What are your thoughts on Realms and Artefacts now ?

[Lucentia]

I don't dislike the realm stuff per se,  I just wish it was more focused (Though this is speaking primarily from a Matched Play perspective, for Narrative and Open play it works quite well as written!)  I would prefer if each realm had one or two good spells/artifacts/realm features etc. that were balanced against one another rather than having a bunch of junk artifacts no one takes, etc.

[Riff_Raff_Rascal]

I'm a fan. I'm currently without a battletome  for my army and they make the game far more interesting and fun. That goes for both list building and casual gaming. Here's the thing, I'm far less concerned about over the top abilities my opponents have, thats not what dampens my fun. I'm always more concerned about having options for my own army and having flexiblility with the tools I have at my disposal. The fun radiates from the fact that I still have to be tactical with these additional tools, regardless of how underwhelming they might be. 

[AdamR]

12 hours ago, Archkyrie11 said:

Nagash can't take an artifact...

i think you've been bamboozled

One of the Shyish realm spells makes the caster ignore save modifiers - aka make him ethereal!

[Kyriakin]

21 hours ago, chord said:

Realm spells are fine.  The artifacts not so much.  Really dislike the whole "my army is from"  approach.  Feels like the game has tipped WAY too much into list building.

It could have been great if armies had been themed to really have really been from that realm in a WYSIWYG kind of way (e.g. an Wanderers army from Shyish that is painted in the ethereal style).

However, it usually amounts to "my army is from _______, because a certain artefact is the best" - despite their army having no visual or fluff connection to that realm.

I didn't like the original unpointed, "free-form" AoS, but now the pendulum has swung so far in the opposite "gamey min-max" direction that elements about the WHFB>AoS transition that I did like (e.g. more thematic armies) are starting to be lost for me under an avalanche of list-building obsession and calls for soup-tomeing every faction back to its WHFB composition (i.e. for more list-building options).

[Azamar]

Precisely as some have said, the biggest issue in my mind is that people are picking the realm based on the artefact they want, rather than the other way around.  When there’s quite an imbalance between artefacts (why would you ever take one with a situational -1 to hit, when you could just take a gryph feather charm?) you end up with most of the artefacts being redundant. 

 

Many of the broken artefacts could likely be faq’d though- I’ve often thought the ethereal amulet would be less of a no brained if it limited the save to a 4+ at best. And the doppelgänger cloak would be less obnoxious if it couldn’t be taken on monsters. 

For me it’s a bit theoretical though, as the realm artefacts don’t actually see much use in my gaming group. The one guy who regularly uses them does so in an army specifically put together in a shadow theme, with a rather nifty looking doppelgänger cloak conversion on the general (encouraging stuff like that surely was the whole point of these realm artefacts in the first place). So I don’t really have a horse in this race at the moment, but it does worry me a bit. 

[El Syf]

One thing that has always baffled me with artefacts in aos is why don’t they points values like the old days? Surely that would sort it out.

[Overread]

The problem is that point values are tied to not just pure stats but context too. This is the core problem with trying to have artifacts that are universal to each faction in the game. A faction that has no ranged attacks for their heroes has no value in an artifact that boosts ranged properties; however any bonus to close combat is going to be far better for them than heroes who are generic skirmishers or magical support. So the same artifact can have a variety of value over the factions.

 

 

My general issue is that with realm artifacts GW is trying to do what they did with having subfactions. It's all a very crude attempt to emulate the Marine market. Ergo getting one army to become several. The problem is that it only works for marines because a Blood Angels and Space Wolves armies are different in more than just a handful of stats or items. They have upgrade packs and distinct different core models as well as heroes, leaders and war machines. A wolves army isn't just "marines with a close combat bonus" they are a totally distinct force.

However with subfactions in AoS and with realms its just a very small number of stat or ability changes. Most of the time you don't even have to be a min-max addict to see that a certain realm item and certain subfaction are going to be the sensible choice for your close combat themed army. However next week you want to take more archers so you shift to a different set for the bonus to those. Long as this is how it remains then people won't feel a loyalty to sticking to a realm nor subfaction for their army. They might theme it visually, but it would only ever be an optional choice. 

 

 

The other issue, with realms specifically, is that I think it dilutes the faction identity. Certain factions are bound to certain realms. Daughters of Khaine are everywhere, but their stronghold is in shadow; and its the same for most others. Even though the realm system means there are few realm barriers for factions (Chaos even made it into Sigmar's own realm before he locked it off); there's clearly a bias for some factions to be from a certain region and area.

Furthermore there's the fact that most people getting into the hobby will copy-cat the GW official scheme. They aren't thinking about subfaction alliances and paint scheme linking; they just see cool models and emulate it; esp since Duncan and co. are showing how to paint on videos. 

 

 

So I guess I'm rambling a but. At present realm stuff isn't too bad, though honestly whilst spells make sense I could see getting rid of the artifacts and keeping things in-faction for them. 

 

[jackmcmahon]

Don't like realm rules that give huge advantages.  Random is good for wargaming, but this takes it too far.

I like artefacts, but some being just 100% better than other options makes me want them to take it a step further and allow both a weapon and defensive item from your realm.  If you REALLY want that ghyrstrike/doppelganger etc it will restrict your other option to something in same realm.  I would be ok with or without a rule that states you can't take faction artefacts if you take realm artefacts to actually enforce this restriction.

Spells I'm kind of torn on.  It does give a huge advantage to multiple cast models, but this ghb is meant to favor wizards with both scenarios and the addition of malign sorceries I think this was the intent.  Ghb 2019 could see it swing to priests or heroes with 5 or less wounds or artillery etc etc.  Part of me wants to say restrict to one realm spell her turn, the other half says let the magic theme have its year until the next ghb.

[Nacnudllah]

I think the Realm Artifacts and Realmscapes are fun from a Narrative/Open perspective, but I really wish they had been full Allegiance replacements.  That would have opened up a lot of creative army ideas while also supporting under-loved factions.  Whereas, what they've done (with the Artefacts) seems to effectively just pile on the toys for already supported factions.

[Overread]

Realm Spells really shine for allied wizards who otherwise have a very limited spell selection. It makes them more viable as a choice to take whereas otherwise its only any signature warscroll  spell and a dispel that you can get out of them (along with the generic ones). Of course realm spells are the same for all wizards so the allied wizard does have to bring something of its own to the table; but in factions that have no wizards that can be a powerful thing in its own right (although I honestly expect to see GW shift some of this so that spell-free factions are either given mages or new tools)

[chord]

5 hours ago, Kyriakin said:

I didn't like the original unpointed, "free-form" AoS, but now the pendulum has swung so far in the opposite "gamey min-max" direction that elements about the WHFB>AoS transition that I did like (e.g. more thematic armies) are starting to be lost for me under an avalanche of list-building obsession and calls for soup-tomeing every faction back to its WHFB composition (i.e. for more list-building options).

Agreed!!  (although I liked the original vision of AoS)  I really dislike the move to list building.  IMO mini wargaming is not good for list building because of the reason you cited, the army is just picked from a realm for an artifact not themed that way from a hobby perspective.    But since I'm unhappy with AoS 2.0 I just buy a lot less.  I'll vote with my wallet. 

[Fulkes]

I don't think the "from the realms" thing is completely to blame. There are people who aren't min maxing their realms (I'm mucking around with Shyish Skaven based on the old Clan Mordkin thing of wearing bones and skulls for example) so the tools are there for building thematic stuff, you just have to separate yourself from the urge to min max everything. 

That said, I feel like we'd probably see more thematic stuff if there was more about what different factions from the various realms look like. The more resources we have like that the more people can get inspired by the lore and less by the rules.

[Superninja]

seems silly to theme a whole army from a realm, to use an item....only to want to try out another item next time.  Guess ill paint another of the same army so I can use an artefact from another realm.

[Overread]

5 minutes ago, Superninja said:

seems silly to theme a whole army from a realm, to use an item....only to want to try out another item next time.  Guess ill paint another of the same army so I can use an artefact from another realm.

Honestly GW could cut the number of artifacts down and then have it so that instead of each army comes from a realm, each leader comes from a realm. 

 

That fits better with the lore as many realms might only have a small outpost of some factions rather than whole armies and legions. Whilst most armies have a home realm or two where they hold their primary power seat. That would cut down on artifcat bloat considerably and if players wanted its a LOT more practical to have, say a few leaders of the same kind with a themed base from different realms than it is to have a few armies around themed realms. 

 

[Superninja]

27 minutes ago, Overread said:

Honestly GW could cut the number of artifacts down and then have it so that instead of each army comes from a realm, each leader comes from a realm. 

 

That fits better with the lore as many realms might only have a small outpost of some factions rather than whole armies and legions. Whilst most armies have a home realm or two where they hold their primary power seat. That would cut down on artifcat bloat considerably and if players wanted its a LOT more practical to have, say a few leaders of the same kind with a themed base from different realms than it is to have a few armies around themed realms. 

 

k

[scrubyandwells]

Re: the following five...

• Endless spells
• Realm artefacts
• Realm spells
• Realm commands
• Realmscape features

I think endless spells stand out as a net-positive for AoS. A nice balance of originality and flavor, light touch (simplicity and non-outsized impact), and $ opportunity.

The other four are a net-negative on the AoS experience in my view, at least for MP tournaments, with maybe the exception of realm artefacts.

A strength of AoS has been its relative simplicity and elegance.

If you're a serious competitive player, you may be happy to invest the effort to become deeply familiar with the above; and you may also not mind the in-game experience of needing to be prepared and capable of both remembering and making sound choices in relation to the additional features.

If you're a casual competitive player, you may find the realm elements lessen your enjoyment. They may reflect a crossing point, where the amount of intimate knowledge required to compete becomes burdensome.

Personally, I'm casually competitive... The various realm rules feel burdensome, especially when they're having an outsized impact on the game and all my brain wants to do is just ignore the damn things.

If going to Holy Wars (a narrative event), and playing on a Realm of Death table with Death scenery + realm spells/features/etc., then absolutely, sign me up. If going to Las Vegas Open's AoS Championship to play competitive AoS, no thanks.

They seem to run counter to 'immersion' at a competitive tournament. They add undue complexity without meaningful benefit. 

With that said, I can live with realm artefacts, but as a solution to one commonly-perceived intent (providing more choice to armies without a battletome), they seem like a bloated approach, again for MP.

Ubiquitous artefacts could be modified annually, but unless the design space is better constrained, with less variance in value, then the same issue will continue: A small number of artefacts will be used commonly, and a majority of them will be ignored.

Of course, I could be wrong. It happens. A lot. 

cc: @Vincent Venturella, @Thomas Lyons, @Brendan_Bear, @David Griffin, @Lhw, @ianob

[Fulkes]

I think @scrubyandwells touches on a good point there: different game types should approach those extra things differently. The rules are clearly just a tool box, but if all you do is grab a hammer out of it then everything is going to look like a nail in response...

[The World Tree]

• Endless spells - Great. Possibly one or two need a minor tweak but I think they are fantastic from a visual and gameplay POV. 
• Realm artefacts - Very much against. I don't think they should be available to battletome armies. I hated it when my Stormcast got so many magic items in AOS1. Keep it simple and make it about the warscrolls. The only upside is it makes some unit choices viable that otherwise wouldn't be. But that's a lesson for improving those warscrolls.
• Realm spells - fine in a casual setting. I think they are nice for armies without battletomes/spell lores. However, there is already so much to remember that it becomes overwhelming. In a more competitive environment, I don't want to be wasting y opponent's time and therefore don't want to be consulting the list of spells every time or questioning everything. I'd prefer you have to roll on the table and both players get that one spell.
• Realmscape features - I like them. Ive been running an AOS League and each round has a realmscape and scenario. There are a couple where it just kills certain armies and Beasts is a logistical problem, but a random roll that is finessed can lead to some interesting challenges that are easy to remember. 

[overtninja]

I really enjoy the endless spells, they give you something to use your extra points on, and often let you come up with interesting combos to strategize around. Obviously, people are clever and come up with some really nasty stuff, like Nagash using a spell-portal to bad-touch people's monsters off the board first turn is interesting, but there you go. Still a nice addition to the game.

Realm artifacts are really uneven, with a lot being fluffy options with limited utility and others being absolutely bonkers for competitive play. I suppose, in the end, when you play a game competitively you basically cast aside all pretense of fluff for whatever is the hardest, most effective, most efficient, and most potent, and any options that help you do that are used, while the rest are disregarded. This does not mean that most of these options have no place - most people, I think, play this game in a more casual, narrative context, but it's a shame that of the large lists of realm artifacts created, precious few see actual play. If anything, the ones that no one ever bothers with could use revising, and the obvious 100% takes could also be modified, so that a greater variety see play.

Realm spells seem cool if you want really fluffy games, and the same goes for realm rules. The latter can really hose certain armies, though, which is really unfortunate. I remember back in 8th edition there were some random scenarios that greatly reduced visible ranges and shooting ranges, and as a Wood Elf player, if those came up in tournaments it was basically an auto-loss for me, which sucks in even a casual tournament setting. No one likes a 'sorry, the rules say your army doesn't function' situation. Outside of those situations (which can generally be avoided buy just not using those rules), the realm rules add some nice interesting spice to the game. That said, it adds lots of randomness to the game as well, which in a more competitive environment might not be welcome. 

Ultimately I enjoy having more options and more ways to play the game, and if the game keeps expanding in new interesting ways I won't run out of things to do, experiment with, or work on as a player and hobbyist, so I'm pretty satisfied overall.

[Phil D]

I'm a narrative player who attends the odd tournament, normally narrative based. I've found that in most of my battles, both my opponent and I have forgotten or not bothered with the realm spells, realm effects or artefacts. As had been said previously it adds a layer that some players can't be bothered with. Personally I am still learning the finesse of my army and stick to basic spells until I fully understand them.

One option that may be open to GW is a system used in sailing to handicap different types of dighy for general racing. All the clubs that race competitively return results to the RYA, who compile the results and look at each dinghy in turn. they then handicap them based how many races they win and by what margin. They then handicap the boat to make its overall result slower. Very basic explanation, but it works. If GW could take the results of the spells and artefacts used in tournaments by the top players, who will be using the best ones, could they then "handicap" the various items by tweaking how they work?

That said, people are saying that these items aren't used at tournaments. Probably a rubbish idea with tons of paperwork for little improvement.

[Overread]

I very much think that Endless Spells are here to stay and look forward to seeing more of them. Giving magic a visual and lasting effect I think is a great move in a miniatures game. IT makes the magic more real and more than just a token thing. What we might see in the future is getting some regular spells that have models too but are not endless spells. Might be casting a chalice that appears on the table and creates an aura and such. 

 

So there's a lot of potential for GW to expand upon the core concept. 

[Kirjava13]

Endless Spells are great, especially given how salty they make my regular DoK opponent just because Nighthaunt have their own (rubbish) personal ones and his (vastly overpowered) elves don't. 

The rest I can take or leave. Realm rules aren't great, given how swingy they can make a game.

[Overread]

3 hours ago, Kirjava13 said:

Endless Spells are great, especially given how salty they make my regular DoK opponent just because Nighthaunt have their own (rubbish) personal ones and his (vastly overpowered) elves don't. 

The rest I can take or leave. Realm rules aren't great, given how swingy they can make a game.

DoK salt is real! It's not just Endless though! It's also mixed with the pain of the cost of our basic troops and the lack of a getting started box! Still at least on those two we kind of made up for it by getting a Christmas box.

[Lhw]

19 hours ago, scrubyandwells said:

Re: the following five...

• Endless spells
• Realm artefacts
• Realm spells
• Realm commands
• Realmscape features

I agree with your analysis, @scrubyandwells. Personally, I love all of them, but I think that's because I'm a competitive player who is happy to read about them all. I think it's also because I've an army that can take advantage of most of them.

I think Endless Spells are defo the best balanced of the lot. Pointed well, with right level of impact on the game.

Artefacts annoy me only because they are often better than allegiance ones. Why take something that gives you rend -2, when you could take a realm artefact that gives you realm -3?

Spells, command abilities and features are all a bit too powerful at times, and seem less well thought out.

[AaronWilson]

I think the best part about it all is it leaves It open for events to decide what they want / don't want to use, then it's up to people to vote with there feet. For local games just discuss with your opponent, I like it all my self.