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.

Has anyone in here played Age of Sigmar? Im a 40k player and wondering how fun Age of Sigmar is, everything i see says its awful and super simple to the point its boring and plays itself. Also how do the old units work? Under Age of Sigmar on GW website theres like a million models, i looked into dwarves and there are ones with their old base (im assuming old models) and ones with circle bases (im assuming new).

Thanks guys!

Age of Sigmar is fun. However, among old fantasy players there's a really polarized reaction so while there are those that loved it, there's also a lot of salt thrown around.

For a more positive vibe, you can visit http://www.tga.community/ which is a more AoS-centric forum.

If you don't want to go there, here's a quick rundown:

- The basic rules are free and the rules for models are free, download via pdfs on the website or the free iOS or Android app.

- the basic rules are simple 4 pages, but that's not to say that's all of it. Most of the special rules are written on the unit's warscroll (datasheet), so that lessens the need to go over the index and cross referencing of rules between various books like in 40K and 8th ed Fantasy.

- Battleplan (scenario) variations is what keeps the game from getting stale. There's a ton of them, but if you stick with matched play (tournament style rules), there's still 6 objective based scenarios that's still pretty good.

- Most points values for units are available separately via the General's Handbook. It's a must have if you want to play with points. Otherwise, you can mockup a list using http://www.scrollbuilder.com/

- Army building is pretty much anything within the same grand alliance. There are four: Order (Humans, Elves, Dwarfs, Lizardmen), Chaos (Daemons, Mortals, Skaven, Beastmen), Destruction (Orcs, Goblins, Ogres, Trolls, Giants), or Death (Vampires, Ghouls, Skeletons, Zombies).

- Before you invest, check if your local scene has anyone playing at all. Otherwise it's a pretty fun game. It's not the same as the old fantasy's rank and file games, but I personally think it's a better game than 40K.

If you are playing and enjoying 40K, there is a high chance you are going to enjoy AoS.

Dunno if its because of similar rules, company or just because 40K is in such bad state that any game is better/more enjoyable in comparison, but almost everyone I know who has enjoyed AoS comes from 40K.
Most of the people who don't like it are those who have played other games/have other games as their main wargame.

So give it a chance if you have the models, you may enjoy it .

As far as I can tell the hate for AoS comes mainly from 2 things.

1: The death of WFB. Many people loved the Old World and the game dearly. AoS is the face of the change.

2: The game was designed for a particular kind of player and for and/or with a particular mindset. It's about having epic battles/sagas with your models as the characters (for Jimmy, if you are familiar with psychographic profiles). Throw down great models and have a blast.
If that's not what you are looking for in a wargame it will not apeal to you. Some people don't seem to understand that something can be good even if not meant/enjoyed by them.

Finally the above 2 things combine, because WFB was not made for the same kind of wargamer as AoS is. That means that old WFB players had their world and game discontinued for something that does not appeal to them. Which sucks, but is not a reflection on AoS as a game.

If you enjoy 40k a lot the AoS is probably your kind of game.

 DarkBlack wrote:
As far as I can tell the hate for AoS comes mainly from 2 things.

1: The death of WFB. Many people loved the Old World and the game dearly. AoS is the face of the change.

2: The game was designed for a particular kind of player and for and/or with a particular mindset. It's about having epic battles/sagas with your models as the characters (for Jimmy, if you are familiar with psychographic profiles). Throw down great models and have a blast.
If that's not what you are looking for in a wargame it will not apeal to you. Some people don't seem to understand that something can be good even if not meant/enjoyed by them.

Finally the above 2 things combine, because WFB was not made for the same kind of wargamer as AoS is. That means that old WFB players had their world and game discontinued for something that does not appeal to them. Which sucks, but is not a reflection on AoS as a game.

If you enjoy 40k a lot the AoS is probably your kind of game.

Very true stuff, good post.

The bulk of the outcry against AoS comes (justifiably) from GW killing off WHFB for it; as well as the game's dreadful launch, which compounded the previous point with a broken ruleset that didn't even provide a matchmaking system outside of "throw everything you own onto the table."

While the first part is somewhat regrettable, GW has actually managed to do a surprisingly decent job of overhauling the rules with the General's Handbook, providing scenario and point-based play systems and other expanded content. The ruleset is simple and easy to use compared to 40k (and 8th ed WHFB), allowing you to spend more time focusing on actually playing against your opponent, and less time earning your rules lawyering degree.

That said, AoS is not without its own legitimate drawbacks. While the smaller-scaled skirmishes of AoS create a much lower barrier for entry, WHFB vets who preferred the large-scale rank battles of old were pretty much left out to dry (it's not all bad though, Total War: Warhammer is pretty much the best version of WHFB there could ever be). Additionally, unit stat lines can feel a bit homogenous. Moreover, while the game's balance is certainly some of the best GW's managed to put out (every unit being capable of potentially being able to kill any other in the game helps a lot with this), it's definitely not going to win any awards in that field either (this might be more of a testament to how incompetent GW's writers and 'testers' are).

So, all that said, you might like it. You might not. If you were looking for a continuation of WHFB, you'll find it on Steam instead. But if you don't mind something a little different that manages to discard decades of built up glut for something more intimate in scale and approachable, it might be worth a try.

I'll give you my rundown of the pros and cons, coming from someone that has been doing whfb and 40k since the mid 90s:

Why I like Age of Sigmar
1) the rules are much simpler and I don't have to memorize a 300 page rulebook and all of its permutations.

2) the rules for everything are free and available online, in an app, or in battle tomes.

3) the flow of the game resembles how in my head a battle would look... kind of like the Total War series.

4) I like how Battleshock works, where instead of a unit just outright disappearing to failed morale, you lose a little here and there (how I'd expect it to be)

5) I like how anything can hurt anything. I really dislike hard counter game play where people figure out that certain units can only be hurt by certain things, so they max out on those.

6) I like how the magic system works. Its simple and easy.

Things I don't like about AOS
1) Summoning. Before the GHB it was busted. After the GHB its not very effective and no one I know uses it.

2) Shooting into combat. I don't mind shooting into combat as a concept. I mind shooting into combat giving no penalties, and how magically only the enemy gets hurt by it. Drop a church on a swirling melee? No problem. Only the enemy gets hurt. Kills my immersion.

3) Characters being able to be readily picked out by shooting. I don't like death stars. In fact I truly hate death stars. However... in fiction and movies our heroes lead from the front. In AOS, your heroes cower and hide in the back because the entire enemy army can target them and kill them in shooting.

4) The GHB point system. Its not a major dislike, but I dislike the lack of balance in a lot of items and how a few battalions are priced so cheaply for what they do. I preferred fan point systems that seemed to be closer to balance and were updated regularly. The GHB system *may* get an annual update, but playing with inferior points for a year is a year too long IMO.

The bell curve of power is a lot smoother than in 40k but it still bugs me.

Those are the big pros and cons off the top of my head that impact me personally.

My main goal of playing wargames today is telling stories and immersion.

1) Summoning. Before the GHB it was busted. After the GHB its not very effective and no one I know uses it.

You know I've been thinking about trying a Wizard Tax.. A wizard, based upon how powerful it is (cost) can cast XXX points worth of summoning.

As a result, Wizards would be able to summon troops without being able to summon massive amounts. However this may bring back WHFB's old "You need a caster to compete" meta.. Definitely needs tuning but I've yet to see much else that would work well enough aside.

How do the old models play in? Do they work fine?

Physically - just as fine to me.

Rules-wise, the tomb kings are pretty powerful. The other factions that don't yet have up to date rules are probably at about a 10-15% disadvantage on average based on the current point costs.

They also lack their own command traits, spells, and campaign upgrades, but that is where pretty much every faction save for sylvaneth and tzeentch lie right now.

After reading and debating in numerous posts about games, the answer is, it depends. What kind of game are you looking for? How old are you? The reason I say that, is in a few cases, it seems younger people 25 or at least under 40 or younger, like more "in depth, lots of charts special rules etc" while the older people like a more "steam line version of a game.

Are you familiar with X-wing by any chance? If so, I would compare Age of Sigmar is like X-wing. Few pages of rules to learn (4 page pamphlet + Generals Handbook) as in easy to learn right away and not be overwhelmed. But when you want more complexity or depth, you can add to it at your leisure and pace. I would say Age of Sigmar has as much depth as 40K but it's not all in your face.

Basically you get into it slowly. Not like 40K BAM! there is your 2000 point army and you need to know how everything works.

Maybe because I am older now, less time to learn things, but I like how I don't have volumes of books that I "need to know and learn" to play the game. I know how to move. I know how to shoot. I know how to attack. That is basically it. Now the great thing about Age of Sigmar is all those "volumes of books" that other gaming systems have are on the Warscrolls (or dataslates in 40K terms) of the army you want to play.

Now you don't have to worry about all these charts. Charts to hit, charts to wound, Charts to what ever. (not talking just 40K but other games where they use many charts for anything.) So pick the army you are interested in modeling, painting and playing with. All the depth are in the warscrolls. Someone here on Dakka has taken the time to take these FREE warscrolls (there are free on the GW site and Age of Sigmar app) and collected them so we can print them out. Even better, he made them so you can cut them out and now have cards I put them in plastic sleeves.

So now instead of having a 100+ page rule book, your codex or more and other supplements in order to play a game, all you have in front of you is your Battletome or Alliance book (the 4 page rules are included in all of them for reference) and or Generals handbook and just your warscrolls/cards infront of you to play with. No more looking on page 43 then go to page 87 back to page 55 in the rule book then refrencing your codex on page 86 then to page 75 and back to the rule book page 99. Everything you need is ON THE WARSCROLLS/CARDS.

For some people, they need the 300+ pages of books for a game to be fun. For others they don't. It all depends on what you want.

I guess one thing 40K does have is rules to be TFG and you can get away with it because "it's in the rules, so I can do so." There is not so much of this here. You know what a rules lawyer is correct? Well you don't have that here in Age of Sigmar, or at least I never seen that word mentioned very much in any Age of Sigmar thread. That can be another reason why a lot of people don't like Age of Sigmar. You don't have to "study" before taking the "test". In other words you don't need to read many special rules, and charts and tables in order to play right away.

So long story short, what are you looking for in a game? What are you not looking for in a game?

Its a fair to middlin game. fairly mediocre. It can be alot of fun and lets you do alot of things other games dont, but it gets old fast. the most important thing is how is your local area? if its like here, dont bother,. if its like some other places, jump on it fast and get in some trial games, if possible, try out different armies before committing, It does not play like old warhammer used to. and some forces are better than they used to be. I found that my main army costs the same in AoS as it did in 8th edition, so in some ways the game can be cheaper, in others its not. It moves like 40k, but I wouldnt consider it a skirmish the way I would malifaux.

It's a nice, switch from 40k I equate it to a beer and pretzel game. My personal look on it is like this, ignore the lore for now it's a bloody mess, pick the army that looks the coolest, take range, and just have fun. It's a total brawl game, just dive in and hack and slash.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
It's a nice, switch from 40k I equate it to a beer and pretzel game. My personal look on it is like this, ignore the lore for now it's a bloody mess, pick the army that looks the coolest, take range, and just have fun. It's a total brawl game, just dive in and hack and slash.

Disregard this comment, it's more than that.

If you want to get out a good hang on what the game is about check on the requisities of list building. I think this article will give you plenty of insights on what the game is about and what makes an ideal list (or how to counter them. )

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/01/starting-age-of-sigmar-basic-list-building.html

*edit* I thought I was in a 40K forum. Ooops.

It is a pretty fun game in my opinion. Much better than 40K at the moment. It still has some issues, most relating to how strong shooting is and how easy it is to snipe out characters and screw over armies that rely heavily on characters to buff units. Overall though it is good but like any other GW game really wants you to modify it to suit your playing group and a lot of the ugly flaws come to light when you treated as a pick up and play game

Lord Kragan wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
It's a nice, switch from 40k I equate it to a beer and pretzel game. My personal look on it is like this, ignore the lore for now it's a bloody mess, pick the army that looks the coolest, take range, and just have fun. It's a total brawl game, just dive in and hack and slash.

Disregard this comment, it's more than that.

If you want to get out a good hang on what the game is about check on the requisities of list building. I think this article will give you plenty of insights on what the game is about and what makes an ideal list (or how to counter them. )

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/01/starting-age-of-sigmar-basic-list-building.html

I say! good sir! I spoke of AoS in a good light aside from the lore.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Lord Kragan wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
It's a nice, switch from 40k I equate it to a beer and pretzel game. My personal look on it is like this, ignore the lore for now it's a bloody mess, pick the army that looks the coolest, take range, and just have fun. It's a total brawl game, just dive in and hack and slash.

Disregard this comment, it's more than that.

If you want to get out a good hang on what the game is about check on the requisities of list building. I think this article will give you plenty of insights on what the game is about and what makes an ideal list (or how to counter them. )

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/01/starting-age-of-sigmar-basic-list-building.html

I say! good sir! I spoke of AoS in a good light aside from the lore.

Not saying you spoke badly of it. I'm saying it's more than a hack-and-slash game. And lore... yes, let's be honest the beginning was a frigging mess. But I think we are starting to be on part with old world quality with the last books (from FEC and onwards)

I will totally love AoS if the bring it into a point where the old world is pretty much re established in a mid fantasy setting, where sigmarines and such make their appearances.

That said imo again so just my view, AoS is more about who can get their wombo off first. Does my rock beat your rock, most of the time. Lot less tactic and planning required, outside of I should activate this before that.

Still fun game and really like the way of doing the armies where you can if you want do just "chaos" or you can do "khorne bloodhound."

Lord Kragan wrote:
But I think we are starting to be on part with old world quality with the last books (from FEC and onwards)

What is FEC? I can't figure it out.

Flesh Eater Courts

Ghouls or, in truth, poor sods who were left stranded in the other realms as the age of chaos loomed on. Tainted by Ushoran, many of them became delusional madman, believing themselves to be bretonnian-esque knights and kings and fighting for the poor and fending off vile monsters (read: slaughtering poor sods that bumped with them and eating them) in order to survive the many dangers of the Age of chaos.

Lord Kragan wrote:
Ghouls or, in truth, poor sods who were left stranded in the other realms as the age of chaos loomed on. Tainted by Ushoran, many of them became delusional madman, believing themselves to be bretonnian-esque knights and kings and fighting for the poor and fending off vile monsters (read: slaughtering poor sods that bumped with them and eating them) in order to survive the many dangers of the Age of chaos.

Quite right, my good man. The noble courts are indeed good-hearted folk, ever vigilant against vile monsters and brigands that sully the land.

Wait, Ushoran (from the Warhammer Fantasy world) is around in Age of Sigmar? Dig Nagash just magically recreate all the vampires he knew from the old days? Does it ever explain how Manfred and the other Mortarchs are around after the end of the world?

Albino Squirrel wrote:
Wait, Ushoran (from the Warhammer Fantasy world) is around in Age of Sigmar? Dig Nagash just magically recreate all the vampires he knew from the old days? Does it ever explain how Manfred and the other Mortarchs are around after the end of the world?

Ushoran (the rot-skinned king, and many more titles now) is a bit of an oddity since he falls on the cathegory of dudes that managed to survive via being sent into the void as the world went KAPUM!

Now, plenty of vampires were recreated by his magic (since he had the souls at hand). It's explained that Mannfred and Neferata had been resurrected because they were useful tools.

Lord Kragan wrote:

Albino Squirrel wrote:
Wait, Ushoran (from the Warhammer Fantasy world) is around in Age of Sigmar? Dig Nagash just magically recreate all the vampires he knew from the old days? Does it ever explain how Manfred and the other Mortarchs are around after the end of the world?

Ushoran (the rot-skinned king, and many more titles now) is a bit of an oddity since he falls on the cathegory of dudes that managed to survive via being sent into the void as the world went KAPUM!

Now, plenty of vampires were recreated by his magic (since he had the souls at hand). It's explained that Mannfred and Neferata had been resurrected because they were useful tools.

Pretty much the only factions with returning characters is Death and Chaos for obvious reasons since both sources have control well over Death, Nagash's relationship with mannfred is kinda strange, well not strange but interesting he bought neferata and mannfred back because they counter balance each other and Arkhan is well Arkhan. Plus I personally enjoy the relationship between Mannfred and Arkhan in end times and AOS it was one of my favorite bits.

Also krell is around somewhere according to the grand alliance Death tome what's interesting the characters he bought back are those where his shadow hanged over them the heaviest in the warhammer world.