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 honestly am loving how GW is handling the army wide special rules. It's so much simpler and easy to follow than what they've done in the past (and way better than how they've handled 40k imo), but imparts so much distinct flavor into how the army plays

chaos0xomega wrote:
I honestly am loving how GW is handling the army wide special rules. It's so much simpler and easy to follow than what they've done in the past (and way better than how they've handled 40k imo), but imparts so much distinct flavor into how the army plays

The... format... irks me a little bit because it looks a lot like D&D 4th edition, but I agree on content, it looks like they hit the balance of simple rules and a meaningful but manageable amount of flavour. We still have to see all the data cards, however - 40k also looked good until the pdfs dropped.

I have to say I always find the strategems in 40K a pain. A whole layer of quite powerful and important abilities and I find in most games I'm either using one or two over and over or forgetting the rest exist.

There's fewer of them now and they're written in a clearer way but yes I agree, I don't like strategems/reactions as a design philosophy generally - slows the game down too much if everything could be a potential decision point for either player and means you need to keep up with all the things your opponent's army *could* do on your own turn, I don't care for it. Alright for casual play with mates, where you can kind of grow into it together and play the same couple of armies regularly, but makes pickup games horrific

 Shadow Walker wrote:
Ironjawz https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/06/19/warhammer-age-of-sigmar-faction-focus-ironjawz/

One thing I found funny is Gordrakk having W20/3+ when most other centrepieces have just W14/4+. Hell, Kragnos, the god/centrepiece of his whole superfaction is W18/4+ (and he would most likely be completely trashed by Gordrakk's mountain of anti-hero/monster abilities and waaagh combo, too). I thought according to Dakka lolconspiracy theories one of the earliest AoS models would have the worst statline while new big shiny one would be the best to drive up sales?

Also kind of funny how Warchanter, a glorified support unit, sports six power fist (8th edition statline) attacks. Remember when 40K was being called 'too lethal' when big beatstick captains sported just three of those?

Yeah, stats for gods never made sense as well as their presence on the battlefield.

Also

Trees https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/06/20/warhammer-age-of-sigmar-faction-focus-sylvaneth/

Basing a lot around the wyldwoods again. Not unexpected i guess.

Wow!!
I am very excited about the Sylvaneth now!

The heal d3 near a woods looks fun to me...
should make my guys a bit more resiliant

I haven't played them in 2 editions,
so a bit rusty...

but a gang of shooters in/near the woods just keeps healing back? Backed up by TreeLords (who also shoot)? Nice!

I have not played Sylvaneth since 1st edition, but always kept adding the occasional new models they get -one of my favourite factions ever produced by games workshop for any system.
Im not thrilled to see them go back to every rule mentioning awakenend wyldwood, but atleast its easy to remember.
Im really hoping this is the edition I can convince my friends to try out AoS.