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.

 Accolade wrote:

What the hell is the point of all of this IP wrangling? They do all this stuff, rename all of the things, and where does that get them? Is Kirby just so angry that he's having this done in a fit of rage while the designers keep saying "Sir, the other companies can still leech off of us!"

I think all the wrangling is just a result of GW not knowing anything about copyright or trademarks. Didn't their head of IP admit he didn't know what he was doing during the CHS case?

Remember, they hire for attitude, not skill.

Herzlos wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:

Which is why I think they're going for the easy targets now. The new rumoured dwarf name, what was it? Davikarr? That's a good piece of IP. Good in the sense that it's easy to protect. It's not like GW having Dwarfs as an army was causing them to lose money. But having Davikarr as an army actually increases their IP portfolio value. Or will, if the game catches on.

However, the CHS case showed that other companies can still use the term Davikarr in a description "i.e. Fully compatible with Games Workshop Davikarr", and their IP doesn't get much added to them unless they differ enough that people don't just regard them as dwarves with a strange name.

Just like the Astra Militarum didn't make any difference to the Imperial Guard.

But the new names do allow GW the right to sue someone that comes up with a novel named "Spots the Davikarr", so they really are protecting their IP!

Here's the catch. A third party reference to dwarves made by GW is generic enough to not be worth much. Everyone and their mother have dwarves in their product lines. A reference to Davikarr on the other hand directs all attention towards GW's brand.

It also creates a mental gap between GW's range of products and every other stunty making company.

Think of Mad Cat. There's a bunch of similar designs scattered across multiple IPs. And yet the name creates an instant link to one particular machine and one particular brand.

the_Armyman wrote:
No one noticed that the turn sequence changed from YGIG to unit activation? That's huge, if true.

Yes. I thought it was a good thing.

chiefbigredman wrote:The rules the guy stated in that giant post seem very similar to the lord of the rings rules, which are a good set of rules (just not super deep in my opinion)

Well, it's not like Warhammer was super deep either. Move-shoot/swing-hit-wound-save-oops-got-yer-flank with an awful lot of special rules and random tables crusted over the surface like so many cheap rhinestones.

NWansbutter wrote:However, the two things I really don't like and hope are not true is the abandonment of WS, BS, S, T, &c. as well as an abandonment of morale/psychology. Those two things were the #1 draws for me to Warhammer back in 1999 when I first took the plunge and bought the 5th edition starter box. To take away those two things would really gut the game for me because that's what set Warhammer apart.

Yeah, 'cos the rumour block mentioned stats that are totally different to WS, BS, S, T, Sv, Ld, etc., like Melee, Range, Might, Armour, Resolve...

agnosto wrote:What doesn't ring true for me is that the rumored rules seem to be a mishmash of other systems. Morale and "regenerating at the end of the turn" sounds like Nerve or whatever in Mantic's KoW.

'Cos keeping the unit together and rallying them to avoid destruction is completely different to what Ld was. (Whoa. You ever get that deja vú feeling?)

Boss Salvage wrote:Etc, etc, etc.

Curiously enough, I've recently been looking into the Of Gods and Mortals fantasy skirmish system, as I heard good things and if Fantasy heads that way, why not shop around? Anyway, this big wall of rumors sounds a whole lot like OGAM 2.0 - which would actually be really cool for OGAM, which IMO is a little too simple for my tastes as it is. But Warhams? I doubt it. Though the poster being German certainly adds some cred

(If you're curious about OGAM, this site is a pretty good place to get started.)

- Salvage

I've been meaning to add that to my library, but TBH I'm sitting on the edge of my seat, waiting for Dragon Rampant.

nudibranch wrote:

SinaLeibniz wrote:
The Inneadim have outposts in America.

No one talking 'bout this?

From what's said in the rumour block, and about the recent arrival of both Sigmar and Chaos, it seems Regalia isn't so much a bubble universe as a region on another world of the Old Ones, as yet untouched by Chaos (but that 'our guys' have just discovered) with continents arranged how they like. (Earthlike) It sounds a bit strange, but it's a convenient shorthand for the continent that matches real-world North America, and it'd be equally inaccurate to call it Naggaroth, 'cos on this new world there was no Morathi or Malekith; no Sundering; no centuries-long civil war; and froms the hints, not even any native elves.

Bottle wrote:These new rumours have me a little anxious. I have an Empire army and if my Empire army can no longer use gunpowder weapons or state troopers I guess that leaves me with my huntsmen, wizards and Knights :/

I have a little pool of money and GW vouchers set aside for AoS, and I do want to get into it because I chose WHFB to be the game I play in GWs and I have had lots of fun doing just that with my Empire dudes.

Oh, if only there was any other place licensed to host games of Warhammer, and some kind of worldwide communication network to keep in touch with local 8th ed fans...

NAVARRO wrote:Triangle bases are out - it's pentagons.

Makes sense, I mean GW created pentagons as we know them.

Nope, octagons! Surely it's obvious, as we all know the eight pointed star of Chaos is one of GW's most recognisable and original creations.

*cough*moorcock*cough*

That's not strictly true JohnHwangDD: Sure, SOME of their models are a bit crappy but they have come out with some awesome stuff too. I think most of this stems from us being spoilt with GW stuff (barring finecast of course).

I live in hope that some day they'll take (or improve) their Deadzone/Dreadball quality and revisit their fantasy ranges with it. Until then they can keep their chopstick elves, shaved apes dressed up as battle sisters, and dragon ducks.

Sarouan wrote:
Does that really surprise you? GW did that all the time. Their fans are still buying the "new rules" no matter what - because it's made by GW, so it must be awesome.

It was quite obvious to me when the End Times series came that it would not last long. Warhammer Battle is dead - long live Age of Sigmar!

That's what they were saying from the very beginning.

Yarp!

So, to me, all that "9th edition" is just nonsense. It's a new game, otherwise why change the name? Better to accept the fact Warhammer Battle is buried deep in the earth - like Epic, Mordheim, Bloodbowl, Warmaster, War of the Ring....

There's a bit of an Epic revival going on in two clubs over here.

kodos wrote:
No one told you to use their minis.
why has no one a problem with alternative minis for warhammer, but declines other rules just because he don't like how their minis look like?

therefore, GW makes the best rules but worst miniatures, because most players (I know) are looking for alternative minis but keep playing their games
(if it would be the other way around, everyone would GW minis with alternative rules)

Ha! QFT!

HobbyBox wrote:Also, I don't see them moving away from the 1-10 numbering system to a 1-6, lowest number being better for skills system.

What was any stat over 6 used for anyway, apart from leadership, one or two very fast elves and things, and the occasional superstrong monster?

A friend that plays Infinity says they use the lowest number is better system, but that is using a d20, not a d6, which leaves more room for rolls to be balanced.

Mayhem uses 'lowest number is better' for combat and shooting damage, using a whole range of dice from d4 to d20. That's an opposed roll rather than looking up results on a table, which might be a little better for that kind of thing, I dunno. (Though what if you flipped WFB's to hit and to wound tables?) But then the rumour block mentioned opposed rolls for AoS anyway.

It is hard to believe they depart that much from 40k and current WHFB stats system and going with something entirely different, especially if it is just lifting it from another game system.

There's nothing new under the sun. Most games these days use stats and mechanics that are similar to something else, often because the author liked how it worked. Even Warhammer wasn't cut from whole cloth. Don't doubt a game that has similarities to another; rather try it out, identify the groups of games with the types of mechanics you like, and have some confidence in any new or discovered game that sounds similar to your preferences.

Does anybody know how to check for trademarks? Would be quite easy to confirm some of these rumours if gw had trademarked the new names somewhere.

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmtext/

lets you search for trademarks by name. Have fun.

 Bull0 wrote:
https://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmtext/

lets you search for trademarks by name. Have fun.

So if they haven't done it yet could we trademark them instead, just in case

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
https://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmtext/

lets you search for trademarks by name. Have fun.

So if they haven't done it yet could we trademark them instead, just in case

That would be hailarious. but im sure there are things to stop people from just trademarking everything.

Also it wont stop GW. they will just send you a letter and hope it scares you away. unless you are some big corporation .

 Desubot wrote:


That would be hailarious. but im sure there are things to stop people from just trademarking everything.

No, you tradmark everything
To only thing to stop you is going to court and get the judge to decide that this is not legal

A company trademarked orange as background colour, or "hello" and everyone who printed it on T-shirts got a warning (until it was brought to court of course and the judge decided that hello can never be a legal trademark)

People can trademark things that other people are using, but ownership does not transfer. The companies that used the trademarks prior to the filing of the trademark can continue to use it indefinitely. Sometimes C&Ds still get sent, but the owner of a trademark does not get the rights to anything else by that name -nor the right to stop others from using it.

GameZone's Heroquest represents a weird misunderstanding of how this works.

 Vermis wrote:

There's nothing new under the sun. Most games these days use stats and mechanics that are similar to something else, often because the author liked how it worked. Even Warhammer wasn't cut from whole cloth. Don't doubt a game that has similarities to another; rather try it out, identify the groups of games with the types of mechanics you like, and have some confidence in any new or discovered game that sounds similar to your preferences.

Honestly, the systems that pick up steam tend to be ones that offer something new to players. New games survive based on the three main elements (fluff, mechanics and miniatures) and all three need to be both excellent and original. Players need to have a reason to play a new game instead of an older one (that they probably already have minis for).

So here's hoping Age of Sigmar offers original gameplay.

They offer new players the ability to pay the most money for a game out of all the competition tho.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
https://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmtext/

lets you search for trademarks by name. Have fun.

So if they haven't done it yet could we trademark them instead, just in case

If no paperwork has been filed yet, then it's not going to be. You want the trademarks to be live before the product goes live, so that a critical delay somewhere along the line doesn't screw you over.

 Boss Salvage wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Just like making up a whole new ruleset ...

Seriously dudes, it reads a lot like 'Of Gods and Mortals' combined with LotR and a little Fantasy. If he's making it up, it's not totally from scratch. And if this is how 9E is going to roll, then GeeDub isn't pulling these completely out of nowhere either - thankfully by all accounts OGAM is good fun?

- Salvage

If I want to play OGAM I'll go play OGAM.

 Vermis wrote:

HobbyBox wrote:Also, I don't see them moving away from the 1-10 numbering system to a 1-6, lowest number being better for skills system.

What was any stat over 6 used for anyway, apart from leadership, one or two very fast elves and things, and the occasional superstrong monster?

A friend that plays Infinity says they use the lowest number is better system, but that is using a d20, not a d6, which leaves more room for rolls to be balanced.

Mayhem uses 'lowest number is better' for combat and shooting damage, using a whole range of dice from d4 to d20. That's an opposed roll rather than looking up results on a table, which might be a little better for that kind of thing, I dunno. (Though what if you flipped WFB's to hit and to wound tables?) But then the rumour block mentioned opposed rolls for AoS anyway.

It is hard to believe they depart that much from 40k and current WHFB stats system and going with something entirely different, especially if it is just lifting it from another game system.

There's nothing new under the sun. Most games these days use stats and mechanics that are similar to something else, often because the author liked how it worked. Even Warhammer wasn't cut from whole cloth. Don't doubt a game that has similarities to another; rather try it out, identify the groups of games with the types of mechanics you like, and have some confidence in any new or discovered game that sounds similar to your preferences.

I agree in the current system the way they handled it, values over 6 don't make a ton of difference. And don't get me wrong, I know there are tons of different ways to handle the stats and the mechanics to resolve them and many of those IMO are better than GWs system.

Looking at GW, to me they like to think of their customers as GW Hobbyists that buy and paint and care about their models and play games as a secondary. I believe a lot of the reason they have two main systems (WHFB and 40k/30k) is that they want to be in those two main markets for tabletop gaming and if a player plays 40k and is looking to play a fantasy game, they want them to play the GW fantasy game and vice versa. In creating this new game, some of the wording that has gone out to stores is that this new game will attract new players to the line. Those will be people who are completely new to tabletop miniature gaming as well as people just new to a fantasy style game who maybe play 40k already.

If that is their main focus, I would think they would keep the basics of the systems similar. And if they are moving things to round bases and having formations be the same as 40k, it would make sense to me that statlines would stay in line with what current WHFB or 40k use now, so that people can find it easy to switch between the two games. That is the only reason why I don't see them going away from it. Doesn't have anything to do with thinking it is a superior system to everything (though I'm sure they believe it is ).

I guess, the rumors to me sounded like it was someone puzzling together bits and pieces from a bunch of systems and then welded it all together to form some mish-mash of a game (formations of 40k, unit cards like Warmahordes, and so on), which isn't necessarily how I think it would all come together as the games designers build it.

I know I could easily be wrong and if this rumor block is 100% true, I'm not going to completely write them off until I can read through the books myself and give the system a few games to see how it works overall. If it is a more fun game that takes a bit less time to play and is less cumbersome, I'm all for it - especially if it is a bit easier for newer players to buy into and start playing.

 Vulcan wrote:


If I want to play OGAM I'll go play OGAM.

And that's what I was saying. Especially with veteran gamers, if you want to get them into a new game, you need to offer them something new.

GW definitely did offer something new back in the day, and over time, the main feature that GW offers is the ability to go into any game store and pick up a game.

Now, I don't know about where you guys live, but around here, it is easy to get in pick up games of 40k or Warmachine/Hordes, but the Warhammer Fantasy crowd isn't so much thriving.

I expect that is true everywhere, and that's why GW is changing their game so drastically.

 SilverDevilfish wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
What's the problem with Nigmos?

Type Nigmo into Urban Dictionary and you'll see what the problem is.

Hint: There's a reason I'm not linking it.

And that pretty well discredits the whole thing as a fake.

 Vulcan wrote:

 SilverDevilfish wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
What's the problem with Nigmos?

Type Nigmo into Urban Dictionary and you'll see what the problem is.

Hint: There's a reason I'm not linking it.

And that pretty well discredits the whole thing as a fake.

Not sure why it's still so hotly debated.

1. Unknown, new poster
2. Odd racist undertones of Sigmar Missionaries fighting Chaos-Primitives in Africa
3. Racist slang terms as IP-names
4. Sad Panda says its bull
5. Darnok says its bull

I've never seen a rumour so thoroughly discredited. This one makes Larry Vela look like an investigative journalist.

R.I.P.

Well, hastings is backing it up.

 Vulcan wrote:

 SilverDevilfish wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
What's the problem with Nigmos?

Type Nigmo into Urban Dictionary and you'll see what the problem is.

Hint: There's a reason I'm not linking it.

And that pretty well discredits the whole thing as a fake.

Not necesarily. Its not a term that is used in the uk as far as I know, or if it is used in the uk anywhere, its certainly not common. Since GW is a uk company they may well call something a name that means something different in another country without even knowing.

zacharia wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 SilverDevilfish wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
What's the problem with Nigmos?

Type Nigmo into Urban Dictionary and you'll see what the problem is.

Hint: There's a reason I'm not linking it.

And that pretty well discredits the whole thing as a fake.

Not necesarily. Its not a term that is used in the uk as far as I know, or if it is used in the uk anywhere, its certainly not common. Since GW is a uk company they may well call something a name that means something different in another country without even knowing.

Still going to be endless jabs and jokes about it. if its true.

 pretre wrote:
Well, hastings is backing it up.

It is possible that someone in GW told them both the same thing. So they could both be unwitting pawns in GWs trolling game. I may have just revealed too much and must leave before GWinquisitorial stormtroopers smash in my door and/or window

How long does it take to write a rule set on this scale? And how long has James Hewitt worked for GW now?

James seemed like a gamer, not a drone, so if he has had a finger in it? Well that might be a bit of positivity.

Probably completely unrelated, but it just popped in to my head whilst I'm trying to find a entailed with Guild Ball stock.

 Desubot wrote:

 Pacific wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 SilverDevilfish wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
What's the problem with Nigmos?

Type Nigmo into Urban Dictionary and you'll see what the problem is.

Hint: There's a reason I'm not linking it.

oh my.....

.. that moves it towards 'fake' on the false/true swingometer I think !

Or it could be SO Fake that it must be true

Anyone else remember when Nintendo announced their new consul would be called the "Wii?"

 Vulcan wrote:

 Boss Salvage wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Just like making up a whole new ruleset ...

Seriously dudes, it reads a lot like 'Of Gods and Mortals' combined with LotR and a little Fantasy. If he's making it up, it's not totally from scratch. And if this is how 9E is going to roll, then GeeDub isn't pulling these completely out of nowhere either - thankfully by all accounts OGAM is good fun?

- Salvage

If I want to play OGAM I'll go play OGAM.

Qft!!

It also sounds like a really bad mash of LotR and world of borecrap, Like I said before, the fluff is what keeps me in the game, rules are a distant 3rd, so if the fluff is naff, the models will need to be amazing to make up for that, and if they carry on down the wow cartoony crap they have been churning out since the chaos deamon book came out years ago (deamon prince, bloodletters... All of it really) then that's another nail in the coffin, and last but not least GW's track record of rules writing is bad enough for me to be very worried about them writing a new ruleset.

Apprehensive is what I am, I was excited by end times and the prospect of 9th being a polished version of 8th, this doesn't sound good.

 pretre wrote:
Well, hastings is backing it up.

I thought Hastings clarified that there was a chance that his source(s) had been corrupted by the rumor?

Wonderwolf wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 SilverDevilfish wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
What's the problem with Nigmos?

Type Nigmo into Urban Dictionary and you'll see what the problem is.

Hint: There's a reason I'm not linking it.

And that pretty well discredits the whole thing as a fake.

Not sure why it's still so hotly debated.

1. Unknown, new poster
2. Odd racist undertones of Sigmar Missionaries fighting Chaos-Primitives in Africa
3. Racist slang terms as IP-names
4. Sad Panda says its bull
5. Darnok says its bull

I've never seen a rumour so thoroughly discredited. This one makes Larry Vela look like an investigative journalist.

R.I.P.

We've already been warned off discussing this "nigmo" crap any further, can you give it a rest? Urban Dictionary is not a reliable source.

Eumerin wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Well, hastings is backing it up.

I thought Hastings clarified that there was a chance that his source(s) had been corrupted by the rumor?

That's called hedging your bets.

I think rather than anyone being "wrong" there are 2 separate products here that are being merged into 1 topic.

Of course, the parts I am hearing about could just be rumour reverb from the post on Dakka???

 pretre wrote:

Eumerin wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Well, hastings is backing it up.

I thought Hastings clarified that there was a chance that his source(s) had been corrupted by the rumor?

That's called hedging your bets.

I think rather than anyone being "wrong" there are 2 separate products here that are being merged into 1 topic.

Of course, the parts I am hearing about could just be rumour reverb from the post on Dakka???

They fear you, Pretre. And for good reason!

Eumerin wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
https://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmtext/

lets you search for trademarks by name. Have fun.

So if they haven't done it yet could we trademark them instead, just in case

If no paperwork has been filed yet, then it's not going to be. You want the trademarks to be live before the product goes live, so that a critical delay somewhere along the line doesn't screw you over.

Depends on the country/system.

The US has a common law system, if you can show you've been using a mark and claiming it with a (TM) that's enough. You can pursue registration on the Federal or State level and get the (R) but it's more exensive and takes longer and you run the risk of being challenged and losing.

I think in the UK you have to register to get any protection.

 odinsgrandson wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 Pacific wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 SilverDevilfish wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
What's the problem with Nigmos?

Type Nigmo into Urban Dictionary and you'll see what the problem is.

Hint: There's a reason I'm not linking it.

oh my.....

.. that moves it towards 'fake' on the false/true swingometer I think !

Or it could be SO Fake that it must be true

Anyone else remember when Nintendo announced their new consul would be called the "Wii?"

A fair point, but at least that example is just a silly association with a word for a willy, and not... well...