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.

Oh yeah, I guessed the Magmadroth name right ;-p

Hmm need to decide if I am going to get the battletome or not. I only plan to get a box or two of the Fyreslayers themselves but I am itching for some good fluff and the Fyreslayers have had the best so far...

Definitely getting White Dwarf at a minimum!
6 Warscrolls? Are they going to be 6 variants of the Magmadroth, some formations, warscrolls for the as of yet unreleased units or some completely unrelated warscrolls???

 Bottle wrote:
Oh yeah, I guessed the Magmadroth name right ;-p

Hmm need to decide if I am going to get the battletome or not. I only plan to get a box or two of the Fyreslayers themselves but I am itching for some good fluff and the Fyreslayers have had the best so far...

Definitely getting White Dwarf at a minimum!
6 Warscrolls? Are they going to be 6 variants of the Magmadroth, some formations, warscrolls for the as of yet unreleased units or some completely unrelated warscrolls???

Runefather, Runesmiter and Runeson, aswell as all three on their Magmadroths ^^

 Ghaz wrote:
So the Magmadroth kit actually gives you two models.

The Beast and the Rider (because the rider just stand on top of the throne this are two models)

 Atia wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
Oh yeah, I guessed the Magmadroth name right ;-p

Hmm need to decide if I am going to get the battletome or not. I only plan to get a box or two of the Fyreslayers themselves but I am itching for some good fluff and the Fyreslayers have had the best so far...

Definitely getting White Dwarf at a minimum!
6 Warscrolls? Are they going to be 6 variants of the Magmadroth, some formations, warscrolls for the as of yet unreleased units or some completely unrelated warscrolls???

Runefather, Runesmiter and Runeson, aswell as all three on their Magmadroths ^^

Thanks! Does that mean the guy with the twin axe is a Runefather/son/smiter on foot, or is there an on foot model built from the kit? (Can the rider simply be put on a 32mm base?)

The beast and choice of two riders, one of which can be floormounted whilst the other rides.

 kodos wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
So the Magmadroth kit actually gives you two models.

The Beast and the Rider (because the rider just stand on top of the throne this are two models)

No. Read the description of the Magmadroth on the pic with the prices. You get a Runefather, Runesmiter or Runeson riding the Magmadroth and the parts to make one of the other two on foot.

I am usually a huge GW fan boy, but that lizard looks goofy. Which is really odd because I think all the Lizardman dino's look brilliant. This one just looks sloppy..

I like the magmathingy, but as usual, I don't like it 85 euros much. (I could buy and entire board game for that much money GW! With like 40 miniatures!)

All the war scrolls and whatnot are up on Twitter and the Facebook AoS pages. Highly recommend people follow Age of Sigmar on Facebook - getting to be a very active and quickly growing group.

The deepstrike ability of one of the characters is much needed.

However, I do have to say I was saddened to see a "funny" rule for one of them. It isn't too bad, but I hoped they would not return with the new races. Ah well.

Edit: My one lingering question though, is who are the blacksmiths and the grim wrath berserkers? They're listed in the lodge chart but not seemingly released yet. Wonder if it will be a third week of Fyreslayers, but strikes me a bit weird to come after the battle tome and not be seen in any of the pictures yet.

At least some people find a use for those terrible dwarf sculpts for something. That musculature, the arms, and legs, etc. are atrocious. I guess it's just accepted at this point that GWs non LOTR dwarves will have horrid proportions/ no sense of anatomy? And at that price point! Unbelievable.

The lizard is a big, goofy looking lizard, that looks okayish. But aren't there a fair number of good looking big lizard/dino/dragon models out there for a much more reasonable price?

Really, all very meh.

 jmurph wrote:
But aren't there a fair number of good looking big lizard/dino/dragon models out there for a much more reasonable price?

If I'm reading this correctly, there are three possible heroes in the box, any of which can ride atop the magmadroth and you can choose one of the others to make as a hero on foot (so any two of three, one mounted, one on foot). I won't say it is a great deal, but it is a better one than if you were just getting the magmadroth alone.

Seeing that design up close on the WD front page raises a practical question about how the mounted slayer is supposed to use that big long axe? Wouldn't the golden ornament at the front get in the way of him swinging it about? I think the axe is a bit too long and gives the appearance of somebody using an oar while on a canoe.

coldgaming wrote:

However, I do have to say I was saddened to see a "funny" rule for one of them. It isn't too bad, but I hoped they would not return with the new races. Ah well.
.

Do tell, or link to them. Some of us don't have a privacyinvasionbook account.

I'm intrigued about the inclusion of "funny" rules for the newer armies. That right there is a very curious development.

 Ghaz wrote:

No. Read the description of the Magmadroth on the pic with the prices. You get a Runefather, Runesmiter or Runeson riding the Magmadroth and the parts to make one of the other two on foot.

still not worth 85

 Grimtuff wrote:

coldgaming wrote:

However, I do have to say I was saddened to see a "funny" rule for one of them. It isn't too bad, but I hoped they would not return with the new races. Ah well.
.

Do tell, or link to them. Some of us don't have a privacyinvasionbook account.

I'm intrigued about the inclusion of "funny" rules for the newer armies. That right there is a very curious development.

Auric Runeson's "Explosive Rage" - pick a visible unit to the Runeson to be the target of his wrath. Re-roll hit rolls of 1 against that unit. If a battleshock test is made against that unit before your next hero phase, you can add 1 to the result if you deliver a "suitably characterful insult or furious put down" aimed at the unit.

EDIT: Games should be fun. I've always liked the silly rules and I'm glad to see them return.

At least it's at the unit and not your opponent....

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

coldgaming wrote:

However, I do have to say I was saddened to see a "funny" rule for one of them. It isn't too bad, but I hoped they would not return with the new races. Ah well.
.

Do tell, or link to them. Some of us don't have a privacyinvasionbook account.

I'm intrigued about the inclusion of "funny" rules for the newer armies. That right there is a very curious development.

Auric Runeson's "Explosive Rage" - pick a visible unit to the Runeson to be the target of his wrath. Re-roll hit rolls of 1 against that unit. If a battleshock test is made against that unit before your next hero phase, you can add 1 to the result if you deliver a "suitably characterful insult or furious put down" aimed at the unit.

EDIT: Games should be fun. I've always liked the silly rules and I'm glad to see them return.

Games should be fun, but stuff like that isn't everyone's idea of fun.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

coldgaming wrote:

However, I do have to say I was saddened to see a "funny" rule for one of them. It isn't too bad, but I hoped they would not return with the new races. Ah well.
.

Do tell, or link to them. Some of us don't have a privacyinvasionbook account.

I'm intrigued about the inclusion of "funny" rules for the newer armies. That right there is a very curious development.

Auric Runeson's "Explosive Rage" - pick a visible unit to the Runeson to be the target of his wrath. Re-roll hit rolls of 1 against that unit. If a battleshock test is made against that unit before your next hero phase, you can add 1 to the result if you deliver a "suitably characterful insult or furious put down" aimed at the unit.

EDIT: Games should be fun. I've always liked the silly rules and I'm glad to see them return.

Games should be fun, but stuff like that isn't everyone's idea of fun.

Yup, sounds like Wulfrik's rule, which was a blank cheque for potential disaster.

GW, will you ever learn?

Also sad to see the joke/4th wall breaking rules continue.

There is one bright side. At least no-one can now argue they were strictly a ploy by GW to invalidate existing collections anymore though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

coldgaming wrote:

Edit: My one lingering question though, is who are the blacksmiths and the grim wrath berserkers? They're listed in the lodge chart but not seemingly released yet. Wonder if it will be a third week of Fyreslayers, but strikes me a bit weird to come after the battle tome and not be seen in any of the pictures yet.

Battlesmith will be the BSB guy that was very first leaked and the Grimwrath Bezerker will be the guy with the twin headed axe is my guess :-)

And they must be in a third week of releases.

 ImAGeek wrote:

Games should be fun, but stuff like that isn't everyone's idea of fun.

I was watching a video on game design - forget what it was called - and it basically argued that there are two kinds of rules: thematic rules and mechanical rules. Thematic rules are great because they give character to the units and playing them, but many players hate them because they are unpredictable or end up making units less effective than they would like. For them, a thematic rule which is mechanically imperfect is a criminal act.

Age of Sigmar, more than anything else, is a thematic game. Every special ability of a unit comes with a short description of why it gets the ability. The Runefather can fix an enemy unit within 3" with a level stare, the sort that can bring doubt to the mind of even the mightiest warrior. The mechanic is that you subtract D3 from the opposing unit's bravery until their next hero phase, which is thematically appropriate for a menacing stare, right? And that's cool. Gives the model some character. He doesn't subtract D3 from bravery. He fething stares at them until they lose D3 bravery.

The insult rule is thematic fun. You've got an angry little dwarf hurling insults at the enemy units, making them slightly easier to hit and slightly more likely to flee during Battle Shock tests. That's awesome. That's fun. And for the player who takes the opportunity to get into it, it makes that model more fun to play - not because he is more mechanically competent, but because he has a unique mechanic that makes playing him more joyous. I am not kidding: I am seriously considering getting this kit for this special ability alone.

Age of Sigmar is all about theme, not mechanics, and that's precisely why I love those rules. The models aren't just a stat line. They have character, and they give the games character. Playing with an insulting dwarf makes for a different game experience than one during which you cannot kneel for any reason, or one where you have to wear a fake beard for the duration. It's not just a competition between two min-maxed lists. It's not about who is smarter or more experienced or who downloaded the best tactics from a forum. It's about making experiences. It's about creating games that you laugh and have fun during - games you remember.

I know some people treat miniature games as math problems, and there's nothing wrong with that. But I think they should loosen up a bit on occasion and enjoy a game for the things you can't quantify with discrete math.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

Games should be fun, but stuff like that isn't everyone's idea of fun.

I was watching a video on game design - forget what it was called - and it basically argued that there are two kinds of rules: thematic rules and mechanical rules. Thematic rules are great because they give character to the units and playing them, but many players hate them because they are unpredictable or end up making units less effective than they would like. For them, a thematic rule which is mechanically imperfect is a criminal act.

Age of Sigmar, more than anything else, is a thematic game. Every special ability of a unit comes with a short description of why it gets the ability. The Runefather can fix an enemy unit within 3" with a level stare, the sort that can bring doubt to the mind of even the mightiest warrior. The mechanic is that you subtract D3 from the opposing unit's bravery until their next hero phase, which is thematically appropriate for a menacing stare, right? And that's cool. Gives the model some character. He doesn't subtract D3 from bravery. He fething stares at them until they lose D3 bravery.

The insult rule is thematic fun. You've got an angry little dwarf hurling insults at the enemy units, making them slightly easier to hit and slightly more likely to flee during Battle Shock tests. That's awesome. That's fun. And for the player who takes the opportunity to get into it, it makes that model more fun to play - not because he is more mechanically competent, but because he has a unique mechanic that makes playing him more joyous. I am not kidding: I am seriously considering getting this kit for this special ability alone.

Age of Sigmar is all about theme, not mechanics, and that's precisely why I love those rules. The models aren't just a stat line. They have character, and they give the games character. Playing with an insulting dwarf makes for a different game experience than one during which you cannot kneel for any reason, or one where you have to wear a fake beard for the duration. It's not just a competition between two min-maxed lists. It's not about who is smarter or more experienced or who downloaded the best tactics from a forum. It's about making experiences. It's about creating games that you laugh and have fun during - games you remember.

I know some people treat miniature games as math problems, and there's nothing wrong with that. But I think they should loosen up a bit on occasion and enjoy a game for the things you can't quantify with discrete math.

You miss the point. It's got nothing to do with thematic vs mechanical rules or whatever. It's because these joke rules break the fourth wall, and that breaks the immersion. Suddenly it's not about the story of two armies doing battle, it's the story about two guys playing a game with figurines and one of them is dancing around pretending to be a pony.

Since they haven't been posted here unless I missed it:

Argh, those pictures dont seem zoomable. My eyesight aint what it used to be.....

 Bottle wrote:
You miss the point. It's got nothing to do with thematic vs mechanical rules or whatever. It's because these joke rules break the fourth wall, and that breaks the immersion. Suddenly it's not about the story of two armies doing battle, it's the story about two guys playing a game with figurines and one of them is dancing around pretending to be a pony.

Bottle, thank you for this! I pay attention to your posts because you have been both a fan of AoS, and shown that you're willing to be reasonable, and even critical of things on occasion.

You can like AoS, and not swallow everything GW releases whole - and this is a great example of that.

To do the reverse (as I'm usually critical of AoS) that Runeson model looks great... just wish the head plume were as detailed as that sweet beard!

 Bottle wrote:

You miss the point. It's got nothing to do with thematic vs mechanical rules or whatever. It's because these joke rules break the fourth wall, and that breaks the immersion. Suddenly it's not about the story of two armies doing battle, it's the story about two guys playing a game with figurines and one of them is dancing around pretending to be a pony.

In this case, the model's special ability is literally insulting another unit. It's not breaking the fourth wall. If anything, it's roleplaying, completely in character, and should enhance your feeling of two armies doing battle. In other words, it's thematic.

As for the fourth wall thing, every single game I've ever played of Warmachine has involved unpainted armies on flat tables with felt cut outs representing forests and hills, with proxy models and occasionally empty bases representing models. Follow Privateer Press on Twitter and see retweet after retweet of empty tables with unpainted armies. That's the entirety of the Warmachine experience. I'll take players having fun and enjoying themselves in the spirit of the game over that any day.

We like what we like and we struggle to explain why. Ultimately, no justification will do, and no debate will change what we like. So, I'll just say, I like the silly rules and I'd rather play a game with a similar minded player than with a player who feels such rules are beneath them.

Uck, the pose on the runemaster wrecks him for me. The Runefather looks like you are supposed to remove that long gold section of the axe handle if you mount him on foot, then he would be fine. Runeson looks solid but suffers from the same off-dynamic posing as many of the fireslayers do. Salamander looks good overall, the saddlethrone thing is a bit silly but not so bad that I couldn't overlook it.

But for $110 that is a trash model. I am expecting a higher quality and much better design on a model with that premium of a price, otherwise forgettable errors become major factors when the price is cranked up that high. For $18 more I can get a magma dragon from forgeworld that will be bigger and look a hell of a lot better.

[edit] And I can toss in $12 more for a better looking character to put on his back as well.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Bottle wrote:

You miss the point. It's got nothing to do with thematic vs mechanical rules or whatever. It's because these joke rules break the fourth wall, and that breaks the immersion. Suddenly it's not about the story of two armies doing battle, it's the story about two guys playing a game with figurines and one of them is dancing around pretending to be a pony.

In this case, the model's special ability is literally insulting another unit. It's not breaking the fourth wall. If anything, it's roleplaying, completely in character, and should enhance your feeling of two armies doing battle. In other words, it's thematic.

As for the fourth wall thing, every single game I've ever played of Warmachine has involved unpainted armies on flat tables with felt cut outs representing forests and hills, with proxy models and occasionally empty bases representing models. Follow Privateer Press on Twitter and see retweet after retweet of empty tables with unpainted armies. That's the entirety of the Warmachine experience. I'll take players having fun and enjoying themselves in the spirit of the game over that any day.

We like what we like and we struggle to explain why. Ultimately, no justification will do, and no debate will change what we like. So, I'll just say, I like the silly rules and I'd rather play a game with a similar minded player than with a player who feels such rules are beneath them.

What the hell does Warmachine have to do this with?? It's the same problem with some competitive-focused players of *all* games. I've seen LEGIONS of grey space marines- posing as vikings or vampires or monks. This is hardly uniquely a Warmachine problem.

Although that point doesn't address the issue anyway. The models are grey because the players are lazy, not because of any requirement by the game itself. In comparison, the game is telling you (the player) to yell at some models to represent your characters. This sort of role playing is popular with some, but I'm not fond of it. The joke runs dry after the first time doing it.

I definitely agree with Bottle, it breaks the 4th wall and I had hoped that GW was going away from it, and hope even more so that it doesn't translate to 40k.

RiTides wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
You miss the point. It's got nothing to do with thematic vs mechanical rules or whatever. It's because these joke rules break the fourth wall, and that breaks the immersion. Suddenly it's not about the story of two armies doing battle, it's the story about two guys playing a game with figurines and one of them is dancing around pretending to be a pony.

Bottle, thank you for this! I pay attention to your posts because you have been both a fan of AoS, and shown that you're willing to be reasonable, and even critical of things on occasion.

You can like AoS, and not swallow everything GW releases whole - and this is a great example of that.

To do the reverse (as I'm usually critical of AoS) that Runeson model looks great... just wish the head plume were as detailed as that sweet beard!

Haha, thanks. I'm glad I don't just annoy everyone :-) I made a decision when getting back into the hobby that I would stick with Warhammer Fantasy where ever GW took it. Now I'm here in the Age of Sigmar trying to make sense of how my Altdorf City Guard fit into this new world - there are things I love about AoS and some things I miss so so much from Fantasy Battle.

Sqorgar wrote:

 Bottle wrote:

You miss the point. It's got nothing to do with thematic vs mechanical rules or whatever. It's because these joke rules break the fourth wall, and that breaks the immersion. Suddenly it's not about the story of two armies doing battle, it's the story about two guys playing a game with figurines and one of them is dancing around pretending to be a pony.

In this case, the model's special ability is literally insulting another unit. It's not breaking the fourth wall. If anything, it's roleplaying, completely in character, and should enhance your feeling of two armies doing battle. In other words, it's thematic.

You're saying "should" as if it's me at fault for not getting into the spirit of these rules, but in truth I am all about having a fun thematic game and love the non-fourth wall breaking rules (like the Auric Runemaster's ability to spot Ur-gold and how that plays in the game). These rules don't do anything to enhance my experience like a good campaign map or issuing a challenge (from WHFB) might do. In fact they detract from the experience.

As for the fourth wall thing, every single game I've ever played of Warmachine has involved unpainted armies on flat tables with felt cut outs representing forests and hills, with proxy models and occasionally empty bases representing models. Follow Privateer Press on Twitter and see retweet after retweet of empty tables with unpainted armies. That's the entirety of the Warmachine experience. I'll take players having fun and enjoying themselves in the spirit of the game over that any day.

Lol, what is this warmachine shade for?

We like what we like and we struggle to explain why. Ultimately, no justification will do, and no debate will change what we like. So, I'll just say, I like the silly rules and I'd rather play a game with a similar minded player than with a player who feels such rules are beneath them.

Wow, again, what's with all the passive insults? I don't feel these rules are beneath me, it's just not my kind of fun in the context of a wargame.

"Breaking the fourth wall" is when the unit itself would do something like insult the opposing player.

Just sayin'. This isn't breaking that fourth wall.

 Kanluwen wrote:
"Breaking the fourth wall" is when the unit itself would do something like insult the opposing player.

Just sayin'. This isn't breaking that fourth wall.

Hold them closer, Pony Dancer