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.

How do?

WarCom article covering what happened to the four Grand Alliances during Broken Realms. And it includes stuff clearly covered by Kragnos.

I won’t say what it is, but avoid reading it if you don’t want spoilers.

Well, they did clearly indicate that it was spoilers, so I wouldn't worry about people unwittingly being spoiled.

I think that it wasn't that surprising for the Kragnos part tbh,

Labeled as spoilers by GW.

I don't think I can necessarily blame them either, their release schedule has been gakked for who knows how long, Kragnos was probably intended to come out quite a while before AoS3 hit, or was even mentioned.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
How do?

WarCom article covering what happened to the four Grand Alliances during Broken Realms. And it includes stuff clearly covered by Kragnos.

I won’t say what it is, but avoid reading it if you don’t want spoilers.

Uuh they said spoilers ahead and put big art "don't read beyond if you don't want to read spoilers", as　such your post　isn't useful for people who want to avoid　spoilers.　gw did it first and clearer

It isn't really spoilers of BR: Kragnos though, because all they are saying is 'stuff the current BR books say is going to happen happens' a surge of life magic and the bashing of Excelsius have already been explicitly referred to as coming. What we didn't know is the details, and we still don't.

Unless I imagine some stuff, they've changed some of the article since it was first posted, so this might've been a mistake/someone messed up the timing of this article.

A certain name was dropped(I could've sworn it was there earlier, I could be wrong) and now its just alluded to.

The Kharadron Overlords and Fyreslayers have been getting along better – the return of a mythic figure, a beacon of hope for all duardin

In the initial article I could've sworn they mentioned (SPOILERS)



And some details about the fate of Excelsis were changed as well.

Nah, you're right. That name you spoiler'd was actually in the article about 6 or so hours ago, I remember seeing it when I read it in the morning. Now it's been removed.

And about Spreadsheetsis

This stuff generally gets written months in advance, so I'd say they hit publish without rechecking it against their squashed release schedules.

Then when it was live they went back and edited it when they realised what had happened.

 nels1031 wrote:
Unless I imagine some stuff, they've changed some of the article since it was first posted, so this might've been a mistake/someone messed up the timing of this article.

A certain name was dropped(I could've sworn it was there earlier, I could be wrong) and now its just alluded to.

The Kharadron Overlords and Fyreslayers have been getting along better – the return of a mythic figure, a beacon of hope for all duardin

In the initial article I could've sworn they mentioned (SPOILERS)

Spoiler:

Grungni, by name

And some details about the fate of Excelsis were changed as well.

They definitely did

I mean, didnt the page say "spoilers" before you even read much of the article? I can't see anything to be annoyed about if you carried on reading it past that point.

 Gir Spirit Bane wrote:
I mean, didnt the page say "spoilers" before you even read much of the article? I can't see anything to be annoyed about if you carried on reading it past that point.

I think its reasonable to assume they would mean spoilers for books that were actually out. As opposed to spoilers for literally anything that might happen in the future.

Not that I care personally, but I get it. It should have been more specific that it would spoil plot from the unreleased Kragnos book.

 Gir Spirit Bane wrote:
I mean, didnt the page say "spoilers" before you even read much of the article? I can't see anything to be annoyed about if you carried on reading it past that point.

The article said that it "contained spoilers for everything up to Kragnos".

Just sayin'.

I assumed it was everything up to Kragnos, but I got roped in by the artwork. That and I tend to click on any AoS/Warcry/Underworlds article.

Not really fussed about it myself, if anything it got me more hyped for the Kragnos book. Like "Oh! How is that going to play out?"

chaos0xomega wrote:

 nels1031 wrote:
Unless I imagine some stuff, they've changed some of the article since it was first posted, so this might've been a mistake/someone messed up the timing of this article.

A certain name was dropped(I could've sworn it was there earlier, I could be wrong) and now its just alluded to.

The Kharadron Overlords and Fyreslayers have been getting along better – the return of a mythic figure, a beacon of hope for all duardin

In the initial article I could've sworn they mentioned (SPOILERS)

Spoiler:

Grungni, by name

And some details about the fate of Excelsis were changed as well.

They definitely did

Spoiler:

refer to Grugni by name when it first went up, it made me raise my eyebrow and thats the point that I realized that the rumors of Kharadron and Fyreslayers being folded into one book was probably, unfortunately, true.

I'm down for it--Orruk Warclans is great with it maintaining each army's own individual identity yet also allowing for a combined arms force. Added bonus that there are CoS units which can be incorporated as well.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm down for it--Orruk Warclans is great with it maintaining each army's own individual identity yet also allowing for a combined arms force. Added bonus that there are CoS units which can be incorporated as well.

Kind of mixed feelings, myself. I think it would open up new ways to play with either army, which is awesome. But as Fyreslayers were my main for quite some time, I'd rather they get some support to expand their roster a bit more. Combining the books seems like the low effort option.

Obviously they could still get some model support with a combined tome, but I'd prefer they be separate and double down with their own playstyles and themes.

Yeah, GW hasn't given Fyreslayers much in the way of support the last few years (Kharadron are in only a marginally better position) I feel like folding them together just guarantees that they'll continue unloved and their thematic differences will be diluted.

Same thing basically happened with Ogors. Neither Beastclaw nor Mawtribes were getting a lot of love - but Beastclaw at least had a strong thematic identity that had a lot of room for potential growth and expansion...

...and then they folded them together. Neither one has really received any attention since and the Beastclaw identity has been heavily diluted by the comparatively milquetoast Ogor Mawtribes.

Shame too, woulda been kinda cool to see them set up Fyreslayers and Beastclaw Raiders as being some sort of long-standing foes or something, play into that Fire and Ice shtick a bit.

A welcome article.

Was curious as to what happened in Broken Realms but not invested enough in AoS to purchase one advanced supplement book, let alone all four.

So people are mad because they mentioned Grungi in an article?

As for Fyreslayers and Khadron, I doubt they'll be folded together. They're two completely different factions whos only common thread is that they're bearded midgets. I would expect to see both armies get some love in the next 12-15 months based on the new edition change and the fact that their books are fairly old at this point.

They also summarized the end of the Kragnos book.

I'd be fine with some new Grungni and Runic Golem kits and a book rolling dispossessed and Fyreslayers together with a 1 in 4 Kharadron rule.

Figure Kharadron were enough of a success to stay standalone and be expanded whereas Fyreslayers were one of those single note one and done early AoS releases that hasn't really caught on as a result.

Togusa wrote:
So people are mad because they mentioned Grungi in an article?

As for Fyreslayers and Khadron, I doubt they'll be folded together. They're two completely different factions whos only common thread is that they're bearded midgets. I would expect to see both armies get some love in the next 12-15 months based on the new edition change and the fact that their books are fairly old at this point.

"As for Beastclaw Raiders and Ogor Mawtribes, I doubt they'll be folded together. They're two completely different factions whos only common thread is that they're gluttonous fat gat guys. I would expect to see both armies get some love in the next 12-15 months based on the new edition change and the fact that their books are fairly old at this point."

"As for Bonesplitterz and Ironjawz, I doubt they'll be folded together. They're two completely different factions whos only common thread is that they're warlike green guys. I would expect to see both armies get some love in the next 12-15 months based on the new edition change and the fact that their books are fairly old at this point."

"As for Free Peoples, Dispossessed, Devoted of Sigmar, Darkling Covens, Scourge Privateers, Order Serpentis, Swifthawk Agents, Eldritch Council, Ironweld Arsenal, Collegiate Arcane, Phoenix Temples, and Wanderers, I doubt they'll be folded together. They're twelve completely different factions whos only common thread is that they're races of Order. I would expect to see all twelve armies get some love in the next 12-15 months based on the new edition change and the fact that their books are fairly old at this point."

Okay, that last one was a stretch. Point still stands.

Wonder what they'll do with gotrek if the AOS dwarfs get rolled into one faction. Will he still be an order mercenary? Will he instead get some synergy? Will he stay low-key demi godly or just go full god? If grugni gets a model I could see gotrek staying as is.

What makes me not concerned is that beastclaw, ironjawz, and bonesplittas all kept their unique identity and rules, plus got more, when they were rolled into combined tomes. More so for Orruks, admittedly, but then beastclaws's viability as it's own army was also lesser.

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:
Wonder what they'll do with gotrek if the AOS dwarfs get rolled into one faction. Will he still be an order mercenary? Will he instead get some synergy? Will he stay low-key demi godly or just go full god? If grugni gets a model I could see gotrek staying as is.

He'll probably just stay as a generic mercenary unless GW has designs to actually use him in the 'main plot' of AoS, but most likely he'll be kept as a BL-only sideshow going on random, irrelevant quests.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
What makes me not concerned is that beastclaw, ironjawz, and bonesplittas all kept their unique identity and rules, plus got more, when they were rolled into combined tomes. More so for Orruks, admittedly, but then beastclaws's viability as it's own army was also lesser.

Beastclaw had a lot of viability as a standalone army - GW just needed to invest into expanding their miniatures range. I'm not sure that its fair to say they preserved their identity though, considering they changed the fluff to make the Everwinter less relevant.

Considering they gained options they are more viable now than they were, and the Everwinter is just as relevant for them as it ever was. It just doesn't follow gutbusters, which it never did.

 Arbitrator wrote:

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:
Wonder what they'll do with gotrek if the AOS dwarfs get rolled into one faction. Will he still be an order mercenary? Will he instead get some synergy? Will he stay low-key demi godly or just go full god? If grugni gets a model I could see gotrek staying as is.

He'll probably just stay as a generic mercenary unless GW has designs to actually use him in the 'main plot' of AoS, but most likely he'll be kept as a BL-only sideshow going on random, irrelevant quests.

Yea but isn't a large sub-plot of those novels that the fyreslayers are worshipping him as a grimnir and a cult is growing? So if grugni is back it could open up gotrek to the spotlight a bit, especially if events lead to a merged faction.

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:
Wonder what they'll do with gotrek if the AOS dwarfs get rolled into one faction. Will he still be an order mercenary? Will he instead get some synergy? Will he stay low-key demi godly or just go full god? If grugni gets a model I could see gotrek staying as is.

He'll probably just stay as a generic mercenary unless GW has designs to actually use him in the 'main plot' of AoS, but most likely he'll be kept as a BL-only sideshow going on random, irrelevant quests.

Yea but isn't a large sub-plot of those novels that the fyreslayers are worshipping him as a grimnir and a cult is growing? So if grugni is back it could open up gotrek to the spotlight a bit, especially if events lead to a merged faction.

Kind of. Problem is Gotrek hates Fyreslayers for being mercenaries, considers Grimnir a lying scumbag and hates being worshipped by people even more than the last two.

The Fyreslayers have very limited appeal and "muddling" the battletome with what will surely feels like unwanted step-siblings to KO players might not go down well I think. Fyreslayers and Disposessed mingled into one force is more likely...

I'd be happier to see the dorfs molded into one book like the destruction factions. AFAIK you can still run pure Ironjawz or Gutbuster armies or mix and match. They've been hyping up this "reunion" of the dorfs for a while and 1 book for multiple armies is preferable to 3.