Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Davor wrote:
But, but, GW said under oath all their ideas are their own and not taken from anywhere else.

That's probably a subject for a different topic, but there is a difference between being inspired by someone else's work when making your own and aping them to the point where you owe them something, GW today argues that they did the former, though back in the day they even went so far as to include Moorcock with some prominent tabletop wargamers in a dedication in the 2nd edition book for fantasy, a privilege they did not extend to other clear influences like Tolkien or Robert E. Howard.

That was a joke Captain Joystick hence the Smiley face with tongue sticking out.

 Captain Joystick wrote:

Davor wrote:
But, but, GW said under oath all their ideas are their own and not taken from anywhere else.

That's probably a subject for a different topic, but there is a difference between being inspired by someone else's work when making your own and aping them to the point where you owe them something, GW today argues that they did the former, though back in the day they even went so far as to include Moorcock with some prominent tabletop wargamers in a dedication in the 2nd edition book for fantasy, a privilege they did not extend to other clear influences like Tolkien or Robert E. Howard.

I suppose that's a privilege extended only to him on account of the fact that the other two you've cited were both long dead.

 Bottle wrote:
For the Seraphon I prefer the theory that they are all in space and teleport up and down rather than being memories manifest.

It's both of these. A given Seraphon is created by the Slann conjuring it forth from memory, but then lives off in the stars somewhere (potentially in the ships, we don't know). When a Slann summons new Seraphon on the battlefield, he is bringing them down from Azyr, not creating them on the spot. If the Seraphon survives the battle then it goes back up, if it dies then the Slann can re-conjure it from its memories. The thing is the Slann remembers the actions that Seraphon took and what events it witnessed, so the re-conjured version isn't a 'blank slate' since it too remembers those things. The only way for a Seraphon to actually stay dead the Slann it's tied to has to die, in which case all the Seraphon that Slann is associated with fade out. But that rarely happens since even on the rare occasion when a Slann's foresight fails him he will generally teleport out before actual death.

Now the above is a bit difficult to figure out since one has to put together bits of fluff from different places but the best sources are the Seraphon battletome and the Legends of AoS: Clan Pestilens novel.

Perhaps "conjuered from memories" mean they have blueprints of the different species or even digital records of who they are and what they have done which they can transfer to the growing vats to clone a fallen Seraphon. Like I said this is just a theory interpreting the accounts of the Seraphon not as fact but instead as someone witnessing technology far beyond what he could interpret.

 Bottle wrote:
For the Seraphon I prefer the theory that they are all in space and teleport up and down rather than being memories manifest.

I do not like this idea at all. I want this more to do with Fantasy and nothing being in space. When I saw Sigmars Space Station that is what started me for so long saying Sigmarines. I really wish space was left for 40K, and AoS stick to the fantasy setting and no teleportation in the game at all unless it's magic teleportation.

At least the memories thing is sort of fantasy like and GW was trying to do something unique there unless that was a copy of something else that I don't know about.

Yeah, I think too many things are lumped into Order, so it almost (?) suffers from the same problem 40k does: When most of your armies are on the same side, it makes it very hard to justify battles against them. Now, I'm not sure if AoS has fluff reasons for let's say Stormcasts vs. Sylvaneth or Seraphon vs. Duardin, but if not then it all but requires you to ignore the narrative or force somebody to play an opposing faction.

40k has the same problem, there are too many Imperium factions and they happen to be more popular, so often you have battles that just hand-wave the setting.

Order is certainly the most popular of the alliances. At a recent tournament, there was 1 Death player (me, default victory!), 5 Chaos, 5 Destruction, and 11 in Order. That's pretty standard from what I've seen; combining some of the most popular 8th ed armies (Empire, Dark Elves, High Elves, Dwarves) and then adding not only the new poster boys of Stormcast, but also two new and well received releases in the form of Slyvaneth and Seraphon, has really driven their popularity.

Chaos has in the past tournaments been way more popular than Destruction, but the recent release of GAestruction and Ironjaws seems to have helped drive a surge. Meanwhile, Death languishes, as pretty much the only people using them are Tomb King players maniacally laughing as we crush everyone that mocked us in 8th.

Ive always looked at 'Sigmar's space station' as a very fantasy throne of the gods-esqe location. Much like the palaces in the clouds sort of thing. It certainly is described as being magical, and it isn't presented as outer space (like people walk around and breathe normally up there).

Davor wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
For the Seraphon I prefer the theory that they are all in space and teleport up and down rather than being memories manifest.

I do not like this idea at all. I want this more to do with Fantasy and nothing being in space. When I saw Sigmars Space Station that is what started me for so long saying Sigmarines. I really wish space was left for 40K, and AoS stick to the fantasy setting and no teleportation in the game at all unless it's magic teleportation. .

Thanks to denial it doesn't have to be!

Davor wrote:

 Captain Joystick wrote:
GW draws most of its cosmology regarding Chaos and Order from the works of Michael Moorcock (Moorcock himself describes GW as one of many companies that flagrantly ripped him off, and he's not wrong), so you'll find it makes more sense of you filter it in that lease.

But, but, GW said under oath all their ideas are their own and not taken from anywhere else.

I've read the Elric saga as well as a number of the Eternal Warrior books, and while the concept of gods devoted to chaos was certainly lifted from Moorcock's work, GW's spin on it is vastly different in my opinion. First of all, GW's "Chaos" isn't really the same as Moorcock's. The gods in Moorcock's multi-verse truly embody CHAOS in its truest form, anarchy, shapelessness, total lack of order and balance, while GW's chaos gods embody emotion taken to extremes (and basically depicted as all consuming evil), with elements of chaos and order represented.

Also, GW never really established an Order pantheon, it was always more of a general opposition to the forces of Chaos.

I guess too many years of the old D&D alignment system have skewed my way of looking at it. There is also the lack of symmetry that bugs me (we have Order vs Chaos, but then we've got Death and Destruction just kind of there). I'm sure I'll get used to it as I read more of the Realmgate books.

GW lifted Chaos pretty much whole cloth, from symbology to the inspiration of gods (see Arioch-Slaanesh and Slortar-Tzeentch). Order never got much detail, but that is because Warhammer is a world of Chaos ascendant. Moocock talked about this directly in his fiction- in some worlds Order and Chaos are relatively balanced, in others, not so much, and in yet others, one completely absent. Not terribly surprising as Warhammer was trying to be edgier fantasy and Moorcock wrote much of his Eternal Warrior fiction in direct opposition of Tolkien (and, to some degree Howard!). Also, Moorcock was a Brit, FWIW. The imagery of early WHF is very heavily inspired by Moorcock.

Current styling, not so much. The overly ornate heavy armor, lots of big monsters, etc. stuff is definitely more video game styled (World of Warcraft/DIablo/Heroes of Might and Magic), and the whole aesthetic looks more modern MTG/D&D than 70s Elric to me. It's more of the same our elves/dwarves/vampires/knights are different.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
So I'm still new to the game, and I have managed to read the first Realmgate book, and am currently working my way through the second one. One of the things that seems to stand out is the way the Factions are done: Order, Chaos, Death, Destruction. I understand the point was to make things a bit more simplified, but there are several armies tied to Order that make me scratch my head a bit. Fyreslayers and Sylvaneth do not strike me as "Order" in any way, one being a mercenary faction and the other being bi-polar nature lovers (as a friend of mine described them).

I also found it odd that we have separate factions for Death and Destruction (two things generally lumped together). I get that they wanted Orcs, Goblins, Ogres, Giants, and Trolls (all previously linked to one another) together as one big faction, and all the various flavors of undead as one faction, so maybe I'm just hung up on the faction names. I just think that the current 4-faction set up is odd, as you have Order and Chaos directly opposed to each other, and then you have Death and Destruction just kind of hanging out, picking fights with everybody. To me, it would have made more sense if they were done up in this manner (or something like it):

Order (Sigmarines, Sarafon, High Aelfs, maybe Dark Aelfs) / Chaos (all Chaos)
Life (Syvaneth, Wood Aelfs) / Death (all Undead)
Creation (Duardin, Empire) / Destruction (Orruks, Grotts, Ogors)

Dark Aelfs are really the only army I have trouble fitting in to this break-out. While they certainly don't fit with the others in this faction, their demeanor really fits better under Destruction and it would add an Aelf army to the Creation/Destruction opposition.

I think your proposed factions totally make sense from a thematic point of view.
But the issue is they are more limiting than the actual 4 factions. Why should I be discouraged from playing an army of Sigmarines and Empire? Or Wood Aelfs and Dark Aelfs? Or Syvaneth and High Aelfs? I feel like all these combinations can easily be great thematic armies. But the further you split the factions, the further you limit these options. One of the major goals of AoS was to give more options and remove unnecessary barriers.

So yes, you could probably argue that Sylvaneth and Fireslayers are not the figureheads of "Order" but that's where they provide the best compromise between theme and number of options.

OP

I read the Sylvaneth legends book and actually most of the characters are written like human characters. They simply have a connection to the forest that impacts what they do. I mean theres a Branchwych character who you could say was a Wood Elf and the story would still make perfect sense. I think the Battletome really over stresses their connection to the Forest and the song to try and stress whats unique about the faction. This does give you the impression that they are a very inhuman and bizarre faction; but they're no more outlandish than the Ents. But, really, they aren't that weird or bi polar.

Sylvaneth are definitely Order because they represent life and nature. These are good things. Theres a part of the faction called the Outcasts which are evil and represent the Destructive side of Nature but essentially they are still a force for order. Most of their army like Alarielle, the Treelords, Revanents are described as peaceful, noble and basically good guys.

You could maybe argue that the Outcasts belong with the Horde...I mean Destruction, but they're more simply putting the bestial (but not Beastmen) factions together in one place. But that's a stretch.

I do agree that Order needs to be subdivided though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Dark Elves might be tied to the Slannesh storyline and end up as part of Chaos.

Simple spelling fix..
Order... should just be Other.

In all honesty, KoW's even simpler system of Good, Neutral and Evil fits easier.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

In all honesty, KoW's even simpler system of Good, Neutral and Evil fits easier.

Not as copy rightable.

I think that what would make the most sense to me would be to have the current factions as they are, and then throw in a neutral Mercenary faction on top of that.

Mercenaries would be available to all Grand Alliances and include things like Fyreslayers, Scourge Privateers, Ogors and so on.

The way I think about it is like this. The mortal realms during the age of myth was the status quo. Order armies wish to maintain that status quo. Good or evil has nothing to do with it. The other factions wish to upset that in some. Death want to end all life. Destruction just loves the joy of the fight. Chaos wishes to corrupt the realms in a variety of ways.

If you look at it like that all the factions make sense, even the dark elves. Even in the old world they were not interested in controlling the world, they just believed that the high elves had usurped their rightful position.

So I read up on the seraphon on the age of sigmar wiki. They leave it pretty vague if they are just made of magical energy and their old memories. The seraphon in the novel consider stormcast to be dreams of sigmar yet they are pretty real.

Or do they still live on their ships which make up constellations. Or maybe it's both? Or constellations are actually ship formations? hmmm.

Chikout wrote:
The way I think about it is like this. The mortal realms during the age of myth was the status quo. Order armies wish to maintain that status quo. Good or evil has nothing to do with it. The other factions wish to upset that in some. Death want to end all life. Destruction just loves the joy of the fight. Chaos wishes to corrupt the realms in a variety of ways.

If you look at it like that all the factions make sense, even the dark elves. Even in the old world they were not interested in controlling the world, they just believed that the high elves had usurped their rightful position.

All of this. Well put!

As for the Seraphon, I'll have a hunt but I'm pretty sure there's a reference to Seraphon coming apart in a shower of sparks and energy when killed.

I'm in the camp of thinking they're like the Doctor from Star Trek: Voyager (after he got his armband) - solid energy projections that are to all intents and purposes alive, real and sentient.

If you ask me, order is the only faction that currently has subfactions that raise an eyebrow... And even amongst those, it's mostly Dark Elves that are a bit out of place. Given how the lore says that Tyrion/Teclis/Malekith couldn't find any Aelfkind during the age of myth, I'm afraid they might just become legacy armies over time. (In any case, infighting amongst order isn't far fetched at all).

Chaos as a grand alliance makes perfect sense now the Horned rat has become the youngest member of the Pantheon. (Rivaling Gods and infighting aplenty).

Destruction makes perfect sense as a "hooligan" style faction with their own Gods who don't really crave power... but destruction/consumption. (Plenty of options for infighting though)

Death also makes sense to me with Nagash as their God (even if some doors are left open for infighting, like Flesh-eater courts, betrayal amongst the mortarchs,powerlust,...)

______________________________________________

The only thing that sometimes annoys me, is the very fractured subfactions right now. Some of them are a right mess (especially those that are supposed to be a subfaction, but can't even get battle-line units). Death is a particularly bad offender in this way. They should reduce the number of factions there to have it make more sense.

Deathmages for instance: why the hell are those a seperate faction... I would have lumped those in with deathwalkers. I think GW kind of dropped the ball on those. It would be way better if they cleaned it up a bit and possibly expand the range of some core "death archetypes".



Anyway, they are going to have to redo the general's handbook quite often if they want to clean up the mess a bit. I think they'll just continue doing what they are doing: makes battletomes for the stuff that does make sense... Although I still think they went too far with splitting up armies. The beastclaw raiders is an example of what I mean. it's a missed opportunity to just make ogors 1 subfaction, rather than desperately trying to split it up into smaller subfactions still.

If you ask me, order is the only faction that currently has subfactions that raise an eyebrow... And even amongst those, it's mostly Dark Elves that are a bit out of place. Given how the lore says that Tyrion/Teclis/Malekith couldn't find any Aelfkind during the age of myth, I'm afraid they might just become legacy armies over time. (In any case, infighting amongst order isn't far fetched at all).

They did however find Slaanesh, who is still full of Aelf souls, and Malekith's mother has some weird shadow army following her.. Might see some new types of dark elves.