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.

rohdester wrote:
Would GW release a retail blurb with a spelling mistake?
Next to last bullet has "amd" instead of "and".

Have you read GW products before? Typos and nonsensical rules aren't exactly rare unfortunately. I'm surprised that over the years no one accidentally put out a flyer for Warhamer.

I want to not be skeptical, I want to not be bitter

but transfers in a box like this. ?

migooo wrote:
I want to not be skeptical, I want to not be bitter

but transfers in a box like this. ?

AoBR had transfers in it.

 warboss wrote:

CatMines wrote:
I think those of us with a GW store nearby are lucky with a release like this. I know I'm going to show up to my GW with a dozen or so models and ask them to demo the game using my existing models if possible. If the rules are that easy, and the game is as fun as they claim (though why would claim otherwise about their own product) then I'll end up subscribing to this new battle system, if not then I ditch AoS.

That's kind of a dick move on the opening weekend and that is coming from a relentless critic of GW. It's the opening weekend and likely the SINGLE employee at the one man store will be stressed enough with a new flagship product without you throwing that in on him on the very day of the release. It is an entirely valid concern though and I absolutely think you should do it... just not on the opening weekend. Go there, get a demo with the already painted sigmarines using the scenario the poor schmuck working there has practiced, download the rules, and see if it is worth you trying to use your existing collection or switch to another game system instead like KOW. If you decide the former, grab your stuff the next weekend and go try out the demo game again with the likely shoehorned in WHFB minis. I'm all for giving GW a waste treatment plant's worth of crap over the stuff they do but it isn't fair to dump it on the minimum wage guy at the demo table whose job likely depends on selling X starters that weekend.

I agree. I never said I would show up opening weekend.The few times I've been there midday on a weekday they manager has had nothing to do but harass me, so I figure I'll actually give him something to talk to me about for once.

 gianlucafiorentini123 wrote:

migooo wrote:
I want to not be skeptical, I want to not be bitter

but transfers in a box like this. ?

AoBR had transfers in it.

So did Stormclaw, in fact the Stormclaw transfers have not been released outside of that box.

 gianlucafiorentini123 wrote:

migooo wrote:
I want to not be skeptical, I want to not be bitter

but transfers in a box like this. ?

AoBR had transfers in it.

It did ? Cool.

 warboss wrote:

rohdester wrote:
Would GW release a retail blurb with a spelling mistake?
Next to last bullet has "amd" instead of "and".

Have you read GW products before? Typos and nonsensical rules aren't exactly rare unfortunately. I'm surprised that over the years no one accidentally put out a flyer for Warhamer.

I believe the current Lizardmen book at one point actually says "(see page xx)".

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 warboss wrote:

rohdester wrote:
Would GW release a retail blurb with a spelling mistake?
Next to last bullet has "amd" instead of "and".

Have you read GW products before? Typos and nonsensical rules aren't exactly rare unfortunately. I'm surprised that over the years no one accidentally put out a flyer for Warhamer.

I believe the current Lizardmen book at one point actually says "(see page xx)".

It did. Known as "page kiss kiss" round here.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 warboss wrote:

rohdester wrote:
Would GW release a retail blurb with a spelling mistake?
Next to last bullet has "amd" instead of "and".

Have you read GW products before? Typos and nonsensical rules aren't exactly rare unfortunately. I'm surprised that over the years no one accidentally put out a flyer for Warhamer.

I believe the current Lizardmen book at one point actually says "(see page xx)".

Personally I have fond memories of "The squad may be an Aspiring Champion at +13 pts" in the 3.5 CSM Codex. And that one schlub who actually insisted on playing it RAW.

I'm pretty excited about this now - I had been on the fence but actually it sounds pretty good. And you know what, as long as individual units and armies still have plenty of variation and additional rules / special abilities then I don't mind a 4-page core rule book...... Best of all if we can download the rules on release day that would be ace.... Looking forward to this now...

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 warboss wrote:

rohdester wrote:
Would GW release a retail blurb with a spelling mistake?
Next to last bullet has "amd" instead of "and".

Have you read GW products before? Typos and nonsensical rules aren't exactly rare unfortunately. I'm surprised that over the years no one accidentally put out a flyer for Warhamer.

I believe the current Lizardmen book at one point actually says "(see page xx)".

Personally I have fond memories of "The squad may be an Aspiring Champion at +13 pts" in the 3.5 CSM Codex. And that one schlub who actually insisted on playing it RAW.

I really hope he transformed the entire squad into a single Aspiring Champion...anything less would be RAI!

Perhaps the 'to succeed stats' and moral rumours were true. That way you remove whole tables as the power of a unit is in the stats that come with the models. Helps bring the thing down to 4... 4 pages or 4 sheets?

i.e. rather than WS/BS being a number it'd be the success; 5+, 4+.

Pepticsalve wrote:
I'm pretty excited about this now - I had been on the fence but actually it sounds pretty good. And you know what, as long as individual units and armies still have plenty of variation and additional rules / special abilities then I don't mind a 4-page core rule book...... Best of all if we can download the rules on release day that would be ace.... Looking forward to this now...

Yeah, I'm mildly looking forward to it now - interested in seeing what it is.

The Sigmarines still suck, though

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Seems like a good spot to point out that Mantic has announced they will release tournament-legal Kings of War lists for all GW Fantasy factions.

That will be awesome, but how long until they recieve a cease and desist order.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The models look awesome, just not interested in a skirmish game. Space Marines in fantasy

 Rune Stonegrinder wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Seems like a good spot to point out that Mantic has announced they will release tournament-legal Kings of War lists for all GW Fantasy factions.

That will be awesome, but how long until they recieve a cease and desist order.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The models look awesome, just not interested in a skirmish game. Space Marines in fantasy

Never. The CHS court case cleared up that malarkey.

 thenoobbomb wrote:

The Sigmarines still suck, though

Totally - I'm looking forward to destroying sigmarine armies any opportunity I get ;-)

What I do hope they keep is proper list building and unit / model points costs, with upgrades etc. Its fun tweaking an army list....

Here's a few examples of GW games condensed to 2 pages + army lists. Admittedly, they assume a degree of familiarity with the full game, but hey, you have 2 spare pages to cover that!

https://onepagerules.wordpress.com/

Pepticsalve wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

The Sigmarines still suck, though

Totally - I'm looking forward to destroying sigmarine armies any opportunity I get ;-)

What I do hope they keep is proper list building and unit / model points costs, with upgrades etc. Its fun tweaking an army list....

If they go the route of timed releases for 'non-core' and armies are built within factions then that would bring variations within itself.

Perhaps at first there'll be less options within an actual unit to prevent rules bloat before they even start. We'll soon see!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Here's a few examples of GW games condensed to 2 pages + army lists. Admittedly, they assume a degree of familiarity with the full game, but hey, you have 2 spare pages to cover that!

https://onepagerules.wordpress.com/

Especially if all special rules/magic powers are moved to the unit entries.

The more I think about it the more I like the idea of a compact rule set. So many games have dense rule books which can really break up the flow of a game. This could be really good......

number9dream wrote:
To be fair to GW if they cant use gate because of stargate, and blizzard and warcraft has had portal in their lore since at least the mid 90s (warcraft 2: beyond the dark portal as an easy example), then they are kind of stuck.

Honestly I don't even care that much about the "realmgates", other than as I said before it kinda confirms the bubbleverse rumor and implies the gates link the worlds together, though that isn't really proven yet. I'm basically just giving GW gak because they're overly litigious IP bullies and claimed in a court of law that they don't take inspiration from anyone and come up with everything themselves with no outside influence whatsoever, not even references.

So it's funny to me to blatantly lie like that, since it's no secret that GW steals from everyone anyway, and then in their "new" lore for their replacement Warhammer game they basically just stuck stargates in there.



Free rules sounds kind of dubious to me. I mean it's GW, who I'm surprised haven't started charging for FAQ's and Errata yet (guess they'd have to make some first), so putting anything up for free immediately has me wondering what the catch is. I doubt it's the full rules, either that or the free rules they're uploading are for all the old models to tide people over until new $60 army books start coming out.

rohdester wrote:
Would GW release a retail blurb with a spelling mistake?
Next to last bullet has "amd" instead of "and".

GW releases actual product full of typos and mistakes...so yes.

What are the transfers for? I thought the detail on the shields was sculpted on, but that's the only thing I can think of that you'd need transfers for.

 jah-joshua wrote:
i just don't get why people would let themselves get so worked up over some fiction, and the names of imaginary things and characters...

For some folks, it's not about the actual details so much as the company that created those details.


Personally, I think AoS seems to be at least an attempt to address many common complaints about WFB, including high model counts, stale fluff, lack of a good starter army, too much grim dark, etc.

If you're a vet who only wanted 9th edition to be a steadfast tweak and some magic fixes, then this probably isn't what you're looking for. But it sounds as though you'll still be able to play the new game with some or all of your existing models.

from atia

https://twitter.com/lady_atia

"The new rules for each miniature will also be in the newly rebranded boxes"

Awesome. Between this and free rules, it's like they finally understand.

I still have no plans to buy the starter (unless a friend talks me into splitting it... he wants the Sigmarines), but I'm feeling better about the new game now.

Looking forward to seeing the rules.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
"Armies without limits"... soooo.... WHFB Unbound?

I was told by a good source that their will be 4 armybooks coming out in the future.(this im very solid on)

Not quite sure about this one but since gods are a huge part of AOS now that what you can bring in your army is dependent on which god your army follows. Salt this one but it sounds plausable

 Sidstyler wrote:

rohdester wrote:
Would GW release a retail blurb with a spelling mistake?
Next to last bullet has "amd" instead of "and".

GW releases actual product full of typos and mistakes...so yes.

What are the transfers for? I thought the detail on the shields was sculpted on, but that's the only thing I can think of that you'd need transfers for.

The standards, maybe?

Looking at the pictures--I think it's for the "runic scrollwork" on the Eternals. They've done similar for the Skitarii/Cult Mechanicus stuff by having little strips of cogs that you cut to place around hoods and the hems of the robes.

 gorgon wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:
i just don't get why people would let themselves get so worked up over some fiction, and the names of imaginary things and characters...

For some folks, it's not about the actual details so much as the company that created those details.


Personally, I think AoS seems to be at least an attempt to address many common complaints about WFB, including high model counts, stale fluff, lack of a good starter army, too much grim dark, etc.

If you're a vet who only wanted 9th edition to be a steadfast tweak and some magic fixes, then this probably isn't what you're looking for. But it sounds as though you'll still be able to play the new game with some or all of your existing models.

I have a feeling tournaments will, for the near future, continue to run 8th edition fantasy events. AOS cannot replace the massed battles, not yet anyway.

 namiel wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
"Armies without limits"... soooo.... WHFB Unbound?

I was told by a good source that their will be 4 armybooks coming out in the future.(this im very solid on)

Not quite sure about this one but since gods are a huge part of AOS now that what you can bring in your army is dependent on which god your army follows. Salt this one but it sounds plausable

Good - Chaos - Destruction - Death. Would those be the four?

Most probably a lot of the rumors are true, but reflect on different things:

1) There is a full rule book, this is the 96 pager.

2) There are 4 pages of rules. These are just for the forces in AoS. They use rolls vs looking up stats because you are using a defined set of figures in the box, and assume you are fighting that one scenario.

3) All models on round bases, because that's what comes in AoS, but base type won't matter.


I'll know in an hour, hopefully...... time for coffee, aspirin, my high blood pressure meds......

It never ceases to amaze me how these threads always follow the same pattern.

First, the speculation. Then the fear due to lack of info. Then rage as frustration sets in at lack of info. Then info, and the sky falls in. Then more info, and everybody wants to marry Tom Kirby

This weekend, it'll be sky falling in again when people try the demo game. Then the game will be broken, and so on...


Anyway, back OT.

I don't why people are excited at the idea of using as many models as you want. You could always do that anyway.

As for the 4 page rulebook. Is this going to end up like 40k? Don't people have to own loads of different codexes and supplements? Must be a pain carting all those books around.

Mikhaila--if you're able to let us know, please holler if there will be an independent release of a rulebook.

ShaneTB wrote:

 namiel wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
"Armies without limits"... soooo.... WHFB Unbound?

I was told by a good source that their will be 4 armybooks coming out in the future.(this im very solid on)

Not quite sure about this one but since gods are a huge part of AOS now that what you can bring in your army is dependent on which god your army follows. Salt this one but it sounds plausable

Good - Chaos - Destruction - Death. Would those be the four?

pretty much. I heard order, disorder, chaos, undead. So yeah


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 mikhaila wrote:
Most probably a lot of the rumors are true, but reflect on different things:

1) There is a full rule book, this is the 96 pager.

2) There are 4 pages of rules. These are just for the forces in AoS. They use rolls vs looking up stats because you are using a defined set of figures in the box, and assume you are fighting that one scenario.

3) All models on round bases, because that's what comes in AoS, but base type won't matter.


I'll know in an hour, hopefully...... time for coffee, aspirin, my high blood pressure meds......

coffee is so good for that bp issue.