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.

Is Age of Sigmar a continuation of Fantasy or Fantasy Battles? This came up in another thread so not to derail that thread, I made this post. While the two games are different the miniatures are the same. Some of the characters are the same. The story is continuing on from what happened. I am not saying this was or was not the correct way of doing things. All I am saying is that AoS is still part of Fantasy fluff wise, but is a different game play wise now. So fluff wise AoS is a continuation of Fantasy.

Your thoughts? Opinions?

It's not an opinion thing. AoS is a fluff continuation from the End Times which ended the old world. Full stop. Are you asking if anyone thinks it's not? Like people believing the world is flat?

Yes and No

Yes in the lore sense it is a continuation of the story. It even features several key heroes from the times before. Some old gods and others mortals or immortals advanced to demi or full god status. It also re-uses pretty much all the models (the only missing ones are Tomb Kings and other models that GW has retired).

That said, rather like a Super Hero comic rebirth or such - the end of the old lore and the start of the new lore is such a massive event and change that AoS is very much like a start of a new setting. Especially considering that even things like how the world is formed and structured are changed; its now a series of worlds linked by realm gates whilst in the past it was a standard planet.


Gameplay wise its totally different. Fantasy was very much based on open battlefields with limited terrain and formation control. With many units having fixed formations to move and turn in; it even affected how combat was conducted and resolved.
In addition much of the magic and spellcraft was not "low magic" but certainly wasn't "high" or "epic". Indeed going back to its roots, Fantasy of old was actually quite low-fantasy in many ways. Elves were basically just spearmen, archers, one dragon and an eagle etc...

AoS is far more Epic/high fantasy with a lot more fantasy creatures and beasts even in the basic rank and file of many armies. In addition the magic has taken a big shift to the point where there are now vast summoning spells and endless spells that persist on the battlefield.




AoS is a continuation and rebuilding of Fantasy. It is both linked and yet different enough to be very distinctive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hulksmash wrote:
It's not an opinion thing. AoS is a fluff continuation from the End Times which ended the old world. Full stop. Are you asking if anyone thinks it's not? Like people believing the world is flat?

Technically aren't some of the realms flat - heck one is lit by a dragon as its sun if I recall right.

 Hulksmash wrote:
It's not an opinion thing. AoS is a fluff continuation from the End Times which ended the old world. Full stop. Are you asking if anyone thinks it's not? Like people believing the world is flat?

I made a simple comment that they are both the same and someone said they didn't agree so I would like to see their view of things. So not to derail that thread I made this. Since this is Dakka and the internet, I have learned to make a new thread to discuss things so we don't derail the original thread.

Personally I separate the two. There's a tenuous link between the two with things like Alarielle and Sigmar in the fluff but really there's not much beyond that. Even with the characters that survived the change most are radically different e.g. Morathi is now a giant snake lady. Most gods are dead or gone, the nations are destroyed and almost nobody knows about the Fantasy world.
So while there are some things that are carried across I think it's different enough to separate the two especially as they're focused on different things. The similarities are more like the similarities in fantasy/aos and 40k than a straight continuation.

Gameplay wise they're totally separate as WHFB was ranked units with pretty tight army building and Sigmar is not at all.

In the lore it is indeed a continuation of the Old World, countless years after the End Times (i.e., the Old World's version of Ragnarok).

Yes, it is a continuation. Taking place aeons after the End Times and the gods remember that world.

Just look at this, It references the End Times.

https://www.blacklibrary.com/coming-soon/november/gotrek-realmslayer-mp3.html

The Old World essentially predates even the times of Myth, so while it's technically a fluff continuation, only the Gods would remember anything about the pre-End Times, as there's not even any written history that exists about it as far as the Mortals in the Realms are concerned.

Even stories from thousands of years before the current AoS setting would STILL only be about things that happened in the Mortal Realms, and the kingdoms that existed before the Time of Chaos, rather than the Old World.

I was under the assumption, cant remember where i saw it (maybe silver tower) that AoS is only 1 of the possible futures of the old world thing. fething tzeencth

Overread wrote:Yes and No

Yes in the lore sense it is a continuation of the story. It even features several key heroes from the times before. Some old gods and others mortals or immortals advanced to demi or full god status. It also re-uses pretty much all the models (the only missing ones are Tomb Kings and other models that GW has retired).

That said, rather like a Super Hero comic rebirth or such - the end of the old lore and the start of the new lore is such a massive event and change that AoS is very much like a start of a new setting. Especially considering that even things like how the world is formed and structured are changed; its now a series of worlds linked by realm gates whilst in the past it was a standard planet.


Gameplay wise its totally different. Fantasy was very much based on open battlefields with limited terrain and formation control. With many units having fixed formations to move and turn in; it even affected how combat was conducted and resolved.
In addition much of the magic and spellcraft was not "low magic" but certainly wasn't "high" or "epic". Indeed going back to its roots, Fantasy of old was actually quite low-fantasy in many ways. Elves were basically just spearmen, archers, one dragon and an eagle etc...

AoS is far more Epic/high fantasy with a lot more fantasy creatures and beasts even in the basic rank and file of many armies. In addition the magic has taken a big shift to the point where there are now vast summoning spells and endless spells that persist on the battlefield.

Pretty much this. So, it really depends on the context of the question in order to give a proper answer. The mechanics of AoS are so different from WHFB that if they released it with a completely brand new model set with zero connection to the Empire, Tzeentch, and all of them, and no one would have called it Warhammer from the outside. 40K's mechanics are almost as strong a divergence, but not entirely.

thekingofkings wrote:I was under the assumption, cant remember where i saw it (maybe silver tower) that AoS is only 1 of the possible futures of the old world thing. fething tzeencth

Multiverse systems can be a pain in the arse.

multiverses with arcanites and even worse, yeah we can has issues

It's like a soft reboot of a movie. Jurassic World, for example. It acknowledges the original happened but it has no bearing on the new thing.

Davor wrote:
Is Age of Sigmar a continuation of Fantasy or Fantasy Battles? This came up in another thread so not to derail that thread, I made this post. While the two games are different the miniatures are the same. Some of the characters are the same. The story is continuing on from what happened. I am not saying this was or was not the correct way of doing things. All I am saying is that AoS is still part of Fantasy fluff wise, but is a different game play wise now. So fluff wise AoS is a continuation of Fantasy.

Your thoughts? Opinions?

It is indeed a continuation.

There are quite a few characters who have reborn (or have been recreated) in the Realms and who's ancestry continues to have an influence - eg Neferata built her favourite city and nation based on her memories of Lahmia.

Some of the stories reference artefacts, people and places that have survived and are now in the Realms, for instance a Slaan intervened to destroy one in Pestilans

In terms of lore? Well yeah, the reason why AoS exists is because they nuked the Old World.

In terms of gameplay? Haha, no. Not at all. Come back when they introduce close order combat, unit facings and actual tactics.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
In terms of lore? Well yeah, the reason why AoS exists is because they nuked the Old World.

In terms of gameplay? Haha, no. Not at all. Come back when they introduce close order combat, unit facings and actual tactics.

While its not a great one, "Scream and Charge" is an actual tactic......I wouldn't recommend it in most cases though.

The spirit of the game is entirely different. Even if WFB vacillated between editions from low-to mid fantasy, it was an entirely different kind of game from AoS and fostered a different mentality.

WFB was intended to be a (very imperfect) abstraction of realistic notions. Formations had to wheel, newtonian physics were generally applicable, the planet was round, was orbited by spheroid celestial bodies, and ostensibly orbited a star. Furthermore, WFB had a high barrier to entry--costs aside, there was a learning curve, and just because you put something on the table, it didn't mean that that thing would get to do everything that the army book stated that i could. Fail a fear check and you can't march. Get flanked and you lose your rank bonus. Goblins will have a hard time landing a blow on a chaos warrior, etc.

To me, the driving philosophy of AoS is to drive down these barriers to entry. You can get started with a "Start Collecting" box (which range from 600-800 points it seems) and have a fun game. Furthermore, every turn, your model will be able to do everything that it said on the card, no matter what the enemy does (except for actually removing that model from the table). There is zero interactivity between enemy models on the table. The skill of an opposing model will not impede your ability to hit or force a save roll on them.

There is published fluff linking them and it is the same company.

In terms of the game though. It's a very different game, developing in a different direction, aimed at a different kind of player and that gives a different gaming experience.

I used to play Dark Elves back when it was Warhammer Fantasy. Are they worth updating for this newer system if I get back into it? thanks

demigirl wrote:
I used to play Dark Elves back when it was Warhammer Fantasy. Are they worth updating for this newer system if I get back into it? thanks

Like many of the elf forces, Dark Elves are now divided into several different subfactions (which can all ally with each other)

The Daughters of Khaine are currently the only Dark Elf group that has been updated with a full Battletome and are a very good army focused on fast close combat strikes and synergies between heros/leaders and their troops. They've got new models in the form of a massive Morathi serpent; close combat and ranged melusai and close combat and ranged khinerai. The Melusai are tough in close combat and you can even go for a whole army of snake women if you want (as armies in AoS require a minimum number of battle-line troops - which for Daughters is Witch Aelves and Sisters of Slaughter - however if you take a Bloodwrack as your general then the close combat melusai count as battleline as well). Khinerai are essentially deep striking units; designed to appear on the board from off table to steal an objective; strike at archers, support close combat units and generally cause trouble.

After that the other subfactions have not had much attention, however there's a very solid core of troops and dragon riding sorceresses in the Darkling Covens - armed warriors led by sorceress covens and powerful mages. Darkling would likely form a good core if you've already got an army, then you can bring in allies from other areas. At 2K points you get to bring 400 points of allies so you could easily bring in a hydra (or two) from Order Serpentis; or some Assassins from the Shadowblades; or even reach out to the new Idoneth Deepkin who are viable allies too.

If you're playing competitively, unless you have a bunch of witch elves and can do a Daughters of Khaine list... I'd say no. The legacy armies that don't have updated lists trend towards uncompetitive not viable.

If you are playing casually in a non tournament environment, then yes.

demigirl wrote:
I used to play Dark Elves back when it was Warhammer Fantasy. Are they worth updating for this newer system if I get back into it? thanks

My experience is that legacy armies are definitly sub-par.

 DarkBlack wrote:

demigirl wrote:
I used to play Dark Elves back when it was Warhammer Fantasy. Are they worth updating for this newer system if I get back into it? thanks

My experience is that legacy armies are definitly sub-par.

It varies somewhat - some are viable, some are viable with specific builds - others work best as allies at present.
I do agree that most will benefit greatly from getting a Battletome and that GW clearly knows this and sees it in their sales.

The bonus is that since we've had 1.0 and 2.0 GW has been far more leaning toward combining armies into functional forces and/or adding models to make them viable. I think most plastic models are safe - finecast might be more risky, but most plastic should be safe and either see themselves being merged or expanded upon.

Overread wrote:It varies somewhat - some are viable, some are viable with specific builds - others work best as allies at present.
I do agree that most will benefit greatly from getting a Battletome and that GW clearly knows this and sees it in their sales.

A lot of the older stuff is clearly being phased out. If it's been repacked with round bases that it'll probably be around for a while, with rules but it may or not be "viable".

I don't like posting negativity, It's a fun game if the limits are not pushed and you're casual about it; but I'm having trouble keeping my disillusionment with GW to myself. All armies in a game should be viable and all the troops should be at least playable, other companies do it! It seems GW can't be bothered though.
What's worse than that is the eternal hope that it will be better after the next edition, battletome, FAQ or release; it always sounds good but then Warhammer is still worse than it should be afterwards

Except currently many units are viable on the tabletop - plus GW took a bit step toward better balance with both the annual Generals Handbook and also a big push to get all codex/battletomes out as quickly as possible (lets not forget until the last few years you could wait YEARS for a new codex or update of any kind - if your army would even ever see one before a new rules edition would come out).

Yes AoS isn't there yet, its dealing with legacy issues from its birth and also the fact that the last year or so has been a very heavy 40K period of releases - esp of codex.

The reality is that AoS is a continuation of WHFB for fluff purposes. The old world lost, Archaon won, and some of the heroes were saved and became deities, mostly working with a Sigmar to crush Chaos (you know, revenge and all). Allarielle, Sigmar, Teclis, Malekith, Morathi, Tyrion, Nagash...they’re all still kicking, all gods now (except Morathi). Nagash and Allarielle are the only gods kicking on the tabletop though. I’d LOVE a Sigmar model though. I think that would be most excellent.

 Overread wrote:
Yes and No

Yes in the lore sense it is a continuation of the story. It even features several key heroes from the times before. Some old gods and others mortals or immortals advanced to demi or full god status. It also re-uses pretty much all the models (the only missing ones are Tomb Kings and other models that GW has retired).

That said, rather like a Super Hero comic rebirth or such - the end of the old lore and the start of the new lore is such a massive event and change that AoS is very much like a start of a new setting. Especially considering that even things like how the world is formed and structured are changed; its now a series of worlds linked by realm gates whilst in the past it was a standard planet.


Gameplay wise its totally different. Fantasy was very much based on open battlefields with limited terrain and formation control. With many units having fixed formations to move and turn in; it even affected how combat was conducted and resolved.
In addition much of the magic and spellcraft was not "low magic" but certainly wasn't "high" or "epic". Indeed going back to its roots, Fantasy of old was actually quite low-fantasy in many ways. Elves were basically just spearmen, archers, one dragon and an eagle etc...

AoS is far more Epic/high fantasy with a lot more fantasy creatures and beasts even in the basic rank and file of many armies. In addition the magic has taken a big shift to the point where there are now vast summoning spells and endless spells that persist on the battlefield.




AoS is a continuation and rebuilding of Fantasy. It is both linked and yet different enough to be very distinctive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hulksmash wrote:
It's not an opinion thing. AoS is a fluff continuation from the End Times which ended the old world. Full stop. Are you asking if anyone thinks it's not? Like people believing the world is flat?

Technically aren't some of the realms flat - heck one is lit by a dragon as its sun if I recall right.

What he said.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarkBlack wrote:

demigirl wrote:
I used to play Dark Elves back when it was Warhammer Fantasy. Are they worth updating for this newer system if I get back into it? thanks

My experience is that legacy armies are definitly sub-par.

They have also been splintered into useless subfactions with no good reason. Take Dark Elves as an example. You have now Darklings Coven, Daughters of Khaine and Shadowblades. Truly atrocious.

Daughters of Khaine are now a fully fleshed out faction (rather well done too in terms of fluff and models) - it is to be hoped the others become the same - there have been some bits and pieces in the novels.

The Dark Elves were always several sub factions that were bound together by an incestious mother and son and the shared wish to defeat, kill enslave etc the High Elves.