Switch Theme:

Which system has the better written rules?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
As of 2019, which system has better written rules?
AOS
40k

View results
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 us
Dakka Veteran





What does dakka think?
   
Made in us
Clousseau




I think they are both pretty bad. They both have some redeeming qualities and then they both have pieces that utterly kill it for me.

So lets break it down and see what would win given the two from my opinion (lol)

AOS
+ the bravery system I thought was cool (until they made the game basically ignore it)
+ the warscroll concept was pretty cool
+ command point mechanic is pretty cool and fairly limited which makes it something that you have to be smarter with
+ simple to hit to wound mechanics don't require memorizing math or a chart
+ monster system where monsters degrade over time was pretty cool

- terrain rules that are random and largely do nothing to impact the game
- alpha strike rules that let you bypass any movement at all and charge in turn 1
- double turn making you stand there two turns in a row eating it
- non interactive rules where you have no way to react and just remove your models off the table wholesale
- true line of sight allowing you to fire at full effect against a model whose pinky toe is the only thing visible
- summoning / recycling dead units effectively giving players free points and turning the game into trying to min/max this coupled with mortal wounds
- staggered release cycle reinforces burn & churn and keeps armies trash tier while other armies are on very easy mode and the rest sit in the middle somewhere
- command point abilities that are ridiculous all costing 1 point makes things "why would I never do this"
- IGOUGO
- bell curve of power is bad. Requires heavy social engineering of your play group to have good games if you don't want to burn & churn


40k
+ warscroll implementation from AOS
+ simple to hit to wound mechanics don't require memorizing math or a chart
+ vehicles that degrade over time instead of being always useful or never useful
+ no double turn

- terrain is largely useless other than if you put big blocks to block line of sight. Nothing hampers movement and so much moves so fast that this removes most need to do well with the maneuver aspect of war.
- command point implementation makes the game all about farming command points. The AOS implementation is superior IMO
- IGOUGO
- non interactive rules where you just remove models wholesale with no reaction available
- alpha strike too easy and bypasses any need to maneuver
- staggered release means that some armies stay trash while other armies are very easy and powerful and a lot of the armies stay in the middle
- bell curve of power is bad. Requires heavy social engineering of your play group to have good games if you don't want to burn & churn
- true line of sight allowing you to fire at full effect against a model whose pinky toe is the only thing visible

It looks like if I have to choose between the two game systems, that AOS wins by a tiny fraction. Both games share the same rot but both games have some cool ideas that if allowed to be built on and removed the easy-mode buttons of non interactive play and heavy reliance on list building would make the games solid.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/10/18 12:44:50


 
   
Made in us
Androgynous Daemon Prince of Slaanesh





Norwalk, Connecticut

AoS. 40k was great at the start of 8th, but there is so much bloat now that it’s way more challenging to get into. AoS is still “army book and core rules” with that new compendium that came out. And the GHB19 if you have something pre-HoS.

Reality is a nice place to visit, but I'd hate to live there.

Manchu wrote:I'm a Catholic. We eat our God.


Due to work, I can usually only ship any sales or trades out on Saturday morning. Please trade/purchase with this in mind.  
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




I pick 30k.

tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam  
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





I voted 40k as "better" rules, but if the deciding factor is "written" its probably AoS. Rule clarity they're about on par, but AoS has things paired down to what matters for the most part. The big criticism I have is just the endless tables of artifacts, spells and command traits in a system that massively restricts both. Everything is so incredibly limited it makes digging through all the piles of options really clunky. In terms of rules, my big gripe with AoS is that I feel like its far more of a "roll the dice and see what happens" system. I never feel like I can plan on anything happening and my brain kind of shuts down and checks out.

I think 40k is a little better system. The standard CP reroll lets you rely a bit more on important psychic powers and the fact that strategems have largely replaced them anyway with a resource based spell system lets you make and execute plans a lot more reliably. At the very least I find myself more invested. It's flip side is the rules are bloated and messy. It tries to let you do anything and use incentive systems instead of restrictions. The end result is an endless parade of bad choices to get bogged down in.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






Rules? 40k. Battletomes/Codex? AoS

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
Irked Necron Immortal




Rules: 40K
Narrative style play: AoS
Matched (pointed) play: 40k
Codex/Battletomes: AoS
Flexibility: 40k
Best overall system: Apoc
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







The problem with trying to pick between them is that the fundamental problem with both is the "Codex" release structure. GW writes each army independently, in a vacuum, without considering its effect on anything else in the game, and all the problems with balance, bloat, etc. come from that. Things like the Bloodbound relying on multiplier-effect auras from characters that can be casually removed by anyone with any shooting at all, or the Knights' Death Grip bringing the ability to casually remove from play anything at all with Strength lower than 8, exist because someone was writing the book in a vacuum and didn't look around at the rest of the game and ask themselves "How is the meta going to affect this/how is this going to affect the meta?"

Warhammer 40k and Age of Sigmar are both "games" that come together by accident at the edge of interactions where the designers didn't bother looking. Sometimes they release panic-patches for 40k, but in general they claim they did exactly what they intended to do, and occasionally that they can't be asked to write workable rules because they're a model company.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/19 05:51:03


Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Designing an army coherently isn't necessarily a problem. I think there's a lot of advantages to doing so. The main problem GW runs into is that they have too many factions to think about how each new one matches against each existing one and things get left behind. They need some consolidation before expansion.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

AOS overall has better rules and better written ones (they have started to consolidate language, although it still has hiccups). 40k is just a fething mess all over though, with barely any care given. AOS has a lot of problems but at least the AOS team seems to be trying. The 40k team is still largely the same old "forge the narrative!" guys from 7th edition and seems to not be able to even consider balance, let alone implement it.

- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
 
Forum Index » Warhammer: Age of Sigmar
Go to: