Ragequit Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Why do people think certain factions should belong in Destruction instead of Order? Death and Chaos is straight forward. Death follows Nagash, Chaos follows one of the five Chaos Gods or are Beastmen. Order at the moment is simply Aelves, Duardin, Stormcast, Seraphon and Free humans. Destruction with the current lore should be just as straight forward. They follow Gorkamorka and the Great Waaagh. DoK and the new Idoneth Deepkin have no place fighting alongside Orruks and Ogors compared to Free People and Sylvaneth. There is infighting amongst all factions but they will definitely fight within their GA against another GA, even Destruction and Chaos follows that rule. Just my two cents. Interested to see what I am missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZaelART Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Huh, yeah, seems straight forward. I'd consider Order as factions that just want to do their own thing, maintain the status quo and worship their own Gods etc. Doesn't mean they're good or evil or that they don't hate other Order factions, they just don't want to succumb to Death / Chaos / Destruction so they'll band together to fight those forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EMMachine Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 I think the main problem is, that when people think of "Order" they think about the "good" guys, where Daughters of Khaine don't belong. The point is, the Grand Alliances are more something like a living philosophy. Chaos is most about corruption, intrigues, partly surviving of the fittest, the gain of ultimate power. Death is mostly dead units and followers of Nagash in Shyish, but normally there could be also some living followers like in the story Deluge of Live or when we think back to the old Vampire storys of Warhammer WHFB. Destruction consist mostly of nomades looting other civilisations, destroying stuff (also I could see Beastmen in this place or Barbarians). Order is mostly about civilisation, building cities, having some sort of Hierachy that not only is defined pure strength, more some sort of Birthright (even here I also could see tribes of more barbaric humans, duardin or Aelves, as long they are praying to gods, like Sigmar, Alarielle, Grimnir, Grungni etc.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZaelART Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Yeah, it's probably more appropriate to consider the GAs as abstract concepts rather than actual political or geographical entities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronWilson Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 It most likely comes from the Old Fantasy days. High Elves were good, Dark elves were bad etc. To be fair, Order as a title suggests the "good guys". I think it's more people not understanding what the "Order" word denotes for the Order alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodmaster Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 People don't get that order simply means "structured" as oposing to Chaos - not theses are the good guys. As usual and observable with other things, far to often, humans try to devide in black and white, where shades of grey are more aproriate. And as with 40k, AoS lacks entrily good guys, that do good simply to do good, which makes for intersting settings, rather then the typical Tolkin-esque Fantasy worlds where there is a great evil that the brave heros have to overcome. It's the same principle that makes "A song of ice and fire" so intriguing and far more belivable, and which starts to crumble in the last two seasons of the TV adaptation after they passed beyond the source material and leaves a sour taste of lost portential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaldoBeardo Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 I think of it more along the lines of; Order builds and has a rule of law - they are civilised. Destruction are effectively locusts who exploit and the only hard and fast rule is survival of the toughest (or sneakiest). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Associating any of the Grand Alliances with a particular god is misleading. As others have said, they're more akin to a roughly defined common philosophy than actual alliances fighting under a common banner. Chaos and Death may seem this way at the moment, but in future we might see an undead faction that has no allegiance to Nagash (and is perhaps even suspicious or hostile towards him) but which would nonetheless be grouped under Grand Alliance: Death - actually, Flesh-eater Courts are a little like this already. This kind of thing has also already happened in Chaos with the addition of Skaven and the Horned Rat, which are associated with the power of Chaos whilst being different in just about every way to the original Chaos pantheon. So even these Grand Alliances aren't as homogenous and straightforward as @Ragequit suggests. And even though it's already been said very eloquently above, it bears repeating; Order aren't the good guys. They're not even all Sigmar worshipers. The factions grouped under Order may not even get along with each other and may have conflicting goals. The only thing that unifies them is a general penchant for law and civilisation - building rather than destroying or corrupting. The Daughters of Khaine belong here, because ultimately they have a clear set of laws that they live by (even though they might seem immoral by our standards) and have nothing to gain and everything to lose if civilisation falls. As for Destruction, I think @BaldoBeardo's definition is spot on - factions that have no laws or permanent civilisation, and which exploit and destroy anything and everything they need to in order to survive and prosper. That's not to say that they don't live within any kind of social structure and they may even establish temporary settlements, empires or codes of law - but they'll cast it all off violently at a moment's notice without a second thought if it benefits them to do so. It makes no sense to restrict Destruction to factions that worship Gorkamarka because not only does that immediately exclude other 'non-civilised' factions that already exist - ogors and fimir for example - but it also excludes the possibility of introducing new non-orruk Destruction factions in the future. But really, when it comes down to it, there's no point in trying to analyse or rationalise the Grand Alliances too much. They're just there to add some structure to the game for us players, and were never intended to be hard-and-fast categories, and they're certainly not something that the races of Age of Sigmar recognise in-universe. Start talking to any inhabitant of the Mortal Realms about which 'Grand Alliance' they belong to and they'll have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harioch Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Personally it's not that I want factions from Order to be moved to Destruction or Death, it's just that I want more diversity in said GA. Also motives can be twisted a bit (like DoK who want civilization to rise again...but at the same time are bloodthirsty and mischievious). To explain, a Destruction's faction that is actually an empire-sort-of-thing but reveal in pillaging and amassing plunders is not anti-thematic. That's why I would have loved the Idoneth to be part of Destruction, because of what we know so far is they are raiding towns and steal souls. It would have been a perfect fit with Ogors attracted to meat and Orruks to fight. Being a follower of Gorkamorka is not a focus of the GA to me because GorkMork is not described as obsessed with control than Nagash is for Death (or Sigmar for Order ?). So a faction lead by a god/demi-god/whatever who decides to ally with Orruks/Ogors in the GA is not unthinkable to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BunkhouseBuster Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 To hose who struggle with the Daughters of Khaine being in Order, I ask them this: Did you ever play Dungeons and Dragons? You see, they had this Alignment Chart that was used to help design and build characters to give the players a better understanding of how their characters and NPCs might behave. There is one axis for how good or evil the character is, basically their level of altruism or selfishness. Another axis is the spectrum of chaos versus law, or how the character behaves in comparison to anarchy or civilization . On each axis is also a neutral point, which gives a grid of 9 squares in which you can lawful good or lawful evil, and chaotic good or chaotic evil. The Order Grand Alliance falls within the lawful end of the spectrum, with both good and evil among their ranks. This is because they try to build civilization up and be more than bunch of marauding barbarians and nomads. So anytime someone complains about Daughters of Khaine being in the Order Grand Alliance, educate them on the Alignment Chart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyderPirate Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 I see it as more of a spectrum between anarchy, turmoil and change at one end (represented by Chaos) and rigidity, structure, control and stagnation at the other (represented by Death). The forces of Destruction are on the chaotic side of the spectrum: they have few rules, and little regard for consequences. Order is on the opposite side of the spectrum, seeking stability and structure, but with room for evolution and development - far from the eternal stagnation of undeath. The DoK seem to me like they fall closer to the centre of that spectrum. The DoK have a hierarchy and they're generally disposed to ally themselves to others to maintain stability, but they're not above disrupting the order of things to achieve their own ends. We don't know enough about the Deepkin yet, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harioch Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 19 minutes ago, BunkhouseBuster said: So anytime someone complains about Daughters of Khaine being in the Order Grand Alliance, educate them on the Alignment Chart Well I do not argue on the Alignement Chart because what you describe is pretty much what I think GA Order is (so is Death in my mind). But with the Background of Morathi being rejected and all by Order gods, Nagash and wants revenge on those who wronged her, I think Destruction could have been where she ended in. Except she hasn't. So I'm not saying it's worse or better now. Just some arguments exist on the side of those who wanted DoK elsewhere but Order and it's not all about what Order is or isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 43 minutes ago, BunkhouseBuster said: To hose who struggle with the Daughters of Khaine being in Order, I ask them this: Did you ever play Dungeons and Dragons? You see, they had this Alignment Chart that was used to help design and build characters to give the players a better understanding of how their characters and NPCs might behave. There is one axis for how good or evil the character is, basically their level of altruism or selfishness. Another axis is the spectrum of chaos versus law, or how the character behaves in comparison to anarchy or civilization . On each axis is also a neutral point, which gives a grid of 9 squares in which you can lawful good or lawful evil, and chaotic good or chaotic evil. The Order Grand Alliance falls within the lawful end of the spectrum, with both good and evil among their ranks. This is because they try to build civilization up and be more than bunch of marauding barbarians and nomads. So anytime someone complains about Daughters of Khaine being in the Order Grand Alliance, educate them on the Alignment Chart This illustration may help... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulsmith Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 May be rather on the nose, but as someone said in another thread, the Third Reich would be in GA Order. Doesn't make them good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praecautus Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 My kids are neutral evil ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DinoTitanedition Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 I don`t think any faction needs to be moved to another Grand Alliance, but I think it`ll help to make them a bit more "good" or "evil", however you want to define that. All grey or all in a sense bad....we have that in 40K. No need for a redundancy there. And now people are going to call me heretic, but I believe, the reason why so many people got aquainted wit AoS and Games Workshops Fantasy range of products again is, because it polarizes much more clearly now as "good" and "evil". If nobody is any of those to directions it`s hard to identify yourself with a faction or generate sympathy for them. That is one of the reasons the old Warhammer game slowly started dying and having the factions be totally grey again is a step in the wrong direction. If you like a "neutral faction" Destruction is pretty much the deal. If you like a "good" faction, you`ll stick with Order, if you want to be one of the everlasting do-no-gooders "Chaos" is your choice and if you want to balance all of those aspects without staying neutral "Death" is your choice. Sometimes it`s simply more enjoyable to have clear distincions between your factions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith01 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 I like the way the Grand Alliances work and have no problem with how the factions within are divided. I've only ever heard people complain online, never in any local stores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleboda Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 4 hours ago, EMMachine said: I think the main problem is, that when people think of "Order" they think about the "good" guys, Ding ding ding! We have a winner. If people would drop the connection between "good" and "order" this would go away. Stalin wanted order. He was not good. In fact, lots of dictators want completely orderly societies and are very, very far from good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 23 minutes ago, DinoTitanedition said: If nobody is any of those to directions it`s hard to identify yourself with a faction or generate sympathy for them. This is just... not right. How can a truly evil character generate sympathy? No-one believes themselves to be evil - even people we might think of as 'evil' believe themselves to be moral, and that their horrific actions are ultimately a sacrifice that must be made for the greater good. Everyone is the hero of their own story. To generate sympathy we need to be able to A) understand why a character feels that what they're doing is right, and B) be able to see them in ourselves to some extent - we have to be able to imagine that their motivations could be ours given the right circumstances and pressures. Far from 'grey areas' making it difficult for people to associate with a character or faction, it's actually essential. That's good storytelling 101. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richelieu Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 49 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said: This is just... not right. How can a truly evil character generate sympathy? No-one believes themselves to be evil - even people we might think of as 'evil' believe themselves to be moral, and that their horrific actions are ultimately a sacrifice that must be made for the greater good. Everyone is the hero of their own story. To generate sympathy we need to be able to A) understand why a character feels that what they're doing is right, and B) be able to see them in ourselves to some extent - we have to be able to imagine that their motivations could be ours given the right circumstances and pressures. Far from 'grey areas' making it difficult for people to associate with a character or faction, it's actually essential. That's good storytelling 101. Completely agree. It's what makes the chaos gods compelling. They are simply manifestations of the essential attributes of civilisation run amok. We can all identify with what motivates at least one, if not all of the chaos gods. Nurgle: agriculture and cultivation Tzeentch: knowledge and innovation Slaanesh: culture and entertainment Khorne: Clausewitz said it best, war is just a "continuation of politics by other means." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skabnoze Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 I think it may simply stem from many people thinking that the Grand Alliance for Order is overflowing with factions while Death and Destruction are a bit bare. I think that is a fairly valid criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucio Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 I think Destruction is the weakest definition for the Grand Alliances, as it's basically just Orruks, Ogors and Grots. Skaven could have gone into here for example bar the odd, more focused choice like Clan Pestillens. What I'd like to see in the future is a Human, Aelf or Duardin addition to Destruction, something like steampunk cyborgs, shape changers, or elementally influenced hybrids. Something that is more in tune with Ghur or Chamon that feels like it's a wild, unstoppable force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BunkhouseBuster Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 1 hour ago, Lucio said: What I'd like to see in the future is a Human, Aelf or Duardin addition to Destruction, something like steampunk cyborgs, shape changers, or elementally influenced hybrids. Something that is more in tune with Ghur or Chamon that feels like it's a wild, unstoppable force. As would I. Perhaps there ought to be a way to chance Allegiance abilities? Such as a Battalion or Chapter Tactics-like rule that changes the Grand Alliance keyword in the Warscroll? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Returning Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 3 hours ago, Skabnoze said: I think it may simply stem from many people thinking that the Grand Alliance for Order is overflowing with factions while Death and Destruction are a bit bare. I think that is a fairly valid criticism. I agree I've also noticed that mixed order lists do pretty well in the competitive scene and now they get more tools to play with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucio Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 1 hour ago, BunkhouseBuster said: As would I. Perhaps there ought to be a way to chance Allegiance abilities? Such as a Battalion or Chapter Tactics-like rule that changes the Grand Alliance keyword in the Warscroll? Honestly? In my friendly games we just do it, so for example I've had an army of "undead" Orruks, using the Zombie rules but Orruk and Destruction keywords instead of Zombie and Death Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.