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.

I'm of two minds about Age of Sigmar.

On the one hand, I like most of the new rules. Having watched some battle reports, it looks like the system is intuitive and fun, despite not resembling any previous edition of Warhammer. I like that GW released the core rules and legacy army rules for free.

On the other hand, I find the lack of guidance on army building unacceptable. I would have appreciated it if GW at least suggested "We'll let the community figure out", because that's clearly their strategy. The "lulz" rules might seem endearing now, but a year or more from now they will almost definitely be tedious.

We'll see if this or KoW ends up sticking locally.

OgreChubbs wrote:

If you set down one of your friends who NEVER heard of warhammer or anything else. How long would it take you to explain every rule in the book to them, then all the rules for their army. Then try and get them to play a game with you and know the rules with out book searching for hours.

Now with that same idea how long would it take you to tell your friend these rules and their army rules?.

I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here.

Yes , complicated things take longer to learn than simple things.

I can teach a friend to play checkers in a much shorter time than I can teach them to play Risk. Which means absolutely nothing if Risk is what we want to play .

I have just downloaded and read the rules for my High Elves.

Where the hell are my unit stats? All I see are weapon stats, abilities, and other things.

That's it. That's all you get. It's all you need really, If you're after a more simplified game that is. I can see why it would be painful if you loved the old WHFB

So units DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE STATS?

*Sighs and relists Elves on swap shop thread*

They have some, It's in the little wheel next to the abilities. But everything has a fixed to hit, wound and save against everything. A goblin will hit Nagash as easily as a skink

So GW completely dropped the ball?

There Is no WHFB any more, it was failing very hard. And it was either this or nothing. If the rumors are true we are in for some spectacular looking kits however.

 ToxicBox wrote:
There Is no WHFB any more, it was failing very hard. And it was either this or nothing. If the rumors are true we are in for some spectacular looking kits however.

Well, it was this, or perhaps addressing the issues plaguing WHFB- over-bloated armies, steadfast, magic rules, cost-of-entry, etc etc.

Certainly not "this or torch the game".

 Verviedi wrote:
So GW completely dropped the ball?

No, they took the ball out into the parking lot and torched it, and then replaced it with a much simpler toy, because after the ball went flat and people stopped playing with it, it made far more sense to get rid of it than to grab the pump and fix it.

 Verviedi wrote:
So units DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE STATS?

*Sighs and relists Elves on swap shop thread*

Models have a movement, a weapon skill, a ballistic skill, strength, attacks, wounds and save. Models lost initiative, but many gained multiple wounds.

-Matt

All the art work reminds me of the 2nd ed starter set for 40k which brings back some nostalgic moments. Besides that, this is a totally new game.

Old WHFB is dead in my books, some of my friends will probably want to continue with 8th ed because we are old and used to it. Otherwise this is a new game that has nothing to do with the old one and I don't know how I feel about it yet.

I'll need to get a few games in with this rule set to see how things turn out.

I feel like this will be a LotR/Hobbit mix-up and GW will go back to the old rules soon enough.

 Verviedi wrote:
So units DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE STATS?

*Sighs and relists Elves on swap shop thread*

Yep. Other than Wounds, Save, Bravery, Move, Abilities, Magic, Weapons (with To Hit, To Wound, Rend and Damage), Command Ability, and Key Words, there are no stats

privateer4hire wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
So units DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE STATS?

*Sighs and relists Elves on swap shop thread*

Yep. Other than Wounds, Save, Bravery, Move, Abilities, Magic, Weapons (with To Hit, To Wound, Rend and Damage), Command Ability, and Key Words, there are no stats

Don't forget range (for each weapon)

 ToxicBox wrote:
They have some, It's in the little wheel next to the abilities. But everything has a fixed to hit, wound and save against everything. A goblin will hit Nagash as easily as a skink

They're pretty much identical game-wise.
Skinks save: 6+ wounds:1 most skink weapons are 5+ to hit and the best one wounds on 4+; the skinks can take multiples (with 10 being the common base, so 10 wounds usually).
Nagash save: 3+ wounds:16 most of Nagash's weapons are 3+ to hit and most wound on 2+
Nagash also has several more special rules than the skinks including being able to fly, ability to wipe a model out if opponent doesn't choose which hand you hide a die in, etc.

privateer4hire wrote:

 ToxicBox wrote:
They have some, It's in the little wheel next to the abilities. But everything has a fixed to hit, wound and save against everything. A goblin will hit Nagash as easily as a skink

They're pretty much identical game-wise.
Skinks save: 6+ wounds:1 most skink weapons are 5+ to hit and the best one wounds on 4+; the skinks can take multiples (with 10 being the common base, so 10 wounds usually).
Nagash save: 3+ wounds:16 most of Nagash's weapons are 3+ to hit and most wound on 2+
Nagash also has several more special rules than the skinks including being able to fly, ability to wipe a model out if opponent doesn't choose which hand you hide a die in, etc.

Sorry, What I meant was it can take out skinks as easily as it can Nagash. I hadn't actually done the theoryhammer myself. So thank you for doing that

I still can't stop laughing over the fact that a unit of little snakes and reptiles now has a decent chance of wounding the physical manifestation of the God of War and Slaughter.

Bravo GW, bravo.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I still can't stop laughing over the fact that a unit of little snakes and reptiles now has a decent chance of wounding the physical manifestation of the God of War and Slaughter.

Bravo GW, bravo.

Yeah, nearly as far fetched as a hobbit hamstringing a witch king or killing a war troll

The little buggers are the ones to watch out for!

 McNs wrote:


On the other hand, I find the lack of guidance on army building unacceptable. I would have appreciated it if GW at least suggested "We'll let the community figure out", because that's clearly their strategy. The "lulz" rules might seem endearing now, but a year or more from now they will almost definitely be tedious.

My question at this point would be: when GW returns some points cost / FOC and makes a few other hotfixes, how are the AoS rules then?

I assume GW will be forced to do at least that, as they are taking too much gak about it. Theoretically, a system of free rules and scrolls would allow them to update the stuff as they go, which might work out alright.

Found this on the web. Dunno if it its old news to some:
http://youtu.be/mFCKQ60yFis
@5:10 or so

Interesting that it comes with rules

 Verviedi wrote:
So GW completely dropped the ball?

You couldn't possibly imagine.

A: "Nice army. Bunch of chaos warrior looking dudes, looks like this is going to be fun."

B: "Ooooh, no. Those are all individual Chaos Lords. See since a model is a model, it works in my favor to use them all as Chaos Lords for the extra wounds.

...

A: "Wulfrick issues a challenge. Don't bypass the language filter like this. Reds8n

B: *cries*.

A: "Since you changed expression, according to the rules Wulfrick can now re-roll failed to hit rolls."

...

A: "So wait, you're saying this is a new edition with no point costs and stupid gimmicky party rules. Why is it good again?"

B: "Because it frees us from those WAAC guys and lets us create a narrative."

A: You couldn't create your own narrative by breaking the rules from last edition or making your own? And now people who want to play regular, even matches are screwed?"

B: "You don't get it, this is a beer and pretzels game."

A: "A terrible, borderline unplayable beer and pretzels game. I'll give you that."

Pictured: Age of Sigmar

Relapse wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Delicate Swarm wrote:
Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.

I just don't see how this is supposed to help.

If WHFB was Beer and Pretzels, then AoS is fething Gerber and Breast Milk since I cannot fathom it needing to be dumbed down THIS much...

Anwser this question before you insult the rules.

If you set down one of your friends who NEVER heard of warhammer or anything else. How long would it take you to explain every rule in the book to them, then all the rules for their army. Then try and get them to play a game with you and know the rules with out book searching for hours.

Now with that same idea how long would it take you to tell your friend these rules and their army rules?

You want to know why they dumbed down the rules? Check the you make the call thread..... no one read the same rule the same way. Then with the 5 charts of how to hit someone then the different rules on what ignored armour and so on it gets confusing.

This is pretty much on the money.

Yes and no. He's making factually correct statements, but both the intent behind them and the conclusions drawn from them are flawed.

Yes, it would take me less time to explain AoS' rules to a random non-geek friend than it would have WHFB, but such people aren't going to be any more interested in AoS because no matter how much you "streamline" the rules it still requires an investment of time & money on a scale such people won't be willing to indulge. Those kinds of people can only be hooked into geekery, in my experience, through board & card games, things that don't require them to invest anything beyond a few minutes of time to learn the rules - if they're the people GW is targeting with AoS, AoS is a failure.

Yes, YMDC is full of people arguing a half-dozen different interpretations of many rules, but the reason they can do that is GW wrote crappy rules. The solution to that problem isn't AoS, a game that negates the need for well-written rules by simply abolishing huge chunks of the game system and telling players to either be happy making pchew pchew noises with their mandollies, or else rewrite half the system themselves from scratch. GW has produced some genuinely fantastic games in the past; Epic, BFG, Necromunda, even 3rd Edition 40K before the codex creep and additional content threw things for a loop - all of them reasonably well balanced and immense fun to play. Games like Mordheim, Blood Bowl, and Gorkamorka had big flaws in some areas, but they were still complete game systems and they had redeeming features that far outweighed the problems.

If folk think replacing "this rule is poorly worded, lots of people are arguing about how it works on the table" with "there are no rules for this at all, how the hell do we even play the game?!", I would very much appreciate the number for your dealers, because I would love some of the top-shelf Mescaline that's apparently being consumed

EDIT: OK, mini-rant time - hey stores/websites with a YouTube channel, 'sup. If you're going to go to the time and effort of making an unboxing video for a product, for the love of feth will you stop either A; recording them at such a terrible resolution you might as well be showing people pieces of gray paper as the sprues, and/or B; not even bothering to zoom in, and/or C; zooming in for closeups and then moving the damn sprues about constantly under the camera like a kid on a sugar rush such that pausing the video results in a blurry mess and you give the viewer sodding motion sickness(I'm lookin' at you BOLS)?!

I know you have to get those vids out fast so you can get DEM VIEWZ, but ffs.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I still can't stop laughing over the fact that a unit of little snakes and reptiles now has a decent chance of wounding the physical manifestation of the God of War and Slaughter.

As opposed to nearly everything hitting on a 4+ in 5E through 8E? GW used so little of the HtH to-hit table, they might as well have made it all coin flips.

Conflicted.

I really like the models and most of the rules. The rules of "scream loudly to get a dice roll bonus." or some such, I really don't like. Fun games are great, non competitive games are great, but I just don't like clown antics.

Also, free forming the armies... errrgh. There should have been more structure here. They didn't need to be super granular, but something is needed. Right now, rich players can bring a ton of huge models to the table and others can't afford to do the same.

We'll see how it goes.

The rules themselves (apart from the silly dancing, shouting ones etc...) are not that bad, there are a few exceptions like the things with bases etc. Being simplified doesn't necessarily mean it will be a simple game, KoW for example is a simple rule set but is a very tactical game. I look at some of the rules and can identify with some of them from other systems. The biggest thing that lets this down IMO is the no points unbound thing. I see people are already trying to fix AoS with house rules points values etc, but you shouldn't have to! I should be able to turn up to a random club, get a game in and not have to worry about getting house rules and armies sorted out. I don't have to do this in any other system I play (which is quite a few). I can turn up with Warmahordes for example, get a game agree with points, take out an army list of said points value and bamn away I go! I went to a GW yesterday to try out AoS, there was a game in progress so I watched it and spoke to the manage. I rose my concerns with him and he dismissed them all with a wave of his hand, we don't need points/balance as we don't care about the competitive/tournament scene yadda yadda yadda. If you have a good tight set of rules you can have casual and competitive /tournament play, perfect example of this is Warmahordes and X-wing. If your game system has one without the other it will suffer as a result. All in all I would like to give this a go as long as they address the whole army building points thin and the other silly rules, as it stands it seems to me they are trying to sell (phrasing) us an unfinished product, this rule set would be fine for alpha or beta testing but not as a finished product.

 Moopy wrote:
Conflicted.

I really like the models and most of the rules. The rules of "scream loudly to get a dice roll bonus." or some such, I really don't like. Fun games are great, non competitive games are great, but I just don't like clown antics.

Also, free forming the armies... errrgh. There should have been more structure here. They didn't need to be super granular, but something is needed. Right now, rich players can bring a ton of huge models to the table and others can't afford to do the same.

We'll see how it goes.

This actually pretty much sums up AoS for me.

However: I will probably play it so infrequently that the few scenarios that come with it will likely be (or feel) non-repetitive. But that's not entirely AoS's fault. The part about no army building structure IS, because building lists, imagining their effectiveness, even if I never play them is a hobby for me, but... I'm more of a SciFi wargamer anyways, and no matter how awesome it is, AoS is is missing jetbikes and energy weapons.

On the bright side, maybe AoS will follow 40k's rules cadence, and there will be a rewrite where the entire game philosophy changes every 12-24 months... faster than even the units can be updated!

xaszatm wrote:
I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.

Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.

This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?

 ToxicBox wrote:

privateer4hire wrote:

 ToxicBox wrote:
They have some, It's in the little wheel next to the abilities. But everything has a fixed to hit, wound and save against everything. A goblin will hit Nagash as easily as a skink

They're pretty much identical game-wise.
Skinks save: 6+ wounds:1 most skink weapons are 5+ to hit and the best one wounds on 4+; the skinks can take multiples (with 10 being the common base, so 10 wounds usually).
Nagash save: 3+ wounds:16 most of Nagash's weapons are 3+ to hit and most wound on 2+
Nagash also has several more special rules than the skinks including being able to fly, ability to wipe a model out if opponent doesn't choose which hand you hide a die in, etc.

Sorry, What I meant was it can take out skinks as easily as it can Nagash. I hadn't actually done the theoryhammer myself. So thank you for doing that

My apologies to you. You're one of the folks I find myself agreeing with in this thread more often than not.
That said, goblins may be able to hit Nagash and a skink unit with same probability but their weapons and their targets' specific stats/abilities make those hits way more likely that a lizard will get injured rather than lord o' the undead

For those that aren't going to play AOS, continue playing 8th Edition or refusing to look at KOW, this might be for you

The Ninth Age...http://warhammer.org.uk/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=129642

 NAVARRO wrote:

xaszatm wrote:
I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.

Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.

This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?

Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.