Age of Sigmar: Second Edition

[Jeff Cope]

Apologies if I missed it, but with First Edition GW made available copies of the 4 page rules via White Dwarf and a few other places.  Has there been any word if they’ll do the same with the 12 page core rules?

i know They’re available for download...

[gnaleinad]

Just finish reading the new Age of Sigmar main book of background information.

Kind of disappointing how the Greenskinz, Gitmob Grots, Moonclan Grots, Spiderfang Grots, Gutbusters, Man-eaters, Firebellies, Troggoths and Aleguzzler Gargants were briefly mentioned. Nothing seems to be looking up for us.

[Infeston]

31 minutes ago, gnaleinad said:

Just finish reading the new Age of Sigmar main book of background information.

Kind of disappointing how the Greenskinz, Gitmob Grots, Moonclan Grots, Spiderfang Grots, Gutbusters, Man-eaters, Firebellies, Troggoths and Aleguzzler Gargants were briefly mentioned. Nothing seems to be looking up for us.

Jeah. At the moment I am also questioning a bit if the rumored Moonclan release will ever happen. 

At the moment Soul Wars feels for me like: Look at all these factions fighting for souls and they all have abilities which have something to do with souls. Sigmar wants get these SOULS, because he needs them for the reforging of the Stormcast and Nagash is pissed, because Sigmar steals his SOULS and wants to claim them for himself. Also Chaos wants to claim those SOULS or corrupt people, because otherwise they would join the ranks of Sigmar or Death. 

Did we forget someone? Oh. Jeah.... Destruction! Jeah. They join the fight, because they like bashing things and we don't need a bigger motive for them to be around. We at GW think Destruction doesn't need an underlying motivation for this expansion or any future expansion, because the only reason they live is, because they want to fight. So we don't have a reason to flesh things out for Destruction.

I mean I get that this a big part of Destruction that they always want to fight and seek for battles. But sometimes I would also wish for more backround story or some other motivations for fighting. Why can't Destruction also have a reason to collect souls?

Maybe some Grots invented some ritual to collect all those souls and transform them into WAAAAGH! energy. Or maybe they try to collect as many souls as they can so that they can manifest Gorkamorka again to lead the biggest WAAAAGH! ever. 

For me it feels that everyone has a bigger motive or role in this Soul War, except Destruction. We seem more like a nuisence in this battle, rather than serious threat. It more like "Go forth, my Stormcast! Fight Nagash's evil forces! Oh...what? Oh nooo... There are those Destruction guys again. They are so annoying! We should remove them from the battlefield and then focus on the more important battle..."

We are the "Team Rocket" of AoS. We sometimes appear to fight the good guys, but in the end we always get beaten up and run away!"

This is just my personal opinion, but I often feel this way as a Destruction player lore-wise. 

[ZaelART]

30 minutes ago, Infeston said:

Jeah. At the moment I am also questioning a bit if the rumored Moonclan release will ever happen. 

At the moment Soul Wars feels for me like: Look at all these factions fighting for souls and they all have abilities which have something to do with souls. Sigmar wants get these SOULS, because he needs them for the reforging of the Stormcast and Nagash is pissed, because Sigmar steals his SOULS and wants to claim them for himself. Also Chaos wants to claim those SOULS or corrupt people, because otherwise they would join the ranks of Sigmar or Death. 

Did we forget someone? Oh. Jeah.... Destruction! Jeah. They join the fight, because they like bashing things and we don't need a bigger motive for them to be around. We at GW think Destruction doesn't need an underlying motivation for this expansion or any future expansion, because the only reason they live is, because they want to fight. So we don't have a reason to flesh things out for Destruction.

I mean I get that this a big part of Destruction that they always want to fight and seek for battles. But sometimes I would also wish for more backround story or some other motivations for fighting. Why can't Destruction also have a reason to collect souls?

Maybe some Grots invented some ritual to collect all those souls and transform them into WAAAAGH! energy. Or maybe they try to collect as many souls as they can so that they can manifest Gorkamorka again to lead the biggest WAAAAGH! ever. 

For me it feels that everyone has a bigger motive or role in this Soul War, except Destruction. We seem more like a nuisence in this battle, rather than serious threat. It more like "Go forth, my Stormcast! Fight Nagash's evil forces! Oh...what? Oh nooo... There are those Destruction guys again. They are so annoying! We should remove them from the battlefield and then focus on the more important battle..."

We are the "Team Rocket" of AoS. We sometimes appear to fight the good guys, but in the end we always get beaten up and run away!"

This is just my personal opinion, but I often feel this way as a Destruction player lore-wise. 

Don't worry, I'm sure AoS 3.0 will be a new Stormcast Chamber vs Destruction... Something about taming nature I'm sure.

[Still-young]

2 hours ago, silentdeathz said:

 

From the SCE thread it's a conversion using sword from stardrake. 

Nothing new. 

 

 

 

I think it’s just a sword in the kit. It’s got a little anvil on the crossguard. 

[Stealth_Hobo]

2 minutes ago, ZaelART said:

Don't worry, I'm sure AoS 3.0 will be a new Stormcast Chamber vs Destruction... Something about taming nature I'm sure.

Yeah, only recently Death players had similar complaints: not enough story presence, poor competetive performance, no new models, etc. and look how things are right now. I'm sure Destruction will have its day and new models, you just have to be patient as GW won't release everything at once. 

[Nevvermore]

2 hours ago, Xasz said:

Seems like defaulting back to Grand Alliance allegiance stuff is gone.

Beforehand you could build your list with, like Slaves to Darkness allegiance and use their battleline-ifs while being able to choose from either the GA Chaos allegiance tables or their faction specific ones.

The part that explicitly allowed this seems to be gone. (or I'm just blind...)

Another new rule that several people in my area missed, is that only every fourth unit in your army can be allies. On top of the normal point limit... super awkward for rather elite armies.

Not the biggest fan of this one.

Matched play only uses the points limit from what I’ve heard, not the one in four from the core rules.

[Xasz]

4 minutes ago, Nevvermore said:

Matched play only uses the points limit from what I’ve heard, not the one in four from the core rules.

New GHB states this:

Quote

For example, a player playing a Battlehost game can spend up to 400 of their 2000 points on allied units. This is in addition to the restrictions that normally apply to taking allied units.

I haven't found anything that would overwrite or ignore the core rules.

[Infeston]

@Xasz I missed this too. You are right. I haven't read into the rules that much. But now I looked the rules up again and sadly have to confirm that you are correct.

Allies now have two restrictions:

 

1. You can only spend 200,400 and 500 points into allies

2. Only 1/4 of your units can be allies. 

 

This really sucks for BCR again, because I cannot include as many wizards as I wanted to before. So in most games I can only include 1 ally or two allies, where I could have included 3-5 allies before. Or I take multiple small units of Sabretusks instead. This is really sad. The more I find out about this edition, the more I dislike it.  I still like the Endless Spells, the new models and the narrative. But there are other things which I don't like.

It would have been cool if it was one way or another. But now that both kind of restrictions apply I don't really like it.

 

I think the point restrictions are enough. Damn. I was so happy that I could now ally in a fungoid-cave shaman and a Firebelly for my BCR army at 1000 points. But I propably won't be able to get two wizards into the army, because of the restrictions. 

[AlphaKennyThing]

45 minutes ago, Infeston said:

@Xasz I missed this too. You are right. I haven't read into the rules that much. But now I looked the rules up again and sadly have to confirm that you are correct.

Allies now have two restrictions:

 

1. You can only spend 200,400 and 500 points into allies

2. Only 1/4 of your units can be allies. 

 

This really sucks for BCR again, because I cannot include as many wizards as I wanted to before. So in most games I can only include 1 ally or two allies, where I could have included 3-5 allies before. Or I take multiple small units of Sabretusks instead. This is really sad. The more I find out about this edition, the more I dislike it.  I still like the Endless Spells, the new models and the narrative. But there are other things which I don't like.

It would have been cool if it was one way or another. But now that both kind of restrictions apply I don't really like it.

 

I think the point restrictions are enough. Damn. I was so happy that I could now ally in a fungoid-cave shaman and a Firebelly for my BCR army at 1000 points. But I propably won't be able to get two wizards into the army, because of the restrictions. 

See I interpreted it as a rule of thumb method of using allies for casual/narrative gaming. I thought the points method still stood exclusively for Matched Play, and read the restrictions part as the allies needing to be from the same Grand Alliance etc.

[Jamopower]

Got my first games in today as I participated in a small three game release tournament with my Slaanesh. The "moving objectives" were fun, but bit of luck dependant, lost the swifting objectives against Ironjawz just because the main objective happened to be the one where all the orcs were for four turns straight. Although the likelyhood for that is really low. 

Otherwise it's close to what it was with some little changes. Multiple command abilities and summoning were as good as I thought them to be (got 2-3 extra units per game and won one game as I got to use the double combat abilities four times on same turn) and magic was as meaningless as I thougt. Got about three spells through in three games with my two wizards and they had very little impact (although keeper hitting on re-rollable 2+ was fun).

[Enoby]

32 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

Got my first games in today as I participated in a small three game release tournament with my Slaanesh. The "moving objectives" were fun, but bit of luck dependant, lost the swifting objectives against Ironjawz just because the main objective happened to be the one where all the orcs were for four turns straight. Although the likelyhood for that is really low. 

Otherwise it's close to what it was with some little changes. Multiple command abilities and summoning were as good as I thought them to be (got 2-3 extra units per game and won one game as I got to use the double combat abilities four times on same turn) and magic was as meaningless as I thougt. Got about three spells through in three games with my two wizards and they had very little impact (although keeper hitting on re-rollable 2+ was fun).

That's very interesting, thanks for sharing. One thing you said really interested me, that being that you felt magic was useless. Was this due to the unbinding range being increased or another/combination of problems?

[Jamopower]

Well slaanesh doesn't have too good spells for starters. The basic spells are much worse than they used to be and they can be unbound from far. The sorcerer lord has a good spell, but not sure if it's 160 points good. Especially when it works less than half of the time. 

[bsharitt]

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/07/01/coming-soon-great-new-ways-to-get-started/

Looks like GW is going to keep doing their 3 tiered starter set thing, which I'm happy to see. Though now instead of buying all the wave 1 easy to build kits, I would have waited and got the little box set(would have saved me $20 if pricing sticks with First Strike). Tempest of Souls is would typically be a nice boost to starter set units, but given the weird sizes of some of the units(evocators and grimghast reapers) and the starter set options(glaivewraith stalker drummer), individual boxes might be better.

Finanlly for the old starter set, they're doing what I wish they'd do for all their Starter Set forces early on instead of when  they're discontinued and each side is now it's on start collecting.  Stormcast one is kind of meh, but the blood bound one looks nice if you want to do mortal khorne.

[michu]

Remember that it's now the only way to get Lord-Relictor. while I'm glad we still can buy this model I would prefer a single miniature realease - way cheaper(same goes for Korgorath).

[Enoby]

11 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

Well slaanesh doesn't have too good spells for starters. The basic spells are much worse than they used to be and they can be unbound from far. The sorcerer lord has a good spell, but not sure if it's 160 points good. Especially when it works less than half of the time. 

Ah right, that makes sense - I was wondering if you meant magic generally, or just for this army. Hopefully Slaanesh becomes more magically adept when the Battletome is released. Did you try endless spells?

[heywoah_twitch]

9 hours ago, Enoby said:

I get that, but a lot of players will choose realms as it suits them - so if they want damage, they'll choose the realm with the best damaging arifact, if they want protection, they'll choose the realm with the best protection and so on. 

I don't see the problem honestly. Just like how if you want spells you'll tend to choose tzeentch or nagash, or if you like melee combat you'll go ironjawz or daughter of khaine?

[pseudonyme]

43 minutes ago, bsharitt said:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/07/01/coming-soon-great-new-ways-to-get-started/

Looks like GW is going to keep doing their 3 tiered starter set thing, which I'm happy to see. Though now instead of buying all the wave 1 easy to build kits, I would have waited and got the little box set(would have saved me $20 if pricing sticks with First Strike). Tempest of Souls is would typically be a nice boost to starter set units, but given the weird sizes of some of the units(evocators and grimghast reapers) and the starter set options(glaivewraith stalker drummer), individual boxes might be better.

Finanlly for the old starter set, they're doing what I wish they'd do for all their Starter Set forces early on instead of when  they're discontinued and each side is now it's on start collecting.  Stormcast one is kind of meh, but the blood bound one looks nice if you want to do mortal khorne.

Bloody hell... if I had known...

[Aeryenn]

3 hours ago, Infeston said:

At the moment Soul Wars feels for me like: Look at all these factions fighting for souls and they all have abilities which have something to do with souls. Sigmar wants get these SOULS, because he needs them for the reforging of the Stormcast and Nagash is pissed, because Sigmar steals his SOULS and wants to claim them for himself. Also Chaos wants to claim those SOULS or corrupt people, because otherwise they would join the ranks of Sigmar or Death. 

Did we forget someone? Oh. Jeah.... Destruction! Jeah. They join the fight, because they like bashing things and we don't need a bigger motive for them to be around. We at GW think Destruction doesn't need an underlying motivation for this expansion or any future expansion, because the only reason they live is, because they want to fight. So we don't have a reason to flesh things out for Destruction.

I mean I get that this a big part of Destruction that they always want to fight and seek for battles. But sometimes I would also wish for more backround story or some other motivations for fighting. Why can't Destruction also have a reason to collect souls?

I just wonder what would be Destruction players' reaction if GW remade most of these smashin and bashin factions into you know, something smarter. It might be hard to give Destruction races more spotlight in the main story if they just want to fight for the reason of fighting. I admit I haven't read Ironjawz battletome but I did read Bonesplitterz and there was no starting point for big campaign. So in order for them to lead the story like Nagash does they need to be more developed, complicated. Or at least have a leader that knows what he's doing. It would be far more interesting then "and there was a great waaagh lead by Big Bad Badass Warboss". 

[Mr. White]

Deepkin should have been Destruction aelves. They're all about raiding and stealing...SOULS.

There would have been our Destruction Soul Wars connection.

[Infeston]

5 minutes ago, Aryann said:

I just wonder what would be Destruction players' reaction if GW remade most of these smashin and bashin factions into you know, something smarter. It might be hard to give Destruction races more spotlight in the main story if they just want to fight for the reason of fighting. I admit I haven't read Ironjawz battletome but I did read Bonesplitterz and there was no starting point for big campaign. So in order for them to lead the story like Nagash does they need to be more developed, complicated. Or at least have a leader that knows what he's doing. It would be far more interesting then "and there was a great waaagh lead by Big Bad Badass Warboss". 

I have to say that I also don't want Destruction tribes to become more civilized and "smarter" in a way that they become similar to aelves and humans. But I think there could be more interesting and "primal" backstories for Destruction rather than fighting.

I don't want them to become Warcraft Orcs, which often seem to be more human than the actual humans in the Warcraft universe. But on the other hand I don't want to listen the same story for every Destruction faction again and again.

I think the backstory for Beastclaw Raiders would be a good example, how you could design a good backstory in my opinion.

[Skabnoze]

Fluff wise they have positioned Gordrakk to be the guy that they can build a large-scale Destruction threat around.  Even the Beastclaw book mentions that the Ogors view Gordrakk as being the main ambassador of Gorkamorka.  If they want to make a major offensive from Destruction in the background I think it will be more similar to Archaon’s invasions rather than god-level plotting.

[Skabnoze]

9 minutes ago, Mr. White said:

Deepkin should have been Destruction aelves. They're all about raiding and stealing...SOULS.

There would have been our Destruction Soul Wars connection.

While I would not turn down flying sharks, Destruction doesn’t really raid they pillage.

[Aeryenn]

I would accept smart goblins faction. Like really smart. It can't be that hard to make a backstory for them. Those smart goblins could make all the planning for less intelligent orruk cousins. ☺️ 

[Kirjava13]

I could also accept an Orc- sorry, Orruk- of dangerous kunnin', unusually smart in a bestial sort of way. Or one given intelligence in some other way, like Azhag with the Crown of Nagash back in Warhammer Vintage, or the warboss with the severed heads that talked to him in the Malign Portents story. Or, hell, just use the opportunity to introduce smarter Orruks! They still want to fight... but they're dead krafty, like...

Meanwhile, Tempest of Souls looks like it might be worth a buy for me as long as I can find someone to flog the Stormcast to for £20- will bring my Grimghast Stalker unit to 12, give me 10 more Chainrasps and ensure that all I need to do is get 2 more of the scythe fellows (from ebay, perhaps?) to make an actual unit of 10 (still silly to have them in a unit of 4 and the Stalkers in a unit of 5...).