Realm of Battle Rules: What are your experiences?

[someone2040]

I think realmscapes are unlikely to become the norm in tournament games, and as a consequence, in matched play games. Of course, there'll be some people that run tournaments with them or their own home games, but I think for the most part they'll be ignored in the same way that Malign Portents tended to be.

At the end of the day, they're not strictly part of the core rules. And because there are some vastly broken ones in there, it suffers from the same fate as Firestorm where it's easier to ignore the entire thing than allow it. Unlike Firestorm, it's unlikely something that will be 'patched' to be made less broken.

 

That being said, I could easily see more themed events picking up a particular realm for the event. Ghur is one of those realms where I think it's not fair to expect people to bring a monster on the off chance they'll have to play in Ghur, but if the entire event is played in Ghur then it just becomes part of what you need to bring along to the event.

I think I would quite happily go to an event that was played in a particular realm. I think there's a little too much uncertainty for me going to an event where each round is in a different realm (even if specified before the event which realms).

[Rhellion]

On 7/12/2018 at 7:14 PM, Bellfree said:

I f***ing hope not.

I think you'll be disappointed then,

[Mephisto]

@Bellfree, you're my freakin' spirit animal. You have the chestnuts to be adamant about things I'd normally skirt around and I respect that.

I don't think competitive play and narrative are mutually exclusive. True "open play" may be. Open play is Vietnam. Nothing makes sense. You might as well be pushing your men around making army noises and then rolling dice to see how sweet he explosion was - you rolled a 6, it was way sweet. But assuming you care about a modicum of actual playing of a game, Realm Rules pose a series of opportunities and challenges. I won't go into that all. People have already hashed that back-and-forth out. 

What I will say is that Narrative Players probably aren't going to just "randomize them all the time." They'll likely have something in mind for their event or whatever. "Dudes, let's have a freakin' Ulgu fight next week!" Says Friend1. "Sweet, I've got some s**t I wanna do," says Friend2. This is fine. This is worthy. 

From a tournament perspective, it's cool if there are SOME preconceived realm scenarios that everyone has going into it. "Round 1, it screws over the shooting army. Round 2, charges are insane! Round 3, Etc!" You can build your lists and show up and deal to an extent but at some point it becomes THE WILL OF RANDOM dictating the battles and not your decisions. 

Meaningful decision - from list building, to paint choices, to battle tactics, and so on - is my mantra. Realm Traits eliminate meaningful decisions. Realm Spells have one decision... pick Banishment or, ya know, the Ulgu spell that gives an extra attack, or whatever. Realm Artefacts? We're cool. Have at it. I'd have done something other than realm artefacts like take that long of a list and just do 6 meaningful artefacts for each faction but I accept the way GW did it.

[Kirjava13]

I played in Ghyran on Friday. It made zero difference, except my opponent's Life Swarm brought back D6 wounds instead of D3. I still murdered all his Bestigor though.

[Nubl0]

After a few gamese and my buddies found they either had no impact or way too much. We probably won’t bother using them anymore, but the realm artifacts are quite nifty.  Honestly I’m more hoping for a big errata on who gets the first turn and a few other things highlighted at the 6n. 

[Requete]

I have noticed that while some people bring attention to potentially broken combos like "12 Longstrikes + Anvils of the Heldenhammer + CPs", other folks get bent out of shape about a random roll that limits shooting to 6 inches! 

Doesn't the very presence of random, nutty realm effects act as a disincentive to building cheesy 'spamstrosity' lists? I wonder if the same people who want to table you on turn 1 before you even get to play are the ones complaining that a random Realm effect could derail their perfectly-planned victory?

If the argument against Realm rules is that they mess up your ironclad scheme for victory, isn't that essentially admitting that "Matched play" is just "win at all costs play" with a polite name? Sorry to put so fine a point on it, but if you're just interested in crushing your opponent with no interference by randomness, I recommend Chess. Though you're not allowed to bring an army with 15 queens so maybe you're not interested?

[Dead Scribe]

I've noticed that narrative events that I've looked at are really nothing more than tournament events anyway only with a story around them, so if a tournament advertised well in advance that they were going to set their games in a NON RANDOM realm with the same rules NOT RANDOMLY GENERATED per round, I'd be more open to that so that it could be prepared against.

I'm more against randomly picking realms and then randomly rolling on those tables to see what effects each game has, because that really does nothing except ****** people over and neuter their listbuilding choices, which from a competitive standpoint I don't think is healthy as listbuilding is a big part of competitive play in the first place.

[mmimzie]

16 minutes ago, Requete said:

I have noticed that while some people bring attention to potentially broken combos like "12 Longstrikes + Anvils of the Heldenhammer + CPs", other folks get bent out of shape about a random roll that limits shooting to 6 inches! 

Doesn't the very presence of random, nutty realm effects act as a disincentive to building cheesy 'spamstrosity' lists? I wonder if the same people who want to table you on turn 1 before you even get to play are the ones complaining that a random Realm effect could derail their perfectly-planned victory?

If the argument against Realm rules is that they mess up your ironclad scheme for victory, isn't that essentially admitting that "Matched play" is just "win at all costs play" with a polite name? Sorry to put so fine a point on it, but if you're just interested in crushing your opponent with no interference by randomness, I recommend Chess. Though you're not allowed to bring an army with 15 queens so maybe you're not interested?

It's not cheesy if the whole point of your army is shooting like KO, who with the acceptance of realm rules can get completely matured or gently buffed depending on what realm you are in. 

 

I think I'd like a world where realm rules are pretty playable in tournaments. 

 

However, I just think they have too much of a potential impact. Where the realms you play in can be the difference in winning and losing. If instead the realms just made thing alittle easier or alittle harder for your army to deal with that would be more reasonable.  

[Kramer]

On 7/14/2018 at 10:17 AM, Bellfree said:

They're tedious random nonsense and I honestly don't really understand how they would be enjoyable even for narrative players.

You're comment is such tedious random negativity I honestly can't believe you actually enjoy the game. Just to put myself in the narrative corner, although that is selling myself and my gaming group short, what your describing there is a lack of empathy. How is it possible, if your genuine, that you can't understand how randomness in a narrative game would be fun? Or for a beer and pretzels game night? I don't like min maxing, ultra hard tournament style play... still i'm able to understand how others would enjoy it. 

So are you just exaggerating to make a point? An attitude which makes everything else you lose it's trustworthiness in my eyes. Or are you genuinly lacking in empathy? 

[Toddy]

While selecting random realm of battle rules for each game at a tournament probably does add too much random swing (or the potential for such), there's no reason to think that's how they have to be used.

Consider for instance the idea of a tournament where the rules pack states that all the games take place in Hysh, and always with say the 'Dazzling Glow' feature (extra -1 to hit targets in cover). The extra tweaks to the rules give generals not only extra tactical considerations during the battle, but in list building as well.

This sort of thing could keep the meta more dynamic, as people have to adapt to different conditions. No randomness required!

[Dead Scribe]

The problem with that is that those extra rules are not standard rules and ****** people over who have bought a collection to compete at the highest level, and are now at the mercy of optional elements.

I think tournaments should honestly always all have the same rules.  Otherwise we lose the context of discussing them when their rules are all different.

[Requete]

46 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

The problem with that is that those extra rules are not standard rules and ****** people over who have bought a collection to compete at the highest level, and are now at the mercy of optional elements.

I think tournaments should honestly always all have the same rules.  Otherwise we lose the context of discussing them when their rules are all different.

I'm not speaking from experience re: AoS, but I have two questions. One, is it a "wargame" or isn't it? Because most conflicts historically have been fought in less than ideal conditions, with one side or the other being favored. In fact, only the worst, stupidest generals would ever get into an "even fight". Everyone has realized for literally thousands of years that it would be dumb to offer battle unless you either have to, or have better than even odds. If AoS is a wargame, then I expect it to offer variable conditions, and I expect those conditions to be tougher for one side than the other.

If that's not the case, then don't pretend that it's a wargame. Sometimes the field is muddy. Mud is better for English longbowmen than it is for French knights. That's war.

Two, if you say you're competing "at the highest level", but a mere fog bank or thunderstorm is enough to get your forces routed from the field in ignominy, then how are you anywhere near "the highest level"? If the "world's strongest man" can't even open a jar of pickles because he has a hangnail, he's not the world's strongest man.

 

[Dead Scribe]

I'm not interested in trying to recreate a war.  I'm interested in a competitive game that offers a competitive experience between two people where the player that builds the better list and plays the better game wins through their own agency.  A game where a scenario robs a player of his agency by making his list not as good or by randomly harming or helping a side is not a very competitive experience.

The context we are discussing is tournament play.  If people like that kind of thing where they are trying to recreate a war, I think that's great.  Just not in tournaments.  Otherwise they aren't really tournaments in my opinion, they are events where the luckiest player is crowned the winner.  

[rokapoke]

My only experience with mainline “tournament play” was Adepticon 2018. The tournament pack was not released prior to the event. Each battleplan had a different manner of scoring objectives, much like the General’s Handbook Matched Play battleplans. So it would be possible to build a list that is optimized for some of the battleplans, but difficult to design your list to excel at all of them — hence the challenge. 

How are realm rules different?

[Diranic]

1 hour ago, Requete said:

I'm not speaking from experience re: AoS, but I have two questions. One, is it a "wargame" or isn't it? Because most conflicts historically have been fought in less than ideal conditions, with one side or the other being favored. In fact, only the worst, stupidest generals would ever get into an "even fight". Everyone has realized for literally thousands of years that it would be dumb to offer battle unless you either have to, or have better than even odds. If AoS is a wargame, then I expect it to offer variable conditions, and I expect those conditions to be tougher for one side than the other.

If that's not the case, then don't pretend that it's a wargame. Sometimes the field is muddy. Mud is better for English longbowmen than it is for French knights. That's war.

Real war isn't generally considered to be fun though. I know some people enjoy historically accurate recreations of warfare but this is a fantasy game with elves and dragons so expecting Age of Sigmar to become a authentic warfare experience seems odd, especially when plenty of other wargames already attempt that.

AoS is a wargame but the game part is pretty important, it needs to be fun. A lot of the realm rules seem really awesome but I totally understand where some people are coming from about a small number of them ( having watched a Kharadron player be stuck with 6" range, It didn't look like he had much fun).

I do really like the realm rules but I can totally understand why some people don't like certain ones or even the whole lot of them, people just come to the game for different reasons. Still not sure this is the right game for recreating historically accurate warfare though.

 

 

[Thostos]

  Taking a break this year from running tournaments and doing escallation and fluff events instead.Though next year,,either Jan or Feb I do plan to run and ITC and I will probably pick a Realm rule set for each scenario(3 rounds).I have done this kind of thing in the past using terrain warscrolls at each table and some of the previous realm effect rules..I leave it up to the players of the match itself to decide if they want to use them or not,,and have them rolloff if they are split on the decision.
 It usually works out fine as our hardcore players in the area dont seem to mind the additional rules but often would prefer not to use them as it adds time to the games played.
 

  

[angrycontra]

The argument I see often popping up in this thread is that "AoS is already rng, full of bullcrap combowombos, why do you now care about some realm rules?" or something like that. Well in my opinion, that is precisely the reason why extra layers of rng are not needed. I've played online tcg hearthstone quite a bit and that game is notorious of heavy rng creeping into the more competetive scene, and that excess rng has never been well received in that game. It's not fun losing game because odds were so heavily stacked against you. Like let's say I was playing duardin force in scorched earth (fyreslayers but with only 1-2 runesmiters) and we roll realm feature "you can't run" and let's assume my opponent has naturally fast army. I can basically just pick up my things and give up there because 4" moving across the board is pointless, or I literally just sit on my objectives doing nothing most of the game. Yeah, real fun.

The big issue with realm rules (and spells) is exactly what has already been said in this thread, that they sometimes do too much. In fact, let me "fix" some of the realm rules:

"You can't run" -> "-1 to all run and charge rolls"

"Missile weapon range max of 6" -> "reduce missile weapon range by 3" to a minimum of 6". If range is 6" or lower already, do not reduce range on that missile weapon."

"Extra rend on 12" or more" -> "re-roll wound rolls of 1 at 12" or more"

Banishment spell should be changed to: "Pick enemy unit within 8", move that enemy unit anywhere on the table more than 12" of the caster but wholly within 24" of the caster" (that's honestly how I read the ability first time.)

And so forth and so forth...

I do however like the idea of pre-planned tournament scenarios, where these realm rules have already been picked and players can prepare for them in advance. That is where the real tactical planning and army building mastery comes to play. But rolling dice to see whether you more likely win or lose scenario before it has  even begun is not good for the game.

[Kramer]

6 hours ago, Dead Scribe said:

I'm not interested in trying to recreate a war.  I'm interested in a competitive game that offers a competitive experience between two people where the player that builds the better list and plays the better game wins through their own agency.  A game where a scenario robs a player of his agency by making his list not as good or by randomly harming or helping a side is not a very competitive experience.

The context we are discussing is tournament play.  If people like that kind of thing where they are trying to recreate a war, I think that's great.  Just not in tournaments.  Otherwise they aren't really tournaments in my opinion, they are events where the luckiest player is crowned the winner.  

And yet you play a dice game ?

[Mephisto]

4 hours ago, angrycontra said:

I do however like the idea of pre-planned tournament scenarios, where these realm rules have already been picked and players can prepare for them in advance.

Same. I've ragged on realm traits / spells a bit already but I'd like to leave some positivity too. Realms are indeed thematic and on the rule of cool side of things. At the LGS, I play with adults so we just pick and agree on stuff. If a tournament pre-planned some big realm scape event like a sweet planar conquest campaign, I'd be cool with having that information upfront and enjoy myself even as a competitive player.

I think it's important they added rules because even if the rules are imbalanced realms are given weight by mechanics actually reinforcing the narrative. This is basic game design and in that respect, GW wasn't wrong to do it.

We can all split hairs over the tuning of the rules but it's an important step. It's just an extra thing to use if you want and a necessary step in reinforcing the setting in the actual gameplay. The AOS setting is a strength of this wargame over others afterall. 

 

[AaronWilson]

I think if a tournament was adamant on using the realm of battle rules, full disclosure of what realms you would be playing in would work best. It allows players to somewhat try and mitigate the RNG of the realms by knowing what tables will be rolled on, what Endless spells will be empowered & what command traits / spells will be available for the games. 

[Dead Scribe]

5 hours ago, Kramer said:

And yet you play a dice game ?

Every game played at the highest level today and for the past decade involve dice or card draws.  Its about how you mitigate the random nature of the game thats important.  Layers upon layers of random rules make that difficult and then all we have is a game where the winner was the one who rolled luckiest.  Thats not a competitive game in my opinion.

[Gaz Taylor]

+++ Mod Hat On +++

Everybody,

I'm not impressed with some of your reactions in this thread and the general negativity, so this is a poke to ask you to either come back to keeping the discussion constructive or not to post. TGA is a nice place for us all to enjoy our hobby and it's not like 'other' forums and I want to keep it that way.

If you dislike the rules (no matter what they are), can you please do one of the following...

• email AOSFAQ@gwplc.com with a constructive email with what you dislike
• use the Age of Sigmar Facebook page to leave feedback (https://www.facebook.com/GWWarhammerAgeofSigmar/). Again, please keep it constructive
• If you are able to go to an event at Warhammer World, Nottingham, please leave feedback at the end of the event.

Cheers

[Siegfried VII]

My opinion on the Realm of Battle rules and the realm of battle lores of Malign Sorcery is that they are not fit for tournament play. They have serious balance issues (many people have provided with enough examples on this in this topic already) and also make the battle last longer. From my experience in tournaments there are many people who attend but are not familiar with all scenarios or the enemy army rules etc. If suddenly such a person is dealt with an extra page of rules and also 6 extra spells the pregame will last forever and even then these players will may be left with negative emotions as one who have studied these rules will still have an edge. And I know that tournaments are competitive but they shouldn't chase away the players who like to compete but don't care to be super meta-game educated.

That said it is clearly written in the core rule: "After picking a battleplan to use, you can pick a Mortal Realm for..."

Therefore these rules are optional so in casual games both players must agree in order for them to be used. Regarding tournaments it will depend on the organizers. 

Personally unless I play at some point in some form of narrative event I won't be using these rules in my games and I certainly won't use them in the tournaments I'm an organizer for.

That's my two cents on the matter.

[NemoVonUtopia]

So far I have only played one game with realm rules with my chaps dwarves vs flesheaters in shyish. In that game the realm didn't really affect much other than letting his general heal by sacrificing ghouls and then regenerating them, the realmscape rule never triggered and the +1 to hit spell would have been good if I succeeded the casting roll. I was a bit unfair that death armies can take advantage of the rules more, but I felt like I had enough benefits as well to balance it a bit.

Overall I am conflicted about realms in general since I play a wide range of armies but I think the chance of getting something devastatingly bad is low enough and the chance of getting something beneficial will balance out in the long run. I also think that realm spells are important to armies without spell lores with the nerf of the generic spells. It would be nice to have my second brayshaman be able to do something useful if there is not endless spells around.

I am not a tournament player, but I agree that pre determining realms would probably be good. On the other hand, having the rules be random might be a way to encourage armies to be more balanced so they dont get ruined by extreme results, though not armies have the diversity to build balanced lists.

I know that I will be using the realms as much as my opponents will let me so I get a better opinion instead of ignoring them like I've done so far.

[Skabnoze]

On 7/14/2018 at 8:45 PM, Mephisto said:

You might as well be pushing your men around making army noises and then rolling dice to see how sweet he explosion was - you rolled a 6, it was way sweet. 

Wait a minute, this is not what we are doing?

Well, I refuse to stop making army noises!