Switch Theme:

General Handbook II will be really different?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




I have been out of the loop a bit. So I am not sure what is happening. I thought there was a rumour with a General's Handbook 2 coming out soon. I thought it was just small updates and nothing much so it would be basically the same. Reading 40K rumours about the new edition, I saw a comment from someone, (forget who or exactly how it was said) but something like "this is what AoS should have been."

So does anyone know or do you think that General's Handbook 2 can be a lot different more like how 40K new edition seems to be going, or do you think they will not really add much and just a few point tweaks?

Would you like them to do what we read for what 40K might become or do you want AoS to be the same with a few point adjustments? I guess what I am trying to say is do you think General's Handbook 2 is a good time to add a lot of new mechanics or we should still keep it simple as it is now but with point tweaks?

Davor

Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.

Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?

Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".  
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Seattle, WA USA

Hard to say, but I think we can count on point tweaks and some new scenarios. They might also include an updated core rules section that includes the FAQ (that'd be kinda nice to have all in one place).

I don't want 40k and AoS to be identical. They're different settings, and as such need a little bit of rules differences to better represent their respective styles. I wouldn't be surprised, though, to see some tweaks to Summoning, since there seems to be a lot of complaining about it (I actually don't have much issue with it), and maybe something about measuring base to base since it seems to be the most common house rule.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Heavily favoring the current set-up with a points tweak. Maybe add some of the obvious things (base to base measure) but keep it a bit different from 8th 40k which is looking to be AoS with more bells and whistles.

Fitting as sci-fi should be more complicated than fantasy anyway.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

I don't think so, just yet. Now, I do think a lot of the new 40k things should be backported to AOS. However, I think that might wait until General's Handbook 3, so they can see how 40k reacts with it. I definitely think a lot of that stuff will make into AOS, but it's too early for such sweeping changes. In fact, depending on how the 40k changes are received, I could actually see next year or so having an actual AOS 2.0 update that changes the core rules to be similar (e.g. maybe having Strength and Toughness again). Granted that's extreme, so such a huge change is unlikely, but I do think that we will see a few of the things 40k is incorporating in AOS sometime.

- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




 Valander wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised, though, to see some tweaks to Summoning, since there seems to be a lot of complaining about it (I actually don't have much issue with it),


What is the problem with Summoning under Matched Play? Since you have to pay points for the models you summon, didn't that address what people were complaining about pre -General's Handbook?
   
Made in us
Auspicious Aspiring Champion of Chaos






Edmond Dantes wrote:
 Valander wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised, though, to see some tweaks to Summoning, since there seems to be a lot of complaining about it (I actually don't have much issue with it),


What is the problem with Summoning under Matched Play? Since you have to pay points for the models you summon, didn't that address what people were complaining about pre -General's Handbook?


It basically swung the pendulum too far the other way in a lot of people's opinions (myself included). Summoning went from stupidly OP to borderline pointless. Yes, you can keep "Schrodinger's Points" in reserve and summon what you need to for the situation, but with how easy it is for a lot of armies to snipe heroes, and the fact that the stuff most people are worried about have high casting values to summon, there is no guarantee you will ever get to use those reserved points, and you may end up never using those points, and all you did was handicap yourself. My issue is that there are certain armies (especially Death armies) whose entire playstyle is based on summoning, and this rule greatly changed the way they play. Free summoning was bad design, but so is full-cost summoning. There has to be something in between so the summoning is viable and useful, but not broken.

2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress
2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Seattle, WA USA

EnTyme summed up the issues most folks seem to have with Summoning pretty well. For myself, I haven't been too upset with how it works, but granted haven't played a lot of games yet. I think the odder pieces come in relation to various spells/abilities which create new units (e.g., Blue Horrors). I think the versatility of customizing and deep-striking on the fly is pretty cool and don't mind setting aside a few points for that, but there is always arguments, it seems, on the interwebs about "Do I still have to pay points for..." in relation to those other abilities.

Consequently, it's at least a FAQ-heavy area, and I wouldn't be surprised to see some other kind of tweaks, too. What, exactly, I don't know. But yeah, seems there needs to be a middle ground somewhere on the current swing.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






I suspect that matched play will get base to base measuring and alternating turn order (as opposed to random initiative).

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis






Home Base: Prosper, TX (Dallas)

God I hope they don't get rid of random initiative. That would be a pretty massive step back in my opinion. It adds a whole other layer of depth.

Best Painted (2015 Adepticon 40k Champs)

They Shall Know Fear - Adepticon 40k TT Champion (2012 & 2013) & 40k TT Best Sport (2014), 40k TT Best Tactician (2015 & 2016) 
   
Made in us
Clousseau




Random initiative seems to be the #1 complaint from a ton of people. That and they want pointless summoning to be... well ... pointless (as in free again)
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Myrtle Creek, OR

 auticus wrote:
Random initiative seems to be the #1 complaint from a ton of people. That and they want pointless summoning to be... well ... pointless (as in free again)


We played non-points for a few games using only the starter box armies that I owned.
Made one of the 40k guys who played demons really want to field his own troops.
He was a self-confessed cheese player and even he said that original summoning was broken as broken could be.
Of course, he said that after chain summoning a bunch of stuff and making my army a golden and blue paste on the table.
But yeah, there's gotta be some sort of limit on summoning that prevents it from being Elmer Fudd pulling dynamite out of his pocket every turn.

Thread Slayer 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

 EnTyme wrote:
Edmond Dantes wrote:
 Valander wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised, though, to see some tweaks to Summoning, since there seems to be a lot of complaining about it (I actually don't have much issue with it),


What is the problem with Summoning under Matched Play? Since you have to pay points for the models you summon, didn't that address what people were complaining about pre -General's Handbook?


It basically swung the pendulum too far the other way in a lot of people's opinions (myself included). Summoning went from stupidly OP to borderline pointless. Yes, you can keep "Schrodinger's Points" in reserve and summon what you need to for the situation, but with how easy it is for a lot of armies to snipe heroes, and the fact that the stuff most people are worried about have high casting values to summon, there is no guarantee you will ever get to use those reserved points, and you may end up never using those points, and all you did was handicap yourself. My issue is that there are certain armies (especially Death armies) whose entire playstyle is based on summoning, and this rule greatly changed the way they play. Free summoning was bad design, but so is full-cost summoning. There has to be something in between so the summoning is viable and useful, but not broken.


Pretty much this. Summoning went from easy to abuse to basically useless. I think the issue was that you could chain summon, since no Rule of 1 existed. So the problem is that people will always cry "But it's not fair!" if someone gets anything for free, but at the same time summoning right now is practically useless. I think it might work if it was A) once per game instead of 1/turn, but doesn't cost reinforcement points, and/or B) Summoning recycles units (i.e. points go back into the "pool" when units are destroyed, and C) could not be used on monsters. In this way you cannot abuse it (at most you could get 1 extra unit once per game, and could not summon a monster) and/or could let armies like Death which rely on summoning a lot as their motif get back that unending horde list, as you could recycle units but could not bring on new units unless you put points aside. However, you'll always find people who will look to abuse it or cry how it's unfair that some armies can recycle and some units cannot.

I actually want to try experimenting with a relaxed set of matched play rules that enables unit recycling for summoning or the 1/game variant. However, full disclosure I play Flesh-Eater Courts so summoning is a major part of my army and as it stands I basically do not get a command ability because they are all summoning, but even a 1/game free summon would IMHO be better than what it is now.

- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






 Hulksmash wrote:
God I hope they don't get rid of random initiative. That would be a pretty massive step back in my opinion. It adds a whole other layer of depth.
Which is what makes random initiative so fun in open/narrative play. But the idea behind matched play is to have player skill as the determining factor as much as possible, something that random initiative hinders. And before the argument pops up that random initiative adds tactics and whatnot, remember that Chess would not function as a strategic game if it had random initiative.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

 privateer4hire wrote:
 auticus wrote:
Random initiative seems to be the #1 complaint from a ton of people. That and they want pointless summoning to be... well ... pointless (as in free again)


We played non-points for a few games using only the starter box armies that I owned.
Made one of the 40k guys who played demons really want to field his own troops.
He was a self-confessed cheese player and even he said that original summoning was broken as broken could be.
Of course, he said that after chain summoning a bunch of stuff and making my army a golden and blue paste on the table.
But yeah, there's gotta be some sort of limit on summoning that prevents it from being Elmer Fudd pulling dynamite out of his pocket every turn.


I think there is several ways to do this. Disclosure, I am a Death player.

I'm thinking something like:

1) No summoning monsters without putting points aside for them, also a summoned unit loses the ability to also summon (so no summoning pink horrors who summon pink horrors who summon pink horrors)
2A) Units that are destroyed can be recycled (go back into the summon pool, does not apply to monsters) so you cannot ad without putting points, but you can recycle.
OR
2B) Summon spells/abilities become single-use abilities, at no additional cost

#1 is a no-brainer and helps to curb a lot of the major abuses. #2A would allow Death especially and chaos to a lesser extent be able to recycle units that are destroyed, lending (especially in the case of death) a sort of "unending horde" vibe which I feel is really fluffy. #2B is probably the most relaxed because it's a 1/game ability, so at best you can get like a single unit, the problem is people who would take a bunch of wizards and summon a bunch of various things all in one go to like double the size of their army. I haven't quite figured out all the fringe exploits that could be possible with it, maybe a combination of both 2s? Summoning spells/abilities become 1/game that you can recycle a unit you fielded that was destroyed, so you A) have to actually field the unit that you want to bring back, B) said unit has to be wiped out, and C) can only do so 1/game

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/02 02:21:52


- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






I just say that any points put in reserve for summoning are multiplied by 1.5 when the game starts. So every 2 points out of the list is 3 points available to summon from during the game.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Clousseau




For my narrative events I just made summoning spells harder to pull off and include the rule of one. No need to bank points that way, and it works great because you can still get some free crap on the table but it is in no way the cone of abuse that it was before GHB.
   
Made in us
Snord




Midwest USA

I had the idea for Summoning that, for Matched Play. the Wizards can use the summoning spell to increase the size of the unit or heal it based on recasting the spell. Basically, once the unit is on the field after the start of Turn 2 (deployed or summoned), a unit can get buffed up with more models. The wizard would cast the spell to spawn in 1d6 models's worth of wounds for each successful "tier" of casting. For example:

- Raise Skeletons would buff the unit 1d6 Skeletons on a casting roll of 5 or more, or 2d6 on a roll of 10 or more

- Morghast Harbingers would get 1d6 wounds worth back, healing up damage before bringing in a new model that would not be at full wounds

- A Soul Grinder would be healed 1d6 wounds on a casting roll of 10

Add in a bit where it can heal models that are in combat, and it might work. Or if that is too much, make it 1d3 on models in combat.



I love how everyone can come up with different ideas for supplemental house rules for the game and no one bats an eye at it! I love Age of Sigmar right now
   
Made in us
Shas'la with Pulse Carbine





Florida

Here is the link to the last update on GHB2 where they show "experimental rules" in which they nerfed Tomb Kings and and buffed Fyreslayers (They didn't reveal if they actually changed any rules just points costs for matched play):

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/02/07/the-generals-handbook-ii-wip-points-sneak-peek/

I can only hope that they also address (i.e. nerf) Beastclaw Raiders too.

I play:
40K: Daemons, Tau
AoS: Blades of Khorne, Disciples of Tzeentch
Warmachine: Convergence of Cyriss
Infinity: Haqqislam, Tohaa
Malifaux: Bayou
Star Wars Legion: Republic & Separatists
MESBG: Far Harad, Misty Mountains 
   
Made in us
Nurgle Veteran Marine with the Flu




Southern California

Why does BCR need a nerf? Maybe some tweaking of the thundertusk. Maybe START at d6 mortals rather then 6 straight up. Other then that they seem fine!
   
Made in ca
Renegade Inquisitor with a Bound Daemon





Tied and gagged in the back of your car

I would much rather keep summoning weak and useless for most armies than deal with the absolute mess that free summoning is.

I've seen 40k games where 1500 point armies put down an additional 2500 points of models after the deployment, and it's asinine. There's probably a way to balance summoning out so that it is useful and not overcosted, but doing so is not worth the risk of ruining an entire game over, especially one as enjoyable as AoS. And if they manage to mess it up just slightly, that's exactly what will happen. For that reason, I'd be in favour of just keeping summoning as it is.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/02 14:44:58


 
   
Made in us
Shas'la with Pulse Carbine





Florida

 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:
Why does BCR need a nerf? Maybe some tweaking of the thundertusk. Maybe START at d6 mortals rather then 6 straight up. Other then that they seem fine!


One of them on its own is fine. At 2000 points, you can easily slot in 4 of them as the beastriders become battle line in alliance and still have 620 points left over for objective grabbers.

Most armies can't do anything against 24 automatic mortal wounds from 26" away. Then next turn they do it again unless you were able to get at least 4 wounds on each of them at range and then you're only looking at 4d6 more mortal wounds at range. They can easily snipe your most important pieces turn 1 and spend the following turns mopping up and grabbing objectives because they are decently fast as well.

Its mortal wound spam and not many things in the game currently can mitigate against that.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/02 16:02:07


I play:
40K: Daemons, Tau
AoS: Blades of Khorne, Disciples of Tzeentch
Warmachine: Convergence of Cyriss
Infinity: Haqqislam, Tohaa
Malifaux: Bayou
Star Wars Legion: Republic & Separatists
MESBG: Far Harad, Misty Mountains 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






It's the BCR characters that are the biggest problem. Raiders with allegiance aren't as bad because mournfangs are overcosted and sabertusks are outright double what they should be. Note that the strongest Destruction armies right now are BCR heroes with Moonclan troops.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in gb
Infiltrating Broodlord





England

Will the GHB2 affect the current battle tomes? I was going to get the FEC one today. Thank you.

 Nostromodamus wrote:
Please don’t necro to ask if there’s been any news.
 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

Probably not. They are redoing battletomes it seems to bring them in line with the newer style FEC one is an old tome so hopefully will be updated soon but there's no indication of it.

- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in gb
Infiltrating Broodlord





England

Okay, cheers. If I get a few months out of it that's fine.

 Nostromodamus wrote:
Please don’t necro to ask if there’s been any news.
 
   
 
Forum Index » Warhammer: Age of Sigmar
Go to: