Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
AlphaKennyThing

Age of Sigmar: Second Edition

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Karol said:

descriptive rules aren't the problem, some games have them, some do not. But and am not sure if this is our inhertitance of being occupied for almost 200years, we read the rules very attentivly, and in any syntax of any language of any language a switch of word or postioning can have drastic influence on the rules. Am not sure if others feel it that way, but to me the rules sometimes feel, as if they were writen down by multiple different people.

I don't have any feelings about the spell models, but I wonder if they are going to be required to play. It wouldn't be good if a non model spell was less powerful then the one that makes you buy a model.

The description sections are very often an issue.  I have played many of the games GW has made since the late 80s and I have seen many of the issues that have cropped up, the FAQs that they made in many cases to deal with them, the changes made to fix those things in subsequent editions, and more recently the online discussions about those things.  It is very often that many people take some of the descriptive sections and try to apply them as rules in a number of cases.

 I appreciate what GW writers are often trying to do in many of these cases, but they would be better served by phrasing these sections in a mechanically concise fashion than worry about stuffing in some thematic phrases.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

I’d also suggest that this is confirmation that AoS was a success and they’re happy to invest more in it. Makes me consider how precarious the situation was for GWs fantasy arm when AoS dropped 

Very! WFB accounted for about 2-4% of worldwide sales towards its death (less than paints). 

 

AoS shot it up to nearly 20%...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cchalmers said:

Very! WFB accounted for about 2-4% of worldwide sales towards its death (less than paints). 

 

AoS shot it up to nearly 20%...

I saw info about 60% before 8th edition of 40k released

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FERRUMITE said:

I hope since FW have completely forgotten about their AoS lines, that GW actually have a paragraph about Tamurkhan and the Chaos Dwarfs as well as Fimir ahaha

I have spoken to the new FW AoS team and learned a bit more what their plans are and will include that in my event summary tomorrow. Suffice to say we may well see some changes!

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Imperial said:

I saw info about 60% before 8th edition of 40k released

Basically, ridiculous success all round ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kako said:

Is it me or those new big spells resemble representations of the Realms? You have Hysh + Ulgu with Morathi (waiting for Teclis), a big Beast spell of Ghur with the Orruk, Flaming Skull of Ashy with the new Stormcast Wizard, a big Shyish ball of Death and the last one could be... Ghyran? Chamon? 

WHfestLiveBlog-Post2-Sorceries3hcd.jpg

WHfestLiveBlog-Post2-Sorceries6vb.jpg

WHfestLiveBlog-Post2-Sorceries5feg.jpg

WHfestLiveBlog-Post2-Sorceries7qkv.jpg

WHfestLiveBlog-Post2-Sorceries4jvd.jpg

Ghyran please be a stikning pile of maggot goo! But due to it’s history it is probably something way more treehugger friendly.. 

I am so excited about this supplement. Anything that enhance the visual experience on the battlefield is much welcomed! Scenery and spell effects for the win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Soulsmith said:

I totally agree that I hope it won't be too similar to the 40K one. Personally I dislike it greatly as it gives a disadvantage to building an army from the models you like. 

 

These arguments of the "AoS is much better than 40K because...." - Fanboys are to tear my hair out.

Like you can bring all the AoS models you like not fearing any disadvantage to those focusung on the most point efficient ones....jesus, get some sanity.

It's like WHFB vs AoS all over again...started by AoS boys.

AoS 2nd Ed. will most certainly approximate the 40K rules, because it's the much more mature game. Period, notbhing to discuss.

Edited by Spiny Norman
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's almost as if there is a back and forth going on between those 2 rule sets! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You probably overestimate AoS' contributiont here but....yea.

Edited by Spiny Norman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they’re anything like the MP rules I think they’ll be fun. 

Dont really play 40K, not my thing, so could someone summarise what the 40K ones are like

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're pretty streamlined and not complicated at all. Just more tactical depth due to cover, various weapon types, stratagems, fall backs,  no shooting in combat (Jesus AoS really?!) and so on.

Think of them as a sophisticated AoS ruleset.

I'm actually liking the Warscrolls and the potential they have to bring individual tactical varity, so I personally would just like to upgrade the AoS Base rules above the "1 page of rules" nonsense but not making them too complicated. I like the idea to operate with warscrolls though.

I feel 2nd ed is just about all that, so my hopes are  high.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they'll be changing it too much to fantasy 40k mind you. 

The damage resolution has to be different in 40k because of the prevalence of multi damage weapons (mostly in the shooting phase). AoS doesn't have the "problem" of footsoldiers carrying the equivalent of a cannon in their bare hands that do D6 damage at -3 rend etc. The 40k rules had to be more complex because of that reason. 

Anyway, it's all guesswork how much AoS will steal from 40k ruleswise at this point. I'm sure there'll be more concrete stuff coming up later today.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, just noticed the khorne dragon....wow, what table can house that monstrosity? ?

Beautiful though, but as a game piece it seems rediculous huge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Chikout said:

I am extremely excited about the new edition. A new big book which brings all the lore together is exactly what people have been asking for. I hope they consulted @JReynolds.

The minis shown are astounding. The stormcast range just gets better and better over time and the nighthaunt are stunning. 

I usually avoid starter sets as I dislike one of the factions (khorne, Nurgle) but I definitely want to build both of these armies. 

I am looking forward to the rules and I have faith they will be great. I really thing the influence of Ben Johnson has helped Aos massively, so as long as he is still at the helm, I am confident we will have a very fun game next month. 

Best of all this should help the community to grow which will give us all more people to play against.

Exciting times.

I feel the same about the starter set, I really want to build both of these armies! Really glad I didn’t jump on the Deepkin train now. 

On the subject of the starter set, we’re assuming there is going to be one but I don’t think I’ve read/seen anything confirming it or what it will contain? 

I really hope we get an “Ultimate Age of Sigmar box starter set” with the hardback book in etc. Like they did with 40k last year.

Exciting times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spiny Norman said:

 

These arguments of the "AoS is much better than 40K because...." - Fanboys are to tear my hair out.

Like you can bring all the AoS models you like not fearing any disadvantage to those focusung on the most point efficient ones....jesus, get some sanity.

It's like WHFB vs AoS all over again...started by AoS boys.

AoS 2nd Ed. will most certainly approximate the 40K rules, because it's the much more mature game. Period, notbhing to discuss.

Wow. Really don't think my comment needed quite such a response, calm down.

My point is simply thus - the 40K system of arranging sections of your army into certain formations works, sure. But it has a knock on effect of making the player taking purely an army of units they find cool be at a disadvantage. I know this from personal experience.  This doesn't even mean my opponent is taking a net list of hyper competitive units. He simply has a lot of troops. But 8 points vs 3 is a massive difference.

I am only saying I hope AOS doesn't use too much of that system. I do not want players to feel they have to take an unnecessary amount of units they don't like to compete. 

The tone of your response is unwarranted, and if you have issues with me you would like to discuss, PM so that the discussion is not derailed.

Edited by Soulsmith
  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

I have spoken to the new FW AoS team and learned a bit more what their plans are and will include that in my event summary tomorrow. Suffice to say we may well see some changes!

Would really love to see Chaos Dwarfs brought into AoS as a properly-supported faction. They would fit the realm of fire and/or metal perfectly!

 

Hashut lives!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Soulsmith said:

unwarranted, and if you have issues with me you would like to discuss, PM so that the discussion is not derailed.

 

I'm deeply sorry, I was assuming by your questionable premises that you are just taking part in the mindless self indulgence mono themed discussion boards like to nuture. You should make your allegations more specific from the beginning to avoid such misunderstandings. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright buddy, you're being a bit of an eejit now, so maybe don't be?

Edited by Kirjava13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Percivael said:

I feel the same about the starter set, I really want to build both of these armies! Really glad I didn’t jump on the Deepkin train now. 

On the subject of the starter set, we’re assuming there is going to be one but I don’t think I’ve read/seen anything confirming it or what it will contain? 

I really hope we get an “Ultimate Age of Sigmar box starter set” with the hardback book in etc. Like they did with 40k last year.

Exciting times.

I would like to think we have decent odds :) Now AoS has cemented itself I think they may feel it makes financial sense to create different versions of a starter set. What models we will be getting that they have revealed I can't say for certain, but among the stormcast I imagine it would include one or two of the foot characters, the new liberator and judicator variant looking guys, and the bolt thrower. The Nighthaunt would probably be a good chunk of the small spirits, a unit of the cairn wraith looking fellows, and cavalry, with a couple characters or maybe just the mounted Knight of Shrouds.

Edited by Soulsmith
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Spiny Norman said:

There is no need to be insulting.

And there's no need to throw yourself into a thread like a stinkbomb either, but here we are.

  • Haha 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Soulsmith said:

I would like to think we have decent odds :) Now AoS has cemented itself I think they may feel it makes financial sense to create different versions of a starter set.

Yeah, I’m  sure we’ll get some more details in the coming days/weeks! ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Soulsmith said:

Wow. Really don't think my comment needed quite such a response, calm down.

My point is simply thus - the 40K system of arranging sections of your army into certain formations works, sure. But it has a knock on effect of making the player taking purely an army of units they find cool be at a disadvantage. I know this from personal experience.  This doesn't even mean my opponent is taking a net list of hyper competitive units. He simply has a lot of troops. But 8 points vs 3 is a massive difference.

I am only saying I hope AOS doesn't use too much of that system. I do not want players to feel they have to take an unnecessary amount of units they don't like to compete. 

The tone of your response is unwarranted, and if you have issues with me you would like to discuss, PM so that the discussion is not derailed.

That kind of system wont ever work anyway due to how costly even basic battleline units are compared to 40k. A 2k AoS list is barely a fraction of what a 2k 40k list is when you compare how many units you take so filling out say, a battalion or equivalent, in AoS would be next to impossible  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Arkiham said:

the only person with any idea of the intention of rules which arent clearly written is the writer. 

it literally takes 3 seconds to explain the intention of rules, it has been done in 40k so there is president, a short explanation can solve alot of FAQ questions before they even arise. 

Yep. Exactly!

That's why people should stop making up intentions and just follow the rules - either as published originally or as clarified/changed in a FAQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...