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.

Could be wrong here but AoS 2.0 seems to be the age of magic.

I specifically took 3 Venators and Judicators because I wanted to remove hero’s. Isn’t that the point - knowing what to get rid of to make it easier for you play the game and win?

I see 2.0 as making the magic using hero’s even more survivable to throw even more big spells because you won’t be able to take them out.

I am hoping Khorne Daemons are the anti-magic horde they should be as well as dispossessed and fyreslayers.

We shall see how it shakes out but I would venture the ballistas sell like gold until GH 2019 comes out and nerfs them.

 akaean wrote:


Age of Sigmar only included the classic armies on release as an olive branch to players to ease the transition, however it is increasingly clear that these armies don't fit the art and theme direction GW has chosen to go. As much as it pains me.

Empire must die to make room for Stormcast.
Greenskinz must die to make room for Iron Jaws
Wood Elves must die to make room for Sylvanath

The Games Workshop era of classic fantasy ranked infantry is over. Its time for GW to cut the cord, let Fantasy finally rest in peace, and let Age of Sigmar grow without carrying around a bunch of dead lines that don't match its art direction.

But this doesn't apply to all lines. Seraphon fit perfectly into AoS, as do Skaven. All the old Chaos stuff goes great alongside the new things. Even the old Tomb Kings line would work alongside Legion of Nagash models. Witch Elves work fantastically with Daughters of Khaine.

There is room for more grounded stuff in AoS. Free Guild fighting alongside Stormcast works both thematically and aesthetically. Yes, they have a different aesthetic to the Stormcast, but that in itself is a good thing, since it helps to contrast the Stormcast, making them feel larger and more powerful than the mere mortals around them. One of the themes of AoS is the world dragging itself back from the conquest of Chaos, so it makes sense for there to be older looking things with new stuff fighting around it.

Slipspace wrote:

Yes, those things made sense in WH because the lore had been built up naturally over time and seemed to operate on some form of internal logic (most of the time, anyway). The background felt a lot more organic in the Old World whereas the AoS lore feels very manufactured and disjointed to many people. The Deepkin are a good example of the problem I have with AoS lore in fact. Yes, they explain how they can fight on land, but it's not a particularly satisfactory explanation. It seems to have come out of nowhere and been done purely to allow these models to appear on the tabletop. GW aren't exploring the lore of the world they've created, they're making it up as they go along to sell models. I think that's my main problem with the setting and why I say it doesn't feel organic or natural. It's all so...contrived.

So again, because WHFB had more time than AoS the lore made sense? Shocker. Trust me, let's go back to 1985 and read some of the WHFB lore, I bet it's not as great as you're remembering.

I dunno about WHFB, but I am glad 40k moved on from Inquisitor Obiwan Sherlock Clousseau.
That said, I think it is fair to compare WHFB as it was when it ended to AoS as we have it now because AoS is the replacement and there's no point replacing something good with something crap saying 'don't worry, it'll be better than the old one once we establish it'.
Fact is we're comparing what we had to what we have.

 jreilly89 wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Yes, those things made sense in WH because the lore had been built up naturally over time and seemed to operate on some form of internal logic (most of the time, anyway). The background felt a lot more organic in the Old World whereas the AoS lore feels very manufactured and disjointed to many people. The Deepkin are a good example of the problem I have with AoS lore in fact. Yes, they explain how they can fight on land, but it's not a particularly satisfactory explanation. It seems to have come out of nowhere and been done purely to allow these models to appear on the tabletop. GW aren't exploring the lore of the world they've created, they're making it up as they go along to sell models. I think that's my main problem with the setting and why I say it doesn't feel organic or natural. It's all so...contrived.

So again, because WHFB had more time than AoS the lore made sense? Shocker. Trust me, let's go back to 1985 and read some of the WHFB lore, I bet it's not as great as you're remembering.

Of course all the lore in WHFB wasn't brilliant all the time and there are some pretty silly parts to it, mostly from the early days when the lore wasn't fully established and there were a lot of in-jokes scattered throughout the background. The difference, I think, is that WH's fluff was built up more naturally and was more grounded despite its fantastical setting. It could be broadly understood by anyone with a vague understanding of fantasy tropes, while having enough of its own spin on things to make it distinctive. My problem with AoS is there are a few too many things that, to me, are just really, really contrived (Dwarves in airships and magic balloon jump packs and an entire race of sea-dwelling elves who fight on land because they bring the sea with them are two prime examples). They look weird (in a bad way) and fall way outside that series of fantasy tropes that provides just enough familiarity to get people hooked.

The problem is, we're dealing with the AoS fluff as it exists now. Yes, that's an unfair comparison with a game that had 30 years to build its background, but that's the situation GW created for themselves so you can hardly blame the gamers for complaining about it. Also, lore can make sense without years of backstory to draw upon. In fact, the less of it there is the more consistent it should be and the more sense it should make. Additionally, the general direction he fluff is going seems to be more fantastical and overblown. That's fine if you like that sort of thing but I think it's a turn-off for a lot of people.

 jonolikespie wrote:
I dunno about WHFB, but I am glad 40k moved on from Inquisitor Obiwan Sherlock Clousseau.
That said, I think it is fair to compare WHFB as it was when it ended to AoS as we have it now because AoS is the replacement and there's no point replacing something good with something crap saying 'don't worry, it'll be better than the old one once we establish it'.
Fact is we're comparing what we had to what we have.

What we had was the same issue I had with 40k's lore. It was 10+ years of "Nothing happened". There were minor skirmishes, but not real story progress, no real victories or losses. My favorite thing about the End Times was "hey, some actual story development". And I think it is fair to say "Wait a bit for AoS lore to get good" because they spent a year trying to retrofit 40 years of WHFB lore with the new world.

I agree. I like that things are moving forward now.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
I dunno about WHFB, but I am glad 40k moved on from Inquisitor Obiwan Sherlock Clousseau.
That said, I think it is fair to compare WHFB as it was when it ended to AoS as we have it now because AoS is the replacement and there's no point replacing something good with something crap saying 'don't worry, it'll be better than the old one once we establish it'.
Fact is we're comparing what we had to what we have.

What we had was the same issue I had with 40k's lore. It was 10+ years of "Nothing happened". There were minor skirmishes, but not real story progress, no real victories or losses. My favorite thing about the End Times was "hey, some actual story development". And I think it is fair to say "Wait a bit for AoS lore to get good" because they spent a year trying to retrofit 40 years of WHFB lore with the new world.

I wouldn't call it development. That implies thought went into it.

It shouldn't take a year to do that. They should have had an idea of how to do that from day 1 especially seeing as most of it was just destroyed.

Slipspace wrote:

Of course all the lore in WHFB wasn't brilliant all the time and there are some pretty silly parts to it, mostly from the early days when the lore wasn't fully established and there were a lot of in-jokes scattered throughout the background. The difference, I think, is that WH's fluff was built up more naturally and was more grounded despite its fantastical setting. It could be broadly understood by anyone with a vague understanding of fantasy tropes, while having enough of its own spin on things to make it distinctive. My problem with AoS is there are a few too many things that, to me, are just really, really contrived (Dwarves in airships and magic balloon jump packs and an entire race of sea-dwelling elves who fight on land because they bring the sea with them are two prime examples). They look weird (in a bad way) and fall way outside that series of fantasy tropes that provides just enough familiarity to get people hooked.

Again, I whole heartedly disagree. It's refreshing to move on to a new setting after years of fantasy tropes. I like Orcs, Grots, and Dwarves as much as the next guy, but if that's all they were turning out I probably never would have gotten into AoS. And we'll just have to disagree on the contrived parts, unless you want to admit the really silly parts of WHFB (Book of Grudges, anyone?)

The problem is, we're dealing with the AoS fluff as it exists now. Yes, that's an unfair comparison with a game that had 30 years to build its background, but that's the situation GW created for themselves so you can hardly blame the gamers for complaining about it. Also, lore can make sense without years of backstory to draw upon. In fact, the less of it there is the more consistent it should be and the more sense it should make. Additionally, the general direction he fluff is going seems to be more fantastical and overblown. That's fine if you like that sort of thing but I think it's a turn-off for a lot of people.

Again, literal gods walking the earth to destroy the world (End Times), but AoS is too overblown? I'll concede, if the setting's not for you, cool. But I for one am glad we're moving into uncharted waters rather than "New Dwarves with subtle differences and different colored Orcs"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pm713 wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
I dunno about WHFB, but I am glad 40k moved on from Inquisitor Obiwan Sherlock Clousseau.
That said, I think it is fair to compare WHFB as it was when it ended to AoS as we have it now because AoS is the replacement and there's no point replacing something good with something crap saying 'don't worry, it'll be better than the old one once we establish it'.
Fact is we're comparing what we had to what we have.

What we had was the same issue I had with 40k's lore. It was 10+ years of "Nothing happened". There were minor skirmishes, but not real story progress, no real victories or losses. My favorite thing about the End Times was "hey, some actual story development". And I think it is fair to say "Wait a bit for AoS lore to get good" because they spent a year trying to retrofit 40 years of WHFB lore with the new world.

I wouldn't call it development. That implies thought went into it.

Oh wow, how long it take you to come up with that sick reply?

It shouldn't take a year to do that. They should have had an idea of how to do that from day 1 especially seeing as most of it was just destroyed.

Retconning 40+ years of story into a whole new setting? Yeah, sure buddy.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Again, literal gods walking the earth to destroy the world (End Times), but AoS is too overblown? I'll concede, if the setting's not for you, cool. But I for one am glad we're moving into uncharted waters rather than "New Dwarves with subtle differences and different colored Orcs"

Well actually I thought End Times fluff was pretty too with the whole power rangers team up magical incarnations crap

End TImes was an atrocity of writing.

40 years of writing is easy to deal with when it's "Some people used to live in a different world. Chaos blew it up and space made Sigmar magical." If AoS was a continuation rather than a 'setting' built on the bones of a better world then I'd agree it's complicated to move on but here we are.

People, as much as I love the warhammer fantasy universe, you are trying to say that it was "better" because it was more "mundane" and "grounded" in reality, when AoS it is not.

But thats not a matter of being better or worse, is a matter of being absolutely different universes in intentionality. AoS is more similar to Nordic Mithology or the universe of Magic: The Gathering. Trying to say that people understood WHFB better than AoS because it as more Tolkien-like fantasy is saying that all fantasy should be equal and follow the same tropes, when it shouldn't.

People has no problems understanding how Magic: The Gathering works. Its just a different kind of fantasy universe.

Now, we can ask "Should have GW killed a tolkien-esque fantasy universe to replace it with a totally different, much more magical and element based, fantasy universe?" but thats a totally different thing.

Again I'll jump on my humble little soapbox and say I call WHFB better not because I subjectively like gritty realistic fantasy better than grand mythological stuff, but because the stuff that came with AoS at launch was silly, vague, and there was so little of it.


That said I'm sure it's gotten better as it's developed and they're certainly starting to fill in the blanks but because the game hasn't actually hooked me and got me into it I've only seen snippets of the new stuff. Stuff like Nagash feeling ripped off about the souls that're supposed to be going to him is cool, whatever the hell Malerion is though just seems stupid though and still hasn't been explained very well going by the wiki.

Oh yeah I don't disagree at the moment of launch AoS has fluff in the more lax of the meaning of the word.

Thats why I said that, if you really want to read about the universe, pick up this new rulebook, and read it. This is, at last, the universe of AoS. All new stuff, coherent, condensed. This fells like a complete package, what should have been released first.

 jonolikespie wrote:
Again I'll jump on my humble little soapbox and say I call WHFB better not because I subjectively like gritty realistic fantasy better than grand mythological stuff, but because the stuff that came with AoS at launch was silly, vague, and there was so little of it.


That said I'm sure it's gotten better as it's developed and they're certainly starting to fill in the blanks but because the game hasn't actually hooked me and got me into it I've only seen snippets of the new stuff.

And this is a big part, I think, of why they did the short stories for Malign Portents like they did. Too many people just ignore the fluff or those trying to explain it to them. Concepts get distorted and corrupted.

Look at the Eidolons of Mathlaan for an example. Early on, we had people summing it up as an "avatar of Mathlaan, like Khaine gets". We had people summing it up as "there's 2 types and they can swap like Morathi".

In both instances, that's not true. The Eidolons are closer to the concept of a Tulpa than they are an avatar. The Idoneth unleash souls from their soulbanks, and the souls coalesce into the form that the Idoneth imagine Mathlaan to have taken. The Aspect it takes varies based upon the Idoneth themselves.

Stuff like Nagash feeling ripped off about the souls that're supposed to be going to him is cool, whatever the hell Malerion is though just seems stupid though and still hasn't been explained very well going by the wiki.

Malerion himself hasn't really been explained in any real, significant detail. All we know is that he controls Ulgu and is treated as an equal by Sigmar and Tyrion and Teclis, and that the angrier he gets the more tangible he becomes. I get the impression that him manifesting properly will not be a good day for someone.

Some things are just poorly explained though. Idoneth need other souls to live. Souls are defined as the life force of a being. So why do Idoneth have a big bank full of souls that they could just be using? Surely they don't need an endless supply of Eidolons at all times so why not leave enough souls in the bank to summon one and basically recycle the other souls?

Why are some gods so much bigger than others? I understand why Nagash got so much stronger after End Times but not how Sigmar went from a guy to god to the biggest best god of the setting.

So many unanswered questions....

Not everything needs an answer. Most mythologies don't go into exacting detail strangely enough and when you do get answers, they tend to be weirder than the questions.

You don't ask for example why Thor's goats regen each day after he eats them or how Loki got himself pregnant and gave birth to a six legged horse. And a lot of AoS is treated as myth, hell a part of it's age is called The Age of Myth.

 jreilly89 wrote:

So again, because WHFB had more time than AoS the lore made sense? Shocker. Trust me, let's go back to 1985 and read some of the WHFB lore, I bet it's not as great as you're remembering.

You'd probably be surprised! AoS is now 3 years old. WFB first edition came out in 1983. The second edition came out in 1984 which provided the basis of a lot of early including the Slaan, incursions of Chaos, the Empire and so forth. Three years in (1986) you also had the introduction of one of the iconic characters of WFB, H. Kemmler in Terror of the Lichemaster expansion. On top of this you also had WFRP first edition and the start of the very well received The Enemy Within Campaign (which is well worth a read even without being into RPGs). WFB background was expanded quite quickly early on and some of it was really quite attractive.

Yes I'm quite old!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
Not everything needs an answer. Most mythologies don't go into exacting detail strangely enough and when you do get answers, they tend to be weirder than the questions.

You don't ask for example why Thor's goats regen each day after he eats them or how Loki got himself pregnant and gave birth to a six legged horse.

Well, with respect to Loki; changed into a Mare and seduced a giant's stallion as a way of stalling him from completing his work to complete Asgard as a way of them avoid having to pay the giant the Sun, Moon and the goddess Freya (apparently). The stallion impregnated Loki though in the process.

I am well aware. My fiance is Norwegian and very much into her mythology. But the point still stands, not everything needs an answer and exacting detail. That in fact tends to ruin more settings than it helps.

Yeah, I actually agree that one of the coolest things of a setting is to let a ton of things unanswered.

Not things like "Whats the ritual of passage into adulthood of ogres?" because, you know, thats actually usefull to know and interesting, but things like "How did this God come to being?". It is a God, a lack of information about him its part of the point.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
Not everything needs an answer. Most mythologies don't go into exacting detail strangely enough and when you do get answers, they tend to be weirder than the questions.

You don't ask for example why Thor's goats regen each day after he eats them or how Loki got himself pregnant and gave birth to a six legged horse. And a lot of AoS is treated as myth, hell a part of it's age is called The Age of Myth.

You don't need answers for everything but you do need answers for plot holes. Idoneth need souls desperately enough to raid everyone around for them but also so little that they can store up an excess of them. Things like that need covering, that's good writing. Things like a detailed history of Gork and Mork and the exact value of each soul are examples of things you don't need to cover.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
I am well aware. My fiance is Norwegian and very much into her mythology. But the point still stands, not everything needs an answer and exacting detail. That in fact tends to ruin more settings than it helps.

You can probably understand the confusion though when an example is given to reinforce a point, but which is really the opposite to the point you were trying to make (i.e. the background for Loki is explained even though it was argued as an example for why you don't need to explain the background).

pm713 wrote:
Some things are just poorly explained though. Idoneth need other souls to live. Souls are defined as the life force of a being. So why do Idoneth have a big bank full of souls that they could just be using? Surely they don't need an endless supply of Eidolons at all times so why not leave enough souls in the bank to summon one and basically recycle the other souls?

The 'soul banks' are used to issue souls to Namarti. They're also used to create Eidolons. They're basically the Soulstones of Ulthuan or the system that Athel Loren had--or even simpler description, Infinity Circuits. The more powerful a soul was, the more soulstuff can be extracted from it to infuse Namarti.

Any other questions or are you going to actually read some fluff rather than complain about it and talk about your fanfic?

 Kanluwen wrote:
Any other questions or are you going to actually read some fluff rather than complain about it and talk about your fanfic?

Yeah is Sigmar's city in the realm of heavens in space or not I swear I have seen both artwork of it being like on a mountaintop reaching for the stars and then of it as like an orbital space station built around a sun or something

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Any other questions or are you going to actually read some fluff rather than complain about it and talk about your fanfic?

Yeah is Sigmar's city in the realm of heavens in space or not I swear I have seen both artwork of it being like on a mountaintop reaching for the stars and then of it as like an orbital space station built around a sun or something

Different things - http://whfb.lexicanum.com/wiki/Realm_of_Azyr

See Azyrheim and Sigmaron

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Any other questions or are you going to actually read some fluff rather than complain about it and talk about your fanfic?

Yeah is Sigmar's city in the realm of heavens in space or not I swear I have seen both artwork of it being like on a mountaintop reaching for the stars and then of it as like an orbital space station built around a sun or something

So, like Mr. Morden says, it's two different locations.

Azyrheim is the city--that's the mountains and whatnot.
The other, if I remember correctly, is basically where Sigmar has his own special supersecret fort and it's built around the core of the World That Was.

The latter part may be changing with the new fluff or being expounded upon.

 Kanluwen wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Some things are just poorly explained though. Idoneth need other souls to live. Souls are defined as the life force of a being. So why do Idoneth have a big bank full of souls that they could just be using? Surely they don't need an endless supply of Eidolons at all times so why not leave enough souls in the bank to summon one and basically recycle the other souls?

The 'soul banks' are used to issue souls to Namarti. They're also used to create Eidolons. They're basically the Soulstones of Ulthuan or the system that Athel Loren had--or even simpler description, Infinity Circuits. The more powerful a soul was, the more soulstuff can be extracted from it to infuse Namarti.

Any other questions or are you going to actually read some fluff rather than complain about it and talk about your fanfic?

Why so rude?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Any other questions or are you going to actually read some fluff rather than complain about it and talk about your fanfic?

Yeah is Sigmar's city in the realm of heavens in space or not I swear I have seen both artwork of it being like on a mountaintop reaching for the stars and then of it as like an orbital space station built around a sun or something

So, like Mr. Morden says, it's two different locations.

Azyrheim is the city--that's the mountains and whatnot.
The other, if I remember correctly, is basically where Sigmar has his own special supersecret fort and it's built around the core of the World That Was.

The latter part may be changing with the new fluff or being expounded upon.

Thanks, actually, that was something that alwys confused me too

pm713 wrote:
Idoneth need souls desperately enough to raid everyone around for them but also so little that they can store up an excess of them.

I mean... that's a lot like saying "People need money desperately enough to spend most of their lives working, but also so little that they can accumulate savings." In general, if you need something, it's always a good idea to stockpile more of that thing than you immediately need if possible. Souls are wealth in Idoneth terms (they even store them in banks!), so the ones who raid the most just want to be as wealthy as they can. I'm not sure it really needs more explanation than that?

Edit: A deeper mystery for me is why "might makes right" allegiances like the Idoneth and the Daughters of Khaine are part of Order, rather than Destruction. If anyone has a good in-world explanation for that, I'd be curious to hear it.

I think Order might be best defined as opposition to Chaos. So the Indoneth and the Daughters of Khaine could be order purely out of their opposition to Slaanesh.

Though I also think they really do have orderly societies. They may end up being stratified and not just, but certainly orderly.