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.

auticus wrote:
Also looks like choosing to not take a double turn can earn you extra points in a scenario.

Now that's interesting. Giving up scenario points in some manner to get the double turn is a possible balancing vector.

auticus wrote:
Not really no. The WHFB setting was destroyed. The world that was the Old World is a now a lifeless globe that orbits Sigmar's palace.

The very fact that part of Mallus is still around shows you that it's part of the same setting. Some characters survived, and they're living in realms based around the Winds of Magic. It's not a replacement, it's a continuation. Yes there were major changes, but it's still the same setting.

 Glane wrote:
The very fact that part of Mallus is still around shows you that it's part of the same setting. Some characters survived, and they're living in realms based around the Winds of Magic. It's not a replacement, it's a continuation. Yes there were major changes, but it's still the same setting.

It's a sequel, technically a continuation of the same 'universe', but if you tell a WHFB fan that it's the same setting you're gonna confuse the crap out of people who jump into the game and then start asking where the Empire is..


Using the term 'setting' like how all the modern Marvel movies are in the same 'setting' even when some are off in space it technically is, but using the term 'setting' as in 'the Old World, with the Empire, Brettonia, and Ulthuan, etc' it's not even remotely the same.

Yep at this point I think we'd just be splitting hairs over what "setting" means.

To pretty much every one I have ever had contact with since AOS came out, they are not the same setting. One setting borrows elements from the other here and there but other then that that's it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Annnnd now the person that sets up first getting first turn ONLY happens if you roll a tie to see who goes first.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rules now available for download on ageofsigmar.com

Could anyone post the rules here? I'm work blocked from AgeofSigmar.com. Oddly, it's filtered for the "games" topic, but games-workshop.com is not.

It's a 20 page PDF, so...

 Kanluwen wrote:
I'm thinking it's going to be Brian Blessed.

It's Becca Scott

https://ageofsigmar.com/new-to-aos/overview/

 Ghaz wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
I'm thinking it's going to be Brian Blessed.

It's Becca Scott

https://ageofsigmar.com/new-to-aos/overview/

Yeah, I have no clue who she is either.

Evocators 140 points for 3.

glancing over the rules update found this interesting under battleshock:

SPLIT UNITS
At the end of each turn, you must remove models from any of the units in your army that are split up into two or more groups, until only one group of models from the unit remains in play. The models you remove count as having been slain.


Under Terrain

OBSTACLES
Some terrain features are obstacles that block attacks to targets that lie beyond them. When this is the case, it will be noted on the warscroll for the terrain feature.
When a missile weapon targets an enemy unit that has all of its models within 1" of an obstacle, then the target unit receives the benefit of cover if the attacking model is closer to the obstacle than it is to the target unit.


Under Alliegence Abilities

ALLIES
One out of every four units included in an army can be an allied unit.
Allied units are treated as part of your army, except that they are not included when working out your army’s allegiance, and can therefore be part of a different Grand Alliance or faction. In addition, an allied model cannot be the army’s general, and cannot use or benefit from your army’s allegiance abilities.
The factions that an army can ally with can be found in its battletome, or with its Pitched Battle Profiles in the current edition of the General’s Handbook. For example, a Stormcast Eternal army can have allies from any other Order faction.

They already said this but:
CHOOSE GENERAL
...If your general is slain, pick another model from your army to become your new general.

Sweet. With the obstacle rule I can get rid of the houserule that was -1 to hit if shooting through terrain to the other side and just scenario rule it so forests etc are "obstacles". Accomplishes a similar function and keeps it from being a dreaded "houserule".

I’m liking what I see so far.

That bit about garrisoning terrain. I wonder if, with tweaks, that could replace the current embarking and disembarking rules? See not only would it bring that under the core rules, giving future factions easy access to it, but it would also allow my Overlords to fight from their ships like they’re supposed to. Just a thought.

No form of malignant spells in the core rules, my wallet is safe for now

Nope they will be in the malignant spell box and in battletomes coming out from this point.

auticus wrote:

Annnnd now the person that sets up first getting first turn ONLY happens if you roll a tie to see who goes first.

Where are you seeing this?

https://imgur.com/gallery/kz5iD0j

Guess more will be leaked soon.
That's a long list for Nighthaunt. It really is a mega release, even compared to idoneth deepkin...

So the final named character we've yet to see is Reikenor the Grimhailer. There is also the Dreadblade Harrow, Bladegheist Revenants, Chainghasts and Dreadscythe Harridans I don't believe we've seen yet (presumably one of them are the two mounted models we've seen).

EDIT: Until we know otherwise, I'm going to call the Grimghast Reavers/Bladegheist Revenants a multi-kit with this being the build for the Bladegheists...

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

auticus wrote:

Annnnd now the person that sets up first getting first turn ONLY happens if you roll a tie to see who goes first.

Where are you seeing this?

Twitter and the celebs posting pics. This particular one was in german.

Decided to take a break and pull up the rules on my phone. Looks like most of it was already revealed in the previews, so no big surprises. The rules do seem to be more tightly written this time around, but I'm sure we'll still have people trying to redefine the word "the" to gain an advantage. :p

One thing to note is that these are the base rules, and the specific Ways to Plays will likely override some of it. I wouldn't be surprised to see each command ability limited to one use per turn in Match Play for example. We'll also probably still be limited to a specific points value of Allies in addition to the 25% of model limitation. I'd be shocked to learn I could bring Archaon as an ally for a 2000 point Slaves to Darkness army.

As a side note, I'll probably be taking my Chaos Gargant a little more often now. Stuff 'em in Me Bag is going to really deter conga lining with that new coherency rule.

I just like the fact that the only way to farm Command Points is to form Battalions which keeps the armies thematic. I also like that you generate them per turn and don't feel obligated to use them(therefore save them up to form a combo later).

The conga-line deterrence is quite interesting.

auticus wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

auticus wrote:

Annnnd now the person that sets up first getting first turn ONLY happens if you roll a tie to see who goes first.

Where are you seeing this?

Twitter and the celebs posting pics. This particular one was in german.

Loving that change. It, the scenarios that discourage double-turns, and the "cover" providing obstacles are all excellent improvements that required only a handful of lines to change, but which help immeasurably.

Also, now that the deployments aren't a race for bare minimum of drops, and Battalions almost universally went up 50pts or so, it should make list building far more flexible.

 Eldarsif wrote:
I just like the fact that the only way to farm Command Points is to form Battalions which keeps the armies thematic. I also like that you generate them per turn and don't feel obligated to use them(therefore save them up to form a combo later).

The conga-line deterrence is quite interesting.

You could also just run your army 100-150pts short.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

auticus wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

auticus wrote:

Annnnd now the person that sets up first getting first turn ONLY happens if you roll a tie to see who goes first.

Where are you seeing this?

Twitter and the celebs posting pics. This particular one was in german.

Loving that change. It, the scenarios that discourage double-turns, and the "cover" providing obstacles are all excellent improvements that required only a handful of lines to change, but which help immeasurably.

Also, now that the deployments aren't a race for bare minimum of drops, and Battalions almost universally went up 50pts or so, it should make list building far more flexible.

Lot of argument about that one, we actually don't know what the rule is supposed to be just yet. Some people are posting the clearer german translation as if that wasn't just a German guy doing the same thing everybody else did when they read the rule in english.

BoLS just posted three new articles, so I'm assuming the NDA is lifted. One of the article showed the Aqshy spells from Malign Sorcery. Imaging a unit of Bloodreavers with proper buff support and Inferno Blades. 6 2-damage attacks per model. Yikes.

Granted the rule in english if you actually follow rules (such as they are) for english is clear. You roll turn 1 with tie break going to the first finished. A no reroll bonus to the smaller army. A simpler version of the 40k one they put in for match play.

auticus wrote:
Sweet. With the obstacle rule I can get rid of the houserule that was -1 to hit if shooting through terrain to the other side and just scenario rule it so forests etc are "obstacles". Accomplishes a similar function and keeps it from being a dreaded "houserule".

So you remove one houserule to add another?

The obstacles bit says it will be noted on the warscroll.

Yep. And it can be added to a custom scenario pretty easily enough. Its a houserule so far as custom scenarios are considered "house rules".

Not sure why this needs to be an issue. There are no warscrolls for generic forests. Custom Scenario specific rules for generic terrain that has no warscroll.

Huh, so you can have allies from a different Grand Alliance eh? That can be interesting....

auticus wrote:
Yep. And it can be added to a custom scenario pretty easily enough. Its a houserule so far as custom scenarios are considered "house rules".

Not sure why this needs to be an issue. There are no warscrolls for generic forests. Custom Scenario specific rules for generic terrain that has no warscroll.

You know what else is great?

Just letting the fricking rules be.

 Kanluwen wrote:

auticus wrote:
Yep. And it can be added to a custom scenario pretty easily enough. Its a houserule so far as custom scenarios are considered "house rules".

Not sure why this needs to be an issue. There are no warscrolls for generic forests. Custom Scenario specific rules for generic terrain that has no warscroll.

You know what else is great?

Just letting the fricking rules be.

We'll that's a bit dickish. I see what he's saying. He now gets to point to a physical rule in the rulebook that he's using for his custom scenarios when one of his local belligerents asks why it has that rule. One less fight for him because it's a rule GW actually uses. He's not forcing a made up rule on others anymore. Seems pretty straight forward.

Frontline Gaming is live-streaming the 2.0 rules on Twitch, and they confirmed that the deployment/choose-who-goes-first, rule has NOT changed, unfortunately. :-(