Necros wrote: the terrain looks great. I'd love to see em do a cities of death style building kit with the separate panels and stuff that matches these
Sigvatr wrote: I wish the terrain came pre-painted. Would buy it.
Same here, I never ever buy unpainted terrain because my paint job will take all the appeal out of it haha
Aye. We had all our armies be painted by professionals and theoretically, we could do the same with the new terrain. The waiting time, however, makes us lose interest in it again.
angelofvengeance wrote:I'm sure you'd appreciate something a little less skully on the tabletop Vermis
No, I mean...
'If only this terrain was Warhammer old world themed'
'Well I'm sure you can come up with different rules for it'
Can't wrap me head.
Terrain should evoke the setting (even if that means it's crusted with skullz), and in rules should 'merely' block sight, provide cover, hinder movement, or be an objective, as appropriate. Any extra majukal effects on your minis should be a minor thing, or at least not the main focus of the kit. It's like being given some Vauban star fortification terrain you didn't really want, despite the fact that it's very, very pretty, and being told you can just give it different rules to turn it into a 19thC US cavalry fort or a Māori pā.
Not sure if it's been posted, but Atia stated what's coming up for next week's preorders(starting August 1st):
Paladins box. Builds Retributors(hammers!), Decimators(greataxes!), or Protectors(glaives!).
So we get bases and Judicators(ranged unit!) this week, Paladins next week.
I'm another in the "that arch looks cool" camp, but why on earth, given all contorting and hoop jumping, have they used a name which is totally unprotectable, not only that, but even uses a term from another wargaming company's property?
It would be nice to have some official previews. At this point though, I picture the guys up top at GW as the principle from Clone High, in both sanity and competency...
That being said, I too love the distinct lack of SKULLZ! (TM), and even the break from the Gothic look, which is great, is a nice change of pace. The side with the stone and the plaster looks very, very fine, and like something survivors from the South of the Empire would have built when trying to start a new civilization. It's very tempting to stray from the path of the "make all terrain but trees". I mean, except for the loss of official support for the Old World, I'm really liking age of Sigmar. Well, that and the new Chaos warrior sculpts. The Bloodreavers are great, but I'm missing the closed helmets on the bigger guys. Suppose that's why the Good Lord gave us greenstuff.
angelofvengeance wrote:I'm sure you'd appreciate something a little less skully on the tabletop Vermis
No, I mean...
'If only this terrain was Warhammer old world themed'
'Well I'm sure you can come up with different rules for it'
Can't wrap me head.
Terrain should evoke the setting (even if that means it's crusted with skullz), and in rules should 'merely' block sight, provide cover, hinder movement, or be an objective, as appropriate. Any extra majukal effects on your minis should be a minor thing, or at least not the main focus of the kit. It's like being given some Vauban star fortification terrain you didn't really want, despite the fact that it's very, very pretty, and being told you can just give it different rules to turn it into a 19thC US cavalry fort or a Māori pā.
"Should"? Sounds like you "should" design your own game.
Bull0, you completely missed his point. In fact, had you not quoted him, I would have assumed you were responding to a different conversation entirely.
His point was that wishing the theme, or aesthetic, of a piece of terrain is different is not a longing assuaged by putting different rules on it. The look of the thing is the issue, not the rules.
To put Vermis' point another way, a really nice 28mm version of a 1997 Queen Vic police cruiser does not make great terrain for an American Civil war game, even if you say "Oh, just give it rules for a late period Conestoga wagon." The look is the problem, not the rules.
has more pics of the other displays/warhammer world in general.
Literally the only thing I care about re AoS at this point is whether it's actually possible as a punter to build one of those Sigmarite temples(2nd link, under the "Entrance" album) using the upcoming terrain, or if it's yet another "look what you can do with our terrain! *mumble* If you can afford to buy dozens upon dozens of kits to fish out the part we used loads of times but only comes one or two to a box... *mumble* deal.
Outside of making a one-off special building for Mordheim, like Vermis says I don't see much use for this new stuff since it just doesn't fit with Realhammer; if it was less encrusted with "Yo dawg, I herd you liek Sigmar..." stuff everywhere it could actually make for some lovely Elven ruins with the right paintjob, but by the time you converted it to remove all the branding you'd be as well building from scratch. It's a real shame GW didn't see the potential in an all-plastic modular kit in the old style; as usual, in their hurry to prevent third parties from "stealing" their sales because the core design isn't protectable, they fail to consider that the level of quality & materials they're capable of producing could have meant folk buying their stuff to use in other games, rather than their customers buying stuff from elsewhere.
I see one scroll that says SIGMAR and a few fairly low key twin tailed comets. I'm not seeing how this wouldn't be appropriate in a Lustrian jungle, a mysterious ruin deep in the Drakwald etc.
Thank you, Wehrkind. Plus, I'm a bit disconcerted that after 8th ed's short tenure, terrain now seems to be judged by some by what special rules and buffs it gives you.
It'd be nice if people stopped responding to confusion about non sequiturs with more non sequiturs, too. I guess I'd have to take some of Bull0's advice and look at a different game's fans...
Azreal13 wrote:I'm another in the "that arch looks cool" camp, but why on earth, given all contorting and hoop jumping, have they used a name which is totally unprotectable, not only that, but even uses a term from another wargaming company's property?
They should've called it something more original but still vaguely dragon-related. Something like...
has more pics of the other displays/warhammer world in general.
Literally the only thing I care about re AoS at this point is whether it's actually possible as a punter to build one of those Sigmarite temples(2nd link, under the "Entrance" album) using the upcoming terrain, or if it's yet another "look what you can do with our terrain! *mumble* If you can afford to buy dozens upon dozens of kits to fish out the part we used loads of times but only comes one or two to a box... *mumble* deal.
I could be wrong, but I don't think they've released the kits to make those temples yet. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
That being said, I would imagine that the kit which will contain the necessary parts will probably make half a temple, with some ruined bits. There's not a lot else that they can do with a structure like that.
Wehrkind wrote: Bull0, you completely missed his point. In fact, had you not quoted him, I would have assumed you were responding to a different conversation entirely.
His point was that wishing the theme, or aesthetic, of a piece of terrain is different is not a longing assuaged by putting different rules on it. The look of the thing is the issue, not the rules.
To put Vermis' point another way, a really nice 28mm version of a 1997 Queen Vic police cruiser does not make great terrain for an American Civil war game, even if you say "Oh, just give it rules for a late period Conestoga wagon." The look is the problem, not the rules.
Er, what? He said terrain should only block LOS and give cover and etc, and any magical shenanigans should be kept to a minimum. I was responding to that. The point that giving it more WFB-appropriate rules doesn't make it a WFB terrain piece is utterly prosaic, I didn't realise that needed debating.
Bull0 wrote:Er, what? He said terrain should only block LOS and give cover and etc, and any magical shenanigans should be kept to a minimum. I was responding to that. The point that giving it more WFB-appropriate rules doesn't make it a WFB terrain piece is utterly prosaic, I didn't realise that needed debating.
My point was that offishul speshul rules slapped on it, whether for AoS, WFB, 40K, Ludo, or Hopscotch, shouldn't matter so much and shouldn't be the first thing that pops into some people's heads regarding it. Especially not as a selling point. That just says to me that GW is peddling the same old kool-aid with it's 'bold new vision', and people are just gobbling it down as usual. It's a pile a' bricks. It's a very pretty pile a' bricks, which should be the main selling point (and is for most, as far as I can see), but it's still a pile a' bricks. It shouldn't have that kind of focus on it.
Nobody buys a specific model of a ruined french farmhouse because it turns the rifles of any fire team inside it into machine guns or bazookas in Bolt Action. Nobody buys a specific Hirst Arts mould 'cos the wall you build from it officially turns KoW regiments into +3 combat berserkers if they hide behind it. People buy terrain because it looks nice, adds fluff and flavour to a tabletop, and adds some generic effects and tactical considerations. If people want to have a specific focus on a piece of terrain in their games, as an objective in a scenario, as causing a certain, non-standard effect if certain minis interact with it, with some possible suggestions by kind old Grandma Wendy, that's great! No problem here. But as official rules on a specific piece of terrain, that'll make your minis cause fear and kill the other guy's minis for you, if you promise to run out and buy a copy of the kit (or two, or five)... no. That's just not good. Don't care how much any of you shout about 'subjectivity' and 'forging the narrative' and 'run away to another game you hatur', it's the same old attempt at a chromed-up spendathon that GW ran the old game into the ground with, but more so. (it's a pile a' bricks!) It's another small sign, among others, that GW's walked up to gamers with a big-eyed, contrite look on it's metaphorical face, and an apparently quick-play, small buy-in skirmish game in one outstretched hand to say 'we're sowwy, we learned our lesson, we pwomise', but the other hand's behind it's back with a pair of firmly crossed fingers.
Not really sure what you're talking about, as there is no requirement that you use the special rules for any of this terrain, just as you don't need to treat any of the 40k terrain kits with their specific special rules if you just want a few LOS blocking buildings on the board instead.
Literally have no idea what your last sentence is meant to be saying. If you like the terrain, buy it, if you don't, don't.
There is no particular incentive to get an in game advantage as, even if you use the special rules, they would apply equally to either side.
You seem to disagree with terrain having very specific rules and then conflate that with a bunch of other generic GW complaints. Maybe take it to discussions.
Well, installed the AoS free app. got to download some warscrolls, and saw three of them locked. Turns out that if you want to download them, you have to buy the AoS book in-app.
So much for all the warscrolls being free... maybe they will still put them at their page for download?
I don't think the rules for new units are going to be uploaded for free like the compediums.
It does seems a bit clunky that you can only access them in app if you bought one of the new books also in app. Sucks for those who bought the hardback copies lol
Those 3 aren't unit warscrolls but what would be formations in 40k. The announcement of the App stated that the scrolls specifically from campaign books will not be in the App. Pretty certain that you won't get them to download for free from Games Workshop. Basically I find that ok since you get all the unit stats and stuff for free. What kinda annoys me though is that you do not get a code or something with the paper book to unlock the warscrolls in the app.
I prefer Codex books in iOS cause of the Hyperlinks for fast referece but campaign books are nice to have for the shelf ... but it is not compatible with the idea of the app.
Bull0 wrote:Er, what? He said terrain should only block LOS and give cover and etc, and any magical shenanigans should be kept to a minimum. I was responding to that. The point that giving it more WFB-appropriate rules doesn't make it a WFB terrain piece is utterly prosaic, I didn't realise that needed debating.
My point was that offishul speshul rules slapped on it, whether for AoS, WFB, 40K, Ludo, or Hopscotch, shouldn't matter so much and shouldn't be the first thing that pops into some people's heads regarding it. Especially not as a selling point. That just says to me that GW is peddling the same old kool-aid with it's 'bold new vision', and people are just gobbling it down as usual. It's a pile a' bricks. It's a very pretty pile a' bricks, which should be the main selling point (and is for most, as far as I can see), but it's still a pile a' bricks. It shouldn't have that kind of focus on it.
Nobody buys a specific model of a ruined french farmhouse because it turns the rifles of any fire team inside it into machine guns or bazookas in Bolt Action. Nobody buys a specific Hirst Arts mould 'cos the wall you build from it officially turns KoW regiments into +3 combat berserkers if they hide behind it. People buy terrain because it looks nice, adds fluff and flavour to a tabletop, and adds some generic effects and tactical considerations. If people want to have a specific focus on a piece of terrain in their games, as an objective in a scenario, as causing a certain, non-standard effect if certain minis interact with it, with some possible suggestions by kind old Grandma Wendy, that's great! No problem here. But as official rules on a specific piece of terrain, that'll make your minis cause fear and kill the other guy's minis for you, if you promise to run out and buy a copy of the kit (or two, or five)... no. That's just not good. Don't care how much any of you shout about 'subjectivity' and 'forging the narrative' and 'run away to another game you hatur', it's the same old attempt at a chromed-up spendathon that GW ran the old game into the ground with, but more so. (it's a pile a' bricks!) It's another small sign, among others, that GW's walked up to gamers with a big-eyed, contrite look on it's metaphorical face, and an apparently quick-play, small buy-in skirmish game in one outstretched hand to say 'we're sowwy, we learned our lesson, we pwomise', but the other hand's behind it's back with a pair of firmly crossed fingers.
Is GW forcing you to use the terrain rules and stopping you from not using them?
Those 3 are the ones from the campaign book. Maybe they were in the starter, too. Well as said those do not have unit rules in it but give a bonus to a preformed selection of units if taken as a group. You do not need them in any way to use your models. If you want them anyhow ... Just buy the book.
Still kinda pissed that the app ain't compatible with paper books. Might have to go full digital if this stays like is ;(.
Bull0 wrote:Er, what? He said terrain should only block LOS and give cover and etc, and any magical shenanigans should be kept to a minimum. I was responding to that. The point that giving it more WFB-appropriate rules doesn't make it a WFB terrain piece is utterly prosaic, I didn't realise that needed debating.
My point was that offishul speshul rules slapped on it, whether for AoS, WFB, 40K, Ludo, or Hopscotch, shouldn't matter so much and shouldn't be the first thing that pops into some people's heads regarding it. Especially not as a selling point. That just says to me that GW is peddling the same old kool-aid with it's 'bold new vision', and people are just gobbling it down as usual. It's a pile a' bricks. It's a very pretty pile a' bricks, which should be the main selling point (and is for most, as far as I can see), but it's still a pile a' bricks. It shouldn't have that kind of focus on it.
Nobody buys a specific model of a ruined french farmhouse because it turns the rifles of any fire team inside it into machine guns or bazookas in Bolt Action. Nobody buys a specific Hirst Arts mould 'cos the wall you build from it officially turns KoW regiments into +3 combat berserkers if they hide behind it. People buy terrain because it looks nice, adds fluff and flavour to a tabletop, and adds some generic effects and tactical considerations. If people want to have a specific focus on a piece of terrain in their games, as an objective in a scenario, as causing a certain, non-standard effect if certain minis interact with it, with some possible suggestions by kind old Grandma Wendy, that's great! No problem here. But as official rules on a specific piece of terrain, that'll make your minis cause fear and kill the other guy's minis for you, if you promise to run out and buy a copy of the kit (or two, or five)... no. That's just not good. Don't care how much any of you shout about 'subjectivity' and 'forging the narrative' and 'run away to another game you hatur', it's the same old attempt at a chromed-up spendathon that GW ran the old game into the ground with, but more so. (it's a pile a' bricks!) It's another small sign, among others, that GW's walked up to gamers with a big-eyed, contrite look on it's metaphorical face, and an apparently quick-play, small buy-in skirmish game in one outstretched hand to say 'we're sowwy, we learned our lesson, we pwomise', but the other hand's behind it's back with a pair of firmly crossed fingers.
I have TONS of 40k terrain. I buy the GW terrain for a few reasons:
1. It's themed. It's cool to have a consistent, themed terrain that looks like an Imperial city.
2. It's a modular system. the pieces work with each other and fit perfectly onto RoB boards, which are themed the same way. The Ophidian Arch follows in this tradition!
3. There is a LOT of variety and you can build very complex buildings
4. It's TALL. A lot of generic buildings are not very tall, which is a problem in 40k with tall models. GW buildings are 10-11" tall with a standard build, and can be bigger if you want. Plus they're multilevel for you to stand your infantry.
5. There are fortifications. A lot of them! And rules for fortifications. Wall of Martyrs is very cool.
6. My favorite maps are urban and fortifications.
Most of the terrain we don't play with special rules (like, a basilica administratum is just a building). The exception is fortifications, especially ones that have weapons, and "special" terrain like skyshield
To put it in another context, If I enjoyed historicals (I don't...), and a company made a bunch of kits that could be used to recreate the streets of Paris or Berlin, I would spend a lot of my time and money there. It would be more satisfying to me than going across generic sand or grass with hills, trees, farmhouses, etc.
If I played Fantasy Battle, I'm sure I'd have modelled most of the themed terrain; if I actually end up playing AoS any amount of time, I'm sure I'd model a lot of AoS terrain (but there aren't that many pieces yet).
streamdragon wrote: So we have quivers, with no bottoms, that magically don't spill the bolts all over the place because reasons.
The Emperor protects.
Wait, wrong game.
...actually...I'm not that sure anymore.
Let me try to help: This is Age of Sigmar, wherein the Emperor God Sigmar has created legions Stormhosts of specially engineered Space Marines Stormcast Eternals, during the First Founding First Striking. Each Stormhost is broken up into Chapters Warrior Chambers and within each Chamber are seven Companies Conclaves each with their own battlefield role. The purpose of the Stormhosts is to conquer the galaxy mortal realms and defeat Chaos to make the Emperor Sigmar the ruler over humanity and the mortal realms.
streamdragon wrote: So we have quivers, with no bottoms, that magically don't spill the bolts all over the place because reasons.
The Emperor protects.
Wait, wrong game.
...actually...I'm not that sure anymore.
Let me try to help: This is Age of Sigmar, wherein the Emperor God Sigmar has created legions Stormhosts of specially engineered Space Marines Stormcast Eternals, during the First Founding First Striking. Each Stormhost is broken up into Chapters Warrior Chambers and within each Chamber are seven Companies Conclaves each with their own battlefield role. The purpose of the Stormhosts is to conquer the galaxy mortal realms and defeat Chaos to make the Emperor Sigmar the ruler over humanity and the mortal realms.
streamdragon wrote: So we have quivers, with no bottoms, that magically don't spill the bolts all over the place because reasons.
The Emperor protects.
Wait, wrong game.
...actually...I'm not that sure anymore.
Let me try to help: This is Age of Sigmar, wherein the Emperor God Sigmar has created legions Stormhosts of specially engineered Space Marines Stormcast Eternals, during the First Founding First Striking. Each Stormhost is broken up into Chapters Warrior Chambers and within each Chamber are seven Companies Conclaves each with their own battlefield role. The purpose of the Stormhosts is to conquer the galaxy mortal realms and defeat Chaos to make the Emperor Sigmar the ruler over humanity and the mortal realms.
It's totally different from WH40K.
anyone who says its not similair to 40k is a fool at the same time, why not? 40k and space marine are pretty awesome and set a great standard, if AoS sigmarines are anything to go by the chaos warriors are going to be epic, aelfs are going to be epic, orruks are going to be epic... its all pretty good if you ask me... so they took something that is highly popular and sells REALLY well and used it in a setting that was not selling, I say kudos and good luck, I am not exactly a big sigmarine fan or a space marine one at that but I can see why they exist and why GW would try to mimic them in a fantasy setting.
40k fantasy is a good thing... I for one want to see their aelfs in ornate armour next, if sigmarines are the standard (like space marine are in 40k) the other models should all be epic...
I still dont understand why people dont understand this. They ARE marines. It is １００％ deliberate. It is also nothing new. Orcs and orks. Elves and eldar. Tomb kings and Necrons etc etc. Is it just that they have gone the other way this time? The marines have always been pretty fantasy based, Ultramarine Romans, White Scar Monguls etc. I feel like people are taking this a little too seriously. I laughed when i read about the mysterious lions chamber and that massive rocket launcher is just crazy enough that I am tempted to buy the new set. Needs a pair of kneeling legs though.
bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Expect Aelfs to have tall pointed helmets and be able to construct things out of a living superstrong material (Ghostbone). They have even developed weaponry that fires supersmall, ultrasharp fragments of this material. Also, their warriors are so devoted, they form into special castes. To protect their souls from the warp, they have developed Soul Gems.....
I mean why bother with all the effort of "writing something original" when you can just crib from what you've already got and have epic space...errr magic battlez (TM)!
I don't really care that they're marine analogs. It's just with AOS emulating 40k to an apparently-increasing degree, I feel like people are going to be asking themselves "why play the same game twice?" Why bother splitting your collection across two games that have the same factions, same backstory, same...well, almost everything.
Well anyway, waiting for Sigmarines to get their gravity cannons, those things will be popular!
streamdragon wrote: So we have quivers, with no bottoms, that magically don't spill the bolts all over the place because reasons.
The Emperor protects.
Wait, wrong game.
...actually...I'm not that sure anymore.
Let me try to help: This is Age of Sigmar, wherein the Emperor God Sigmar has created legions Stormhosts of specially engineered Space Marines Stormcast Eternals, during the First Founding First Striking. Each Stormhost is broken up into Chapters Warrior Chambers and within each Chamber are seven Companies Conclaves each with their own battlefield role. The purpose of the Stormhosts is to conquer the galaxy mortal realms and defeat Chaos to make the Emperor Sigmar the ruler over humanity and the mortal realms.
It's totally different from WH40K.
anyone who says its not similair to 40k is a fool at the same time, why not? 40k and space marine are pretty awesome and set a great standard, if AoS sigmarines are anything to go by the chaos warriors are going to be epic, aelfs are going to be epic, orruks are going to be epic... its all pretty good if you ask me... so they took something that is highly popular and sells REALLY well and used it in a setting that was not selling, I say kudos and good luck, I am not exactly a big sigmarine fan or a space marine one at that but I can see why they exist and why GW would try to mimic them in a fantasy setting.
40k fantasy is a good thing... I for one want to see their aelfs in ornate armour next, if sigmarines are the standard (like space marine are in 40k) the other models should all be epic...
I'm not opposed to Stormcast Eternals. I agree that GW needed a Space Marine equivalent in fantasy I just think they created one in a very lazy way that does a disservice to their fans/customers. WH40K is Space Marine centric, they are the keystone for the game and most of the background and introduction to other races/factions is told from their perspective. 40K centers on the Imperium and the heroes of the Imperium are the Astartes. Fantasy didn't have that key faction that the game could revolve around it was dispersed and anarchic in that factions had their own independent backstories and conflicts that didn't have to impact or involve humanity. 40K needs the Imperium in a way that Fantasy never needed the Empire.
Have Stormcast Eternals as big, armored, face smashing warriors of good as the gateway into AoS is a good move by GW. They fill a niche that was previously open. GW didn't have to just take Space Marine fluff and swap out a few words, add in a superfluous amount of adjectives and use it for Stormcast Eternals. I think AoS deserved a little more separation from 40K. I mean, The First Striking? Really? C'mon, that's just silly.
Alpharius wrote: Anyway, I just hope that GW doesn't go all wonky with the model scale here.
I suppose Orcs (or whatever they're called now) will be larger than normal humans - but I hope normal humans are...normal human sized.
I hope normal humans *shrink* by a few mm, to represent 5'3" historical humans, rather than the 6'4" ubermenschen that makes Orks and SMs look smaller.
The smaller the basic human, the bigger the rest of the game is.
jmurph wrote: bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
they are just haters leave them be, they made up their mind on AoS and are pouncing on people who "gasp" are in support of it... I like AoS, will not deny it and will support it like they denounce it, the fact that I am "new" is just something they attack because in their eyes only "old veterans can have an opinion". and just to point out, AoS rekindled my love for miniature collecting and painting, why should I not be enthusiastic about it?
Like I said, I am not a big fan of sigmarines but I do understand why they would be used.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jmurph wrote: bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Expect Aelfs to have tall pointed helmets and be able to construct things out of a living superstrong material (Ghostbone). They have even developed weaponry that fires supersmall, ultrasharp fragments of this material. Also, their warriors are so devoted, they form into special castes. To protect their souls from the warp, they have developed Soul Gems.....
I mean why bother with all the effort of "writing something original" when you can just crib from what you've already got and have epic space...errr magic battlez (TM)!
I like the models I won't lie. I hate they ripped up 30 years of fluff and changed everything to stupid names when the could have moved the setting on in a more sensible fashion.
I already have 3 40k armies and so won't play AoS and will continue to play 8th edition as its different.
That's the spirit! Dismiss any and all criticism as 'haters'. Far far easier than actually acknowledging faults.
oh so being enthusiastic about a game is a fault now, had no idea... I am sorry... I will just be quite then and let everyone hate AoS, sorry for wasting everyone's time by being new and enthusiastic,
jmurph wrote: bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
There is no problem, obviously, and I'm guessing/hoping that was just an observation?
Anyway, I just hope that GW doesn't go all wonky with the model scale here.
I suppose Orcs (or whatever they're called now) will be larger than normal humans - but I hope normal humans are...normal human sized.
I noticed the art for the orruks made them really huge, do not know if it will be like that in the minis but I hope so, bigger orruks are better orruks
That's the spirit! Dismiss any and all criticism as 'haters'. Far far easier than actually acknowledging faults.
oh so being enthusiastic about a game is a fault now, had no idea... I am sorry... I will just be quite then and let everyone hate AoS, sorry for wasting everyone's time by being new and enthusiastic,
jmurph wrote: bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
There is no problem, obviously, and I'm guessing/hoping that was just an observation?
Anyway, I just hope that GW doesn't go all wonky with the model scale here.
I suppose Orcs (or whatever they're called now) will be larger than normal humans - but I hope normal humans are...normal human sized.
I noticed the art for the orruks made them really huge, do not know if it will be like that in the minis but I hope so, bigger orruks are better orruks
I hope they don't get any bigger so thell at least blend in with my existing models.
bitethythumb wrote: I noticed the art for the orruks made them really huge, do not know if it will be like that in the minis but I hope so, bigger orruks are better orruks
I hope they don't get any bigger so thell at least blend in with my existing models.
Which Ork models? WFB4E / 5E, perchance? Those were nicely-sized.
Tbf I do have black orcs which are a bit bigger. Still if the new models look good and fit on sqaure bases I will get them same with the rest of the ranges so long as they look like the old range in features (ie goblins have long pointy nose, needle teeth and big ears)
Expect Aelfs to have tall pointed helmets and be able to construct things out of a living superstrong material (Ghostbone). They have even developed weaponry that fires supersmall, ultrasharp fragments of this material. Also, their warriors are so devoted, they form into special castes. To protect their souls from the warp, they have developed Soul Gems.....
Elves have pointy helmets. They always had a crap ton of gems as decoration too, pretty much like Soul Gems.
Oh, and I absolutely love that giant crossbow. That thing is badass
That may be a "crossbow", but it looks like an arm mounted cannon, and the little bows sticking out make it look plain silly. I kinda want to see it on one of those teal Stormcast, though, bet he'll look like Megaman. Gotta give Gee Dubs a little credit here for the new aesthetic direction. Does it recall Warmachine to a degree? Yes. But it also has this sorta comic book and anime vibe to it that you don't really get with a lot of high fantasy, or western fatale fantasy of any sort for that matter, and as a fan of comics and anime, that really appeals.
Are there any rumors about what the normal humans will look like yet? As cool as the Sigmarines are, I'd really like to see their mortal, non fae, non nine livered, allies, especially if their miniatures involve crested great helms or broad hats and fluffy pants...
That's the spirit! Dismiss any and all criticism as 'haters'. Far far easier than actually acknowledging faults.
oh so being enthusiastic about a game is a fault now, had no idea... I am sorry... I will just be quite then and let everyone hate AoS, sorry for wasting everyone's time by being new and enthusiastic,
jmurph wrote: bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
There is no problem, obviously, and I'm guessing/hoping that was just an observation?
Anyway, I just hope that GW doesn't go all wonky with the model scale here.
I suppose Orcs (or whatever they're called now) will be larger than normal humans - but I hope normal humans are...normal human sized.
I noticed the art for the orruks made them really huge, do not know if it will be like that in the minis but I hope so, bigger orruks are better orruks
Don't worry soon you will hit the daka wall.
Same group of 9-12 ish people complain and ride each others posts and if you say anything different they all hump you like a dog. Then you visit less and less and find a better forum...happens alot around here....like ALOT. Thats why the average person has 500ish posts. Where these few I speak of have 10k+ lol
cerealkiller195 wrote: Besides everything what I truly do not understand is why they ddidn't wait for warhammer total war to come out to see if it did anything to sales.
Don't worry soon you will hit the daka wall.
Same group of 9-12 ish people complain and ride each others posts and if you say anything different they all hump you like a dog. Then you visit less and less and find a better forum...happens alot around here....like ALOT. Thats why the average person has 500ish posts. Where these few I speak of have 10k+ lol
My favorite time of year is when GW releases their financial statements. I like make some pop corn and watching people go full idiot when they put together their own separate analysis and using inputs only they think are reasonable and then spout it off like its a fact. Charts are great but they are still subject to GIGO.
Being an auditor, it really hits home when I understand who the general audience financial statements are written for. The general consensus always seems to be GW is hiding something. Maybe someone who has the time on their hands can submit this as a case study to www.goingconcern.com .
That's the spirit! Dismiss any and all criticism as 'haters'. Far far easier than actually acknowledging faults.
Really don't think that this thread in particular needs a valiant defender of all the carefully composed critiques of AoS that we are seeing on every page.
My favorite time of year is when GW releases their financial statements. I like make some pop corn and watching people go full idiot when they put together their own separate analysis and using inputs only they think are reasonable and then spout it off like its a fact. Charts are great but they are still subject to GIGO.
GW have posted a loss in 5 of their last 6 financial quarterly reports.
I wonder if that means GW are doing well or maybe they're struggling? It's a real head scratcher.
My favorite time of year is when GW releases their financial statements. I like make some pop corn and watching people go full idiot when they put together their own separate analysis and using inputs only they think are reasonable and then spout it off like its a fact. Charts are great but they are still subject to GIGO.
GW have posted a loss in 5 of their last 6 financial quarterly reports.
I wonder if that means GW are doing well or maybe they're struggling? It's a real head scratcher.
I'm sorry but this is simply not true. Profits have declined, but they have not actually made a loss for several years. Please check your facts before posting.
Can we not turn this into a GW financial discussion?
For the new models I really like the super cannon crossbow buy. I'm probably going to end up grabbing a box of the archers. Most of my shooting will come from other forces of order.
I'm someone who hasn't really ever cared about WHFB, I'll admit that the change in aesthetics has actually made me somewhat interested. But, I don't really care about the actual AOS rules either. I'm rather more interested in these for the hobby aspect and in that regard, I think GW actually did a good job here. I'd even be somewhat interested in buying the bolter guys. These are going to be sets of 10 or 5?
I think my interest may just come from the fact that the Sigmarines look like something I'd fight in a Castlevania game.
The archers are kind of boring. Very static poses. I'm curious to see what we get for the Khorne lads; I'm assuming axes will be a significant theme, but a set with more Marauder options would be cool.
Charles Rampant wrote: The archers are kind of boring. Very static poses. I'm curious to see what we get for the Khorne lads; I'm assuming axes will be a significant theme, but a set with more Marauder options would be cool.
If you look in the big Age of Sigmar book, there's definitely some hints.
Blood Warriors have something that looks like a Klingon Bat'leth, some Blood Warriors with 2x big ol' axes, and mention of three likely character models we have yet to see.
Skullgrinder, Slaughterpriest, and Deathbringers.
Charles Rampant wrote: The archers are kind of boring. Very static poses. I'm curious to see what we get for the Khorne lads; I'm assuming axes will be a significant theme, but a set with more Marauder options would be cool.
The Archers are boring? Im pretty sure you could interchange any one set of the Sigmarines and just swap arms... Great models, I am loving painting the Chaos faction from the starter box, but man.. The sigmarines all look the same.
Barzam wrote: I'm someone who hasn't really ever cared about WHFB, I'll admit that the change in aesthetics has actually made me somewhat interested. But, I don't really care about the actual AOS rules either. I'm rather more interested in these for the hobby aspect and in that regard, I think GW actually did a good job here. I'd even be somewhat interested in buying the bolter guys. These are going to be sets of 10 or 5?
I think my interest may just come from the fact that the Sigmarines look like something I'd fight in a Castlevania game.
THIS. This is exactly it. I kinda had a passing interest in some fantasy things but the Sigmarines? I actually consider them for bits for 40k.
Castlevania not so much, but those archers and so many knights remind me of the Dark Souls' Black Knights or the ones the Dark Souls 2' Iron Fortress. And I like that a whole lot.
They are going to make some really cool guards for some any D&D campaign I run with a castle or something! I have magnets in the heads so I can swap between the default helm and the other heads I posted awhile back. I think the Blood Angle heads look the best on them.
jmurph wrote: bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
Not many others created an account on pre order day, inhabited AoS threads exclusively until it was mentioned that recent members who were posting exclusively in AoS threads in support of AoS was a bit suss and list their interests as "AoS" though.
But it absolutely could just be huge coincidence and massive enthusiasm, that's absolutely true.
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
No problem at all- I actually think the scale and simple mechanics are a smart move, even if it's not the game for me (FWIW, I didn't really like WHFB rules all that much either; I prefer SOBH or Two Hour Wargames for my skirmishing rules and DBA/HoTT for block troop wargaming). The setting changes I am not a fan of (the Old World had some really good stuff), but I certainly see GW's angle. I would note that your responses seem a bit more deliberate, though, than bitemythumb's responses cheering every GW move and deriding any critique as "haters."
The blending with 40k elements seems pretty blatant and definitely moving it into a more tecnofantasy aesthetic. Not sure how wise that is since 40k is pretty technofantasy as it is. I guess it will make it easier to collapse them together at some point if necessary. Somewhat ironic given how hard GW worked to distance the settings previously from early tie-ins.
anyone who says its not similair to 40k is a fool at the same time, why not? 40k and space marine are pretty awesome and set a great standard, if AoS sigmarines are anything to go by the chaos warriors are going to be epic, aelfs are going to be epic, orruks are going to be epic... its all pretty good if you ask me
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
No problem at all- I actually think the scale and simple mechanics are a smart move, even if it's not the game for me (FWIW, I didn't really like WHFB rules all that much either; I prefer SOBH or Two Hour Wargames for my skirmishing rules and DBA/HoTT for block troop wargaming). The setting changes I am not a fan of (the Old World had some really good stuff), but I certainly see GW's angle. I would note that your responses seem a bit more deliberate, though, than bitemythumb's responses cheering every GW move and deriding any critique as "haters."
The blending with 40k elements seems pretty blatant and definitely moving it into a more tecnofantasy aesthetic. Not sure how wise that is since 40k is pretty technofantasy as it is. I guess it will make it easier to collapse them together at some point if necessary. Somewhat ironic given how hard GW worked to distance the settings previously from early tie-ins.
SoBH is a great game, I'm seriously considering going back to it instead of AoS, as it is essentially the same game but better.
Yup, literally all I can give you is the name and that the "Geysers of Boiling Blood" special rule for Time of War and the Brimstone Peninsula allows for a player with one or more PRIESTS of KHORNE to choose to add or subtract 1 from your dice roll to determine which geyser erupts.
Yup, literally all I can give you is the name and that the "Geysers of Boiling Blood" special rule for Time of War and the Brimstone Peninsula allows for a player with one or more PRIESTS of KHORNE to choose to add or subtract 1 from your dice roll to determine which geyser erupts.
They sound interesting. please dont have stomach with mouths or skulls in it and ill seriously look, otherwise great name, good idea but terrible model
That's the spirit! Dismiss any and all criticism as 'haters'. Far far easier than actually acknowledging faults.
H.b.m.c I've always respected your opinions, because most of the time your reasonable and have well founded critiscms that have reasoning given for why you feel that way. But calling people who imply that a new person that likes age of Sigmar is either in gw's pocket or a troll hater's is in my opinion pretty legit. That's not really ignoring solid arguments and criticism that's ignoring the people that say: "I do not like this game, so no sane person could. Because it sucks. And can only ever be experienced by anyone as sucking." I am pretty sure that's what haters are. I have been here for a while now so I don't consider myself a newbie but I too like age of sigmar. I like getting to play a game in turn 1 instead of sitting around shoving my models in my opponents general direction for 2 turns while he casts magic and I'm just waiting to get into charge range. I like sequential unit activation making me consider and prioritize which of my models are worth more to me so who should strike first during my enemies turn to minimize casualties in my key units. I like the priority rolls that can turn the tide in a battle and stop me from planning my entire turn during my opponents turn. I like a lot of things that age of Sigmar does a LOT better then what 8th did.
I read gates of Azyr and couldn't put the book down until i finished, short and sweet definitely but it actually made me want more of this fluff. For all the things age of sigmar got wrong, it is also getting a lot of things RIGHT. It does take more work to find a balanced way to select armies, totally true, but once you figure something out that seems to work people you play with generally hop onto the bandwagon real quick and you get a locally accepted "comp ruleset" in a few weeks time that just keeps growing every time we play games and discover things that need tweaking. I'm having a blast playing a faster paced more dynamic game that's challenging my tactical insights and finally dragging me out of the slump that i know my army so well that i just mindlessly move my models pretty much the same way every game to try and win like I did in 8th. Not a single warscroll i have tried sucks so bad that I would never play a unit. Parts of my collection that never saw play because point wise they weren't worth it go on the table again. Age of sigmar HAS expanded my game play experience.
Ofcourse i think dumping all the fluff up to this point is a bleeding shame. Of course I miss aspects of 8th that age of Sigmar quite plainly does not offer. But all in all I AM actually enthusiastic about this game. Nothing changed for me really other then i have another game i can choose to play. I mean come on, you can even still come in and play games of 8th in the actual GW shop here. Are there flaws in the game, yeah a heaping pile of them but 8th had so many flaws in it that we completely changed comp rules for tournaments for that game too. So are we taking a step back with AOS? I prefer to see it as a step sideways, it's not really that much worse and when capable writers like Chris Wraight get their hands on it, this fluff is actually pretty damn awesome and engaging. So I'm still very much ready to see where this game goes. And a lot of people that never played 8th and just see the pretty damn cool new AOS models and get into the game now? Can't really blame them for being wholly enthusiastic. So in summary. We old vets like to grumble like old dwarfs do, but that doesn't really make anyone a hater.
Saying only gw lackeys and trolls can like AOS though? Yeah sorry if that is someone's opinion I don't really mind if someone calls them a hater.
jmurph wrote: bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
Not many others created an account on pre order day, inhabited AoS threads exclusively until it was mentioned that recent members who were posting exclusively in AoS threads in support of AoS was a bit suss and list their interests as "AoS" though.
But it absolutely could just be huge coincidence and massive enthusiasm, that's absolutely true.
It sounds entirely plausible,
as Lego can no doubt confirm the forum has loads of lurkers, and something that they are actually really keen on coming out is just the sort of thing to push them to make an account and support/talk about the new 'wonderful thing'
it's not as if this is a small KS where convincing a few dozen people might actually make the difference between funding (and so more pledges) and not funding (and so nothing), GW is not going to bother seeding forums with fake posters (they just don't care enough to do so)
Just about rumours, Have we heard anything about stuff for some other factions then Khorne and Stormcast Eternals? From what I have understand we can expect new dwarf (sorry, Duardin) stuff witch will be different from the current range to represent the new duardin factions.
Ps: Lady Atias twitter has been shut down which is a shame since she had some pretty accurate rumours.
That Cross... Cannon... Crosscannon (you'll get caught up in the), would look not so bad on something larger. Like a Clan Moulder construct or some large Automaton of some sort.
jmurph wrote: bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
Not many others created an account on pre order day, inhabited AoS threads exclusively until it was mentioned that recent members who were posting exclusively in AoS threads in support of AoS was a bit suss and list their interests as "AoS" though.
But it absolutely could just be huge coincidence and massive enthusiasm, that's absolutely true.
It sounds entirely plausible,
as Lego can no doubt confirm the forum has loads of lurkers, and something that they are actually really keen on coming out is just the sort of thing to push them to make an account and support/talk about the new 'wonderful thing'
it's not as if this is a small KS where convincing a few dozen people might actually make the difference between funding (and so more pledges) and not funding (and so nothing), GW is not going to bother seeding forums with fake posters (they just don't care enough to do so)
I wouldn't say that. They have clearly taken a different approach to the AoS release and have been pushing it. They have even sent review copies of the boxsets to media outlets.
I've waited to see more models before saying anything about this game. I feel a little bad about it, but I really like the models. I'll never have an army (probably), but I can see myself buying a set or five. Cool models are cool models, rules be damned.
jmurph wrote: bitethythumb is quite the cheerleader. Here less than 20 days and what 200+ posts pushing AoS? That is some serious enthusiasm!
Whats the problem? There are *gasp* some of us who are completely behind this game.
Not many others created an account on pre order day, inhabited AoS threads exclusively until it was mentioned that recent members who were posting exclusively in AoS threads in support of AoS was a bit suss and list their interests as "AoS" though.
But it absolutely could just be huge coincidence and massive enthusiasm, that's absolutely true.
so I am supposed to join the warmachine thread even though I am not interested in warmachine? I also participated in a few painting modelling threads to get started? got myself brushes etc... lets be clear, I have been a member on dakkadakka WAAAY before, but I have forgotten my account/password (my email most likely changed as well)... I like AoS, it rekindled my love for miniature modelling... why should I not participate in its discussions? oh... I could have joined warseer/bols but I much prefer dakka dakka...
anyways, if you think I am a GW lackey so be it I kinda like that... maybe I can start spreading rumours, by the way did anyone mention female sigmarines on the way yet?
Yeah that is also something I'm wondering about, unlike space marines we haven't heard the geneseed does not take on women type of excuse for why there could be no female stormcasts. I actually still need a picture of Valkia the bloody next to a Liberator or Prosecutor if anyone could swing that. Gonna convert me up a female stormcast if those dimensions work out a bit.
Haight wrote: The longbows are nice. The cross bows are okay (quivers are stupid).
Whatever the hell that gaping maw of an arrow bolt storm bazooka panzershreckboltenstormenwerfer abomination is, it's stupid looking and fugly.
"Thunderbolt Crossbow". 1 in 5 Judicators may take one. You pick an enemy unit within 18" and roll a dice, subtracting 1 from the roll if the target is a Monster. If the result is equal to or less than the number of models in the unit, the unit suffers D3 Mortal Wounds.
Yup, literally all I can give you is the name and that the "Geysers of Boiling Blood" special rule for Time of War and the Brimstone Peninsula allows for a player with one or more PRIESTS of KHORNE to choose to add or subtract 1 from your dice roll to determine which geyser erupts.
My source tells me he's armed with an Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxe in each hand! These are giant bloodaxes with bloodaxeflails attached to their bloodhafts (bloodaxeflails are bloodaxes on the ends of rageflails). This way at the same time he's bloodaxing you with the bloodaxe parts of the Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxes the bloodaxeflails are rageflailing around to bloodaxeflail you simultaneously!
Yup, literally all I can give you is the name and that the "Geysers of Boiling Blood" special rule for Time of War and the Brimstone Peninsula allows for a player with one or more PRIESTS of KHORNE to choose to add or subtract 1 from your dice roll to determine which geyser erupts.
My source tells me he's armed with an Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxe in each hand! These are giant bloodaxes with bloodaxeflails attached to their bloodhafts (bloodaxeflails are bloodaxes on the ends of rageflails). This way at the same time he's bloodaxing you with the bloodaxe parts of the Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxes the bloodaxeflails are rageflailing around to bloodaxeflail you simultaneously!
*pushes Abadabadoobaddon into the aforementioned geyser of boiling blood* Well, now that that's taken care of.. The judicators are prime pickings for 40k shenanigans. I expect to see crossbow wielding marines at some point. The big honkin cannon is anit ridiculous but I think I could have fun with it.
This game had to come at the worst time (I'm broke.) I would love to own the starter set + the archway/gate terrain though, and I'm not really interested in the chaos dudes even if they look pretty swell.
NickOnwezen wrote: Yeah that is also something I'm wondering about, unlike space marines we haven't heard the geneseed does not take on women type of excuse for why there could be no female stormcasts. I actually still need a picture of Valkia the bloody next to a Liberator or Prosecutor if anyone could swing that. Gonna convert me up a female stormcast if those dimensions work out a bit.
Nothing in the fluff says a stormcast has to be male. All it says is a warrior of great fighting skill or strong of heart who has rejected/hates chaos, or something along those lines. So a stormcast could be an ork, elf or hell even the lord relictor is a tomb king. So if you can think of a great female warrior who has died or will have died due to the generation gap then fire away dude
NickOnwezen wrote: Yeah that is also something I'm wondering about, unlike space marines we haven't heard the geneseed does not take on women type of excuse for why there could be no female stormcasts. I actually still need a picture of Valkia the bloody next to a Liberator or Prosecutor if anyone could swing that. Gonna convert me up a female stormcast if those dimensions work out a bit.
Nothing in the fluff says a stormcast has to be male. All it says is a warrior of great fighting skill or strong of heart who has rejected/hates chaos, or something along those lines. So a stormcast could be an ork, elf or hell even the lord relictor is a tomb king. So if you can think of a great female warrior who has died or will have died due to the generation gap then fire away dude
Inb4 wall of text
Which tomb king? The rumours (i havent read anything definite yet) i have read say he is Arkhan the black. I am skeptical about that but he is definately a highly placed undead (TK/VC) character.
NickOnwezen wrote: Yeah that is also something I'm wondering about, unlike space marines we haven't heard the geneseed does not take on women type of excuse for why there could be no female stormcasts. I actually still need a picture of Valkia the bloody next to a Liberator or Prosecutor if anyone could swing that. Gonna convert me up a female stormcast if those dimensions work out a bit.
Nothing in the fluff says a stormcast has to be male. All it says is a warrior of great fighting skill or strong of heart who has rejected/hates chaos, or something along those lines. So a stormcast could be an ork, elf or hell even the lord relictor is a tomb king. So if you can think of a great female warrior who has died or will have died due to the generation gap then fire away dude
Inb4 wall of text
Which tomb king? The rumours (i havent read anything definite yet) i have read say he is Arkhan the black. I am skeptical about that but he is definately a highly placed undead (TK/VC) character.
I was thinking he might be Dieter when reading the novella.
Yup, literally all I can give you is the name and that the "Geysers of Boiling Blood" special rule for Time of War and the Brimstone Peninsula allows for a player with one or more PRIESTS of KHORNE to choose to add or subtract 1 from your dice roll to determine which geyser erupts.
My source tells me he's armed with an Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxe in each hand! These are giant bloodaxes with bloodaxeflails attached to their bloodhafts (bloodaxeflails are bloodaxes on the ends of rageflails). This way at the same time he's bloodaxing you with the bloodaxe parts of the Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxes the bloodaxeflails are rageflailing around to bloodaxeflail you simultaneously!
Yup, literally all I can give you is the name and that the "Geysers of Boiling Blood" special rule for Time of War and the Brimstone Peninsula allows for a player with one or more PRIESTS of KHORNE to choose to add or subtract 1 from your dice roll to determine which geyser erupts.
My source tells me he's armed with an Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxe in each hand! These are giant bloodaxes with bloodaxeflails attached to their bloodhafts (bloodaxeflails are bloodaxes on the ends of rageflails). This way at the same time he's bloodaxing you with the bloodaxe parts of the Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxes the bloodaxeflails are rageflailing around to bloodaxeflail you simultaneously!
Were can I read this fluff on how Sigmarines are created? Since I plan to make mine all with normal human heads and not the helmets. Are Sigmarines really just like Alphonse Elric from Full Metal Alchemist? is there no living flesh inside the suit and its just hollow, thats why they dont take off the helmet?
Chopxsticks wrote: Were can I read this fluff on how Sigmarines are created? Since I plan to make mine all with normal human heads and not the helmets. Are Sigmarines really just like Alphonse Elric from Full Metal Alchemist? is there no living flesh inside the suit and its just hollow, thats why they dont take off the helmet?
I thought there were pictures of them with their helmets off somewhere.
Chopxsticks wrote: Were can I read this fluff on how Sigmarines are created? Since I plan to make mine all with normal human heads and not the helmets. Are Sigmarines really just like Alphonse Elric from Full Metal Alchemist? is there no living flesh inside the suit and its just hollow, thats why they dont take off the helmet?
The book Gates of Azyr has the leader in the Boxed set taking his helmet off to talk to a human, and she recognizes that he's human, after initially thinking he was a demon.
edit: It also has tidbits about how they were created.
Chopxsticks wrote: Were can I read this fluff on how Sigmarines are created? Since I plan to make mine all with normal human heads and not the helmets. Are Sigmarines really just like Alphonse Elric from Full Metal Alchemist? is there no living flesh inside the suit and its just hollow, thats why they dont take off the helmet?
The book Gates of Azyr has the leader in the Boxed set taking his helmet off to talk to a human, and she recognizes that he's human, after initially thinking he was a demon.
edit: It also has tidbits about how they were created.
Yup, and during the battle, several of them are killed and they bleed. So, they are flesh and blood, not spirits. The book describes them as just below gods in terms of power; demi-gods. Think an army of Hercules.
If one of them is mortally wounded, their remains get revived by Sigmar's powers and the broken shell is put into a huge...steam-and-magic driven golem so that despite having their body broken, they can fight on and inspire their batte brothers.
Sigvatr wrote: If one of them is mortally wounded, their remains get revived by Sigmar's powers and the broken shell is put into a huge...steam-and-magic driven golem so that despite having their body broken, they can fight on and inspire their batte brothers.
... Ok, the moment they release Steampunk Dreadnoughts is the moment my wallet weeps.
Chopxsticks wrote: Were can I read this fluff on how Sigmarines are created? Since I plan to make mine all with normal human heads and not the helmets. Are Sigmarines really just like Alphonse Elric from Full Metal Alchemist? is there no living flesh inside the suit and its just hollow, thats why they dont take off the helmet?
The book Gates of Azyr has the leader in the Boxed set taking his helmet off to talk to a human, and she recognizes that he's human, after initially thinking he was a demon.
edit: It also has tidbits about how they were created.
Yup, and during the battle, several of them are killed and they bleed. So, they are flesh and blood, not spirits. The book describes them as just below gods in terms of power; demi-gods. Think an army of Hercules.
Sigvatr wrote: If one of them is mortally wounded, their remains get revived by Sigmar's powers and the broken shell is put into a huge...steam-and-magic driven golem so that despite having their body broken, they can fight on and inspire their batte brothers.
... Ok, the moment they release Steampunk Dreadnoughts is the moment my wallet weeps.
Dread not, my child, Games Workshop is more than happy to help you. Sorry, I just couldn't resist the pun.
So, there are Sigmarine dreads? Alrighty, then. I'll just be over here, painting up some plain ol' Stormcast. Oh, and some Greatswords. The Stormcast are starting to grow on me, but, maybe they could tone down the SM parallels a notch? Hopefully they at least leave the mortals more separate from "IG with Bowlas, and the dreaded Russ Lee Steamtank."
Just saying that one of the books has a small shadow image of the steampunk dreadnaught you all speak off, I am not going to say which book so you will have to buy all of them... and find it --- ALL HAIL GW
Yup, literally all I can give you is the name and that the "Geysers of Boiling Blood" special rule for Time of War and the Brimstone Peninsula allows for a player with one or more PRIESTS of KHORNE to choose to add or subtract 1 from your dice roll to determine which geyser erupts.
My source tells me he's armed with an Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxe in each hand! These are giant bloodaxes with bloodaxeflails attached to their bloodhafts (bloodaxeflails are bloodaxes on the ends of rageflails). This way at the same time he's bloodaxing you with the bloodaxe parts of the Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxes the bloodaxeflails are rageflailing around to bloodaxeflail you simultaneously!
Wow how awful sounding.
Pass.
Safe to say he was joking. though if you believe that well.....
This "slaughterpriest" I am going to guess is some form of khorne sorcerer yes i know khorne hates magic but he doesnt have to be magic. He could be some form of magic void. Funnily enough before this guy was rumoured I converted two sorcerers for my khorne stuff out the box renamed blood priests.
Yup, literally all I can give you is the name and that the "Geysers of Boiling Blood" special rule for Time of War and the Brimstone Peninsula allows for a player with one or more PRIESTS of KHORNE to choose to add or subtract 1 from your dice roll to determine which geyser erupts.
My source tells me he's armed with an Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxe in each hand! These are giant bloodaxes with bloodaxeflails attached to their bloodhafts (bloodaxeflails are bloodaxes on the ends of rageflails). This way at the same time he's bloodaxing you with the bloodaxe parts of the Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxes the bloodaxeflails are rageflailing around to bloodaxeflail you simultaneously!
Wow how awful sounding.
Pass.
Safe to say he was joking. though if you believe that well.....
This "slaughterpriest" I am going to guess is some form of khorne sorcerer yes i know khorne hates magic but he doesnt have to be magic. He could be some form of magic void. Funnily enough before this guy was rumoured I converted two sorcerers for my khorne stuff out the box renamed blood priests.
It was obviously a joke but it doesn't exactly sound implausible based on some of GWs Khorne releases and naming conventions. It probably isn't going to end up being too far wrong.
AlexHolker wrote: It's probably not a good sign when people can't tell the difference between people taking the piss out of your stupid setting and the setting itself.
Its hardly new with GW though. Its been like that for years
Yup, literally all I can give you is the name and that the "Geysers of Boiling Blood" special rule for Time of War and the Brimstone Peninsula allows for a player with one or more PRIESTS of KHORNE to choose to add or subtract 1 from your dice roll to determine which geyser erupts.
My source tells me he's armed with an Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxe in each hand! These are giant bloodaxes with bloodaxeflails attached to their bloodhafts (bloodaxeflails are bloodaxes on the ends of rageflails). This way at the same time he's bloodaxing you with the bloodaxe parts of the Exalted Bloodaxeflailaxes the bloodaxeflails are rageflailing around to bloodaxeflail you simultaneously!
Wow how awful sounding.
Pass.
Safe to say he was joking. though if you believe that well.....
This "slaughterpriest" I am going to guess is some form of khorne sorcerer yes i know khorne hates magic but he doesnt have to be magic. He could be some form of magic void. Funnily enough before this guy was rumoured I converted two sorcerers for my khorne stuff out the box renamed blood priests.
It was obviously a joke but it doesn't exactly sound implausible based on some of GWs Khorne releases and naming conventions. It probably isn't going to end up being too far wrong.
My thoughts that it's probably going to be similar, less is sometimes more you know.
This "slaughterpriest" I am going to guess is some form of khorne sorcerer yes i know khorne hates magic but he doesnt have to be magic. He could be some form of magic void. Funnily enough before this guy was rumoured I converted two sorcerers for my khorne stuff out the box renamed blood priests.
Priests are effectively different enough to Sorcerers/Wizards now that it works okay to show them on the field.
If I had to hazard a guess though, it will be something akin to the Shrinemaster for a Warshrine.
AlexHolker wrote: It's probably not a good sign when people can't tell the difference between people taking the piss out of your stupid setting and the setting itself.
I think they crossed that line when they made Murderfang the Curseborn mudering people with his Murderclaws while under his Murderlust on the planet of Omnicide.
cerealkiller195 wrote: Besides everything what I truly do not understand is why they ddidn't wait for warhammer total war to come out to see if it did anything to sales.
Or maybe wait till the game comes out. It's not out yet is it not? Still in development? Maybe when it's released that will be the time when GW releases the fluff for the old minis that are in the game.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Where is the CSM? The Chaos SigMarines. Is there not a story where half the brotherhood split into evil entities and brother fights brother?
Is there the 20 sons, or should I say 18 sons and 2 that can't be named who head the Storm Calling? Or this hasn't happened yet but will happen soon?
Daston wrote: What ever the current addition ork is..3rd?
Tbf I do have black orcs which are a bit bigger. Still if the new models look good and fit on sqaure bases I will get them same with the rest of the ranges so long as they look like the old range in features (ie goblins have long pointy nose, needle teeth and big ears)
The note is really that GW has inflated orks at least twice, and 1st gen orks now look like gobbo size.
cerealkiller195 wrote: Besides everything what I truly do not understand is why they ddidn't wait for warhammer total war to come out to see if it did anything to sales.
Or maybe wait till the game comes out. It's not out yet is it not? Still in development? Maybe when it's released that will be the time when GW releases the fluff for the old minis that are in the game.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Where is the CSM? The Chaos SigMarines. Is there not a story where half the brotherhood split into evil entities and brother fights brother?
Is there the 20 sons, or should I say 18 sons and 2 that can't be named who head the Storm Calling? Or this hasn't happened yet but will happen soon?
No, no, we're not at that part of the story yet. We're still at the part where the god-ruler of mankind sends out his newly-minted supersoldiers on a great crusade to reconquer the myriad lands of the universe for humanity once more.
Nah dude, just the same tired 40K jokes that have been posted in every Age of Sigmar thread since the first pics and details came out. I imagine the folks that keep posting them to be the same folks that we can thank for Adam Sandlers career longevity.
AlexHolker wrote: It's probably not a good sign when people can't tell the difference between people taking the piss out of your stupid setting and the setting itself.
PlaguelordHobbyServices wrote: In all seriousness, that thing looks dumb. I'd honestly rather just use up the 100 or so boltguns I have sitting in a bitz box.
Tag them up in sixes, to make Hurricane Crossbolters!
Though the pictured thunderbolt thing makes me think, "Missile Boltlauncher" more than anything else =D
Talys wrote: I think that big crossbow guy is hilarious. That thing must be bigger than a 40k missile launcher, LOL.
I dig the black armor.
I dont get it - what is that quad-bow supposed to fire? I'm guessing it doesnt rapid-fire bolts, as the calibre is huge. Does that mean it fires one huge bolt - like a ballista bolt? So where is the bolt? Did the dude just fire it, and that is why the bolt isnt shown?
How big would the bolt have to be to fill a barrel that large? Is it an exploding rocket-bolt or what?
Talys wrote: I think that big crossbow guy is hilarious. That thing must be bigger than a 40k missile launcher, LOL.
I dig the black armor.
I dont get it - what is that quad-bow supposed to fire? I'm guessing it doesnt rapid-fire bolts, as the calibre is huge. Does that mean it fires one huge bolt - like a ballista bolt? So where is the bolt? Did the dude just fire it, and that is why the bolt isnt shown?
How big would the bolt have to be to fill a barrel that large? Is it an exploding rocket-bolt or what?
Eggheart wrote: [ I dont get it - what is that quad-bow supposed to fire? I'm guessing it doesnt rapid-fire bolts, as the calibre is huge. Does that mean it fires one huge bolt - like a ballista bolt? So where is the bolt? Did the dude just fire it, and that is why the bolt isnt shown?
How big would the bolt have to be to fill a barrel that large? Is it an exploding rocket-bolt or what?
I'd assume it fires a single lightning bolt, similar to how the bow version fires an arrow that explodes into mini lightning bolts.
I'm sure there's a good, fluffy reason why the process of reforging souls into Stormcast Eternals only works on the souls of male warriors and not females.
Maybe even female warriors look male after they have been reforged. In fact no matter who you were, what race or gender, reforming makes you a male human warrior in apperence.
Maybe because Sigmar makes them in his own image or some such.
I dont get it - what is that quad-bow supposed to fire? I'm guessing it doesnt rapid-fire bolts, as the calibre is huge. Does that mean it fires one huge bolt - like a ballista bolt? So where is the bolt? Did the dude just fire it, and that is why the bolt isnt shown?
How big would the bolt have to be to fill a barrel that large? Is it an exploding rocket-bolt or what?
GW has never made functional weaponry aside from basic small arms and melee weapons. GW has rarely been good at functional anything.
Sigvatr wrote: If one of them is mortally wounded, their remains get revived by Sigmar's powers and the broken shell is put into a huge...steam-and-magic driven golem so that despite having their body broken, they can fight on and inspire their batte brothers.
... Ok, the moment they release Steampunk Dreadnoughts is the moment my wallet weeps.
Been trying to get into the fluff, Just seems pretty poor, not really appealing to me at all, and im normally pretty easily pleased with fantasy and sci-fi.
I was one of the few that did not see so many similarities to space marines, but now I have read some of the fluff, its very similar to space marine stuff, some of the words too its like they use there own jokey word generator to come up with them.
I am however looking forward to seeing some Dwarves or whatever stupid name they have now, hope they get a shift on with them.
I'm not a sigmarine hater but the missile troops really don't do it for me. A unit of ranged troops in head-to-toe plate armour doesn't make a lick of sense. Here's hoping we're getting to the end of this and can have some more chaos, or the other factions, soon.
I thought this muight be relevant to the discussion on lack of females thus far in AOS:
(From Josh Reynolds site)
Q
Is it possible that any of the stormcast eternals were women, or members from one of the other races like aelfs and duardim?
A:
I actually asked about that. The answer I was given was...possibly? It's being left vague intentionally, was my understanding. Nothing stopping you saying yours are aelfs or whatever, if you want.
Mr Morden wrote: I thought this muight be relevant to the discussion on lack of females thus far in AOS:
(From Josh Reynolds site)
Q
Is it possible that any of the stormcast eternals were women, or members from one of the other races like aelfs and duardim?
A:
I actually asked about that. The answer I was given was...possibly? It's being left vague intentionally, was my understanding. Nothing stopping you saying yours are aelfs or whatever, if you want.
Mr Morden wrote: I thought this muight be relevant to the discussion on lack of females thus far in AOS:
(From Josh Reynolds site)
Q
Is it possible that any of the stormcast eternals were women, or members from one of the other races like aelfs and duardim?
A:
I actually asked about that. The answer I was given was...possibly? It's being left vague intentionally, was my understanding. Nothing stopping you saying yours are aelfs or whatever, if you want.
It's rather a cop out answer though.
Yea, it's the coward's answer. Games Workshop is afraid that many of their male players will run from the icky cooties if there are any female stormcast eternals in the actual fluff, apparently.
I'm still trying to figure out why they're so blatantly sexist (male-only knights, storm troopers, unwilling to confirm any female storm cast eternals but all the named ones are male, etc) when the guys just down the hall at Forgeworld aren't (They actually mention women in their fluff sometimes and don't dance around the issue with vague answers! And even ignore the male-only knight thing)
Wouldn't be surprised if Forgeworld at least mentions female stormcasts in their fluff someday.
Bull0 wrote: I'm not a sigmarine hater but the missile troops really don't do it for me. A unit of ranged troops in head-to-toe plate armour doesn't make a lick of sense. Here's hoping we're getting to the end of this and can have some more chaos, or the other factions, soon.
I agree, Im interested to see something new. Not the same model released 4 weeks in a row.
Yea, it's the coward's answer. Games Workshop is afraid that many of their male players will run from the icky cooties if there are any female stormcast eternals in the actual fluff, apparently.
I'm still trying to figure out why they're so blatantly sexist (male-only knights, storm troopers, unwilling to confirm any female storm cast eternals but all the named ones are male, etc) when the guys just down the hall at Forgeworld aren't (They actually mention women in their fluff sometimes and don't dance around the issue with vague answers! And even ignore the male-only knight thing)
Wouldn't be surprised if Forgeworld at least mentions female stormcasts in their fluff someday.
It's the smart answer. If gender is left open to your imagination, what's the downside? People who want them to be male can play them thinking they're male and vice versa. The more important question would be why you need the designer's official confirmation that they're female when you could just assume that they are...
Bull0 wrote: I'm not a sigmarine hater but the missile troops really don't do it for me. A unit of ranged troops in head-to-toe plate armour doesn't make a lick of sense. Here's hoping we're getting to the end of this and can have some more chaos, or the other factions, soon.
I agree, Im interested to see something new. Not the same model released 4 weeks in a row.
there's probably at least 2 more kits coming for the Sigmarines
Yea, it's the coward's answer. Games Workshop is afraid that many of their male players will run from the icky cooties if there are any female stormcast eternals in the actual fluff, apparently.
I'm still trying to figure out why they're so blatantly sexist (male-only knights, storm troopers, unwilling to confirm any female storm cast eternals but all the named ones are male, etc) when the guys just down the hall at Forgeworld aren't (They actually mention women in their fluff sometimes and don't dance around the issue with vague answers! And even ignore the male-only knight thing)
Wouldn't be surprised if Forgeworld at least mentions female stormcasts in their fluff someday.
I hope FW never even acknowledges this horrid game.. They got plenty of 40k to work on, no reason to even consider female anything for AoS.
It's the smart answer. If gender is left open to your imagination, what's the downside? People who want them to be male can play them thinking they're male and vice versa. The more important question would be why you need the designer's official confirmation that they're female when you could just assume that they are...
The downside is there are no female storm cast eternals in the actual fluff. Like, anywhere, named or unnamed. Because GW is too cowardly to acknowledge that women actually exist. It's the equivalent of having a movie (or more appropriately, a series of movies) and saying "People of color MIGHT exist in this world if you use your imagination!" and yet the entire cast of every movie in the series, including the background characters, are white.
It's the smart answer. If gender is left open to your imagination, what's the downside? People who want them to be male can play them thinking they're male and vice versa. The more important question would be why you need the designer's official confirmation that they're female when you could just assume that they are...
The downside is there are no female storm cast eternals in the actual fluff. Like, anywhere. Because GW is too cowardly to acknowledge that women actually exist. It's the equivalent of having a movie and saying "People of color MIGHT exist in this world if you use your imagination!" and yet the entire cast of the movie, including the background characters, are white.
Right, because every single Stormcast Eternal has been named and gendered as of now...
Seriously, you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. Every bit of the background that we have gotten about the generalities of the Stormcast is gender neutral. We have had male characters named, but that's as far as it has gone for gender specifics.
Seriously, you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. Every bit of the background that we have gotten about the generalities of the Stormcast is gender neutral. We have had male characters named, but that's as far as it has gone for gender specifics.
If you recall my original post, it's sexism in comparison to Forgeworld (and Fantasy Flight Games and Black Library, really). Maybe it isn't an issue. However, WE HAVE COMPARISONS LITERALLY NEXT DOOR (not even in the next building. Literally in the same building, next door, down the hall!) where within the same fluff, Forgeworld is willing to acknowledge, mention, or have female characters while GW is not. And I always found that strange and puzzling.
Fantasy Flight Games and Forgeworld always states "Men and women" while GW says "mortals". Fantasy Flight Games always adds "Although they are a brotherhood, there are both men and women in the cult" or "Xerunt Frostfathers can be female, despite the masculine name" while GW just says "Brotherhood" (when GW talkes about Stormcast Eternals). And then when interviewed about it directly, Josh Reynolds just says "Maybe".
Why is GW so cowardly about this while their various subsidiaries and partners are not?
(and the gender neutrality is debatable. Sure, they always use "mortals" when saying the stormcast eternals' origins, but if you actually read the white dwarf pics here, they also always use male pronouns for them and, again, they're referred to as a "Brotherhood" without the disclaimer that FFG gives. In addition to the fact that all the named Stormcast Eternals are male, and the only way to find out that the females are a "maybe" is to go ask Reynolds directly, I think it's pretty obvious what the average buyer is going to think about them considering how much you have to go out of the way with interpretation of words for female stormcast eternals when they're always referred to as "His" and "brotherhoods". If nothing else, official confirmation of female Sigmarines might have at least helped deflect the "Space Marines... IN FANTASY!" accusations a little, which Josh Reynold's "maybe" clearly isn't going to do.)
Because characters that aren't a cross between space marines and necrons are otiose in this faction. Clearly.
You know what might have actually grabbed my interest a little? If the Sigmarines kept the aesthetic of the armored champion of their god, without all the silly slap a new coat of paint on it literal Astartes background. Instead, they should have made them Champions of Sigmar. Yes, in that way.
Someone who wants to be a Sigmarine does great deeds in the name of the Heldenhammer. If they are worthy of his notice, they may gain angelic wings, or a magical hammer, or a voice to compel the masses to rise up against Chaos...the goal is ascension to Sigmar's army, hidden away in his palace to prepare for the final assault on the Realm of Chaos or whatnot.
Of course, if they fall in the Path to Glo - er, Righteousness, the consequences are dire...they may become ever-more intolerant of non-Sigmarites, might become crazed flagellants, or worst of all, lose their humanity and become little more than hammer-wielding suits of armor.
@TiamatRoar: You are far too emotional about a business doing business. Your emotions cloud your rational thinking on this one. It's an extremely simple, smart decision by GW.
Their playerbase is male. Period. Female players are an extremely tiny minority. GW are a business. You cater to the biggest possible audience.
That is it. Male players prefer male characters in pretty much any media, be it movies, games or tabletops. Reasons for this don't matter, at all.
Why would GW ever alienate parts if its customer base? What would GW gain from changing their "Could be both!"? Nothing. They are a business and they act as one. That has nothing to do with cowardice (the term you keep throwing around), but with business sense.
You can either accept that or keep on raging about the evil company GW is. Vote with your wallet because /that/ is the only thing GW cares about.
That is it. Male players prefer male characters in pretty much any media, be it movies, games or tabletops. Reasons for this don't matter, at all.
Some of my favorite comic book, movie, television, webcomic, and even tabletop gaming characters are female. Bit of a sweeping statement, don't you think?
Malifaux, Warmahordes and Infinity have pretty good female representation in their games and they're all doing very well, so I don't think having females in the game is going to hurt their business at all. I like females in my games if for nothing more than variety in what I'm painting. 'Male players prefer male characters' definitely is a sweeping statement. Most people probably don't care, at which point why not include female models? It's not going to hurt, there's more variety, and it might get a few more female players in.
That is it. Male players prefer male characters in pretty much any media, be it movies, games or tabletops. Reasons for this don't matter, at all.
Some of my favorite comic book, movie, television, webcomic, and even tabletop gaming characters are female. Bit of a sweeping statement, don't you think?
It's a statement that refers to the average. We're talking business practice here and your personal opinion doesn't matter on that level. Don't take this as offensive to you as a person. It's just when talking about business, you need to look at the greather scheme of things and not individuals. I absolutely hate football (soccer) and am bored to death by it. Would the statement that the majority of Germans love football then be falsified by my personal opinion?
That is it. Male players prefer male characters in pretty much any media, be it movies, games or tabletops. Reasons for this don't matter, at all.
Some of my favorite comic book, movie, television, webcomic, and even tabletop gaming characters are female. Bit of a sweeping statement, don't you think?
It's a statement that refers to the average. We're talking business practice here and your personal opinion doesn't matter on that level. Don't take this as offensive to you as a person. It's just when talking about business, you need to look at the greather scheme of things and not individuals. I absolutely hate football (soccer) and am bored to death by it. Would the statement that the majority of Germans love football then be falsified by my personal opinion?
Well, in that case, I would absolutely love to see your source on that data. Likewise, this isn't meant as offensive to you as a person, but it's a very broad statement and when making that kind of generalization, you need to back it up with some kind of evidence.
Sigvatr wrote: @TiamatRoar: You are far too emotional about a business doing business. Your emotions cloud your rational thinking on this one. It's an extremely simple, smart decision by GW.
Their playerbase is male. Period. Female players are an extremely tiny minority. GW are a business. You cater to the biggest possible audience.
That is it. Male players prefer male characters in pretty much any media, be it movies, games or tabletops. Reasons for this don't matter, at all.
Why would GW ever alienate parts if its customer base? What would GW gain from changing their "Could be both!"? Nothing. They are a business and they act as one. That has nothing to do with cowardice (the term you keep throwing around), but with business sense.
You can either accept that or keep on raging about the evil company GW is. Vote with your wallet because /that/ is the only thing GW cares about.
I um... well, I think everyone else already ninja'd me on this one. But I'll echo them anyways.
Source, please?
Addendum Edit:
Besides, I thought the implication was that Age of Sigmar was supposed to attract new players in part, which is why they revamped the rules and the setting. Because I imagine the old player base, which are mostly male, wasn't bigenough for GW to do such drastic measures. If that's the case, then basically slapping half of the human population which is nearly completely untapped for its revenue potential by GW's original product with "Oh, and although it's no where in any of the official game written materials, if you ask one of the designers directly, he'll tell you that some of these guys referred to in male pronouns as brotherhoods where all the named characters are male-only might be female, maybe." seems to be kind of self-sabotaging for that.
And somehow I don't think GW will lose many players by confirming that some stormcast eternals are female. There aren't THAT many sexist men in the world who will run away screaming from GW because GW dared to infect their stormcast eternals with girl cooties.
TiamatRoar wrote: [I um... well, I think everyone else already ninja'd me on this one. But I'll echo them anyways.
Source, please?
(besides, I thought the implication was that Age of Sigmar was supposed to attract new players in part, which is why they revamped the rules and the setting. Because I imagine the old player base, which are mostly male, wasn't bigenough for GW to do such drastic measures. If that's the case, then basically slapping half of the human population which is nearly completely untapped for its revenue potential by GW's original product with "Oh, and although it's no where in any of the official game written materials, if you ask one of the designers directly, he'll tell you that some of these guys referred to in male pronouns as brotherhoods where all the named characters are male-only might be female, maybe." seems to be kind of self-sabotaging for that.
And somehow I don't think GW will lose many players by confirming that some stormcast eternals are female. There aren't THAT many sexist men in the world who will run away screaming from GW because GW dared to infect their stormcast eternals with girl cooties.
This isn't entirely the same as it's a RPG but it reminds me of Mass Effect where a high percentage of players picked the male character. Link
I do wish there were more female models especially if they were not overly sexualised.
That is it. Male players prefer male characters in pretty much any media, be it movies, games or tabletops. Reasons for this don't matter, at all.
Some of my favorite comic book, movie, television, webcomic, and even tabletop gaming characters are female. Bit of a sweeping statement, don't you think?
It's a statement that refers to the average. We're talking business practice here and your personal opinion doesn't matter on that level. Don't take this as offensive to you as a person. It's just when talking about business, you need to look at the greather scheme of things and not individuals. I absolutely hate football (soccer) and am bored to death by it. Would the statement that the majority of Germans love football then be falsified by my personal opinion?
Well, Germans not interested in football are not a small minority (oh the heresy!).
I don't think it's that much of a specific business decision to sell more male troops and characters than female ones. It's just... common. Especially in a war game. Female troops are over-represented in GW's range if you look at human history for comparison, and this is the usual source. And there're females in Tolkien's universe, but...
With males prefering male characters - I never heard of Dark Eldar players sorting out the females but saw some who did the opposite. I think most people want some variety in a lot of miniature ranges and GW know this very well. I suppose we'll see some females in future releases like always - those golden boys and the dwarfs later are just not the prime model range for that.
Sisters of Sigmar, anyone???
any variety of Elf, Sisters of Battle, Chaos, Eldar, Guard, Dwarfs, Vampires, Tomb Kings, Kislevites, and Dark Eldar have all had female models direct from Citadel...
there are a lot of models that get overlooked every time this issue comes up...
personally, i don't care if they put some female characters into the Stormcast Eternal Brotherhoods, or not...
there are plenty of cool female characters in GW's settings already...
Well, in that case, I would absolutely love to see your source on that data. Likewise, this isn't meant as offensive to you as a person, but it's a very broad statement and when making that kind of generalization, you need to back it up with some kind of evidence.
Precise data on a sample that's never been measured? Impossible. The best actual number we have is tournament participants. Estimating the % of female players to 3-5% or less. Other than that, you're looking at tons of anecdotal evidence, you'd have to measure by a personally done survey etc. Nah. In the end, it boils down to anecdotal experience of a lot of people reported over various media, design strategies and marketing decisions. Tabletop is one of the most male-centric fields you could come across. Geek, niche hobby.
On the bright side, there are Dwarvish females in the GW model line. It's just that, true to Tolkeinesque lore, they look and dress just like the males (beards and all!), so much so that humans can't tell them apart
Well, in that case, I would absolutely love to see your source on that data. Likewise, this isn't meant as offensive to you as a person, but it's a very broad statement and when making that kind of generalization, you need to back it up with some kind of evidence.
Precise data on a sample that's never been measured? Impossible. The best actual number we have is tournament participants. Estimating the % of female players to 3-5% or less. Other than that, you're looking at tons of anecdotal evidence, you'd have to measure by a personally done survey etc. Nah. In the end, it boils down to anecdotal experience of a lot of people reported over various media, design strategies and marketing decisions. Tabletop is one of the most male-centric fields you could come across. Geek, niche hobby.
That's not the same as saying that male players prefer male characters in pretty much any media, though. At all. I'm not going to argue that most tabletop gamers aren't males, but that's, er, not quite what was being discussed.
In the end, I'm not really all that bothered about it - it's nowhere near the top of reasons why I'm not interested in AoS - but it would be nice if they had said some of them were a resurgent sect of the Sisters of Sigmar or something, instead of going "Iunno, you figure it out". They seem like perfect candidates.
Then again "Iunno, you figure it out" seems like a popular GW attitude these days...
Making all the stormcast eternal models masculine is understandable, if a bit cheapskate, because making separate feminine models requires more design work and a larger variety of casts and various other costs.
It's the fluff where GW's being inexplicably cowardly. Forgeworld only makes masculine solar-auxiliary models yet almost always refers to "men and women" when talking about them and cults and everything else.
In the case of the stormcast eternals, like many other models that aren't completely human or aren't even biological at all, GW has always inexplicably either proclaimed "Man!" (Knights, Necrons) or in this case, "Brotherhood of guys referred to only with male pronouns and all the named characters are confirmed to only be male, but if you go ask a designer about female stormcast eternals, he'll say "Maybe."!
I mean, really, all you have to do is add an "s" in front of the "he" or change the "is" to "er" in the "his" every once in a while (not all the time, obviously) and you're pretty much good to go. That's what Forgeworld did a lot of the time (they have a female necron, female knight, etc). Stormcast Eternals are ab-human-ish enough that GW could have gotten away with either saying "Oh, yea, some of them are women but since they're souls-reforged, they all take on a similar build and bulk" or "Oh, it's a woman under the armour on some cases. It's just that the armour is too bulky to tell", or "There are female stormcast eternals. We just didn't make any models for them."
Instead, they say nothing. And continue to refer to stormcast eternals with male pronouns and only have male named-characters in the fluff.
Again, I HIGHLY doubt GW will lose that many customers just because they dared to say "Some stormcast eternals are female." In the case of 18% of the players choosing female Shephard, how many people do you think refused to buy Mass Effect just because female shepherd was an option? I'd hope it'd be zero (or a few very very disturbed individuals). Meanwhile they'd at least give a lot more leverage and flexibility to Black Library authors and to female-loving players who are trying to be consistent with the fluff (sure, "mabye" means those players could make female eternals anyways, but it's still gonna look out of place when all actual fluff sources only EVER mention males)
Forgeworld, Fantasy Flight Games, and Black Library have realized this. So why hasn't GW?
again, GW has had quite a few females in the fluff...
Empire novels, Elf novels, Dwarf novels, and Vampire novels just in Fantasy alone...
i have never felt there was a shortage of female characters in the fluff...
will we see any females fighting for Sigmar???
we just might...
it is a bit early to tell...
jah-joshua wrote: again, GW has had quite a few females in the fluff...
Empire novels, Elf novels, Dwarf novels, and Vampire novels just in Fantasy alone...
i have never felt there was a shortage of female characters in the fluff...
will we see any females fighting for Sigmar???
we just might...
it is a bit early to tell...
cheers
jah
Novels are all Black Library.
And of course, even GW itself has women and women models here and there. They just inexplicably make some FLUFF cases to be male-only even when they didn't need to (Knights are explicitly stated to only be men, Necrons never have any female ones mentioned by GW, and now, besides a "Maybe" from a designer, Sigmarines are male-only in practice, as shown by their mascule pronouns and lack of mention of any female ones anywhere).
Really, in the case of knights, necrons, and (to stay on topic) the Sigmarines, the models have enough excuses that GW could have just said "Some are female." ("were female" in the necrons' case) like Forgeworld, Black Libary, and FFG do and left it at that, yet they don't. At most, we get a "maybe" if you ask a designer while the official fluff for Stormcast Eternals continues to only be men and refer to male pronouns.
jah-joshua wrote: again, GW has had quite a few females in the fluff...
Empire novels, Elf novels, Dwarf novels, and Vampire novels just in Fantasy alone...
i have never felt there was a shortage of female characters in the fluff...
will we see any females fighting for Sigmar???
we just might...
it is a bit early to tell...
cheers
jah
You mean like those plentiful female space marines?
I'm talking 10 feet tall with gene-seed and augmentation, etc.
Yup, no female marines exist, no female sigmarites will either.
You mean like those plentiful female space marines?
I'm talking 10 feet tall with gene-seed and augmentation, etc.
Yup, no female marines exist, no female sigmarites will either.
Yea, I need to repeat this again. It would have helped at least a little to deflect those "Sigmarines!!!" criticisms if GW went out and boldly stated "Some stormcast eternals are female!" (bonus points if they actually mention one by name in the fluff stories!). I imagine the benefit of that would have exceeded the amount of customers they'd lose for daring to confirm that female stormcast eternals exist (again, I'd like to hope that they'd lose ZERO customers for doing that. Unless you think there really are a lot of people out there who would have said "WHAT!? SOME STORMCAST ETERNALS ARE FEMALE? EW, SCREW YOU GW!")
TiamatRoar wrote: Again, I HIGHLY doubt GW will lose that many customers just because they dared to say "Some stormcast eternals are female." In the case of 18% of the players choosing female Shephard, how many people do you think refused to buy Mass Effect just because female shepherd was an option? I'd hope it'd be zero (or a few very very disturbed individuals). Meanwhile they'd at least give a lot more leverage and flexibility to Black Library authors and to female-loving players who are trying to be consistent with the fluff (sure, "mabye" means those players could make female eternals anyways, but it's still gonna look out of place when all actual fluff sources only EVER mention males)
Forgeworld, Fantasy Flight Games, and Black Library have realized this. So why hasn't GW?
Maybe it's not what boys in their pre- or early teens (a time often marked by a disdain for anything "girly" and a seeking of masculine figures to identify with) want.
Maybe it's not what boys in their pre- or early teens (a time often marked by a disdain for anything "girly" and a seeking of masculine figures to identify with) want.
What's sad is that, like several others have stated, this is most likely GW's thinking on the matter. I myself wonder what kind of study or marketting research they're using, if any, to determine that those boys would avoid AoS like the plague just because there's one or a few stormcast eternals in the fluff that's a woman (named or not). While they might be looking for masculine figures and wouldn't like to put any female models on the table or have any women in their own stormcast brotherhood, I'm pretty sure most boys have gotten over the "GIRLS HAVE COOTIES!" stage by then so that they wouldn't be saying "I'm not going to buy AoS because some stormcast eternals in the story are women!"
AegisGrimm wrote: Ah, female space marines, Dakka's own Godwin's Law. Good times.
I thought it was Mat Ward? Or maybe the rule has shifted since he left the company.
Regarding the M/F issue, it's probably just simple laziness. That doesn't make it better, but it goes a long way to explaining the mindset. They've got X number of special character models, and it just doesn't occur to them to make any of them female. The Sigmarines are all in big, bulky, vaguely-masculine armor, so the author just uses male pronouns. Most instances of sexism don't come from a guy thinking to himself, "Grrr, I hate women!" It's laziness, and it still sucks. Thankfully, there are other companies that are at least trying to do better.
You mean like those plentiful female space marines?
I'm talking 10 feet tall with gene-seed and augmentation, etc.
Yup, no female marines exist, no female sigmarites will either.
Yea, I need to repeat this again. It would have helped at least a little to deflect those "Sigmarines!!!" criticisms if GW went out and boldly stated "Some stormcast eternals are female!" (bonus points if they actually mention one by name in the fluff stories!). I imagine the benefit of that would have exceeded the amount of customers they'd lose for daring to confirm that female stormcast eternals exist (again, I'd like to hope that they'd lose ZERO customers for doing that. Unless you think there really are a lot of people out there who would have said "WHAT!? SOME STORMCAST ETERNALS ARE FEMALE? EW, SCREW YOU GW!")
I hope you didn't take my position as against female anything.
It would be refreshing to see female sigmarites, just as it would be refreshing to see a female space marine or two.
Heck, even HALO had female Spartans... Look at Noble Team from Halo: Reach. Sure, it was just *one* but the implications were enough.
AegisGrimm wrote: Ah, female space marines, Dakka's own Godwin's Law. Good times.
I thought it was Mat Ward? Or maybe the rule has shifted since he left the company.
Regarding the M/F issue, it's probably just simple laziness. That doesn't make it better, but it goes a long way to explaining the mindset. They've got X number of special character models, and it just doesn't occur to them to make any of them female. The Sigmarines are all in big, bulky, vaguely-masculine armor, so the author just uses male pronouns. Most instances of sexism don't come from a guy thinking to himself, "Grrr, I hate women!" It's laziness, and it still sucks. Thankfully, there are other companies that are at least trying to do better.
To be honest, that's what I thought BEFORE Reynolds said "Maybe" to women. The fact that he said "Maybe." instead of "Sure!" (potentially implying that he knew the company didn't want to be straddled with officializing female stormcast eternals in the fluff, ) kinda makes me pretty sure they actually DID put some thought into this.
Alternatively, "Maybe" means "Hmm, that's a good idea. Why didn't I think about that?" but that sounds overly optimistic to me.
It's also hard for me to imagine this as a mere accident/laziness when they go out of their way to refer to pre-Stormcast mortals as "mortals" instead of "men", yet DIDN'T go out of their way to think of another term besides "brotherhood". Or at least, like FFG and Forgeworld (who's just down the hall!) have done numerous times, include a disclaimer that the masculine term doesn't exclude women.
It's like they want their cake of not comitting to women eternals yet want to eat the cake too by leaving it open but in the end, it just resulted in them missing a big opportunity to differentiate Sigmarines from Space Marines and to give a lot of flexibility to the fluff, Black Library, female-loving players (IE, a missed opportunity for more untapped customers and revenue that would have costed them nothing)
Now (Unless GW does a 360 on this stance) the fluff as well as Black Library are forced to never have female eternals, restricting them unnecessarily, and AoS's eternals won't attract as many female loving players because they'll feel out of place when there aren't any examples of female stormcast eternals in any fluff source.
I honestly feel like the simplest answer is probably the most likely, making female Eternals costs money and might negatively impact sales.
Now I'm not implying that making female models is more expensive or somehow will make people not want to buy Eternals, but there is definately a tradeoff to offering the option.
If GW added female SE into the box then everyone who buys a box is forced to either use them, or buy extra boxes. Considering people were already complaining about not being able to buy gryphounds seperate from the Castellent I don't see people wanting to field either all male or all female SE being happy with buying twice the number of boxes.
Alternatively, if they added conversion bits into the box I can guarentee it would up the price (whether or not you consider it good value), and we all know how much people love GW prices.
Honestly, I love mixing female miniatures into my armies, but I really feel these complaints are unwarrented. No one has complained at the lack of females in other ranges both for GW or other companies like Mantic. Female miniatures in general seem to unfortunately be relegated to boutique lines in metal or resin.
Edit: Just read the complaints about the lack of explicit female SE in the lore, fair enough. I mean to be fair though, AoS just came out. Theres really no reason to think yet that there wont be any female SE characters introduced in the future. I mean there was a female Skitarii Alpha in oneof the books I believe, and they are close to essentially genderless anyway.
Heck I wouldn't even be surprized to hear the lack of women in GWs products is the result of a lack of female writers.
Jack Flask wrote: I honestly feel like the simplest answer is probably the most likely, making female Eternals costs money and might negatively impact sales..
Like I said earlier, they don't need new models. Forgeworld doesn't have any female models yet continues to mention females in the fluff. And GW could have just simply said one of three things with stormcast eternals:
They could have explicitly confirmed men AND women (and maybe orcs/aelfs/whatever if they want) can become stormcast eternals BUT:
Option 1) The reforging makes them all look alike in the end. So while a stormcast eternal might be a woman, she looks like the men. They're angels so gender differences don't exist.
Option 2) The armour is so bulky that while they wear the armour, you can't tell if it's a man or woman underneath it, but there are woman in there sometimes.
Option 3) They just didn't bother to make any female models, but female eternals do exist.
Instead they just cop out with... well, "Maybe." (and only if you go ask a designer. It's not stated anywhere in the fluff or rules or a "forging a narrative" tip section)
Dryaktylus wrote: I don't think it's that much of a specific business decision to sell more male troops and characters than female ones. It's just... common. Especially in a war game. Female troops are over-represented in GW's range if you look at human history for comparison, and this is the usual source.
Feth human history. If I wanted a game about historical warfare, I'd be playing a historical wargame. I like sci-fi and fantasy precisely because it has an excuse to tell this idea that "women aren't soldiers" to go die in a ditch.
What? Surely the great wyrm Drakkenvald attacking the allies in the schwarzlager during WWII is the single and solitary source for Chaos Dragons with Chaos Lords on them? Where is your sense of HISTORY?! And I'm pretty sure allied forces depended on their Life Mages to get through the SS's Death and Shadow wizards at Battle of Dwarf's Beard! Man, don't even get me started on the Elves! Or the atrocities the Skaven committed when battling the Ogre Kingdoms in...
well, you get the idea. Anyone using "HUMAN HISTORY!" as limitations for a Fantasy game is really stretching it.
Jack Flask wrote: I honestly feel like the simplest answer is probably the most likely, making female Eternals costs money and might negatively impact sales..
Like I said earlier, they don't need new models. Forgeworld doesn't have any female models yet continues to mention females in the fluff. And GW could have just simply said one of three things with stormcast eternals:
They could have explicitly confirmed men AND women (and maybe orcs/aelfs/whatever if they want) can become stormcast eternals BUT:
Option 1) The reforging makes them all look alike in the end. So while a stormcast eternal might be a woman, she looks like the men. They're angels so gender differences don't exist.
Option 2) The armour is so bulky that while they wear the armour, you can't tell if it's a man or woman underneath it, but there are woman in there sometimes.
Option 3) They just didn't bother to make any female models, but female eternals do exist.
Instead they just cop out with... well, "Maybe." (and only if you go ask a designer. It's not stated anywhere in the fluff or rules or a "forging a narrative" tip section)
I mean fair enough, and I agree, but the setting only just got released. Sure they could've had itmto start, but with almost nothing written in the setting so far there's still plenty of time for it to be explored further.
Guildsman wrote: Regarding the M/F issue, it's probably just simple laziness. That doesn't make it better, but it goes a long way to explaining the mindset. They've got X number of special character models, and it just doesn't occur to them to make any of them female. The Sigmarines are all in big, bulky, vaguely-masculine armor, so the author just uses male pronouns. Most instances of sexism don't come from a guy thinking to himself, "Grrr, I hate women!" It's laziness, and it still sucks. Thankfully, there are other companies that are at least trying to do better.
It's maybe laziness with the IG in 40k. And that's it. No female (special) characters? You're kidding.
And the Sigmarine armour isn't 'vaguely' masculine.
Feth human history. If I wanted a game about historical warfare, I'd be playing a historical wargame. I like sci-fi and fantasy precisely because it has an excuse to tell this idea that "women aren't soldiers" to go die in a ditch.
Sci-Fi and Fantasy could have such excuses, most of the settings don't do it more than GW do.
Is there a thread about this topic? Don't know. but the whole discussion doesn't belong to this one.
I mean, perhaps it'd make a cool bitz pack, you know, sell a blister of Sigmarette parts that you can use your extra weapons from the Liberator box to get a better value for your $50 purchase. Personally, I don't want women in my grunt units. It wouldn't keep me from buying units if there were a woman here or there, and I have no issue with female specialists, but I don't think women belong on the front line, and it tends to be reflected in my armies. But these are toy soldiers in fantasy land we're talking about at the end of the day, and if people want lady warriors and it sells, then they should be available.
So, got my AoS box today. The Sigmarites are great, but with the exception of the Bloodreavers, the Khorne models are plain ugly. The football helmets, the skulls everywhere (there are muscles that are skulls), heck the Chaos Lord looks like an Infested Terran from StarCraft. I couldn't help but notice that in the big, colorful hobby book that common, non Chaos humans who aren't chilling with Sigmar are generally referred to as tribes. Does anyone think this means that our mortals down the road might be a little more primitive, maybe like Visigoths or something of the like?
It's maybe laziness with the IG in 40k. And that's it. No female (special) characters? You're kidding.
Is there a thread about this topic? Don't know. but the whole discussion doesn't belong to this one.
.
I'm pretty sure the IG Codex does mention "men and women", actually. Yes, there aren't any female special characters (or female models for generic characters even), but it at least acknowledges their existence in the setting(far as I remember, at least. Not including the part where GW retconned out female storm troopers and (IIRC) female commissars, of course).
As for the discussion being here... well, the discussion comes from the latest leaks and their... odd choice of wording (being gender neutral for the stormcast eternals' origins yet NOT gender neutral for the eternals themselves) as well as a designer's statement on the matter, all of which are relevant to the topic (at least, initially). Well, that' was the reasoning I had when I brought it up, myself, at any rate.
Can you guys keep the social justice out of here for christ sake? Dark eldar and eldar have plenty of female special characters. Also as far as 40k and fantasy goes being 'family friendly' means in general you don't see overly sexual themes which is probably why slaanesh is getting replaced by the horned rat.
-----
Slightly more on topic i got my first few games of Age of Sigmar in. I fought 3 battles with 10 stormvermin and 1 warlock. In my opinion the game made skaven under-powered with the exception of warp lightning possibly but then the warlord load-out worked for somebody else. It's ridiculously easy to avoid magic missiles now as long as you stay out of the enemy wizard's range. In fact it's pretty pathetic how much that helps.
I almost won my first game and luck helped a ton but lost on the dice roll whose turn it'd be next and he smeared the warlock with his sigmarine hero.
2nd game went even worse as he kept winning each turn to go first and luck was almost always in his favor. It was skaven vs skaven and he had a warlord with stormvermin.
Finally the last battle was against 3 ogre ironguts and a leader of some kind.
If anybody is wondering the game included i think the minimum unit size of 5-10 for units so mostly core and semi-elite (basically included stormvermin, plague monks and similar) and any unnamed hero.
Final thoughts are the game type we did was agreed by most to put ogres on top by a lot. Command powers are nice as are wizard abilities but normally anybody will learn really fast to just stay out of your wizard range by the end of your turn so you can never blast them with awesome spells like warp lightning which leads to buff heavy wizards. The random turns for players is absolute garbage so if you try to stay at range they can get lucky with 2 turns in a row and close in to assault you in that time. It's a lot more like 40k and buildings can't be garrisoned which is weird. Also the game is smaller so random chance goes way, way up. On the plus side you can probably play a good sized game with 100 USD pretty easily.
Overall i still prefer warhammer fantasy. I don't hate Age of Sigmar as much as i did before playing but it still needs point systems of some kind even if players decide on different ones.
It's maybe laziness with the IG in 40k. And that's it. No female (special) characters? You're kidding.
Is there a thread about this topic? Don't know. but the whole discussion doesn't belong to this one.
.
I'm pretty sure the IG Codex does mention "men and women", actually. Yes, there aren't any female special characters (or female models for generic characters even), but it at least acknowledges their existence in the setting(far as I remember, at least. Not including the part where GW retconned out female storm troopers and (IIRC) female commissars, of course).
You misunderstood my post. I meant that it's lazy not to do some female parts in the IG troop boxes. But there are plenty of female characters in other armies in 40k and WHFB. /offtopic
flamingkillamajig wrote: Can you guys keep the social justice out of here for christ sake? Dark eldar and eldar have plenty of female special characters. Also as far as 40k and fantasy goes being 'family friendly' means in general you don't see overly sexual themes which is probably why slaanesh is getting replaced by the horned rat.
Cause women = sex, amirite?
(....I mean, is that what you seriously think of first when you think of women in the fluff? That's just wrong.)
Also, the social justice wouldn't be so blatant if the guys down the hall (Forgeworld) weren't so blatantly contrasting with GW's handling of the matter.
That said, I think all the points for the most part on the matter (at least, that could be anywhere near the original topic of the stormcast eternals' handling of the matter, itself) have been made by now, anyways. So I don't have anything else I need to say on the matter (at least, as long as someone else doesn't come up with something new about it)
No i'm saying GW has the most sexually modest female models in general which is generally what people complain about. That also has nothing at all to do with 'Age of Sigmar' which is something i was actually trying to discuss and is infinitely more on topic than what you said. If you want to discuss that there's a million threads on it in off-topic that will inevitably be closed due to devolving into a hate fight between those 2 major groups that won't shut up.
jah-joshua wrote: again, GW has had quite a few females in the fluff...
Empire novels, Elf novels, Dwarf novels, and Vampire novels just in Fantasy alone...
i have never felt there was a shortage of female characters in the fluff...
will we see any females fighting for Sigmar???
we just might...
it is a bit early to tell...
cheers
jah
Novels are all Black Library.
And of course, even GW itself has women and women models here and there. They just inexplicably make some FLUFF cases to be male-only even when they didn't need to (Knights are explicitly stated to only be men, Necrons never have any female ones mentioned by GW, and now, besides a "Maybe" from a designer, Sigmarines are male-only in practice, as shown by their mascule pronouns and lack of mention of any female ones anywhere).
Really, in the case of knights, necrons, and (to stay on topic) the Sigmarines, the models have enough excuses that GW could have just said "Some are female." ("were female" in the necrons' case) like Forgeworld, Black Libary, and FFG do and left it at that, yet they don't. At most, we get a "maybe" if you ask a designer while the official fluff for Stormcast Eternals continues to only be men and refer to male pronouns.
A wasted opportunity.
Black Library is still GW, just as Forge World is, so it is all under the same umbrella...
if you want Army Books as an example, the HE, WE, DE, TK, and VC all had females...
i am sure the next versions will, too...
as for Eternals, i don't see the need, just as i don't see the need with Space Marines...
we still don't know what is coming down the line, though...
if you want to decry this as a wasted opportunity, that's understandable...
GW has to choose how they want to present each faction...
one human faction that is purely male doesn't seem like a problem to me, especially when all of the Elves and Undead represent strong female characters quite nicely...
seems to be much ado about nothing...
maybe Sisters of Sigmar will make a comeback...
I think it would have been easier to just have the Eternals be the souls of valiant warriors of both genders inhabiting the suit of armor.
Or have them all made in Sigmar's image, literally all having the face and likeness of Sigmar, whatever gender or race they might have been originally.
You've got an explanation for both genders without having to make differentiated models, unless there's going to be distinct female models in service to our lord Sigmar.
highlord tamburlaine wrote: I think it would have been easier to just have the Eternals be the souls of valiant warriors of both genders inhabiting the suit of armor.
Or have them all made in Sigmar's image, literally all having the face and likeness of Sigmar, whatever gender or race they might have been originally.
You've got an explanation for both genders without having to make differentiated models, unless there's going to be distinct female models in service to our lord Sigmar.
That is the worst possible "solution" to this problem.
If anyone is still wondering whether Sigmarines are WHFB versions of Space Marines this should put it to an end.... we are now having the same damned "Female Space Marine" argument except now it's a "Female Sigmarine" discussion
I personally don't lose any sleep at night worrying about lack of females in a wargame. The whole conversation reminds me of a guy I witnessed in a game store who was complaining to a woman who had came in with her kids to see what miniature gaming was about.
He jumped right in with the whole sexism in gaming shtick and pointed out a miniature of a woman in chain mail that had nipple bumps as he went on his rant.
I stepped as far away from him as I could get, not wanting any part of the conversation, and the woman just kind of nodded, smiled, and quickly shooshed her kids out the door, to never again be seen.
I am really disliking how the entire Sigmarine faction just looks like the same five sculpts with weapon swaps. I keep on trying to talk myself into getting the starter, but the Sigmarines are just so boring and not my style of fantasy, and the Chaos guys are all way over-designed. I know that might sound contradictory, but the older I get the more practical I want my miniatures to look. Give me fifteen years and I'll be playing historicals.
The crossbow cannon is ridiculous. I also can't stand the fact that even the Sigmarines butts are armored in plate. It just further reduces my ability to suspend my disbelief and get into the setting.
I hope that GW starts releasing something other than Sigmarines here before too long, I'm anxious to see some new designs and directions for old favorites.
Gallahad wrote: I am really disliking how the entire Sigmarine faction just looks like the same five sculpts with weapon swaps. I keep on trying to talk myself into getting the starter, but the Sigmarines are just so boring and not my style of fantasy, and the Chaos guys are all way over-designed. I know that might sound contradictory, but the older I get the more practical I want my miniatures to look. Give me fifteen years and I'll be playing historicals.
The crossbow cannon is ridiculous. I also can't stand the fact that even the Sigmarines butts are armored in plate. It just further reduces my ability to suspend my disbelief and get into the setting.
I hope that GW starts releasing something other than Sigmarines here before too long, I'm anxious to see some new designs and directions for old favorites.
Clearly what we need now are some more lightly armoured Sigmarscouts with more realistic/historical camo-cloaksshrouds over their gold plate.
AlexHolker wrote:
That is the worst possible "solution" to this problem.
I disagree. We are talking about the demigod soldiers of a once mortal barbarian king reborn into godhood who decided to name everything which wasn't bolted down using his name as a root word. Sigmar clearly has humility issues and we can probably read more about it once GW releases the Sigmarillion.
highlord tamburlaine wrote:I think it would have been easier to just have the Eternals be the souls of valiant warriors of both genders inhabiting the suit of armor.
Or have them all made in Sigmar's image, literally all having the face and likeness of Sigmar, whatever gender or race they might have been originally.
I do like the fact that the initial creation of the Stormcast Eternals is called "The First Striking".
In the latest White Dwarf there is a "Chamber" organisation diagram. Most models we know about, but under the auxiliary command bit there seems to be some kind of battle standard and a musician.,,perhaps a hint of models to come? The 3 Paladin varieties look awesome as well.
Gallahad wrote: I am really disliking how the entire Sigmarine faction just looks like the same five sculpts with weapon swaps. I keep on trying to talk myself into getting the starter, but the Sigmarines are just so boring and not my style of fantasy, and the Chaos guys are all way over-designed. I know that might sound contradictory, but the older I get the more practical I want my miniatures to look. Give me fifteen years and I'll be playing historicals.
The crossbow cannon is ridiculous. I also can't stand the fact that even the Sigmarines butts are armored in plate. It just further reduces my ability to suspend my disbelief and get into the setting.
I hope that GW starts releasing something other than Sigmarines here before too long, I'm anxious to see some new designs and directions for old favorites.
I think the fact that the Sigmarines all look the same except with different weapon combos is made worse by the fact that they are only releasing Sigmarines at the moment. Would have been nice if they had staggered the releases and mixed up a few of the factions a bit. I do find their models utterly boring and uninspiring and it's a shame that the characters have way too much silly detail going on when they should be the exceptional standout designs. That said the Chaos range, except for the big monster, is quite nice; I wouldn't say that those models are over-designed really. Some great potential for Berzerkers of Khorne conversions.
Agree on the crossbow cannon thing...utterly ridiculous model. On the design of the armour I think the whole appearance looks impractical. However I am hoping that some of the other factions don't carry across that same over designed bulky armour appearance.
Agree with you about hoping to see something else other than Sigmarines released soon..looking forward to see what they do with the Dwarves and Orcs...
flamingkillamajig wrote: Can you guys keep the social justice out of here for christ sake? Dark eldar and eldar have plenty of female special characters. Also as far as 40k and fantasy goes being 'family friendly' means in general you don't see overly sexual themes which is probably why slaanesh is getting replaced by the horned rat.
-----
Slightly more on topic
You don't get to say people should abandon an argument for being off-topic, just after you've been pushing your own stance in that argument. Choose one or the other in a post, please.
Relapse wrote: I personally don't lose any sleep at night worrying about lack of females in a wargame. The whole conversation reminds me of a guy I witnessed in a game store who was complaining to a woman who had came in with her kids to see what miniature gaming was about.
He jumped right in with the whole sexism in gaming shtick and pointed out a miniature of a woman in chain mail that had nipple bumps as he went on his rant.
I stepped as far away from him as I could get, not wanting any part of the conversation, and the woman just kind of nodded, smiled, and quickly shooshed her kids out the door, to never again be seen.
See, that's further evidence that the issue is costing the miniatures industry potential customers. Although GW doesn't really go that far with their own models.............. well, usually (Morathi, Lilith, etc),
Slightly more on-topic, it would have been pretty funny if GW made some female Sigmarine models and instead of people saying "They're copies of marines!", everyone would be saying "They're copies of marines and sisters of battle!"
But... it would still have been much better because then those poor neglected SoBs would be getting a bit more attention again. Or at least some nice conversion opportunities. Heck, imagine the memes and jokes. "Finally, Plastic Sisters, thanks to Age of Sigmar!" And hey, a faction that combined both space marines and SoBs would be a little more interesting than "Space Marines... IN FANTASY!" that we currently have.
And I don't expect them to create a female faction. If GW cared about doing something like that, we'd see updated SoBs finally.
Making Warhammer any less white and male-dominated would be a big change that would surely prove controversial with the customer base. That's the last thing GW would want for Age of Sigmar.
Fabio Bile wrote: Making Warhammer any less white and male-dominated would be a big change that would surely prove controversial with the customer base. That's the last thing GW would want for Age of Sigmar.
More seriously (assuming you were sarcastic), it's a bit sad that they blew up the Warhammer Fantasy World with the End Times, signalling a great change, only for nothing to really have changed at all. Why bother revamping the setting entirely if you're going to do absolutely nothing new with the new setting?
Fabio Bile wrote: Making Warhammer any less white and male-dominated would be a big change that would surely prove controversial with the customer base. That's the last thing GW would want for Age of Sigmar.
Sure, because destroying Warhammer as we know it isn't controversial at all.
Dryaktylus wrote: I don't think it's that much of a specific business decision to sell more male troops and characters than female ones. It's just... common. Especially in a war game. Female troops are over-represented in GW's range if you look at human history for comparison, and this is the usual source.
Feth human history. If I wanted a game about historical warfare, I'd be playing a historical wargame. I like sci-fi and fantasy precisely because it has an excuse to tell this idea that "women aren't soldiers" to go die in a ditch.
While I'm sympathetic to the general theme of the argument, without human history you wouldn't have much of the good ol' cod-dark-ages/cod-medieval/cod-renaissance modern fantasy, and most of the conventions of wargaming itself, in the first place. Fething human history is how we ended up with this magical collection of bubble universes swirling round the cosmic bowl, populated almost entirely (at this point) by golden-golem ground marines.
RoninXiC wrote:Wow the paintings are sooooo baaaad. And 10 of the same cheap painting next to each other? wow.
flamingkillamajig wrote: No i'm saying GW has the most sexually modest female models in general which is generally what people complain about.
What?
I have never seen people complaining that the very few female models GW does make are not skimpy enough.
On the contrary, there is boobplate all over the place. Hell, there's even Boobplate: The Faction (SOB)
I'm not sure if this is serious or trolling, you saw the witch elves right? how much they were toned down?
The Boobplate issue is odd on one hand people want female figures to be recognizable as female but not over sexualized, I think SoB do this quite well, the only skin they show is their face.
And its still too much for some. No wonder GW wont touch SoB now because there scared of the reactions from certain people. But its fine to have perfect men time after time because after all perfect chiseled mussels is what everybody wants on men right?
highlord tamburlaine wrote: I think it would have been easier to just have the Eternals be the souls of valiant warriors of both genders inhabiting the suit of armor.
Or have them all made in Sigmar's image, literally all having the face and likeness of Sigmar, whatever gender or race they might have been originally.
You've got an explanation for both genders without having to make differentiated models, unless there's going to be distinct female models in service to our lord Sigmar.
That is the worst possible "solution" to this problem.
Indeed its the same as my marines are girls so we don't need SoB argument all over. Its stupid
RoninXiC wrote: Wow the paintings are sooooo baaaad. And 10 of the same cheap painting next to each other? wow.
I thought the same, it really does all feel like its aimed at early teens when you look at this new stuff in person, particularly the literature, if you can all it that.
Pretty sure WFB seemed more mature in the early days, or maybe I just want to remember it like that
Thraxas Of Turai wrote: I do like the fact that the initial creation of the Stormcast Eternals is called "The First Striking".
In the latest White Dwarf there is a "Chamber" organisation diagram. Most models we know about, but under the auxiliary command bit there seems to be some kind of battle standard and a musician.,,perhaps a hint of models to come? The 3 Paladin varieties look awesome as well.
All of this was inside of the big book.
The "Paladins" are Retributors(2h hammers), Decimators(2h axes), and Protectors(Glaives).
Better pictures of Dragonfate Dias and Numinous Occulum found from GW Preston Facebook. Like Baleful Realmgate, Dragonfate Dias was first sighted in 2013 Triumph and Treachery book but it has received a new base. Numinous Occulum is a new item. It looks like it might be somehow compatible with Ophidian Archway.
Thraxas Of Turai wrote: I do like the fact that the initial creation of the Stormcast Eternals is called "The First Striking".
In the latest White Dwarf there is a "Chamber" organisation diagram. Most models we know about, but under the auxiliary command bit there seems to be some kind of battle standard and a musician.,,perhaps a hint of models to come? The 3 Paladin varieties look awesome as well.
All of this was inside of the big book.
The "Paladins" are Retributors(2h hammers), Decimators(2h axes), and Protectors(Glaives).
Cheers Kanluwen, I must have missed it amongst all the "what genitalia have they got?" rumour discussion.
That Occulem looks great, and indeed compatible with the Archway.
How exactly do you use your standing armies in it?
Warscrolls for all existing factions and units are available (for free) on the website.
Be prepared to rage slightly at the "hilarious" special rules they've foisted on old armies, while playing the rules for new models with a straight bat.
@ Grot6 Pretty much what Azrael said. If you want points as some sort of guideline to use by far the best formula I have seen thus far is available in this thread:
Summoning may still be an issue though. Failing that it appears to be "place what you want on the gaming table and go from there".
Interesting that they sat on some of the terrain for so long before releasing it. I would have bought an Ophidian Archway yesterday but my local GW still had a Deathknell Watch on the shelves so I snaffled it up.
On the subject of Warhammer scenery IIRC the likes of the Magewrath Throne and Dreadfire Portal were sold out/no longer available. They are back in stock now:
On the subject of Warhammer scenery IIRC the likes of the Magewrath Throne and Dreadfire Portal were sold out/no longer available. They are back in stock now:
To be honest, I haven't seen them gone. But "Walls and fences" were gone for sure. And now they're back
There's hope for the Gardens of Morr yet then :-)
And "Lair of the Astromancer", and "Fortified Manor", and "Chapel" and "Watchtower"...
I don't get why people are so upset about the paintings. It been literally the same thing in the recent 40k codices and nobody says a word about it. AoS does it, and everyone loses their minds. People are just looking for things to hate about this game and it's really annoying.
Samurai_Eduh wrote: I don't get why people are so upset about the paintings. It been literally the same thing in the recent 40k codices and nobody says a word about it. AoS does it, and everyone loses their minds. People are just looking for things to hate about this game and it's really annoying.
No, people (me included) have said about it in the 40k codexes too. They're crap in the 40k stuff too, them being there doesn't make them good.
Samurai_Eduh wrote: I don't get why people are so upset about the paintings. It been literally the same thing in the recent 40k codices and nobody says a word about it. AoS does it, and everyone loses their minds. People are just looking for things to hate about this game and it's really annoying.
Wow, hyperbole much, firstly, a few people isn't "everybody", secondly, I'm pretty sure we've had at least 1 thread related to how crap the same style art is in the 40k codices too.
Samurai_Eduh wrote: I don't get why people are so upset about the paintings. It been literally the same thing in the recent 40k codices and nobody says a word about it. AoS does it, and everyone loses their minds. People are just looking for things to hate about this game and it's really annoying.
What's so great about the same couple of spotters-guide line drawing jpegs, copied and pasted several times across a bunch of premium-priced pages, then?
Sigvatr wrote: If one of them is mortally wounded, their remains get revived by Sigmar's powers and the broken shell is put into a huge...steam-and-magic driven golem so that despite having their body broken, they can fight on and inspire their batte brothers.
... Ok, the moment they release Steampunk Dreadnoughts is the moment my wallet weeps.
You mean sort of like the entire premise behind warmachine, that kind of steampunk dreadnought :p?
Sigvatr wrote: If one of them is mortally wounded, their remains get revived by Sigmar's powers and the broken shell is put into a huge...steam-and-magic driven golem so that despite having their body broken, they can fight on and inspire their batte brothers.
... Ok, the moment they release Steampunk Dreadnoughts is the moment my wallet weeps.
You mean sort of like the entire premise behind warmachine, that kind of steampunk dreadnought :p?
Yes like that, but with weapons that don't look like FFVII weapons having a bee sting allergy.
I don't really like those terrain pieces, though I can see what they were going for, they're just a bit too exaggerated for me.
My favourite WFB plastic terrain was the Watchtower and the Fortified Manor and the Chapel. Those were a bit cartoony too, but they were pretty usable on top of it.
Samurai_Eduh wrote: I don't get why people are so upset about the paintings. It been literally the same thing in the recent 40k codices and nobody says a word about it. AoS does it, and everyone loses their minds. People are just looking for things to hate about this game and it's really annoying.
That's actually why I asked. The 40k ones were used to show different insignia etc (in a painfully superfluous manner but still). I can't make out any difference in these pics but it might just be because I'm on my phone.
Sigvatr wrote: If one of them is mortally wounded, their remains get revived by Sigmar's powers and the broken shell is put into a huge...steam-and-magic driven golem so that despite having their body broken, they can fight on and inspire their batte brothers.
... Ok, the moment they release Steampunk Dreadnoughts is the moment my wallet weeps.
You mean sort of like the entire premise behind warmachine, that kind of steampunk dreadnought :p?
Yes like that, but with weapons that don't look like FFVII weapons having a bee sting allergy.
Hm. Judging by the current sigmarine line, I'm pretty sure a potential sigmarine dreadnought would render the PP ones positively modest in comparison.
I see what you're saying tho, not for everyone (I like both designs)
Bottle wrote: There's hope for the Gardens of Morr yet then :-)
Sorry to be the bearer of bad new but I doubt it will be back Had expressed my interest in the item when new stock came back in via their online shop a few weeks ago. Received an email to say it was back in stock but when I clicked into the site it was still unavailable etc. Got in touch with customer services and received the following reply about 2 weeks ago:
"Thank you for contacting us, and we are really sorry to inform you that this product is no longer available and there is no stock left of it.
For a technical mistake you have received an e-mail saying that the product was available, but the product is actually discontinued ( you can se the sentence stating No longer available in the product availability just under the "buy it button")."
I would love if they sporadically released some of the older discontinued stock on a shore term release basis but probably more trouble for them than it is worth at this stage.
Sigvatr wrote: If one of them is mortally wounded, their remains get revived by Sigmar's powers and the broken shell is put into a huge...steam-and-magic driven golem so that despite having their body broken, they can fight on and inspire their batte brothers.
... Ok, the moment they release Steampunk Dreadnoughts is the moment my wallet weeps.
You mean sort of like the entire premise behind warmachine, that kind of steampunk dreadnought :p?
Thank you. At least somebody gets it. These ground marines are basically steampunk marines combining the dwemer from elder scrolls, warmachine, 40k and the knight archers from anor londo in dark souls 1. Not that the elder scrolls and dark souls bit is bad but they're going way over the top and the story is mostly bad.
Replacing slaanesh with the horned rat does seem to aim this more towards the kiddies though. I wonder if the horned rat will basically be the new chaos undivided. Not sure how i'd feel about a bunch of human warriors following the horned rat. I suppose it could look cool if done right. Perhaps cults start worshiping him and don similar horned headgear with red eyes and a pointed nose. I keep thinking of this like the darkspawn of dragon age. Basically corrupted humans and other factions. Here's to hoping they go the good route with it instead of the dumb one. As much as i hate skaven being declared chaos very specifically now it'd at least add more variety between this and 40k with the horned rat replacing slaanesh which is much needed after the ground marines ruined it.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Replacing slaanesh with the horned rat does seem to aim this more towards the kiddies though. I wonder if the horned rat will basically be the new chaos undivided. Not sure how i'd feel about a bunch of human warriors following the horned rat. I suppose it could look cool if done right. Perhaps cults start worshiping him and don similar horned headgear with red eyes and a pointed nose. I keep thinking of this like the darkspawn of dragon age. Basically corrupted humans and other factions. Here's to hoping they go the good route with it instead of the dumb one. As much as i hate skaven being declared chaos very specifically now it'd at least add more variety between this and 40k with the horned rat replacing slaanesh which is much needed after the ground marines ruined it.
Don't know that I'd be eager to see the shift, but rat-worshipping humans aren't new. There was a short fluff piece in the second Realms of Chaos book - The Lost and The Damned - that featured a cult of such in a human city.
Personally I find it dumb that Slaanesh is a singular enough entity to be kidnapped in the first place. I thought the chaos gods were emotions themselves, so kidnapping Slaanesh is the equivalent of kidnapping pleasure itself. At that point, does Pleasure just stop existing? (note that although Slaanesh was birthed into the material realm by the Elder in the 30th Millenium, from its perspective it ALWAYS existed, because Pleasure always exists)
Well, that's how the Chaos gods were portrayed previously but more and more GW seems to be moving away from that or something, apparently?
And the Horned Rat doesn't even correspond to any emotion in the first place! (at least, none that isn't already taken by the other Chaos Gods)
TiamatRoar wrote: And the Horned Rat doesn't even correspond to any emotion in the first place! (at least, none that isn't already taken by the other Chaos Gods)
To bring up yet another unfortunate 40k analogy, the Horned Rat does seem to be a suitable stand in or even replacement for Malice. Although Nurgle and Tzeentch doubtless have an affinity for Skaven, the apparent cynicism and contempt that Skaven individuals have for each other and their own societies, let alone other races, is representative of a specific kind of hatred not present in the emotional spectrum of the big four Chaos gods. It's more like a fear-based thing, a proper xenophobic thing, rather than a kind of hatred related to rage, despair, manipulation or pleasure.
Still no replacement for Slaanesh, though. I choose to think that these Aelfs 'believe' to have captured her - a mark of stereotypical elven arrogance.
"Replacing slaanesh with the horned rat does seem to aim this more towards the kiddies though."
yes because, backstabbing, mass murder, pestilence, lying, stealing and such is far more kids friendly than "excess"... I think they replaced slaanesh because the horny one is far better suited for a "constant war" themed game than someone who focuses on excess, Slaanesh makes sense as a god but I could never understand why he even bothered with war, war is not good for drugs, sex, excess and rock and roll... it never made sense why he would bother to have whole armies, horned one does... plus skaven outnumbered humans by A LOT surely the horned one would have been one of the main gods, or should have been a LONG time ago.
"Replacing slaanesh with the horned rat does seem to aim this more towards the kiddies though."
yes because, backstabbing, mass murder, pestilence, lying, stealing and such is far more kids friendly than "excess"... I think they replaced slaanesh because the horny one is far better suited for a "constant war" themed game than someone who focuses on excess, Slaanesh makes sense as a god but I could never understand why he even bothered with war, war is not good for drugs, sex, excess and rock and roll... it never made sense why he would bother to have whole armies, horned one does... plus skaven outnumbered humans by A LOT surely the horned one would have been one of the main gods, or should have been a LONG time ago.
Excess of violence, pride in being a skilled soldier, not to mention the depraved sort of warcrimes that he surely finds amusing.
There's plenty of reasons why The god of depravity would indulge in warfare. War is just another form of entertainment, after all.
Thank you. At least somebody gets it. These ground marines are basically steampunk marines combining the dwemer from elder scrolls, warmachine, 40k and the knight archers from anor londo in dark souls 1. Not that the elder scrolls and dark souls bit is bad but they're going way over the top and the story is mostly bad.
Eh I think they look more like the Looking Glass Knight from DS2 than the Silver Knights. Hell LGK even has lightning attacks.
"Replacing slaanesh with the horned rat does seem to aim this more towards the kiddies though."
yes because, backstabbing, mass murder, pestilence, lying, stealing and such is far more kids friendly than "excess"... I think they replaced slaanesh because the horny one is far better suited for a "constant war" themed game than someone who focuses on excess, Slaanesh makes sense as a god but I could never understand why he even bothered with war, war is not good for drugs, sex, excess and rock and roll... it never made sense why he would bother to have whole armies, horned one does... plus skaven outnumbered humans by A LOT surely the horned one would have been one of the main gods, or should have been a LONG time ago.
Slaanesh's love of other things besides War was why Slaanesh actually opposed the End Times. But mechanics-wise, Slaanesh's love of grace and beauty and speed was the perfect fluff reason for Chaos to have its glass cannons. Without Slaanesh, you have Nurgle for durability, Tzeentch for magic and range, and Khorne for the jack-of-all-stats, and nothing for the speedy glass cannon. I mean, I guess Skaven could be glass cannons if they wanted to be but they're an entire separate faction with an entire array of various archetypes. I think it'd be kinda silly if we ended up having to mark our Chaos Warriors with "The Mark of the Horned Rat" if we felt like giving them +1 Initiative.
I could never understand why he even bothered with war, war is not good for drugs, sex, excess and rock and roll
Nope, nope, nope. Slaanesh is all about experiencing every sensation possible and war, bloodlust, (mortally) dangerous adventures are one of them. While hurr durr Khorne marches just for sake of slaughter, Slaanesh can go to war in the name of "adventure time". Hell, Sigvald even traversed the matereal world so he could get the helmet of Khorne, which he thought would infuse him with new, godlike "experiences". Stagnation, monotony (even if was continous orgy) would be dirrect opposites.
Samurai_Eduh wrote: I don't get why people are so upset about the paintings. It been literally the same thing in the recent 40k codices and nobody says a word about it.
Uh, have you been living under a rock?
The cheap, crap-tier quality of the artwork and fluff in the 40K rulebooks since the tail-end of 6th to present are a frequent complaint.
"Replacing slaanesh with the horned rat does seem to aim this more towards the kiddies though."
yes because, backstabbing, mass murder, pestilence, lying, stealing and such is far more kids friendly than "excess"... I think they replaced slaanesh because the horny one is far better suited for a "constant war" themed game than someone who focuses on excess, Slaanesh makes sense as a god but I could never understand why he even bothered with war, war is not good for drugs, sex, excess and rock and roll... it never made sense why he would bother to have whole armies, horned one does... plus skaven outnumbered humans by A LOT surely the horned one would have been one of the main gods, or should have been a LONG time ago.
Slaanesh's love of other things besides War was why Slaanesh actually opposed the End Times. But mechanics-wise, Slaanesh's love of grace and beauty and speed was the perfect fluff reason for Chaos to have its glass cannons. Without Slaanesh, you have Nurgle for durability, Tzeentch for magic and range, and Khorne for the jack-of-all-stats, and nothing for the speedy glass cannon. I mean, I guess Skaven could be glass cannons if they wanted to be but they're an entire separate faction with an entire array of various archetypes. I think it'd be kinda silly if we ended up having to mark our Chaos Warriors with "The Mark of the Horned Rat" if we felt like giving them +1 Initiative.
well slaanesh units are not gone, and the lore has not removed him, he is just no longer part of the main 4 (I guess) I mean we could all still be wrong about the logo itself, maybe he fused with a dark elf for all we still know.. its not like GW is stopping the production of daemonettes and I personally think that with AoS there will be far more options for glass canons now that its all about warscrolls, they could literally add any unit now and you can fit it around any army you want.
and rat servants have always been a big thing in GW...
Plus, I'm a bit disconcerted that after 8th ed's short tenure, terrain now seems to be judged by some by what special rules and buffs it gives you.
]
Had expressed my interest in the item when new stock came back in via their online shop a few weeks ago. Received an email to say it was back in stock but when I clicked into the site it was still unavailable etc. Got in touch with customer services and received the following reply about 2 weeks ago:
