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.

I know I’m not the only one psyched about the summer release of Warcry. I guess one of the biggest questions I have is how modular do we think the plastic kits for the warbands will be? This Path to Glory style of game seems to me to be ideal for a broadly customizable kit with different weapon options and such, so that players warbands hailing from the same realm can avoid being too samey. What do you guys think?

I think that until they make this game not be all about chaos that its going to fall into the same category as the gorechosen game.

I don't know. Khorne is a faction. Chaos is a super faction. While the other three Grand Alliances aren't represented (at first anyway), I would expect Warcry to have a far wider appeal than Gorechosen. Plus, tabletop skirmish versus board game may also open up the audience some more.

Me, I'm hoping for more Necromunda than Kill Team in the equipment options. I have ample reason to doubt that's what we're going to get, but it would be cool to have. What the reveal video showed is some model's I'd say are definitely monopose and some that could be done as a multipose kit. But I doubt we'll get both options in the same kit my money is on monopose models and all the wonderful equipment options that entails. But again, I really, really hope I'm wrong on this.

Yeah, this looks like Shadespire as a wargame: set teams, monopose/-build models, probably with names.
Could be cool or could fail in the long run, when you can't use models from your existing armies which is a lot of the pull behind Kill Team.

Thats my thinking as well. People that love chaos will love this. People that have no attachment to chaos will likely meh this and wait for their faction to get rules.

Which astounds me that they'd do the rest of the factions in the game like this other than trying for Gorechosen part II.

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Yeah, this looks like Shadespire as a wargame: set teams, monopose/-build models, probably with names.
Could be cool or could fail in the long run, when you can't use models from your existing armies which is a lot of the pull behind Kill Team.

I don't know about names except in the same way Kill Teams got names. They already have Shadespire for a low model count Age of Sigmar game with specific characters. I don't know what Warcry would even add if they went with absolutely fixed teams that you may only use upgrade and strategy cards on. It would be the same game just without the board.

I'm hoping it's a deeper version of Skirmish instead. Even if I doubt that the stupid no model no rules thing gets eased on for this game, I want to believe that the wargame heritage will shine through more than Shadespire's board game heritage.

auticus wrote:
Thats my thinking as well. People that love chaos will love this. People that have no attachment to chaos will likely meh this and wait for their faction to get rules.

Which astounds me that they'd do the rest of the factions in the game like this other than trying for Gorechosen part II.

Unless they are going for a Necromunda style of game. I play Necromunda even though my interest in the Imperium as a whole is severely limited. I can imagine Warcry will be similar for many people.

I'm mostly excited for the boatload of terrain. The box looks thicker than Kill Team.

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Yeah, this looks like Shadespire as a wargame: set teams, monopose/-build models, probably with names.
Could be cool or could fail in the long run, when you can't use models from your existing armies which is a lot of the pull behind Kill Team.

Well, set teams is bunk I would say given that GW said in the comments on their Facebook page that Warcry will usually be played with around a dozen models per side. The starter looks to have 6, so I am guessing at the very least we can add members as our warbands gain experience and such. It remains to be seen whether the kits will have weapon options but man I hope they do. It would be a good sign for things to come.

It occurred to me right after I posted about a dozen model per side, that the harpies and furies in the boxed set may be aligned each to either tribe.

I wasn't a chaos guy until I saw this game, as I mostly use the more Greco-Roman pieces of equipment as conversion fodder for making good guys.

And to be fair, I'm hoping for a team to come out I can do that with.

But there is also SO MUCH pull towards this game, despite not being a chaos guy. I suspect that will be the same for others too.

It'd going to help that each faction will presumably have a very different aesthetic to choose from.

auticus wrote:
Thats my thinking as well. People that love chaos will love this. People that have no attachment to chaos will likely meh this and wait for their faction to get rules.

Which astounds me that they'd do the rest of the factions in the game like this other than trying for Gorechosen part II.

It's not ideal, but depending on a player's faction they might be able to put together a suitable "counts-as" warband. For example, I'll be converting up some grimdark, dark souls-esque Stormcast/Sigmarites to use as chaos warriors/marauders for this.

I'm willing to bet stormcast armor makes for a prized trophy...

I think labeling this as 'Gorechosen Part II' is a vast oversimplification of what it is and its appeal. This is Necromunda AoS edition.

Nine non-Chaos factions at launch! See if you can guess the factions...

my guess:
Bonesplitterz
DoK
Vampires
Gloomspite
Idoneth
Ironjawz
Nighthaunt
Stormcast.

Still leaves out space for one faction and I hope to God the ogors get a bit of love.

Fingers crossed for Lizzies myself...

Yeah, I guess that answers what all those players with no interest in Chaos are going to do.

Tinfoil hat time: my guess is Fyreslayers. At the time the picture was released Fyreslayers are still an old faction without an up to date Battletome, and thus not worthy of inclusion in the picture. Can't advertise silly old stuff. However, before Warcry is released they'll get their new tome and faction abilities and endless... invocations and terrain piece and are now new and modern and shiny enough to be included.

Or Sigmarine punchy guys and witchy guys are two separate factions in the rules but, all being Sigmarines, need only one icon.

These additional factions make me worry.
I was expecting/hoping warcry to be some kind of Necromunda/Mordheim 2.0, where each model's wargear can be completely customized. Given GW's reluctance on conversions, the rules only permit such customization when the kits themselves have all the options. That's why Necromunda kits have a lot more diversity than typical 40K kits.
Since we will be able to use models from faction that have very few options in term of wargear, I suspect the game as a whole won't rely on extensive customization/wargear progression (so not a Mordheim-like campaign system where you buy additional gear as games go on).

I also find it weird that they create a bunch of completely new kit, but at the same time provide rules for existing one. That's unusual of GW. Necromunda is really based on the kits made for the game itself (and a few additions like GSC that work well). On the other side, KT is all about using standard 40K minis (with the accompanying wargear limitations), there's no middle ground.

So I'm increasingly confused about what this game should/will be…

Kill Team has models that were specifically released for that game in the Rogue Trader box. It's less in quantity than what Warcry will get, but much the same in principle. I wouldn't get hung up on whatGW has done in the past too much. They seem to be willing to experiment and see what sells best. We had battle boxes with only a new character per side, with the rest being comprised of existing models. We had battle boxes that shook this up with a new unit that saw its premiere in that box, like Aberrants and Deathwatch. Now we got a battle box with completely new sculpts, and in a twist more mono pose than the multi part kits that are to follow. I don't see why GW couldn't have figured Warcry might need a little help to get off the ground with new Chaos sculpts, help that Kill Team didn't need because the the greater popularity of 40k over AoS. Or even that they thought they could get away with no new models for Kill Team, being surprised by how well it sold and then figuring if it made them so much profit on existing models, how much much more money would the lure of new models make them.

I fear you are right about the lack of options (but that's a general concern with GW these days), but I don't think GW actually cares if they give different things wildly varying treatment in the same game. Shadow War Armageddon or Kill Team could have given Necrons options to vary their equipment, even among the sparse bits their kits have to offer. GW opted against that to keep the models in line with 40k. At the same time, factions with extensive access to kits get those options in Kill Team. I could see the very same thing happen in Warcry. If you're lucky to choose the right faction, you have options. If you don't, tough luck.

IMO, I kind of see this as taking the mold investment hat once when into the boxed games and spreading it out, letting people buy what they want ala carte, and for a higher premium due to that.

The pics and video from Adepticon bode well for Warcry in terms of weapon options and posability for the warband kits. As far as the non chaos factions being available at launch, I suspect that is more a concession to those complaining loudly about how Warcry is starting off, than it is a concession of the strongly chaos orientated narrative.

Dread Master wrote:
The pics and video from Adepticon bode well for Warcry in terms of weapon options and posability for the warband kits. As far as the non chaos factions being available at launch, I suspect that is more a concession to those complaining loudly about how Warcry is starting off, than it is a concession of the strongly chaos orientated narrative.

I'd say it's less of a 'concession' and more 'a part of the original plans' considering we're just a little under two months since they announced the game and we still know precious little about it other than some pretty miniatures and a few odds and ends.

 Ghaz wrote:

Dread Master wrote:
The pics and video from Adepticon bode well for Warcry in terms of weapon options and posability for the warband kits. As far as the non chaos factions being available at launch, I suspect that is more a concession to those complaining loudly about how Warcry is starting off, than it is a concession of the strongly chaos orientated narrative.

I'd say it's less of a 'concession' and more 'a part of the original plans' considering we're just a little under two months since they announced the game and we still know precious little about it other than some pretty miniatures and a few odds and ends.

Maybe. Some have conjectured that this is the first of what will be faction themed skirmish offerings under the Warcry brand. All will be revealed in due time.

While you are waiting for more news, I can recommend the Warqueen Novella. It has some information on the different Darkoath warbands, the way they dress and their politics. It's a fun read and only £3.

Wasn't there a game before about building up a Chaos warband in the northern wastes where you started out with a few humble marauders and an aspiring champion. You gathered warriors and got mutations along the course of a campaign.
That's what I reckon this Warcry thing will be like. Honestly I think the addition of the other grand alliances would just water down that cool narrative, like how GW shoehorns every faction into the modern 40k campaigns

Mostly interested in any new background material tbh

 Kroem wrote:
Wasn't there a game before about building up a Chaos warband in the northern wastes where you started out with a few humble marauders and an aspiring champion. You gathered warriors and got mutations along the course of a campaign.
That's what I reckon this Warcry thing will be like. Honestly I think the addition of the other grand alliances would just water down that cool narrative, like how GW shoehorns every faction into the modern 40k campaigns

Path to Glory?

It's a somewhat difficult situation in that we're talking about Age of Sigmar rather than the old setting. Previously, Chaos dudes punching other Chaos dudes would have been firmly set in the Chaos Wastes, where no one else goes. You'd have Chaos dudes, monsters, and maybe undead animated by excess magic or the will of the Chaos Gods. Either way, that would firmly put them in the Chaos dudes or monsters camp. But that can only happen because the writers restrained themselves with the setting and put a lot of geographies and motivations along with plausible logistics in it.

Age of Sigmar is by design a big punch fest set up so anyone can meet anyone else anywhere and get to it. Much is (effectively) infinite and carried by big magic that can make anything happen. Age of Sigmar's designers wouldn't know restraint if it bit them on the ass.

Because of this I wouldn't consider the inclusion of the other Grand Alliances as "watering down" Warcry. In the old setting you would be right. In the new setting, that is deliberately designed to allow for wider mixes, the coolness of the narrative is entirely down to competence of the designers. There's nothing inherently speaking against all those non-Chaos guys finding themselves in Chaos territory. They just need to be tied into the narrative correctly. Whether that will happen or not, I dare not speculate. I certainly don't believe GW's designers to be particularly competent. But I don't think the integrity of the setting is sacrificed just because there's all manner of different factions present in the same way as would be the case in the old setting.

Conceptually I could certainly envision a game system (with a fitting narrative attached) where the focus of the game is the attention of the Chaos Gods mortals attain by being in a specific place, doing their thing. Fighting under tha gaze of the gods gives us a setting in which mutation is plentiful. For the protagonists of the narrative, the Chaos warbands, that means trying to perform acts they believe will grant them the favor or their chosen god (or all the gods if they can't decide) and try to amuse it in the hopes of gaining advantageous mutations and growing more powerful along the way. For all the other warbands it means dodging the gaze of the gods and doing what they came here to do without suffering afflictions that will eventually cripple them. And for everyone there's the threat that regardless of whether they amuse or not, they will suffer the random gifts of that gods simply through prolonged exposure (that is participating in the campaign).

It could give both sides access to the same game mechanics but require different actions and goals to steer a warband to success, depending on whether they want to enhance or dodge mutation.

I'll leave the motivations of why those non-Chaos warbands are there open, considering we aren't even entirely sure who, why and how is participating yet, but for the Chaos worshippers it shouldn't matter who they measure their mettle against as long as they are victorious against a foe whose defeat they can dedicate to their chosen god. After all, Khorne cares not from whence the blood flows.

I'm stoked for this.

So far, the Iron Golems look to be what I want, but I don't think I'll be painting them red- maybe some kind of darker armor color instead.

I'm honestly hoping to see some new Chaos units that look more like actual Chaos warriors. I miss the warriors from the 90's with their wild variety of looks.

I'd like to see them with a lot of modular bits to give them their own unique 'look' in their armor- some with the traditional horns, spiked crests, chain-plumes, all kinds of other stuff with the wicked baroque armor to boot.

I think if they were big and beefy dudes they could be a low model count warband, or perhaps you could run 3 or 4 with some barbarians or something as chaff.

IMHO Chaos Warriors are very much what made Warhammer Fantasy. Why GW never kept them around has baffled me.

 Geifer wrote:

 Kroem wrote:
Wasn't there a game before about building up a Chaos warband in the northern wastes where you started out with a few humble marauders and an aspiring champion. You gathered warriors and got mutations along the course of a campaign.
That's what I reckon this Warcry thing will be like. Honestly I think the addition of the other grand alliances would just water down that cool narrative, like how GW shoehorns every faction into the modern 40k campaigns

Path to Glory?

Nah this was circa 2003 - 2004, not a recent one. May have just been a WD article to be honest.

I do like your ideas, my theory was that by adding non-chaos factions you reduce the likihood of Chaos specific mechanics like mutation tables, recruiting demons, Chaos god favour tables, risking becoming a Chaos spawn etc.
I think the idea that the game is almost reversed for other factions, who instead of seeking to gain notice are trying to avoid it, is quite novel!