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.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
And no, Warcraft does not dwarf the Dark Souls trilogy by any stretch of the imagination

I don't care about the overarching argument in this thread within any capacity but you are absolutely out of your mind if you think this is a true statement. 35 million copies sold is pocket change compared to what WoW has raked in over its lifetime.

Because it's an MMO so it has a constant revenue stream. Expansions too.

Actual copies sold is a very different matter.

Of course it's going to be bigger still, but people overestimate WoW's actual impact compared to a game like, say, Dark Souls. Especially when it comes to visual aesthetic and tone which is what I was referring to.

Low fantasy.....hmmm

And yet many peoples favourite was Dany and her Dragons.....and/or the unkillable Jon and his Dire Wolf, giant magic wall.....it did have quasi medievil elements but also High Fantasy - prophercies, long journeys across strange lands, mythical beasts and even a dark lord (well Ice Lord) advancing from the North with an vast army of Undead.

Low or gritty fantasy doesn't mean a lack of fantastical elements. By your definition Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar are practically identical, however I'm fairly certain this thread wouldn't even be happening if that was actually the case.

You can, and they have, told the same style of stories in both worlds - so a few sewer jacks facing skaven or other horrors in the sewers beneath a unknowing and uncaring city or grand outrageous swashbucking adventures on flying ships - somethimes they even combine in Gotrek novels in both worlds.

By exploring or taking an specific element of these fantasy world you can craft a narrrative or experience to suit - be that the struggle of a singel Witch Hunter or lone survivor of a Orc raid with no magic etc or the total opposite with Archmages battling Greater Daemons. ALL of these can have consequences of action or inaction, use of magic or lack of same.

While the stories might be similar superficially, the differences in the settings render them entirely different in fact. You might get stories about combat both in sewers and on airships in both a WHF and an AoS Gotrek novel, but in the WHF novel the airship is a singular oddity while in AoS it's as commonplace as hopping on a riverboat would be in the Old World, and in the AoS novel the sheer scale of things outside that grimy sewer completely changes the context and so, to anyone who considers the story beyond "*reads book* Huh, that was fun. *chucks in a corner and never thinks about again*" it can't have the same tone or implications as the version in the WHF novel.

Any story in AoS can only raise its stakes so high before it has to start contriving reasons why any WHF-tier plot wouldn't just get trampled under something huge and unfathomably powerful - in WHF the Gods are distant beings who - if they even exist at all - occasionally empower a mortal for long enough to strike a single fateful blow; in AoS the Gods have armies of magical supermen striding around the land and exist *in* the world. In AoS magic is sometimes dangerous, but it's also ubiquitous - to the point of mundanity in some places; in WHF, magic exists in the world as a reality in the same way the belief of magic existed in our own history - for the vast majority it's a distant horror, a superstition, a sense of suspicion about a stranger, but just often enough to keep the sense of dread alive, it becomes a terrifying reality.

Two recipes can use very similar lists of ingredients, yet result in meals that are completely different depending on the few differences and the quantities in which the ingredients are used.

Yodhrin makes some very good points which I would be challenged to bring a reasonable argument against. Even though both settings draw on many of the same tropes, inspiration, and stylings, etc. they are night and day in terms of how the two settings are actually depicted.

The respective RPGs are reflective of the stark contrasts between the two settings.

In WFRP you usually play the ratcatcher or the innkeeper or any of the other blue collar mooks in the gritty mundane corners of the Warhammer setting, and you're mostly just trying to survive and make it through without losing too many of your limbs or being horrifically mentally and emotionally scarred by the horrors that be.

In AoS you pretty much start the game already a mythic hero or a demigod at a power level over 9000, your character is already a hero and you're making them into a superhero - but the margin between "hero" and "superhero" is a very fine and fuzzy line because you're not necessarily all that much more powerful in the late game than you are when you start.

Mind you, that doesn't mean that super-beings don't exist in the Old World (Archaon, Balthasar Gelt, etc.), nor does it mean that meek peasants don't exist in the Mortal Realms, it just means that the frames of reference of both settings are centered on completely different ends of the scale.

Livings gods like Archaon are a rarity in the Old World and most people are helpless level 0 normies that would die to a stiff breeze, whereas in AoS they are dime a dozen to the extent that its not even really worth thinking about the redshirts - because even the redshirts have a high probability of powering up to demigod status for arbitrary but not uncommon reasons.

AoS is more similar in narrative to 40k than to Fantasy.


In 40k you also have the problem of having books about normal guys like Gaunt Ghost's stories, etc... but at the end of the day a single planet means nothing for the imperium as a whole. That doesnt make those stories devoid of meaning or emotion, because a good writter can make you care about those characters, just like a novel about the strugles of a african kid can be engaging even if his life or death is meaningless as a whole for humanity.


A story about a skirmish in a forest in age of sigmar or the old world has the same relevance: 0 for the world, and 100 for the characters involved with their lifes and those of their loved ones at stake.

The above two posts from Yodhrin and chaos0xomega regarding high versus low fantasy really resonate with me.

As a young buck in the late 80s I had been offered a chance to play a very long 1st Edition campaign with my much older cousin’s ex-college buds who had been playing since the smaller softcover pamphlet sized books (long before the Red and Blue starter boxes). Having just read all the Dragonlance “novels”, I expected to be flying around on platinum dragons while dual wielding Vorpal Blades. Instead, we found ourselves as a party of grubby level 1 nobodies, living in the gutter near the local tavern and counting every copper piece to fund an expedition into the Pine Hills to collect the meagre bounty posted for brigands and a “ferocious beast” who had been waylaying the peasant farmer wagons and routed the local constabulary.

After multiple and very brutal woodland skirmishes with the local banditry and suffering incredible attrition from low-tech booby-trapped pathways, we finally cornered the ringleader. He was not a lich, demon, mind flayer, beholder, demigod or any other fantastic being – he was just a traveling musician of the scandalous sort, a performer and a cut-throat dandy. After being chased from the local village for various transgressions, he accidentally stumbled into a deep cave where he startled a massive hibernating brown bear. With incredible luck he managed to charm recalcitrant bear with his musical talents and with it at his disposal, the “ferocious beast”, he formed his group of highway men.

Our haul was a small lockbox with a few silver pieces, a rusting dagger with runes which turned out to be a +1. The bearskin, which the local crafter was able to turn into a +1 AC suit of leather to compensate the resurrection stat penalty (-1 CON?) for the thief who the bear maimed and killed. The bear meat was smoked and packed as iron rations. After being bankrupted by the local priesthood for thief’s resurrection we resumed our grubby existence.

Fast forward 30+ years – while balls deep in a conversation with that very same cousin on R.E Howard’s brand of “low fantasy” as it exists in his literary works contrasted with modern day game developer’s concept of “low fantasy” in Hyboria, he asked me -

“Do you still want to fly around on a platinum dragon while dual wielding Vorpal swords?”

I responded with “Nope. I’ll settle for chasing down that skullduggerous gypsy and his charmed bear in the Pine Hills.”

tldr: When it comes to fantasy less IS more. It takes only one tiny oddity to turn the mundane into the fantastic. The mind-blowing complexity of “generic” humanity is more than enough to weave a rich tapestry of heroic and memorable series of events (especially as it relates to the Elector Counts) and truly requires only a dash of fantastic elements.

Is less more? Reading your anecdote, I spent the time thinking "man I'd prefer the flying dragon and vorpal swords".

When it comes to fantasy, preference and execution are everything. I can create a story about Space Marines and have just as much drama, tension, and commentary on the human condition as any story about guardsmen.

Why exactly is a commentary about the human condition a.focal point?

For alot of people there just comes a point where too much fantasy is no.longer relatable in terms of setting and aesthetics.

Not to mention high fantasy tends to suffer from.the same tropes.as super heroes in which every scenario or campaign seems to have the fate of the world on its shoulders.

I'll take Grossesax's bard, bear, and bandit.campain too.

While you can write the same story in AoS as you can in WHFB, WHFB as a setting is more grounded and relatable.

On the one hand people say they want more innovation in the Fantasy genre, but at the same time so many of the classical Fantasy tropes work because they aren't too far from the real world we live in.

I remember having this discussion back in the 90's with one of my mates talking about WHFB vs 40k and why WHFB was a better setting for stories. In 40k you have Space Marines and infinite worlds to fight on, and Space Marines are cool, but they elevate the setting above regular people. In WHFB, you have the regular people of the Empire and Bretonnia fighting against exceptional odds on a world not dissimilar to our own. Now that doesn't necessarily make WHFB a better setting for a game, because the cool factor of Space Marines goes a long way for a table top game, but for forging compelling narratives, we both agreed WHFB was the better setting.

I always liked the contrast of 40k vs WHFB. I enjoyed both settings and had armies in both games... liked WHFB stories more, liked 40k models more, liked standard WHFB games more, liked scripted 40k games more.

Man, I want to play in that campaign too!

Let's not forget that when WHF came out it was a revelation. Take a look at a lot of the gaming art and fiction from the mid 80s, the Larry Elmore (and imitators) art, the D&D campaigns thinly translated into fiction.

A buddy of mine called it the age of Rens Faires, yeah everyone is in the Middle-ish ages but they have perfect teeth, clean clothes, play for everything in cash and never get seriously hurt.

WHF with its offering of the Rat Catcher class and pictures of toothless guys in rags was a real breath of fresh air.

I'm not saying I'd want to spend all my imaginary time there bartering rat pelts for eggs but it was something new.

Another vote for the rat catchers. Much much prefer a low fantasy setting.

A group of rag tags "heroes" led by a low level witch hunter and raiding the town crypts is much more interesting for me than some superhumans fighting demi gods

That's why, when i was playing video games rpg, i always liked the few first hours, and was getting bored afterward


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Anyhow, cant wait to see what comes out of this project. The first few sketches were rather interesting. Its a bit frustrating that the info about the game is drop feeded

Carlovonsexron wrote:
Why exactly is a commentary about the human condition a.focal point?

For alot of people there just comes a point where too much fantasy is no.longer relatable in terms of setting and aesthetics.

Not to mention high fantasy tends to suffer from.the same tropes.as super heroes in which every scenario or campaign seems to have the fate of the world on its shoulders.

I'll take Grossesax's bard, bear, and bandit.campain too.

Different Strokes for different folks I think - played and ran quite a bit of WFRP and still enjoy including the new iteration. Also worth remembering that 1st ed WFRP did have a higher level of magic (and much safer) and magic use. Yes you could play a ratatcher at the start but also a Troll Slayer or Wizards Apprentice... all have different stories to be told.

My fav campaigns:



I enjoy chracters growing, changing and stories accomodating that

However like others - really looking to see what they do with the world alongside the ongoing 4th WFRP.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I remember having this discussion back in the 90's with one of my mates talking about WHFB vs 40k and why WHFB was a better setting for stories. In 40k you have Space Marines and infinite worlds to fight on, and Space Marines are cool, but they elevate the setting above regular people. In WHFB, you have the regular people of the Empire and Bretonnia fighting against exceptional odds on a world not dissimilar to our own. Now that doesn't necessarily make WHFB a better setting for a game, because the cool factor of Space Marines goes a long way for a table top game, but for forging compelling narratives, we both agreed WHFB was the better setting.

I never got that argument.

The only reason why anyone would think WFRP is a better story setting than 40k is because no one made an RPG where you can play a Hive sludge collector, a Ratskin, or a low level scribe.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I remember having this discussion back in the 90's with one of my mates talking about WHFB vs 40k and why WHFB was a better setting for stories. In 40k you have Space Marines and infinite worlds to fight on, and Space Marines are cool, but they elevate the setting above regular people. In WHFB, you have the regular people of the Empire and Bretonnia fighting against exceptional odds on a world not dissimilar to our own. Now that doesn't necessarily make WHFB a better setting for a game, because the cool factor of Space Marines goes a long way for a table top game, but for forging compelling narratives, we both agreed WHFB was the better setting.

I never got that argument.

The only reason why anyone would think WFRP is a better story setting than 40k is because no one made an RPG where you can play a Hive sludge collector, a Ratskin, or a low level scribe.

Getting off topic but I would LOVE Necromunda the RPG!

Back on topic, Low vs High Fantasy comes down to restraint vs freedom. It's tense when the heroes are cornered by the bad guys if they're a group of scribes and rat catchers and a hedge wizard who can kind of make sparks from his fingers.

Now a good writer can still make the battle tense even if the heroes are Knightly Lords in their Mythryl armor and the wizard is opening portholes to Heaven to bring down hosts of angels. It just takes more world building and explanation to sell why they high-end heroes are having trouble and explaining what their limits are.

But you don't have to tell me what the lowly scribe's limits are, I am a lowly scribe, I know exactly what his limits are.

The problem with high-end fantasy is a poor writer can just throw in a few deus ex-machinas and it fits. Of course Arch-Cardinal Brightlance can summon the Host of Heaven! It even gets dull.

With low-power fantasy the writer has to think a bit more, and if a writer finally does say "#$%^ it, DXM time!" it feels properly epic, and not "huh, a host of angels with flaming swords, must be Tuesday".

It doesn't help when a lot of the arguments you lot are using have no basis in what the actual lore is for AoS.

I will never understand the perception that somehow it's A Bad Thing that you have unexplored areas but having everything known is A Good Thing.

There are only so many times it can believably be the case that the Empire lost a patrol in the Drakwald Forest, again, to an "unknown threat".
Spoiler: It was Beastmen. It's always Beastmen. Because they live in the Drakwald Forest.

Also, it sounds like a lot of you don't actually want a wargame--it sounds like you want a RPG. Check out "Soulbound" to see how they're running things for AoS on that front.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It doesn't help when a lot of the arguments you lot are using have no basis in what the actual lore is for AoS.

I will never understand the perception that somehow it's A Bad Thing that you have unexplored areas but having everything known is A Good Thing.

There are only so many times it can believably be the case that the Empire lost a patrol in the Drakwald Forest, again, to an "unknown threat".
Spoiler: It was Beastmen. It's always Beastmen. Because they live in the Drakwald Forest.

Also, it sounds like a lot of you don't actually want a wargame--it sounds like you want a RPG. Check out "Soulbound" to see how they're running things for AoS on that front.

And...? I’ve tried to read the lore for AOS and don’t find it as compelling as the WHF lore. It’s actually that simple. Different strokes.

So what lore have you read? Genuinely curious here, as the early stuff is as bad as early WHFB stuff was.

I will never understand the perception that somehow it's A Bad Thing that you have unexplored areas but having everything known is A Good Thing.

There are only so many times it can believably be the case that the Empire lost a patrol in the

Kanluwens got a point.

Personally, for me the real difference between Age of Sigmar and Warhammer Fantasy is not one of high fantasy vs low fantasy, its one of "Open Fantasy" vs "Closed Fantasy" (pretty much making this up as I go). Age of Sigmar is an open-ended setting, the majority of the setting is physically unmapped, the majority of the characters are unnamed, the majority of the history is unexplored, the majority of events unknown, the borders of the various kingdoms, etc. are undefined, etc. etc. etc. You can literally do anything you want within the setting and make it fit into the established lore because of how much design space there is to work with, and that will still be true 50 years from now unless they do something stupid and release something like "A Definitive Cartographic Guide to the Entirety of the Mortal Realms, Including Detailed Histories of the Peoples and Places Found Therein" that establishes firm rules for the setting and world to follow. 40K is similar - though there are some more limitations to what you can do within the 40k setting, but its still a big galaxy and theres plenty of room for oddball planets, weird aliens, new factions, and bizarre events. Star Wars is another example of an open ended setting, though it has to deal with some of the same limitations as 40k, theres still plenty of design space for basically whatever you want to write into it.

Warhammer Fantasy on the other hand is/was fairly closed - there are well defined kingdoms with fairly well defined borders, a fairly definitive world map, a lot of well-defined history and events, etc. etc. etc. There are a lot of limitations as to what you can do with the Warhammer setting short of moving the timeline (but if you move the timeline you potentially preclude the involvement of certain characters that you might otherwise want involved in the relevant events, etc.) - worse still a lot of it was tied to real world geography/history/stereotypes in a manner that restricted what you could implement in a manner that didn't offend someones political sensibilities ("faction xyz is a cultural stereotype of xyz marginalized community") or realistic expectations ("Ogres have to be vaguely central asian in their theming, because their Kingdoms are in an area roughly analagous to central asia - it would be weird for them to be located there, but thematically based off of Zulu tribesmen from south africa or scottish highlanders, etc."). Warmachine suffers from some similar issues, less so from stereotypes, but more in that the map is fairly well-charted - short of opening up another continent theres not really any space for a new "kingdom" - no surprise then that 2 of the last 3 factions added to the game have basically been invaders from another dimension/your nightmares (and the third faction an exploration of a long-established but little explored minor kingdom that has spent most of the games history being occupied by one of the major powers).

I think the move to Age of Sigmar was probably in no small part driven by the need for more design space and creative freedom than what the World-That-Was realistically had to offer. In terms of "open" settings I can't think of any more open than Age of Sigmar, its literally a creative sandbox where almost anything goes.

Seeing as my favorite Dragonball Z arc is the Cell Saga, with time travel, mushroom-cloud throwers galore, teleportation to different planets, cyborgs, genetic superbeings capable of regenerating from a single cell, and a villain who blows up a chunk of Heaven itself, I feel like I should be AOS’s target demographic. I want big, crazy adventures across space and dimensions. I want thundergod mooks. I just need some sort of “in” to the setting, some way to start visualizing it, and maybe a basic map.

Back in the day, I bought a $20 book that describes the history of the Warhammer World and all its factions (including Chaos Dwarfs because it was back in the day). I would love something like that for Age of Sigmar, an affordable yet chunky fluff intro book that isn’t full of rules clutter. Have they ever released anything like that?

 Kanluwen wrote:
So what lore have you read? Genuinely curious here, as the early stuff is as bad as early WHFB stuff was.

What is a good starting point? I’d be interested to read some of the most un-WHFB AOS novels to get a feel for the setting’s flavor. However, current BL prices make me hesitant to pick up a book that has mixed reviews or takes place entirely in one little part of one AOS city (negating the scope of the setting and making me nostalgic for WHFB novels instead).

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Is less more? Reading your anecdote, I spent the time thinking "man I'd prefer the flying dragon and vorpal swords".

When it comes to fantasy, preference and execution are everything. I can create a story about Space Marines and have just as much drama, tension, and commentary on the human condition as any story about guardsmen.

They'd be really bad ones. Space Marines don't have the same biology, psychology, relationships or hierarchy of needs as humans.
They frankly have more in common with orks than humans, just for the lack of romantic/procreation relationships/partnerships and children (as well as the genetic engineering and indoctrination, and the latter is more extreme for marines than orks).
Space Marine priorities are generally big picture stuff that is downright disturbing when swinging around to put a lens on 'the human condition'

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
So what lore have you read? Genuinely curious here, as the early stuff is as bad as early WHFB stuff was.

What is a good starting point? I’d be interested to read some of the most un-WHFB AOS novels to get a feel for the setting’s flavor. However, current BL prices make me hesitant to pick up a book that has mixed reviews or takes place entirely in one little part of one AOS city (negating the scope of the setting and making me nostalgic for WHFB novels instead).

The Following are great: (IMO)

Court of the Blind King https://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-age-of-sigmar/novels/the-court-of-the-blind-king-ebook-en-2019.html
Spear of Shadows by Josh Reynolds - https://www.blacklibrary.com/all-products/spear-of-shadows-ebook.html
City of Secrets: https://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-age-of-sigmar/novels/city-of-secrets.html
Dark Harvest https://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-horror/dark-harvest-ebook-2019.html
The Serpents Bargain https://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-age-of-sigmar/quick-reads/the-serpents-bargain-2019.html
Thieves Paradise https://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-age-of-sigmar/novels/thieves-paradise-ebook-2019.html
Code of the Skies https://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-age-of-sigmar/novels/code-of-the-skies-ebook-2019.html
Scourge of Fate https://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-age-of-sigmar/novels/advent-2018-25-scourge-of-fate-ebook.html
Bone Desert https://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-age-of-sigmar/novels/the-bone-desert-ebook-2018.html
Soul Wars https://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-age-of-sigmar/novels/ebook-soul-wars.html

Thanks! I’ll check them out.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
So what lore have you read? Genuinely curious here, as the early stuff is as bad as early WHFB stuff was.

What is a good starting point? I’d be interested to read some of the most un-WHFB AOS novels to get a feel for the setting’s flavor. However, current BL prices make me hesitant to pick up a book that has mixed reviews or takes place entirely in one little part of one AOS city (negating the scope of the setting and making me nostalgic for WHFB novels instead).

Myths and Revenants is my best suggestion. It has a lil' bit of everything.

Morden's suggestions are good too, but IMO are a bit faction focused.

Yeah, +1 for dragons and vorpal swords. I don't know what most of you are talking about, I don't give a rats arse about scribes and rat-catchers, I see humans literally every day and I barely care about the real ones let alone some rando peasant. I certainly don't want to spend my free time playing some poorly dressed Landshneckt, gimme elves and dragons and orcs and ogres. If high fantasy "just turns them into superheroes" then...well, good! That's what I want!

WHFB as a setting was great because it DID have all that high magic and high fantasy in it. I mean, the two most popular book series were about a dark elf riding a velociraptor who had his soul permanently bonded to a demon, and dwarf berserker and his human bard taking down vampires and dragons and mages. Y'know, normal peasant stuff. Clearly the "Low-fantasy" stuff is the most popular aspect of WHFB /rolleyes

Hell, if I could have Stormcast Eternals in ToW I'd be 100% cool with it, fluff be damned. A bunch of plate armored superhumans is why I made an Undivided Mortals of Chaos army to begin with!

chaos0xomega wrote:
Warhammer Fantasy on the other hand is/was fairly closed - there are well defined kingdoms with fairly well defined borders, a fairly definitive world map, a lot of well-defined history and events, etc. etc. etc. There are a lot of limitations as to what you can do with the Warhammer setting short of moving the timeline [...] I think the move to Age of Sigmar was probably in no small part driven by the need for more design space and creative freedom than what the World-That-Was realistically had to offer. In terms of "open" settings I can't think of any more open than Age of Sigmar, its literally a creative sandbox where almost anything goes.

The idea that few new things could be implemented in the Warhammer Fantasy world is of course nonsense. Even within the narrow focus of the Old World, they did little with Kislev, Estalia, the Border Princes, Araby, Norsca. Is Estalia not just Spain? Geographically, yes. Culturally, socially, militarily it could have been anything. Zoom further out, and there is even more space to manoeuvre. They wanted to introduce some aquatic race (Idoneth)? Already hinted to exist deep in the ocean, but besides "existing", nothing was known and it could have taken any form they'd want. New Chaos warbands (Warcry)? Cathay was said to be strongly influenced by Tzeentch, and who knows in what ways that could manifest (especially since it's Tzeentch!). All kinds of other things could have been introduced in Naggarond, Lustria, the Southlands and certainly the far east. Those few pre-existing hints in older lore could be interpreted to mean almost anything, or simply ignored altogether. Just look at what they did with the Ogres. Altdorf? Yeah, relatively limited in what new things you can introduce there. Hinterlands of Khuresh? Erm, whatever you want, bring it on! As for storytelling, the idea that the WHFB world was particularly limiting feels odd given the existence of actual historical fiction. Even about real-world history, there is more we don't know than we do know. Numerous new stories can be told about known people, and even more about newly imagined people in known settings.

It only gets limiting if you merely want to constantly write about cataclysmic world changing events and characters with the powers of gods, and that's where WHFB was certainly "too small" - and based on what they're doing in AoS, that's what they wanted to write about. Maybe some or many customers are also interested in that kind of stuff, but to me it just feels like a sequence of superhero movies. Big powers, high stakes, slight change in the status quo, and on to the next instalment. Unfortunately, I'm personally far more interested in the motivations and limited powers of Samwise Gamgee and Tyrion Lannister than the godlike powers of Superman or Morathi.

Anyway, back to the settings: Star Wars may be a large open setting, but the games and movies always connect it to something we already know from other games and movies, because that's the point of a setting. There is something you know and understand, and then you can expand or dig deeper from there. "Anything goes" is not an interesting setting, it's the lack of one. It's a slate so blank it might as well not exist.

ToW is both very open and incredibly limiting for that very reason, everything is geographically locked in place and there's almost no reason certain armies would ever fight, but it's also only half-explored like Coenus said. If it hadn't gone End-Times, you could still have easily come up with reasons to create Fyreslayers or Kharadron overlords or Idoneth within the setting and make them work

I read historical fiction (and “low” fantasy) for different things than I read “high” fantasy for. A Guy Gavriel Kay fantasy set in not-quite-China focuses on characters and world building and setting the stakes and limitations of the story, which is great. Moorcock’s Corum stories are full of balls-to-the-wall wtf creatures, magic powers, and weird surprises around every corner, which is also great. There’s no reason why WHF can’t give the former while AOS gives the latter. Neither type of storytelling is superior; they each have their mood and time.

It only gets limiting if you merely want to constantly write about cataclysmic world changing events and characters with the powers of gods, and that's where WHFB was certainly "too small" - and based on what they're doing in AoS, that's what they wanted to write about. Maybe some or many customers are also interested in that kind of stuff, but to me it just feels like a sequence of superhero movies. Big powers, high stakes, slight change in the status quo, and on to the next instalment. Unfortunately, I'm personally far more interested in the motivations and limited powers of Samwise Gamgee and Tyrion Lannister than the godlike powers of Superman or Morathi.

As perviously said - these stories are told and take place in AOS as well as well as the big scale stuff.

Tyrion was someone who helped shaped the fate of the entire Seven Kingdoms and more - pretty high stakes - he did not have magic or Dragons but until Season 6+ he had intelligence. Samwise saves the entire known world..... no small stakes there and there are plenty of people of power in those novels.

Morathi is a interesting character who happens to have lots of power (IMO) as are plenty of others.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:


Back in the day, I bought a $20 book that describes the history of the Warhammer World and all its factions (including Chaos Dwarfs because it was back in the day). I would love something like that for Age of Sigmar, an affordable yet chunky fluff intro book that isn’t full of rules clutter. Have they ever released anything like that?

The 2nd ed. core rulebook has a lot of that (though admittedly theres a lot of crunch in there too).

The idea that few new things could be implemented in the Warhammer Fantasy world is of course nonsense. Even within the narrow focus of the Old World, they did little with Kislev, Estalia, the Border Princes, Araby, Norsca. Is Estalia not just Spain? Geographically, yes. Culturally, socially, militarily it could have been anything.

Have to agree to disagree. Even though they did little with that material, they still gave us enough insight into it to know what it was and how it would end up looking whenever they got around to it.

 His Master's Voice wrote:
I never got that argument.

The only reason why anyone would think WFRP is a better story setting than 40k is because no one made an RPG where you can play a Hive sludge collector, a Ratskin, or a low level scribe.

I will say I have never played WFRP This is talking more broadly about the worlds as they appeared to the average gamer. I don't think the average gamer has played WFRP.

But yeah, the expanse of the 40k world meant you could write whatever world you wanted into existence, but then you don't really need 40k to write a world into existence. The compelling bit of WHFB as a world in and of itself is that it's already a grounded background within which you can your stories. Maybe it wasn't the best of examples as 40k is obviously sci fi which has its own tropes that have been developed outside of 40k over many decades also.

I have found that about half of people expressing like or dislike of AoS lore vs WHFB lore are just looking for 'excuses' because they feel "it just isn't my thing as much as the other one is" is a not a legitimate argument. Which is sadly ironic, because that is the most legitimate argument.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Have to agree to disagree. Even though they did little with that material, they still gave us enough insight into it to know what it was and how it would end up looking whenever they got around to it.

I don't think anything they've done in AoS could not have existed within WHFB. Enough of the world was left unexplored that even if there wasn't a pre-existing place that had the theme they wanted, they could have just carved out a section of the world to make it. The only thing is that something like Sigmarines don't really fit with the vibe of the world, but that doesn't mean they couldn't have been shoehorned in if you really wanted to ruin the setting

And just because you think you know what it was and how it would end up looking doesn't mean it would turn out how you think if and when it finally did get fleshed out. Maybe the parts described in the few existing sentences don't become the focus of that lore expansion, and another part they didn't talk about much or at all becomes the central theme. Even within our existent world, if someone writes a few sentences about a place or a people group your own experiences when you go visit yourself could be wildly different.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I have found that about half of people expressing like or dislike of AoS lore vs WHFB lore are just looking for 'excuses' because they feel "it just isn't my thing as much as the other one is" is a not a legitimate argument. Which is sadly ironic, because that is the most legitimate argument.

My intention wasn't to express like or dislike at all, but rather try and figure out the broad appeal of WHFB vs AoS.

Obviously individuals have their own preferences for what they like vs what they don't, I figured that went without saying.