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.

To be honest, i would be happy with just a list of "official rule sources"

At the moment there are;

Codexes
Codex Supplements
Campaign Books,
White Dwarf formations,
Box specific formations,
Web only formations.

Now we need sites like detachment compendium or some army builder just to keep track. It can't be denied it is a bit too much for a good portion of people.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
*skims through Generals' Handbook*

Reinforcement points? Who thought that was a good idea?

Whilst 40K does need a massive ground-up overhaul to remove the endless bloat that it has attracted over 2 editions, I really do hope it doesn't get as simplified as the AoS rules.

I mean, it's nice that they added Matched Play and gave everything points, but each unit can still be armed with whatever. Unit options, wargear options and characters are all just "blah" in those rules, seemingly not costing anything above the base-line guys in the unit. That's no way to balance a ruleset. Some things are worth more than others, and a Devastator Squad w/4 Missile Launchers is worth more than a Devastator Squad where you've (for whatever reason) chosen to take nothing.

I think it's a good idea. Like I said once to a guy who plays daemons (and by playing I say he brings 2.5k points to 1.5k games in 40k)... "I'm sorry you've got to pay for your army now".

There's a few aspects born out of the FAQ that need ironing (which they are working) but it's a good concept since summoning let's you charge and act inmediately after entering the battlefield, so it's not like in 40k where you have to endure the pre-emptive strike and sufer the scatter that can bone you ( not in AoS though you cannot place closer than 9'' from the foe), plus summoning is easier than in 40k and more flexible :you have better statistical chance of succes (most basic stuff triggers on a 4-5, so it's 90-80 chance of success while in 40k, on 3d6 you'd have a 12.5% chance to summon the same thing) you don't need a lucky roll to get the power to summon x thing. All wizards (of the corresponding factions) know how to summon stuff.

Plenty of characters don't have any upgrades also but regarding units, this I think is them doing away with the "illusion of thought". Grav-guns cost x points but ultimately you're going to try to fit in as many as you can so you may as well include it in the base point.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
*skims through Generals' Handbook*

Reinforcement points? Who thought that was a good idea?

Whilst 40K does need a massive ground-up overhaul to remove the endless bloat that it has attracted over 2 editions, I really do hope it doesn't get as simplified as the AoS rules.

I mean, it's nice that they added Matched Play and gave everything points, but each unit can still be armed with whatever. Unit options, wargear options and characters are all just "blah" in those rules, seemingly not costing anything above the base-line guys in the unit. That's no way to balance a ruleset. Some things are worth more than others, and a Devastator Squad w/4 Missile Launchers is worth more than a Devastator Squad where you've (for whatever reason) chosen to take nothing.

If you think Pink Horrors splitting and summoning spam in 40K is bad, you've never seen a Tzeentch Daemon or Nagash list in Age of Sigmar. Reinforcement points were pretty much a hammer blow pointed straight at those armies; summoning now works as a form of Deep Strike and gives you flexibility with your spare points to choose what you want to summon in a game. Reinforcement points make a lot of sense, but most agree that they are too harsh on some armies.

Unit armament isn't unbalanced like you suggest. Unit entries clearly state which weapons that models can be equipped with (you can't have a Chaos Warrior with both a Halberd and a Greatblade for example) and units which do have "special weapons" are hard-capped as to how many of those they can take based on their unit size. The only "imbalance" is if a person actively doesn't build their models with those special weapons...but unlike 40K, there's absolutely zero reason not to use them, especially as they diversify the unit.

Not sure I follow your reasoning honestly, how much AoS do you play? As someone who participates in AoS tournaments, I can assure you that it's a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more balanced game than 40k. There's power lists but nothing on the scale of 2++ re-rollable death-stars in 40K or horrendously under-priced models like Wraithknights, every army has a counter and every faction can be made competitive in some way through the Grand Alliance rules.

But that's getting a bit too off-topic
Super keen on fluff spoilers, I wanna know what's up with Sicarius. Also, how on earth will Guilliman react to Centurions?

Yup.

AoS has a much wider summoning pool. If you're a Nercomancer, you can summon any Undead unit that isn't a Special Character - that includes your mates Bob and Bert, who can the summon more stuff.

So whilst Reinforcement points look odd to the 40k eye, they're necessary because of how it all works in AoS (no more summoning the ideal unit at the ideal time laziness. Not anymore, oh no!)

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So whilst Reinforcement points look odd to the 40k eye, they're necessary because of how it all works in AoS (no more summoning the ideal unit at the ideal time laziness. Not anymore, oh no!)

Nevermind tzeentch herald that by RAW would summon in average close to 100 copies of himself in first turn. Then on second turn unless you get all those killed you could start it fresh. Not every one of those will create 100 copies but good chunk will.

Keep this until you get bored of creating more and just start throwing in bolts at the enemy...

At least they got it fixed but sheesh. They didn't realize that having just ONE tzeentch herald in the army breaks the rules right away?

tneva82 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So whilst Reinforcement points look odd to the 40k eye, they're necessary because of how it all works in AoS (no more summoning the ideal unit at the ideal time laziness. Not anymore, oh no!)

Nevermind tzeentch herald that by RAW would summon in average close to 100 copies of himself in first turn. Then on second turn unless you get all those killed you could start it fresh. Not every one of those will create 100 copies but good chunk will.

Keep this until you get bored of creating more and just start throwing in bolts at the enemy...

At least they got it fixed but sheesh. They didn't realize that having just ONE tzeentch herald in the army breaks the rules right away?

They don't expect players to be jerks, much like I doubt the 40K rules-writers anticipated 2++ re-rollable invulnerable save units
Besides, that's what the General's Handbook is for. If you're playing Narrative Play and someone tries to pull that stunt, they're clearly not worth playing with. Also, who on earth would buy 100 Heralds of Tzeentch?

tneva82 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So whilst Reinforcement points look odd to the 40k eye, they're necessary because of how it all works in AoS (no more summoning the ideal unit at the ideal time laziness. Not anymore, oh no!)

Nevermind tzeentch herald that by RAW would summon in average close to 100 copies of himself in first turn. Then on second turn unless you get all those killed you could start it fresh. Not every one of those will create 100 copies but good chunk will.

Keep this until you get bored of creating more and just start throwing in bolts at the enemy...

At least they got it fixed but sheesh. They didn't realize that having just ONE tzeentch herald in the army breaks the rules right away?

Tneva we've had this conversation a while back but I don't want to repeat it, so all I'm going to say is quit that gak-ass hyperbole.

If you want to apport something of substance beyond: I DON'T LIKE IT! You're welcome, but do so.

By the way, 0,000000012% chance to summon 100 heralds isn't average, at all. Please don't make up stuff for your arguments either.

EDIT: forgot about arcane tome, damn it.

How is he making stuff up if it's possible?

Ruin wrote:
How is he making stuff up if it's possible?

Treating a one in a billion chance as fact and a clear example that breaks systematically balance is an hyperbole and making stuff. But to further ellaborate I'd have to go and talk about statistical significance and all that, and as constipated as I am I don't want to.

Caederes wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So whilst Reinforcement points look odd to the 40k eye, they're necessary because of how it all works in AoS (no more summoning the ideal unit at the ideal time laziness. Not anymore, oh no!)

Nevermind tzeentch herald that by RAW would summon in average close to 100 copies of himself in first turn. Then on second turn unless you get all those killed you could start it fresh. Not every one of those will create 100 copies but good chunk will.

Keep this until you get bored of creating more and just start throwing in bolts at the enemy...

At least they got it fixed but sheesh. They didn't realize that having just ONE tzeentch herald in the army breaks the rules right away?

They don't expect players to be jerks, much like I doubt the 40K rules-writers anticipated 2++ re-rollable invulnerable save units
Besides, that's what the General's Handbook is for. If you're playing Narrative Play and someone tries to pull that stunt, they're clearly not worth playing with. Also, who on earth would buy 100 Heralds of Tzeentch?

Since when having one tzeentch herald is being jerk?

Show's "quality" of game when having something as simple as ONE basic hero breaks the system. We aren't even talking about some cryptic combo utilizing multiple sourcebooks or something. We are talking about THE most basic hero choice for daemon tzeentch forces. Just that. Nothing else. No other unit. No batallion rule or something. One basic unit that's by all logic is very common. One that you could expect to see at least 2 or 3.

But taking 1 breaks game immediately.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lord Kragan wrote:
By the way, 0,000000012% chance to summon 100 heralds isn't average, at all. Please don't make up stuff for your arguments either.

Tzeentch herald has very small chance(like under 1%) of failing to create another herald. 3 dice one time ability. You ARE aware of that rule right?

Then new herald has exact same chance to create yet another. I presume you are aware that just because first herald used ability new one hasn't lost his right?

And so on. And so on.

Guess you haven't ever studied probabilities if you claim it's 0.000000012%. So I'll just ignore anything you say regarding probabilities.

tneva82 wrote:
Since when having one tzeentch herald is being jerk?

Show's "quality" of game when having something as simple as ONE basic hero breaks the system. We aren't even talking about some cryptic combo utilizing multiple sourcebooks or something. We are talking about THE most basic hero choice for daemon tzeentch forces. Just that. Nothing else. No other unit. No batallion rule or something. One basic unit that's by all logic is very common. One that you could expect to see at least 2 or 3.

But taking 1 breaks game immediately.

Errr...what? I said summoning spam to the degree you describe DOES NOT ACTUALLY HAPPEN IN NORMAL GAMES as usually people aren't jerks that would abuse that system. If you're going to say the rules system is broken because of one element that can be abused, where's your defence for Ynnari spamming Windriders? I'll wait patiently.

The point you seem to be missing is that both 40K and AoS have elements that can be abused...except AoS curbed those out with the General's Handbook. For 40k you need ITC/Community Comp/3rd party tournament rules to avoid the abuse. If a player shows up to a game with the intent of summoning 100 Heralds of Tzeentch, they're either a) not worth playing against in a Narrative Game or b) going to realize their "tactic" (note the quotation marks) doesn't work in Matched Play.

I'd argue Magnus breaks 40K immediately but whatever. Show me someone who will actually go out of their way to purchase 100 Heralds of Tzeentch - unless you're saying they're ok to just use proxies and blu-tac'd bases to prove your point, which is pathetic - so that they can use them all in a game. Show me. I'll wait.

Speaking of which....does Age of Sigmar have any armies you physically can't play?

Yeah...you realize 40K has a faction that legally cannot be fielded by itself because of the core rules of the game? Poor Timmy just wanted to play an army of Legion of the Damned and even bought their codex. He didn't know his army immediately loses the game on Turn 1...

Caederes wrote:

Super keen on fluff spoilers, I wanna know what's up with Sicarius. Also, how on earth will Guilliman react to Centurions?

be intreasting to see how all the named UM chars react to the return of Gulliman. as for Centurions, keep in mind while they're new and weird things to us, or Gulliman they're proably one of the easier to understand new things. they're just a combined enhanced armor and weapons system thats pretty conventional compared to some of the other changes

We definitely dial back the the level of snark here please.


Thank you.

Caederes wrote:
Also, how on earth will Guilliman react to Centurions?

I really do wish Text-to-Speech wasn't a thing.

It is fairly obvious that you can't just take Aos's rule set and transfer it over but there are a lot of lessons that can be learnt. One good one is a fairly regular points adjustment. How long have people been complaining about the wraithknight's points for? Taking feedback from the community in this is another aspect that Aos is embracing well and that should be transferred over to 40k. Just adding these elements would help to balance 40k immensly.

Well, I don't think 'one' Herald is breaking the game, or being a jerk. It's multiple Heralds, with the level of jerk being proportional to the number of Heralds.

Of course Summoning is now limited by points and so there is cap on 'Jerk'. But Jerk reaches infinity when in a points free game a player says "all these individually based snotlings are my proxy Heralds".

Cheers
Mark

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Caederes wrote:
Also, how on earth will Guilliman react to Centurions?

I really do wish Text-to-Speech wasn't a thing.

I'm glad someone got the reference

Realistically though, I don't expect they'll touch on that as it's about the last thing Guilliman should be concerned with given...
I'm very curious to see what Cypher does, they've said there's a big twist with him in the book and I doubt they're referring to his identity being revealed.

Cypher is Alpharius, nothing else makes sense.

Joyboozer wrote:
Cypher is Alpharius, nothing else makes sense.

Not sure if you're being ironic or not, but if it's the latter, trust me, the Horus Heresy novels make it clear that's not the case (and I won't say why obviously)

 pizzaguardian wrote:

Now we need sites like detachment compendium or some army builder just to keep track. It can't be denied it is a bit too much for a good portion of people.

this does exist!

http://bloodofkittens.com/codex-compendium/

Chikout wrote:
It is fairly obvious that you can't just take Aos's rule set and transfer it over...

That's sorta how we got 40K in the first place...

 Azreal13 wrote:

Chikout wrote:
It is fairly obvious that you can't just take Aos's rule set and transfer it over...

That's sorta how we got 40K in the first place...

Those were the eighties, we don't talk about them anymore.

 Vector Strike wrote:

 pizzaguardian wrote:

Now we need sites like detachment compendium or some army builder just to keep track. It can't be denied it is a bit too much for a good portion of people.

this does exist!

http://bloodofkittens.com/codex-compendium/

That was the point, we need people to put their time to scour the webz and put them together from dozens and dozens of sources. Bless their hearth tough..

I think we'll just see the recent FAQ's integrated into the core rule set.

Perhaps a few minor changes here and there, merge/simplify some of the USR's.

I have a feeling vehicles will no longer be obsec (the Victrix formation in GS3 actually excludes vehicles in its obsec rule...)

They could nerf invis, eldar jetbikes (maybe no longer relentless?) and do something about GMC's and we'd have a bit more balance back.

For deathstars, perhaps some rule stopping characters joining units of a different faction? Does that work?

I'd like to see the terrain rules tightened up or reworked as well, back to area terrain would be best IMHO.

I doubt very much they will AoS it. Killing the goose that lays the golden eggs is not a savvy business plan.

Oh and summoning is clearly broken, what a daft mechanic.

8th huh.

Darn.

I'll have to come up with a whole new sig.

The only thing AoS did was drastically increase the amount of nostalgic Tomb kings and Bretonnian players asking ".. but when do we get models?"

 Johnny The Lictor wrote:
Whelp, the End Times have come.

Indeed.
I guess we have to buy a ton of books (trilogy at least) to get a hand on the rule book.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Unit options, wargear options and characters are all just "blah" in those rules, seemingly not costing anything above the base-line guys in the unit. That's no way to balance a ruleset. Some things are worth more than others, and a Devastator Squad w/4 Missile Launchers is worth more than a Devastator Squad where you've (for whatever reason) chosen to take nothing.

Some weapon options do have different points - Stormcasts have quite a few.

No no no. You 40k TFG stay on the 40k side. It's where we like you.

Chikout wrote:
It is fairly obvious that you can't just take Aos's rule set and transfer it over but there are a lot of lessons that can be learnt. One good one is a fairly regular points adjustment. How long have people been complaining about the wraithknight's points for? Taking feedback from the community in this is another aspect that Aos is embracing well and that should be transferred over to 40k. Just adding these elements would help to balance 40k immensly.

Sure you can transfer AoS's rule set over to 40k.
People have already done it. One fan site has made data scrolls for several armies.
They're not perfectly balanced but AoS's rules let you move, shoot, close combat and have morale effects.
Different form of rules but really pretty easily compatible with 40k armies if you want to do it.
I would buy back into 40k again (haven't played in a couple of editions) hard if they actually did 'port AoS rules over.