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.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Vasarto wrote:
If it was not for the "space marines" in a mother fething FANTASY setting, I would like this game,

They have a Greek god motif going on, looking like the god of war, Ares. The gold coloring mixed with spiked halo is a bit reminiscent of Helios, the sun god. The masks they all wear are not unlike the dramatic masks the Greeks used to wear when representing the gods in their plays. The lightning symbols draws comparisons to Zeus. Although the warhammers and idea of warrior Gods fighting off an apocalypse seem more Norse to me. So it is a mix of influences.

So your mother fething FANTASY setting remains unperturbed by the inclusion of distinctly thematic, fantasy elements.

There are so many things wrong with it I have heard about that I will never actually play it....just paint the one kit for it I got.

Hey man. that's entirely your choice to make. I think you are wrong about some things, or at the very least, by taking an overly pessimistic view on the game, aren't allowing yourself a fair chance to enjoy the game. But you don't have to enjoy something if you don't want to. I think it is pretty nifty though. Even the mustache rule.

Is the mustache rule still cool if a girl happens to have that army?

 Vasarto wrote:

Is the mustache rule still cool if a girl happens to have that army?

I'm sorry, but I find having one's knickers in a twist over those rules really, really stupid and I often ask those people to re-think their lives as they obviously seem to not have bigger problems in their lives. It's obvious that those few odd rules were made "for the lulz" as a funny, silly send-off for the legacy armies (Sigmarines, Sylvaneth or Khornites don't have such rules and I believe Pestilens skaven don't have them either) and if you don't like it just act like that's a fixed bonus for your units or ignore it altogether if that's yours and your opponent's conclusion. If a girl gets worked up over the beard rule for dwarfs or moustache rule for Empire then, I'm sorry, but she's being stupid. It is obvious that they aren't supposed to be treated seriously, so reactions like that only make that person look unreasonable.

So, yeah, those rules are nifty and fun. They go along well with the casual beer and pretzels fun that AoS aspires to be. If you don't like it, house rule it. Noone with a brain is going to treat those rules seriously so you can always come to some conclusion with your opponent.

RoperPG wrote:

 tydrace wrote:
Saw a couple of Age of Sigmar games this weekend. The second game, the Ogre played won before the other player got its first turn due to Sudden Death (Ogres had less models).

Both players still agreed the first match was fun, but that wouldn't want to use the Sudden Death rules anymore.

What, how? Two of the conditions require playing until at least turn 4 and if you picked something close to the Ogre battleline as your 'kill this' option, that's hardly the rules' problem!
If you don't like Sudden Death but don't want to houserule too much, most of the scenarios in the books ignore it as a victory condition.

I remember there's also a way to break the game by taking Nagash. If you take him and only him and get first turn, you can summon some 160 skeletons minimum instantly. Not sure whether it's actually allowed, but there ya go.

 Vasarto wrote:
Is the mustache rule still cool if a girl happens to have that army?

Does it say that it has to be a real mustache? Wear a fake mustache or draw one on your finger and hold it up to your nose. Grab some greasepaint and pull a Groucho. Heck, just hold a pencil between your upper lips and your nose. Glue a caterpillar to your face. Go nuts.

The way I see it, you can have fun and enjoy a game with rules like that or you can be a whiny little bitch about it, sucking all the joy from the room with your swirling vortex of cheerless, woebegone melancholy. Personally, I find games more entertaining when people don't actively avoid playing with me.

CoreCommander wrote:
I've just introduced AoS to a friend of mine as I was very interested in the reaction of a person that has never played a miniatures game before. So, what's his background:

1. Has played some boardgames - 3 to be precise: Star Realms, Death Angel and Twilight Struggle. Of the three, he prefers Star Realms 99% of the time.

2. Mostly plays PC games in his spare time. A couple of years ago he was heavily invested in DoW2 so I suppose that he has some vision for himself how a warhammer 40k battle should look or feel.

His feedback on AoS was that the game seems to be quick and dynamic. He didn't have problems learning the rules and he didn't have any questions about them. Overall he likes them, but right off the bat he suggested that we should tweak them a little as to make them more reasonable (for him). He thought that each player could only choose one type of attack with any single unit (ranged or melee), that the battle phases should not be locked in order and that players should alternate in activating units. All units should still be allowed only one phase of a type per round (so a unit can't move twice for example). For example:
1. Jim moves his unit A
2. Bob shoots with his unit B
3 Jim assaults with his unit A
4. Bob moves his unit C
etc.

What was interesting for me is that:

1. The player had ZERO problems with tweaking the rules to his liking. I suspect that have they been longer he wouldn't have wanted to. Right now he sees that units can shoot, run, move and assault and is thinking how could these 4 simple actions be arranged so that the game feel right to him.

2. Other players that I have played with, in times past, will not try the game under any circumstances or will try it only to prove their point that it is a "bad" game (what would be a "good" game is another topic). No one was willing to tweak the rules and all were adamant that should the game be played it must be played as is. They see neither possibility for growth nor anything interesting to them in AoS. The players I'm talking about played 40k at some point in the past and then moved to Warmahordes, Infinity and Malifaux.

This is nothing new for any of you, I suppose, but I thought that another comparison between "new" and "old" players' reactions is in tone with the topic. Take it as you want.

That's nice, but pickup games and house rules don't generally go well together. I used to play pickup games of chess at lunch time. If I had to learn new rules for every person I played, I would never have bothered. I don't have time for such nonsense, and I don't find such behavior enjoyable. If you do, well that's great for you. But if a game requires house rules to be fun, then that implies to me that the rules are poorly designed from the outset.

 Vasarto wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:
think it is pretty nifty though. Even the mustache rule.

Is the mustache rule still cool if a girl happens to have that army?

Absolutely.


And that doesn't even get into the beards and mustaches one can buy on Amazon (by RAW, the mustache only need be present, not necessarily naturally-grown).

I like aos

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Space Mariens are merely superhumans in pauldrons. So are Sigmarines. That's the way GW wrote them.

We've lived with that SM imagery for over 25 years, so it's going to be a bit difficult to let go.

I dunno man the writers are writing them differently compared to space marines in my opinion.

They are superhumans that get killed by blunted weapons, make camps because they actually tire like warriors, superhumans who also feel horror, despair and literally cry about their lost memories and loved ones and mind you some of them went running after the illusions of their old loved ones charging right into the line of khorne axes dying in the process. Oh and a stormcast vomiting through his helmet upon seeing a GUO. Even the stormhost obessed with vengeance against chaos their leader showed sympathy to a chaos warrior he killed upon seeing his face.

Book spoilers marking




The Hallowed knights/Celestial Vindicators stormhosts are my favorites considering the events of the book in the warstorm. The reason why I find stormcast more interesting is because even though the reforging process messed up their memories somewhat their memories are "still" there and dealing with all those old memories resurfacing these warriors are not children/teenagers grown and made into weapons like space marines.

But men, women and of all races not aligned to chaos who have lost families, homes and loved ones and want to push back the tide of chaos hell the leader of the Hallow knights stormhost



Hence why many of them prefer not the die even though they get reforged is because they end up losing the most valuable thing they have left, the memories of their past. Let's not also forget the process slightly murdering their emotions slowly turning them into a robot the more times they die. Plus the stronger the stormcast the longer it takes for the forging to complete.

Yeah design wise people can talk to the cows come home about how similar they look to space marines but personality wise? How they act? In my opinion the are pretty much nothing like space marines they act pretty human in opinion. In eyes after reading the books they are just the good/order version of chaos warriors. Hell one stormhost just view sigmar as a man who rose to power hence why they try to keep themselves from bowing in his presence. (sigmar does not mind this either)

Well this is my opinion on the subject and as with all opinions you are free to disagree with me.

 argonak wrote:

That's nice, but pickup games and house rules don't generally go well together. I used to play pickup games of chess at lunch time. If I had to learn new rules for every person I played, I would never have bothered. I don't have time for such nonsense, and I don't find such behavior enjoyable. If you do, well that's great for you. But if a game requires house rules to be fun, then that implies to me that the rules are poorly designed from the outset.

To be more exact, the game didn't require any additional rules to be fun to the new player. It was O.K. for him as it was. He just thought it would be better if we tweaked it. I can say the same for 40k or other games that I play that have much more detailed rules than AoS. The fun part for the new player comes from the cool factor in the warscrolls. The core rules themselves are malleable.

To clarify (as I didn't say if I like the game or not in my previous post) - I don't find the game to be an unequaled masterpiece. In fact I used to think very poorly of it, but I've grown kind of fond of it. Now I think it is just an O.K. introductory game to mini-wargaming and GW's lore/miniatures. It certainly lacks detail compared to other games, but on the other hand I managed to sell it to a person who's a fan of 40k lore. I tried to get him into 40k, but the learning curve kind of put him off.

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
I like aos

Same here. Positive mood. Even strict 40k players started AoS. Only some Fantasy vets are still cautious.

 Klerych wrote:
If a girl gets worked up over the beard rule for dwarfs or moustache rule for Empire then, I'm sorry, but she's being stupid. It is obvious that they aren't supposed to be treated seriously, so reactions like that only make that person look unreasonable.

The beard rule is not a good look for the game. The subtext to it is that they either didn't consider that a woman might be playing or they didn't care enough to take it into consideration. After reading the rule I came to the same justification as other players, above - it doesn't say the beard has to be real. Heck, it doesn't say you have to be wearing it, either. Start collecting the beards of your enemies and forge them into a super-beard. But all that's after the fact justification for a rule from a developer that has historically gone out of their way to exclude women with all sorts of "girls are icky" fluff (see: orcs, space marines, dwarves. I played a dwarf engineer in Warhammer Online. She was great and I had a great time. Later I found out there were players who thought my being able to play her was the worst thing to ever happen to Warhammer.)

I guess what I'm saying is please don't get overemotional about it. It's only a rule. It's okay if people think it's dumb and say so.

~

I've played all of the six scenarios in the starter book now. In the sixth one we added Skarr Bloodwrath and the Judicators to the armies from the starter. I think it is becoming very apparent that Age of Sigmar is best played with a ton of terrain and that the terrain has to actually restrict movement in some way. The "Warmachine Table" terrain style does not work here. I think you probably also really need to use the terrain setup rules to give the terrain more character - they don't say you have to roll on the table, just pick rules for them. There are also lots of special rules - the scenery battlescrolls have rules for things like "Walls", for instance. I think it's essential to use the rules provided for terrain to avoid the dreaded scrum in the middle of the table phenomenon.

The sixth scenario in the book is a showdown where the goal is to kill the enemy general with your general. In our game, this caused the game to begin with a redshirt massacre and then a clash between the two generals, supported by the (pretty fearsome) characters in their army. At the end of the combat phase, one was left with two wounds remaining and the other with one! The next combat phase saw a victory for Vandus Hammerhand, Stormcast Lord-Celestant, who struck down Korghos Khul with one wound remaining (by causing one unsaved wound in the combat phase). Just like in the book!!! It was really dramatic! Good job, Age of Sigmar!

So far my main complaint is dice rolling content. Too much time is spent rolling dice and rerolling dice! I think we are going to attempt a technological solution to this problem.

There is also too much flipping between warscrolls, especially ones in different places. I definitely think some kind of improved reference format is required here. Cards would have been nice - the warscrolls are pretty, and they're fine for book entries, but there should be a more concise format for tabletop play.

I guess what I'm saying is please don't get overemotional about it. It's only a rule. It's okay if people think it's dumb and say so.

Let me guess your not female? I would have no problem with the stupid rules, if there were also rules that work for female players too.

Cards would have been nice - the warscrolls are pretty, and they're fine for book entries, but there should be a more concise format for tabletop play.

Agreed they seem to have missed several tricks here - printed colour card packs of "armies" would have been a good seller - at least to everyone I know playing the game.

Works well for WM/H, Malifuax and others..........

Makumba wrote:

I guess what I'm saying is please don't get overemotional about it. It's only a rule. It's okay if people think it's dumb and say so.

Let me guess your not female? I would have no problem with the stupid rules, if there were also rules that work for female players too.

Bad guess.

ETA: I think perhaps you have misread me. It's not female players who I think should "not get overemotional." It's people who get extremely upset whenever anyone says something (like that rule) is kinda messed up. Hope that helps clarify!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I wonder if it would be possible to legally make cards? It seems like stats would probably be okay but maybe not reprinting the rules text verbatim. Summary ones should be alright, at least for the warscrolls that are freely available?

Cards would be massive. I'd buy cards for pretty much every single unit that ever came out, whether I owned them or not. They would help so much on the battlefield. Too much page flipping with scrolls, hard to remember everything.

 HiveFleetPlastic wrote:
I wonder if it would be possible to legally make cards? It seems like stats would probably be okay but maybe not reprinting the rules text verbatim. Summary ones should be alright, at least for the warscrolls that are freely available?

I think most (all?) of the warscrolls fit on a single page in a PDF file, so you could just print them out at 50% scale, four to a page. The text would be a bit small, though I doubt there'd be any problems of legality.

+1 for cards, but from a business stand point they'd be tricky.
1st, due to the limited space you'd have to produce native language versions. Not a massive issue, but a consideration.
Doing them as singles in the boxes wouldn't necessarily work for this reason.
2nd, because of the first reason, you'd have to do them as 'packs' - but this causes problems because (using Stormcasts as an example) while you could do it for existing units, we already know that there is another Prosecutor variant in the pipeline, the Ghal Maraz book makes mention of two units (Command Temple and Hunter-Assassins) that we haven't seen pics of yet, and there's indications of a possible big gribbly in the pipeline, meaning the packs would have to be constantly updated.

The only other option is web-only individual orders, which would have all kind of logistic nightmares attached to them.

Still, fingers crossed...

RoperPG wrote:
1st, due to the limited space you'd have to produce native language versions. Not a massive issue, but a consideration.

Actually, that's probably a pretty massive issue. I don't know how they do it in the unit packs, but the scenery I've purchased had the rules in five different languages (as did the assembly instructions for the the AoS box set). My guess is that GW does a lot of business in European non-English speaking countries, and it would be problematic to package each product in fully localized versions. This means they'd have to include 5 cards with each unit (potentially much more - don't the Prosecutors come in three varieties in a single box, so 15 cards?), of which the extras would just be additional cost as played throw them out. And we all know how GW feels about additional costs.

It's possible that once the armies are more complete, they could release faction decks, but it depends on the release style for the armies. Are they going to just release armies as one big chunk, infrequently, or will they continue to add to old armies at a constant rate? From what I've seen, they intend to do a lot of story-based, limited time models, so faction decks may not be possible either.

Frankly, the app is the best solution, and it would be great if it worked on older iOS equipment, or I could get it from the Amazon store for my Kindle, but I'm SOL.

The only other option is web-only individual orders, which would have all kind of logistic nightmares attached to them.

That's how Privateer Press currently does upgrade cards for Warmachine MKII. I recently had to order about 40 cards for my various MKI units at a cost of 50 cents a piece. Not bad, except when you consider the $5 shipping fee. I'd be pissed if I had to pay $5.50 for a single missing card.

CoreCommander wrote:

What was interesting for me is that:

1. The player had ZERO problems with tweaking the rules to his liking. I suspect that have they been longer he wouldn't have wanted to. Right now he sees that units can shoot, run, move and assault and is thinking how could these 4 simple actions be arranged so that the game feel right to him.

2. Other players that I have played with, in times past, will not try the game under any circumstances or will try it only to prove their point that it is a "bad" game (what would be a "good" game is another topic). No one was willing to tweak the rules and all were adamant that should the game be played it must be played as is. They see neither possibility for growth nor anything interesting to them in AoS. The players I'm talking about played 40k at some point in the past and then moved to Warmahordes, Infinity and Malifaux.

This is nothing new for any of you, I suppose, but I thought that another comparison between "new" and "old" players' reactions is in tone with the topic. Take it as you want.

I have no problems with tweaking rules that I don't like to the betterment of my group's experience. What I have a problem with is HAVING to tweak many of the rules just from the get go to get the game to what I would like it to be. As such I will just play something else. This isn't specific to AoS either. I havetried tons of different mini games in my day that I just didn't like the rules for so moved on to something else and no one cared. It is only within the bounds of GW players that people get offended when someone says that one of their games or the company itself has even the slightest negative issues about it. I play games I like and when AoS was announced hoped that maybe it would rekindle my interest in fantasy. After the release that was a No. Such is life and I won't lose any sleep over it and will keep playing the other stuff I enjoy.

I am really intrigued that coming in completely cold even this total mini-gaming newb saw how annoying the I GO-YOU GO turn process is. He had some good insights and ideas right from the start. All he needs is a bit of a discussion with other gamers to find a game that actually already fits the bill of what he would like to see and he would likely move on from AoS too.

We have never had issues with house rules for pick up games. Though with my 40k House rules they take up one side of a sheet of paper and that is with art.
I just printed a few copies and laminated them to hand out to see if my opponent wants to use them. If there are any they don't want to use we cross them off with a dry erase marker and don't use them.
One guy commented that he was not realy into 'House Rules', but because they were easy to read and I had made an effort to make them easily available he did not have any issues with them.

 Skriker wrote:

I am really intrigued that coming in completely cold even this total mini-gaming newb saw how annoying the I GO-YOU GO turn process is. He had some good insights and ideas right from the start. All he needs is a bit of a discussion with other gamers to find a game that actually already fits the bill of what he would like to see and he would likely move on from AoS too.

I was also surprised by his feedback to tell you. I'm guilty of belonging to the latter group of gamers and years of playing games by the rules with no tweaking whatsoever has left me a bit dry on ideas. My changes would've been based on games that I know to work well - it seems I've become lazy and will just try to borrow the rule that most closely does what I want from somewhere else (I'd even search for such a rule in systems I don't play). My post was more about how a completely new player, unburdened by any frameworks imposed to him by other games, would react to a mostly "empty" (compared to other games) system, than trying to show that AoS is a good system. I still think it is a good introductory experience, but as you said I've been preparing him for other games (DZC for example).

 Skriker wrote:

I am really intrigued that coming in completely cold even this total mini-gaming newb saw how annoying the I GO-YOU GO turn process is.

AoS is a hybrid. The movement/shooting/charge phases are I-Go-U-Go, but the combat phase is alternating (with some maneuvering through pile in) and both players perform battle shock every turn. I like that, as it gives you the ability to coordinate some grander strategy with your units, while still having combat be more immediate and reactive.

I was enjoying a few games of AoS, until my local group all decided to adopt a specific comp which kills summoning. That's half the reason I played again.

 krodarklorr wrote:
I was enjoying a few games of AoS, until my local group all decided to adopt a specific comp which kills summoning. That's half the reason I played again.

Yeah, I suppose that would tint it somewhat. No game is fun when you're against TFG.

A lot of people would argue it is TFG who likes unlimited summoning.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
A lot of people would argue it is TFG who likes unlimited summoning.

Unlimited summoning is part of the game. Hands down.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
A lot of people would argue it is TFG who likes unlimited summoning.

I don't summon unlimited. I enjoy moderate amounts of summoning, like extra Warriors or extra archers here and there, nothing crazy. I don't even own that many warriors. I just dislike the fact that simply because I also own Arkhan and Nagash, they want to nerf summoning, even though I don't want to use them in particular. A normal Liche priest summoning is not that scary.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
A lot of people would argue it is TFG who likes unlimited summoning.

Maybe I'm just being dumb, but in most games literally stopping people from playing is somewhat dickish. MTG control players, for example.

Makumba wrote:

I guess what I'm saying is please don't get overemotional about it. It's only a rule. It's okay if people think it's dumb and say so.

Let me guess your not female? I would have no problem with the stupid rules, if there were also rules that work for female players too.

You know, it's easier to come up with a rule about moustache for renaissance knights or beards for dwarfs, but what would you cast as a feminine rule? Who has bigger breasts? Curvier body? That's sexualizing. Has more make-up on? Sound slaaneshy, tbh. Be able to name at least seven different shades of some colour? See, it's not that easy - beards and moustaches are just tropes for those things based on history and precursors of the genre. What'd be the feminine trope that fits the era? Who cooks better? Who does better laundry? That's awfully sexist. Maybe wearing a dress? But that's still dodgy, what if she wears a skirt or shorts/pants? It's hard to find a feminine trait that can be used as an idea for a funny rule without being offensive and you can't blame GW for including one in their game. Maybe they even tried and failed, we'll never know.

Makeup or items of jewelry would be comparable.

Not touching the rest of your post.