Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan

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.

**Dawnbringer**

Yodhrin wrote:
If folk were using Perry historicals already odds are their primary concern is value rather than aesthetic or scale, so "but it's not as THE AWESUMZ as Sigmarine Superangels!" is unlikely to sway their purchasing habits.

Or maybe, just maybe they really do care about aesthetic and scale and just think GW can't be arsed to do either properly.

**streetsamurai**

Exactly, might only be fluff

**insaniak**

docdoom77 wrote:
If this is true, the 96 page rulebook is the important bit.

That doesn't actually say that the 96 page book is a rulebook.

No terrain. Not surprising, but kicks it out of the 'most awesome start set Games Workshop has ever produced' spot, IMO.

**streetsamurai**

Wonder what the price will be on this one.

**A Town Called Malus**

PLC wrote:
docdoom77 wrote:

If this is true, the 96 page rulebook is the important bit.

Crucially it is not called a rulebook....

Yeah, it's probably a black library short story or something.

**adamsouza**

streetsamurai wrote:
Wonder what the price will be on this one.

My best guess $115 (Dark Vengeance)
What I think it should be $100.
What I want it to be $75.

**agnosto**

The 96 page book is probably background and scenarios or the like.

Price? I'm guessing around $120-150 (USD).

**Aerethan**

And still not a damn word on how people are supposed to use all these damn models we have laying around for this new "system".

**agnosto**

Aerethan wrote:
And still not a damn word on how people are supposed to use all these damn models we have laying around for this new "system".

We're not, we're meant to buy all new models as they release them.

Wishful thinking that the 96 page book has army lists for all factions?

**adamsouza**

I know there is a ton of venom in this thread towards GW, but do you seriously think the 4 page quicksheet is all the rules they would include in a starter set ?

I'm pretty sure the 96 pages will encompass :
box contents
assembly instructions
how to play
fluff
pretty pictures
painting guide

**timetowaste85**

Should pay attention to the bit where "some of these models will fit in nicely with prior collections, while the Sigmarines will convince people to build a new force". Really suggests them keeping up with the current lines.

**Alpharius**

Warscrolls are coming soon - right?

**mikhaila**

Silent Puffin? wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:

How many companies really release their "beta rules to the public for fine tuning it feedback"?

Prodos.

Pathfinder RPG did a pretty successful job doing this. Wouldn't work for GW. They wouldn't listen to feedback.

**Kanluwen**

PLC wrote:
docdoom77 wrote:

If this is true, the 96 page rulebook is the important bit.

Crucially it is not called a rulebook....

Even more crucially?

The "four page rules sheet" lines up with the supposed leak from the German GW site, which referenced "Warscrolls" as free downloads as well..

**Mort**

It does sound more like the Sigmarites are NOT "Empire".

Sounds to me like they are a new/different faction entirely....

**insaniak**

adamsouza wrote:
I know there is a ton of venom in this thread towards GW, but do you seriously think the 4 page quicksheet is all the rules they would include in a starter set ?

Other than precedent, is there any particular reason to believe that they wouldn't do that, if they thought it might push add-on sales?

They wouldn't be the first company to release a condensed version of the rules with just enough detail to play with the starter set, and keep the full rulebook as an add-on sale.

**Accolade**

insaniak wrote:
adamsouza wrote:
I know there is a ton of venom in this thread towards GW, but do you seriously think the 4 page quicksheet is all the rules they would include in a starter set ?

Other than precedent, is there any particular reason to believe that they wouldn't do that, if they thought it might push add-on sales?

They wouldn't be the first company to release a condensed version of the rules with just enough detail to play with the starter set, and keep the full rulebook as an add-on sale.

Well, and could AoS as a game be as complicated as Space Hulk or Kill-Team, and therefore only require four pages? It seems that maybe this would be the mini-game you get with the models, and then since 9th is a whole separate thing you buy that rule book separately. It works as a way of selling a "game" per se, and nixing the whole mini-rule book option, something I'm sure GW is happy to have...er, fixed.

**agnosto**

Case in point. They sold just the mini rulebook, likely as a test case, months ago. I foresee two options (other than some limited edition nonsense) for full rules, $85 hard bound and $35 mini.

**Accolade**

agnosto wrote:
Case in point. They sold just the mini rulebook, likely as a test case, months ago. I foresee two options (other than some limited edition nonsense) for full rules, $85 hard bound and $35 mini.

Sure, what's an extra $35 between friends anyway? They didn't have any problem selling the rules for the Adeptus Mechanicus army for an extra $20 to get the whole set for that one army, so I think this plan would be in-line with the current business model.

**JohnHwangDD**

adamsouza wrote:
do you seriously think the 4 page quicksheet is all the rules they would include in a starter set ?

It very well could be if you don't need stuff like Magic, Ranks, Monsters, War Machines, Swarms, etc. 4 pages of core rules may well be enough.

Strip the game down to it's core of Move / Shoot / Fight, and move any unit-specific special rules to the unit description, and this could work just like the old 40k 2E datasheets.

**privateer4hire**

Yodhrin wrote:
privateer4hire wrote:
Howard A Treesong wrote:
There's a quite cynical air to these releases that gives the impression all this was done for the sake of their IP, as regular fantasy figures don't give them enough exclusivity. They seem to have binned an entire game system because they don't want to make armies with knights and elves in anymore because other people can too.

Honestly I don't like what I've seen. It looks like another generic fantasy type thing that's sprung up and I tend to skim over, it doesn't excite me or feel very warhammer. The Sigmar warriors just look a lot like Scibor's spartans.

Possibly less we'll be able to protect this than: players will think your Perry historical War of the Roses miniatures don't look as cool as armored angels as they did as alternative empire troops.

And what happens when someone decides Sigmarines are too expensive and decides to use cheap historical Greeks? Or when half a dozen companies in southern & eastern Europe all put out variations on not-Sigmarines? Or when folk just proxy in the Sanguinary Guard models they already own? If folk were using Perry historicals already odds are their primary concern is value rather than aesthetic or scale, so "but it's not as THE AWESUMZ as Sigmarine Superangels!" is unlikely to sway their purchasing habits.

The only reason GW think these kinds of moves will allow them a more protectable stance on IP is because they don't understand IP law, and the only reason the don't understand why it's not going to stop people using third-party models and proxies is because they cannot fathom the idea that their product is not completely price inelastic.

Just a supposition (by that I mean my supposition of the Sigmar models being a cool new force farther away from historical models so to entice folks to buy GW specifically). Also if you want to spend more money than for GW models, Scibor's a good place to do it (high quality models at high quality prices).

**Crimson Devil**

Avrik_Shasla wrote:
I am honestly going to get two of the kits. If the kit comes with all those miniatures I am going to have a field day.

I know there may be a lot of different opinions, but I am a total fan of this set and I must say it's one of the best things GW has put out for a while. They needed a quick skirmish game to take on Warmahordes, and they may pull it off with this release, if the rules are good that is.

Kan has a better chance and getting us to stop calling the lizardthing "Battlecat" than GW has of writting rules as good as Privateer Press'.

**Kid_Kyoto**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
adamsouza wrote:
do you seriously think the 4 page quicksheet is all the rules they would include in a starter set ?

It very well could be if you don't need stuff like Magic, Ranks, Monsters, War Machines, Swarms, etc. 4 pages of core rules may well be enough.

Strip the game down to it's core of Move / Shoot / Fight, and move any unit-specific special rules to the unit description, and this could work just like the old 40k 2E datasheets.

Do they even need shoot? I don't see anyone with a ranged weapon.

Roll 2d6 for how far you move.
If you hit an enemy roll 2d6 and add your Cool stat.
Whoever's higher wins, whoever's lower dies.
If there's a tie the game ends and everyone goes home.

**DO IT TO IT**

"Realmgate" may be the most hilariously stupid word GW has come up with, imo. I dunno why, but it kills me.

**warboss**

PLC wrote:
posted on my blog http://www.thefieldsofblood.com/

Local retailer received this:

Warhammer Age of Sigmar Starter Set

•The most awesome Starter Set Games Workshop has ever produced!

Obviously not true. The only thing the southern hemisphere gets first are price increases! Also, nothing will top Dreadfleet for the most awesomest starter GW has ever produced. It was so good, GW deemed it too valuable to even sell the last few (tens of) thousand copies for something as empheral as cash money. Clearly this will end up with big false red text in Petre's Thread of Grudges.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DO IT TO IT wrote:
"Realmgate" may be the most hilariously stupid word GW has come up with, imo. I dunno why, but it kills me.

Single word? Possibly... but not "name". All the wolfie wolf talons of the wolf lord space wolfs probably take the cake there.

**Mort**

DO IT TO IT wrote:
"Realmgate" may be the most hilariously stupid word GW has come up with, imo. I dunno why, but it kills me.

Umm. Why? What is so bad about it?

These 'gates' might be the connections between the various 'realms'. Seems to make sense, if that's the true, and is pretty straight-forward and simple.

Obviously - there are going to be a group of people who will rip GW no matter -what- names, images, fonts, minis, colors, factions, etc, etc, that they come up with. It's like there are dozens of people waiting for ANY bit of news just so they can rip into it (for no apparent reason) and be negative - just for the sake of being negative. I am waiting for that guy to come in and start shouting, "REALMGATE? SO DUMB! I AM SELLING ALL MY ARMIES NOW!"

People crack me up.

**JOHIRA**

PhantomViper wrote:

Spoiler:

So wait, why are Space Marines getting another chapter again? Don't we have enough already?

**insaniak**

Mort wrote:
Obviously - there are going to be a group of people who will rip GW no matter -what- names, images, fonts, minis, colors, factions, etc, etc, that they come up with. It's like there are dozens of people waiting for ANY bit of news just so they can rip into it (for no apparent reason) and be negative - just for the sake of being negative. I am waiting for that guy to come in and start shouting, "REALMGATE? SO DUMB! I AM SELLING ALL MY ARMIES NOW!".

And then at the opposite end of the spectrum you have the people who dismiss any criticism as people being negative just for the sake of being negative.

Different people like (and dislike) different things. Can we all try sticking to the topic, rather than ranting about how screwed up the universe is because other people don't share our own personal opinions?

**AlexHolker**

I think "Realm Gate" would be better than "Realmgate", but if you've got a gate that is either between realms or one-per-realm, it's not a bad name.

The overuse of the naming convention that produces "Stormcast Eternals" bugs me more.

**Achaylus72**

I am agoged at the new minis but again GW decided that if we did not get enough Khorne in the last year then we get more Khorne stuff.

What the hell, why doesn't GW bite the bullet and squat Slaanesh and Tzeentch and just have Khorne and Nurgle.