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.

That's pretty exciting. I don't see the Seraphon or KO Battletome unavailable, so it probably won't be a Fec/Skaven or Gloomspite/Sylvaneth style release.... Pity. Either of those faction's would have been cool to get in a double box with Tzeentch.

Course, could be wrong about that.

As is the Tzeentch in several regions.

Of course this could both be GW stopping sales because they are about to update in January and/or because GW hasn't ordered any stock of them in ages and they've run out.

That said its not really a huge surprise. Those last 3 factions are all that remains not on 2.0 and with a new army only just out the door the only thing left is to address the Tzeentch, Overlords and Seraphon.

Thematically speaking all three make sense.

Tzeentch REALLY wants to envelop Chamon where the Overlords are based from the same way Khorne wants Aqshy, Nurgle wants Ghyran, and Slaanesh Hysh/Ulgu. That was part of the original Realmgate Wars plot with Ghal-Maraz.

Seraphon are the Order version of Just As Planned. Cold, calculated logic versus the insidious scheming/plots of Tzeentch.

 Carnikang wrote:
That's pretty exciting. I don't see the Seraphon or KO Battletome unavailable...

I just checked and the Kharadron Overlords physical battletome is unavailable in the US, UK, Australia, Germany and France.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Carnikang wrote:
That's pretty exciting. I don't see the Seraphon or KO Battletome unavailable...

I just checked and the Kharadron Overlords physical battletome is unavailable in the US, UK, Australia, Germany and France.

Time to ride the magic hype airship!

With a stop at the station for Giants and Hysh. Or Hysh giants. Or enormous Hysh things that aren't giants. Whichever.

"The Giants of Hysh" actually sounds pretty cool.

Of course, in GW-speak that'd be the "Gargants™ of Hysh", which isn't as cool...

Only until the find our war of the gargantuas" was a thing, and they scramble for a new name!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
"The Giants of Hysh" actually sounds pretty cool.

Of course, in GW-speak that'd be the "Gargants™ of Hysh", which isn't as cool...

So true.

As far as I am concerned,
"Gargants" are the giant (pun intended!) orkish walking trash cans from Epic/Space marines...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
"The Giants of Hysh" actually sounds pretty cool.

Of course, in GW-speak that'd be the "Gargants™ of Hysh", which isn't as cool...

Sunshatter Gargants, if you please.

I think you may be losing your edge.

There are still terms I refuse to use. I still say 'giant'. And dwarf, elf, ogre, orc, minotaur...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
"The Giants of Hysh" actually sounds pretty cool.

Of course, in GW-speak that'd be the "Gargants™ of Hysh", which isn't as cool...

Surely you mean Gitstomper Tremorwalkers

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
"The Giants of Hysh" actually sounds pretty cool.

Of course, in GW-speak that'd be the "Gargants™ of Hysh", which isn't as cool...

Surely you mean Gitstomper Tremorwalkers

I feel like if we spent a day coming up with every possible whacky combination that GW could come up with, they'll be forced to stop using those names. Or come up with even worse things.

Gigantoid seems obvious, given what happened with ogres and borrowing formorian from mythology.

Guess we dodge a bullet since the Cygor didn't get renamed the Stareoid

Eh, most aren't that bad. Made-up names will always sound silly to some extent since they are nonsense we have not encountered before. There are plenty of videos where the comedy comes from people just speaking in a different language that the viewer does not understand. Now obviously GW pushes it beyond that in many places, but "gargant" and "formoroid" are pretty benign.

Remember that ripperdactyls, bloodsecrators, and deadwalkers exist.

I keep hoping that one of these days, y'all realize you're far more obsessed with the names than GW is. Half the time, GW still uses the Old World names in social media.

*edit* And to add on to what Ninth is saying, the entire Khorne line was obviously named by Nathan Explosion.

oh man please don't tease me with the possibility of Seraphon and Kharadron Overlord battletomes. My two favorite armies in AoS!

My wife wanted to play Seraphon and the local store still had last year's battleforce box (which was a ridiculous deal) so I was like "YEP". Bought them and had the whole thing plus a couple boxes of skinks, a slann, and some chameleons (wife thought they were cute) painted in about 2 months. Only trouble was (and is) their lack of battletome and reliance on summoning, which is powerful, but pretty boring IMO. Oh, and a couple key units are failcast, but luckily the slann is chunky enough that it's not brittle.

And I specifically did not buy into KO because while I LOVE their models, it was pretty obvious just reading their rules that, well, they're terrible. Instead I bought Stormcast, which I deeply regret because they A) aren't good and B) just don't have flavor at all. I can live with A, but B is a deal breaker, as they just don't inspire me to paint them at all.

I think I'm just going to bite the bullet and ebay most of the Stormcast aside from a few units that can be useful as allies, and go all in on KO and Cities (love a bunch of the old empire and dwarf stuff like steam tanks and gyrocopters!).

Now if they'd come out with new and better versions of witch hunters and warrior priests, I'd be in heaven.

Well, if you want go Cities, you don't actually have to deal with allies, as they can all take Sigmarines as native units in limited quantities, and one can take Overlords as well.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Eh, most aren't that bad. Made-up names will always sound silly to some extent since they are nonsense we have not encountered before. There are plenty of videos where the comedy comes from people just speaking in a different language that the viewer does not understand. Now obviously GW pushes it beyond that in many places, but "gargant" and "formoroid" are pretty benign.

Remember that ripperdactyls, bloodsecrators, and deadwalkers exist.

I agree. A large portion of these names sound silly because they are new. As much as I like to joke about the Chaos Lord on Kayak Lizard, Karkadrak isn't inherently bad. Good number of the names are the same. They just don't have the decades of momentum with them like anything Tolkien, Gygax or ancient folklore and myth does. And yes, most all of them were done for trademark purposes. As a child of the 1980's practically every toy I had was from that same vein. So I am not going to suddenly throw stones now.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Eh, most aren't that bad. Made-up names will always sound silly to some extent since they are nonsense we have not encountered before. There are plenty of videos where the comedy comes from people just speaking in a different language that the viewer does not understand. Now obviously GW pushes it beyond that in many places, but "gargant" and "formoroid" are pretty benign.

Remember that ripperdactyls, bloodsecrators, and deadwalkers exist.

I agree. A large portion of these names sound silly because they are new. As much as I like to joke about the Chaos Lord on Kayak Lizard, Karkadrak isn't inherently bad. Good number of the names are the same. They just don't have the decades of momentum with them like anything Tolkien, Gygax or ancient folklore and myth does. And yes, most all of them were done for trademark purposes. As a child of the 1980's practically every toy I had was from that same vein. So I am not going to suddenly throw stones now.

Are you saying you were born in the 80s and talking about 90s toys? Because 80s toys really weren't named that way. Many were just really simple puns, like 'Soundwave,' 'Shipwreck' and 'Venger.' There was a strong emphasis on each toy having a unique 'identity' as marketing ploy.

Generic Nounverb Adjectivenoun (and its variations) is a very 21st century thing tried by a lot of a gaming companies. You can see WotC do it during D&D 3rd edition as they went from Monster Manual 3 to MM 4, and their collectible minis during the same period.

The Karkadrak is just confusing, since Krakadrak is an Old World dwarfhold.

Voss wrote:

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Eh, most aren't that bad. Made-up names will always sound silly to some extent since they are nonsense we have not encountered before. There are plenty of videos where the comedy comes from people just speaking in a different language that the viewer does not understand. Now obviously GW pushes it beyond that in many places, but "gargant" and "formoroid" are pretty benign.

Remember that ripperdactyls, bloodsecrators, and deadwalkers exist.

I agree. A large portion of these names sound silly because they are new. As much as I like to joke about the Chaos Lord on Kayak Lizard, Karkadrak isn't inherently bad. Good number of the names are the same. They just don't have the decades of momentum with them like anything Tolkien, Gygax or ancient folklore and myth does. And yes, most all of them were done for trademark purposes. As a child of the 1980's practically every toy I had was from that same vein. So I am not going to suddenly throw stones now.

Are you saying you were born in the 80s and talking about 90s toys? Because 80s toys really weren't named that way. Many were just really simple puns, like 'Soundwave,' 'Shipwreck' and 'Venger.' There was a strong emphasis on each toy having a unique 'identity' as marketing ploy.

Generic Nounverb Adjectivenoun (and its variations) is a very 21st century thing tried by a lot of a gaming companies. You can see WotC do it during D&D 3rd edition as they went from Monster Manual 3 to MM 4, and their collectible minis during the same period.

The Karkadrak is just confusing, since Krakadrak is an Old World dwarfhold.

I am saying things in the 1980s were given names for trademark purposes like now. Not that they are following 21st century game naming conventions which probably exist since it is easier to trademark those names while not being letter salad every time. I think in the case of D&D it more of thing that they were running out of monster name ideas. I never bothered with anything beyond the first one, but weren't there a lot of Lesser, Greater, switching the nouns around (as in wolfwere which I know is from at least 2nd ed too), different material/element or some variation on existing monsters with a twist in the latter D&D monster manuals? I remember skimming through one and that being the case.

I am sure Karkadrak is less confusing that anything Vampire the Requiem did. Which is how I largely view AoS. The designers took things they liked from the world that was and bring it into Age of Sigmar which may or may not be the same as it was. Maybe Karkadraks were first encountered in the ruins of Krakadrak and called something like lizards of Krakadrak. Over time, the name of the ruins faded from memory but the lizards became an ever present threat now are only associated with the name Krakadrak.

karkadrak seems more like smashing together "Karcharos" and "drakon" from greek to mean "shark dragon" which isnt the worst (or the best) description of the thing.

for what is worth I like the name, and as Im not familiar with the old hammer.dwarf.holds (always and forever a Tilean dog of.war!) don't find it confusing.

Carlovonsexron wrote:
karkadrak seems more like smashing together "Karcharos" and "drakon" from greek to mean "shark dragon" which isnt the worst (or the best) description of the thing.

for what is worth I like the name, and as Im not familiar with the old hammer.dwarf.holds (always and forever a Tilean dog of.war!) don't find it confusing.

Actually I think it may also take some inspiration from the Karkadann, which is a mythical creature that is described as a scaly rhinoceros with a poisonous/medicinal horn. It even has the rhino horn. So maybe Karka- from the mythical scaled rhinoceros, and -drakk from dragon.

dirkdragonslayer wrote:

Carlovonsexron wrote:
karkadrak seems more like smashing together "Karcharos" and "drakon" from greek to mean "shark dragon" which isnt the worst (or the best) description of the thing.

for what is worth I like the name, and as Im not familiar with the old hammer.dwarf.holds (always and forever a Tilean dog of.war!) don't find it confusing.

Actually I think it may also take some inspiration from the Karkadann, which is a mythical creature that is described as a scaly rhinoceros with a poisonous/medicinal horn. It even has the rhino horn. So maybe Karka- from the mythical scaled rhinoceros, and -drakk from dragon.

That does make sense. Reminds me of the Idoneth Allopex, which is a combination of allopus (scientific name for thresher shark) and apex.

Or...crocodile dragon. Crock-drag. Krak-a-drak. To avoid obvious jokes. I dunno, but a big lizard mount sort of makes me think of that

Fun fact - over on the TGA forums someone noticed that several of the recent "model hint rumour images" could be linked together and appears t obe as ramshackle and have a big stump leg rather like a certain walking skeleton ship from Vampire Coast in TW Warhammer (which took its source from an old GW White Dwarf and FW model army years back)(.

 Overread wrote:
Fun fact - over on the TGA forums someone noticed that several of the recent "model hint rumour images" could be linked together and appears t obe as ramshackle and have a big stump leg rather like a certain walking skeleton ship from Vampire Coast in TW Warhammer (which took its source from an old GW White Dwarf and FW model army years back)(.

I'd go with it being something for the Grotbag Scuttlers rather than Pirate Vampires (in AoS Nagash has the undead pretty much under his bony thumb).

 Ghaz wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Fun fact - over on the TGA forums someone noticed that several of the recent "model hint rumour images" could be linked together and appears t obe as ramshackle and have a big stump leg rather like a certain walking skeleton ship from Vampire Coast in TW Warhammer (which took its source from an old GW White Dwarf and FW model army years back)(.

I'd go with it being something for the Grotbag Scuttlers rather than Pirate Vampires (in AoS Nagash has the undead pretty much under his bony thumb).

There has been a pirate vampire fleet referenced in the lore, plus the undead - especially the vampires always chaff under his grip.

Also nothing says that Nagash can't have vampire pirates - the realms have huge oceans.

(yes GW you can do Man O War AoS style- go on you know you want too!)

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Fun fact - over on the TGA forums someone noticed that several of the recent "model hint rumour images" could be linked together and appears t obe as ramshackle and have a big stump leg rather like a certain walking skeleton ship from Vampire Coast in TW Warhammer (which took its source from an old GW White Dwarf and FW model army years back)(.

I'd go with it being something for the Grotbag Scuttlers rather than Pirate Vampires (in AoS Nagash has the undead pretty much under his bony thumb).

There has been a pirate vampire fleet referenced in the lore, plus the undead - especially the vampires always chaff under his grip.

Yeah, but I want to see the Grotbag Scuttlers first...