Age of Sigmar: Second Edition

[Jamopower]

3 minutes ago, daedalus81 said:

It's incredibly unlikely that we're going to single out spells some don't like.

If you're worried about banishment then don't take large units.

Invisibility was tweaked in many tournament comps for 40k. It's also a good example, what a single too powerful spell can do for a game.

[daedalus81]

1 minute ago, Jamopower said:

Invisibility was tweaked in many tournament comps for 40k.

Because the opponent had no agency when that spell happened in a system that allowed for crazy death stars.  You do have a choice what to put on the table for unit sizes, dispels, and maneuvering to keep out of range from that caster.  You also potentially have summons to bring back in and I'll bet there is a spell that teleports a unit back.

 

 

[Jamopower]

It might be that Banishment is not the problematic spell, there are 42 of them coming. That's the part I would be a bit wary. That's also one of the reasons I don't believe they will see much use out of friendly games.

[GeneralZero]

can someone summarize what was said in this podcast (as there is no subtitles). Thx in advance (and can be useful for all)

[VoodooChileIRL]

They mention in the Stormcast podcast a new Beasts of Chaos (I guess Brayherd) spell which we've apparently seen this week but I don't remember seeing any mention of it in the faction/rule articles to date. Did I miss it or should we expect Brayherd Faction Focus later today?

If anyone is wondering the spell seems to let you teleport an enemy hero. They mention using it to teleport a hero safely behind his unit ending up in front and getting attacked.

[Siorra]

Let us all take a moment to reflect on this Tzeentch change. They get a point for summoning for every spell cast, including enemy spells. Whilst poor old Seraphon only get them from holding back on casting spells. (Which in a strange way counters Tzeentch if they play each other).

This makes their main strength, casting spells, even stronger. Seems scary to come up against, and I am truly terrified.

EDIT: They will also not have to pay for horrors splitting, right? RIP.

[daedalus81]

1 minute ago, Siorra said:

Let us all take a moment to reflect on this Tzeentch change. They get a point for summoning for every spell cast, including enemy spells. Whilst poor old Seraphon only get them from holding back on casting spells. (Which in a strange way counters Tzeentch if they play each other).

This makes their main strength, casting spells, even stronger. Seems scary to come up against, and I am truly terrified.

That really depends how many points they get for each cast and how many points it is for a unit.  And Seraphon might get enough dispels off on choose to summon more, which reduces Tzeentch's ability to summon on both ends.

[MrZakalwe]

2 minutes ago, Siorra said:

Let us all take a moment to reflect on this Tzeentch change. They get a point for summoning for every spell cast, including enemy spells. Whilst poor old Seraphon only get them from holding back on casting spells. (Which in a strange way counters Tzeentch if they play each other).

This makes their main strength, casting spells, even stronger. Seems scary to come up against, and I am truly terrified.

EDIT: They will also not have to pay for horrors splitting, right? RIP.

We'll have to wait and see how much horrors cost after this. In the warhammer days when they auto split they were quite expensive (not worth it in fact). 

I am a little concerned about summoning though, I must admit. 

[S133arcanite]

It seems that every day, something terrifying happens...

 

That, or we are all being way to melodramatic???

 

 

 

 

Looks like the brayherd bros (TM) are getting a cool new spell that can pull people off objectives or in front of your trio of ghorgons

[Chikout]

5 minutes ago, GeneralZero said:

can someone summarize what was said in this podcast (as there is no subtitles). Thx in advance (and can be useful for all)

They talked about summoning. They said that Tzeentch get a point for each spell successfully cast in the game by either army. The said that khorne's bloodtithe table has been changed to summon units rather than give abilities. 

The bray shaman gets a spell that can move an enemy unit towards it. 

The lore talk was just a summary of the story so far 

[daedalus81]

1 minute ago, S133arcanite said:

That, or we are all being way to melodramatic???

 

^ that part.  ?

[Siorra]

2 minutes ago, Chikout said:

The said that khorne's bloodtithe table has been changed to summon units rather than give abilities. 

I thought he said you can choose either the buffs or summoning? So you get a choice from the pool.

[Ollie Grimwood]

1 hour ago, Jamopower said:

This is already bit far from the original context. Malign sorcery is an add-on content to the game, an expansion similar to malign portents or the Firestorm campaign. Now I understand that for many it is an interesting addition. However in a game where only the other party has wizards and they get additional bonus rules on top of their normal abilities, it is very similar to playing a scenario that has a universal -1 to hit for shooting due heavy raining between an Undead army and Wanderers. I would assume that the shooting analogue is a scenario that most people would consider quite unfair for the Wanderers.  But just like the scenario special rules, the Malign sorcery is optional content, so it can be left out in that kind of case and included when both players have their wizards.

For a knockabout game that’s fine and no change from how it’s always been. 

For serious Matched play however, wizards are available in one way or another for all factions, it’s up to players to build their Amries accordingly.  I’d be against suggestions to ban a section of the game based on a situation that comes down to player choice. One wouldnt arrive at a matchedplay tournament with one hero and expect them to alter Duality of Death because you put yourself at a disadvantage  

I’d also point out GW  has Firstorm allegiances at their events. 

[Jamopower]

 

1 minute ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

For a knockabout game that’s fine and no change from how it’s always been. 

For serious Matched play however, wizards are available in one way or another for all factions, it’s up to players to build their Amries accordingly.  I’d be against suggestions to ban a section of the game based on a situation that comes down to player choice. One wouldnt arrive at a matchedplay tournament with one hero and expect them to alter Duality of Death because you put yourself at a disadvantage  

I never said anything about serious matched play or tournaments. I said that in our games, where wizards are used seldomly, it would feel unfair to suggest playing with these rules if I'm the only one having a wizard. It just got exaggerated and out of the context. For a tournament, it's of course clear what you're expecting and you either go along with it, go knowing that you're getting some hard time, or don't go at all.

As a separate topic, more related to tournament gaming. I have to say that it's hard to see the reasoning for all of these summoning mechanisms (other than of course more sales). It's of course fun to have a reasonably restricted amount of summoning in a casual environment, but that can already be done. However it's hard to see how giving stuff free to already quite good armies such as Tzeentch, Seraphon, Nurgle or the Undead will work. Even if you get something minor like an unit of horrors for free over the time of the game, it is still free and will make the army better, and if this is compensated by raising the points costs, it just makes the summoning compulsory as you are otherwise in disadvantage due already paying the cost for the summoning. Same result happens, if it is compensated by giving everyone else better abilities or reducing the cost of their units due them not able to summon. For an army such as Slaanesh or Khorne, it won't be an issue, as they are already bit behind, so it won't matter so much if they get a freebie. However for an army such as Free peoples or Ironjawz it can get really problematic. 

[Deadkitten]

3 hours ago, GeneralZero said:

I don't agree. Magic is just a tool. And it can be fun and challenging to fight against magic with some other things. If you feel that bad, just tell your opponents that you'll grab a wizzard so he have a chance to prepare a counter strategy even without magic.

There's a difference between having a hammer and thinking everything looks like a nail and staring at a bunch of nails needing a hammer.  Having said that I'm definitely in the wait and see camp.  But I think it's reasonable to say that magic is getting a boost w 2nd ed.  Hopefully, the tools are there without getting into the magic arms race some editions/systems have required.

 

10 hours ago, Lemondish said:

As someone who is jumping in with 2e, I'd like to just share that I feel the faction focus articles and rules previews are very well done. You may feel like there's been very little information, but for me and others like me it's ALL new information. The faction focus articles in particular have been my favourites since they do a great job of summarising each faction, where they come from, a bit about how they play and how to be successful, and some new rules that seem neat (though I wouldn't know their impact). That's enough to get me hooked and I check back every day.

I fear that a deeper post with a boatload of information aimed at current players wouldn't be all that useful for me - a prospective new addict.  Longtime players may not like the lack of info, but you'll ultimately get every detail you want with the book's inevitable release. I, on the other hand, would have tuned out on the first complex rule breakdown post when it became clear I don't have the knowledge to gauge the effect of these changes. The way they present them now, with loads of build up and exposition, is perfect.

Just a noobs perspective. 

This is actually a great point.  MtG has a Timmy-Johnny-Spike psychometric that would go a long way in some of these discussions.  (Although sometimes I think GW looks at the player base and just sees a bunch of Timmys.)  Basically, not everything is supposed to appeal to you and just because it doesn't isn't evidence that GW messed up or missed the mark somehow.

 

 

1 hour ago, Lemondish said:

I would think that the time for that feedback isn't now. Provide feedback before anybody has even played a single game of 2e? Feedback on isolated pieces without seeing the whole picture seems... unhelpful at best. I'm sorry to say, but I'd be rather disinclined to listen at this point if I was GW. 

I'd say bookmark it, but this tendency to outright ban things before the game is even released and the impact is truly known seems pretty unhealthy. It comes off as folks are unwilling to give rule changes a fair shake. 

This stuff doesn't drop in a vacuum.  Some of it we can look at objectively and know how it plays out.  There are a lot of similarities in 40K.  No, it isn't a straight analog, but again, it isn't necessarily a stretch to predict some of the impact.  If you have limited gaming time, it's perfectly reasonable to say "you know what, that looks unfun.  Let's just skip it. "  There are going to be plenty of groups that will slug through the 2 dozen games necessary to gauge any particular thing it's fair shake.

 

6 hours ago, NurglesFirstChosen said:

 

That being said, some people’s views will always be negatively skewed no matter the evidence. 

I know there are definitely some naysayers but also remember that some of us have 20-25 years worth of evidence we're working from.  GW has a long way to go overwrite some of their past blunders.  I think they're on the right track though which is hopeful.  And I also have full confidence in the TOs as a bit of a safety valve.

[daedalus81]

3 minutes ago, Deadkitten said:

This stuff doesn't drop in a vacuum.  Some of it we can look at objectively and know how it plays out.  There are a lot of similarities in 40K.  No, it isn't a straight analog, but again, it isn't necessarily a stretch to predict some of the impact.  If you have limited gaming time, it's perfectly reasonable to say "you know what, that looks unfun.  Let's just skip it. "  There are going to be plenty of groups that will slug through the 2 dozen games necessary to gauge any particular thing it's fair shake.

Some think it looks unfun, because they don't want to make the necessary adjustments to account for it.  There are still scores of unknown spells and artifacts.  As well as mountains of point and scroll changes to process.

And all those spells and artifacts are equal opportunity.  They're not bound to one faction.

[Jamopower]

5 minutes ago, daedalus81 said:

Some think it looks unfun, because they don't want to make the necessary adjustments to account for it.  There are still scores of unknown spells and artifacts.  As well as mountains of point and scroll changes to process.

And all those spells and artifacts are equal opportunity.  They're not bound to one faction.

Someone said it very well some pages back. If an ability is such that it requires everyone to make changes and react to that to counter it, it is a strong indicator that the ability might be broken. Be it that it's available to both players. Especially in a wargame, where you can freely pick whatever fancies you, having abilities that require you to have option A and B in your army just to have a fun and fair game, it is troubling, even if it means that in the bottom line the games are pretty even after that. Especially if those option A and B are such that they are not available, or the availability is limited, for some armies. 

In other words, if ability is such, that it changes the game into a competition who can pull it trough first and it's not a core mechanism of the game, it is not perhaps a good for the game as whole. Now we don't know how it'll turn out, but the Banishment (or summoning) sure looks like that kind of ability.

[Chikout]

With the news about tzeentch summoning,  a Barack Nar army from Chamon starts to look better and better. Two navigators each with an artifact,  will be putting out 6 unbinds a turn  between them at +1. Once a battle it becomes four unbinds each. Put each of them in one of the cheaper ships and the enemy wizards will have nowhere to hide. As a nice bonus any other heroes you have will be able to Unbind too. 

 

[GeneralZero]

2 minutes ago, Chikout said:

Barack Nar army from Chamon

what/where is this list?

[Chikout]

2 minutes ago, GeneralZero said:

what/where is this list?

One of the kharadron Overlords sky ports is Barak Nar. It has three of special abilities. It gives every hero an extra unbind, so navigators get two. It gives +1 to Unbind and once a battle it gives everyone an extra unbind.There is a Ko artifact that adds an unbind. There is another artifact if your army comes from Chamon that gives you another unbind. The ships  which will be cheaper in aos2 will give your unbinders mobility and make them more durable.

[amysrevenge]

1 minute ago, Chikout said:

One of the kharadron Overlords sky ports is Barak Nar. It has three of special abilities. It gives every hero an extra unbind, so navigators get two. It gives +1 to Unbind and once a battle it gives everyone an extra unbind.There is a Ko artifact that adds an unbind. There is another artifact if your army comes from Chamon that gives you another unbind. The ships  which will be cheaper in aos2 will give your unbinders mobility and make them more durable.

I believe that artefact you mentioned also get an extra dice on your unbinds if you already have one (or two hahaha)....  3D6+1 is a pretty good unbind.

[Tittliewinks22]

Just now, amysrevenge said:

I believe that artefact you mentioned also get an extra dice on your unbinds if you already have one (or two hahaha)....  3D6+1 is a pretty good unbind.

FAQ'd to work exactly like the one they spoiled earlier.  No more 3d6.

5 minutes ago, Chikout said:

The ships  which will be cheaper in aos2 will give your unbinders mobility and make them more durable.

Can't unbind if you are in a ship...

[Chikout]

1 minute ago, amysrevenge said:

I believe that artefact you mentioned also get an extra dice on your unbinds if you already have one (or two hahaha)....  3D6+1 is a pretty good unbind.

Unfortunately that was changed in a FAQ.  Maybe a little too powerful.

[amysrevenge]

Booooooo (lol)

[Chikout]

2 minutes ago, Tittliewinks22 said:

FAQ'd to work exactly like the one they spoiled earlier.  No more 3d6.

Can't unbind if you are in a ship...

Yeah, that's true. Got a little carried away....