Warhammer Legends

[AthlorianStoners]

Im confused  at the outrage here. 

GW haven’t invalidated any existing armies at all. They’ve essentially just given something extra.

[AlphaKennyThing]

10 minutes ago, AthlorianStoners said:

Im confused  at the outrage here. 

GW haven’t invalidated any existing armies at all. They’ve essentially just given something extra.

That's the way I see it. If you still have large collections of old WHFB armies, you can bring them back to the tabletop in Open and Narrative Play - it is quite clear they are not intending for them to appear in Matched Play. Matched Play is something they continually have to tweak and adjust to keep balanced, trying to do that for a load of Legends factions that don't even exist in the setting is not something they're going to so.

Personally I think it's great they've made a mini-tome to update all the warscrolls and give you something decent to work with when playing the old factions. To update it even after rules changes is a nice gesture too!

[Ollie Grimwood]

58 minutes ago, AthlorianStoners said:

Im confused  at the outrage here. 

GW haven’t invalidated any existing armies at all. They’ve essentially just given something extra.

I think some may have been raging so long they can’t see when they’ve been done a solid. 

Ironical the most rage I’ve seen is from people who claim to love The WtW but if they generate too much heat the response from GW is that they simply won’t bother there certainly isn’t any pot of gold sitting at the end of a rainbow made of Mengil’s Manflayers.  If gets too much trouble it isn’t worth their time  

This is nice thing GW are doing. 

I find it galling  as there are people out there who are doing some very cool WtW stuff with AoS rules but as usual it’s being drowned out ( on other platforms not TGA I might addd) by the usual bunch of ragequiters from yesteryear. 

P.s. 

Id never really spent any time looking at the mounted sorceress or dreadlord (filthy elfs ain’t they) They are awesome models. 

Edited May 6, 2018 by Ollie Grimwood

[Sheriff]

48 minutes ago, AthlorianStoners said:

Im confused  at the outrage here. 

GW haven’t invalidated any existing armies at all. They’ve essentially just given something extra.

Sure, they haven't invalidated anything now, but said they will - hence people are concerned their dudes are being demoted to narrative-only. 

[Lousy Beatnik]

19 hours ago, HorticulusTGA said:

I still don't understand why GW didn't republish, at the launch of AOS, or better, at the GHB 2016 release, a reworked version of their old WD articles about "no points" games, from Jervis Johnson and Nigel Stillman for example. It would have shown the possibilies of non point games, and the philosophy of such games, just like they did with the 40k 8th Designer FAQ. 

Yep. AoS really needed a "designer's notes" from the start. In white dwarf, on the site, the rules download and the first campaign book. You can't release a game with no points, and not even give some context (I've read plenty of independent games that explained their game. Swashbuckling game Donnybrooke for example has very rough points, but says anyone choosing only the "best" options is playing the wrong game).

It would have saved me pondering for a year what was going on...

17 hours ago, Kaleb Daark said:

I wonder if some brets and TKs will resurface for a final last chance to buy (and sell out in ten minutes flat!)?

Can't sell out... "Made to order"

I think a tomb kings release could be disappointing, we haven't seen a plastic kit go back into production.

[Kyriakin]

1 hour ago, AthlorianStoners said:

Im confused  at the outrage here. 

GW haven’t invalidated any existing armies at all. They’ve essentially just given something extra.

GW have only done one Legends army so far, and the "outrage" is clearly not about those Dark Elves. The elephants in the room are what may befall the two Compendium armies in the future.

When our time comes to be added to Legends, do you think Tomb Kings will subsequently exist in both pointed Compendium and unpointed Legends at the same time?

If the answer is "no", that would not represent "something extra", but a trade (i.e. more interesting warscrolls in exchange for our pointed status).

Being pointed trumps everything for me, as the vast majority of gamers seem to be allergic to both unpointed games and fan-made points. Former points (i.e. TK16 or TK17) may have slightly more "mandate" by way of having been official in the past, but, again, good luck finding regular opponents who will accept that.

Edited May 6, 2018 by Kyriakin

[JontyGoesGaming]

2 minutes ago, Kyriakin said:

If the answer is "no", that will indeed represent an invalidation of the TK and Brets in terms of matched play.

Yes. You won’t be able to use Brets or Tomb Kings at GW events, possibly GW shops, or Matched Play tournaments. That’s been made completely clear. 

But Iyou can use them pretty much everywhere else you can possibly think of! I’ll even bet that the community comes up with a way of translating the old spell lore and artefact list from the old Army Books into a Battletome format- I’ll certainly have a go for Brets. 

Can I just ask though, is there not even a single army that has been released or had a Battletome within the last four years that you could face collecting and using for matched play instead? I’m a proud Bretonnian player, and I will never sell them and will try to get them out of the box a few times a year once the ToL rules are out. 

But I wouldn’t dream of trying to take them to a GW heat or 3rd party matched play event, because I’ve got a more up to date (and arguably more fun) army for that.

[AthlorianStoners]

48 minutes ago, Sheriff said:

Sure, they haven't invalidated anything now, but said they will - hence people are concerned their dudes are being demoted to narrative-only. 

Right ok I see where you’re coming from. I made a post earlier about certain factions not being at risk, but I don’t think Gitmob would be at risk, there’d be a fair few armies getting relegated before them for them to be at risk. To clarify I’m referring to outrage on Facebook and other areas, TGA as always is a place where reasonable discussion abounds. 

@Kyriakin ahhh ok i see your concern. From my perspective I’ve never seen a player running either armies so they didn’t immediately come to mind for me as a point of concern, but I’m a post GHB player.

Not having played either faction, I’d always assumed players who run them do so out of a love for the modes and armies, not their competetive side. In my mind someone willing to play them now probably wouldn’t be put off by using older points nowadays anyway. 

[Kyriakin]

28 minutes ago, JontyGoesGaming said:

Yes. You won’t be able to use Brets or Tomb Kings at GW events, possibly GW shops, or Matched Play tournaments. That’s been made completely clear. 

But Iyou can use them pretty much everywhere else you can possibly think of! I’ll even bet that the community comes up with a way of translating the old spell lore and artefact list from the old Army Books into a Battletome format- I’ll certainly have a go for Brets. 

Can I just ask though, is there not even a single army that has been released or had a Battletome within the last four years that you could face collecting and using for matched play instead? I’m a proud Bretonnian player, and I will never sell them and will try to get them out of the box a few times a year once the ToL rules are out. 

But I wouldn’t dream of trying to take them to a GW heat or 3rd party matched play event, because I’ve got a more up to date (and arguably more fun) army for that.

I am not competitive in the slightest, and tournaments aren't of much interest to me.

I often get a vibe from Open Players that everyone who wants points must be competitive when, in fact, most casuals I know don't/can't play unpointed. It's too amorphous and free-form. We need a certain amount of external guidance and structure.

Eyeballing unpointed games is for Open Players who are themselves "hardcores" - albeit at the opposite end of the spectrum from the more visible min-max tourney hardcore players. In this regards, True Open Players know and understand the game to such an extent that they can process all of the many variables and permutations to set up a game that provides worth and enjoyment to both/all parties.

In my experience, true casuals are actually in the middle of the spectrum. Predominantly playing pick-up games in clubs and FLGS, while using the universal language of Matched Play to keep things at least somewhat consistent, easy and fair.

Would TK17 get curb-stomped by a hardened Tzeentch player/list? Of course. But, then again, so will 75% of the factions in the game (e.g. Darkling Covens, Brayherd, etc.). But the current Matched Play situation at least allows these non-meta factions - and perhaps non-optimized lists for otherwise meta factions - to have fun games with each other.

Edited May 6, 2018 by Kyriakin

[JontyGoesGaming]

That’s a fair point- most narrative players use a points or power level too - I know I do a lot of the time . Point taken!

I suspect people will probably use the current points as a ballpark, and then there’s scope for a few tweaks here and there as a community led thing- it happened before after all, no reason not to happen again. 

[AthlorianStoners]

I agree and would group myself in that same category of casual player who uses points for ease of play. 

For my part, I 100% would never refuse to play some using GHB17 points for Tomb Kings if they are moved to Legends.

[Ollie Grimwood]

Surely the points from the AoS faction units using the same models and the GHB16 compendium points would suffice for almost all cases in term of casual pick up games. Yes some of the Dark Elf units are better in the Legends but they also don’t have Alliegence abilities, battalions or artefacts (unless I’ve missed them) so should balance enough for most games. 

[Kyriakin]

12 minutes ago, AthlorianStoners said:

I agree and would group myself in that same category of casual player who uses points for ease of play. 

For my part, I 100% would never refuse to play some using GHB17 points for Tomb Kings if they are moved to Legends.

How about TK16?

To be honest, I think TK16 will have moved backwards by way of standing still. Several extra layers (e.g. allies, etc.) have subsequently been added to the meta that they would lack. Plus there is just a general ongoing power-creep that even effects some of the earlier true AoS factions, such as Ironjawz.

IIRC, some stuff was under-costed, so I guess they would still be upper-mid-tier. However, I can't see them being anywhere near the sharp end, as they were before "Nerferata" put a curse on them.

Edited May 6, 2018 by Kyriakin

[Kaleun]

Dark Elves are my first and only love in both the Wahammer World and AoS. So I am pretty hyped for the "Warhammer Legends" Rules.

Biggest thing for me: We have now clear rules about the Reaper Bolt Thrower. So no Crew-Sniping anymore! It lost a bit of its damage potential but gained the single shot it had in the Warhammer universe.

Point costs: I dont see why you wouldnt use the point costs of the recent warscrolls. There is nothing new in this Warhammer Legends Compendium. We already have point costs for everything.

The buffs for the Executioners and the Black Guard (etc.) have already been mentioned. I think we will have that changes soon be brought over to the Darkling Covens and the Order Serpentis. Finally the Dark elves get some proper rend on their Executioners.

There are downsides never the less. The Dreadlord on Black Dragon got a much smaller shield (reroll 1s instead of everything) and some core rules (like the +2 bravery of banners near heroes) are lost. Assas got their much needed rend now.

I am am sad that GW left the Druchii-Warhost Battalion aside. It was my favourite.

I see the legends Compendium more as a sign that we will have rules for our old models in the future. Good Job GW!

[AthlorianStoners]

13 minutes ago, Kyriakin said:

How about TK16?

To be honest, I think TK16 will have moved backwards by way of standing still. Several extra layers (e.g. allies, etc.) have subsequently been added to the meta that they would lack. Plus there is just a general ongoing power-creep that even effects some of the earlier true AoS factions, such as Ironjawz.

IIRC, some stuff was under-costed, so I guess they would still be upper-mid-tier. However, I can't see them being anywhere near the sharp end, as they were before "Nerferata" put a curse on them.

Hahaha honestly I wouldn’t have a problem with it. With both versions you can get a good idea of where they stand and what they do, and since they won’t receive new stuff I think it’s perfectly cool to pick whichever one you prefer to play with.

[Sharkbelly]

I think this is GW's way of moving forward with the brand.  They're not interested in putting too much time and effort into an old product line.

[Rane]

reeee points reeee

[HorticulusTGA]

3 hours ago, Sharkbelly said:

I think this is GW's way of moving forward with the brand.  They're not interested in putting too much time and effort into an old product line.

I guess you are right.

But GW just released for the third time a full rules update for an outdated army (Dark elves) for an unsupported game (WFB), for free, and people would call it low effort and low time ? That's not fair.

GW could just have told us to use our old Dark Elves models as one of the many AOS factions using those models in the current timeline, aka Scourge Privateer and such, who have updated rules (including points) and a very good place in the fluff (notably in the novels and in the Free cities).

Instead GW try to be nice to the old guard, and people get angry ? I find this situation a bit unfair...

It seems like people don't want to adapt to the new setting. You don't even have to buy a new army (even if GW would like you to), or to really use the new fluff (like Scourge privateer), you just have to use the current rules for those Aelves factions from the current timeline but based on the old DE range.

We are in the Age of Sigmar, not on the World-that-was : GW is IMO quite nice to support the WFB people who don't want to play with WFB rules and with AOS fluff (even without point ; the alternative would be to have nothing).

Edited May 6, 2018 by HorticulusTGA

[Infernalslayer]

I don't mind if they make current OOP compendium models illegal in tournaments and can understand the reasons behind that. But as mentioned in other posts i need points to have a semblance of balance in the casual games that i am going to use those miniatures. It is good in theory that you can use the models in open play but how often can you pick up a game with someone at your local store and have them agree to a game without point costs?

I can play a casual friendly game with someone using my GH 2016 compendium Gorthor the Beastlord with my Brayherd, since he has points in that book and we can balance out our armies but if someone wants to use Malekith from the new Dark Legends pdf that has a new warscroll without points they would have a hard time finding anyone willing to play against them.

GW can give point costs for the Legends range with a disclaimer "This points are to help you balance your forces in casual games and are not allowed in official events/tournaments" and there would be far fewer worried and displeased people since they can still have some pick up games at their FLGS and use their old toys from time to time.

Points are not meant only for tournament and competitive games but provide a guidance for both players to play their armies with a set structure, be it at their FLGS or at their kitchen table on a rainy afternoon.

[Verengard]

5 hours ago, HorticulusTGA said:

But GW just released for the third time a full rules update for an outdated army (Dark elves) for an unsupported game (WFB), for free, and people would call it low effort and low time ? That's not fair.

Noone asked for DE compendium as they already made DE into subfactions - with allegiances or even battletomes. Instead they could spend the time making allegiance & balanced points for Brets & TK. Reactions would be much different.

And to be honest - to make narrative games in Old Worlds you need ALL comepediums not just one... Untill all are released what is the use of this, making people angry ?

[rokapoke]

10 minutes ago, Verengard said:

Noone asked for DE compendium as they already made DE into subfactions - with allegiances or even battletomes. Instead they could spend the time making allegiance & balanced points for Brets & TK. Reactions would be much different.

And to be honest - to make narrative games in Old Worlds you need ALL comepediums not just one... Untill all are released what is the use of this, making people angry ?

Once again, they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. Clearly, there are a lot of quick and angry reactions to the release of the Dark Elf Legends rules, which came not too long after the teaser of Legends (at Adepticon, on March 21). So by trying to maintain a short period of time between promise and execution, they produced one full-fledged faction for it -- and proceed to get attacked for their efforts.

Instead, they could have waited, and developed rulesets for all of the Legends factions for an enormous one-time drop... at a later date to be determined. So then the internet would be blasting them for forgetting about the Legends concept they had already promised!

I personally feel a lot of the community has to sit back and take a deep breath. The sky is not falling -- GW has been doing lots of phenomenal things, including listening to customer feedback, which is why Warhammer Legends exists in the first place. As an educator, I can tell you that constructive criticism is helpful, but angry feedback doesn't exactly fuel any change (except to listen less to customer feedback -- nobody likes being dumped on!).

So let's see where this goes -- particularly when it comes to other factions and whether or not they're removed from matched play. Respond when we have more information.

[svnvaldez]

10 hours ago, Sheriff said:

Sure, they haven't invalidated anything now, but said they will - hence people are concerned their dudes are being demoted to narrative-only. 

There is nothing wrong with open and narrative play and these rules allow you to use your models for that. Matched play is design for a tournament setting and a lot of these old models are still sold on squares.  The only reference to a correct base size are the GA books from like 2.5 years ago.

A lot of these units will be repackaged in a new battletome. DE witches are both in the DE pdf and the DoK battletome.

Its about time they start removing some of these old models that don’t fit the new aesthetic/direction from matched play imo.

[mhsellwood]

I have read the new battletome and find it really interesting.

First, I was assuming that the Legends release would have rules for the specific models made available for order, i.e. the Manflayers, the dreadlords etc. but that was it, so essentially a sop to allow you to actually use the models that you have purchased. Instead GW have completely re-done the compendium rules - and by this I mean every single warscroll has been re-done, and even ones that have been subsequently re-worked (Witch Aelves) have a unique version in the Legends book. In many ways they have released a new edition army book for free.

Second, the entries are in terms of clarity and layout the next step up from the current scrolls. The weapon options you have for your characters are really clearly laid out, what is an attack from a mount versus the character is explicit (for example look at the Dreadlord entry - you may have one of 3 weapon layouts, and you may have a repeater crossbow. The mount attacks are in a seperate block. Very clear to read and understand), there is a change in how War Machines work (much closer to the old 8th Edition approach of crew as tokens rather than independent units), some flavour loss by making certain weapon options consistent across units - compare the various Dark Elf Spears, Dark Elf Hand Weapons, Dark Elf Great Weapons.

Third, the army as a whole is a lot harder hitting. Executioners have rend -2 and 2 damage (!!!!), Cold Ones get rend on the charge, chariots all do more impact damage, hydras and Kharibdyss both get much more damaging (also shout out for the improvement in the Kharibdyss's feast of bones - goes from 6+ on wounds caused by one attack, to all wounds inflicted heal a wound). Shooting is hard to call, as the reaper is both better (no crew sniping now) but also worse (less than half the damage output) and repeater crossbowmen have gone from a +1 to hit at 20 models to re-roll 1s at 20, so bit of an up and down.

Where there is some overlap between Legends and current warscrolls I wonder whether there will be a move to harmonise the two? I doubt it, but an interesting thought.

[Kyriakin]

5 hours ago, svnvaldez said:

Matched play is design for a tournament setting

Points allow casuals to play easy pick-up games in clubs and stores by way of providing a universal language for army composition. Can casual players really eyeball this multi-layered game with all its many variables?

I think the name "Matched Play" was a mistake in this regard.

Edited May 7, 2018 by Kyriakin

[svnvaldez]

39 minutes ago, Kyriakin said:

Points allow casuals to play easy pick-up games in clubs and stores by way of providing a universal language for army composition. Can casual players really eyeball this multi-layered game with all its many variables?

I think the name "Matched Play" was a mistake in this regard.

Mistake or no "Matched Play" and points are designed for tournaments.

"You will find detailed additional rules for taking part in a tournament, as well as a comprehensive points-based system that assigns a value to every unit available in the Warhammer Age of Sigmar range." (Introducing matched play: pg 70 of the GH2017)

Narrative and open play have plenty of options that do not involve points... take  a look at the armies section of open play on  page 14 of the GH, points are just 1 of the 5 options offered.

Split the players into two teams, using one of the methods described below.

1. SELECTORS

2. WOUNDS

3. POINTS

4. CONFEDERATION

5. GAMES MASTER

Legacy armies from 8th ed often do not fit with the current Warhammer Age of Sigmar range... those that do are in battletomes and I don't see a problem with removing ones that don't fit.

 

Edited May 7, 2018 by svnvaldez