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'm waiting for ToW, but i'm loving some of the new AoS models.
however i'm a fluff/lore person and what i've seen on the AoS lore it's awful, and from what i've seen of the game mechanics they're way to boring and simple.
So hit me with your best sales pitch on why i should give the lore and game a second or third look.
(new seraphon are beautiful, and the preview of the new free cities or whatever humans looked amazing as well.)
The setting isn't high fantasy, its epic high fantasy. It's where the land in one realm is so empowered that hills are present one day and the next they turn into mountains; where another realm has rivers of silver, mountains of gold; birds with pistons for wings and dust storms made of rust.
It's a wild setting that you'd find on the album covers of metal music from the old days. It's taking fantasy to 12 (forget 11!).
Yes its somewhat over the top and this can have some downsides - it can be hard to mentally envision things like farming, food production, settlements. Time is also tricky because there's no date and time system really, very tricky for humans who live such short lives
Personally I'd say if you want to get into the lore try some of the Novella books. Longer then a short story but not as heavy as a full book. They give fantastic flavour for the setting and world and they cover a range of factions and characters.
I'd avoid the early books; the Stormcast early books were more campaign books and can be a bit one-note in stormast doing awesome stuff. Their story has evolved since then and they've a darker side to them.
Mechanics wise, eh it a GW game with GW level rules. If you've already enjoyed 40K and Old World and are looking forward to more Old World then you already know the ups and downs of GW and how they approach rules.
Personally my only continued gripe is the double-turn and some play groups just house rule it out. Other htan that whilst I'd like to see more depth to some elements of the rules; the game is steady and works well. Close combat alternating activations is a great boon.
And in the end you get to put awesome Seraphon or Vampires or Ghost armies on the table to play with. Some of those might come back for Old World; some might not and some might take years to appear there. Even if they do GW might use very different styles and designs.
Personally one thing I like about the lore is that most factions are way more overt. Skaven are not just skulking and losing all the time*; Vampires are not near extinct and hiding ; orks aren't only on the fringes (heck lore wise orruks will work with regular models and during the early days of the setting stood shoulder ot shoulder against Chaos).
*I mean they are skaven so even when they win the in-fighting can be just as bad
Overread wrote: AoS lore is best taken with a pill of metal.
The setting isn't high fantasy, its epic high fantasy. It's where the land in one realm is so empowered that hills are present one day and the next they turn into mountains; where another realm has rivers of silver, mountains of gold; birds with pistons for wings and dust storms made of rust.
It's a wild setting that you'd find on the album covers of metal music from the old days. It's taking fantasy to 12 (forget 11!).
Yes its somewhat over the top and this can have some downsides - it can be hard to mentally envision things like farming, food production, settlements. Time is also tricky because there's no date and time system really, very tricky for humans who live such short lives
Personally I'd say if you want to get into the lore try some of the Novella books. Longer then a short story but not as heavy as a full book. They give fantastic flavour for the setting and world and they cover a range of factions and characters.
I'd avoid the early books; the Stormcast early books were more campaign books and can be a bit one-note in stormast doing awesome stuff. Their story has evolved since then and they've a darker side to them.
Mechanics wise, eh it a GW game with GW level rules. If you've already enjoyed 40K and Old World and are looking forward to more Old World then you already know the ups and downs of GW and how they approach rules.
Personally my only continued gripe is the double-turn and some play groups just house rule it out. Other htan that whilst I'd like to see more depth to some elements of the rules; the game is steady and works well. Close combat alternating activations is a great boon.
And in the end you get to put awesome Seraphon or Vampires or Ghost armies on the table to play with. Some of those might come back for Old World; some might not and some might take years to appear there. Even if they do GW might use very different styles and designs.
Personally one thing I like about the lore is that most factions are way more overt. Skaven are not just skulking and losing all the time*; Vampires are not near extinct and hiding ; orks aren't only on the fringes (heck lore wise orruks will work with regular models and during the early days of the setting stood shoulder ot shoulder against Chaos).
*I mean they are skaven so even when they win the in-fighting can be just as bad
the wound mechanics is one of the things that turns me off the most about thte game. how do you find that feels do you?
Best description I've heard is that AoS is a "dad game."
Come home from work, deal with the kids, mow the lawn, get your friends over, laugh it up and enjoy a narrative game with your buds. Enough complexity to keep you engaged, not enough to make you go crosseyed.
It's not for everyone, and if you're saying "sell me on it" it's probably not for you. Personally, i kinda prefer the wound system in AoS since i don't have to memorize a ratio table during gameplay. Even if it really just results in "finer control over probability to damage" rather than the "rocket, paper, tank" dynamic with Toughness
Lore wise, i freaking love it. The whole thing is unhinged insanity with "creativity pushed too far". Totally unrelatable ... but sometimes you want to have ultracapitalist skydwarves in pressurized derigibles fighting malformed orks who turn the land they fight on into swamps. Or maybe half-aborted deformed elves who turn the air into water and ride giant sharks into battle against an army of poetic-justice-punished ghosts.
Is it stupid? Yeah, probably. But thar isn't the real question.
The real question is "YEEEEAAAAAAAHHHHHH" as you play a sick guitar riff and gold plated warriors appear in a lightning strike to do battle!
The only thing that really puts me off is the stupid names. I think AoS came about when GW were at the peak of their 'protect the IP at all costs!' mentality; and I swear they literally sat down with a copyright lawyer, changing the names of orks, trolls, elves etc one letter at at time until the guy in the grey suit gave them the thumbs-up. Just feels really cynical to me, don't like it.
I think they done pretty good improving the lore since it came out. I love AoS, but even I have to admit the beginning was not great. The early books with 90% of the pages being Stormcast fighting chaos where not great. But they expanded a lot since.
Thing to remember about the realms is that they are pretty normal, as in just high fantasy and not totally insame, in the centers and more and more magical as you move towards the edges. So there are normal humans living, just not farter out in the realms.
AoS is, like 40K, a sandbox. If you want relatively grounded armies, the option is still there.
The wounding mechanic I really like, as it makes Big Things suitably deadly, as failed saves can see multiple Little ‘Uns go squish.
This is nicely balanced out, for the most part, by having largely fixed To Hit and To Wound rolls.
The combat phase takes a bit of getting used to, as you really need to stop and think about your order of fighting, particularly as your opponent is under no obligation to match you combat to combat.
It is a pretty straight forward game. Easy to learn, but with genuinely surprising tactical depth. I mean, it’s no Chess of course, but it still rewards cunning plans and shrewd use of resources.
Genuinely, the main complaint I can levy is the haphazard updates. Some armies have had multiple books by now. Others are left to languish. And there’s just no rhyme or reason that I can see.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Haven’t really been sold on the game, but I’ve decided to give it a shot because I really like the new seraphon models, so when they come out I’ll give it a try.
Overread wrote: AoS lore is best taken with a pill of metal.
AoS is like what would happen if the art pieces that got airbrushed on the side of stoner vans came to life and started a pro-wrestling career. If this sentence sounds totally horrible or totally rad to you is a matter of personal taste - for me, it took some time to make it click, but once they pushed so hard that they passed through 'this looks like knockoff World of Warcraft and is kinda cringy' uncanny valley and arrived in 'so overly hyped that it starts to make sense' metal-album-cover city it started to work for me. Including the dadjoke names
Overread wrote: AoS lore is best taken with a pill of metal.
AoS is like what would happen if the art pieces that got airbrushed on the side of stoner vans came to life and started a pro-wrestling career. If this sentence sounds totally horrible or totally rad to you is a matter of personal taste - for me, it took some time to make it click, but once they pushed so hard that they passed through 'this looks like knockoff World of Warcraft and is kinda cringy' uncanny valley and arrived in 'so overly hyped that it starts to make sense' metal-album-cover city it started to work for me. Including the dadjoke names
Honestly what I'd love is some big battle scene artwork from GW to really help sell the insane wildness of the battlefields. Not just your standard "big character or two standing in the foreground" but the full on "here's a mass battle" bit of art
johnpjones1775 wrote: Haven’t really been sold on the game, but I’ve decided to give it a shot because I really like the new seraphon models, so when they come out I’ll give it a try.
Hey, guess what? You're sold enough!
Really all it takes is minis you like enough to spend your $ on.
Overread wrote: AoS lore is best taken with a pill of metal.
AoS is like what would happen if the art pieces that got airbrushed on the side of stoner vans came to life and started a pro-wrestling career. If this sentence sounds totally horrible or totally rad to you is a matter of personal taste - for me, it took some time to make it click, but once they pushed so hard that they passed through 'this looks like knockoff World of Warcraft and is kinda cringy' uncanny valley and arrived in 'so overly hyped that it starts to make sense' metal-album-cover city it started to work for me. Including the dadjoke names
Honestly what I'd love is some big battle scene artwork from GW to really help sell the insane wildness of the battlefields. Not just your standard "big character or two standing in the foreground" but the full on "here's a mass battle" bit of art
unfortunately GW seems to have moved away from that style.
it's most notable in the 40k codex covers, especially the guard. last two at least have just focused on one officer, rather than a squad or a platoon or a company in a battle like the old days
I will not do anything to support current GW anymore. however if you think the game is popular in your area and you have players to game with i would consider that one of the most motivating factors...unless you just hate the game mechanics to much.
Personally i think there are better games out there to play than AOS even though i do love the Kharadron Overlords models.
GAMES-DUST1947/infinity/B5 wars/epic 40K/5th ed 40K/victory at sea/warmachine/battle tactics/monpoc/battletech/battlefleet gothic/castles in the sky,/heavy gear
I will not do anything to support current GW anymore. however if you think the game is popular in your area and you have players to game with i would consider that one of the most motivating factors...unless you just hate the game mechanics to much.
Personally i think there are better games out there to play than AOS even though i do love the Kharadron Overlords models.
at this point i love the new seraphon so if i'm going to be getting the models anyway, might as well get the game a try.
johnpjones1775 wrote: I'm waiting for ToW, but i'm loving some of the new AoS models.
however i'm a fluff/lore person and what i've seen on the AoS lore it's awful, and from what i've seen of the game mechanics they're way to boring and simple.
So hit me with your best sales pitch on why i should give the lore and game a second or third look.
(new seraphon are beautiful, and the preview of the new free cities or whatever humans looked amazing as well.)
I was not a Fantasy Player and I was on a break from 40K when AoS dropped, but I noticed the great models at the FLGS. After a few years I took the plunge.
Gameplay is clean. Models are great. Lore was a bit stuffy at first but it’s a wide-open setting now where anything goes.
All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand
johnpjones1775 wrote: I'm waiting for ToW, but i'm loving some of the new AoS models.
however i'm a fluff/lore person and what i've seen on the AoS lore it's awful, and from what i've seen of the game mechanics they're way to boring and simple.
So hit me with your best sales pitch on why i should give the lore and game a second or third look.
(new seraphon are beautiful, and the preview of the new free cities or whatever humans looked amazing as well.)
I was not a Fantasy Player and I was on a break from 40K when AoS dropped, but I noticed the great models at the FLGS. After a few years I took the plunge.
Gameplay is clean. Models are great. Lore was a bit stuffy at first but it’s a wide-open setting now where anything goes.
my biggest hang up is the complete lack of any sort of toughness or anything. my biggest issue with 40k is that a S3 weapon can would a T9+ vehicle or monster, and it just seems like AoS takes that to the extreme.
johnpjones1775 wrote: I'm waiting for ToW, but i'm loving some of the new AoS models.
however i'm a fluff/lore person and what i've seen on the AoS lore it's awful, and from what i've seen of the game mechanics they're way to boring and simple.
So hit me with your best sales pitch on why i should give the lore and game a second or third look.
(new seraphon are beautiful, and the preview of the new free cities or whatever humans looked amazing as well.)
I was not a Fantasy Player and I was on a break from 40K when AoS dropped, but I noticed the great models at the FLGS. After a few years I took the plunge.
Gameplay is clean. Models are great. Lore was a bit stuffy at first but it’s a wide-open setting now where anything goes.
my biggest hang up is the complete lack of any sort of toughness or anything. my biggest issue with 40k is that a S3 weapon can would a T9+ vehicle or monster, and it just seems like AoS takes that to the extreme.
and when you look at the AoS core rules this is true, however looking at the actual stuff on the table and yes the big stuff is wounded on a fixed number based on the attackers profile most of the big stuff has a reasonably decent save, and not too many low strength models have the "rend" ability to reduce that save, plus big things with quite a few wounds are usual.
the main factor though is to make those S3 attacks the smaller gribblies need to get close, which is not that easy as physical screening units work here and massed ranged combat is not the same as 40k
its a quirk, having the SvT table is in many ways better, however it does seem to work out ok and reasonably fast
they seem to have learned from 8th Fantasy that large models need a decent number of wounds, the game is still brutal and anything isolated is going down but the way the combat order works also adds some depth to this that is not apparent
Yea massive number of wounds good but not needed. My vengorian lord(10w) took on quite a lot of stuff and held on just fine(until lucky spell did 5d3 mw at which point things go hairy).
In terms of too killy problem isn't generally weak stuff wounding easily but mw spams(new seraphon looks silly. Hopefully not as bad as it loooks but 3 units taking 4d3 mw from kroak plus rest looks scary. That kills tough stuff faster than skeletons wounding monster on 4+ )
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/05/12 08:02:12
MW spam has plagued AoS since its inception. IMO the plague of 3rd edition has been the rapid proliferation of 6s to hit wound automatically and have rend -8, er, deal MWs.
Like, why do units dealing MWs on hit rolls outnumber units with rend -3 or better?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/05/22 19:14:43
