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.

**unmercifulconker**

namiel wrote:
Lockark wrote:
I'm convinced the lack of points is just a starter set thing. In the break down for how war scrolls work, they talk about in the description were you find the find of upgrades the unit can take.

How can you buy upgrades with no points?

you cant buy upgrades.................

Im sure the bit about warscrolls in the white dwarf talked about the warscroll containing any details of upgrades that a model/unit may be able to take.

**Accolade**

lord_blackfang wrote:
OnePageAnon wrote:
As someone that writes simple and short rulesets I must say that GW really dropped the ball with AoS.

The ruleset spends too much space in explaining things that don't really matter, and not enough space going over the fundamentals. Add to that the fact that there is no balancing system of any kind, and this release is just baffling! There is a part of me that really hopes that this is only a small part of something bigger, but I am skeptical since its GW we are talking about...

Frankly I am impressed that they managed to stuff a Mysterious Terrain table and a campaign system in there.

Gotta get the important stuff in there

**NewTruthNeomaxim**

Another... wink from James...

"So... without seeing the scenario book, maybe we have our terminology wrong... With units having no upper limit size, per se... maybe the scenarios say, "Each player may bring 5 War-scrolls", and then the model limit is whatever upper bound the players previously agreed to. The "5 War Scrolls" limit would be the balance that would keep someone from bringing a potential pool of 30 Nagash models, to a "30 model max" friendly game? James... blink once if I am on to something? tongue emoticon"

To which he simply responded with a wink emote.

Its as close to SOMETHING from GW as we've got on the matter at the moment.

**judgedoug**

Lockark wrote:
I'm convinced the lack of points is just a starter set thing. In the break down for how war scrolls work, they talk about in the description were you find the find of upgrades the unit can take.

How can you buy upgrades with no points?

Alternate weapons configurations.

Let's say there are points on future warscrolls.
There's nothing in the rulebook that says anything about points.
How do you use points then

**cygnnus**

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
I just wrote the following on Facebook... and it should be noted that James Hewitt... yes, GW Design-Team James Hewitt, immediately "liked" my posting...

"Right now the only "balance" mechanism seems to be the tremendously powerful "sudden victory" mechanic, and how it interplays with deployment. Once you have seen each-other's "army" you alternate deploying units, stopping whenever you like. Its like a weird bid/gamble system where you stop when you feel you have "enough" to win, knowing your opponent would be leery of going 30% over you in pure numbers... I don't "quite" get it yet... but there is a kind of meta-play there.

You and your opponent pick an upper limit... say 100 models. But then, the meta-game of deployment kicks in, and you might stop at say 40-models, essentially bidding on your ability to have "enough" to pull of whatever sudden victory you get."

Which only works as a bidding mechanism if the two bidding currencies are the same. From what we can see, it's "models" that count. Presumably the SuperDuperSigmarites(tm) are more powerful model-for-model than, say, Skaven (or Thugs, or Skinks, or Goblins, or you name it...) so stopping when you have "enough" models is very easy if you're using the SuperDuperSigmarites(tm)

Kinda like saying, "I'm betting with Dollars and you'e betting with Pesos" but only the final number on the bills counts, not either value...

Doesn't work...

Valete,

JohnS

**Kanluwen**

I'm really not sure how to feel about all of this.

**Mymearan**

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Another... wink from James...

"So... without seeing the scenario book, maybe we have our terminology wrong... With units having no upper limit size, per se... maybe the scenarios say, "Each player may bring 5 War-scrolls", and then the model limit is whatever upper bound the players previously agreed to. The "5 War Scrolls" limit would be the balance that would keep someone from bringing a potential pool of 30 Nagash models, to a "30 model max" friendly game? James... blink once if I am on to something? tongue emoticon"

To which he simply responded with a wink emote.

Its as close to SOMETHING from GW as we've got on the matter at the moment.

It's hilarious, but that's the best indication we have that there will indeed be some kind of balancing mechanic in the game. I'm back to being hopeful!

**Chopxsticks**

Thud wrote:
Chopxsticks wrote:
This could be, I wouldnt play a game unless there was a decided on number of models however. Power issues aside, until we know more, I wouldnt agree to a whatever you bring. It would be simple, no more than say 30 models thats the limit. Seems pretty easy to me.

Ok. I'll bring 30 Bloodthirsters.

Still as simple?

Actually I dont see why not. We have no idea what units synergize with each other, If your a tool who spent that much money on 30 Bloodthirsters to be that tool who puts 30 of them down on the table then so be it I guess, For all we know though some unit may have an ability that says if a Bloodthirster is within 12" Auto kill it. Then what??

**reiner**

Lockark wrote:
I'm convinced the lack of points is just a starter set thing. In the break down for how war scrolls work, they talk about in the description were you find the find of upgrades the unit can take.

How can you buy upgrades with no points?

Bitcoin

**Zywus**

Thud wrote:
Bottle wrote:
Thud wrote:
Chopxsticks wrote:
This could be, I wouldnt play a game unless there was a decided on number of models however. Power issues aside, until we know more, I wouldnt agree to a whatever you bring. It would be simple, no more than say 30 models thats the limit. Seems pretty easy to me.

Ok. I'll bring 30 Bloodthirsters.

Still as simple?

Limit warscrolls and models. "Let's play 5 warscrolls, 30 models max".

Now you've just made every low-quality model useless. "You brought those Khorne Cultist dudes from the starter box? Oh, that's cute, 'cause I've only brought the, ya'know, good models."

There's a reason why other games have point systems. Not all models are equally good, nor should they be equally good, but they still need to function within the same rule set without taking the bad models just being shooting yourself in the foot.

Indeed. As long as there is no mechanic that lets you have more of the lesser models such as goblins, there will never be an in-game reason for taking them,

**Bottle**

Yes it does feel that elite armies are much more benefitted, as you get so much more bang for your buck on Warscroll, Model and Sudden Death terms. Not sure how it will work, but can only imagine Nagash and other big baddies are now much easier to kill by grunts.

**OgreChubbs**

I do not remember dark veng having a point thing on the cards, did they?

They just gave you a layout and 2 or was it 3 scenarios on what units to take.

**Enkiel**

Bottle wrote:
Yes it does feel that elite armies are much more benefitted, as you get so much more bang for your buck on Warscroll, Model and Sudden Death terms. Not sure how it will work, but can only imagine Nagash and other big baddies are now much easier to kill by grunts.

D3 mortal wound per caster per turn can make one sad Nagash/Glottkin

**Chopxsticks**

But we have not seen all the cards........ For all we know the lesser units buff the elite units.

And people keep throwing our stupid numbers for models. Of course GW wants you to buy 30 Bloodthirsters, they are $115 each... But seriously who is going to. And then what shop is going to OK it. How hard is it just to have a list of models that you are only allowed 1 on the table at the time of deployment...

**Thud**

Chopxsticks wrote:
Thud wrote:
Chopxsticks wrote:
This could be, I wouldnt play a game unless there was a decided on number of models however. Power issues aside, until we know more, I wouldnt agree to a whatever you bring. It would be simple, no more than say 30 models thats the limit. Seems pretty easy to me.

Ok. I'll bring 30 Bloodthirsters.

Still as simple?

Actually I dont see why not. We have no idea what units synergize with each other, If your a tool who spent that much money on 30 Bloodthirsters to be that tool who puts 30 of them down on the table then so be it I guess, For all we know though some unit may have an ability that says if a Bloodthirster is within 12" Auto kill it. Then what??

30 Bloodthirsters was an extreme example to underline my point; if your best counter-argument is "lol you're silly for buying expensive models" you might want to try to think of something better.

Also, if there really is a wargear that auto-kills Bloodthirsters within 12" (or something equivalent) how the hell is that supposed to be an argument for the game being better than it seems? "Don't worry, the game might not be broken, it might be ridiculously broken. Yay! Fun! Progress!"

**gozer il gozeriano**

What if they are going for a system similar to Open Combat?
This way you would have your own stats for all your models, bases wouldn't matter, indivivual stats for all minis on the table (or "scrolls") etc. And they could focus on producing models
I know it's not very GWish but...

**His Master's Voice**

Chopxsticks wrote:
How hard is it just to have a list of models that you are only allowed 1 on the table at the time of deployment...

It's not hard. But it's something one would expect GW to decide upon when they made the game, given how important that little detail is to the internal balance of the system.

It's a bit like being sold a model and told you have to cast certain parts on your own. Sure, you can assemble the kit as it is, but no weapons for you and the left foot is missing.

**Bottle**

If bows have a range of 24" too, I bet they can wreck monsters quickly!

I'm interested to see how combined units will now work, like Screaming Bells and Fanatics. Also interested in seeing how warmachines and crew work and chariots too. Can't wait to see more warscrolls!

**Henry**

It's like someone deliberately wrote a satire of a postmodernist approach to war gaming. I can't work out if all of this is serious or if it's some over the top example of Poe's law.

**Prestor Jon**

Enkiel wrote:
Bottle wrote:
Yes it does feel that elite armies are much more benefitted, as you get so much more bang for your buck on Warscroll, Model and Sudden Death terms. Not sure how it will work, but can only imagine Nagash and other big baddies are now much easier to kill by grunts.
D3 mortal wound per caster per turn can make one sad Nagash/Glottkin

If the main attempt at game balance is to make it easier for rank and file units to kill powerful monsters/characters then that creates a disincentive for gamers to buy big expensive kits.

**pretre**

Prestor Jon wrote:
Enkiel wrote:
Bottle wrote:
Yes it does feel that elite armies are much more benefitted, as you get so much more bang for your buck on Warscroll, Model and Sudden Death terms. Not sure how it will work, but can only imagine Nagash and other big baddies are now much easier to kill by grunts.
D3 mortal wound per caster per turn can make one sad Nagash/Glottkin

If the main attempt at game balance is to make it easier for rank and file units to kill powerful monsters/characters then that creates a disincentive for gamers to buy big expensive kits.

Keep in mind that big numbers of shooty troops is also balanced by sudden death victory. So suddenly, a tiny bit of balance appears.

**Talys**

Thud wrote:
30 Bloodthirsters was an extreme example to underline my point; if your best counter-argument is "lol you're silly for buying expensive models" you might want to try to think of something better.

Also, if there really is a wargear that auto-kills Bloodthirsters within 12" (or something equivalent) how the hell is that supposed to be an argument for the game being better than it seems? "Don't worry, the game might not be broken, it might be ridiculously broken. Yay! Fun! Progress!"

Some of them say "any number of models" and some of them say, "only one model". So I guess you could say, 30 bloodthirsters vs. 3000 goblins?

But seriously, is nobody considering this game as a game just for fun? If it's deployed and played in the spirit of entertainment and enjoyment, it looks like it could be pretty fun.

**carmachu**

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Best case scenario, it's a good game that they killed WHFB to make (which to me, a fan of regimental games, is still "meh" at best). Worst case scenario they killed WHFB to make a mediocre skirmish game in a market where I can't throw a cat without hitting another skirmish game.

Though they do say it can be played with lots of models.... but it it's another game like 40k where you have 100's of individual models and a movement phase takes you an eternity then I'm not interested. I've never been a huge fan of that aspect of the 40k rules system.

See I've loved 40k, I could play it right now with some guys at work, but its too much- too many models. Thats why i walked from fantasy too. SO if its got less models I might be more inclined to pick it up and play as a skirmish game.

**Silent Puffin?**

Bottle wrote:

I'm interested to see how combined units will now work, like Screaming Bells and Fanatics. Also interested in seeing how warmachines and crew work and chariots too. Can't wait to see more warscrolls!

Its looking less and less likely that they will even be in the game.

**ShaneTB**

I originally said that any notion of balance would be in the scenarios (in the book included in the starter set).

That's the last chance now.

I was 110% in for going back to Warhammer (well, Aos), but the 0 point play with 29% more if you have more real money is no good. No good at all.

**Chopxsticks**

Thud wrote:
Chopxsticks wrote:
Thud wrote:
Chopxsticks wrote:
This could be, I wouldnt play a game unless there was a decided on number of models however. Power issues aside, until we know more, I wouldnt agree to a whatever you bring. It would be simple, no more than say 30 models thats the limit. Seems pretty easy to me.

Ok. I'll bring 30 Bloodthirsters.

Still as simple?

Actually I dont see why not. We have no idea what units synergize with each other, If your a tool who spent that much money on 30 Bloodthirsters to be that tool who puts 30 of them down on the table then so be it I guess, For all we know though some unit may have an ability that says if a Bloodthirster is within 12" Auto kill it. Then what??

30 Bloodthirsters was an extreme example to underline my point; if your best counter-argument is "lol you're silly for buying expensive models" you might want to try to think of something better.

Also, if there really is a wargear that auto-kills Bloodthirsters within 12" (or something equivalent) how the hell is that supposed to be an argument for the game being better than it seems? "Don't worry, the game might not be broken, it might be ridiculously broken. Yay! Fun! Progress!"

Exactly, an extreme example. Same as the auto kill Bloodthirsters... If all you have to say to an agreed upon unit limit is "im bringing $3,450 worth of Bloodthirsters" then whatever I suppose, your GW'd perfect target audience. I didnt say anyone was silly for buying expensive models, but you cant honestly read back over your own comment and not think buying 30 Bloodthirsters isnt silly... I own a single Bloodthirster and a Glotkin, which seems reasonable to bring to an agreed model count battle. Not 30..

**angelofvengeance**

carmachu wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Best case scenario, it's a good game that they killed WHFB to make (which to me, a fan of regimental games, is still "meh" at best). Worst case scenario they killed WHFB to make a mediocre skirmish game in a market where I can't throw a cat without hitting another skirmish game.

Though they do say it can be played with lots of models.... but it it's another game like 40k where you have 100's of individual models and a movement phase takes you an eternity then I'm not interested. I've never been a huge fan of that aspect of the 40k rules system.

See I've loved 40k, I could play it right now with some guys at work, but its too much- too many models. Thats why i walked from fantasy too. SO if its got less models I might be more inclined to pick it up and play as a skirmish game.

Have you tried having smaller games of 40K??

**Chopxsticks**

Talys wrote:
Thud wrote:
30 Bloodthirsters was an extreme example to underline my point; if your best counter-argument is "lol you're silly for buying expensive models" you might want to try to think of something better.

Also, if there really is a wargear that auto-kills Bloodthirsters within 12" (or something equivalent) how the hell is that supposed to be an argument for the game being better than it seems? "Don't worry, the game might not be broken, it might be ridiculously broken. Yay! Fun! Progress!"

Some of them say "any number of models" and some of them say, "only one model". So I guess you could say, 30 bloodthirsters vs. 3000 goblins?

But seriously, is nobody considering this game as a game just for fun? If it's deployed and played in the spirit of entertainment and enjoyment, it looks like it could be pretty fun.

Thats the problem, everyone seems to think people only play this game in a tournament setting. Were everything is at stake so if you dont bring those 30 Bloodthirsters you have no chance..

**TheAuldGrump**

The thing is that the game should be playable in a tournament setting - not that the game must be played in a tournament setting.

The Auld Grump

**edlowe**

It's a bit weirdly worded but looking at the rules describing warscrolls and the scrolls themselves the could be something else going on regarding balance.

The rules state that the scrolls contain all the rules for the models (note not units)

The scrolls state that the units are either individual figures or are any number of figures.

What if there is a simple one page armylist for each faction in the background book? The scrolls are all the refernce material.

I'm probably grasping at straws here, but it would be a simple system to have.