Malign Portents

[Kramer]

3 minutes ago, Trout said:

ut if you aren't interested in one or more of those, it doesn't really make the case for spending the $60

Book is €20 right? Still not worth it in your opinion? (cards are a further 12)

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-NL/Malign-Portents-2018-ENG

[Trout]

Just now, Kramer said:

Book is €20 right? Still not worth it in your opinion? (cards are a further 12)

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-NL/Malign-Portents-2018-ENG

Yes, I think the Malign Portents book is worth it and I have purchased it. I was referring to the Realmgate Wars. It's the Realmgate Wars books that don't make a strong enough case for purchasing them unless you love story, art, and game (which not everyone does).

[Kramer]

Just now, Trout said:

Yes, I think the Malign Portents book is worth it and I have purchased it. I was referring to the Realmgate Wars. It's the Realmgate Wars books that don't make a strong enough case for purchasing them unless you love story, art, and game (which not everyone does).

Never mind then! 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, chord said:

Interesting,  I thought the realmgate wars had a good amount of thematic rules and battleplans.  The different rules for the different parts of the realms really fit their themes.  

I think my minor issue with the Realmgate Wars battleplans and Time of War rules is that they felt very specific to the exact forces, places and stories that were represented in the book. Obviously you could use those resources with any forces, but if you used different forces it didn't really feel like you were participating in the narrative - just reading about it and then playing through a completely unrelated confrontation.

The way that the Malign Portents material is presented feels subtly different to me, but I think it works better. I can use the battleplans, harbingers, portents rules, etc with any army and feel like I'm actively participating in the events that the book talks about, because they represent something that's happening to everyone all across the Mortal Realms, rather than having my Flesh-eater Court randomly playing through an encounter that happened between the Hammers of Sigmar and Korghos Khul's Bloodbound at a specific place in Aqshy. The Realmgate Wars books are superb if you're playing through the specific plotlines with the actual armies that were involved, but when you can't do that they fall a little flat for me.

[chord]

Just now, Jamie the Jasper said:

I think my minor issue with the Realmgate Wars battleplans and Time of War rules is that they felt very specific to the exact forces, places and stories that were represented in the book. Obviously you could use those resources with any forces, but if you used different forces it didn't really feel like you were participating in the narrative - just reading about it and then playing through a completely unrelated confrontation.

Interesting. I agree some of the battleplans are very story specific ,but I've had good luck using others in custom campaigns along with the times of war (unrelated to the realmgate wars).  Most of the narrative ones in the GHB are from the realmgate wars.

[Guest]

Just now, chord said:

Interesting. I agree some of the battleplans are very story specific ,but I've had good luck using others in custom campaigns along with the times of war (unrelated to the realmgate wars).  Most of the narrative ones in the GHB are from the realmgate wars.

Yeah, they work perfectly well with any armies from a purely functional perspective. I've played and enjoyed several of them with forces other than those depicted in the story. They just fall a little flat as a way of making players feel like part of the Realmgate Wars narrative. It lacked the whole 'why we fight' thing to make everyone feel like their battles were part of the story regardless of what faction they were playing with. You were just playing through something that happened to a Stormcast army, but using Skaven instead of Stormcast, for reasons that were completely outside of the Realmgate Wars plot.

[Menkeroth]

3 hours ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

Yeah, they work perfectly well with any armies from a purely functional perspective. I've played and enjoyed several of them with forces other than those depicted in the story. They just fall a little flat as a way of making players feel like part of the Realmgate Wars narrative. It lacked the whole 'why we fight' thing to make everyone feel like their battles were part of the story regardless of what faction they were playing with. You were just playing through something that happened to a Stormcast army, but using Skaven instead of Stormcast, for reasons that were completely outside of the Realmgate Wars plot.

That's true, but then I think you go too far, because if you play with other armies it means it's another story, the story of your own making. Narrative a global thing, but it can't cover everything. Yes, Hammers of Sigmar and Korghos Khul fought on the Brimstone Peninsula as a part of the Realmgates Wars... but the RW ended and a new era begun. Still, the Peninsula remains and why not fighting over it with other forces? it's you who gives them motivation and reasons to fight, when you are not recreating the specific events of the RW.

[Guest]

11 hours ago, Menkeroth said:

That's true, but then I think you go too far, because if you play with other armies it means it's another story, the story of your own making. Narrative a global thing, but it can't cover everything. Yes, Hammers of Sigmar and Korghos Khul fought on the Brimstone Peninsula as a part of the Realmgates Wars... but the RW ended and a new era begun. Still, the Peninsula remains and why not fighting over it with other forces? it's you who gives them motivation and reasons to fight, when you are not recreating the specific events of the RW.

I don't disagree, I'm just saying that I think Malign Portents does a better job than the Realmgate Wars series of providing narratives and tools that make everyone feel like direct, active and meaningful participants in the story that's unfolding right now. My home brewed Flesh-eater Court didn't have a role to play in the Realmgate Wars because the story and gameplay tools weren't written or presented that way. Yes, I could have created my own story to weave them into the narrative, but that's not quite as satisfying - if I'm going to do that then I'll probably come up with a narrative and a set of encounters that are unique and meaningful to them, rather than trying to shoehorn them into an official narrative that wasn't designed for them. But I don't have to make that choice with Malign Portents because GW has created a story that's broad enough to accommodate everyone, and created a thematic set of gameplay tools that everyone has an immediate narrative justification for using with no mental gymnastics required.

To put it more succinctly, Realmgate Wars is like a historical re-enactment whereas Malign Portents is more like a sandbox. I think it will have a much broader appeal for that reason.

[Menkeroth]

6 hours ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

Yes, I could have created my own story to weave them into the narrative, but that's not quite as satisfying - if I'm going to do that then I'll probably come up with a narrative and a set of encounters that are unique and meaningful to them, rather than trying to shoehorn them into an official narrative that wasn't designed for them.

You are saying it in such a way as if you think it's a bad thing, but why? creating the narrative of all your own is the best such a hobby can give people. And of course, you feel your FEC does not belong quite right to the events of RW, after all RW presented specific forces. But then the places of the events remain and are a sandbox too. MP is broader because now all the forces and alliances fight in the campaign, after all now we have much more fluff and books then we had when RW started. But both scenarios and Times of War also were and are the same sandbox you want, because they are universal. MP allows all the sides to participate from the start whereas RW were building momentum - first SC and Khorne, than the Sylvaneth and  Nurgle, followed by grots and orruks and so on. You certainly have all the possibilities for forging your own stories in either campaigns, especially because MP is only starting and will be too a global historical campaign

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Menkeroth said:

You are saying it in such a way as if you think it's a bad thing, but why? creating the narrative of all your own is the best such a hobby can give people. And of course, you feel your FEC does not belong quite right to the events of RW, after all RW presented specific forces. But then the places of the events remain and are a sandbox too. MP is broader because now all the forces and alliances fight in the campaign, after all now we have much more fluff and books then we had when RW started. But both scenarios and Times of War also were and are the same sandbox you want, because they are universal. MP allows all the sides to participate from the start whereas RW were building momentum - first SC and Khorne, than the Sylvaneth and  Nurgle, followed by grots and orruks and so on. You certainly have all the possibilities for forging your own stories in either campaigns, especially because MP is only starting and will be too a global historical campaign

We're going to have to disagree on this, sorry. Malign Portents offers an immersive sandbox for everyone. Realmgate Wars offers a detailed and compelling story that's more satisfying and immersive if you have an army that can represent those found in the story. I'm not saying one is better than the other, I'm saying they're different. I do think Malign Portents will more easily allow anyone and everyone to feel fully connected to the story because of the way it's structured and presented, but which approach people enjoy more is a personal and subjective thing. I'm not going to say that you're wrong for enjoying Realmgate Wars more - that would be silly.

And yes, creating your own narrative is great, but I don't buy narrative supplements so that I can ignore half the content that's irrelevant to my army and then do the work myself. I buy narrative supplements to immerse myself in the world and story that GW have created. If I want to do my own creative thing I'll go elsewhere.

[Menkeroth]

46 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

Malign Portents offers an immersive sandbox for everyone. Realmgate Wars offers a detailed and compelling story that's more satisfying and immersive if you have an army that can represent those found in the story. I'm not saying one is better than the other, I'm saying they're different.

With all respect, I disagree, because they are not that different as it might seem. Why? because if you take all the RW books / stories, you will see that it's a huge sandbox covering several Realms. After all, they are all campaigns, which narration is a history now - likewise with the Season of War and Seeds of Hope, for instance. MP no doubt will be considered a series of historic events once the campaign is over. RW indeed is a bit more specific, but on the other hand it's written that with its beginning lots of other forces joined the fray. After all, GW always says that what they present is a frame for your own imagination. 

50 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

I do think Malign Portents will more easily allow anyone and everyone to feel fully connected to the story because of the way it's structured and presented, but which approach people enjoy more is a personal and subjective thing

That's true and hardly anyone can argue that. But that is because MP has already given place for everyone whereas RW were doing it in stages. I understand those who were put off because it's only SCE and Chaos, but with each book more and more forces entered the fray, so now it's more of a broad frame to insert also your stories into, because not only SC and Chaos were fighting those wars.

52 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

I'm not going to say that you're wrong for enjoying Realmgate Wars more - that would be silly.

Likewise, but I was not saying this, I like all the GW narration at this point, and am excited by the Death-centered MP no less - finally Death gets some love, even if lazy damn GW could not issue a separate mini for prince Vhordrai. Lazy ******.

53 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

And yes, creating your own narrative is great, but I don't buy narrative supplements so that I can ignore half the content that's irrelevant to my army and then do the work myself.

Why do you think so? it's not so bad you imagine. Narrative supplements are both historical stories and frames for your stories at the same time. They are meant to inspire you no less than to immerse yourself in the current plot, because everything will be a part of the AoS setting. 

55 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

I buy narrative supplements to immerse myself in the world and story that GW have created. If I want to do my own creative thing I'll go elsewhere.

Me too, but again, they don't contradict each other, and certainly don't need to interfere with each other in this sense. GW always states they want to inspire you to do your own thing in their settings by what they create, it's normal. Your Anvilgard - an amazing collection, by the way - only proves it, because you've taken what already exists and now are creating your own feats and stories of your city host. It's exactly what GW wants.

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, Menkeroth said:

With all respect, I disagree, because they are not that different as it might seem. Why? because if you take all the RW books / stories, you will see that it's a huge sandbox covering several Realms. After all, they are all campaigns, which narration is a history now - likewise with the Season of War and Seeds of Hope, for instance. MP no doubt will be considered a series of historic events once the campaign is over. RW indeed is a bit more specific, but on the other hand it's written that with its beginning lots of other forces joined the fray. After all, GW always says that what they present is a frame for your own imagination. 

That's true and hardly anyone can argue that. But that is because MP has already given place for everyone whereas RW were doing it in stages. I understand those who were put off because it's only SCE and Chaos, but with each book more and more forces entered the fray, so now it's more of a broad frame to insert also your stories into, because not only SC and Chaos were fighting those wars.

Likewise, but I was not saying this, I like all the GW narration at this point, and am excited by the Death-centered MP no less - finally Death gets some love, even if lazy damn GW could not issue a separate mini for prince Vhordrai. Lazy ******.

Why do you think so? it's not so bad you imagine. Narrative supplements are both historical stories and frames for your stories at the same time. They are meant to inspire you no less than to immerse yourself in the current plot, because everything will be a part of the AoS setting. 

Me too, but again, they don't contradict each other, and certainly don't need to interfere with each other in this sense. GW always states they want to inspire you to do your own thing in their settings by what they create, it's normal. Your Anvilgard - an amazing collection, by the way - only proves it, because you've taken what already exists and now are creating your own feats and stories of your city host. It's exactly what GW wants.

Well, I started thinking about my responses to this, but I'd really just be repeating what I've already said. I think the Malign Portents narrative and toolbox are better structured to appeal to and engage the imaginations of a much larger cross section of players. The Realmgate Wars feels niche and less ambitious by comparison, despite being solid stuff and running to hundreds more pages. I think (with zero hard evidence) that MP is going to be the runaway success that RW wasn't. You're not going to change the way I feel about that, but I'd be very interested to read others' take on it to see which of us has the more widely held preference.

[hellalugosi]

i think MP has stronger legs than RW. as much as i loved RW, the modular gameplay of MP is a lot more accessible. You can slot it into any single game you play without much fuss and have it work well. the interactivity seperate it from your standard narrative campaign book, which i believe is what RW is. RW more or less just gives us neat scenarios and times of war. MP in a much smaller size offers a complete change to gameplay and a slew of support no matter what force you play and what game type you play. 

I like RW a lot, but i 100% believe most of the narrative and art  and army support from the books could have either been included in battletomes or in their very own website like MP. GW has learned how to hype up and keep people interested in MP because they didnt just drop an almost 100 buck book out and wait to see how it does. they got us a cheap nice book, supported by an accessible model buy in and a website full of information and narrative.

all in all im salty the stormhost sections from RW didnt return in the SCE battletome lol

[Killax]

Yeah as a fan of the Stratagems and Command Points of 40K I'm really happy with Malign Portents. I still have to pick up the card pack but I am 100% certain it will add a nice additional dimension for this years army plans and general local scene that likes to play in campaign like settings.

What I really like the most about Malign Portents is that the story is very clear and not too much things are crossing each other. I guess this is truely the big advantage of just looking at it from a Grand Allegiance perspective in general and have stories to follow from individual characters online too.

I am really looking forward to what more GW has in store for this, I wonder if we're going to be in MP this whole year and if GW will return more of the older scenery pieces also, I'd love that personally even if it was just an online GW exclusive. 

[Rogue Explorator]

I think it is worth to wait until Malign Portents has run its full course before we compare it to Realmgate Wars.

 

After all it has just started and is supposed to run for quite some time, I would rather have seen the whole thing before I decide how the two measure up to each other.

[someone2040]

I don't get the comparison anyway. They're 2 very different beasts.

Realmgate Wars was more about telling the story, and giving you battleplans and army ideas to re-create those historical battles.  It's a narrative supplement first and foremost.

Malign Portents on the other hand is more like a gaming supplement than narrative. It gives you all these cool extra rules you can use to spice up your games if you so choose. And while it has some narrative in there, it's a far cry from being a narrative book like the Realmgate Wars was.

I don't really think they're comparable products. You know, that old Apples and Oranges thing.

[MacDuff]

I don't know if Malign Portents is worth it because I haven't picked it up yet. But I'm sure enjoying all the MP short stories I'm getting on the site for FREE.

[Chikout]

The malign portents website has been updated with the campaign info. Are you going to choose the drake, the eye or the skull?

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Chikout said:

The malign portents website has been updated with the campaign info. Are you going to choose the drake, the eye or the skull?

I've taken a look at the dilemma and the 3 options - they all seem very vague to me. I don't really understand what I'm fighting for or voting for. I can't even begin to guess how the winning choice might influence what happens next week. Am I missing something?

[Riluo]

I am confused as to how you pick one of the three options and what each one stands for. What I'm I missing/overlooking

 

[Killax]

10 hours ago, someone2040 said:

I don't get the comparison anyway. They're 2 very different beasts.

Realmgate Wars was more about telling the story, and giving you battleplans and army ideas to re-create those historical battles.  It's a narrative supplement first and foremost.

Malign Portents on the other hand is more like a gaming supplement than narrative. It gives you all these cool extra rules you can use to spice up your games if you so choose. And while it has some narrative in there, it's a far cry from being a narrative book like the Realmgate Wars was.

I don't really think they're comparable products. You know, that old Apples and Oranges thing.

I'd say they are very much compairable but each of these campaign content rulebooks is indeed fleshed out in a completely different manner. This is good also because it indeed means that everybody who likes particular aspects of campaigns really can pick and choose how they want to.

- Like you said, Realmgate Wars was the narrative historical battle for Age of Sigmar. Containing rules for Battalions, Warscrolls and all to match with that narrative.
- Firestorm was another narrative battle season for Age of Sigmar. Containing rules for Allegiances, Battalions and all to match with that narrative. One thing I think Firestorm improved AoS upon is give a map. The first time we've seen this where this made a good impact on the campaign and in addition to that there was more added to be used in the core rules system so the narrative immersion was complete.
- Malign Portents is another narrative battle season for Age of Sigmar. Containing rules for Heralds and largely focusses on a sub-game that is essentially akin to Command Points from Warhammer 40.000. Giving optinions to influence the game as the battle progresses. Like Firestorm Games Workshop provided a map again to make the immersion more and more complete. In addition to that we see several scenarios again that match this narrative and basically allow you to play it our.

So if anything they arn't apples and oranges, they are a product that gruadually evolves into a better one because of the feedback Games Workshop recieved from the other campaign books. Many felt that Firestorm's alteration to Allegiances wasn't really appropriate to use outside of the campaign so GW even responded in excluding it to Grand Allegainces. However the Firestorm content was used in 2017 and it's pretty much now said and done.

When I browse through my Malign Portents book I see a lot of the great aspects of the Firestorm designs remain and basically also see that GW's design team now wanted to focus on an impact that is less directly tied to anyone's Allegiance in particular. We also see this in GW's Community post that includes ALL Allegiances as being part of Malign Portents. Where before one reason as to why Firestorm wasn't that popular was likely because it did not include ALL Allegiances, it focused on much less. 

I see no difference in all these campaign books however, there is narrative that can be played, there is a design aspect that is highlighted for that narrative. A TLDR version would remain:
- Realmgate Wars gave acces to Warscrolls and Battalions that where used for that campaign and wern't used for all events.
- Firestorm gave acces to Allegiances and Battalions that where used for that campaign and wern't used for all events.
- Malign Portents gives acces to Heralds and the "Portent deck system" that will be used for that campaign and isn't likely to be used for all events.

My guess also remains that Slaanesh will escape, either as part of MP or it's own new campaign, that will likely again include a deck system that will be used for that campaign and isn't likely to be used for all events. It's a cycle that is very consistent for all these additional products.

I like the additional products because I enjoy adding more rules to the core system. Because this way you get inspired to do something new. However that new stuff isn't always available to all events. 

34 minutes ago, Chikout said:

The malign portents website has been updated with the campaign info. Are you going to choose the drake, the eye or the skull?

 Skull offcourse!

[Killax]

39 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

I've taken a look at the dilemma and the 3 options - they all seem very vague to me. I don't really understand what I'm fighting for or voting for. I can't even begin to guess how the winning choice might influence what happens next week. Am I missing something?

 

26 minutes ago, Riluo said:

I am confused as to how you pick one of the three options and what each one stands for. What I'm I missing/overlooking

 

Have you guys followed the campaign narrative a little or do you have experience with how Games Workshop usually works out their online/promoted campaigns?

What it basically allows you to do is enter votes to where the narrative of this campaign will lead into. Every story has a beginning and end and it's up to the voters to decide where this narrative will be going. The Malign Portents book and online stories are basically the start and prelude of the battles to come. When the battles are played and points are entered you decide the outcome.

From the MP wesbite itself:

Offcourse GW will not explicitly state where the story is going at this point because well, there is no reason to spoil a campaign that litterly just started today. 

Star(drake): You basically want to make use of the energies that are set loose by the effects the movements of Nagash in Shyish have. The book allows you to explore this context deeper but as the website states it basically allows you to set the focus on the story for this particular event within MP. In a way it allows the setting to go more sci-fi. 

Eye: You basically want to use these events to your advantage, I see a lot of votes going for this one and logically soo because it will allow GW to explore the stories more of the character involvements. Plots, twists and backstabbing. In a way it allows the setting to go more political fantasy. 

Skull: Lastly you basically want to focus on the battles that thake place, the grim darkness and basically the absolute urge for destruction that was also commonly found in WFB. In a way it allows the setting to go more grim-dark. For me personally the vote will go that route because it fits my Khorne army's narrative the best.

Hope that helped a little. All the content of MP's website is a lot to cover in one post, but if you look into the narrative you can see why these three paths are given. The only thing that might be a bit difficult to comprehend is that it is indeed competely narrative based and assumes you have read into it a little. Or basically followed the MP website weekly. I don't know all the stories for example but did follow the ones for Chaos and Death, by large because those are the two army narratives I would like to explore next/boost.
 

[Chikout]

42 minutes ago, Riluo said:

I am confused as to how you pick one of the three options and what each one stands for. What I'm I missing/overlooking

 

You earn points by playing games or painting stuff. You can use these forms to record games played at home.

You then register your results in a participating store. One warscroll painted or one game win let’s you put one vote towards your chosen choice. 

Each week there will be a new dilemna with 3 possible actions you can take. 

This weeks dilemna is

Each time you get a point throughout the campaign you can choose to put it towards one of three choices; Drake, skull or eye. These choices will represent different things each week. 

This week the drake choice is 

FOLLOW THE FALLING STAR

The stars themselves are the key. You use powerful spells or shamanic rites to manipulate these celestial bodies to your will.

Trusting in fate is something order might do.

The eye choice is

SEIZE THE OPPORTUNITY

Even an ill wind can fill your sails. Whilst hope is replaced with paranoia and superstition, you make the most of the growing madness. 

This feels like a chaos or destruction choice for me. 

The skull choice is

DESTROY THE NAYSAYERS

How dare these stargazing fools spread dire rumours? You are not afraid of the darkness. Exile these bothersome prophets, or send their secrets to the grave.

This feels like a choice death might make. Trying to paper over the cracks and maintain the status quo suits them best.

The theme of Malign portents is omens and prophecy so the choices are deliberately a little vague. I imagine that things will crystallise and become more clear as the campaign progresses. 

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, Killax said:

Star(drake): You basically want to make use of the energies that are set loose by the effects the movements of Nagash in Shyish have. The book allows you to explore this context deeper but as the website states it basically allows you to set the focus on the story for this particular event within MP. In a way it allows the setting to go more sci-fi. 

Eye: You basically want to use these events to your advantage, I see a lot of votes going for this one and logically soo because it will allow GW to explore the stories more of the character involvements. Plots, twists and backstabbing. In a way it allows the setting to go more political fantasy. 

Skull: Lastly you basically want to focus on the battles that thake place, the grim darkness and basically the absolute urge for destruction that was also commonly found in WFB. In a way it allows the setting to go more grim-dark. For me personally the vote will go that route because it fits my Khorne army's narrative the best.

 

I think you're reading a lot into those vague little snippets. I understand your interpretation, and your interpretation is valid, but it's still just your personal interpretation. There's nothing in the snippets of text that rules out your interpretation, but there's also nothing there that explicitly supports it. I could come up with several completely different but equally plausible interpretations. And that's the problem - for this to be a meaningful choice that I care about, there needs to be at least some indication of what effect my choice will have. That's what's missing. I'm not asking for a reveal of anything that's coming up, but there should be some kind of hint of the general direction of travel that each choice represents to guide my decision. The choices are clearly different, but I have no way to judge which choice I should make or why. I might as well roll a D3.

 

"The stars themselves are the key. You use powerful spells or shamanic rights to manipulate these celestial bodies to your will."

Ok, but why would I want to manipulate these celestial bodies to my will? What does that do? What am I hoping to achieve by doing that?

 

"Even an ill wind can fill your sails. Whilst hope is replaced by paranoia and superstition, you make the most of the growing madness."

What does 'making the most of the growing madness' actually mean? Does it mean taking advantage of the distraction to dominate the realms and expand my own power base (an 'evil' choice)?  Does it mean making the best of a bad situation to try and achieve something positive out of it (a 'good' choice)? How can I decide how I want to influence the story if I can't even tell if what I'm choosing is good or evil?

 

"How dare these stargazing fools spread dire rumours? You are not afraid of the darkness. Exile these bothersome prophets, or send their secrets to the grave."

Isn't the whole point of the Malign Portents narrative and gameplay tools that we should be making use of prophets and portents? What would be my reason for voting for something that seems to go against the whole spirit of the campaign? What outcome would I hope to create by doing this?

 

These are supposed to be dilemmas, but it's not a dilemma of I'm not able to weigh the pros and cons of each option. It's a wild stab in the dark from a position of zero knowledge. Like I said, I might as well just roll a D3 - it makes as much sense as any other method of choosing at this point.

[Killax]

7 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

I think you're reading a lot into those vague little snippets. I understand your interpretation, and your interpretation is valid, but it's still just your personal interpretation. There's nothing in the snippets of text that rules out your interpretation, but there's also nothing there that explicitly supports it. I could come up with several completely different but equally plausible interpretations. And that's the problem - for this to be a meaningful choice that I care about, there needs to be at least some indication of what effect my choice will have. That's what's missing. I'm not asking for a reveal of anything that's coming up, but there should be some kind of hint of the general direction of travel that each choice represents to guide my decision. The choices are clearly different, but I have no way to judge which choice I should make or why. I might as well roll a D3.

"The stars themselves are the key. You use powerful spells or shamanic rights to manipulate these celestial bodies to your will."

Ok, but why would I want to manipulate these celestial bodies to my will? What does that do? What am I hoping to achieve by doing that?

 

"Even an ill wind can fill your sails. Whilst hope is replaced by paranoia and superstition, you make the most of the growing madness."

What does 'making the most of the growing madness' actually mean? Does it mean taking advantage of the distraction to dominate the realms and expand my own power base (an 'evil' choice)?  Does it mean making the best of a bad situation to try and achieve something positive out of it (a 'good' choice)? How can I decide how I want to influence the story if I can't even tell if what I'm choosing is good or evil?

 

"How dare these stargazing fools spread dire rumours? You are not afraid of the darkness. Exile these bothersome prophets, or send their secrets to the grave."

Isn't the whole point of the Malign Portents narrative and gameplay tools that we should be making use of prophets and portents? What would be my reason for voting for something that seems to go against the whole spirit of the campaign? What outcome would I hope to create by doing this?

These are supposed to be dilemmas, but it's not a dilemma of I'm not able to weigh the pros and cons of each option. It's a wild stab in the dark from a position of zero knowledge. Like I said, I might as well just roll a D3 - it makes as much sense as any other method of choosing at this point.

Yeah the whole point of the campaign is to read into vague snippets. This is why we look at the signs, we see this reflected in the use of the Malign Portents deck and Portents point. The story is set up in such a way that you can decide where it will go. We also see this reflected in the 'Malign Portents deck', you obtain points and can choose where to follow up with next. It's all designed with this narrative.

As for the Star, Eye and Skull, the archievements that come out of that for your army is really tied to the narrative you want to play it into. What I dissagree with is that anything in particular is directly linked to any Grand Allegiance or any sub-Allegiance. It can even be said that for these three the three Legions of Nagash all follow a different goal. 
Legion of Sacrement for example would be much more tied to the Stars in this case. Tzeentch and Stormcast could follow that parton too. 
Legion of Blood is much more character based and thus tied to the Eye. Nurgle and Daugters of Khaine could follow that patron too.
Where both Legion of Night and Grand Host of Nagash seem to be set on utter destruction. Khorne and Ironjawz could follow that patron too. 

What it all means is that you choose, you don't know the pros and cons, it isn't a hard choice to make and not like any political vote. You pick one of the three portents to follow this month and next month you can choose for another one. If you can't choose and want to roll a D3 then that's an option too.