that players given the reins will tear a game apart, great things happen when people work on a thing for the love of it, rather than because the accountants want to sell more minis, or sell more of that faction. Case in point:
Haechi wrote:It's very civil because people who don't care about it don't spend their days trashing their forums. Unlike here.
Why do you think people here don't care? Why else would they be here? They played these games, loved them, and watched them go downhill thanks to faulty logic and obstinate decisions - that's going to stick even when they move onto other games. The gamers who really don't care about GW's core 2 are all off on other forums.
As Eternal Flitter said, one of the differences between there and here is that players over there are actually listened to. You might be surprised how far that goes, how much frustration it cuts out.
That's not the point. The point is people who dislike AoS are polluting the AoS forums all over the internet. You might think it's fair because you're angry at the loss of WHFB, but I, like many others, never played WHFB and really enjoy AoS, and I shouldn't have to through hate messages everyday just so I can have a conversation with others like me.
Haechi wrote: That's not the point. The point is people who dislike AoS are polluting the AoS forums all over the internet. You might think it's fair because you're angry at the loss of WHFB, but I, like many others, never played WHFB and really enjoy AoS, and I shouldn't have to through hate messages everyday just so I can have a conversation with others like me.
Then don't open threads with titles like "I still feel depressed about WFB ending" because you're pretty much guaranteed to read some sort of AoS-bashing.
There's plenty of positive threads about AoS, here and elsewhere. Mostly dealing with specific releases, tactics or army-specific topics.
Haechi wrote: That's not the point. The point is people who dislike AoS are polluting the AoS forums all over the internet. You might think it's fair because you're angry at the loss of WHFB, but I, like many others, never played WHFB and really enjoy AoS, and I shouldn't have to through hate messages everyday just so I can have a conversation with others like me.
Then don't open threads with titles like "I still feel depressed about WFB ending" because you're pretty much guaranteed to read some sort of AoS-bashing.
There's plenty of positive threads about AoS, here and elsewhere. Mostly dealing with specific releases, tactics or army-specific topics.
This. So, so much.
Also, people who assume that a game (or anything, really) can live in a void, bereft of all possible negative feedback from prospect players or just downright critics that enjoy games in the same niche (in this case, wargamers) are... not sporting a very realistic view of things. Every game will have to deal with criticism - be it from the baggage they carry with (from their IP like, say, Star Wars, or past editions - 40k is getting a serious case of this at the moment.). Of course, this works the other way around, too - the simple proof of this is that AoS would not even be looked at if it wasn't being pushed by GW. End of.
Now, one cannot disregard critics (or "hater hipsters", as I saw mentioned in another thread ) just because they have a different point of view, especially when their critic stems from the very thing that makes the game viable in the first place - its legacy as a sort of WFB's spiritual successor.
To the OP - Yeah, you can pretty much forget about the Old World getting back by GW's hands, really. Your best bet really is KoW and (imo) 9th Age.
Eternal flitter wrote: It's been said countless times but the best thing to do is play whatever system you can get games in as long as you enjoy it at least a little. Personally I don't really get AoS and rebasing is not on my to-do list at all so I'm all aboard the 9th age train. And yes, I also agree that it's going to be a hard slog to get it off the ground but things are looking brighter what with some miniatures companies openly stating they want to sculpt models for T9A, including one exclusively. And I have to say the vast majority of traffic on T9A website is very civil for wargaming standards, mainly because people enjoy the interaction at every level of the design process and don't get too frustrated about things, which is in stark contrast to a company who disables comments on their YouTube videos...
It's very civil because people who don't care about it don't spend their days trashing their forums. Unlike here.
Absolutely true which is why I don't roll around AoS threads just to troll. I believe saying I dislike something once is sufficient to get the point across. However, there's still stuff to talk about and ultimately we're all still playing a fantasy war game.
Haechi wrote: That's not the point. The point is people who dislike AoS are polluting the AoS forums all over the internet.
But it's the point you brought up. Wondering why the kind of people who 'don't care' aren't 'polluting' the 9th Age forums.
Simplest answer is, as said, they do care.
Unravelling it a bit more, the people who care about 9th Age are mostly off on the 9th Age forum, caring about it. People on Dakka who care about GW-supported 8th ed don't really have too many other big places to visit online, that aren't focussing on AoS; and this is still, ostensibly, the Warhammer Fantasy section of Dakka. And they've recently experienced what lots of WFB players have experienced before: they and the game they care about have been gazumped by a game that might sell more minis. Only this time it involves a little more than random charge distances and hordes.
You might think it's fair because you're angry at the loss of WHFB, but I, like many others, never played WHFB and really enjoy AoS, and I shouldn't have to through hate messages everyday just so I can have a conversation with others like me.
Emphasis mine. Well, I guess you don't really get why people miss Warhammer. What have you played before?
And yeah, what Jouso said.
Also, I dropped WFB back about 6th-7th edition. But I still like the fluff and kept up on new mini releases, to see what I could use in other rules (most of my Dragon Rampant daydreams involve the old world), and also to see if GW would come to their senses and make WFB more about tactics, less about exploiting army books and spamming builds.
Haechi wrote: That's not the point. The point is people who dislike AoS are polluting the AoS forums all over the internet. You might think it's fair because you're angry at the loss of WHFB, but I, like many others, never played WHFB and really enjoy AoS, and I shouldn't have to through hate messages everyday just so I can have a conversation with others like me.
*scratches head*
Hmm, It's almost like the 'Aos general discussion and background' forum is a place to discuss Aos related topics, such as why one may like or even why one dislikes the game.
You don't get to censor people's opinions, especially on a board called 'general discussion' and if people have less than pleasant things to say about the game, they are fully entitled to say those things on said board. And maybe it suggests that (shock, horror!) there may be flaws or genuine issues with said game? Smoke and fires, and all that. You don't get to just hand wave away negative points and positions as 'polluting the forums'. This isn't an echo chamber my good man. Nor are we living under a regime that promotes censorship or allows for only 'haechi's vetted and approved opinions' to be posted. People have good, and bad things to say about Aos. Accept it and deal with it. If you can't deal with people having negative opinions about something you like, and shock, horror, discussing and talking about said negative opinions(you know... on a forum, which of all things, exists as a platform to discuss and talk about things, and a 'general Aos discussion' forum at that!), and can only resort to name calling and childish dismissals of said negative viewpoints, (rather than discussing proactive and empowering ways and means of getting the most out of Aos, and by extension, other wargames) then maybe the Internet is the wrong place to be hanging out.
Haechi wrote: That's not the point. The point is people who dislike AoS are polluting the AoS forums all over the internet. You might think it's fair because you're angry at the loss of WHFB, but I, like many others, never played WHFB and really enjoy AoS, and I shouldn't have to through hate messages everyday just so I can have a conversation with others like me.
Cry me a river. The description on this board is "Discuss the Warhammer Fantasy background and anything not covered in the other Warhammer Fantasy forums. Both for Age of Sigmar and legacy WHFB."
You could have easily ignored this thread. The title makes it pretty damned obvious what the content of the thread was going to be.
There's actually a number of 'sarcasm marks'- the backwards question-mark is one, and others are basically squiggly lines of various kinds above a dot.
Nurgle wrote: Its been a few months and yet I still want to gouge my eyes out at what AoS is. I spent roughly 500 on Chaos Dwarfs from FW and roughly 200 on Bretonnians so that I could hop in on the endtimes. Now im sitting here with an empty wallet and two half assembled armies that I cant bring myself to even look at. I tried AoS and quit halfway through my fith or sixth game and havent looked back.
Tried watching a lets play of Mordheim on youtube and got the same blues.
Is there any chance GW might bring back WFB? Like actual blocks of infantry?
I agree with everyone else and unfortunately its not very likely. If it does happen, its at least 3 years away. GW works in 2 year lead time production cycles, so they're not likely to drop AoS until its two years old. Then you'd need another two years of development time before they could release wfb 9th (if they wanted to). But remember, GW management liked AoS so much they took down the old space marine statue and shoved him under a staircase. They think Sigmarines are the hot new thing that'll blow the world of wargaming away. My guess it'll take a least 5 years before they're willing to even consider they might have been wrong. Who knows, by then they might have found enough wealthy 12 year olds to support the game and to keep it going. I doubt it, but its possible. Your best bet is to just transition to a new hobby. Others have suggested Kings of War, I agree, its a pretty good game.
Haechi wrote: That's not the point. The point is people who dislike AoS are polluting the AoS forums all over the internet. You might think it's fair because you're angry at the loss of WHFB, but I, like many others, never played WHFB and really enjoy AoS, and I shouldn't have to through hate messages everyday just so I can have a conversation with others like me.
Cry me a river. The description on this board is "Discuss the Warhammer Fantasy background and anything not covered in the other Warhammer Fantasy forums. Both for Age of Sigmar and legacy WHFB."
You could have easily ignored this thread. The title makes it pretty damned obvious what the content of the thread was going to be.
I don't think Haechi was referring to this thread in particular - rather the overwhelming Hatedom that AoS has generated and its penchant for invading anywhere AoS is discussed, whether or not they're welcome there.
If it's in a General thread, fine I guess, I don't really see the point in complaining ad nauseum about something you can't change, but it's fair enough that the topic is sufficiently broad enough to allow that kind of thing.
But when you've got a topic called "AoS Positivity Thread' or Facebook groups that specifically state they're there for the -positive- and -optimistic- discussion of AoS and then have these people rush in like a tidal wave of bile, shouting about how terrible AoS is, how it's for young children, how it's doomed to failure...you can see how people like Haechi might be a little disgruntled.
Like he says, he likes the game, and he shouldn't have to wade through that bile just to discuss a game he likes. People have a right to express their opinion, but in the proper place and within reasonable bounds of polite interaction.
Personally, I don't like AoS, but I can restrain myself from going places I'm not wanted and ruining the experience for people who do like it. Why not live and let live?
Well, yeah, but it seems like AoS enthusiasts feel it's perfectly acceptible to to the direct opposite in threads like this one, but at the same time complain about it happening to them?
Anyway, this is not a thread to bemoan the elements of AoS, it's being sad at how completely and suddenly GW killed off a much-loved setting.
I know if I am ever going to play KoW, my area is so dead when it comes to gaming that I will be buying and painting multiple forces to loan to other people just to see a game. And if I'm going to do that, it's going to retain as much of the Old World feel as possible.
Dr.Delorean pretty much sums up my feeling towards this. I don't care for Call of Duty, so I don't go to Call of Duty forums to complain about how bad I think something they enjoy is.
Also I'm not a fan of hyperbole that happens in these threads. 'gouge my eyes out', 'everyone hates it'...c'mon guys....I'm presuming we're all adults, let's respect each other like adults.
You just have to start a tread for AoS positive only or whatever and people should respect that and not come into ruin it. It does actually work for a while anyway. Like most threads it can get derailed at times. But this way you people know you're that group of guys and gals having this fun conversation and should the rude interrupt, you simply move, then if the jackass follows again and again and intrudes its easer mo sort that out. But hopefully they won't bug that far. Worked everywhere else.
VeteranNoob wrote: You just have to start a tread for AoS positive only or whatever and people should respect that and not come into ruin it. It does actually work for a while anyway.
It works most of the time actually. I see plenty of civil discussion on AoS here, tactics releases on whatnot.
It's topics like "future of AoS", "my army is being squatted", "look at how successful AoS is in my neck of the woods" that rubs people the wrong way.
Actually as a rule of thumb I'd avoid any AoS thread over 5 pages long. Even if it has a seemingly innocent title
Dr.Delorean pretty much sums up my feeling towards this. I don't care for Call of Duty, so I don't go to Call of Duty forums to complain about how bad I think something they enjoy is.
Like you say, you 'don't care' about cod. It makes no sense to go onto a cod forum. But here's the thing - plenty people do care about Aos, or wfb. Some quite passionately - and they've every right to care for it and feel that way.
And by extension, if you do care for Aos (or wfb), it is actually quite ok to go onto forums to complain about how bad something is, in your opinion, even if somewhere in the world, someone else might like it. There are such thing as legitimate complaints and objective reasonings thst can point out faults, flaws and glaring issues. 'Liking' something is not a requirement to participate in a discussion or say your piece. Unless there was a regime change overnight where only vetted and approved opinions towing the party line are allowed to participate.
It's the point of a discussion forum. To speak your piece, It doesn't matter if someone else likes it or dislikes whatever it is you wish to discuss, that has no relevance to your right to step forward and say what you want to say.
VeteranNoob wrote: You just have to start a tread for AoS positive only or whatever and people should respect that and not come into ruin it. It does actually work for a while anyway.
It works most of the time actually. I see plenty of civil discussion on AoS here, tactics releases on whatnot.
It's topics like "future of AoS", "my army is being squatted", "look at how successful AoS is in my neck of the woods" that rubs people the wrong way.
Actually as a rule of thumb I'd avoid any AoS thread over 5 pages long. Even if it has a seemingly innocent title
jouso wrote:
It's topics like "future of AoS", "my army is being squatted", "look at how successful AoS is in my neck of the woods" that rubs people the wrong way.
Aye, that! Putting up a 'positive comments only' title, like some kind of clubhousesign, is only going to antagonise already-raw feelings.
Deadnight wrote:Like you say, you 'don't care' about cod. It makes no sense to go onto a cod forum. But here's the thing - plenty people do care about Aos, or wfb. Some quite passionately - and they've every right to care for it and feel that way.
That too. As was already said, this is still the WFB section of the board. Imagine you played and enjoyed some other game, and enjoyed talking about it on some online forum, when the game is pulled, CoD is presented as it's natural successor or sequel that you're all but expected to buy into, and the forum switches over to a bunch of people raving about CoD and how they'd never have played that clunky ol' game that came before it.
I think they should have made a new forum section for AOS and kept fantasy battles here - the two are way to opposed to each other to have simply overwritten everything that was fantasy with AOS - especially since people are still playing old school fantasy.
Maybe it was accidental but it still looks pretty trollish to have done that.
On the original topic, I too remain in a kind of denial state about "Old World" Warhammer being gone.
Now, I'm one of those people who likes AoS... at least, the idea of the excellent GW fantasy models, on round bases, fighting in a game that maintains the spirit of WFB but brings the scale down to where I can collect it.
It's the destruction of the Old World, and the annihilation of its characters and story that remains inconceivable. Although I've bought more fantasy product this year than ever before (as I was a 40k player before) I'm still imagining these models fighting in the Empire, or Sylvania, or some Dwarven hold in the World's Edge mountains.
Although I'm an eager and willing fan, entirely open to a new world and new armies, I don't think I'll ever connect with a world of molten silver rivers falling from a chunk of earth floating in space, the way I might with some peasant village in Brettonia.
And, I'm beginning to realize that even though GW won me to their fantasy line with the change to Age of Sigmar, they'll lose me as they kill off the Old World line of products, and replace them space marines riding dragons.
But, I've been a gamer a long time. And, in my experience, valuable IPs always come back. I've seen it with Battletech, and Shadowrun, and even Warzone. I suspect the Old World will be back one day. I'd just prefer it happen before I get too old.
Dr.Delorean pretty much sums up my feeling towards this. I don't care for Call of Duty, so I don't go to Call of Duty forums to complain about how bad I think something they enjoy is.
Like you say, you 'don't care' about cod. It makes no sense to go onto a cod forum. But here's the thing - plenty people do care about Aos, or wfb. Some quite passionately - and they've every right to care for it and feel that way.
And by extension, if you do care for Aos (or wfb), it is actually quite ok to go onto forums to complain about how bad something is, in your opinion, even if somewhere in the world, someone else might like it. There are such thing as legitimate complaints and objective reasonings thst can point out faults, flaws and glaring issues. 'Liking' something is not a requirement to participate in a discussion or say your piece. Unless there was a regime change overnight where only vetted and approved opinions towing the party line are allowed to participate.
It's the point of a discussion forum. To speak your piece, It doesn't matter if someone else likes it or dislikes whatever it is you wish to discuss, that has no relevance to your right to step forward and say what you want to say.
I absolutely agree that there is a place or legitimate criticisms and I think AoS deserves some. but saying it is so bad that it makes someone want to 'gouge out your eyes' is not effective criticism, it's meaningless hyperbole. I understand that people need to vent frustration but I totally sympathize with users who visit this forum because they want to ask legitimate questions or have constructive discussions about a game they enjoy, and instead get bombarded with hyperbolic negativity.
chaosmarauder wrote: I think they should have made a new forum section for AOS and kept fantasy battles here - the two are way to opposed to each other to have simply overwritten everything that was fantasy with AOS - especially since people are still playing old school fantasy.
Maybe it was accidental but it still looks pretty trollish to have done that.
I was rather unimpressed when as soon as AoS dropped the forums were all renamed AoS instead of creating new forums for AoS and maybe consolidating the WHFB forums down to 1 or 2. I believe the explanation was that the admins monitor discussion of different games and create new forums based off that, but really I think it's a bad idea to have AoS and WHFB in the same forum given the circumstances.
It's not like mazik said, not liking COD so not going to a COD forum to complain about it.... it's more akin to liking Battlefield and having your "Battlefield discussion" forum which has existed for years being renamed "COD discussion" with the description "For COD and BF discussion". Of course you're going to end up with a gakstorm of posts and threads.
I actually am pretty ambivalent about the mechanics of AoS. Honestly, I would have no problem playing any force from AoS, but in the Old World setting.
As long as it's with a group of like-minded people, the problems with Age of Sigmar take a backseat. But quite frankly, I am not all that exited to support a game system when an entire game setting got swiped away with a bit of a "too bad, play the new setting".
I would be stupidly exited to have a group of 5-10 people willing to use the mechanics of Age of Sigmar but other than the appearance of the Stormcast, completely pretend the Old World never got destroyed. I totally agree with everything Oggthrok posted above.
Unlike the Old World, I just can't get wity the new setting, which is basically half a dozen worlds in the Eye of Terror linked by Webway portals, where Chaos has warped reality to mind-bending extremes.
I don't really see it as WFB ending. Or that anything was taken away.
The game evolved over the years. The 2014 WFB had little in common with the 1984 version.
We still have rules for Tyrion and Teclis and many other special characters in Age of Sigmar. It is easy enough to put a Slayer hero and a human hero on the board and call them Gotrek and Felix.
The new realms are large enough that everything including Bretonia and the Empire can exist.
endur wrote: I don't really see it as WFB ending. Or that anything was taken away.
The game evolved over the years. The 2014 WFB had little in common with the 1984 version.
We still have rules for Tyrion and Teclis and many other special characters in Age of Sigmar. It is easy enough to put a Slayer hero and a human hero on the board and call them Gotrek and Felix.
The new realms are large enough that everything including Bretonia and the Empire can exist.
But isn't that just it? The realms are large enough, so large in fact nothing has any importance. Battle between Stormcast and Bloodbond in Skull Crag to take the Skull Bastion atop the Bloodied Peak just seems so utterly meaningless when from all the fluff that's came out the realms are practically infinite. The Old World was finite, when something happened in the fluff, it was important. The fall of Karaz-Karak was epic, the last great strong hold of the dwarves brought down by the inevitable tide of Skaven they've been fighting for Centuries. AOS has nothing of the sort.
Don't get me wrong, I like high fantasy as much as the next miniture war gamer but I simply can't relate to the peoples of the new world because the only characters they've paid any attention to are the guys who most strongly symbolise the extinction of the world we loved. Perhaps if they took a different approach to the fluff, gave us a small Empire besieged then introduced the Stormcast as saviors, but as of now there is little interest in the weird Asgardian realms, I'd take my good old bastardised Europe of the Old World any day.
endur wrote: I don't really see it as WFB ending. Or that anything was taken away.
The game evolved over the years. The 2014 WFB had little in common with the 1984 version.
We still have rules for Tyrion and Teclis and many other special characters in Age of Sigmar. It is easy enough to put a Slayer hero and a human hero on the board and call them Gotrek and Felix.
The new realms are large enough that everything including Bretonia and the Empire can exist.
But isn't that just it? The realms are large enough, so large in fact nothing has any importance. Battle between Stormcast and Bloodbond in Skull Crag to take the Skull Bastion atop the Bloodied Peak just seems so utterly meaningless when from all the fluff that's came out the realms are practically infinite. The Old World was finite, when something happened in the fluff, it was important. The fall of Karaz-Karak was epic, the last great strong hold of the dwarves brought down by the inevitable tide of Skaven they've been fighting for Centuries. AOS has nothing of the sort.
Don't get me wrong, I like high fantasy as much as the next miniture war gamer but I simply can't relate to the peoples of the new world because the only characters they've paid any attention to are the guys who most strongly symbolise the extinction of the world we loved. Perhaps if they took a different approach to the fluff, gave us a small Empire besieged then introduced the Stormcast as saviors, but as of now there is little interest in the weird Asgardian realms, I'd take my good old bastardised Europe of the Old World any day.
I never got the feeling stuff mattered in the Old World either. New races, changes to armies would all come with the progression of the game, as they do now. Those are the real changes, and I love the moving plot in AoS that comes with new armies, characters, etc. The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.
coldgaming wrote: The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.
That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.
coldgaming wrote: The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.
That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.
Well, that was the Old World, as GW was in charge of it. One of my constant problems though was that it was all on one planet. I'm not a sci-fi person, but I find the AoS realms more believable (in the getting into the lore sense) than the Old World. The problem for me was imagining that all of these races built up and evolved on an earth-sized planet to similar levels of sophistication. It's also one of my problems with the whole concept of finding our interpretation of intelligent aliens in real life. They would have to have evolved to such a point during the same blink in time that humans did. It's not whether human-like aliens ever existed, but whether they would exist in proximity in the same nano second (on a universal scale) that we do.
On real earth, there are no comparable species to humans that we would communicate with, do battle with, fight over the same resources with, etc. For there to be a dozen or more on one planet in the Old World was too much for me. Might just be a personal thing about this stuff though.
I think things would be understandably different than Earth seeing as each race has dieties (directly) involved. For me, the Old World always felt like it started hugely magical like the AoS setting, but then has settled and entered a calm period.
I much prefer a one world setting, as from the start the new realms sound like a Magic the Gathering set, where there is a world for each color of mana. Which works perfectly fine depending on the setting of a game, but it's so completely jarring compared to the Old World.
I can't see as how the Old World is any less believable than a DnD world, and is probably even more realistic than such fantastical worlds.
I loved the whfb background, but for me it ended long ago. Back when the novels were about inconspicuous characters like Sam Warble, or Felix and Gotrek fumbling around caves without a clue. Characters outside of the game like Konrad, or Johann von Mecklenburg, who didn't have the weight of the game on their shoulders, and whose adventures were interesting without an apocalypse as a consequence of failure. Thankfully I still have all my old boxtrees, and a whole shelf of warhammer literature to read and re-read, so it hasn't really gone.
Like others have said, I'll still play AoS, but using it's mechanics to play games set in the old world.
coldgaming wrote: The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.
That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.
Well, that was the Old World, as GW was in charge of it. One of my constant problems though was that it was all on one planet. I'm not a sci-fi person, but I find the AoS realms more believable (in the getting into the lore sense) than the Old World. The problem for me was imagining that all of these races built up and evolved on an earth-sized planet to similar levels of sophistication. It's also one of my problems with the whole concept of finding our interpretation of intelligent aliens in real life. They would have to have evolved to such a point during the same blink in time that humans did. It's not whether human-like aliens ever existed, but whether they would exist in proximity in the same nano second (on a universal scale) that we do.
On real earth, there are no comparable species to humans that we would communicate with, do battle with, fight over the same resources with, etc. For there to be a dozen or more on one planet in the Old World was too much for me. Might just be a personal thing about this stuff though.
I can understand your problem if you imagine them all evolving physically like they do on Earth, but not all species in WHFB evolved because WHFB has magic, some races were introduced, created, manipulated, corrupted.
If your only problem with the Old World is that it couldn't have existed using regular Earth "rules", you must absolutely hate 40k and, ya know, a huge chunk of all fantasy and sci-fi worlds
Even if you are attached to the idea of the races evolving to similar levels of technology, I'm not really sure why that's hard to believe on 1 planet. Some event causes multiple sentient species to be in the one place and they'll tend to develop their technology (or lack of it) at a similar rate. You could even picture it a planet that only had 1 sentient species and then some event caused them to evolve differently. Or just use the good old fashion fantasy explanation for anything you want to exist but can't exist in real life "because magic".
But yeah, even though it was only one planet, there was still a bunch of stuff that could have been explored, sections of the map that were only mentioned in passing or brief descriptions. The map was big enough to have lots of shuffling of the races without completely wiping them out (if that's what you wanted, GW for the most part seemed to like the stagnant world the same way they like a stagnant 40k universe..... until they blew it up).
AoS just feels like an intangible universe where nothing matters.
coldgaming wrote: The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.
That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.
Well, that was the Old World, as GW was in charge of it. One of my constant problems though was that it was all on one planet. I'm not a sci-fi person, but I find the AoS realms more believable (in the getting into the lore sense) than the Old World. The problem for me was imagining that all of these races built up and evolved on an earth-sized planet to similar levels of sophistication. It's also one of my problems with the whole concept of finding our interpretation of intelligent aliens in real life. They would have to have evolved to such a point during the same blink in time that humans did. It's not whether human-like aliens ever existed, but whether they would exist in proximity in the same nano second (on a universal scale) that we do.
On real earth, there are no comparable species to humans that we would communicate with, do battle with, fight over the same resources with, etc. For there to be a dozen or more on one planet in the Old World was too much for me. Might just be a personal thing about this stuff though.
I can understand your problem if you imagine them all evolving physically like they do on Earth, but not all species in WHFB evolved because WHFB has magic, some races were introduced, created, manipulated, corrupted.
If your only problem with the Old World is that it couldn't have existed using regular Earth "rules", you must absolutely hate 40k and, ya know, a huge chunk of all fantasy and sci-fi worlds
Even if you are attached to the idea of the races evolving to similar levels of technology, I'm not really sure why that's hard to believe on 1 planet. Some event causes multiple sentient species to be in the one place and they'll tend to develop their technology (or lack of it) at a similar rate. You could even picture it a planet that only had 1 sentient species and then some event caused them to evolve differently. Or just use the good old fashion fantasy explanation for anything you want to exist but can't exist in real life "because magic".
But yeah, even though it was only one planet, there was still a bunch of stuff that could have been explored, sections of the map that were only mentioned in passing or brief descriptions. The map was big enough to have lots of shuffling of the races without completely wiping them out (if that's what you wanted, GW for the most part seemed to like the stagnant world the same way they like a stagnant 40k universe..... until they blew it up).
AoS just feels like an intangible universe where nothing matters.
Everything can be explained by magic indeed. I think it comes down to the sense something gives me. I've always found Warhammer models evocative, but the world and map itself felt forced and inauthentic. But in general I get my fluff kick from the models, tables and rules.
coldgaming wrote: The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.
That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.
Well, that was the Old World, as GW was in charge of it. One of my constant problems though was that it was all on one planet. I'm not a sci-fi person, but I find the AoS realms more believable (in the getting into the lore sense) than the Old World. The problem for me was imagining that all of these races built up and evolved on an earth-sized planet to similar levels of sophistication. It's also one of my problems with the whole concept of finding our interpretation of intelligent aliens in real life. They would have to have evolved to such a point during the same blink in time that humans did. It's not whether human-like aliens ever existed, but whether they would exist in proximity in the same nano second (on a universal scale) that we do.
On real earth, there are no comparable species to humans that we would communicate with, do battle with, fight over the same resources with, etc. For there to be a dozen or more on one planet in the Old World was too much for me. Might just be a personal thing about this stuff though.
Good thing the planet was supposed to be roughly twice Earth's size (I have no idea where that statistic comes from, but it popped up a lot) and basically nobody evolved naturally. The Old Ones had a hand in creating almost all of the races and even shaping the continents I'm a way they liked better.
I feel the pain. Not for losing the game, which I think was becoming over-bloated and unwieldy. I miss the setting. I loved the Empire and the renaissance/ middle-ages feel it had to it. I love the minis and the culture and now I have no idea whether any of it remains in the new setting. Of course, I can use my old minis and their warscrolls but as what? Refugees and survivors of Middenheim, Altdorf, Nordland etc? Or will they just be peasant militia thrown into the meatgrinder by the holy golden Sigmarines??
I feel your pain I really do. I used to be like this that WFB the sweeping grandeur was over a Nurgle 8th ed army collecting dust in a box but now I looked at AoS and thought...Why not? I actually in a way prefer the way they look on round bases especially today I was in GW looking at the new Pestilens stuff and I thought you know what theres potential there.. Forces are looking more themed now plus £115 for both the Virulent Horde and Start collecting Pestilens that's rather awesome.
Of course my Nurgle army is still going to get painted and added to at least until I run out of square bases it makes a great display force plus ive spent what 300+ quid on it not going to do what that dude did and get my knickers in a twist and burn a army..
AoS plays faster as well no cards no fiddly ranking system its bam bam bam resolution battleshock is genius in calculating wounds and the such I just haven't seen an army I would collect until now.. I have seen people do fantastic things with the minatures that have come out and now a part of me wants AoS to succeed because whats the point in slipping backwards.. it hurts the company and it hurts us as a collective..
But yeah... you just need to find an army that clicks with you man a piece of Azyr's background that you can call your own..
I think a lot of people poo-pooing the Old World as being too small really have no sense of scale. By all rights, the Great Forest of the Empire would be the size of most of the center of Europe, taking weeks to cross on foot or horseback.
Let's be real: The Old World was effectively infinite in size and nothing mattered anyways.
The Chaos Wastes were described as being infinite (in at least one thing I've read - can't remember what it is off the top of my head, though), and even they weren't there was nothing stopping the writers from adding island after island, continent after continent to the unexplored space.
As far as battles having any meaning... it was pretty much written on the wall that Chaos was an unbeatable force and that given enough time, the good guys would lose. It didn't matter whether Middenheim fell at any point, because Middenheim will fall eventually. Because Chaos is infinite and undefeatable. Just like it doesn't matter if the Stormcast Eternals claim the Bloodforge in the Skull Plains of Archioch or whatever.
The status quo hasn't changed at all. The only thing that was lost was the breadth of background available to the Old World, which given enough time, AoS will have as well.
Rihgu wrote: Let's be real: The Old World was effectively infinite in size and nothing mattered anyways.
Err.... No. And to say this you are clearly VERY misinformed about the size of the Old World or are just trying to be snide - the fact that it could be and was ended means that it was very, very finite.
Saying it openly that there are infinite realms of every is a completely different thing altogether, since there can be multiple copies of everything made out of everything. By definiton, you can an have an Archaon made entirely of jelly battling a Sigmar made of cheese somewhere out there.
Rihgu wrote: Let's be real: The Old World was effectively infinite in size and nothing mattered anyways.
The Chaos Wastes were described as being infinite (in at least one thing I've read - can't remember what it is off the top of my head, though), and even they weren't there was nothing stopping the writers from adding island after island, continent after continent to the unexplored space.
...except for the map of the world showing the continents and basic layout :p Small islands, sure, those could crop up, but overall the world was shaped quite a lot like Earth, except for Ulthuan.
And you might be confusing the Wastes with the Realm of Chaos, there - sooner or later, the Chaos Wastes ended, and that's where things got REALLY bad.
I'll rescind my statement about the map being infinite in size. I thought I remembered seeing the world map in the BRB or maybe at the local store and there being quite a bit of "HERE THERE BE DRAGONS", especially around the edges. Googling it (something I should have done first ) has revealed that the world is a pretty set size (whatever that size is).
However, I still very clearly remember a short passage, perhaps from the End Times: Nagash? I'll try to find it next time I'm near my copy... which said something to the effect of: the Chaos Wastes being infinite (or near infinite) in size and that countless tribes wandered them, with cities and empires rising and falling constantly. The cities and empires rising and falling bit is what stands out the most in the memory, so I'm hoping somebody else recognizes it?
It was infinite in the sense that GW could have explored more and more of it in greater detail to reveal new things or even changed the way the world looked if they wanted to. There were things of great enough magic to change the continents, wipe out races, reveal new races. Even without changing it, they also only explored in detail about half the land mass of the world that actually did exist .
AllSeeingSkink wrote: It was infinite in the sense that GW could have explored more and more of it in greater detail to reveal new things or even changed the way the world looked if they wanted to. There were things of great enough magic to change the continents, wipe out races, reveal new races. Even without changing it, they also only explored in detail about half the land mass of the world that actually did exist .
Pretty much. Who remembers the Albion campaign? A new place revealed/explored that expanded the setting and added background in a non-intrusive way. And it wasn't long before that where Lustria was revealed in detail with the first Lizardmen army book. Then a decade later the East was further explored with Ogre Kingdoms.
GW had plenty to explore. What did we truly know about Araby, Estalia, Cathay, Nippon, Ind, the Dragon Isles, Desolation of Nagash, the old Strygos Empire, the Southlands, and so on? People who say the Old World was boring and played out only look at a fraction of the map when they say these things.
Rihgu wrote: I'll rescind my statement about the map being infinite in size. I thought I remembered seeing the world map in the BRB or maybe at the local store and there being quite a bit of "HERE THERE BE DRAGONS", especially around the edges. Googling it (something I should have done first ) has revealed that the world is a pretty set size (whatever that size is).
However, I still very clearly remember a short passage, perhaps from the End Times: Nagash? I'll try to find it next time I'm near my copy... which said something to the effect of: the Chaos Wastes being infinite (or near infinite) in size and that countless tribes wandered them, with cities and empires rising and falling constantly. The cities and empires rising and falling bit is what stands out the most in the memory, so I'm hoping somebody else recognizes it?
I remember that tidbit from W:AR. And, to be honest, the Chaos Wastes really are infinite... it's just that at some point they stop being the Old World's Chaos Wastes and become.... something else
AllSeeingSkink wrote: It was infinite in the sense that GW could have explored more and more of it in greater detail to reveal new things or even changed the way the world looked if they wanted to. There were things of great enough magic to change the continents, wipe out races, reveal new races. Even without changing it, they also only explored in detail about half the land mass of the world that actually did exist .
Pretty much. Who remembers the Albion campaign? A new place revealed/explored that expanded the setting and added background in a non-intrusive way. And it wasn't long before that where Lustria was revealed in detail with the first Lizardmen army book. Then a decade later the East was further explored with Ogre Kingdoms.
GW had plenty to explore. What did we truly know about Araby, Estalia, Cathay, Nippon, Ind, the Dragon Isles, Desolation of Nagash, the old Strygos Empire, the Southlands, and so on? People who say the Old World was boring and played out only look at a fraction of the map when they say these things.
Indeed, it was GW's choice to both not explore the world they created nor develop the storyline. There could have been all manner of things in the unexplored parts of the world, which was most of the world.
Stories end, get over it.
The Old World did not generate enough interest/money to maintain it, it had a LONG run, but it had reached the end of it's story/buisness life span.
Stories end, get over it.
The Old World did not generate enough interest/money to maintain it, it had a LONG run, but it had reached the end of it's story/buisness life span.
The setting reached the end of its lifecycle or the system did? As others have pointed out, lot of mileage left in that setting.
Stories end, get over it.
The Old World did not generate enough interest/money to maintain it, it had a LONG run, but it had reached the end of it's story/buisness life span.
The setting reached the end of its lifecycle or the system did? As others have pointed out, lot of mileage left in that setting.
Settings are just a medium to what should happen there. Anyone can come up with something they could have done in The Old World, would a significant number of people stay (or become and stay) interested while GW dug up and explored every bit?
Similar to: how many people found EVERY location and quest in Skyrim before they got over it and played something else?
Stories end, get over it.
The Old World did not generate enough interest/money to maintain it, it had a LONG run, but it had reached the end of it's story/buisness life span.
The setting reached the end of its lifecycle or the system did? As others have pointed out, lot of mileage left in that setting.
Settings are just a medium to what should happen there. Anyone can come up with something they could have done in The Old World, would a significant number of people stay (or become and stay) interested while GW dug up and explored every bit?
Similar to: how many people found EVERY location and quest in Skyrim before they got over it and played something else?
You're comparing apples to oranges there.
Ignoring beforehand the fact that you're comparing a game that also serves as a hobby and that has a billion hours more of time and cash investment (not to say emotional investment) than a computer game, you should use the entirety of the Tamriel Setting - along with all the games that spawned from it - not Skyrim alone, for that comparison. You're pretty much saying "How long would you get bored after playing x or Y edition" or "how long would you get bored of playing with X or Y army."
E.g: Bethesda switched genres a bit with ESO, but didn't torch the entire setting to do so.
Stories end, get over it.
The Old World did not generate enough interest/money to maintain it, it had a LONG run, but it had reached the end of it's story/buisness life span.
The setting reached the end of its lifecycle or the system did? As others have pointed out, lot of mileage left in that setting.
Settings are just a medium to what should happen there. Anyone can come up with something they could have done in The Old World, would a significant number of people stay (or become and stay) interested while GW dug up and explored every bit?
Similar to: how many people found EVERY location and quest in Skyrim before they got over it and played something else?
You're comparing apples to oranges there.
Ignoring beforehand the fact that you're comparing a game that also serves as a hobby and that has a billion hours more of time and cash investment (not to say emotional investment) than a computer game, you should use the entirety of the Tamriel Setting - along with all the games that spawned from it - not Skyrim alone, for that comparison. You're pretty much saying "How long would you get bored after playing x or Y edition" or "how long would you get bored of playing with X or Y army."
E.g: Bethesda switched genres a bit with ESO, but didn't torch the entire setting to do so.
Hence the "similar to", but fine:
Do you think a profitable amount of people would stay interested while every possibility of *insert example of large setting for immersive form of entertainment* is explored.
Stories end, get over it.
The Old World did not generate enough interest/money to maintain it, it had a LONG run, but it had reached the end of it's story/buisness life span.
The setting reached the end of its lifecycle or the system did? As others have pointed out, lot of mileage left in that setting.
Settings are just a medium to what should happen there. Anyone can come up with something they could have done in The Old World, would a significant number of people stay (or become and stay) interested while GW dug up and explored every bit?
Similar to: how many people found EVERY location and quest in Skyrim before they got over it and played something else?
You're comparing apples to oranges there.
Ignoring beforehand the fact that you're comparing a game that also serves as a hobby and that has a billion hours more of time and cash investment (not to say emotional investment) than a computer game, you should use the entirety of the Tamriel Setting - along with all the games that spawned from it - not Skyrim alone, for that comparison. You're pretty much saying "How long would you get bored after playing x or Y edition" or "how long would you get bored of playing with X or Y army."
E.g: Bethesda switched genres a bit with ESO, but didn't torch the entire setting to do so.
Hence the "similar to", but fine:
Do you think a profitable amount of people would stay interested while every possibility of *insert example of large setting for immersive form of entertainment* is explored.
It still isn't similar, but I won't dwell on that point.
As Fenrir so kindly put forth already, the issues conspiring against FB were not coming from the setting itself, but from the rules system. Look at Mordheim - it's "dead" (aka, GW ditched it) and yet there's a thriving community playing. Look at the Warhammer RPG. At Bloodbowl. They all come from the Old World.
Actually, the Old World gathered so little interest that Total War: Warhammer is actually coming out - not a mod, mind you, but a full fledged game. This year. For Creative Assembly to pick it up, I think it would have to have a "profitable amount of people interested" in it.
Do you think a profitable amount of people would stay interested while every possibility of *insert example of large setting for immersive form of entertainment* is explored.
With a new setting they can finally do for fantasy what has been so successful for 40k and have an infinite space for fiction. They can go back and create new parts of the realms and BL authors have a big sandbox this time. As the authors have said with Fantasy there was a limited amount of narrative possibilities unless you opened up pocket dimensions or. chaos realms. BL was able to go back in time and do time of legends but until they decided to let the timeline advance it just writes itself into a corner. I wish we saw more from the Cathay, Araby , Nippon, etc but still . This is a great move for the BL coverage even though they face the challenge of starting everything over, and for many, in contrast to the world that was.
VeteranNoob wrote: With a new setting they can finally do for fantasy what has been so successful for 40k and have an infinite space for fiction. They can go back and create new parts of the realms and BL authors have a big sandbox this time. As the authors have said with Fantasy there was a limited amount of narrative possibilities unless you opened up pocket dimensions or. chaos realms. BL was able to go back in time and do time of legends but until they decided to let the timeline advance it just writes itself into a corner. I wish we saw more from the Cathay, Araby , Nippon, etc but still . This is a great move for the BL coverage even though they face the challenge of starting everything over, and for many, in contrast to the world that was.
So, in one sentence it's essentially "the old world was filled up, there was nothing left to explore", in another it's "I wish they would have explored all those areas we barely heard anything about".
It can't really be both, can it?
Stories end, get over it.
The Old World did not generate enough interest/money to maintain it, it had a LONG run, but it had reached the end of it's story/buisness life span.
Even if I agreed with this, which I don't, Necromunda (the game) stopped being supported, without blowing up Necromunda (the world). Mordheim stopped being supported, without GW obliterating the ruins of the city in a second catastrophe. I could go on and on.
It's one thing to decide that a setting is tapped out for financial purposes, but another to decide to destroy, systematically, the entire setting. You can (and GW has, repeatedly) done one without doing the other.
What makes it worse, for me, is that AoS is supposedly set thousands of years later in a much larger, conjoined series of planes of existence, and you still have Sigmar and Nagash and Archaon and slayers and lizardmen and all the same bloody stuff. If you're going to make a dramatic break from the old--especially when you destroy the old and sent it into the dark reaches of time---the new stuff should be dramatically different. Otherwise, why did you bother?
Because people would complain just as badly about new stuff as they would about there being no new stuff?
It's in a transition, though. The old stuff is slowly being replaced with new things and stuff that fits the new setting is being changed.
I do deeply miss the old world and wished they did continue it but what's done is done. I find it best to embrace the new and look to a brighter horizon rather than go into a corner and sulk.
Another thing to consider is that people like mystery and enjoy the corners of a map remaining unfilled or myths and theories to go unsolved. When the wood elf book was released the woodies got a bit upset that GW mapped out the Athel Loren forest and had most of their personal fluff and theories thrown out the door.
If mythical Cathay, Nippon and Ind got mapped out completely and all fan speculation died down because all the questions had been anwsered then it would certainly lose it's magic of the unknown.
Baron Klatz wrote: Because people would complain just as badly about new stuff as they would about there being no new stuff?
It's in a transition, though. The old stuff is slowly being replaced with new things and stuff that fits the new setting is being changed.
I do deeply miss the old world and wished they did continue it but what's done is done. I find it best to embrace the new and look to a brighter horizon rather than go into a corner and sulk.
Another thing to consider is that people like mystery and enjoy the corners of a map remaining unfilled or myths and theories to go unsolved. When the wood elf book was released the woodies got a bit upset that GW mapped out the Athel Loren forest and had most of their personal fluff and theories thrown out the door.
If mythical Cathay, Nippon and Ind got mapped out completely and all fan speculation died down because all the questions had been anwsered then it would certainly lose it's magic of the unknown.
You're forgetting that a good quantity of the players wantedGW to actually explore Ind, Cathay and Nippon, from what I gathered over the years.
And there is always a third option to the "take it or sulk on it" statement you made - keep playing in the setting. Use either a previous WB edition, go to KoW or embrace the 9th Age. I know for a fact that I'm going to keep on working on my Asur well through this year and the majority of the next, be it in fluff or modelling wise.
One can also play in the old world setting and use the Age of Sigmar Rules. The warscrolls are there so you can do whatever you like.
I also had plenty of fluff for a handfull of characters and backstories I had created for varius campaigns I had participated with my High Elves but I liked the fact that the fluff progressed with the End Times and now with Age of Sigmar. Now mind you I don't like everything new or all the changes but we can't have everything.
In my opinion the new realms open endless possibilities for one to create their fluff backstory and play their own narrative campaigns. And again in the end if you find people with similar tastes you can always keep playing in the old world...
Warhammer fantasy was my introduction into the tabletop gaming world. I still remember the first two armies I say - Brettonia vs Orcs and Goblins. Over the years (20 to be exact), my gaming group and I have moved through every game GW introduced, but I always had an emotional connection to fantasy because it started it all. I can only speak for myself, but I had been prepared for the death of the fantasy world for quite some time before it actually happened. I watched the number of people playing it dwindle until it got to the point where people came up in amazement to see what the "new" game was that my friends and I were playing, since the average war gamer had never seen it. When I heard about End Times, I thought it had a lot of potential. I was excited at the prospect of exiled humans and dwarves to form a new society somewhere, perhaps even in Lustria or in the east near Cathay...not destroy it all, especially not when they are about to release Warhammer Total War.
I am not opposed to AoS, and I do think a dramatic change was necessary in game mechanics and fluff, as Warhammer Fantasy was on life support. However, I think End Times could have been an intriguing setting for the game that would have been moderately successful for a 2 year stretch. Then they could have gradually broke down the old world and introduced AoS. I probably would have (and I would venture to guess a fair number of other players too) been more receptive to the fluff change. As it stands, it felt like a big FU to all the loyal players that had made GW what it is today, and it has instilled a sense of unease in GW games now, since we never know when the next game will be "AoS'ered". I will be intrigued to see how AoS develops, even if the setting is not my cup of tea. I will probably check out KoW as a rule set for future gaming, though there model line has really become quite interesting too.
VeteranNoob wrote: With a new setting they can finally do for fantasy what has been so successful for 40k and have an infinite space for fiction. They can go back and create new parts of the realms and BL authors have a big sandbox this time. As the authors have said with Fantasy there was a limited amount of narrative possibilities unless you opened up pocket dimensions or. chaos realms. BL was able to go back in time and do time of legends but until they decided to let the timeline advance it just writes itself into a corner. I wish we saw more from the Cathay, Araby , Nippon, etc but still . This is a great move for the BL coverage even though they face the challenge of starting everything over, and for many, in contrast to the world that was.
So, in one sentence it's essentially "the old world was filled up, there was nothing left to explore", in another it's "I wish they would have explored all those areas we barely heard anything about".
It can't really be both, can it?
I think I know what you are saying so sorry if I have this wrong. The setting was constrained by its size and borders, even though some of those areas we have barely heard anything about still provide a potential for coverage. For example Graham McNeill and I talked about WHFB & 40K where in 40K you can just create a new planet since the gaming universe is not completely mapped out like WHFB is.
Grumblewartz wrote: . As it stands, it felt like a big FU to all the loyal players that had made GW what it is today, and it has instilled a sense of unease in GW games now, since we never know when the next game will be "AoS'ered".
They only have one other game. And its time is coming.
40k (game base is shrinking due to scale/pricing/balance)
HH (both board game and wargame - gaining a large following)
LOTR (had a MASSIVE following, getting rebooted soon)
Specialist board games (space hulk, bac, DO, etc, selling very well)
AOS (selling better than the naysayers say)
All have their target audiences and are getting much love this year. The reasons for the boardgames/army sets are many cons are going to small box games instead of single unit purchase army games. GW had to change their products in order to qualify for the convention spaces.
40k (game base is shrinking due to scale/pricing/balance)
HH (both board game and wargame - gaining a large following)
LOTR (had a MASSIVE following, getting rebooted soon)
Specialist board games (space hulk, bac, DO, etc, selling very well)
AOS (selling better than the naysayers say)
All have their target audiences and are getting much love this year. The reasons for the boardgames/army sets are many cons are going to small box games instead of single unit purchase army games. GW had to change their products in order to qualify for the convention spaces.
Sorry to say this, but any proof of the sales volume of any of the GW product (regardless of the side taken, be it "it's not selling at all" or "it's selling like cupcakes") is anecdotal because GW doesn't disclose any hard numbers about their sales. Also, HH is pretty much a FW game, and if you ask the 30k players, they want to keep it that way.
What Fenrir meant is that GW only has one really big game now, as there is no hard evidence of AoS's success or 40k's downfall - if you want, just take a look at the ICV2 discussion.
40k (game base is shrinking due to scale/pricing/balance)
HH (both board game and wargame - gaining a large following)
Specialist board games (space hulk, bac, DO, etc, selling very well)
Space Marines is Space Marines bro, regardless of fripperies like uniform.
VeteranNoob wrote: With a new setting they can finally do for fantasy what has been so successful for 40k and have an infinite space for fiction. They can go back and create new parts of the realms and BL authors have a big sandbox this time. As the authors have said with Fantasy there was a limited amount of narrative possibilities unless you opened up pocket dimensions or. chaos realms. BL was able to go back in time and do time of legends but until they decided to let the timeline advance it just writes itself into a corner. I wish we saw more from the Cathay, Araby , Nippon, etc but still . This is a great move for the BL coverage even though they face the challenge of starting everything over, and for many, in contrast to the world that was.
So, in one sentence it's essentially "the old world was filled up, there was nothing left to explore", in another it's "I wish they would have explored all those areas we barely heard anything about".
It can't really be both, can it?
I think I know what you are saying so sorry if I have this wrong. The setting was constrained by its size and borders, even though some of those areas we have barely heard anything about still provide a potential for coverage. For example Graham McNeill and I talked about WHFB & 40K where in 40K you can just create a new planet since the gaming universe is not completely mapped out like WHFB is.
To me having the world mapped out is not a constraint, and certainly not a bad thing. In fact, it's quite the opposite, having things thought out and mapped out in your universe is a good thing, it helps things remain fairly consistent from author to author, story to story. That being said, the Old World was no where near being filled in. You had a map, but there were blurred edges, areas of mystery and " here be dragons" which still allowed you to fit in whatever force you wanted into the setting. You yourself had a list of essentially unexplored areas that we had little more than a name and some vague descriptions of. There were plenty of areas to expand upon without starting over.
VeteranNoob wrote: The setting was constrained by its size and borders, even though some of those areas we have barely heard anything about still provide a potential for coverage.
I don't know how you can possibly say the setting was constrained when GW never explored the constraints.
It wasn't the setting that was constrained, it was GW's mindset toward the setting, not wanting to either expand nor advance the setting of the WHFB world.
I am not opposed to AoS, and I do think a dramatic change was necessary in game mechanics and fluff, as Warhammer Fantasy was on life support. However, I think End Times could have been an intriguing setting for the game that would have been moderately successful for a 2 year stretch. Then they could have gradually broke down the old world and introduced AoS. I probably would have (and I would venture to guess a fair number of other players too) been more receptive to the fluff change. As it stands, it felt like a big FU to all the loyal players that had made GW what it is today, and it has instilled a sense of unease in GW games now, since we never know when the next game will be "AoS'ered". I will be intrigued to see how AoS develops, even if the setting is not my cup of tea. I will probably check out KoW as a rule set for future gaming, though there model line has really become quite interesting too.
I agree with this. honestly GW did a poor job of introducing AoS after the End Times.
Mind you I am also of the opinion they didn't need to completely destroy everything to make the change. They could of had Sigmar reborn defeat Archaon and save the world but the Chaos magic flooding the world slowly changes things. Then you can jump the setting ahead a few thousand years and have a long history where the old alliances and people broke down into new factions we see now.
Honestly that whole 6 month period after the last End Time book dropped and we heard NOTHING and then suddenly we got AoS dropped on it was one of the poorest business/PR decisions I have ever seen.
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:I know for a fact that I'm going to keep on working on my Asur well through this year and the majority of the next, be it in fluff or modelling wise.
*Pale, skinny fistbump*
Grumblewartz wrote:I do think a dramatic change was necessary in game mechanics and fluff
Nah, just game mechanics. Even if they didn't want to expand eastwards or advance the storyline (such as the 'advancement' turned out), they had 2,500 years of history just since the empire was founded, and more, to explore. Historical players get a lot of mileage out of lesser spans of RL history.
40k (game base is shrinking due to scale/pricing/balance)
HH (both board game and wargame - gaining a large following)
Specialist board games (space hulk, bac, DO, etc, selling very well)
Space Marines is Space Marines bro, regardless of fripperies like uniform.
Aye! A couple of historical periods and scenarios, featuring the same ol' faction beating things up. (Or beating eachother up) And people say that the Warhammer world was constrained...
Deadawake1347 wrote:
To me having the world mapped out is not a constraint, and certainly not a bad thing. In fact, it's quite the opposite, having things thought out and mapped out in your universe is a good thing, it helps things remain fairly consistent from author to author, story to story. That being said, the Old World was no where near being filled in. You had a map, but there were blurred edges, areas of mystery and " here be dragons" which still allowed you to fit in whatever force you wanted into the setting. You yourself had a list of essentially unexplored areas that we had little more than a name and some vague descriptions of. There were plenty of areas to expand upon without starting over.
This! The vastness of the Empire alone was mentioned - it's also been referenced in publications as tiny islands of civilisation separated by vast gulfs of wild forest, or words to that effect. Plenty of space there for more than just beastmen and orcs.
Plus, any Tolkienish co-medieval fantasy world worth it's salt needs a map.
People also seem to forget how 'big' the world gets when the fastest thing that you can get your hands on is a horse. Historically, most folks did not venture much beyond ten miles from where they were born. I'm quite enjoying Bernard cornwells Saxon series right now, and his England, which we consider to be a tiny country, consists of four Saxon kingdoms, Cornwall, the (bloody) Welsh territories, the (bloodier) scots which is essentially unmapped for our hero uhtred, and beyond this, you have the fresians, the franks, the Irish, the dal riada (Ulster/Scottish isles kingdom) and god knows how many Viking and Danish holds. Even this tiny country has literally no end of places to go adventuring and causing trouble.
Having infinite space or even infinity worlds (in 40k) doesn't necessarily add to the tapestry. So much of what 40k has boils down to one dimensional 'jungle world' and the whole thing is coloured with very basic, very broad strokes. A single world, or even a continent or a country the size of Britain offers a far more 'intimate' setting and that is not a bad thing.
VeteranNoob wrote: The setting was constrained by its size and borders, even though some of those areas we have barely heard anything about still provide a potential for coverage.
I don't know how you can possibly say the setting was constrained when GW never explored the constraints.
It wasn't the setting that was constrained, it was GW's mindset toward the setting, not wanting to either expand nor advance the setting of the WHFB world.
Too many forums... I'm not sure if we are talking about the same thing or even agreeing
Actually, the Old World gathered so little interest that Total War: Warhammer is actually coming out - not a mod, mind you, but a full fledged game. This year. For Creative Assembly to pick it up, I think it would have to have a "profitable amount of people interested" in it.
I think there's a ton of people interested to the extent that they're prepared to spend, what, £40 on a video game and spend the odd evening playing it.
WHFB on the other hand, needed people to spend £100s if not £1000s and devote enough time to painting for it to feel like a full-time job... I was looking at getting in to WHFB around the End Times. I fancied Vampire Counts. Then I worked out how much money I would need to spend, and how much time I would need to spend painting, skeletons and zombies that were only really bloody cannon fodder - but I had to take them (hundreds of them) for the core unit tax... And I thought - actually, no.
I think there's a ton of people interested to the extent that they're prepared to spend, what, £40 on a video game and spend the odd evening playing it.
WHFB on the other hand, needed people to spend £100s if not £1000s and devote enough time to painting for it to feel like a full-time job...
But that's little to do with the popularity of the setting. (Apart from the lengths people were willing to go to 'officially' participate in it, before they burned out)
You didn't need hundreds of skeletons and zombies to appease the core tax. My vampire count army was 75 models or so total. That was at 2000 points.
Myths like needing hundreds of models to paint before you could play are what contributed to the game being binned in the first place by people, because if I didn't know any better I wouldn't want to be forced to paint hundreds of models either and people rarely fact-check anything.
I loathe the new setting, and the game rules do nothing for me.
The whole thing left such a bad taste in my mouth that I have barely played even 40K since, and won't spend another dime on any of it (new at least.) *
I hope AoS fails miserably and GW gets bought out. There is no limit to my salt.
Herod wrote: I loathe the new setting, and the game rules do nothing for me.
The whole thing left such a bad taste in my mouth that I have barely played even 40K since, and won't spend another dime on any of it (new at least.) *
I hope AoS fails miserably and GW gets bought out. There is no limit to my salt.
That's terribly spiteful, it is actually the right place though.
The new setting fits the new game; in that it gives lots of player freedom to create your own narrative to match a flexible game that can be play as (and with what) you like. Each new realm is a setting in it's own right, giving creative freedom to the players.
Actually, the Old World gathered so little interest that Total War: Warhammer is actually coming out - not a mod, mind you, but a full fledged game. This year. For Creative Assembly to pick it up, I think it would have to have a "profitable amount of people interested" in it.
I think there's a ton of people interested to the extent that they're prepared to spend, what, £40 on a video game and spend the odd evening playing it.
WHFB on the other hand, needed people to spend £100s if not £1000s and devote enough time to painting for it to feel like a full-time job... I was looking at getting in to WHFB around the End Times. I fancied Vampire Counts. Then I worked out how much money I would need to spend, and how much time I would need to spend painting, skeletons and zombies that were only really bloody cannon fodder - but I had to take them (hundreds of them) for the core unit tax... And I thought - actually, no.
Getting into a wargame is an entirely different level of commitment than a video game, you really can't just pick up 8th and try it for a bit.
I got into Warhammer around when AoS released, the cost put me off BEFORE adding a bunch of stuff I didn't really want for core tax . Not to mention the tome I had to convince someone to teach me.
Herod wrote: I loathe the new setting, and the game rules do nothing for me.
The whole thing left such a bad taste in my mouth that I have barely played even 40K since, and won't spend another dime on any of it (new at least.) *
I hope AoS fails miserably and GW gets bought out. There is no limit to my salt.
That's terribly spiteful, it is actually the right place though.
I want GW to fail at this point, not because I'm spiteful but because GW used to be a company that made things I like, now they don't, I would like them to go back to making things I like even if it means they have to fail before they or someone else picks up the ball.
Sure, maybe it's selfish, but I don't really care.
The new setting fits the new game; in that it gives lots of player freedom to create your own narrative to match a flexible game that can be play as (and with what) you like. Each new realm is a setting in it's own right, giving creative freedom to the players.
I still just don't understand this argument. Players always had creative freedom, if you didn't like the Old World you could always pretend it was something else, you could write your own fluff. The world was big enough not only for GW to expand it more but for players to write whatever the hell fluff they wanted and just shoe horn it in to the world as they see fit.
You could have invented a fictional town within the Old World that was on the edge of a volcano, or hidden in a cave under the ocean, or in a part of the world being overtaken by Chaos. If you could imagine it, it could be done in one of the many unexplored parts of the world.
Creative freedom is something you always have in wargaming, it doesn't need to be granted.
Creative freedom is something you always have in wargaming, it doesn't need to be granted.
That's spot on. Prior to AoS I was building up a Samurai Army to count as Empire. I had high hopes 9th edition would fix some of 8th's problems and revitalize the communities. Too bad.
I saw the huge amount of WHFB stuff now being in the "last chance to buy" (aka "where models go to die") and I felt like a little part of me died too. WHFB may have been dying already, but while the models were still there, it wasn't truly dead. Now that most stuff is gone, it is definite
Ah well, at least it will allow me to spend money on other stuff instead.
I was never huge into WHFB gaming, as I never had time to paint armies for both that AND 40k. However, I am/was a huge fan for the last nearly 20,years, and loved all the fluff, as well as reading all the Black Library novels.
Hell, just yesterday I found my copy of the Albion Campaign rules that were sold with White Dwarf!
I know it's an odd angle to take, but lately, I have been thinking of playing KoW in 15mm scale as something more manageable to paint (I generally have to provide armies for both sides to get my games in, as I live in a dead area, and my friends/wife will play, but not interested in painting).
I've actually found that because of Kings of War's "steal old Warhammer players" approach, coupled with Ral Partha's 15mm Demonworld line, I can actually set all my 15mm KoW games in the Warhammer World, as the Demonworld line especially has the old 90's Warhammer aesthetics. So that's where I am going to get my nostalgic Warhammer Fantasy fix, GW's squatting of armies be damned. Between them and minis from Splintered Light miniatures, I can pretty much cover every WHFB race but Lizardmen and Chaos.
I figure if GW is dead set on killing their setting AND armies, I will just keep a great setting alive but stop giving GW any more money.
AegisGrimm wrote: I was never huge into WHFB gaming, as I never had time to paint armies for both that AND 40k. However, I am/was a huge fan for the last nearly 20,years, and loved all the fluff, as well as reading all the Black Library novels.
Hell, just yesterday I found my copy of the Albion Campaign rules that were sold with White Dwarf!
I know it's an odd angle to take, but lately, I have been thinking of playing KoW in 15mm scale as something more manageable to paint (I generally have to provide armies for both sides to get my games in, as I live in a dead area, and my friends/wife will play, but not interested in painting).
I've actually found that because of Kings of War's "steal old Warhammer players" approach, coupled with Ral Partha's 15mm Demonworld line, I can actually set all my 15mm KoW games in the Warhammer World, as the Demonworld line especially has the old 90's Warhammer aesthetics. So that's where I am going to get my nostalgic Warhammer Fantasy fix, GW's squatting of armies be damned. Between them and minis from Splintered Light miniatures, I can pretty much cover every WHFB race but Lizardmen and Chaos.
I figure if GW is dead set on killing their setting AND armies, I will just keep a great setting alive but stop giving GW any more money.
Those do indeed show a distinct kinship to 90s WFB. Very nice.
While I like 15mm models in general, I haven't been able to find enough 15mm models that I actually like aesthetically to get in to 15mm WHFB. Some armies aren't too bad, some armies aren't well represented, some armies are well represented but the models are pretty mediocre.
I quite like the current aesthetic of WHFB Orcs and Goblins and as of yet I haven't seen anything in 15mm that satisfies me. Same with Lizardmen. And those are my 2 main WHFB interests.
It seems like you could make a decent Bretonnian army as there's a lot of 15mm historics from the 1300-1500 sort of period. I also remember seeing a bunch of decent looking skeletons which would be a good basis for a VC force.
I think there's a ton of people interested to the extent that they're prepared to spend, what, £40 on a video game and spend the odd evening playing it.
WHFB on the other hand, needed people to spend £100s if not £1000s and devote enough time to painting for it to feel like a full-time job...
But that's little to do with the popularity of the setting. (Apart from the lengths people were willing to go to 'officially' participate in it, before they burned out)
I was going to say this but I have no need for that since Vermis got the drop on me! *Fistbumps back*
I think it's universally agreed that FB needed a change desperately - what we mainly disagree on is the extent of the changes necessary. I am on the side of "balance the damned rules PLEASE and shake up the world a little". They should have taken a good long look at 6th Edition and tried to revert things a bit, imo.
Creative freedom is something you always have in wargaming, it doesn't need to be granted.
That's spot on. Prior to AoS I was building up a Samurai Army to count as Empire. I had high hopes 9th edition would fix some of 8th's problems and revitalize the communities. Too bad.
No need to feel depressed, it's for the best. The models would be released anyway and you would have obese guys in gold lycra, christmas tree Archaon, LEGO juniors dracoth cavalry and power armour dragons all in whfb, all depicted on soulless cgi illustrations by deviant art artists in brand new 9th edition wararmy warboooks.
Seriously now, I'm really grateful that at least they had the courage to destroy it, that way whfb will live long after both GW and AoS bite the dust.
WFB is not dead, it just got raised and is Unbreakable and Unstable.
Warhammer:Total War is reviving interest in the game, and it is clear that Creative assembly have no interest in AoS, right down to the damnation with faint praise.
Creative Assembly podcasts shows a lot of 8th gear in the background and there is a lot of love for the lore.
Unbreakable and Unstable. - now the monkeys are not writing army books and rules fanfixes are seeping in. The game is getting less broken, but is also destabilising. Your local meta will fix this.
You can still get into WFB if you act soon, and there is no small chance that GW will come to its senses once the AoS cash cow bursts.
Personally, I think that Ronnie Renton should crow louder and louder about all the WHFB customers he's getting, nothing will stick in GW's ire like hearing this and they may decide to bring back a living rulebook or something like just to scorch the earth for other companies.
I will quietly hope and pray that they give it to the FW/new SGs guys and keep it the hell away from the 'GW Prime' team, to keep it very clear of detritus from AoS. If we want a skirmish game to go with it, SG can rereleash or indeed reimagine, Mordheim.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: Personally, I think that Ronnie Renton should crow louder and louder about all the WHFB customers he's getting, nothing will stick in GW's ire like hearing this and they may decide to bring back a living rulebook or something like just to scorch the earth for other companies.
While I agree...at the same time GW looked at the numbers and realized they could afford to lose those customers as there number were not growing. That was sort of the whole point of the Warscrolls for each army that came out last summer. Grab who you can who MIGHT like AoS and say so long (and thanks for all the fish!) to the rest.
Remember WHFB was canned because it was not selling and new players were not coming in. We can argue to death as to WHY that was *cough* Rules! *cough* but at the end of the day all 15 armies were 15% of sales. As far as GW is concerned Ronnie can have them.
So im just going to throw this out here, what if GW had kept WFB and just had it split into WFB and AoS?
Somthing along the lines of Chaos Daemons with models having interlapping rules in the two games.
Double the profit for GW, just have to write new rules for WFB is all.
Nurgle wrote: So im just going to throw this out here, what if GW had kept WFB and just had it split into WFB and AoS?
Somthing along the lines of Chaos Daemons with models having interlapping rules in the two games.
Double the profit for GW, just have to write new rules for WFB is all.
If you start from the premise that WFB wasn't pulling its' weight for GW financially, then look at AoS from that starting point a lot of the changes make sense.
Comp, core tax, 1 box rarely meant 1 unit like it does in 40k, minis lacking 'wow' factor because they have to tesselate on squares, high buy-in, army book development cycles/bulk releases, etc. etc.
The downside is that if those chains of reasoning are correct, then maintaining WFB without significant changes renders those decisions pointless, because you still have to support the very problems you were hoping to get rid of.
It'd be like a fat kid deciding to lose weight by exercising, but eating a box of Krispy Kreme before every workout to make sure he had enough energy.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: Personally, I think that Ronnie Renton should crow louder and louder about all the WHFB customers he's getting, nothing will stick in GW's ire like hearing this and they may decide to bring back a living rulebook or something like just to scorch the earth for other companies.
While I agree...at the same time GW looked at the numbers and realized they could afford to lose those customers as there number were not growing. That was sort of the whole point of the Warscrolls for each army that came out last summer. Grab who you can who MIGHT like AoS and so so long (and thanks for all the fish!) to the rest.
Remember WHFB was canned because it was not selling and new players were not coming in. We can argue to death as to WHY that was *cough* Rules! *cough* but at the end of the day all 15 armies were 15% of sales. As far as GW is concerned Ronnie can have them.
And I'm sure Ronnie will have no qualms with it. Meanwhile the disgruntled vets are siding with Mantic vs GW, piling additional points for Ronnie.
I am pretty sure that if Kings of War grows big enough GW will have to do something about it. But I personally have no idea about how much that enough will be.
I am pretty sure that if Kings of War grows big enough GW will have to do something about it. But I personally have no idea about how much that enough will be.
Well it's taken them a few weeks since GW canned the whole TK line to show their Empire of Dust concept art at this years Salute.
I am pretty sure that if Kings of War grows big enough GW will have to do something about it. But I personally have no idea about how much that enough will be.
Well it's taken them a few weeks since GW canned the whole TK line to show their Empire of Dust concept art at this years Salute.
My 9th age UD army is happy.
I am guessing we'll have Brets after Empire of Dust.
And I'm sure Ronnie will have no qualms with it. Meanwhile the disgruntled vets are siding with Mantic vs GW, piling additional points for Ronnie.
I am pretty sure that if Kings of War grows big enough GW will have to do something about it. But I personally have no idea about how much that enough will be.
Oh I quite agree, KoW is a very good tournament game. It plays fast and allows enough modelling freedom that I hope it gets bigger. We can argue back and forth about Mantic's minis but I think it's fair to say they are getting better in that department.
GW probably will have to respond if things keep going the way they are. At the very least release a larger scale version of AoS with regiment rules and those movement trays for round minis like they did with War of the Ring. They made too much of an investment in AoS to completely can it.
And I'm sure Ronnie will have no qualms with it. Meanwhile the disgruntled vets are siding with Mantic vs GW, piling additional points for Ronnie.
I am pretty sure that if Kings of War grows big enough GW will have to do something about it. But I personally have no idea about how much that enough will be.
Oh I quite agree, KoW is a very good tournament game. It plays fast and allows enough modelling freedom that I hope it gets bigger. We can argue back and forth about Mantic's minis but I think it's fair to say they are getting better in that department.
GW probably will have to respond if things keep going the way they are. At the very least release a larger scale version of AoS with regiment rules and those movement trays for round minis like they did with War of the Ring. They made too much of an investment in AoS to completely can it.
Indeed, I agree with that assessment, especially on the possible increment of a large scale version of AoS with that specific movement tray (It immediately came to mind when I first saw that AoS boxes were beign repacked with round bases). I think it's a matter of time.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: While I like 15mm models in general, I haven't been able to find enough 15mm models that I actually like aesthetically to get in to 15mm WHFB. Some armies aren't too bad, some armies aren't well represented, some armies are well represented but the models are pretty mediocre.
I quite like the current aesthetic of WHFB Orcs and Goblins and as of yet I haven't seen anything in 15mm that satisfies me. Same with Lizardmen. And those are my 2 main WHFB interests.
It seems like you could make a decent Bretonnian army as there's a lot of 15mm historics from the 1300-1500 sort of period. I also remember seeing a bunch of decent looking skeletons which would be a good basis for a VC force.
VeteranNoob wrote: With a new setting they can finally do for fantasy what has been so successful for 40k and have an infinite space for fiction. They can go back and create new parts of the realms and BL authors have a big sandbox this time. As the authors have said with Fantasy there was a limited amount of narrative possibilities unless you opened up pocket dimensions or. chaos realms. BL was able to go back in time and do time of legends but until they decided to let the timeline advance it just writes itself into a corner. I wish we saw more from the Cathay, Araby , Nippon, etc but still . This is a great move for the BL coverage even though they face the challenge of starting everything over, and for many, in contrast to the world that was.
It's a "great move" for BL coverage if you enjoy the type of pointless, stake-less, bombastic, world-ending catastrofiction that is evidently all some BL authors are capable of writing. Creating an emotive, affecting narrative within the constraints of an existing world isn't a negative if you actually like that existing world and find its people interesting, that's why we have tons of fiction set in, you know, our own world in our own time - an author writing a book about NYPD detectives or a French doctor in wartime or an African politician battling conspiracy and corruption isn't whinging that they have "limited narrative possibilities" because they can't just blow up Africa on a whim or deploy the Deus Ex Astartes to save the day when they write themselves into a corner.
If BL authors couldn't handle writing WHFB fiction(and evidently it's not impossible, since we have plenty of great WHFB novels), the solution is to hire better authors, not blow up the setting and replace it with consequence-free pulp so your present stable of cheapie-hires don't have to bother improving.
It's like how there were dudes on the Khemri forum that were whining about how you couldn't write interesting stories about the Tomb Kings (post deadding, that is). Just not enough imagination, or focus on character. Mad kings are always a great foil for a main character's struggles.
Anvildude wrote: It's like how there were dudes on the Khemri forum that were whining about how you couldn't write interesting stories about the Tomb Kings (post deadding, that is). Just not enough imagination, or focus on character. Mad kings are always a great foil for a main character's struggles.
I can't fathom how someone can look at "undead Ancient Egypt with magic and Renaissance-era tomb robbers" and think "nowp, no basis for a story there..."
Christ you could get two or three decent novels out of a Ciaphas Cain-style Indiana Jones parody alone.
I personally would love to see a sort of violent Jeeves and Wooster thing, with an exhasperated Liche Priest or Tomb Herald having to deal with a delusional King who's alternately convinced he's completely impervious to all damage, and thinking he's still Mortal.
Anvildude wrote: It's like how there were dudes on the Khemri forum that were whining about how you couldn't write interesting stories about the Tomb Kings (post deadding, that is). Just not enough imagination, or focus on character. Mad kings are always a great foil for a main character's struggles.
I can't fathom how someone can look at "undead Ancient Egypt with magic and Renaissance-era tomb robbers" and think "nowp, no basis for a story there..."
Christ you could get two or three decent novels out of a Ciaphas Cain-style Indiana Jones parody alone.
The struggle between VC and TK's alone is enough to spawn a good chunk of novels.
Anvildude wrote: It's like how there were dudes on the Khemri forum that were whining about how you couldn't write interesting stories about the Tomb Kings (post deadding, that is). Just not enough imagination, or focus on character. Mad kings are always a great foil for a main character's struggles.
I can't fathom how someone can look at "undead Ancient Egypt with magic and Renaissance-era tomb robbers" and think "nowp, no basis for a story there..."
Christ you could get two or three decent novels out of a Ciaphas Cain-style Indiana Jones parody alone.
The struggle between VC and TK's alone is enough to spawn a good chunk of novels.
Hell, the struggle from among TK factions (they're basically city-states that have been at war with one another for more years than there's been peace) would make for an interesting canvas for a few novels.
Rosebuddy wrote: Never mind that kings from multiple dynasties waking up all at once makes for decent comedy. There's a Pratchett book with this premise, after all.
"I, the great Ansep Shasut, am KING of Khandur!"
"No, I, the greater Shapsan Aput, am King of Khandur!"
"Both of you are pale imitations of fools, for I, the Great and Powerful Tri'Xhi, am Queen of Khandur!"
Eventually, after discovering how pointless it is to send undying armies against each other, they start working on complicated ceremonial schedules to share the throne while accounting for that the exact borders of their kingdom has changed throughout the centuries and trying to juggle the multiple neighbouring kingdoms in the same situation.
Rosebuddy wrote: Never mind that kings from multiple dynasties waking up all at once makes for decent comedy. There's a Pratchett book with this premise, after all.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: While I like 15mm models in general, I haven't been able to find enough 15mm models that I actually like aesthetically to get in to 15mm WHFB. Some armies aren't too bad, some armies aren't well represented, some armies are well represented but the models are pretty mediocre.
I quite like the current aesthetic of WHFB Orcs and Goblins and as of yet I haven't seen anything in 15mm that satisfies me. Same with Lizardmen. And those are my 2 main WHFB interests.
It seems like you could make a decent Bretonnian army as there's a lot of 15mm historics from the 1300-1500 sort of period. I also remember seeing a bunch of decent looking skeletons which would be a good basis for a VC force.
15mm can cover just about everything.
Some of the Goblins aren't too bad, I'm struggling to see many Orcs I like and nothing Night Goblin-ish. I think there's some 10mm hooded Orcs some people use as 15mm Night Goblins, but the range is very limited.
While the range of 15mm isn't terrible, if you try and recreate a WHFB army there'll usually be holes and inconsistent aesthetic and sometimes the sculpting on 15mm fantasy models leaves a bit to be desired.
Rosebuddy wrote: Never mind that kings from multiple dynasties waking up all at once makes for decent comedy. There's a Pratchett book with this premise, after all.
"I, the great Ansep Shasut, am KING of Khandur!"
"No, I, the greater Shapsan Aput, am King of Khandur!"
"Both of you are pale imitations of fools, for I, the Great and Powerful Tri'Xhi, am Queen of Khandur!"
Rosebuddy wrote: Never mind that kings from multiple dynasties waking up all at once makes for decent comedy. There's a Pratchett book with this premise, after all.
Aw man, I loved Pyramids, one of Pterry's best
Agreed. I mean, You Bastard was an invention of pure genius
Anvildude wrote: I personally would love to see a sort of violent Jeeves and Wooster thing, with an exhasperated Liche Priest or Tomb Herald having to deal with a delusional King who's alternately convinced he's completely impervious to all damage, and thinking he's still Mortal.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: While I like 15mm models in general, I haven't been able to find enough 15mm models that I actually like aesthetically to get in to 15mm WHFB. Some armies aren't too bad, some armies aren't well represented, some armies are well represented but the models are pretty mediocre.
I quite like the current aesthetic of WHFB Orcs and Goblins and as of yet I haven't seen anything in 15mm that satisfies me. Same with Lizardmen. And those are my 2 main WHFB interests.
It seems like you could make a decent Bretonnian army as there's a lot of 15mm historics from the 1300-1500 sort of period. I also remember seeing a bunch of decent looking skeletons which would be a good basis for a VC force.
15mm can cover just about everything.
Some of the Goblins aren't too bad, I'm struggling to see many Orcs I like and nothing Night Goblin-ish. I think there's some 10mm hooded Orcs some people use as 15mm Night Goblins, but the range is very limited.
While the range of 15mm isn't terrible, if you try and recreate a WHFB army there'll usually be holes and inconsistent aesthetic and sometimes the sculpting on 15mm fantasy models leaves a bit to be desired.
I hate the fact that GW has gotten rid of all those kits (most of them were ones i was goin to buy). I cant bring myself to go onto the AoS site anymore. Its lucky my local Independant Retailer has refused to get rid of the old models, and put in an order for all the kits that would be discontinued.
The real issue here is that GW managed to make an interesting and unique take on the traditional Tolkienesque fantasy world, built it up with more interesting lore for, what, 30 years? Gave use backstory, cultures, tragedy and triumph and emotional attachments to characters, but in the end treats it as a boardgame and money source rather than as a franchise. Had they started their licensing 10 years ago (properly, mind you, rather than the charlie-foxtrot that happened with Warcraft) they could have essentially a globally recognized fantasy empire- bestselling book series, blockbuster movies, video games, dedicated successful stores and national tournaments that don't require a con tacked on.
Instead, they're throwing out their in-house development because it doesn't seem to be making a profit, while tossing the license at every Joe and Jane with a computer- many (if not most) of which are treating the source material with more respect and therefore managing to make pretty awesome games out of them.
Anvildude wrote: The real issue here is that GW managed to make an interesting and unique take on the traditional Tolkienesque fantasy world, built it up with more interesting lore for, what, 30 years? Gave use backstory, cultures, tragedy and triumph and emotional attachments to characters, but in the end treats it as a boardgame and money source rather than as a franchise. Had they started their licensing 10 years ago (properly, mind you, rather than the charlie-foxtrot that happened with Warcraft) they could have essentially a globally recognized fantasy empire- bestselling book series, blockbuster movies, video games, dedicated successful stores and national tournaments that don't require a con tacked on.
Instead, they're throwing out their in-house development because it doesn't seem to be making a profit, while tossing the license at every Joe and Jane with a computer- many (if not most) of which are treating the source material with more respect and therefore managing to make pretty awesome games out of them.
You mean fire ever land fighting death everland in the epic battle of endless horde A vs endless horde B is not full of feelings.
Remember WHFB was canned because it was not selling and new players were not coming in. We can argue to death as to WHY that was *cough* Rules! *cough* but at the end of the day all 15 armies were 15% of sales. As far as GW is concerned Ronnie can have them.
WHFB wasn't selling due to bad rules. It wasn't selling because of the stupid crazy cost of having a viable army. Pains me to think how much I would have spent on my Skaven if it weren't for the starter set....horde armies need so many core choices it is crazy. GW just priced themselves out of their own game.
Remember WHFB was canned because it was not selling and new players were not coming in. We can argue to death as to WHY that was *cough* Rules! *cough* but at the end of the day all 15 armies were 15% of sales. As far as GW is concerned Ronnie can have them.
WHFB wasn't selling due to bad rules. It wasn't selling because of the stupid crazy cost of having a viable army. Pains me to think how much I would have spent on my Skaven if it weren't for the starter set....horde armies need so many core choices it is crazy. GW just priced themselves out of their own game.
Bad rules did cause a lot of players to leave or shelve their armies in favour of other games. I know I petered out due to the crappiness of the 8th edition. Cost of updating army books cause a sell off of 6 of my armies and just left the oldest ones. Which eventually got boxed up and archived.
8th ed floundered both because a lot of vets didn't like the new rules and also because it was prohibitively expensive and time consuming for newer players to build an army.
Remember WHFB was canned because it was not selling and new players were not coming in. We can argue to death as to WHY that was *cough* Rules! *cough* but at the end of the day all 15 armies were 15% of sales. As far as GW is concerned Ronnie can have them.
WHFB wasn't selling due to bad rules. It wasn't selling because of the stupid crazy cost of having a viable army. Pains me to think how much I would have spent on my Skaven if it weren't for the starter set....horde armies need so many core choices it is crazy. GW just priced themselves out of their own game.
Bad rules did cause a lot of players to leave or shelve their armies in favour of other games. I know I petered out due to the crappiness of the 8th edition. Cost of updating army books cause a sell off of 6 of my armies and just left the oldest ones. Which eventually got boxed up and archived.
While it's true that there was a lot of ragequit when 8th dropped it was gaining traction (if not sales) gradually with each new armybook release that ended up levelling.
I know for sure tournament attendance was at or very near all-time high by late 8th edition (inc. End Times)
Whether that translated to sales for GW or just recasters and alternative brands is entirely GW's own making.
If people slowly stop playing over time after sticking with 8th for good while, is it a rage quit or sign of the ruleset being duff enough to make people lose interest?
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: If people slowly stop playing over time after sticking with 8th for good while, is it a rage quit or sign of the ruleset being duff enough to make people lose interest?
In my experience ragequitters vastly outnumbered those who left with a well-set 8th edition. Some even got back gradually afterwards, IME more came back than left later on.
Going by big national/regional events also seems to confirm this trend, of course your local experience might be different.
It is also interesting that when GW started loosening the game up for End Times, sales picked up. Unfortunately, GW took this to mean that blowing up the world for a generic pseudo-myth setting was the answer. Realistically, I think that also had appeal to draw it closer to 40K (fight on endless worlds!) so that they weren't as bound by setting coherence and let them roll out their new flagship ubermensch faction (that otherwise look suspiciously like SMs or Chaos warriors). Likewise it favors their new IP protectionist naming conventions (no more generic ogres or orcs- only orruks and ogors now!).
Fortunately, Oldhammer isn't too hard to replicate with other lines and there are plenty of good rules to be found (or just use a prior edition). So chaos can live on in the Old World!
For me, I never really had a chance to be a part of Warhammer Fantasy Battles. When I was a kid my older brother used to love taking me to the local comic shops, and his friends all played a game call Warhammer (though he himself did not). And I found it AMAZING, I absolutely loved looking at their armies, watching them play, reading through their rulebooks/armybooks and White Dwarf magazines. None of them had any interest in 40k, it was all about Fantasy. I always told myself I would build my own army and play one day. When I was a young teen a friend and I got into 40k, and later WM/H and then many other miniature games, but I never really got to return to Fantasy as I didn't know anyone else who was interested. I bought some Dark Elves and some things from other armies, I wrote my own fluff, I kept up with the army books and the editions. I knew I would be moving to a bigger city for grad school and I planned on becoming a real Fantasy player then, it was a dream I suppose. But then the End Times happened and AoS followed. I won't deny that I am actually interested in AoS, but it isn't WFB. The fluff is dead, Bretonnia are sent to the void, rank and file is over, so many things I loved about the game are gone. It's sad to realize I will never truly be part of what I wanted to part of since I was 4 years old. Goodbye WFB, I hardly knew ye'!
jmurph wrote: It is also interesting that when GW started loosening the game up for End Times, sales picked up.
I don't think it had anything to do with the game loosening up so much as people liking the models. A lot of people were disappointed with the rules loosening up at the same time and it's possible a year after End Times if GW hadn't already killed WHFB that it may have been dead anyway.
Unfortunately, GW took this to mean that blowing up the world for a generic pseudo-myth setting was the answer.
Realistically the success of End Times had nothing to do with releasing AoS. AoS would have been planned a long time before End Times, if ET failed or if ET did awesome it would have made absolutely no difference, we were getting AoS either way.
Fortunately, Oldhammer isn't too hard to replicate...
The hardest thing to replicate was the ability to find large groups of varied opponents.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Brutus_Apex wrote: 8th edition rules were amazing. Not perfect, but by far the best set of rules of any edition of warhammer.
You can argue about how "good" the rules were in and of themselves, it's subjective. What's less subjective is that the rules failed to satisfy large swathes of existing customers and failed to entice new customers. So in that sense, 8th sucked.
Brutus_Apex wrote: 8th edition rules were amazing. Not perfect, but by far the best set of rules of any edition of warhammer.
Sort of a shame they were such a massive failure they killed the game then, isn't it?
A game can be just fine rules-wise and fail for totally different reasons.
GW has gotten away with selling us Mercedes A-class for C-class money, then E-class and finally Bentley money. Which is a fine car and all that, but doesn't really make sense if your business is fleet operations and after all the basic models have a Renault engine on them. GW's reply was to say "hey, here's this new place where you don't need that many cars, plus our cars will now have 6 wheels and will only come in fluorescent colours, this is how cars should look".
So plenty of people have moved to Renaults, Peugeots or Opels (sorry, Vauxhalls). Less flashy, but still fun and does the work just fine.
Or they would just keep the old car, with a bit of maintenance it will last for many, many years.
Brutus_Apex wrote: 8th edition rules were amazing. Not perfect, but by far the best set of rules of any edition of warhammer.
You can argue about how "good" the rules were in and of themselves, it's subjective. What's less subjective is that the rules failed to satisfy large swathes of existing customers and failed to entice new customers. So in that sense, 8th sucked.
Still sold better than AoS though so technically 8th is better than the current version of AoS.
No comment in best ruleselt though.
I do think that the gaming community has a lot of "rage quitters" or people who don't like change like other posters have said. It's like that around here people just got all mad and quit playing....not sure why people can't still play 8th edition and use the models that are available? You can still buy the models so you will still support your FLGS more than just quitting the game altogether.
Wish it was easier to find a game then it was before
chiefbigredman wrote: I do think that the gaming community has a lot of "rage quitters" or people who don't like change like other posters have said.
It depends how you define "rage quit". If you think of a person saying "This game is no longer something I enjoy" as "rage quitting", sure, there's lots of "rage quitters".
People are too quick to chalk up "don't like specific changes" to "don't like change". I absolutely hate being labelled with "don't like change" when I can be very specific about WHICH changes I don't like.
not sure why people can't still play 8th edition and use the models that are available?
As you said yourself....
Wish it was easier to find a game then it was before
Firstly I don't really like 8th to begin with. When 8th rolled around my gaming group tried to stick with 7th. The problem is people quit (as they do with any game, even if it's a supported one) but new people don't join up. You end up with only a few players playing games with the same armies and it gets stale after a while.
You can still play it as a back burner game that you only play from time to time, but most people don't want to invest the sort of time and effort required to build a WHFB army to play a back burner game. At this point I'm not getting rid of my larger WHFB armies.... but hell if I'm adding more models to them to play a game once or twice a year and I'm certainly not going to bother adding to the half finished armies. They'll probably end up on ebay or more likely the trash can when I can be arsed cleaning out my storage area.
chiefbigredman wrote: You can still buy the models so you will still support your FLGS more than just quitting the game altogether.
Except you can't still buy the models from your FLGS for a bunch of stuff, and it's only going to get worse. And buying WHFB/AoS models from your FLGS is also giving money to GW, so no, I don't particularly want to reward GW for killing the game. I'd rather support my FLGS by buying non-GW stuff.
I do think that the gaming community has a lot of "rage quitters" or people who don't like change like other posters have said. It's like that around here people just got all mad and quit playing....not sure why people can't still play 8th edition and use the models that are available? You can still buy the models so you will still support your FLGS more than just quitting the game altogether.
We do, thank you very much (though playing more 9th age than 8th lately).
I support my FLGS buying x-wing, SAGA and other stuff, too. Of the new releases I'd only maybe will buy the orc shaman. We'll see what happens when they get around re-doing elves (sorry, AElfs).
chiefbigredman wrote: I do think that the gaming community has a lot of "rage quitters" or people who don't like change like other posters have said.
It depends how you define "rage quit". If you think of a person saying "This game is no longer something I enjoy" as "rage quitting", sure, there's lots of "rage quitters".
People are too quick to chalk up "don't like specific changes" to "don't like change". I absolutely hate being labelled with "don't like change" when I can be very specific about WHICH changes I don't like.
My meaning was there are a lot of people who got all mad that GW did not release a new 9th edition so they just quit playing any form of fantasy all together at the FLGS. Did not give any chance to even stop by the store any more (which hurts local business). Some people just play Fantasy but then read the Age of Sigmar rules and said "nope this is not anything I am interested in" and then don't even play fantasy anymore...maybe because they aren't going to get new army books, or army releases or whatever.
Side note Age of Sigmar is a different game altogether.
Firstly I don't really like 8th to begin with. When 8th rolled around my gaming group tried to stick with 7th. The problem is people quit (as they do with any game, even if it's a supported one) but new people don't join up. You end up with only a few players playing games with the same armies and it gets stale after a while.
You can still play it as a back burner game that you only play from time to time, but most people don't want to invest the sort of time and effort required to build a WHFB army to play a back burner game. At this point I'm not getting rid of my larger WHFB armies.... but hell if I'm adding more models to them to play a game once or twice a year and I'm certainly not going to bother adding to the half finished armies. They'll probably end up on ebay or more likely the trash can when I can be arsed cleaning out my storage area.
Fantasy is my main miniature game and still play it just about as frequently as I used to (depends how busy I am with work and life etc). My friend and his brother have about 5 armies, I have 2, and my brother in law has 1 so we have a variety of things to play. I still enjoy playing it even though I am using 8th edition rules, I just take the rules for what they are and we house rule anything we agree on being wrong etc and I see nothing wrong with that happening at FLGS because I still buy models there, I still buy my paints there and board games etc.
p.s let me know if you want to sell half finished armies I am always in the market haha
chiefbigredman wrote: You can still buy the models so you will still support your FLGS more than just quitting the game altogether.
Except you can't still buy the models from your FLGS for a bunch of stuff, and it's only going to get worse. And buying WHFB/AoS models from your FLGS is also giving money to GW, so no, I don't particularly want to reward GW for killing the game. I'd rather support my FLGS by buying non-GW stuff.
Yes I agree there is a lot of models that are gone now or direct only. But that doesn't mean you can't buy current stock from the FLGS. If nobody buys it he looses his money in his inventory basically.
I am still playing 8th edition, still painting and still buying models every so often. Nothing wrong with staying with the current 8th edition book in my opinion. If you know people with armies from when fantasy was still around but they don't show up anymore you can still play it and I will continue to do so. I just don't buy into all the new rulesets or army books every few years (gets expensive) but I will use what I have and if I can't find models at some point I am sure there are lots of people who are getting rid of armies they don't want anymore.
I do think that the gaming community has a lot of "rage quitters" or people who don't like change like other posters have said. It's like that around here people just got all mad and quit playing....not sure why people can't still play 8th edition and use the models that are available? You can still buy the models so you will still support your FLGS more than just quitting the game altogether.
We do, thank you very much (though playing more 9th age than 8th lately).
I support my FLGS buying x-wing, SAGA and other stuff, too. Of the new releases I'd only maybe will buy the orc shaman. We'll see what happens when they get around re-doing elves (sorry, AElfs).
I still support my FLGS as well but there is a large part of the community I recently moved to who don't even frequent the store anymore because Fantasy was their main game and they just decided to not play fantasy anymore or any other games.
If GW had the nouse, they would release a 9th edition with two or three large hardback books containing all sixteen factions between them. Prebalanced. Then sell what people want via GW mail order unboxed, by the sprue and with bases for either AoS or Warhammer 9th.
They could easily turn this into a win/win if that had the business sense to do so. Age of Sigmar need not die, its a good gateway product, even if the background is inconsequential.
Wsrhammer 9th can be sold mail order only, which cuts out the middleman, without packaging, which cuts on production materiel. It doesnt need to be a big seller, its enough if the models are just there. GW has the tooling to make up the sprues as they need to because manufacturing is in house.
There is no logical reason not to do this other than as Fenrir Kitsune understood, the game has officially moved on and wont want to be seen to go back for reasons of management dogma.
Orlanth wrote: If GW had the nouse, they would release a 9th edition with two or three large hardback books containing all sixteen factions between them. Prebalanced. Then sell what people want via GW mail order unboxed, by the sprue and with bases for either AoS or Warhammer 9th.
They could easily turn this into a win/win if that had the business sense to do so. Age of Sigmar need not die, its a good gateway product, even if the background is inconsequential.
Wsrhammer 9th can be sold mail order only, which cuts out the middleman, without packaging, which cuts on production materiel. It doesnt need to be a big seller, its enough if the models are just there. GW has the tooling to make up the sprues as they need to because manufacturing is in house.
There is no logical reason not to do this other than as Fenrir Kitsune understood, the game has officially moved on and wont want to be seen to go back for reasons of management dogma.
I agree.
GW plans far ahead and Age of Sigmar must have been in the works for a while before release. I don't think that they knew how well end times was going to sell so they had to release all the materials they already created.
Doesn't GW have a new CEO or similar position that was hired just before Age of Sigmar was released?
Anyways I feel that they might end up releasing a 9th edition that mail order or something like that. They are re issuing some of the speciality games so I wouldn't put 9th edition past them in some form.
chiefbigredman wrote: I do think that the gaming community has a lot of "rage quitters" or people who don't like change like other posters have said.
It depends how you define "rage quit". If you think of a person saying "This game is no longer something I enjoy" as "rage quitting", sure, there's lots of "rage quitters".
People are too quick to chalk up "don't like specific changes" to "don't like change". I absolutely hate being labelled with "don't like change" when I can be very specific about WHICH changes I don't like.
My meaning was there are a lot of people who got all mad that GW did not release a new 9th edition so they just quit playing any form of fantasy all together at the FLGS. Did not give any chance to even stop by the store any more (which hurts local business). Some people just play Fantasy but then read the Age of Sigmar rules and said "nope this is not anything I am interested in" and then don't even play fantasy anymore...maybe because they aren't going to get new army books, or army releases or whatever.
Side note Age of Sigmar is a different game altogether.
It's still disingenuous to say that's "rage quitting".
I don't think there were all that many WHFB players who were genuinely happy with 8th then just dropped everything when AoS rolled around. Maybe a few, but I think it's a minority.
Many people were already languishing under 8th, either sticking with 7th in reasonably closed groups and hoping GW would update 9th to be better and introduce fresh blood, or playing 8th when they didn't really love it but were invested enough to hold out hope for the next edition. Some of those players might even have been waiting a decade for a new army book to come out.
Then End Times rolled around, people got excited for a while, then realised the name might be literal.... then waiting for 6 months with no news at all from GW and finally when AoS came out it was nailing the coffin shut on the game they loved after years of struggling with it.
That's not what I'd describe as "rage quitting" or "just don't like change".
Orlanth wrote: If GW had the nouse, they would release a 9th edition with two or three large hardback books containing all sixteen factions between them. Prebalanced. Then sell what people want via GW mail order unboxed, by the sprue and with bases for either AoS or Warhammer 9th.
They could easily turn this into a win/win if that had the business sense to do so. Age of Sigmar need not die, its a good gateway product, even if the background is inconsequential.
Wsrhammer 9th can be sold mail order only, which cuts out the middleman, without packaging, which cuts on production materiel. It doesnt need to be a big seller, its enough if the models are just there. GW has the tooling to make up the sprues as they need to because manufacturing is in house.
There is no logical reason not to do this other than as Fenrir Kitsune understood, the game has officially moved on and wont want to be seen to go back for reasons of management dogma.
I agree.
GW plans far ahead and Age of Sigmar must have been in the works for a while before release. I don't think that they knew how well end times was going to sell so they had to release all the materials they already created.
Doesn't GW have a new CEO or similar position that was hired just before Age of Sigmar was released?
Anyways I feel that they might end up releasing a 9th edition that mail order or something like that. They are re issuing some of the speciality games so I wouldn't put 9th edition past them in some form.
AoS was in the works since 2013. GW employees leaked out information before it's arrival that they wanted to continue fantasy and had great ideas for it but they were told it was being discontinued because it was financially doomed.
Rountree is the new fellow in charge and is a gamer rather than Kirby who knew everything about money but nothing about gaming. (To his credit he did save the company from going under)
He's responsible for alot of GW's positive changes that have fans saying "hurrah for the age of Rountree! ".
The specialist games is definitely the biggest hope for the old world. Remains to be seen if they'll go that direction, though.
chiefbigredman wrote: I do think that the gaming community has a lot of "rage quitters" or people who don't like change like other posters have said.
It depends how you define "rage quit". If you think of a person saying "This game is no longer something I enjoy" as "rage quitting", sure, there's lots of "rage quitters".
People are too quick to chalk up "don't like specific changes" to "don't like change". I absolutely hate being labelled with "don't like change" when I can be very specific about WHICH changes I don't like.
My meaning was there are a lot of people who got all mad that GW did not release a new 9th edition so they just quit playing any form of fantasy all together at the FLGS. Did not give any chance to even stop by the store any more (which hurts local business). Some people just play Fantasy but then read the Age of Sigmar rules and said "nope this is not anything I am interested in" and then don't even play fantasy anymore...maybe because they aren't going to get new army books, or army releases or whatever.
Side note Age of Sigmar is a different game altogether.
It's still disingenuous to say that's "rage quitting".
I don't think there were all that many WHFB players who were genuinely happy with 8th then just dropped everything when AoS rolled around. Maybe a few, but I think it's a minority.
Many people were already languishing under 8th, either sticking with 7th in reasonably closed groups and hoping GW would update 9th to be better and introduce fresh blood, or playing 8th when they didn't really love it but were invested enough to hold out hope for the next edition. Some of those players might even have been waiting a decade for a new army book to come out.
Then End Times rolled around, people got excited for a while, then realised the name might be literal.... then waiting for 6 months with no news at all from GW and finally when AoS came out it was nailing the coffin shut on the game they loved after years of struggling with it.
That's not what I'd describe as "rage quitting" or "just don't like change".
This. There was no "rage quitting" in my local club, just a slow meander away from the game as people found they didn't enjoy it any more and moved onto different things for their weekly game. By the time End Times came out, it met with massive indifference.
If GW did 9th edition, it would be interesting to see, but I don't think it'll happen as they've gutted a lot of the ranges. Could produce them again, but they could also produce chaos toilets again. They don't though.
Orlanth wrote: If GW had the nouse, they would release a 9th edition with two or three large hardback books containing all sixteen factions between them. Prebalanced. Then sell what people want via GW mail order unboxed, by the sprue and with bases for either AoS or Warhammer 9th.
They could easily turn this into a win/win if that had the business sense to do so. Age of Sigmar need not die, its a good gateway product, even if the background is inconsequential.
Wsrhammer 9th can be sold mail order only, which cuts out the middleman, without packaging, which cuts on production materiel. It doesnt need to be a big seller, its enough if the models are just there. GW has the tooling to make up the sprues as they need to because manufacturing is in house.
There is no logical reason not to do this other than as Fenrir Kitsune understood, the game has officially moved on and wont want to be seen to go back for reasons of management dogma.
I agree.
GW plans far ahead and Age of Sigmar must have been in the works for a while before release. I don't think that they knew how well end times was going to sell so they had to release all the materials they already created.
Doesn't GW have a new CEO or similar position that was hired just before Age of Sigmar was released?
Anyways I feel that they might end up releasing a 9th edition that mail order or something like that. They are re issuing some of the speciality games so I wouldn't put 9th edition past them in some form.
AoS was in the works since 2013. GW employees leaked out information before it's arrival that they wanted to continue fantasy and had great ideas for it but they were told it was being discontinued because it was financially doomed.
Rountree is the new fellow in charge and is a gamer rather than Kirby who knew everything about money but nothing about gaming. (To his credit he did save the company from going under)
He's responsible for alot of GW's positive changes that have fans saying "hurrah for the age of Rountree! ".
The specialist games is definitely the biggest hope for the old world. Remains to be seen if they'll go that direction, though.
It's a matter of how much goodwill from the shareholders does Roundtree have. If his new approach doesn't work in a certain timespan they'll ask for his head.
Orlanth wrote: If GW had the nouse, they would release a 9th edition with two or three large hardback books containing all sixteen factions between them. Prebalanced. Then sell what people want via GW mail order unboxed, by the sprue and with bases for either AoS or Warhammer 9th.
They could easily turn this into a win/win if that had the business sense to do so. Age of Sigmar need not die, its a good gateway product, even if the background is inconsequential.
Wsrhammer 9th can be sold mail order only, which cuts out the middleman, without packaging, which cuts on production materiel. It doesnt need to be a big seller, its enough if the models are just there. GW has the tooling to make up the sprues as they need to because manufacturing is in house.
There is no logical reason not to do this other than as Fenrir Kitsune understood, the game has officially moved on and wont want to be seen to go back for reasons of management dogma.
I agree.
GW plans far ahead and Age of Sigmar must have been in the works for a while before release. I don't think that they knew how well end times was going to sell so they had to release all the materials they already created.
Doesn't GW have a new CEO or similar position that was hired just before Age of Sigmar was released?
Anyways I feel that they might end up releasing a 9th edition that mail order or something like that. They are re issuing some of the speciality games so I wouldn't put 9th edition past them in some form.
AoS was in the works since 2013. GW employees leaked out information before it's arrival that they wanted to continue fantasy and had great ideas for it but they were told it was being discontinued because it was financially doomed.
Rountree is the new fellow in charge and is a gamer rather than Kirby who knew everything about money but nothing about gaming. (To his credit he did save the company from going under)
He's responsible for alot of GW's positive changes that have fans saying "hurrah for the age of Rountree! ".
The specialist games is definitely the biggest hope for the old world. Remains to be seen if they'll go that direction, though.
It's a matter of how much goodwill from the shareholders does Roundtree have. If his new approach doesn't work in a certain timespan they'll ask for his head.
The shareholders are mostly big funds who give exactly zero gaks about the company or how it's run providing it keeps churning out dem dividends every year, that's how Kirby was able to do whatever the feth he liked for so many years despite declining revenue and customer base - he made "efficiency savings" or just borrowed money and paid out the dividends on time. I think Rountree's main issue will swing on whether or not there are any "Kirby loyalists"(ie people wedded to his way of doing things) - if there are, they might cause him problems in more subtle ways.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Well i guess none of you want to play 8th edition online with me in a virtual representation of Warhammer Fantasy 8th edition :(.
I mean yeah the game ended but i still want to play with you guys.
Is there noone near where you live that still plays 8th? You're near Detroit that's a big centre! (P.s I'm super close but have no models down where I just moved too at the moment)
Im right with the OP. I have a complete Dark Elf army and started an Orcs and Gobs army...la sigh. I fill like a crazy person calling around looking for 8th ed orcs and gobs. Hustling ebay all hours of the day, hunting other forums for swap/buys.
Well we can still play this game virtually. There is 'Universal Battle' and if that's not enough there's also Tabletop Simulator both of which have Warhammer Fantasy. Universal Battle seems more into 9th and KoW though.
Vri wrote: Im right with the OP. I have a complete Dark Elf army and started an Orcs and Gobs army...la sigh. I fill like a crazy person calling around looking for 8th ed orcs and gobs. Hustling ebay all hours of the day, hunting other forums for swap/buys.
Ya I still do this quite often. Always in the swap shop or on bartertown looking for some deals. I still never finished my Empire army so trying to pick away at getting pieces for that....and lord of the rings which is still semi supported but can get good deals online if you look hard enough.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
flamingkillamajig wrote: Well we can still play this game virtually. There is 'Universal Battle' and if that's not enough there's also Tabletop Simulator both of which have Warhammer Fantasy. Universal Battle seems more into 9th and KoW though.
This. There was no "rage quitting" in my local club, just a slow meander away from the game as people found they didn't enjoy it any more and moved onto different things for their weekly game. By the time End Times came out, it met with massive indifference.
See, here in the States, I saw the exact opposite happen in a number of stores in multiple states. There was a LOT of rage quitting when 8th was released followed by a slow and steady return to the player base as the players realized that 8th really wasn't as terrible as they thought.
Then everyone stopped playing again once it was clear that the name End Times was literal...
Vri wrote: Im right with the OP. I have a complete Dark Elf army and started an Orcs and Gobs army...la sigh. I fill like a crazy person calling around looking for 8th ed orcs and gobs. Hustling ebay all hours of the day, hunting other forums for swap/buys.
Ya I still do this quite often. Always in the swap shop or on bartertown looking for some deals. I still never finished my Empire army so trying to pick away at getting pieces for that....and lord of the rings which is still semi supported but can get good deals online if you look hard enough.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
flamingkillamajig wrote: Well we can still play this game virtually. There is 'Universal Battle' and if that's not enough there's also Tabletop Simulator both of which have Warhammer Fantasy. Universal Battle seems more into 9th and KoW though.
Check your PM man
Yeah i saw it but it sounded more about IRL fantasy 8th gaming and i just sold my 2 warp lightning cannons. At this point without those it'd be much harder to fight a game against an opponent :(. Sides i have an 8th edition vampire counts army book going to massive waste since 8th died.
@Platuan4th: For me i started in 8th and i never saw anywhere near the type of rage AoS was met with. I saw no less than a few big Warhammer Fantasy players actually slap their hand against the side of their face in sheer awe of that garbage. It was like an April Fools joke but it was real. Even most Fantasy players that gave it a chance gave up on it. At best it was meant for people leaving 40k and painters or modellers. It was GW pretty much kicking out the Warhammer Fantasy fan-base unceremoniously.
@Anvildude: It's fairly easy when you're used to it. In fact the system (on Universal Battle anyway) is in many ways superior. You don't need all the models to use what you want and most movement is easier with all the arcs and angles represented. They even have arc of visibility. You may have to get used to using models not meant to be other models with the names of what they are stuck onto what they should be. People normally represent regular base sizes though. If you really take issue with it become a member for super cheap and you can use all the armies various people created. I would become a member but i don't have that type of cash. I don't know the details for Tabletop Simulator but there's a guy modding for it named 'Vess' and he's made models for all the armies that were in 'Warhammer: mark of chaos' and its following video game expansion.
It's a matter of how much goodwill from the shareholders does Roundtree have. If his new approach doesn't work in a certain timespan they'll ask for his head.
The shareholders are mostly big funds who give exactly zero gaks about the company or how it's run providing it keeps churning out dem dividends every year, that's how Kirby was able to do whatever the feth he liked for so many years despite declining revenue and customer base - he made "efficiency savings" or just borrowed money and paid out the dividends on time.
Yup, but there are several indicators pointing out that they can't ride that wave anymore.
And it's not like Roundtree was an outsider. He's almost 20 years in and made it all the way to CEO so he's still a Kirby man even if he's evidently bringing some changes in.
When a big fund starts receiving too many indicators that the company will not deliver they either sell or bunch up voting rights and bring in a new CEO they can trust to turn the company around.
The company I worked a few years back had exactly that happen to them. The owners sold a majority stake to a big fund which first of all planted a new CEO, which over the course of 6 months changed 3/4 of higher management and roughly 1/3 of middle management. Most of them brought from the outside (very little internal promotion).
That's how funds operate, once/if GW fails to deliver the current management is in hot water.
I was sad when the Old World ended, but over the months after the End Times I started to think about the Old World in a different way. The more I think about, the more I saw the Old World was sorta generic in a few areas that I didn't realize before. Maybe it's just me who is thinking about it.
Nova_Impero wrote: I was sad when the Old World ended, but over the months after the End Times I started to think about the Old World in a different way. The more I think about, the more I saw the Old World was sorta generic in a few areas that I didn't realize before. Maybe it's just me who is thinking about it.
Pretty much every fantasy or sci fi world has a lot of generic elements. People like a bit of familiarity thrown in with a bit of uniqueness. If you tried to create a fantasy world without any generic elements my guess is that it would suck and not be very popular.
Baron Klatz wrote: Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.
What a load of old pish. His knowledge of WHF as a setting evidently isn't as extensive as he believes, given he can caricature Kislev as a land of "slavic stereotypes where everyone drinks vodka and is called Ivan", and believes that all the Chaos tribes are blonde & ginger Viking ripoffs. Maybe he should have spent more time reading those WFRP books(and a few BL novels for good measure) and less leaving them on the shelves to gather dust. Then we get to the laughable stage of the screed when he blames WHF for his own lack of originality, because the basic illustrative "here's how to play and use the fluff we've written as a baseline" GW-provided adventure packs use the basic material - it's amazing how he's managed to become a world-renowed expert on original fantasy settings and RPG games without figuring out you're supposed to have a competent GM modifying the campaigns or outright creating new ones from scratch rather than just slavishly replaying the provided intro ones over and over again.
The best bit, the part that genuinely made me laugh out loud, was the part where he contrasts boring, derivative, unoriginal WHF with original, evolving WH40K, a setting that fundamentally amounts to said boring, derivative, unoriginal fantasy with Herbert, Heinlein, and Space Catholicism bolted to the side
Have a word with your friend man, if he keeps furiously paddling up that Egyptian river he'll get lost for good, and given the level of sneering disdain his writing displays nobody will be too keen to go looking for him.
Baron Klatz wrote: Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.
It makes me wonder, are people only just now discovering WHFB copied historical elements and other fantasy elements? I mean, that article sounds like it's supposed to be some revelation... as if they didn't realise as soon as they started reading about WH the blatantly obvious themes adapted from other sources? I started WHFB when I was about 10 and it was one of the first things I picked up on, a few original elements here and there but otherwise just adapted from what already exists.
Though there definitely are some non-generic elements within WH, originality isn't a big strength of WHFB, it was the way it put all those adapted elements together, fleshed them out, built them in to extensive miniature ranges and made a fun game. Beyond that when they wrote interesting stories within the perhaps not entirely original world.
I guess I've never been in to the whole roleplaying side of WH, maybe if I tried roleplaying in WH worlds I'd find it more boring.... but then i find roleplaying boring to begin with so that's probably not going to be a good gauge of anything
Baron Klatz wrote: Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.
It makes me wonder, are people only just now discovering WHFB copied historical elements and other fantasy elements? I mean, that article sounds like it's supposed to be some revelation... as if they didn't realise as soon as they started reading about WH the blatantly obvious themes adapted from other sources? I started WHFB when I was about 10 and it was one of the first things I picked up on, a few original elements here and there but otherwise just adapted from what already exists.
Though there definitely are some non-generic elements within WH, originality isn't a big strength of WHFB, it was the way it put all those adapted elements together, fleshed them out, built them in to extensive miniature ranges and made a fun game. Beyond that when they wrote interesting stories within the perhaps not entirely original world.
I guess I've never been in to the whole roleplaying side of WH, maybe if I tried roleplaying in WH worlds I'd find it more boring.... but then i find roleplaying boring to begin with so that's probably not going to be a good gauge of anything
You can derive an original setting from unoriginal elements - pastiche, done well, is every bit as valid as sitting down and writing your whole new world of Gorblevorbula VII, home of the Greeblesnorks, Groowps, and Garblefabulons, from scratch, just as collage can produce art every bit as attractive as some mad acid trip-esque abstract piece painted entirely from your own imagination.
Baron Klatz wrote: Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.
He just realised WFB was generic? Better not tell him how much of 40K is a straight copy of other things with the serial numbers filed off or there'll be hell to pay.
Baron Klatz wrote: Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.
Half of that read like he was complaining about GW's business strategies but blaming it on the Old World; the other half read like deeply-held personal issues with a GM. There's a little bit of cheap oversimplification for laughs sprinkled in as well, like the written equivalent of talking about an argument you had and using a silly voice for the other person. Oh! And a bit of making fun of Warhammer for using widely-held concepts...that Warhammer helped popularize. Saying Warhammer is derivative for using green, dumb, belligerent orcs is like making fun of Aliens because the Colonial Marines have the same gear as the dudes in Avatar.
One wonders what he thinks of super-original and not-derivative-at-all Age of Sigmar...since he seems to hold 40k as a unique, completely original setting - that can compete with Star Wars, for crying out loud - I'm quite curious to know.
Baron Klatz wrote: Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.
What a load of old pish. His knowledge of WHF as a setting evidently isn't as extensive as he believes, given he can caricature Kislev as a land of "slavic stereotypes where everyone drinks vodka and is called Ivan", and believes that all the Chaos tribes are blonde & ginger Viking ripoffs. Maybe he should have spent more time reading those WFRP books(and a few BL novels for good measure) and less leaving them on the shelves to gather dust. Then we get to the laughable stage of the screed when he blames WHF for his own lack of originality, because the basic illustrative "here's how to play and use the fluff we've written as a baseline" GW-provided adventure packs use the basic material - it's amazing how he's managed to become a world-renowed expert on original fantasy settings and RPG games without figuring out you're supposed to have a competent GM modifying the campaigns or outright creating new ones from scratch rather than just slavishly replaying the provided intro ones over and over again.
The best bit, the part that genuinely made me laugh out loud, was the part where he contrasts boring, derivative, unoriginal WHF with original, evolving WH40K, a setting that fundamentally amounts to said boring, derivative, unoriginal fantasy with Herbert, Heinlein, and Space Catholicism bolted to the side
Have a word with your friend man, if he keeps furiously paddling up that Egyptian river he'll get lost for good, and given the level of sneering disdain his writing displays nobody will be too keen to go looking for him.
First of all, I wanted to say "hello", since this is my first time on Dakka Dakka. Long time lurker, but only now I've decided to create an account. Nice to meet all of you.
Well now...
First critical post that I've recieved since starting my blog, and what a post it is!
Now to buisness. I'll try not to sneer in disdain too much, as I'll try to explain why I think that you've completely misunderstood my post.
My knowledge about WFB or WFRP or 40K isn't as extensive as I think it is. I'm not considering myself an Alpha and a Omega of Games Workshop's franchises. I'm just a guy who played them for most of his life and likes them a lot (yes, even WFB/WFRP!). After many years I've decided to start writing about it in a completely non-professional matter. Just a bloke with his opinions, writing a post every two weeks - that's me. But an expert? Don't make me laugh. I've never said that I was an expert in the first place.
About Kislev and Norse - sorry to break it to you, but they are stereotypes, or rather the guys at GW tried to incorporate slavic tribes into their game, aloing with Vikings. It was a typical case of westerner's idea about life in the east/north. It didn't irk me, it was just funny. Look at the "Checkist" career in Realms of the Ice Queen for example. Pure hilarity. By the way, I didn't said that all tribes are ginger haired and blue eyed. I meant the Norse. Kurgans, Hungs and other northern tribes are not nordic.
I've read quite a lot source books and BL novels over the years. When I'm GMing (and I usually do in my group) I tend to gather as much source material as possible. It's because I've read all those books, I get a pretty good (I think) view on old Warhammer Fantasy.
As for my lack of originality - it's not true. I always try to spice up my games with various pop cultureal references, ideas from other sources and such. I kinda have to do that in WFRP, since the source material gets stale really, really fast. I don't have trouble with being original. The game has and that's a shame.
As for WH40K vs WFB comparison - 40K is a ripoff of other games/ideas/influences, that's true. However it does that so much better and in a more funny, creative way. 40K is in constant flux, it continues to grow and expand. WFB grew for a short time, then stopped, then regressed and finally died, wondering what exactly happened and why AoS is replacing it. As for what I think about AoS you can probably guess from my sneering posts, full of disdain and self-proclaimed greatness.
Finally we come to the last sentence, my favorite. You see, I don't paddle up the river. I'm not looking for fame, fortune or even recognition. I've started this blog because I've simply wanted to write, share my thoughts, opinions and ideas - even those that are not popular. I know that this will sound selfish, but I'm doing this mainly for myself. I just like it. If someone else feels that I'm a braggard, sneer-lord or self-righteous douchenozzle, then more power to him. I'm not going to say what others want to hear, but what I want to say, even if it is inconvenient or "wrong" in that person's mind. I'm entitled to do this, just like you're entitled to post here about me being a "world-renowed expert" (Again, that was good. Made me smile.)
By the way, I was surprised that you didn't wrote anything about that in the comments section? I'd love to engage in a discussion with you, since I reply to every single comment on my Blog. Next time don't be shy and write your feeling there, and not here, where I came only because my analitics showed me that a large portion of traffic was generated from Dakka Dakka.
Once again, I'm really happy to finally be here and I will be sure to post more. This is a great place and I'm sure that my time here won't be wasted.
Yes Warhammer is generic, and there isn't much orginality in its fantasy tropes, however there was a lot of originality in th imagery and the attitude.
It was and is grimdark when grimdark was unsafe for kids, or even a word. It was grimdark through the politically correct age and gets away with it, and it was grimdark when nutcases in American through D&D was satanic.
Second it has a lot of adult themes, but doesn't conform to the usual cheesecake. Now some would consider it an advantage to have hot girl miniature in each faction, and it would be nice to see some. But the vast majority of gaming companies that depict women at all will have them in armoured versions of beachwear or skimpy dresses, and of course they all look like supermodels.
Now there are a lot of things that are tired, the writing style for one. The two dimensional roxxor nature of most of the antagonistic factions, though admittedly some thought has been put into the chaos gods themselves. The overuse of grimdark to an omnipresent cliche. The catastrofiction, and the ignorance of scale.
But people have been handwaving over this since the 80's. The better writers considently overlook the constant impending doom to write more believable fiction inside the Warhammer world, when in ther End Times was in fact an honest appraisal of how things were heading even since Slaves to Darkness came out.
... sorry for putting your blog post in the spotlight like that, just wanted to let that one fellow know he wasn't alone in seeing a bit of blandness in the old world.
On the bright side, it's certainly giving people something to talk about!
... sorry for putting your blog post in the spotlight like that, just wanted to let that one fellow know he wasn't alone in seeing a bit of blandness in the old world.
On the bright side, it's certainly giving people something to talk about!
No worries. I'm happy for that little fact. After all, the art of dialogue and discussion is important and I like to chat with other people about their feelings towards the hobby. Even if they are in opposite to mine.
Xathrodox, what are the fantasy heavyweights that far surpass Warhammer? I've read some stuff growing up that doesn't hold up well now that I'm older. I did read a book a few years ago called Black Company that was surprisingly different. Then after that I read Sword of Shannara . . .
I will agree Warhammer Fantasy copied a bit from other works but so does 40k, Star Wars and various others. It's kind of the norm to copy LotR these days though there are offshoots here and there. Fantasy combined most of my favorite fantasy things together though into one universe. I mean there are guns, steampunk, magic, daemons, vampires, king arthur and various other things. It also was a bit individual in that the good guys are Germans in a sense (the empire) and Skaven (rat-men) were totally unique. Also ogre kingdoms were a fantasy faction that we don't see enough of on its own.
For me it was the depth and scale of the universe that i loved. Also watch the 'Mark of Chaos' video game cinematic. It set the tone well for me. Empire soldiers are just normal men facing horrors they can't hope to comprehend. It's like if 40k had the imperium with only the imperial guard and no space marines but possibly still chaos marines. The issue is the threat is very real and you can relate more to human citizen soldier than super-human genetically modified death machine that shoot lasers out his butt hole. Age of Sigmar adds marines. There's no real threat in AoS, no coming darkness swallowing everything but good guys beating back bad guys with no resistance. Where's the struggle? Bad guys are just existing to be the next trophy on the wall. That's not cool or interesting.
Monkey Tamer wrote: Xathrodox, what are the fantasy heavyweights that far surpass Warhammer? I've read some stuff growing up that doesn't hold up well now that I'm older. I did read a book a few years ago called Black Company that was surprisingly different. Then after that I read Sword of Shannara . . .
It depends really. D&D comes to mind, simply because how diverse and varied all those games are, not to mention the ongoing support and developement of new editions. I'm not a fan personally, since I preffer Dark Fantast setting, but I do respect the classics and D&D is the biggest classic of them all.
Oh and yes, I know that they are also not original in many cases. However there are just so many flavors and variants of them, including really unique ones, that it dosen't really matter in my opinion.
As for games that have that distince "dark and gritty" feeling, I'm surprised that no one made a Dark Souls RPG. For me this is one of the most original and unique Dark Fantasy worlds ever made. What fo you think?
It depends really. D&D comes to mind, simply because how diverse and varied all those games are, not to mention the ongoing support and developement of new editions. I'm not a fan personally, since I preffer Dark Fantast setting, but I do respect the classics and D&D is the biggest classic of them all.
Oh and yes, I know that they are also not original in many cases. However there are just so many flavors and variants of them, including really unique ones, that it dosen't really matter in my opinion.
I'm sorry, but it really feels like you're giving a pass to other stuff that you're calling out Warhammer for. What D&D are you talking about? The 'base setting'? It's hard to get more generic than that. Most D&D campaigns have brutal, thuggish orcs. Most D&D campaigns have murderhobo PCs. Yeah, there's a lot more out there, but D&D is really a system and framework rather than a setting, and it's kind of unfair to say "look at all this variety!" when pointing to lots and lots of different campaign worlds as opposed to just the Old World.
...which can get pretty varied, actually. I recommend doing a quick Google for 'The Shadow of the Sun'; it's a second-edition Warhammer Fantasy Campaign writeup, and my second-favorite campaign to read about (the first being the fantastic All-Guardsman Party). It's set in the Border Princes in the wake of the Storm of Chaos, and you've got a lot of the standard archetypes - an elven noble, a wizard's apprentice, a grumbling dwarf - but everyone's put their own spin on things. The dwarf, for example, is using the excuse of grudge-settling in order to buy more time away from his arranged marriage. There's so much creativity involved, all rooted in the Warhammer setting and mining some really long-standing background for cool moments. You don't have to put some bizarre new spin on classical monsters or move away from real-world inspiration to make a setting interesting. You just have to know how to hook people with it.
There's a few distinct DnD settings- Greyhawk (the Original), Eberron, Forgotten Realms (setting of the infamous Drizzt Do'Urden novels) and even the Dragonlance setting- all of which have many novels set in them.
Granted, it's incredibly common for DMs to create their own setting and just use the DnD rules, but it's all relative, really.
For me, there's a huge difference in feeling between those settings. I grew up reading DnD supplements, flipping through The Art of TSR, and failing to enjoy the game itself. The setting always felt 'inoffensive', designed to allow any nerd to do whatever he wanted with it. When I first started reading WHFB, I found the world intriguing. There were and still are some things I didn't like about the setting, but it definitely had a strong flavor.
Essentially, when reading DnD novels, the strength of the writing and characters is all that's keeping me reading. I read them despite the setting. (Although, I honestly have not finished the first Drizzt trilogy or the Dragonlance Chronicles. I just couldn't maintain interest, and the writing was really weak.) With WHFB, the flavor of the setting can save an otherwise dreary book. Even Jonathan Green's writing is palatable in the context of the Old World. (Also, the quality of writing seems much higher in the Black Library. Perhaps the setting inspires the writing more, or perhaps BL knows more about fiction crafting than "start your RPG session in a tavern, then write down what happens.")
Anvildude wrote: There's a few distinct DnD settings- Greyhawk (the Original), Eberron, Forgotten Realms (setting of the infamous Drizzt Do'Urden novels) and even the Dragonlance setting- all of which have many novels set in them.
Granted, it's incredibly common for DMs to create their own setting and just use the DnD rules, but it's all relative, really.
Right, which is why I don't think it's a fair comparison. Eberron's pretty unusual and takes things in a different direction from 'generic fantasy', but Greyhawk? Forgotten Realms? Dragonlance, as much as I love it? They hit even more Tolkien notes than Warhammer. Doesn't seem fair to criticize the Old World for it but give all of D&D a pass.
Anvildude wrote: There's a few distinct DnD settings- Greyhawk (the Original), Eberron, Forgotten Realms (setting of the infamous Drizzt Do'Urden novels) and even the Dragonlance setting- all of which have many novels set in them.
Granted, it's incredibly common for DMs to create their own setting and just use the DnD rules, but it's all relative, really.
Darksun was pretty good and managed to put a pretty neat spin on the standard tropes.
Like any setting, many Dragonlance books were hit or miss. I loved them as a kid. An old beat up copy of Dragons of Autumn Twilight got me into reading for enjoyment at 10 years old. But once you get rid of the nostalgia tinted glasses major flaws in the writing appear. I enjoyed the Elenium by David Eddings, then went on to read the Tamuli by the same author. They were essentially the same books, just in a different setting. For the most part they had the same characters. It's getting harder to impress me as I get older.
With original concepts like Skaven and separate and distinct Chaos gods, I like Warhammer fantasy as a setting. I think that all fantasy settings have certain parameters most follow (magic, fantasy species), and quality depends on the characters and plots. This is what made me enjoy Dark Souls so much. It still had magic and impossible creatures like any other fantasy.
D & D also had Ravenloft and Spelljammer, which I enjoyed as a kid because they were different. I remember another setting, Hollow World, that was a huge disappointment.
Heh. Dragonlance is basically the same book, written 20 times.
The Drizzt novels are pretty decent, though. I started them chronologically, with the Homeland trilogy, so I didn't have the same introduction that others did.
But yeah, DnD is definitely a 'here's a setting to play in' type of creation- I mean, that's what it's for.
And I suppose that might be part of what gives the Old World its unique flavor- it was written not so much so that people could have their own adventures of all kinds, but so that all factions would have a reason to be fighting against all other factions (and themselves) in major ways- which meant that there was a lot less nobility and a lot fewer strong ties, leading to a less common flavour to the world- the Dwarven Grudges especially, as well as the Tomb Kings- it's surprisingly rare that you find self-willed non-vamp undead being a major faction, much less with the Egyptian, "Death is holy/sacred" aspect rather than as a horrible perversion of power politics. (Can you tell which armies I played/play?)
Well, considering D&D is rooted in wargaming turned fantasy and borrowed heavily from Tolkien, it's kind of hard to view it as very "original". It pretty much created most modern RPG tropes, for better or for worse. Subseqeunt settings varied in creativity- most still borrowed heavily from Tolkienesque fantasy, but Dark Sun and Planescape stand out as notable exceptions.
WHFB took heavy cues from Michael Moorcock and rejected the Tolkien morality paradigm (and it's unfortunate implications). Instead, it drew fantasy into a darker direction. In many ways, it is kind of like a dark Tokien- still heavily inspired by history, but drawing in Chaos to a largely immoral world instead. And GW certainly made their imprints on fantasy as well- green orcs and goblins, warriors of Chaos, high helmed elves, etc.
In light of D&D, where characters often become more like superheroes or demigods, the Warhammer world presented a much grimmer picture rooted in mortality, danger and death. Much like Chaosium's Stormbringer! but with more plague :-)
I spent the last weekend playing 8th edition followed by playing the new total war last night. Seeing the map of the old world was fantastic
I wonder how many people will play the game maybe for nostalgic reasons and think "hey maybe I'll get back into this" (a group of us did just that when DoW2 came out) then find AoS bears no resemblance to Warhammer and so they won't bother. Or go and try KoW.
Daston wrote: I spent the last weekend playing 8th edition followed by playing the new total war last night. Seeing the map of the old world was fantastic
I wonder how many people will play the game maybe for nostalgic reasons and think "hey maybe I'll get back into this" (a group of us did just that when DoW2 came out) then find AoS bears no resemblance to Warhammer and so they won't bother. Or go and try KoW.
I haven't bought Total War yet, but I am thinking it may just depress me more than anything
Well Warhammer was generic superficially. I mean Dwarfs are still Dwarfs in the traditional sense. Live underground in great mines/kingdoms, Elves are Lithe and Magical, Humans Easily corruptible and petty, etc.
It's just that GW had their own spin on it that was all it's own. I mean the number of times I have seen the discussion as to who was responsible for the War of the Beard were always enjoyable no matter how many times it has been rehashed.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Weren't the dark elves mostly responsible for the 'War of the Beard'? The other part was dwarf pride and elven arrogance/smugness.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Weren't the dark elves mostly responsible for the 'War of the Beard'? The other part was dwarf pride and elven arrogance/smugness.
Initially yes they attacked a Dwarf trade caravan, but the events that unfolded afterward were very much a product of each civilizations own making. The arrogance of the Phoenix king, The stubbornness of the Dwarfs, all that happened without the Dark Elves involvement.
It just fractured in a transdimensional sort of way.
GW shenanigans over the last few years were driving their player base away anyway - and the "death" of WHFB just created the chaos star from its player base.
Some were exodited, saw the numbers on the wall and left after 7th, turned their backs on gaming and left, ne'er to return.
Some went to Kings of war.
Some left for other games completely (dropping whfb for epic) but didn't leave GW.
Some went to AoS Some went to 8.5 (houseruled 8th ed).
Some went to 9th age.
Some went to warmachine/hordes
Some went to other game systems by smaller companies and had crab-loads of fun.
Some went to
flamingkillamajig wrote: Weren't the dark elves mostly responsible for the 'War of the Beard'? The other part was dwarf pride and elven arrogance/smugness.
Initially yes they attacked a Dwarf trade caravan, but the events that unfolded afterward were very much a product of each civilizations own making. The arrogance of the Phoenix king, The stubbornness of the Dwarfs, all that happened without the Dark Elves involvement.
I really enjoyed the Time of Legends novels covering this period and the war - had a nice sense of tragedy running through them............also did a good job of how the wood elves began.
I love the Warhammer world and as far as I am concerned the End Times are a alternative future.........one that was averted in the main Warhammer world..........indeed we know from the Archeon novel that there were many many possible futures.....
Age of Sigmar I am quite enjoying - the game is ok not great (although it could have been) but with a comp system as much or more fun than WFB. But then I don't like chaff or limited visibility or army killing magic spells............not a huge fan of ranked units tbh. We are actually enjoying Dragon Ramant with our Warhammer models more than WFB or AOS. Just looking at adding some rules for artillery and war machines and a few tweeks for bigger games but its fast, fun and tactical.
re the Warhammer background - like all fantasy settings it builds on what has gone before - be that the fables of classical antiquity, the Norse saga's or the works of Howard and Tolkein. Moorcock was as others have noted a massive influence - especially since GW used to produce Stormbringer (another one of my beloved worlds/games).
Like the best worlds Warhammer did have its own style, its own way of doing things and its own creations - Skaven - now there is a unique idea, the sheer unpleasantness of them and their society, the way they talk, their approach to tech - ramshackle dangerous steampunk and total self servingness- all of it was in their from the beginning - I have the citadel journal where they were introduced and its great. As far as I can see this was a pure GW creation - I don't think there was anything like it before?
Age of Sigmar has some good fun stuff - its massive and over the top and I don't mind that...........I do enjoy some of the worlds they have given partial brush strokes too and want to see more and its beginning to happen........
There are other equally great worlds for me.............
Stormbringer and the multiverse I have already mentioned.
Stephen Erikson's convoluted and wonderfully High fantasy world/s described in The Malazan Book of the Fallen
The Land in The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant
I hope this is getting too off topic, but the question of origins intrigues me. As far as I can tell, Skaven seem to be inspired by the Secret of Nimh rats with the whole Chaos/life is cheap spin. And while ratmen are pretty widespread and certainly predate WH, I do not know of any other setting that portrayed ratmen in this manner. Leiber used wererats who were cunning and devious, and the whole infiltrating civilization while everyone is either ignorant or in denial seems to borrow heavily from this, but they were not the techno mad scientists types (which seems to be more of a trope that developed for goblins).
I have noticed that in addition to Moorcock, Chaos borrows heavily from OD&D for it's greater daemon imagery. Compare the Lord of Change with the Type I/vrock and the Keeper of Secrets with the Type II/glabrezu. The Bloodthirster is just a reskin of the Type VI/Balor (itself a copy of the Balrog), and so a sort of copy of a copy. The Great Unclean One doesn't seem to match the pattern and the closest I have found so far is Chet from Weird Science which was released in 1985, 4 years before the first GUO, so maybe a source of inspiration?
I have less luck finding clear analogues for the lesser daemons. Crab clawed bald ladies seems to be original to GW. The lesser Bloodletters are based on older art that seems heavily inspired by Alien and the ridged parts look almost tech-tubelike. Horrors are pretty nondescript and look like malformed goblins in the original sculpts, but the coloration seems unique (though it later overlaps Slaanesh color territory). Plague bearers seem inspired by the old Harryhausen Cyclops.
jmurph wrote: I hope this is getting too off topic, but the question of origins intrigues me. As far as I can tell, Skaven seem to be inspired by the Secret of Nimh rats with the whole Chaos/life is cheap spin. And while ratmen are pretty widespread and certainly predate WH, I do not know of any other setting that portrayed ratmen in this manner. Leiber used wererats who were cunning and devious, and the whole infiltrating civilization while everyone is either ignorant or in denial seems to borrow heavily from this, but they were not the techno mad scientists types (which seems to be more of a trope that developed for goblins).
Probably 'Pinky and the Brain' as far as mad scientists go. GW has always been known for borrowing or ripping off IP's (starship troopers, judge dredd, 'sly marbo'/sly stallone as rambo) which is odd how they got so protective of their IP after a while. Seems a bit hypocritical.
I just don't see the difficulty in keeping the Old World alive in fluff, but with different games. I can easily do it with my buddies.
Skirmish for me would be either Advanced Song of Blades and Heroes or the new "not-Mordheim" fan-game from the Kings of War setting- not to mention just full on good old-fashioned Mordheim.
Because of how they structured the game to steal disenfranchised Warhammer players, it works just fine for games in the Old World. Hell, I'm playing games in the Old World that aren't even 28mm scale!
It depends really. D&D comes to mind, simply because how diverse and varied all those games are, not to mention the ongoing support and developement of new editions. I'm not a fan personally, since I preffer Dark Fantast setting, but I do respect the classics and D&D is the biggest classic of them all.
Oh and yes, I know that they are also not original in many cases. However there are just so many flavors and variants of them, including really unique ones, that it dosen't really matter in my opinion.
I'm sorry, but it really feels like you're giving a pass to other stuff that you're calling out Warhammer for. What D&D are you talking about? The 'base setting'? It's hard to get more generic than that. Most D&D campaigns have brutal, thuggish orcs. Most D&D campaigns have murderhobo PCs. Yeah, there's a lot more out there, but D&D is really a system and framework rather than a setting, and it's kind of unfair to say "look at all this variety!" when pointing to lots and lots of different campaign worlds as opposed to just the Old World.
...which can get pretty varied, actually. I recommend doing a quick Google for 'The Shadow of the Sun'; it's a second-edition Warhammer Fantasy Campaign writeup, and my second-favorite campaign to read about (the first being the fantastic All-Guardsman Party). It's set in the Border Princes in the wake of the Storm of Chaos, and you've got a lot of the standard archetypes - an elven noble, a wizard's apprentice, a grumbling dwarf - but everyone's put their own spin on things. The dwarf, for example, is using the excuse of grudge-settling in order to buy more time away from his arranged marriage. There's so much creativity involved, all rooted in the Warhammer setting and mining some really long-standing background for cool moments. You don't have to put some bizarre new spin on classical monsters or move away from real-world inspiration to make a setting interesting. You just have to know how to hook people with it.
I meant mainly Dark Sun and Ravenloft (yes, I know that it's a Bram Stoker ripoff basically). They are certainly not heroic, not nice and murderhobos don't have an awfully long lifespan in these settings.
I'll check out the campaign that you've mentioned. Thanks.
It depends really. D&D comes to mind, simply because how diverse and varied all those games are, not to mention the ongoing support and developement of new editions. I'm not a fan personally, since I preffer Dark Fantast setting, but I do respect the classics and D&D is the biggest classic of them all.
Oh and yes, I know that they are also not original in many cases. However there are just so many flavors and variants of them, including really unique ones, that it dosen't really matter in my opinion.
I'm sorry, but it really feels like you're giving a pass to other stuff that you're calling out Warhammer for. What D&D are you talking about? The 'base setting'? It's hard to get more generic than that. Most D&D campaigns have brutal, thuggish orcs. Most D&D campaigns have murderhobo PCs. Yeah, there's a lot more out there, but D&D is really a system and framework rather than a setting, and it's kind of unfair to say "look at all this variety!" when pointing to lots and lots of different campaign worlds as opposed to just the Old World.
...which can get pretty varied, actually. I recommend doing a quick Google for 'The Shadow of the Sun'; it's a second-edition Warhammer Fantasy Campaign writeup, and my second-favorite campaign to read about (the first being the fantastic All-Guardsman Party). It's set in the Border Princes in the wake of the Storm of Chaos, and you've got a lot of the standard archetypes - an elven noble, a wizard's apprentice, a grumbling dwarf - but everyone's put their own spin on things. The dwarf, for example, is using the excuse of grudge-settling in order to buy more time away from his arranged marriage. There's so much creativity involved, all rooted in the Warhammer setting and mining some really long-standing background for cool moments. You don't have to put some bizarre new spin on classical monsters or move away from real-world inspiration to make a setting interesting. You just have to know how to hook people with it.
I meant mainly Dark Sun and Ravenloft (yes, I know that it's a Bram Stoker ripoff basically)
Considering that the Ravenloft setting grew out of a let's do a Dracula campaign, sure.
But more Hammer and cheesy 70s films Dracula than actual Bram Stoker.
I meant mainly Dark Sun and Ravenloft (yes, I know that it's a Bram Stoker ripoff basically). They are certainly not heroic, not nice and murderhobos don't have an awfully long lifespan in these settings.
I'll check out the campaign that you've mentioned. Thanks.
Honestly, I'd say Ravenloft is less original than Warhammer - I never played in the setting, but everything I've seen relies heavily on established characters and settings as a backdrop. I mean, the overarching conceit of the Mists and Darklords and so forth is very uniquely Ravenloft, but those tend to be used as an excuse to introduce your PCs to a realm ruled by Dracula or have them bump into Frankenstein. Not a bad thing in the least, and it looks like you're acknowledging that, but still.
Hope you enjoy reading the campaign! I need to go back and finish it sometime.
I meant mainly Dark Sun and Ravenloft (yes, I know that it's a Bram Stoker ripoff basically). They are certainly not heroic, not nice and murderhobos don't have an awfully long lifespan in these settings.
I'll check out the campaign that you've mentioned. Thanks.
Honestly, I'd say Ravenloft is less original than Warhammer - I never played in the setting, but everything I've seen relies heavily on established characters and settings as a backdrop. I mean, the overarching conceit of the Mists and Darklords and so forth is very uniquely Ravenloft, but those tend to be used as an excuse to introduce your PCs to a realm ruled by Dracula or have them bump into Frankenstein. Not a bad thing in the least, and it looks like you're acknowledging that, but still.
Hope you enjoy reading the campaign! I need to go back and finish it sometime.
It's true and I fully realise that there's really no such thing as 100% originality in any setting. After all it's the essence of popculture - borrowing stuff from other sources and improving it, changing it. I don't mind that. It's just that at some point it's not enough.
Reading the campaign and so far loving it. Great stuff right there.
. Not to mention the tome I had to convince someone to teach me.
