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.

decker_cky wrote:
https://boagworld.com/design/why-whitespace-matters/

http://uxmyths.com/post/2059998441/myth-28-white-space-is-wasted-space

http://www.serif.com/blog/how-important-is-white-space-in-print-design/

Interesting articles, and I can certainly see the importance of it in presentation, advertising and marketing. Even from a reading comprehension perspective not cluttering a page with a wall'o'text is usually a good idea.

However I refer to this, this and this. It's too much. It's a single unit entry, plus a bunch of needless white space.

This is why the bestiary section, such as it is, for this book takes up 9 pages... yet only gives us 9 adversaries.

They need to do better.

That's awful. White-space can suck it...if someone wants content they want content. Booklets this scarce are a joke.

It is better than a wall of text, but I will say there is too much space between the behavior table and the unit rules above.

I hope some folks put some playthroughts up on youtube, i'd like to see the game in action. Plus it looks like these adversaries are going to be a bit tougher than the pushovers in ST. With the blightkings being a near match for an opposing player and the wrathmongers looking like a terror, it'll be interesting.

It's not even just the space between the rules and the table. It's the whole layout. It's a graphic designer's fever dream, with different font sizes, embedded artwork, text overlays, text at different angles, and then scattered rules beneath it. Then the behaviour table.

The only cohesive thing about is that every single unit entry is this bad.

AoS is infested with this stuff, and they have the added awfulness of those half fluff/half-kinda rule paragraphs that somehow attempt to combine unit size, unit leadership and equipment into an 'evocative' paragraph. It's a bad way to write rules and it's an even worse way to present rules.

They're actually succeeded in making things more cluttered. Who knew that when the most recent Ork Codex came out it would start a wave of terribly presented out rulebooks.

Well... I did. I said as much at the time, that removing fluff and going to a simple paragraph of flavour text, a massive photo, and a haphazard set of rules was going to end up looking awful. AoS just magnified it and now nuQuest is suffering from that.

 Thargrim wrote:
With the blightkings being a near match for an opposing player and the wrathmongers looking like a terror, it'll be interesting.

Nice as that may be, there is a pretty big downside to the Wrathmongers being an adversary type in this game: You have to buy Wrathmongers.

Dumbest Khorne release in a decade. Those derpy hammer flails are just the worst. Give me the brutal looking Blood Warriors any day.

Man, it's like you have some sort of issue with illegible rules. Slowing everything down and making scanning a pain in the ass by incorporating fluff and rules just makes the game more immersive.

Heh, I like the Wrath Monger kit. I like the alternate builds for them a lot more though. I found it odd that they didn't include rules for Skull Reapers as well.

That kit and the Blight Kings are tied for some of my favorites just in terms of how much extra bits they came with. Perfect for conversions!

The bulk of my Bloodbound have all been rearmed with leftovers from the Wrath Monger kits, and I'd do the same with my Acolytes if we ever see a Tzeentchian equivalent!

 highlord tamburlaine wrote:
I found it odd that they didn't include rules for Skull Reapers as well.

Not enough room.

I made coop rules for the first dungeon in SoH

[edit, look for last post]

I mostly just want to use the Hammerhal setting for skirmish gaming.

Bought my copy, Dark Elf is miscast. Part of his animal jaw bone neckpiece is non-existent. Time to phone up GW.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Bought my copy, Dark Elf is miscast. Part of his animal jaw bone neckpiece is non-existent. Time to phone up GW.

That's odd, usually GW plastics don't have any significant miscasts. Sometimes you'll get more flash than usual but to have a part absent is odd. The molds for some of these models may be starting to age though...but that's a wild guess.

As a random thought, I wonder if you'll be able to get the Lord Celestant on Ebay cheaper than the clampack model, much like the Questor from Silver Tower?

FitzChevalric wrote:
I made coop rules for the first dungeon in SoH

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8si56eijuoqpm61/1.%20The%20Catacombs.pdf?dl=0

Nice work! Have downloaded the cards.

It's a lot of fighting acolytes is that the same in the game?

My copy of soh has not arrived yet

Marxist artist wrote:

FitzChevalric wrote:
I made coop rules for the first dungeon in SoH

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8si56eijuoqpm61/1.%20The%20Catacombs.pdf?dl=0

Nice work! Have downloaded the cards.

It's a lot of fighting acolytes is that the same in the game?

My copy of soh has not arrived yet

I believe the first dungeon is entirely vs acolytes, based on what I heard some dungeons are themed around a particular chaos god or something. Fighting acolytes for the first dungeon might not be a bad idea, while players get their grip on the game. I assume the blightkings and other foes are a lot harder to defeat. Correct me if i'm wrong but I don't think exotic adversaries will pop up too commonly either. They look particularly challenging, but it may not be worth it to collect every single kind because you might not use them too often. I plan on getting plaguebearers in particular, since I can't justify buying all of em. I don't like blowing all my money in one spot especially with GW releasing odd stuff left and right, only reason I haven't got Shadows over Hammerhal yet is cause I spent all my free cash on Blood Bowl.

 Thargrim wrote:

Marxist artist wrote:

FitzChevalric wrote:
I made coop rules for the first dungeon in SoH

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8si56eijuoqpm61/1.%20The%20Catacombs.pdf?dl=0

Nice work! Have downloaded the cards.

It's a lot of fighting acolytes is that the same in the game?

My copy of soh has not arrived yet

I believe the first dungeon is entirely vs acolytes, based on what I heard some dungeons are themed around a particular chaos god or something. Fighting acolytes for the first dungeon might not be a bad idea, while players get their grip on the game. I assume the blightkings and other foes are a lot harder to defeat. Correct me if i'm wrong but I don't think exotic adversaries will pop up too commonly either. They look particularly challenging, but it may not be worth it to collect every single kind because you might not use them too often. I plan on getting plaguebearers in particular, since I can't justify buying all of em. I don't like blowing all my money in one spot especially with GW releasing odd stuff left and right, only reason I haven't got Shadows over Hammerhal yet is cause I spent all my free cash on Blood Bowl.

Thanks for response, I bought just the box contents minus miniatures of ebay as have all the models bar the stormcast already, or at least good proxy's for them.

I hope all the quests get co-op cards from the community and applaud the effort so far. Haven't even got bloodbowl yet!

 Thargrim wrote:

Marxist artist wrote:

FitzChevalric wrote:
I made coop rules for the first dungeon in SoH

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8si56eijuoqpm61/1.%20The%20Catacombs.pdf?dl=0

Nice work! Have downloaded the cards.

It's a lot of fighting acolytes is that the same in the game?

My copy of soh has not arrived yet

I believe the first dungeon is entirely vs acolytes, based on what I heard some dungeons are themed around a particular chaos god or something. Fighting acolytes for the first dungeon might not be a bad idea, while players get their grip on the game. I assume the blightkings and other foes are a lot harder to defeat. Correct me if i'm wrong but I don't think exotic adversaries will pop up too commonly either. They look particularly challenging, but it may not be worth it to collect every single kind because you might not use them too often. I plan on getting plaguebearers in particular, since I can't justify buying all of em. I don't like blowing all my money in one spot especially with GW releasing odd stuff left and right, only reason I haven't got Shadows over Hammerhal yet is cause I spent all my free cash on Blood Bowl.

I already have a solid Bloodbound force, so won't have any problems fielding the Blood Warriors or Wrathmongers. I'll eventually work on my Tzeentch force and have some Tzaangors to field, and one day, I'll start Nurgle. This really seems like the type of game where GW could make rules for any model in from the tabletop to be used. I'm really excited to see where this goes!

Second Dungeon The Ancient Halls is ready to playtest for Co-operative playing. Let me know what you think of it?

[edit, look for last post]

Have you posted these playtest files on BGG?

There's definitely demand for coop!

Yeah, such material is usually quite well received over there, though Games Workshop can be a tyrant about such things.

I noted the first file in some thread over there, though I'm sure a full thread would probably be appreciated.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
I noted the first file in some thread over there, though I'm sure a full thread would probably be appreciated.

When finished i combine all dungeons in one PDF

Awesome!

On another note, my phone's E-reader can't download those links. What program do you guys use to see them?

think you need to have an account with dropbox? They're PDFs.

Ah, okay, thanks!

Dungeon number 3 ready for playtesting.

[edit, look for last post]

FitzChevalric wrote:
Dungeon number 3 ready for playtesting.

Dungeon 1. https://www.dropbox.com/s/8si56eijuoqpm61/1.%20The%20Catacombs.pdf?dl=0
Dungeon 2. https://www.dropbox.com/s/9mvzpn9e53p471t/2.%20Ancient%20Halls.pdf?dl=0
Dungeon 3. https://www.dropbox.com/s/lnm800fxshrd605/3.%20Branching%20of%20the%20Ways.pdf?dl=0

All good keep going!

FitzChevalric wrote:
Dungeon number 3 ready for playtesting.

Dungeon 1. https://www.dropbox.com/s/8si56eijuoqpm61/1.%20The%20Catacombs.pdf?dl=0
Dungeon 2. https://www.dropbox.com/s/9mvzpn9e53p471t/2.%20Ancient%20Halls.pdf?dl=0
Dungeon 3. https://www.dropbox.com/s/lnm800fxshrd605/3.%20Branching%20of%20the%20Ways.pdf?dl=0

First rule change: When "Adversaries: none" read "Adversaries: Roll on ambush table"
Except Dungeon 1, room 7 - Dungeon 2, room 6 - Dungeon 3, room 6

FitzChevalric wrote:

FitzChevalric wrote:
Dungeon number 3 ready for playtesting.

Dungeon 1. https://www.dropbox.com/s/8si56eijuoqpm61/1.%20The%20Catacombs.pdf?dl=0
Dungeon 2. https://www.dropbox.com/s/9mvzpn9e53p471t/2.%20Ancient%20Halls.pdf?dl=0
Dungeon 3. https://www.dropbox.com/s/lnm800fxshrd605/3.%20Branching%20of%20the%20Ways.pdf?dl=0

First rule change: When "Adversaries: none" read "Adversaries: Roll on ambush table"
Except Dungeon 1, room 7 - Dungeon 2, room 6 - Dungeon 3, room 6

Played first game rules hold up well! Top work

Some of my impressions of the game after a few plays:

Oh cool! Will have to watch that later though, busy right now.

Also saw you uploaded it on Reddit. Someone might want to point out to that fellow that the artwork isn't recycled but new.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ageofsigmar/comments/5y8who/my_impressions_of_shadows_over_hammerhal/

[Edit] Hey thanks! I really need to stop lurking on Reddit and respond there myself.