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

The Scattering of AoS's Ruleset

Recommended Posts

On 11/27/2018 at 7:03 AM, chord said:

, just had a game last week where, we had a question we knew it was answered somewhere, but were like oh ****** it, just agree to whatever

The GW approach to rules and gaming all summed up nicely.

It's what lets GW 'get away with' their fairly shoddy rules production. I loves me some GW, but rules (writing, organization, presentation, consistency) have always been their weakest point.

Edited by Sleboda

Share this post


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

Oh heck yes... And consistent terminology across all abilities and effects.

And more distinct terms. Like I mentioned in my Flowchart thread, we have Commands Traits, Battle Traits, Command Abilities, Abilities, Allegiance Abilities, and two different used for Allegiance. (Not to mention Wounds and Mortal Wounds where one is not subsumed by the other.)

There had to be more sensible terms to use to keep these concepts distinct.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 

If GW really wanted/want to push the game in its own merits they need to do what most gaming franchises do and give you everything you need to play anyone without complication without all of the frills currently attached.

They don't want to. Their entire existence is based on selling a hobby. They took a stab at making pure game-only books a while back in 40K and it was a disaster.

They realize that they would be a much less successful business  if they didn't the the whole hobby together and tried to just sell rules with nothing creating investment/attachment through the models/hobby.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What even is the difference between the designer's commentary and the FAQ?  Why can't they just be consolidated into a single document?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm currently working on a personal project to collect all of the core rules into one word doc so as to be able to edit it as I go. This and also my army specific rules. Each section will still have book name and page number so if playing at a table and someone calls you out on a non-GW printed doc, you at least cited your sources. I plan on posting it in this convo at some point for everyone. Hopefully everyone can edit it visually to their liking. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

What even is the difference between the designer's commentary and the FAQ?  Why can't they just be consolidated into a single document?

FAQs/erratas are basically rules clarifications.  Designers commentary is more what the designers were thinking when they wrote a particular rule item so give you a better idea on how it should play.

3 hours ago, Riff_Raff_Rascal said:

I'm currently working on a personal project to collect all of the core rules into one word doc so as to be able to edit it as I go. This and also my army specific rules. Each section will still have book name and page number so if playing at a table and someone calls you out on a non-GW printed doc, you at least cited your sources. I plan on posting it in this convo at some point for everyone. Hopefully everyone can edit it visually to their liking. 

Really good idea, would suggest you stick to the freely available rules/FAQs for anything you post on here and leave gaps to let people fill in their own army details :)

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would really appreciate a rule compendium containing all rules needed to play a matched game. They could update this every year. GHB seems to be a good place for this. But i would also pay for another book containing only the needed rules.

Someone mentioned already the idea to include the digital version of this books if you buy the hardcover ones. I thought this myself very often. If this would be the case i wouldn`t have to cary this much stuff and could use some serach features to find the needed rules much faster.

My backpack get`s heavy with all the books that i have to take with me. Thankfully the FreeGuilds don`t have their own battletome, so i safe some grams there. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could always be worse - we could be playing 40k.  You think AoS has scattered rules?  40k is a ****ing nightmare.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mikethefish said:

It could always be worse - we could be playing 40k.  You think AoS has scattered rules?  40k is a ****ing nightmare.

Is it really? 

Every army currently has a codex with the exception of Genestealer Cults (who are next) and Sisters of Battle (who are after that and getting a full relaunch with plastic models and codex). Prior to that each army had rules within its respective Index with several others. Ontop of that is the Generals Handbook, which we now expect, which in part adds up the FAQ/Errata documents anyway as well as expanding on them.

After that there's the Core rules and then simply Community FAQ and Errata for core rules and codex and GHB. 

 

The only area of complication is that classic models and upgrades are now in the index not in the codex for some models. However that is basically a sort of optional layer that some clubs/events will use and some won't, so its by no means mandatory. Furthermore I'd wager its a bit like Warhammer Classic models in AoS - there as a feature, but likely won't be updated and will steadily fall further and further out of use as time passes.

 

 

 

That's a FAR cleaner situation. Each army even has its own tab on the GW website with a clear display of where the rules are. Many factions in AoS don't even have a link on the store page to where their rules are located (if they have any at all); unless they have a Battletome. 

 

 

No I'd say 40k is in a very strong position with clarity on where rules are. Or at least where the rules are located; the organising and lack of index issues are likely much the same, but you can easily work out what to get to play the game for each army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they dropped the stupid realmscape rules, that'd be dozens of totally worthless pages you wouldn't have to bother with anymore.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

Is it really? 

It is really, and I will tell you why.

I get what you are saying about the Codexes and that is great.  But here are a few additional points that you overlooked about the Index entries.  I, an Ork player, will use the new Ork codex as an example, but these issues span the entire game...

Firstly, I have my shiny new Codex in hand.  It's great.  But there are several units that did not make it into the actual Codex.  Does that mean that the options for those models are illegal to play?  Not at all.  It's perfectly acceptable to use older Index entries.

So essentially, I am looking at my brand new Ork Codex and not seeing all the options I can take.  Let's move on...

If I take a look at the brand new entry for Ork Kommandos, I notice a few things are different.  In previous editions, I used to be able to take heavy weapons for the unit (Burnas, Big Shootaz, etc).  These have been eliminated from the modern Dataslate (basically Warscroll, for those readers who don't speak 40k).  Presumably this was done because models for those options don't exist.  So, ok - that's fine.  Does that mean I can't take those options anymore?  No it does not.  GW  has stated that players are allowed to use the wargear and weapon options from the Index/older editions.  You are able to take the rules and points cost from the Codex entry, and use the weapon options (and appropriate points cost) from the Index to flesh them out.

So basically when looking at an actual modern Codex entry, I am not looking at all the options available.  I have to use multiple books just to get the rules and points costs for one single unit.  Add that to my prior point about using Index options not printed in the Ork codex, and you have one very convoluted set of rules.

And again, this problem is not limited to Orks, but applies to the whole game.  So, tell me again about how great a place 40k is for being clear and concise?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mikethefish

I think that with things like previous options in the Index only and old base sizes are things where GW is very lenient in their "ruling" because they are not in the competitive scene at all. So they don't ban you. Heck they don't enforce ANY rule in their game, they encourage open and narrative play and alternative modes and house rules and all that. 

I think its purely a PR element to soften the blow of "losing options" many of which might be older models or conversions. I think that going forward those index will end up like Classic models for Warhammer in AoS. Casually supported on the side right now, likely not to get rules revisions in the future and generally will  eventually be consigned to friendly/casual matches and won't be allowed at tournaments (which will generally filter down to people).

 

So the rules for the game are simple, its only older players who will even feel the "pressure" to use the index whilst newer players (to armies not just to the whole game) are more likely to just stick with the simple codex. 

 

You can even see this in how GW doesn't show the index up for sale on factions who have a codex and I'd fully expect the index to go away at some point.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mean to keep harping on your point - not meaning this as a personal attack or anything - but what you are saying, I am just not convinced.

I think your issue is that you are confusing the attitudes of players (local or otherwise), and what you THINK that GW is planning to do (maybe sorta someday), with the way the game actually is.

Is the Index going away?  At some point, hopefully.  Will it be this edition? Maybe?  They have said absolutely nothing on the subject, aside from reinforcing (multiple times) that Index stuff is allowed, even in Matched Play. Personally I don't think the Index will go away in 8th Edition.  But what I believe doesn't really matter.

The state of the game, currently, is that we have Codexes that do not reflect the army options available to players, new or old.  We have Codex entries that do not show everything a specific unit can do (not going to lie - I have a massive problem with this).  And we have a company who is unwilling to take a stand, and make a ruling about things like Index entries, base sizes, and unit options, essentially letting 40k 8th resemble the wild west of miniature gaming.

I MUCH prefer the AoS situation right now.  Sure there are old PDF armies still floating around, and the GHB is really necessary for some of the older Battletomes.  I play Ironjawz myself (what can I say, I am an Orruk/Ork fan), and am very used to relying on the GHB for a bunch of my personal army's special rules. But at least I can look at a Warscroll, and find out the actual rules of a particular unit.  At least there is a base size guide, and rules for using it in Matched Play.  

So yeah, I am not particularly swayed by your point that 40k is more clear and concise, with their army rules.

Edited by mikethefish
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2018 at 6:15 AM, Riff_Raff_Rascal said:

I'm currently working on a personal project to collect all of the core rules into one word doc so as to be able to edit it as I go. This and also my army specific rules. Each section will still have book name and page number so if playing at a table and someone calls you out on a non-GW printed doc, you at least cited your sources. I plan on posting it in this convo at some point for everyone. Hopefully everyone can edit it visually to their liking. 

Wouldn't this be illegal? To publish stuff that comes in paid books could be a copyright infrangment, is this not the case?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bradipo322 said:

Wouldn't this be illegal? To publish stuff that comes in paid books could be a copyright infrangment, is this not the case?

It's a grey area... It's probably not a good idea to upload it, but depending on where you live, copying text you've legally purchased for personal use should be fine.

Where I live it's ok to directly duplicate up to 10% of a book's text for research and reference purposes, i just can't show up to a warhammer store with those copied pages unless i also bring the original source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly GW has been more free with AOS content online; however some stuff is still print only. Heck you know hte best thing - ask GW direct, though its honestly the kind of question that likely is best asked higher up the chain than the general customer service staff - who might just give you a generic stock answer unless pressed/requested to ask further up the chain. 

 

Home use is one thing but distribution of material is often a whole other ballgame. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2018 at 5:55 PM, Bellfree said:

If they dropped the stupid realmscape rules, that'd be dozens of totally worthless pages you wouldn't have to bother with anymore.

Aw man not those. That's one of my favorite things about the new edition is better immersion that you're fighting in magic realms and your commanders are taking advantage of that in both tactics and arming themselves appropriately.

I know it's a somewhat divisive thing match-wise but I'm happy they're pushing what makes the Mortal Realms so special.

On the scattered rules subject. I'd like a Rulebook for matched play, Narrative book for narrative & open play with tons of lore and fluff ideas (call it the Realm Tome) and a Tourney book that condenses all the needed matched stuff like faqs and certain rule packs.

Each could have the core rules in the back (without the diagrams they can be condensed to 8 pages, though match might keep it's pics for eager newbies) and support that playstyle so someone focused in that direction just needs their army battletome, one of the three Rulebooks to set how serious the game is (casual, fluff fun or tourney serious) and one additional content book like the malign sorcery, skirmish and possible future ones like Warhammer Quest rpg battles or a Dreadfleet upgrade called Realmfleet that has airships, flying leviathans and skyships go from their own naval game to supporting the armies on land(or something comparable to land like shifting mercury landscapes or areas composed of fused spirits 😛 )

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bradipo322 Truly, I haven't considered that yet because my need for solid rules referencing has outweighed potential copyright shenanigans at this time. But I do plan on investigating further. In the end, I'd rather be able to share something like this with everyone rather than greedily keep it too myself. As some pointed out, we do have a better way to ask GW questions these days so I'll start there. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2018 at 9:15 PM, Riff_Raff_Rascal said:

I'm currently working on a personal project to collect all of the core rules into one word doc so as to be able to edit it as I go. This and also my army specific rules. Each section will still have book name and page number so if playing at a table and someone calls you out on a non-GW printed doc, you at least cited your sources. I plan on posting it in this convo at some point for everyone. Hopefully everyone can edit it visually to their liking. 

As an update, I'll describe what I have so far in terms of format. I have only tackled the actual core rules (the 20 pages or so) and condensed them to 12. I found a page or two from those rules that looked generic enough to make a simple watermark for my new document. I also acquired the true font(s) that GW uses in their books. Each page has three columns of text just like the books, approximately the same font size. Each section/topic will end with the page number and acronym  of the document that information is from so if information from multiple books gets on the same page of this document, you can look it up. Here's where it gets spicy. I've taken the few FAQs for the core rules and spliced them directly into their appropriate section highlighted in red. This is the true purpose of the condensed rules: to update them as we get more FAQs. The Q&A format of some of the rules clarifications is extremely tricky to incorporate into the document since its subjective to summarize it. Thats where I'd hope the community here would help out if I come to the point of publishing an alpha version.

The end result will be very unexciting visually. There's no pictures, only tables and bullet point lists in some cases. But it'll be something I can realistically carry as a hardcopy to the table with me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main rules should all be in one place; probably in the Generals Handbook. Keep them updated every year along with the updated point values. 

That said, I've never had an issue with the rules as they are right now. I usually have the Core Rules, Generals Handbook and my armies Battletome at hand. If any ambiguity comes up in our reading/interpretation of the rules on anything, we toss a coin or roll a dice and keep playing. We'll talk it over with someone else afterwards or something, just incase the same thing comes up in the future. Though that has happened maybe twice. 

I'm quite happy with AoS. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An update on my comprehensive rules project: I've currently re-formatted the core rules, artifacts and spells, realm rules, and the 18 pitched battle scenarios from GHB17, MP and GHB18.  My favorite part is that the realmscape and corresponding artifact and spell lists are rolled into two pages each. I plan to add, pitched battle profiles as well as the updated allies list. I'm currently at a 36 page document. Outside of that, I have determined that you don't need anything else to show up at a table unprepared and just start playing casually (assuming you have your army's rules as well). 

Being that this document will primarily be used for reference only, the order of the sections will be set based on what I currently believe is the order that people set-up a game and not necessarily the most common rules used during the game. The inspiration of this doc was to prevent people from having to flip through tons of pages and books and so I don't want that to happen here. Instead, the order of the sections will hopefully keep most of the referencing to the first 10 pages. Here's what I have in mind:

1. Build your army (pitched battle profiles and ally list) 2.  Realms (optional) - choose where army is from and where the battle will take place. 3. Choose your scenario (pitched battles) 4. Scenery Rules (optional) - scenery section from Core Rules 5. Triumphs table (optional) 6. Core rules (the rest of it) 7. Endless spell rules

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2018 at 3:14 PM, Overread said:

With a working index you can have as many sheets of reference material as you want because the index guides you to where you can find the relevant information (or at least to all sources of relevant information on a subject). It's something I really wish GW would get back into the habit of including; as well as getting someone intelligent on the team who doesn't play Wargames to ask all the basic "how does that work, where's the rules reference, why isn't it there, where is the index" questions. 

There seems to be a space for someone to compile an index of page reference numbers for the main core rulebooks.  A single printable handy sheet that would cover the main core books (not FAQs or Battletomes) could be an easy solution to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2018 at 6:39 AM, chord said:

Yes I know that 🙄 .  But maybe you don't realize several factions have no spell casters.  (Sure they could ally in one, but many don't fit the lore) so thus the endless spells are not useful to all but those artifacts are.

Or maybe like myself I'm not interested in the spells even though I have casters and I also think several of the models are just plain ugly.  But I'd like the artifacts.   

Photocopy the artifacts from a friend's book?

I understand not wanting to pay full price for something that has just a few rules that you want, but it seems to me that GW did think this product through.  The fact that most people purchase it, or find some level of use for the product, strikes me as their target goal.  Their main goal was most likely for this product to have as wide of a sales base within Age of Sigmar players as possible.  The second goal, and probably the one the dev team cared about most, was to make it a fun addition to the game for most players.  It seems to me that they succeeded at both of those goals - although some people do not care for the associated monetary cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Riff_Raff_Rascal said:

An update on my comprehensive rules project: I've currently re-formatted the core rules, artifacts and spells, realm rules, and the 18 pitched battle scenarios from GHB17, MP and GHB18.  My favorite part is that the realmscape and corresponding artifact and spell lists are rolled into two pages each. I plan to add, pitched battle profiles as well as the updated allies list. I'm currently at a 36 page document. Outside of that, I have determined that you don't need anything else to show up at a table unprepared and just start playing casually (assuming you have your army's rules as well). 

Being that this document will primarily be used for reference only, the order of the sections will be set based on what I currently believe is the order that people set-up a game and not necessarily the most common rules used during the game. The inspiration of this doc was to prevent people from having to flip through tons of pages and books and so I don't want that to happen here. Instead, the order of the sections will hopefully keep most of the referencing to the first 10 pages. Here's what I have in mind:

1. Build your army (pitched battle profiles and ally list) 2.  Realms (optional) - choose where army is from and where the battle will take place. 3. Choose your scenario (pitched battles) 4. Scenery Rules (optional) - scenery section from Core Rules 5. Triumphs table (optional) 6. Core rules (the rest of it) 7. Endless spell rules

Yes sir, this one right here! I saw him practicing threadomancy!

 

To bite on the premise of the question, here's my question: Tell me what books and other information I need to bring to the table, for a game against a random stranger, who could bring any models, spells, and rules, but won't share any of his books except for his Army's Battletome (because nobody would tell you it's sane to bring every army's battletome).

From my recollection, I have to bring: My Army's Battletome, Core Rules Book, Malign Sorcery, Malign Portents, General's Handbook 2018, and the FAQ (Don't we have several?). That's an awful lot of books to bring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Fairbanks said:

</snip>

From my recollection, I have to bring: My Army's Battletome, Core Rules Book, Malign Sorcery, Malign Portents, General's Handbook 2018, and the FAQ (Don't we have several?). That's an awful lot of books to bring.

Not malign portents, no rules worth mentioning in there.  FAQ and core rules are on your phone and in the app. So all you need is your book, the GHB and malign sorcery. And you could get those on the app too so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×