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.

I'm definitely getting it, and I've been off GW for years now.

Relatively quick, pick up style game, that caters to a more competitive gamer crowd, with awesome sculpts and low model count, in a fantasy setting?

Ticked every box

No.

Simply because GW has been putting out one off games like this for years and they ALWAYS fall flat, have bad rules, lose support, and are forgotton.

The orginal warhammer quest was a legendary game. The new release "silver tower" is already forgotten.

I'm turned off by possibly having to buy warbands I'm not interested in so I can get cards I want, but the BatReps I've seen have me excited. It's all going to depend on the price of the extra warbands and how vital the extra cards are. If each warband box contains the latest broken card, I'll skip the game. If the cards are useful, but not essential, I'm in.

Pancakey wrote:
No.

Simply because GW has been putting out one off games like this for years and they ALWAYS fall flat, have bad rules, lose support, and are forgotton.

The orginal warhammer quest was a legendary game. The new release "silver tower" is already forgotten.

There's so much wrong with this statement. We DO know the ruleset by and large at this point and the unanimous affirmation it is that it's a GOOD game and that it's going to have a ton of support.

I like silver tower and still play it! So you know, that is also false.

Pancakey wrote:
No.

Simply because GW has been putting out one off games like this for years and they ALWAYS fall flat, have bad rules, lose support, and are forgotton.

The orginal warhammer quest was a legendary game. The new release "silver tower" is already forgotten.

You've never played Gorechosen, have you?

Anyway, yes I will definitely be playing it. I think I've enjoyed all the AoS boxed games as of now, so this one should be promising too.

Pancakey wrote:

Simply because GW has been putting out one off games like this for years and they ALWAYS fall flat, have bad rules, lose support, and are forgotton.

People actually have the game and have reviewed it, and the rules are well known and considered good. As for support, we've seen existing copies of the first two warband expansions (there are unboxing videos) with four more announced (Stormcast, Blood Warriors, Skaven, Fyreslayers). Personally, I'm hoping that the fact that it is called Warhammer Underworlds: Shadespire means that they are planning additional expansions down the line not in Shadespire.

The orginal warhammer quest was a legendary game. The new release "silver tower" is already forgotten.

WHQ had a second big box game (Shadows of Hammerfal), not to mention two hero box sets and a physical card expansion (which is apparently no longer around). Also, according to one of those NOVA (I think) threads, WHQ will be getting something else "soon". I think the launch of 40k 8th pretty much stalled everything else that was in development (AoS has been hurting this year, IMO), but I think it'll start improving in January. I think WHQ was intended to be a one off game, but its popularity forced GW to rethink that and maybe dedicate some actual resources to it long term.

Also, Blood Bowl has good rules, good support, and is anything but forgotten.

Lately their "one off" games have been quite good, but they aren't intended to be supported long term. They are one-off games. You're meant to play through it, then be done with it so you can buy the next one.

Shadespire is a little different, since obviously they plan on supporting it in the short term by releasing several warbands. After the initial 8 warbands are out, who knows. If it hasn't done well, maybe they'll be done. If it's popular, maybe they'll do another starter set of Warhammer Underworlds: Somewhere Else, with a new story, probably some updated main rules, and a new batch of warbands.

their one of games IMO are mediocre, not bad, not good, just bland and meh. I havent considered any of the rules associated with AoS to be "good" so much as "good enough" Silver tower was fun the first 2 times, got boring as hell really fast.

 thekingofkings wrote:
their one of games IMO are mediocre, not bad, not good, just bland and meh. I havent considered any of the rules associated with AoS to be "good" so much as "good enough" Silver tower was fun the first 2 times, got boring as hell really fast.

I thought gorechosen was pretty good for a stand alone game, especially for one that was just an excuse to discount some models. I still play it occasionally.

motski wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
their one of games IMO are mediocre, not bad, not good, just bland and meh. I havent considered any of the rules associated with AoS to be "good" so much as "good enough" Silver tower was fun the first 2 times, got boring as hell really fast.

I thought gorechosen was pretty good for a stand alone game, especially for one that was just an excuse to discount some models. I still play it occasionally.

the khorne thing made me really shy away from that one.

I really want to try Shadespire, but I just don't have the time or money to expand into something new at this point. Sure, I can change where my hobby budget goes, but I just don't have the mental faculties to get into a new game, especially if I'm trying to get Narrative campaigns going locally.

I hope it's good though, and that it sells well. I am liking this "new" GW. They are making good decisions lately, for the most part.

Im open to it if they ever release a warband Im interested in. (not renaissance German free people, or at least a good ol fashioned mortals of tzeentch or slaanesh warbands)

Watch It Played is one of my favorite board game channels.
Here's Rodney Smith's overview of how the game plays.
One thing I really like about his demos is that he lets the viewers form their own opinion just by viewing the mechanics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBcTk4Azndo

I plan on giving it a shot. I think it is fair to question the depth of GW's commitment to its board game releases, though. And following the X-Wing model of trying to boost sales of things people may not want via the cards included route. It sucked buying a ship just for a card in X-Wing; same for buying a warband just to get a good card.

 totalfailure wrote:
I plan on giving it a shot. I think it is fair to question the depth of GW's commitment to its board game releases, though. And following the X-Wing model of trying to boost sales of things people may not want via the cards included route. It sucked buying a ship just for a card in X-Wing; same for buying a warband just to get a good card.

IF it hits that magic profit, I think they will support it well. If not, its one and done. The scale of the game is good for intro into AoS setting and concepts, the board just really makes me cringe.

What about the board makes you cringe?

 privateer4hire wrote:
What about the board makes you cringe?

Fair question, honestly in general, the concept of shadespire as a "boardgame". I think it could have been the skirmish game that skirmish wanted to be (2nd coming of mordheim) . But since it does have a board, I dont like the sameness that a board this style will give to each game (maybe if they had or develop some kind of tiles like battletech does) The look and design, I really am put off by it. Shadespire itself is a ruined city in a desert, the board doesnt really make me see that, looks more 40kish to me. I think it would be better with buildings to go into (even if they are 2d) much like the old boards for Cadwallon. If you are going to use a 2d board with huge hexes. the games will fast become "be on these hexes to win" kinda thing. If I could find a way to make this game work without a board.. I would be all over it.

If my friends are interested in playing I'll give it a go. I like what I've seen about the setting, and Silver Tower was pretty fun, so this is probably worth a shot. It's not a priority for me, though: there's lots of hobby stuff I'd rather spend money on first.

 thekingofkings wrote:

 privateer4hire wrote:
What about the board makes you cringe?

Fair question, honestly in general, the concept of shadespire as a "boardgame". I think it could have been the skirmish game that skirmish wanted to be (2nd coming of mordheim) . But since it does have a board, I dont like the sameness that a board this style will give to each game (maybe if they had or develop some kind of tiles like battletech does) The look and design, I really am put off by it. Shadespire itself is a ruined city in a desert, the board doesnt really make me see that, looks more 40kish to me. I think it would be better with buildings to go into (even if they are 2d) much like the old boards for Cadwallon. If you are going to use a 2d board with huge hexes. the games will fast become "be on these hexes to win" kinda thing. If I could find a way to make this game work without a board.. I would be all over it.

Gotcha. I think GW are using Shadespire as an honest to goodness attempt at playing in FFG's backyard.
They are packaging models with cards that require you to buy the set or miss out on this/that upgrade you may want for your collection.
As somebody who was initially very excited about the game, my interest is cooling.
The more i watch videos, the more I'm seeing too much FFG in the game.
It seems it will be more popular with the cutthroat crowd.
If netlisting an entire 40k army is a thing, imagine how easy it will be with 3-7 figures and cards with known effects.

I may still buy in but will probably avoid the organized play if it's picked up locally.

 privateer4hire wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:

 privateer4hire wrote:
What about the board makes you cringe?

Fair question, honestly in general, the concept of shadespire as a "boardgame". I think it could have been the skirmish game that skirmish wanted to be (2nd coming of mordheim) . But since it does have a board, I dont like the sameness that a board this style will give to each game (maybe if they had or develop some kind of tiles like battletech does) The look and design, I really am put off by it. Shadespire itself is a ruined city in a desert, the board doesnt really make me see that, looks more 40kish to me. I think it would be better with buildings to go into (even if they are 2d) much like the old boards for Cadwallon. If you are going to use a 2d board with huge hexes. the games will fast become "be on these hexes to win" kinda thing. If I could find a way to make this game work without a board.. I would be all over it.

Gotcha. I think GW are using Shadespire as an honest to goodness attempt at playing in FFG's backyard.
They are packaging models with cards that require you to buy the set or miss out on this/that upgrade you may want for your collection.
As somebody who was initially very excited about the game, my interest is cooling.
The more i watch videos, the more I'm seeing too much FFG in the game.
It seems it will be more popular with the cutthroat crowd.
If netlisting an entire 40k army is a thing, imagine how easy it will be with 3-7 figures and cards with known effects.

I may still buy in but will probably avoid the organized play if it's picked up locally.

With all these side games and "distractions", it makes me wonder whats going on with AoS, have they just stopped and started "buying time" with board games while working on 8th 40k or are they done with factions for AoS?

AoS seems to be doing just fine. They released GHB2, Firestorm campaign and even a surprise in the form of Blightwar, which IMHO was overpriced.

I really think Shadespire is their "oh, yeah?" to FFG.
Thing is, if they don't distribute and market it just right, it may do just as well as FFG's RuneWar miniature game----which I predict will be on FFG's webstie bargain sale as early as next Chriistmas.

 privateer4hire wrote:
AoS seems to be doing just fine. They released GHB2, Firestorm campaign and even a surprise in the form of Blightwar, which IMHO was overpriced.

I really think Shadespire is their "oh, yeah?" to FFG.
Thing is, if they don't distribute and market it just right, it may do just as well as FFG's RuneWar miniature game----which I predict will be on FFG's webstie bargain sale as early as next Chriistmas.

Runewars is already on it's third print run, so it's doing just fine.

So you're cooling to Shadespire because you're worried a "game first" offering from GW with a focus on organized play might be competitive? It always astounds me how GW has brainwashed people over the years with their poor game design and balance, convincing them that playing a game competitively is bad. Now GW has realized that they need to respond to the market, but their existing customer base is resistant. It's pretty crazy

No, I don't think we're going to have much of a local community for it sadly.

WUWU wrote:

 privateer4hire wrote:
AoS seems to be doing just fine. They released GHB2, Firestorm campaign and even a surprise in the form of Blightwar, which IMHO was overpriced.

I really think Shadespire is their "oh, yeah?" to FFG.
Thing is, if they don't distribute and market it just right, it may do just as well as FFG's RuneWar miniature game----which I predict will be on FFG's webstie bargain sale as early as next Chriistmas.

Runewars is already on it's third print run, so it's doing just fine.

So you're cooling to Shadespire because you're worried a "game first" offering from GW with a focus on organized play might be competitive? It always astounds me how GW has brainwashed people over the years with their poor game design and balance, convincing them that playing a game competitively is bad. Now GW has realized that they need to respond to the market, but their existing customer base is resistant. It's pretty crazy

Actually, me and the couple of other guys who play each other locally are outliers.
The rest of our FGS's community is MORE than happy to play competitively, call competition, all the time.

I think this might just be popular with those guys who seem to live for the purpose of tabling their opponent on the first or second turn with the latest power list.
They are more representative of the current GW players (note I'm a GW player but play with the very minority local group who are casual) that I've seen.
Competitive players are great for sales since they will buy and buy and buy---and that helps keep the FGS's lights on.

There's nothing wrong with that style of play but it's not my particular style of fun.

Someone should do this game but set in the world of Anchorman and all the teams are various news crews!

I hit a guy with a trident.

I'll admit my interest was piqued as I liked the idea of getting back into fantasy. However, the preview in this month's WD left me feeling a little flat on the concept so I'm in the no camp for now.

I don't think playing competitively is bad.

However I feel playing competitively all the time distills any game down to its min/max components, and I get burned out and bored with that approach very quickly.

I don't like shadespire because it looks like a form of magic the gathering.

I want to try it. I'm hoping that a friend gets it first so I can feel how the game plays. Then maybe I'll start collecting it.

I feel like it'll be like X-wing. I'll get factions that I don't need just to get the action cards... But hey, that's how you play competitive games like this.