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.

*looks at new Bret rules*

I swear that these rules are being written by a different fething company...

It seems very well thought for a GW product haha.

But it seems odd a Duke is that powerful (that's close to a former Chaos Lord profile...).

SU-152 wrote:
It seems very well thought for a GW product haha.

But it seems odd a Duke is that powerful (that's close to a former Chaos Lord profile...).

Now that more strength doesn’t automatically mean more armour piercing, they’ve got the flexibility to do this sort of thing.

SU-152 wrote:
It seems very well thought for a GW product haha.

But it seems odd a Duke is that powerful (that's close to a former Chaos Lord profile...).

The Duke does have the Grail Vow, so that implies he has supped from the Grail and gained some divine power. Not too far away from Chaos gifts...

models with upgrades that cost points..

what is this heresy..

I still Men at Arms are still pants, interesting the monk model now actually does something though

sad to see "always strikes last" is a thing instead of an initiative modifier though

I got excited at the "up to 0-50% can be spent on characters" but then saw magic items were limited. Was hoping for a return to herohammer

Looks very interesting! System seems flexible and the allies and mercenaries was an unexpected but welcome addition.

Still no points for the individual models? Or did I miss it? Anxious to see what a normal trooper will cost.

 bong264 wrote:
I got excited at the "up to 0-50% can be spent on characters" but then saw magic items were limited. Was hoping for a return to herohammer

Hmm... let's see how poweful a Duke with T 5 and 7 wounds + 100 points in magic items + vows + virtues is...

The new article seems to confirm something that GW hasn't touched upon so far.

In a recent video, the Honest Wargamer Rob "speculated" that the free PDF rules won't be just low-effort rules akin to "legends" (or whatever it's called) rules for AoS & 40k, but full fledged army lists that would be on the same strength land granularity level with the "main factions".

He also added that the rulebooks/campaign books would just add rules to build thematic/alternate army list, which won't be just straight-out superior or more detailed to the PDF rules.

The new article seems to confirm the "thematic army lists in books" bit, which is encouraging for those who want to wargame with armies that aren't main factions.

If he's right, Dark Elf, Vampire, Skaven and Ogre players can breathe a sigh of relief and look forward to playing with new rules.

The Men-At-Arms are described as poor fighters but cheap in points.

They do however have the ability to become stubborn and the shieldwall rule allows them to give ground instead of falling back. Even poor fighters look very hard to actually break?

I am very interested on that "Horde" keyword. Enough rank & file and you fight in Extra Rank like in 8th?

 Dreamchild wrote:
The new article seems to confirm something that GW hasn't touched upon so far.

In a recent video, the Honest Wargamer Rob "speculated" that the free PDF rules won't be just low-effort rules akin to "legends" (or whatever it's called) rules for AoS & 40k, but full fledged army lists that would be on the same strength land granularity level with the "main factions".

He also added that the rulebooks/campaign books would just add rules to build thematic/alternate army list, which won't be just straight-out superior or more detailed to the PDF rules.

The new article seems to confirm the "thematic army lists in books" bit, which is encouraging for those who want to wargame with armies that aren't main factions.

If he's right, Dark Elf, Vampire, Skaven and Ogre players can breathe a sigh of relief and look forward to playing with new rules.

Don't follow the channel but I'd imagine Rob would have more than an inkling than most Youtube folks on what the product is going to look like. Not to mention that some channels are apparently starting to get their preview rules etc.

Another homerun. More slot-y than I dared hope.

Hmm, so once again a great weapon for a character costs the same amount of points whether you have 3 or 5 Attacks...

 Ohman wrote:
The Men-At-Arms are described as poor fighters but cheap in points.

They do however have the ability to become stubborn and the shieldwall rule allows them to give ground instead of falling back. Even poor fighters look very hard to actually break?

They are poor fighters, they barely can kill Skeleton warriors if not already running away from them! Its more of an case that they "hold" enemy down so that the Knights can heroically intervene by slamming right into the flanks and save the day.

SU-152 wrote:

 bong264 wrote:
I got excited at the "up to 0-50% can be spent on characters" but then saw magic items were limited. Was hoping for a return to herohammer

Hmm... let's see how poweful a Duke with T 5 and 7 wounds + 100 points in magic items + vows + virtues is...

It’s the save of the Hippogryph which caught my attention.

Griffonic Pelt is a nice addition, giving Mr Tweetyflapdeath protection. And we can add Barding for presumably a 4+ save.

And as the beastie itself adds to its owner’s stats? I have to assume, in the absence of further information, the saves add together.

Heavy Armour + Shield = 4+ save on its own. So…does being mounted on that beast now grant a 1+ save?

 Dreamchild wrote:
The new article seems to confirm something that GW hasn't touched upon so far.

In a recent video, the Honest Wargamer Rob "speculated" that the free PDF rules won't be just low-effort rules akin to "legends" (or whatever it's called) rules for AoS & 40k, but full fledged army lists that would be on the same strength land granularity level with the "main factions".

He also added that the rulebooks/campaign books would just add rules to build thematic/alternate army list, which won't be just straight-out superior or more detailed to the PDF rules.

The new article seems to confirm the "thematic army lists in books" bit, which is encouraging for those who want to wargame with armies that aren't main factions.

If he's right, Dark Elf, Vampire, Skaven and Ogre players can breathe a sigh of relief and look forward to playing with new rules.

Denial is a hell of a thing to go through, don't worry you'll get through those stages of grief eventually.

Heres the thing, the PDF lists are apparently the "Grand Army" lists. The Grand Army lists are said to be the totality of units available to that faction. By that logic, any "thematic army list" for Dark Elves, Vampires, Skaven, Ogres, etc. would essentally be/necessitate an update to the PDF army list, because you are adding units to that faction. We know that they will not be updating the PDF army list though, which means those thematic lists for those factions won't be happening - aside from the fact that GW already said that the core factions are the ones that would be explored and updated in forthcoming expansions, and the other factions like VC and Skaven would not be.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
OK. I don’t remember pre-6th Ed Warhammer list building terribly well, but this feels like a mix of post-6th WHFB and 2nd Ed 40K.

The “slots” are carried over (Characters, Core, Special, Rare) but rather than so many of each, it’s now a maximum percentage of your available points.

I’m encouraged by this.

5th was as such: 25%+ spent on regiments. Not Core or anything like that. Regiments. Up to 25% on characters, up to 25% on war machines, and up to 25% on Allies. Guess what you can get as your Allies? If you guessed "no restrictions", then you are spot on.


Percentages have always been a garbage composition tool and have led to the worst imbalances in the game. Not shocked at all that they're in.

Not sure I agree.

Having to spend 25% on Core prevents “I’ll just take minimal Gobbos lololololol tactical genius” type shenanigans.

But, I do prefer better defined Core, Special, Rare.

This for now seems like a pleasing blend of the two.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Though if memory serves, Bretonnians have long had a great percentage cap on characters?

I may be entirely misremembering that. In which case, I do wonder where that memory came from.

Those shenanigans simply depends on what is core

And in the past this was based on fluff not on power
Meaning some armies wanted to play core units only, which was fluff (and strong), while others played with 25% less

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


It’s the save of the Hippogryph which caught my attention.

Griffonic Pelt is a nice addition, giving Mr Tweetyflapdeath protection. And we can add Barding for presumably a 4+ save.

And as the beastie itself adds to its owner’s stats? I have to assume, in the absence of further information, the saves add together.

Heavy Armour + Shield = 4+ save on its own. So…does being mounted on that beast now grant a 1+ save?

There must be a typing error there. 'Counts as hand weapon' is missing and bird having heavy armor makes no sense since scaly skin exists.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Bit at the end implies that main factions get a physical army list of some format.

Hardly surprising. Who didn't expect army books to return?

I did but there was some uncertainty expressed recently in this thread about it, that's why I'm pointing it out.

This thread also heavily indulged in speculation that TOW would be in Epic scale, I wouldn't listen to half of it. Main issue is whether they'll all be amalgamated into a couple books HH style or whether each army will get one. I suspect the latter in some kind of format (perhaps as suggested above for variant lists) as there's a lot more background and fluff you can fill WHFB army books with than HH when you have 20 slightly varying degrees of Space Marine.

 Londinium wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

I did but there was some uncertainty expressed recently in this thread about it, that's why I'm pointing it out.

This thread also heavily indulged in speculation that TOW would be in Epic scale,

Awkward, that was me!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

And we can add Barding for presumably a 4+ save.

And as the beastie itself adds to its owner’s stats? I have to assume, in the absence of further information, the saves add together.

Heavy Armour + Shield = 4+ save on its own. So…does being mounted on that beast now grant a 1+ save?

Judging from the Grail Knight stats it may be that the mount only provides a save bonus when barded. It may give +1W, though.

The Duke on a Hippogrif seeme to have a single statline with two sources of attacks, like regular cavalry.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Dreamchild wrote:
The new article seems to confirm something that GW hasn't touched upon so far.

In a recent video, the Honest Wargamer Rob "speculated" that the free PDF rules won't be just low-effort rules akin to "legends" (or whatever it's called) rules for AoS & 40k, but full fledged army lists that would be on the same strength land granularity level with the "main factions".

He also added that the rulebooks/campaign books would just add rules to build thematic/alternate army list, which won't be just straight-out superior or more detailed to the PDF rules.

The new article seems to confirm the "thematic army lists in books" bit, which is encouraging for those who want to wargame with armies that aren't main factions.

If he's right, Dark Elf, Vampire, Skaven and Ogre players can breathe a sigh of relief and look forward to playing with new rules.

Denial is a hell of a thing to go through, don't worry you'll get through those stages of grief eventually.

Heres the thing, the PDF lists are apparently the "Grand Army" lists. The Grand Army lists are said to be the totality of units available to that faction. By that logic, any "thematic army list" for Dark Elves, Vampires, Skaven, Ogres, etc. would essentally be/necessitate an update to the PDF army list, because you are adding units to that faction. We know that they will not be updating the PDF army list though, which means those thematic lists for those factions won't be happening - aside from the fact that GW already said that the core factions are the ones that would be explored and updated in forthcoming expansions, and the other factions like VC and Skaven would not be.

Which is literally what I said was a good thing. Nobody from my gaming circle has expressed zero interest in thematic lists.

If every faction (even not the main factions) get a Grand Army list with a similar number of special rules/magic items, that's literally the same as every previous edition of WHFB & the one thing that non-main faction players (from my experience) were asking for.

Yeah, If every army has a minimum grand army list it'll be fine for the non-main factions if the new "infamy" lists in books come out with same power level but different then the non-main factions will be able to participate for a long long time.

It's a bonus if the non-main factions get an infamy army or two but not critical for balance. Sorry if all Lizardmen will have to take saurus for example instead of a southlands skink infamy list but overall it seems a good place for everyone based on the article.

that only depends on how they are written

with a part of the army can be from those sub-factions, not having them means others are already missing out
if those parts are the powerful units, well than there will be a problem

based on the article it is impossible to say if GW screwed the faction balance up or not, it just shows what possibilities to unintentionally screw it up are there

Can somepne explain what a grand army list is to me? Like I'm 10 or smt.

Yes it will be great, they will achieve perfect balance right out of the gate as always, no need for updates, guaranteed no power creep and no mandatory keeping up with campaign supplements to stay viable. In fact I heard that this is the most playtested edition of all time.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
*looks at new Bret rules*

I swear that these rules are being written by a different fething company...

I don't know whether or not to think that it's a good thing that GW's games design philosophy is so schizophrenic.