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.

 Sigvatr wrote:
I wish the terrain came pre-painted. Would buy it.

Same here, I never ever buy unpainted terrain because my paint job will take all the appeal out of it haha

 angelofvengeance wrote:
The Ophidian archway piece is actually quite big and quite detailed...

That is a nice bit of terrain.

If only it were for Warhammer Fantasy.

I'm liking the new style of terrain, closer to greek or roman style than "skull skull skull".

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

That is a nice bit of terrain.

If only it were for Warhammer Fantasy.

I'm sure you could adapt some rules for it in 8th.

 angelofvengeance wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

That is a nice bit of terrain.

If only it were for Warhammer Fantasy.

I'm sure you could adapt some rules for it in 8th.

This is not the response to terrain to which I'm accustomed.

I'm sure you'd appreciate something a little less skully on the tabletop Vermis

the terrain looks great. I'd love to see em do a cities of death style building kit with the separate panels and stuff that matches these

 Necros wrote:
the terrain looks great. I'd love to see em do a cities of death style building kit with the separate panels and stuff that matches these

The Archway is fully modular.

To what end I don't know.

 Rayvon wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
I wish the terrain came pre-painted. Would buy it.

Same here, I never ever buy unpainted terrain because my paint job will take all the appeal out of it haha

Aye. We had all our armies be painted by professionals and theoretically, we could do the same with the new terrain. The waiting time, however, makes us lose interest in it again.

angelofvengeance wrote:I'm sure you'd appreciate something a little less skully on the tabletop Vermis

No, I mean...

'If only this terrain was Warhammer old world themed'

'Well I'm sure you can come up with different rules for it'

Can't wrap me head.

Terrain should evoke the setting (even if that means it's crusted with skullz), and in rules should 'merely' block sight, provide cover, hinder movement, or be an objective, as appropriate. Any extra majukal effects on your minis should be a minor thing, or at least not the main focus of the kit. It's like being given some Vauban star fortification terrain you didn't really want, despite the fact that it's very, very pretty, and being told you can just give it different rules to turn it into a 19thC US cavalry fort or a Māori pā.

Not sure if it's been posted, but Atia stated what's coming up for next week's preorders(starting August 1st):
Paladins box. Builds Retributors(hammers!), Decimators(greataxes!), or Protectors(glaives!).

So we get bases and Judicators(ranged unit!) this week, Paladins next week.

I'm another in the "that arch looks cool" camp, but why on earth, given all contorting and hoop jumping, have they used a name which is totally unprotectable, not only that, but even uses a term from another wargaming company's property?

Wall reminding me a whole lot of


Not a bad thing really.

 Desubot wrote:
Wall reminding me a whole lot of

Spoiler:

Not a bad thing really.

Same thing I was thinking. I like that it's a piece of terrain not entirely covered in skulls

Looks like Lady_Atia got shut down by GW. If anyone finds another line on spoilers let us know.

How dare we get informed and excited about anything. Just line up with your wallets out plebs.

It would be nice to have some official previews. At this point though, I picture the guys up top at GW as the principle from Clone High, in both sanity and competency...



That being said, I too love the distinct lack of SKULLZ! (TM), and even the break from the Gothic look, which is great, is a nice change of pace. The side with the stone and the plaster looks very, very fine, and like something survivors from the South of the Empire would have built when trying to start a new civilization. It's very tempting to stray from the path of the "make all terrain but trees". I mean, except for the loss of official support for the Old World, I'm really liking age of Sigmar. Well, that and the new Chaos warrior sculpts. The Bloodreavers are great, but I'm missing the closed helmets on the bigger guys. Suppose that's why the Good Lord gave us greenstuff.

 Vermis wrote:

angelofvengeance wrote:I'm sure you'd appreciate something a little less skully on the tabletop Vermis

No, I mean...

'If only this terrain was Warhammer old world themed'

'Well I'm sure you can come up with different rules for it'

Can't wrap me head.

Terrain should evoke the setting (even if that means it's crusted with skullz), and in rules should 'merely' block sight, provide cover, hinder movement, or be an objective, as appropriate. Any extra majukal effects on your minis should be a minor thing, or at least not the main focus of the kit. It's like being given some Vauban star fortification terrain you didn't really want, despite the fact that it's very, very pretty, and being told you can just give it different rules to turn it into a 19thC US cavalry fort or a Māori pā.

"Should"? Sounds like you "should" design your own game.

Bull0, you completely missed his point. In fact, had you not quoted him, I would have assumed you were responding to a different conversation entirely.

His point was that wishing the theme, or aesthetic, of a piece of terrain is different is not a longing assuaged by putting different rules on it. The look of the thing is the issue, not the rules.
To put Vermis' point another way, a really nice 28mm version of a 1997 Queen Vic police cruiser does not make great terrain for an American Civil war game, even if you say "Oh, just give it rules for a late period Conestoga wagon." The look is the problem, not the rules.

 reds8n wrote:
I think this particular tangent has been done to death, so lets' move on.

Thanks !


https://www.flickr.com/photos/133089306@N08/sets/72157655911579881/

Has some pics of the AoS display at Warhammer World

https://www.flickr.com/photos/133089306@N08/collections/72157655875302725/

has more pics of the other displays/warhammer world in general.

Literally the only thing I care about re AoS at this point is whether it's actually possible as a punter to build one of those Sigmarite temples(2nd link, under the "Entrance" album) using the upcoming terrain, or if it's yet another "look what you can do with our terrain! *mumble* If you can afford to buy dozens upon dozens of kits to fish out the part we used loads of times but only comes one or two to a box... *mumble* deal.

Outside of making a one-off special building for Mordheim, like Vermis says I don't see much use for this new stuff since it just doesn't fit with Realhammer; if it was less encrusted with "Yo dawg, I herd you liek Sigmar..." stuff everywhere it could actually make for some lovely Elven ruins with the right paintjob, but by the time you converted it to remove all the branding you'd be as well building from scratch. It's a real shame GW didn't see the potential in an all-plastic modular kit in the old style; as usual, in their hurry to prevent third parties from "stealing" their sales because the core design isn't protectable, they fail to consider that the level of quality & materials they're capable of producing could have meant folk buying their stuff to use in other games, rather than their customers buying stuff from elsewhere.

It'd be quite good if you have an Alpha Legion army in 40/30K...

I see one scroll that says SIGMAR and a few fairly low key twin tailed comets. I'm not seeing how this wouldn't be appropriate in a Lustrian jungle, a mysterious ruin deep in the Drakwald etc.

Thank you, Wehrkind. Plus, I'm a bit disconcerted that after 8th ed's short tenure, terrain now seems to be judged by some by what special rules and buffs it gives you.

It'd be nice if people stopped responding to confusion about non sequiturs with more non sequiturs, too. I guess I'd have to take some of Bull0's advice and look at a different game's fans...

Azreal13 wrote:I'm another in the "that arch looks cool" camp, but why on earth, given all contorting and hoop jumping, have they used a name which is totally unprotectable, not only that, but even uses a term from another wargaming company's property?

They should've called it something more original but still vaguely dragon-related. Something like...

Vermian archway. Yeah. I like the sound of that.

Desubot wrote:Wall reminding me a whole lot of

Spoiler:

Not a bad thing really.

Where's that from?

Skyrim

Trailer and in game location.

 primalexile wrote:
Looks like Lady_Atia got shut down by GW. If anyone finds another line on spoilers let us know.

That really sucks, I liked her twitter feed

 Yodhrin wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
I think this particular tangent has been done to death, so lets' move on.

Thanks !


https://www.flickr.com/photos/133089306@N08/sets/72157655911579881/

Has some pics of the AoS display at Warhammer World

https://www.flickr.com/photos/133089306@N08/collections/72157655875302725/

has more pics of the other displays/warhammer world in general.

Literally the only thing I care about re AoS at this point is whether it's actually possible as a punter to build one of those Sigmarite temples(2nd link, under the "Entrance" album) using the upcoming terrain, or if it's yet another "look what you can do with our terrain! *mumble* If you can afford to buy dozens upon dozens of kits to fish out the part we used loads of times but only comes one or two to a box... *mumble* deal.

I could be wrong, but I don't think they've released the kits to make those temples yet. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

That being said, I would imagine that the kit which will contain the necessary parts will probably make half a temple, with some ruined bits. There's not a lot else that they can do with a structure like that.

More tiles Bob?

BoLS thinks they have spotted a full 6 tiles set for Age of Sigmar, not just the one we've seen 'leaked'

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/07/hidden-in-plain-sight-age-of-sigmar-battle-board.html

if its any news the tree people are almost all sold out :/

 Wehrkind wrote:
Bull0, you completely missed his point. In fact, had you not quoted him, I would have assumed you were responding to a different conversation entirely.

His point was that wishing the theme, or aesthetic, of a piece of terrain is different is not a longing assuaged by putting different rules on it. The look of the thing is the issue, not the rules.
To put Vermis' point another way, a really nice 28mm version of a 1997 Queen Vic police cruiser does not make great terrain for an American Civil war game, even if you say "Oh, just give it rules for a late period Conestoga wagon." The look is the problem, not the rules.

Er, what? He said terrain should only block LOS and give cover and etc, and any magical shenanigans should be kept to a minimum. I was responding to that. The point that giving it more WFB-appropriate rules doesn't make it a WFB terrain piece is utterly prosaic, I didn't realise that needed debating.

 primalexile wrote:
Looks like Lady_Atia got shut down by GW. If anyone finds another line on spoilers let us know.

Wasn't just gw. It was those idiots at bols who take anyones stuff and claim it as their own and that other idiot from spiky bits rob baer