Jump to content
Welcome Guest!

Join us now to get access to all our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, and so, so much more. It's also quick and totally free, so what are you waiting for?

Infeston

Members
  • Content count

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24 Lord Celestant

About Infeston

  • Rank
    Judicator
  1. Will Destruction fit in the new narrative?

    Don't say that. :-( For me the short focus on Destruction at the beginning was what pulled me back into AoS. At the moment it seems like GW is not just pulling back from Destruction, but also from AoS as a whole. I know we should try to be positive in this forum, but sometimes it is hard for me to be always positive if it seems like GW does care less about Destruction and more about Stormcast. I don't say this because I don't like AoS, but because is really love this game. I got all my hopes up, because of the hype at the beginning. But at the moment it seems like the AoS hype is fading away, at least for me. It still keep my hopes up. But i can't handle too much waiting. Maybe I am also just impatient. But I hope someone can understand my concerns at the moment. I want this game to succeed and want to support it. But I also only want to support it if it seems like GW is also caring about the game. I have seen too many interesting new game formats fade away and I don't want this to happen to AoS.
  2. Will Destruction fit in the new narrative?

    Jeah. In this way you are right. But the Ogor "releases" were also all just old models. As well as the Grots. So Orruks are the only Destruction faction which really got new models. To be honest, I don't mind if the next Destruction release would be Ogors or Grots as long as its not Orruks. I think a completely new faction for Destruction would also be exciting. Also the Orruk factions are the only Destruction factions which play a major role in the story (even though they only play a minor role compared to Stormcast and Chaos). You don't hear about some Ogors or Grots interfering in serious business or being an equal encounter to the Stormcast boys. I also want something that differs from 40k. For me it seems like they try the same formular which worked for 40k with AoS, so that for every faction in 40k there is a faction equivalent in AoS. I wish for something that differs from 40k like Kharadron Overlords for example. There is no 40k equivalent for the Kharadron Overlords (I think Squats don't count). Also there are no Ogors, or Troggoth in 40k (there are some Ogors, but not a whole faction). I think GW should improve on things which differ from 40k rather than establishing equivalents for AoS. But this is also just my opinion. Some people may see things a little different.
  3. Will Destruction fit in the new narrative?

    I like the suggestions for allegiances, new factions etc. a lot. Would be great if GW could read this and think about it. :-D I would also welcome a completely new faction to Destruction. Maybe also a completely new race. But I still like to see new ogors. I seriously hope the new hero won't be an Ironjawz Orruk. Most of the heralds we've seen were part of factions which aren't the centrepieces of the allegiances, so there is hope. A sky grot captain in some kind of mini ship or zeppelin would be great, like Brokk Grungson. Or an ogor hero with some kind of elemental enhancement (like burning shoulders, or his body consisting of earth for example). I think for me the best thing would be a Troggoth hero. Because this is what I would find the most interesting. A hero similar to Throgg: http://warhammerfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Throgg. I think Throgg is also one of the coolest troll miniatures I have ever seen. Would be really cool to get a whole troll faction with a troll leader similar to Throgg (but uncorrupted by Chaos). There are so many possibilites. Sadly Destruction gets often ignored and when they are focussed it is often only about greenskins.
  4. Will Destruction fit in the new narrative?

    I still hope that GW isn't going to make Destruction only about Green, Green and even more green and only create equivalents to 40k for AoS. I still hope they will also add something to the other factions like Troggoths, Gargants or Ogors. This would make Destruction more diverse. If I wanna play Orruks in power armor I can also play 40k. I also think that for Destruction Ironjawz got enough at the moment. I would be happy about a non-green faction update. But I would also accept a Grots update with new models. I just wish for more interesting models for our beloved Destruction. Sky Grots would also be really cool.
  5. Will Destruction fit in the new narrative?

    This is also a big fear that I have. But I would even be happy if they reimagined the Gutbuster Ogors. At the moment I have the fear that Ogors will eventually get the Tomb Kings treatment. I only play Sigmar because I can still play my old Ogor army in the new setting. But it makes me sad that GW only focusses on Ironjawz and Orruks. Ogors are the one thing which differs from 40k and makes them a unique faction in the setting. Orruks exist in both systems. I hope they will still keep Ogors relevant and will also eventually add new Ogor models, which may look different or have different abilities and look more Aos-esque. For example I could imagine Ogors with a Maw instead of their belly. Or maybe they will expand the Firebellies and add a faction full of burning and flaming Ogors. Also unique faction traits where they regenerate wounds if they do damage, because they eat their enemies. I could imagine so many things, but I am very sad that Ogors get no support. Jeah Death definitely needed this. I am happy for our brothers in neglection that they will finally get something. On the other hand they also released a lot of Khorne and Stormcast sets. So there is no reason why GW couldn't release a set for both armies or just support both alliances at the same time. Would be neat to have a set which is not all about Stormcast, but instead Death and Destruction fighting each other. I would like that. :-) I know GW is a business and sells Stromcasts, because they are popular. But I still wish they would support Destruction more. I also play no 40k and I never played it. So all the 40k releases don't matter for me in any way.
  6. Will Destruction fit in the new narrative?

    No thats not what I wanted to say. But maybe Destruction will only play a side role. And that they won't get any new models soon. But maybe Im wrong. :-)
  7. Hey everyone, People keep talking about the new narrative coming maybe next year and that it will be all about Death reclaiming areas etc. While I feel glad that Death will now get some focus I am also scared that our beloved Destruction will not play a big part in the new setting. I have the feeling that we may only get one Destruction hero (which I believe almost certainly to be an Orruk) as one of the Heralds and that will be it. I think every Grand Alliance has a place in a death-themed narrative but Destruction. I don't know if they would fit in and which role they propably would play. What do you think? Is there a place for Destruction in this narrative? Im starting a little bit to lose interest if there isn't anything happening for Destruction at the moment. I would also be happy if there would be some more detailed information about Destruction lorewise. The current lore about Orruks is always "There is this big guy and everyone follows him, because he is strong...The end". But I don't find the stories to be very interesting. There aren't any mayor rivalries or stories about Destruction. You don't know how for example Gordrakk got the strongest Orruk. It just says: Gordrakk is the biggest and baddest because he killed things. Nothing about how he fought his way up etc. I find the story aspect of Destruction very boring. But I did like the story about the Beastclaw riders and that they were hunted by the Everwinter. But that was only in the battletome. After that you don't hear from them in the main story. I would find it very exciting to see a story where a sudden giant snowstorm approaches and some guys have to fight through it. Narratively I feel like third wheel as a Destruction player, because we have no real or exciting lore. It often seems that we have no place in the main story, because the only major characters only appear in the battletomes, except Gordrakk. But I also think he didn't play a major role in the All-Gates other than just smashing some stuff and being a distraction. For me it feels like they are the monsters which you fight in a Dungeon RPG. They come from somewhere and then gets slain, but have no real purpose or motivations other than fighting with the "Heros". I know that its often a lot what Orruks are about, but I think there would still be a place for an interesting narrative.
  8. Beastclaw Raiders Load-out Question

    From a narrative standpoint I would disagree. Why shouldn't the leader(aka Skalg) also be a Horn Blower. I mean it is unlikely that musicians are leaders, but on the other side it was also unusal that the musicians can carry a banner and an instrument. I can't agree with the reasoning that one model can only play one role. In the end the only thing that differs is the wording. Logically and narratively speaking i see no reason why the leader can't be a mighty Horn Blower. I think this is the thinking which transfers from Warhammer Fantasy to AoS or tabletop in general. It was always an unspoken rule. And i think to make it official it should be cleared and written down. It gets also a bit philosophical. Where does it say that something could only be this or that? Most of the time something is more than one thing. In my opinion the word "be" doesn't say it can only be this, or otherwise it has to be that. If it is worded they "A model can only be a Skalg, or a Banner Bearer, or a Horn Blower" I would agree that there is only one option.
  9. The Rumour Thread

    Jeah I am starting to feel the same way. I have the strong feeling GW is going back to their old ways and trying to hide something. I did like the new transparency and communication with the players. But especially the AoS releases since Kharadron Overlords were underwelming. I found many changes with the GHB2017 not that well thought-through. I liked the Firestorm releases from a narrative perspective. But most of the new model releases were also often combined sets with old models. For me this seems like the old models didn't sell so well and they wanted to make them more attractive by selling the old models together with new model releases (Blightwar for example). I hope my feeling is wrong and they pull out something special and exciting. I came back to AoS because I was hyped about all the changes. But at the moment the releases lower my excitement more and more. Sorry if I sound too negative. I still like AoS very much and I love this game. But i also have some fears. I have seen many games getting hyped and burning down very fast. And i hope this doesn't happen with AoS, because this was the first Tabletop game system that I really enjoyed playing. :-)
  10. Beastclaw Raiders Load-out Question

    Wow thanks for passing this on. :-)
  11. Beastclaw Raiders Load-out Question

    The thing is that it says "Models in this unit may be Horn Blowers". If it would say "One model in this unit may be a Horn Blower" I would agree. Also it doesn't clarify the identity thing in the warscroll. We just assume that it would be that way. But if you only look at the wording it could be possible that a Skalg may also be a Hornblower. If you look at the weapon types it seems very clear. There it says "Some may be equipped with this. Other may be equipped with that". The wording cannot be misinterpreted. But the way it is written for the Skalg and the Horn Blower there could be different interpretations. Also the wording for the Skalg isn´t the same as the Horn Blower. The leader of a unit is automatically a Skalg. It does not say: "You may choose one model to be the leader, this model is a Skalg. As Skalg wields...". It does simply say "The leader of this unit is a Skalg. It does also not say if this is a special kind of unit type like a Horn Blower. It just states what the leader of the unit is called, not that it is a special unit type.
  12. Beastclaw Raiders Load-out Question

    I agree a little bit on what Konic is saying. And i guess i get what you are trying to express. It just says that the leader of the unit is a Skalg. It does not say that a Horn Blower cannot be the leader of a unit. So I guess what Konic is trying to say that the Leader who is a Skalg could also be a Horn blower. It doesn't say that a model cannot be both. If the wording would be that one model could be either a Skalg or a Hornblower I would say it is the way it was mentioned by heywoah_twitch. Here is the description again: DESCRIPTION A Mournfang Pack has 2 or more models. Some Mournfang Packs are equipped with Culling Clubs or Prey Hackers in one meaty hand, and spiked gauntlets called Iron Fists in the other, which they use to bat aside an enemy’s blows before punching them in the face. Other Mournfang Packs prefer to wield mighty two-handed Gargant Hackers to chop giant monsters down to size, or bisect lesser foes with a single blow. The Mournfangs themselves gore their foes with their massive Tusks. SKALG The leader of this unit is a Skalg. A Skalg may be armed with an Ironlock Pistol in addition to his other weapons. HORN BLOWER Models in this unit may be Horn Blowers. You can roll three dice and pick the two highest results when determining the charge distance for a unit if it includes any Horn Blowers. It does not really say that a unit cannot be both a Horn blower and a Skalg. I think the wording makes it totally possible that one model could be a Horn blower with a banner and also be the Skalg. It also says "Models in this unit may be Horn Blowers" which means that every model of a unit could still be a Horn blower and also wear a banner. So it would be possible that the whole unit wears banners, consists of Horn Blowers and has one Skalg Horn Blower leader with a banner. For me Konic's argumentation totally makes sense.
  13. Ok thanks. I didn't know that this means they are available soon.
  14. Hey everyone, Every time I visit the GW website the Icebrow Hunter and the Sabretusks are sold out. I just wanted to add something new to my Beastclaw army. Is GW going to discontinue Beastclaw Raiders? It seems like units such as yhetees, sabretusk and hunters are hard to get. Greetings
  15. Hi everyone, Just wanted to discuss the BCR abilites, because I think they will now be used more often by people who still play BCR. Even though our numbers may be low. And i think the abilites could still be improved. Especially the rolls of 5 and 6. I think this is the only ability in the game, where you hope to roll a 1,2,3,4 but not a 5 or 6. A short description for everyone who doesn't know this ability: In each hero phase you roll a dice: on 1-2 everyone can reroll save rolls of 1, on a 3-4 everyone gets a 3" movement, on a 5 every enemy unit within 3" of your models suffers D3 mortal wounds on a 6 roll, and on a 6 they suffer D6 mortal wounds. If you are lucky enough to roll a 5, you still have to roll a 6 to do D3 damage. If you are lucky enough to roll a 6, you have to roll a 6 again and after that also a 6 if you want maximum effect. This would be three 6's in a row. Which are the odds that this might happen? I think it should be more rewarding to roll a 6 for an allegiance ability. What do you think? Maybe I am wrong but I am really interested what you have to say about the ability annd what could be improved. Has it ever happened that the Everwinter roll of 5 or 6 worked for anyone and was still effective? How could the ability change to make it more interesting?
×