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.

Not many, sledgehammer.

Might not be up to date, but I believe the only that would really fit are a priest of sigmar (core ST), and a battlemage.

Expanding your proxy options a bit, there's a dwarf engineer, assassin of unspecified race AFAIK, and a number of stormcast that could be anyone with some decent armor, and you can push that further if the only thing you care about is not having the Chaotic trait. It's really easy to just use w/e you want with a reasonable profile. For instance, I'm using a liche priest as a necromancer, a wraith as a wight, and there's not even demon/undead/living/fantasy race traits, so there's not much that would feel wrong applying a given profile to a character that kind of fits.

Most of the Empire range was brought over into AoS as generic human forces called Freeguild. Some heroes made it into Silver Tower form but I don't think there's much for generic humans right now.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Pretty sure they tried to go more narrative with it and it's at least been implied that this one revolves around 5 specifically named characters, rather than the summoner and whichever 4 PCs there are.

So a GM who rolls on AI tables and PC's that have their names and history chosen for them?

Sounds like a blast.


And yes I know you can ignore that last part. I'm not an idiot. I just question why they did it in the first place.

Yeah, I'm super-skeptical, feels like they're falling right into early AOS prescribed fun/forced role stuff in this case. I'm not touching this one until I read at least one review by someone I trust. Fortunately, there's a reviewer who I do trust who's stated he's getting the game quickly.

Honestly I don't think anyone should buy a game this expensive without checking out a few reviews. Boardgamegeek are usually pretty good and unaffected by the bias of GW fans. They seem to be trying to tell story with this one. That could be good but it sounds like it limits replayability.

Honestly, if this game looked like it was a direct expansion/sequel/additional campaign for silver tower, even with all of my reservations about ST (it's far from perfect), my group's had enough fun that I'd have jumped right on in.

There is a lot of new info about the game on the war of sigmar blog. It looks very promising with a much more in depth role-playing element.

https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com

For the lszy.

Ohhh, now that sounds pretty good. And the tiles look pretty decent. I acutally consider buying it now with models, because you never can have enough...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Pretty sure they tried to go more narrative with it and it's at least been implied that this one revolves around 5 specifically named characters, rather than the summoner and whichever 4 PCs there are.

So a GM who rolls on AI tables and PC's that have their names and history chosen for them?

Sounds like a blast.


And yes I know you can ignore that last part. I'm not an idiot. I just question why they did it in the first place.

I mean, Wizards of the Coast gives you prebuilt campaigns with characters and NPCs for D&D that you can play right out of the box too, and that seems to be a pretty popular game.

The GM can decide the monster actions too. I do admire how hard you're working to find things to complain about though!

Are the villains and henchmen backwards compatible like the heroes?

Vorian wrote:
The GM can decide the monster actions too. I do admire how hard you're working to find things to complain about though!

So if I understand this correctly, the GM can auto decide the monsters' actions, or you can go random actions. Making a GM optional? Does that sound about right? Seems like they're trying to make it appealing to both camps of players.

https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com/bloggings/1731

All I know is what's written there

They have also done a small fluff post as well.

https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com/bloggings/1734

Images

Well now that art work would make for some seriously cool looking mini's

I wonder if this might be a glimps of whats to come. The City looks huge, maybe we are just starting our adventure out in it!

A beggar and a Sewerjack/Rat-Catcher; step 1 of the road to an AoS based edition of WHFRP is complete!

I'm intrigued but the card based skill/loot system still concerns me.

 notprop wrote:
A beggar and a Sewerjack/Rat-Catcher; step 1 of the road to an AoS based edition of WHFRP is complete!

I'm intrigued but the card based skill/loot system still concerns me.

Dude after reading that small fluff extract I REALLY want an AOS rpg since I am really enjoying this blend of low and high fantasy. Plus some of the locations in the realm gate wars book would be awesome to adventure in. What's funny is the lord castellant does not like his friends home made ale.

I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?

Also means that once you've played through once, you probably know things that would make a subsequent playthrough much less fun. But I guess that was also true of Silver Tower. These boards games are meant to be played through once, and then you buy the next one.

Albino Squirrel wrote:
I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?

Also means that once you've played through once, you probably know things that would make a subsequent playthrough much less fun. But I guess that was also true of Silver Tower. These boards games are meant to be played through once, and then you buy the next one.

The advantage of being a GM you can make your own small events to add into the game. Case example if someone was playing a wight king or necromancer I would make a small event in town of trying to find a way to disguise yourself or having your party members figure out a way for you to use your gold etc.

Albino Squirrel wrote:
I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?

Also means that once you've played through once, you probably know things that would make a subsequent playthrough much less fun. But I guess that was also true of Silver Tower. These boards games are meant to be played through once, and then you buy the next one.

You actually can direct the minions on your own, ditching the dice rolls. That or you guys collaborate and "share" the secrets. Or you could do like, you guys get to know a part of the secrets but the other doesn't know THAT part.

Now that is the kind of artwork GW needs to start having in Age of Sigmar and 40K again. Non of this Computer generated stuff.

Have a mixture of all types of art, not just one type that starts to make everything look the same.

Albino Squirrel wrote:
I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?

Also means that once you've played through once, you probably know things that would make a subsequent playthrough much less fun. But I guess that was also true of Silver Tower. These boards games are meant to be played through once, and then you buy the next one.

It sounds like quite a step back toward OriginalQuest. The GM (certainly the ones I played with) would actively try to kill the party and ensure they befell whatever heinous traps he had laid. We played again a few months ago and my abiding memories were my character making it back to town with thousands in gold only to be killed by a runaway horse just as I had bought a new horse and the GMs near constant cackles and laughter as the party was killed in a variety of different ways. It was good fun for all.

Albino Squirrel wrote:
I like the sound of the background, but what a terrible choice to add the GM role. Sounds like it is the worst of both worlds. You are required to have one, otherwise one player will know secret things the party shouldn't know, but the GM has nothing worthwhile to do except read passages and roll for enemies, since they aren't really meant to try to win. Who will want to be the GM?

That's kind of what GMs are like in any game. GMs are never trying to "win", they're trying to tell a story and facilitate the players' experience. Unless you're evil, I guess.

There's less space for storytelling since it's mostly written for you, but the GM can make decisions to personalize it or can even write their own changes/versions in later playthroughs.

Nah, in Quest they are trying to kill you or they're not doing it right!

I'm w/ Albino here, GM's in the worst possible place- it sounds like they don't have the resources to be a true adversary/competitive force, but don't have enough storytelling/flexiblity to be a GM since everything I've seen looks very structured.

I can imagine that the notion of a GM might be overwhelming to those that have never needed one, especially in a board game.
Those of us who have GM'd or played with a GM should know that nothing is ever as simple as it being written out for you. Players will always deviate from the path and a good GM will flow with it. I once GM'd a premade Pathfinder campaign that actually ended up in a different premade Pathfinder campaign as my players seemed more interested in going that direction.

I think people will find a way to play this game with or without a GM. That should not be the break point, A poorly written story and lack of options should be the break point. This sounds very much like an introductory into GM'ing.

Umm, in a GW game which from what I can tell has very limited adversaries and prefab characters and maps, with very basic action options, unless they've made a far more robust rules set than anything they've revealed and felt the need to not talk about it, I'm leaning towards this having little meaningful agency.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Umm, in a GW game which from what I can tell has very limited adversaries and prefab characters and maps, with very basic action options, unless they've made a far more robust rules set than anything they've revealed and felt the need to not talk about it, I'm leaning towards this having little meaningful agency.

People like basic.
Look at X-wing's popularity, and the advent and success of DnD next.
People who dismiss 'basic' as inferior are in my experience people I dont want to play with

I think you miss the point of a GM and story telling and that's ok, its not everyone's cup of tea.
The complexity of rules isn't what its about, and prefab is par for the course with pre-build campaigns, with a little time and a few beers you can create what ever you want, there is nothing stopping you but yourself.
This game could have very little substance, we dont know yet, but again that is the joy of GM, they can add more to the story to fill it out, it makes it more fluid and less robotic.
I see the GM as an asset, AI cards can only do so much and they do it the same every time...