Jump to content

Age of Sigmar: Second Edition


Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Gotrek said:

I'm assuming it because there has been ZERO indication that you choose spells from your home realm, so why would I entertain that thought? Yes, the concepts of both choosing your lore and getting a second lore randomly assigned are not mutually exclusive, but it is really, really, dumb. 

I don't think it's dumb at all.  Being able to choose from a list of Realm spells will give a boost to those factions without a spell-lore of their own.  There may be a bonus to casting if fighting in your own Realm, which would offset the fact that your opponent gets their own realm-lore as well as yours.  If you wish you can play one or the other without problem as they are separate rules.  Neither concept necessarily favours one side or the other.  

Whether or not it is in the new edition, the idea is not dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I just hope it isn't the case of a pre game roll that determinates, if we play in my opponent or my own realm.

Quote


If you honestly cant tell the difference between a unit being DEAD and being out of position i do not have high hopes for this exchange...

1) MSU (multiple small units) will drastically reduce the efficiency of banishment. Who cares if 1 of your 4 identical units gets moved (except of course if they were guarding an objective)

2) you are capable of killing and/or unbinding the wizard. Its not like youre helpless. Especially if you're order and can get the new stormcast wizard

 

And if your unbinds are limited, or opponents can cast it outside of the range you can unbind with ally, and your army happens to be msu, but with few units banishment becomes an instant win. Being able to eliminate 400 or more pts, of an opponent per turn with little to no way to counter it, is wrong. And while I understand that a 120 strong vulkit zerker list won't worry about having 2-3 units teleported to the back, it is not the case for all armies.

 

Did other people also feel that the sea elf write up was great? In depth on strategy and unit interaction, with cool tricks and forshadowing of how stuff will work with new core game mechanics. GW did a good jobe with that one.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is dumb, is having random spells... Random effects, sure, as part of the unique characteristics of the realm, but random spells?

Picture a wizard of Hyish spending a lifetime perfecting the ability to harness the magics of the realm and utilise them in the form of the spell Banishment... Then little Billy no-beard from Ghyran shows up for a day and is blasting the same spell off without a second thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye, as Gotrek says, it doesn't look like you get to pick your spells from a realm too, just your artefacts. We went through all this a few pages back when I asked the question previously.

Basically, Banishment is a fairly potent spell, in certain situations. Lets run through where it would be very useful, and then we'll run through the cons.

Banishment

1. If you're Legions of Nagash and Disciples of Tzeentch, and you take the Umbral Spell Portal. Scary! Or is it? 

For one turn, yes. Endless Spells are just that..  endless. Once you've cast Umbral Spell Portal, that's it, it's on the board. Additionally, you have to set up the first portal within 12" of the caster, and then the second one wholly within 18" of that. If you want to cast through it, you need to set it up within 1" of your caster on the turn you summon it. Banishment only has a 12" range, measured from the portal. Just go around the threat range. If it's been put on an objective, it's a bit more irritating, as you'll need to send 2-3 individual units to capture it for the game, but on the flipside you're going to have all your opponent's casters stood around the spellportal spamming magic. That is a very vulnerable basket in which to put all your valued eggs. Send a Purple Sun through for epic bants, if you can get the cast off. If a unit of Brutes charged 3 Necromancers stood round a portal, that's goodnight sweetheart. If your opponent is playing to defend the portal, they're not playing the scenario, and you're still just as likely to have a chance.

2. Building your entire army around a Spell Portal/Banishment combo.

...Is a silly idea. There is a one in six chance of getting the realm with Banishment each game. If you turn up to games nights wanting everyone to play your army in that realm only, people are going to think you're a bit poo.

In my opinion Banishment is as situationally useful as many other spells. It can be very useful at that moment in the game fighting on an objective in the closing turns and you need to move it for the win, but it can be countered fairly easily, and there are better spells to use for many armies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Aelfric said:

I don't think it's dumb at all.  Being able to choose from a list of Realm spells will give a boost to those factions without a spell-lore of their own.  There may be a bonus to casting if fighting in your own Realm, which would offset the fact that your opponent gets their own realm-lore as well as yours.  If you wish you can play one or the other without problem as they are separate rules.  Neither concept necessarily favours one side or the other.  

Whether or not it is in the new edition, the idea is not dumb.

The thing is, for the most part Battletome armies are so much better at casting and...everything else that they'll be able to make better use of the new options than the armies that didn't have options to begin with. +1 not Non-BT armies, +1.5 for BT armies.

Then who benefits the most is always going to be lopsided. Casting bonuses vs. Additional spell options  comes down to the armies. For example, the legions of sacrament battalion list doesn't really get much out of a casting bonus but benefits MASSIVELY from having even more spells to cast. Same with Nagash.

One side getting massively more out of the realm bonus is why the realm bonuses are problematic. Making them even more top-heavy just makes the problem worse.

99% of the time this won't matter, pick-up matched play games give you enough time to agree on which realms would be the most fair for the armies in play. For tournaments it would be almost constant feel-badsies. 'Rolled up Aqshy against Kharadron, what a waste of time!' "Got Nagash in the Hysh round, half my army finished the game 6" away from my table edge." People generally have problem when they feel like they lost to random army bonuses rather than their opponent. And  if you get rid of all the randomness it just becomes tedious book-keeping. So you know the whole tournament is gonna be in Hysh you have to build every list around mitigating banishment. If every game is in Ulgu you have to build your list around Umbral Spellportal one way or another, if the realms change every game that's super annoying to keep track of and you have to build your list to not have anything that can be screwed over by the realm bonuses. Specifically for multi-round competitive tournaments I don't think the realm rules are worth the hassle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AlphaKennyThing said:

If it's been put on an objective, it's a bit more irritating, as you'll need to send 2-3 individual units to capture it for the game, but on the flipside you're going to have all your opponent's casters stood around the spellportal spamming magi

What if your whole army consists of 4-6 units, and even fewer at less then 2000pts?

 

3 minutes ago, AlphaKennyThing said:

Send a Purple Sun through for epic bants, if you can get the cast off

True, if your army actually does have casters, and he has to be fast enough to actually get to the portal. There aren't always only two objectives per game.

 

5 minutes ago, AlphaKennyThing said:

In my opinion Banishment is as situationally useful as many other spells.

I agree with that. Against an army with 100-120 models, with casters and good board control, banishment is situational. Teleporting a unit off an objective last turn of a game, or even making your opponent stack more units per objective, means banhisment can work even without the spell being actually cast, Opponents will always have to play as if it was succesfully cast, the same way one has to play assuming the opponent will get turns back to back. And here some armies also are able to deal with it easier, while others get demolished if it happens to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Gotrek said:

If you honestly cant tell the difference between a unit being DEAD and being out of position i do not have high hopes for this exchange...

1) MSU (multiple small units) will drastically reduce the efficiency of banishment. Who cares if 1 of your 4 identical units gets moved (except of course if they were guarding an objective)

2) you are capable of killing and/or unbinding the wizard. Its not like youre helpless. Especially if you're order and can get the new stormcast wizard

 

If you honestly think that a 5 man unit of paladins or blight kings on your back board edge ISN'T as good as dead, you really need to read their warscrolls better.

1) MSU only helps you if your army has good, cheap MSU options. A 5 man unit of Retributors is still 220pts gone out the window. Same with any other expensive singular unit with mediocre speed. This also completely discounts the fact that the nature of Sigmar heavily lends itself to NON-msu play with the way army buffs tend to work.

2) You are also capable of tabling them, that doesn't mean you're going to be able to do it. Your opponent will be doing everything they can to stop you from stopping them. Tell me, without one of the 2 dispel scroll abilities in the game, how on earth are you going to stop a +5 Arkhan cast from going off? Not everybody gets a stormcast wizard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, blueshirtman said:

What if your whole army consists of 4-6 units, and even fewer at less then 2000pts?

True, if your army actually does have casters, and he has to be fast enough to actually get to the portal. There aren't always only two objectives per game.

Aye, there is no doubting it, going into a game you're going to have to pray hard that you're not up against a list with Umbral Spell Portal in the realm with banishment, as you'll be in for a tough fight. Good thing is, you'll have access to Banishment too if you take an ally. I thought of you actually when I saw a picture yesterday, so I've stuck it below in an attempt to raise your morale!

20180610_123203.jpg.cff841dd9fe78f11259593ca75af101c.jpg

Basically, possible to keep the theme quite nicely.

So yes, if you play an opponent with strong magic that takes a Spell Portal AND you play in the realm with Banishment, your game is going to be an uphill struggle from the off.

In other realms against other armies, it'll be more in your favour, so it should be a level playing field in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bellfree said:

The thing is, for the most part Battletome armies are so much better at casting and...everything else that they'll be able to make better use of the new options than the armies that didn't have options to begin with. +1 not Non-BT armies, +1.5 for BT armies.

Then who benefits the most is always going to be lopsided. Casting bonuses vs. Additional spell options  comes down to the armies. For example, the legions of sacrament battalion list doesn't really get much out of a casting bonus but benefits MASSIVELY from having even more spells to cast. Same with Nagash.

One side getting massively more out of the realm bonus is why the realm bonuses are problematic. Making them even more top-heavy just makes the problem worse.

99% of the time this won't matter, pick-up matched play games give you enough time to agree on which realms would be the most fair for the armies in play. For tournaments it would be almost constant feel-badsies. 'Rolled up Aqshy against Kharadron, what a waste of time!' "Got Nagash in the Hysh round, half my army finished the game 6" away from my table edge." People generally have problem when they feel like they lost to random army bonuses rather than their opponent. And  if you get rid of all the randomness it just becomes tedious book-keeping. So you know the whole tournament is gonna be in Hysh you have to build every list around mitigating banishment. If every game is in Ulgu you have to build your list around Umbral Spellportal one way or another, if the realms change every game that's super annoying to keep track of and you have to build your list to not have anything that can be screwed over by the realm bonuses. Specifically for multi-round competitive tournaments I don't think the realm rules are worth the hassle.

Although I have yet to play in a tournament (other than a local small one)I do understand the concerns ( and there is cause for them), especially with endless spells.  But I was talking about a list of spells for each realm rather than the endless spells.  A list of realm-specific spells would give each army more choice, but I would say that increasing your choice from one to two is a greater boost than an increase from two to three.  Also, if a wizard's warscroll says they can cast one spell per turn, then increasing the choice does not increase the number of spells they can cast.  And if an army already has good spells, they are still more likely to cast those rather than any others.  It also adds flavour and depth to each army.

As far as Endless spells are concerned, they are in the Malign Sorcery supplement rather than in the core rules, as far as I'm aware, and we don't know if they are matched or narrative based.  Also, as a supplement, it would become a choice for inclusion and not mandatory.  There seems to be a rise in the number of narrative tournaments, so it may be an option that some will embrace and others won't, and that just means a wider choice and wider appeal for everyone.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bellfree said:

If you honestly think that a 5 man unit of paladins or blight kings on your back board edge ISN'T as good as dead, you really need to read their warscrolls better.

 

I have four words that solves that problem (for stormcast)   

Pennant of the Stormbringer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Skabnoze said:

My understanding is that you pick a realm for your army and that determines your artifacts, but the realm magic that is available is based on the realm where the battlefield is located.  

That's what I thought was going on also. Though I am also fine with spells being based on army realm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AlphaKennyThing said:

In other realms against other armies, it'll be more in your favour, so it should be a level playing field in the end.

Which of the realms do you think favors low count armies?  

 

2 hours ago, Aelfric said:

Also, if a wizard's warscroll says they can cast one spell per turn, then increasing the choice does not increase the number of spells they can cast.

But isn't the problem here, that some armies either run more then 1-2 casters, or have casters that can cast more spells then one per turn, or both at the same time? I mean yes techniclly we can imagine a game where an X points gobbo army with 1 shamans fights an legion army of the same size that has 1 necromancer, but I am getting a gut feeling that it does not happen that often.

 

4 hours ago, Bellfree said:

1) MSU only helps you if your army has good, cheap MSU options. A 5 man unit of Retributors is still 220pts gone out the window. Same with any other expensive singular unit with mediocre speed. This also completely discounts the fact that the nature of Sigmar heavily lends itself to NON-msu play with the way army buffs tend to work.

Very true, plus some battalions don't even leave you enough points to buy an msu unit of any kind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ReynakZhen said:

I have four words that solves that problem (for stormcast)   

Pennant of the Stormbringer

You mean, Pennant of the pay 140 points to use an ability 1 turn and be basically useless the rest of the game? 

Yeah, it's a great solution. Bring a 140 points hero to counter that trick once a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's wait until the spell rules come out before we start pointing fingers at things that are broken, eh? :)

Banishment looks fine. If you don't want a specific unit to be banished, then don't walk into range of it. 12'' range is incredibly short - Meaning the caster would have to actively run at you to ever have a chance of using it* - and what happens to scary out-of-position casters? That's right, they get run down and/or shot off the board.

*Not counting the portal shenanigans, but we don't know how widely that will be able to be used yet, tournament rulings, etc. The portal would be the problem here, not banishment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blueshirtman said:

Which of the realms do you think favors low count armies?  

There aren't any, but nor are there any that favour high model count armies, either. That's all going to be down to the scenario you're playing. All the while GW are using model count for holding objectives, certain factions are going to find things harder.

Ghur's chance of double combats would be great for BCR, and the extra rend on long range weapons in Aqshy will make the Huskard more pewpew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DanielFM said:

You mean, Pennant of the pay 140 points to use an ability 1 turn and be basically useless the rest of the game? 

Yeah, it's a great solution. Bring a 140 points hero to counter that trick once a game.

Knight-Vexillor is hardly useless, allowing things like Fulminators to reroll charges? you can consider that useless all you want, it has won me several battles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mayple said:

Let's wait until the spell rules come out before we start pointing fingers at things that are broken, eh? :)

Banishment looks fine. If you don't want a specific unit to be banished, then don't walk into range of it. 12'' range is incredibly short - Meaning the caster would have to actively run at you to ever have a chance of using it* - and what happens to scary out-of-position casters? That's right, they get run down and/or shot off the board.

*Not counting the portal shenanigans, but we don't know how widely that will be able to be used yet, tournament rulings, etc. The portal would be the problem here, not banishment. 

Against clever opponent, the "don't walk within 12" of it" is enough to make the spell really good. You can after all have it on Vampire lord on zombie dragon etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AlphaKennyThing said:

Ghur's chance of double combats would be great for BCR, and the extra rend on long range weapons in Aqshy will make the Huskard more pewpew.

Cool. I thought that the aquashy thing wouldn't work on snowball, because it isn't a real range attack. Good to know it works

 

1 hour ago, Mayple said:

- Meaning the caster would have to actively run at you to ever have a chance of using it* - and what happens to scary out-of-position casters?

Lets say one objective has nagash sitting on it, and the rest of the undead army sits on the other. You kind of a have to decide on which objective to push. I hope that with the mystic shield nerf, charging nagash isn't as ineffective as it was in the past. I don't know the math on it, so am not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

Against clever opponent, the "don't walk within 12" of it" is enough to make the spell really good. You can after all have it on Vampire lord on zombie dragon etc. 

I honestly cannot think of an instance where I would want my VLoZD to use banishment. He wants to be in combat, that's why he exists. Hell, combat is the only way he can heal or deal damage.

Secondly, remember it's magic then movement so unless you are on the receiving end of a double turn the wizard will have to move within 12" of you giving you a chance to either run or kill it before the wizard can even try to cast the spell. 

6 hours ago, Bellfree said:

If you honestly think that a 5 man unit of paladins or blight kings on your back board edge ISN'T as good as dead, you really need to read their warscrolls better.

1) MSU only helps you if your army has good, cheap MSU options. A 5 man unit of Retributors is still 220pts gone out the window. Same with any other expensive singular unit with mediocre speed. This also completely discounts the fact that the nature of Sigmar heavily lends itself to NON-msu play with the way army buffs tend to work.

2) You are also capable of tabling them, that doesn't mean you're going to be able to do it. Your opponent will be doing everything they can to stop you from stopping them. Tell me, without one of the 2 dispel scroll abilities in the game, how on earth are you going to stop a +5 Arkhan cast from going off? Not everybody gets a stormcast wizard.

1) lightning chariot and suddenly it's just a 1 turn delay before your paladin are back in the thick of it. 

2) You kill him. Arkhan is squishy and can't heal outside of casting vile transference. You have judicators, stardrake, and the ballista to kill at ranged and the fulminators or retributors to kill in combat.

6 hours ago, blueshirtman said:

What if your whole army consists of 4-6 units, and even fewer at less then 2000pts?

 

True, if your army actually does have casters, and he has to be fast enough to actually get to the portal. There aren't always only two objectives per game.

 

I agree with that. Against an army with 100-120 models, with casters and good board control, banishment is situational. Teleporting a unit off an objective last turn of a game, or even making your opponent stack more units per objective, means banhisment can work even without the spell being actually cast, Opponents will always have to play as if it was succesfully cast, the same way one has to play assuming the opponent will get turns back to back. And here some armies also are able to deal with it easier, while others get demolished if it happens to them.

We get it. You play beastclaw. One point of note is that model count isn't what matters, unit count is what matters. Those 120 vulkites or skeletons are still only 3 units.

7 hours ago, Aelfric said:

I don't think it's dumb at all.  Being able to choose from a list of Realm spells will give a boost to those factions without a spell-lore of their own.  There may be a bonus to casting if fighting in your own Realm, which would offset the fact that your opponent gets their own realm-lore as well as yours.  If you wish you can play one or the other without problem as they are separate rules.  Neither concept necessarily favours one side or the other.  

Whether or not it is in the new edition, the idea is not dumb.

Yes it is, here's why:  wizards get bolt, shield, warscrolls spell, choice of 6 battletome spells, choice of 7  home realm spells, AND 7 more spells for the realm they're fighting in. That many decisions to make will lead to choice paralysis and require entirely too much book keeping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ReynakZhen said:

Knight-Vexillor is hardly useless, allowing things like Fulminators to reroll charges? you can consider that useless all you want, it has won me several battles.

The Vexillor is extremely slow compared to Fulminators, and the aura only reaches 12. There are ways to use it effectively, but most of the time you will have to restrain the Fulminators movement so they don't get outside of that aura. Plus you can get that reroll for a single command point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gotrek said:

We get it. You play beastclaw. One point of note is that model count isn't what matters, unit count is what matters. Those 120 vulkites or skeletons are still only 3 units.

Its 4 units, from what I have seen most slyer lists their vulkits in 20-30 man sized squads so 120 would be 4 units, plus heros and riggers or some sort of ally to dispel stuff.  And yes I do play beastclaws, but I said while it hurts and army with 4-5 units really hard, it hurts everything else too. You won't see stuff like paladins, or any other slower elite units in lists, if there is a chance someone will "kill" them with one spell.

Also as I mentioned it before, the spell doesn't even have to be cast to affect the game. Suddenly planting an anvil on on objective no longer works. So either you have to double the number of such units, or anvil units fall out of favor, unless they are really cheap or really fast. But even really fast won't help you if your opponent kicks you off an objective in the last turn of the game. In fact vs tough strong casters late game banish is more of a problem then turn 1-2. Because in the later turns your unbind dudes maybe dead, your "scroll" maybe used up. So there maybe no one there to stop the spell from being cast. Add to this a possible a double turn, and you a very uninteractive game play.

And even if all of this happens in random games, when you randomly roll a realm, this may end up with people droping the realm rules, same as they did with terrain rules etc And I don't want people to remove stuff from the game. Specially when the non banish stuff looks cool, and no where near comperable in power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

Against clever opponent, the "don't walk within 12" of it" is enough to make the spell really good. You can after all have it on Vampire lord on zombie dragon etc. 

I'll rephrase//expand for clarity: Don't walk within 12" of it unless you're able to charge it. I'd refer to the rule-of-thumb when fighting Tzeentch, which is often (but of course, not always) - "Stop first movement just outside of spell range, rush straight at them in the following turn - worst case scenario they shoot you with spells for one turn if they get a double" -- Which takes advantage of the limitations that comes with spellcasting; It only happens in the hero phase, which means (normally) no movement before they start blasting, meaning you know -exactly- where the line is. Stand outside of the line. This is standard strategy versus spell-heavy armies; in this case, we're worried about a specific spell (Do they pick these new spells the way they currently pick extra spells? I.E; Do they declare "This mage here has banishment" ? In which case, that's doubly easy to deal with) 

Just in case I used a lot of words but failed to get it across: 
Don't walk within 12 of a Banisher (Trademarked terminology, whoop!) unless you're able to get right up in their face. 

It's a good spell, sure, but far from the broken nuclear bomb that it has been made out to be. The old balewind would have made this a bit more scary, but still not unavoidable. Not counting spell failure or unbinding, which adds to the "Eh" factor. 

45 minutes ago, blueshirtman said:

Lets say one objective has nagash sitting on it, and the rest of the undead army sits on the other. You kind of a have to decide on which objective to push. I hope that with the mystic shield nerf, charging nagash isn't as ineffective as it was in the past. I don't know the math on it, so am not sure.

That's actually a very interesting thing to bring up! Me and a buddy ran an experiment two weeks ago to see what kind of stuff Nagash could feasibly survive in combat - and we found that, underwhelmingly, he's not all that tanky versus the more traditional methods of damage: In this case, a 40-rat blob of buffed spear-wielding clanrats. 2 attacks each, 3+ (+1 to hit from lord of war trait) ,3+, no rend, 1 damage. Got 60ish attacks, landed 20something wounds, he saved 9-11ish of them with all of his saves, which almost killed him. A second, un-buffed unit finished him off. 

On the flipside, he's considered very tanky versus more heavy hitting, or mortal wound stuff; but volume of attacks really gets him down.

So yeah, in the scenario you described, I'd definitely chalk up Nagash as out of position and I would charge a capable combat unit at him without a second thought. He prefer to sit right next to his big bad flying bodyguards (who can mulch entire 40-man units in one go, if you were curious. Battleshock counting) 

To jump ahead to the next comparison: A lord of change is equally vulnerable if out of position ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is very good to hear. I have have had some really bad expiriance with +2 re-roll 1s nagash floating on an objective, and am probablly not the only one.

IMO one of the main strenghts of AoS was that no matter what nothing was unkillable in the game. Or at least till nagash and stardrakes started being played. Being able to kill everything adds a lot to the game. Not only is there fewer auto lose situations, but makes the game more "dangerous" to play. Few things are worse then a game, where you play soliter or your so tough that you just don't care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...