What are your thoughts on Realms and Artefacts now ?

[Overread]

Ontop of that all the artifacts and spells are not model requirements for WYSIWYG. Barring the Endless Spells, which are their own distinct models, you don't need to do anything to your models or their bases in terms of assembly or painting to represent any of the realm artifacts or spells or such. You can choose to model your bases and paint scheme a specific way, but most of the realms are so huge that they'll each have mountains and volcanoes and plains and seas and such.

[SwampHeart]

On 12/8/2018 at 9:32 AM, jackmcmahon said:

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. 

That's already how it works - you can't pick multiple realms to take artifacts from. 

[Kirjava13]

13 hours ago, SwampHeart said:

That's already how it works - you can't pick multiple realms to take artifacts from. 

I think the point is that a lot of the time it doesn't matter, as you only get a second artefact by taking another battalion, of which most armies up to 2000 points are only really going to have one of.

[jackmcmahon]

23 hours ago, SwampHeart said:

That's already how it works - you can't pick multiple realms to take artifacts from. 

Ya I know. I mean to allow an artefacts from both sides of the one realm you pick.  One of the weapons, one of the items.  Then cut off your ability to choose allegiance artefacts.  So you'd be capped at two artefacts (usually not a restriction) and they'd both have to be from same realm.  So if there is an "op" artefact in realm x, the other artefacts in that realm would begin to see play just based on someone wanting that op artefact.

[jackmcmahon]

This would also add an amount of balance against battletome armies, because if they want the artefacts that were meant to give non battletome armies options, they have to exclude the ones in their battletome. 

[Chickenbits]

I like realm spells and features,  but the internal balance between artefacts is terrible. Seeing the same model/artefact combos every game adds nothing to the fun for me. 

[Skreech Verminking]

As a skaven player who sometimes takes part on some event/tournament, I really have to say that I can only profit from the realm feature/artifacts and spells.

As many army’s have the problem not owning a battletome or have any special allegiance ability in the ghb, we won’t be able to cast any special spells, who could buff our units to insanity like Dok, Death legions something, etc.

And most of our so called available artifacts (if we exclude those from the different realms) are mostly rubbish.

Thanks to the realm features/ artifacts etc. Grand allegiance armies can at least try and compete with armies like daughters of khaine etc. .

edi: as for some artifacts (cough cough doppleganger cough cloak, cough cough), yes they might definitely need a slight debuff.

also some realm feature might need a chance. Only 6range for any range weapon in a full game just seems to be insane, maybe changing it to only  the first round would be much more  welcome.

 

[PJetski]

What if the Doppelganger Cloak was designed to stop the 100% melee armies like how the Ulgu realmscapes exist to stop 100% shooting armies?

[Mayple]

3 hours ago, Skreech Verminking said:

also some realm feature might need a chance. Only 6range for any range weapon in a full game just seems to be insane, maybe changing it to only  the first round would be much more  welcome.

I like the similar rule in Skirmish, where there's fog/mist, and it increases the range every round. So it would be 6 - 12 - 18 - 24, etc. or 12 - 18 - 24, etc. Think that would be an improvement. 

[AaronWilson]

16 hours ago, PJetski said:

What if the Doppelganger Cloak was designed to stop the 100% melee armies like how the Ulgu realmscapes exist to stop 100% shooting armies?

I think's people main issue with the cloak is can lead to feel bad situations, like I charge with Alarielle / Durthu, go with Alarielle, kill unit, unit with durthu can't hit me, Durthu goes and kills the unit, etc. 

[RuneBrush]

Personally I like all of the extra items.  Some of the "must-have" artefacts could do with a bit of a tweak and as unpopular as it is, I actually like to see an army themed to a realm if you're using a realm artefact*.

Spells are a lovely addition, though need to be consolidated into one publication/reference cards.  Again a few need a tweak as they're ridiculously good (I'm looking at you +1 damage spell ).  I wouldn't have an issue if they limited a unit to casting 1 realm spell per turn either.

Realm effects I've not played enough of to make a hugely informed comment.  I do think that some hamper armies that have a single play style so perhaps a few tweaks wouldn't hurt - however I do think a lot of the things GW implement are done to encourage a bit of diversification and to get people away from the "this is the best unit so I shall field the maximum number and little else" lists.

* I also accept that this isn't practical in 90% of situations

[Archkyrie11]

On 12/7/2018 at 4:30 PM, Fulkes said:

If Neferata is in the army he has access to her spell though and can ignore rend every turn and fly (basically becoming ethereal):

I stand corrected then, Don't play Death nor against so didn't know about this.

On 12/7/2018 at 5:13 PM, SwampHeart said:

There's a realm spell in Shyish that makes you ethereal. 

I Probably should've known about the Spell though lol

[Fulkes]

1 hour ago, Archkyrie11 said:

I stand corrected then, Don't play Death nor against so didn't know about this.

I Probably should've known about the Spell though lol

It's all good, no one can truly be expected to know everything in the game (despite what some competitive players claim online).

[Lemon Knuckles]

I think the design space opened up by these additions is interesting, but there's obviously room for tweaking and improving.

One aspect that I think should be considered is exploring how to make the choice of what realm your army is from a bit more meaningful.  Right now, the choice basically comes down to a choice between the top few artefacts.  One answer is as many here are suggesting and try to create a more balanced list of artefacts.

But another interesting possibility is to increase the opportunity cost of choosing a realm so that it is not simply determined by artefact choice.  For example, make the realm Command Ability and perhaps a choice of a single realm spell from a smaller list of more balanced realm spells part of list creation rather than rolling the realmscape.  That way, my choice of realm is not solely determined by my desire of a particular artefact; I now have to balance my desired combination of artefact, Command Ability and extra Spell that are all determined by my realm of origin.  Would still have to work on the balancing of the actual options, but it would add more interest to realm selection during list building, and potential open up more space for innovative list builds.

[Bellfree]

For Competitive Matched Play:

I hated them when they were announced, I hate them even more now. My one solace is that I was RIGHT.

The relics are mostly useless with a few visibly OP ones being used to make Top Tier lists and models even stronger.

The spells are mostly irrelevant except a few that help make Top Tier lists and models even  stronger.

Notice something about the actual Realm of Battle rules and realmscape features? It's pretty obvious when you look around the site.  Almost no one outside of threads like these and the narrative posts talks about them ever. They come up in list building threads once every 10-15 pages or so, they pop up in tournament discussions when a weird list makes it into the top 16(yeah, he pulled XYZ realms against ZXY opponents so he had a pretty good draw). Hundreds of pages worth of discussion of every aspect of competitive Age of Sigmar and less than 1% of it even mentions that Realm of Battle exists.

This is because they don't matter. Unless you know what the Realm and Realmscape feature you're using is FAR in advance(Oh, Ulgu? Better not bring any shooting units, Ghyran? Time to bust out Alarielle!) They are far too random to bother taking into account when building lists. When the range of abilities is anywhere from 'Roll a 6 and take a mortal wound' to 'Figure out how to deal with 4 Dread Saurians being on the table at once' bothering with them at all is utterly pointless, even counterproductive.

The realm of battle rules exist to say 'F YOU!' to a handful of players each round and 'Huh, free win I guess.' to a handful of others and that is IT.

[Bellfree]

On 12/11/2018 at 3:52 PM, PJetski said:

What if the Doppelganger Cloak was designed to stop the 100% melee armies like how the Ulgu realmscapes exist to stop 100% shooting armies?

This would be even worse. Every time you have a rule that says '**** your army and any like it' it's bad design.

 If, for example, a Khorne army is pigeonholed into taking Warpfire throwers specifically to deal with this one asinine item, that's a terrible feeling for the Khorne player as it makes them less effective against armies where the Warpfire thrower isn't as good. It also is a GIANT NEON SIGN for the player that brought the '****** you for playing a melee army' item that if he kills the Warpfire throwers first, he wins for free.

If you want to push balanced armies, DESIGN BALANCED ARMIES! When half the armies in the game have ******-all for shooting, there's not a whole lot of option

[Yoshiya]

6 minutes ago, Bellfree said:

The realm of battle rules exist to say 'F**K YOU!' to a handful of players each round and 'Huh, free win I guess.' to a handful of others and that is IT.

The rules exist for casual players to have a more interesting game outside of power play all the time. The fact that the tournament subset of players feels they are unfair to their perfect list they've planned is not GWs concern.

That said, I DO agree some of them are too extreme whilst some do basically nothing. Ulgus range abilities are just poorly thought out and fun though the Ghur rules are they arent necessarily practical for everyone.

I really think with a little balance they'd be a great addition but people seem more interested in shouting down players that like the (optional) rules to actually take part in that conversation.

[RuneBrush]

7 minutes ago, Bellfree said:

It's pretty obvious when you look around the site.  Almost no one outside of threads like these and the narrative posts talks about them ever.

What's positive though is that people have embraced realmscape features in narrative/open games even if matched play games are more conservative in their application.  GW even wrote a community post a while back on how TO's may wish to pre-select realmscape features for tournaments.

Also putting my mod hat on - please watch your language and not try and get round the profanities filter

[BWG Cannonball]

I personally love the artefacts, but hate the Realm Rules.  I feel like they are way too swingy for anything outside of narrative play.  It also feels like it's adding additional rules bloat for an unnecessary reason other than to have more things to worry about when you're playing.

At our local gaming club we tend to not use them simply because they are so swingy and it's more things to remember.

[TMS]

When playing at my place we've a system where we decide well in advance what realm we're going to playing in for that day, and then the feature is rolled before each match begins. That gives it a cool sort of expeditionary feeling where you know where you'll be going but you can't say for sure what's going to happen there, so you have the chance to tailor your force in more or less risky ways. We play matched play games but not like they were tournament games, of course.

 

The artefacts are cool but the obviously strong ones blow the rest out of the water, which is boring in the long run.

[Mayple]

6 hours ago, Bellfree said:

Almost no one outside of threads like these and the narrative posts talks about them ever

 

6 hours ago, Bellfree said:

Hundreds of pages worth of discussion of every aspect of competitive Age of Sigmar and less than 1% of it even mentions that Realm of Battle exists.

 

6 hours ago, Bellfree said:

This is because they don't matter. Unless you know what the Realm and Realmscape feature you're using is FAR in advance(

 

That's all a bit assumptious, no? It is fine if you feel this way, but that doesn't make it fact. In context of realm features, list building remains much like it used to, with some extra thought given to trying to not make the armies too one-dimensional, in case of realm X crashing down on that one aspect. It is not a difficult thing to manage, and not at all an impossibility. With the exception of 6" shooting in Ulgu, playing around the realm features is similar to accounting for terrain (how it is set up), and terrain features. Two highly influental elements that are also mostly random. If one refuses to take into account the battlefield; realm, terrain, features - when building their army and forming their strategy, then it is to be expected that they will not fare well. 

6 hours ago, Bellfree said:

The relics are mostly useless with a few visibly OP ones being used to make Top Tier lists and models even stronger.

If most relics are mostly useless, and some are op, aren't you skipping a step? Surely the standard isn't set to either "Useless" or "Overpowered"

 

6 hours ago, Bellfree said:

For Competitive Matched Play:

I hated them when they were announced, I hate them even more now. My one solace is that I was RIGHT.

According to you

Not something you should just go ahead and presume. 

[SwampHeart]

I think they work fine for matched play (and we've seen them work fine for major events). The key is understanding they need to be curated - there are certain realms/realmscapes that don't fit matched play. But if the TO steps up and makes good choices on realms and features they add an extra layer to the game, and a new level of challenge. The thing that frustrates people is you can't plan for them and they're so varied that building for them is impractical, but that's a good thing. Its good that you can't list build the entire game - I love list building but some of the game should be on the table. If you are truly as good a player as you think you are you should be able to adapt your play to the realms. 

If I have any issue with the realms its the spells but most of that comes from how AoS handles magic as a whole right now. Big casters, who are already heavily favored if you invest in spells, get better in the realms and everyone else loses out. Basically it just exasperates the current issue of magic being a 'go big or go home' system. I don't dislike the spells for the most part (I generally love magic, I like wizards and spells and the like) - I'd just like armies that don't have a caster with a bonus to cast and 2 spells a turn to not feel like they can't participate in the phase. 

[azoxystrobin]

I don't like them.

The realm spells are all over the place ranging from almost pointless to game changing. The effect they have on different armies is also imbalanced, for some armies that don't have native wizards, then they are pointless, simply more opportunities for the opponent to get the upper hand.
For other armies that specialize in sorcery they are a massive boon
and for the forgotten armies that don't have battletomes they can be a breath of fresh air, literally making things playable again.

The realm artefacts, as has been said before in this thread, means that almost all armies are from Ulgu so they can get the doppelganger cloak. It's really sad because there are loads of options, but why would anyone take a sword of +1 to hit (or equivalent)  when a) there are much better things to take and b) there's the same in thing in your battletome anyway.

The realms themselves are pretty good, bringing another set of obstacles that an army has to take into account, and also an extra spell that isn't all that powerful, but is at least thematic. I would be fine with matched play in the realms because it should force lists to build to adapt to all the realms, or build specifically for the realm being fought in.

The Malign sorceries are a great addition to the game however. Not always balanced as the very first errata showed, but the fact that they can be affected by both players and cost army points makes them less ubiquitous than the doppelganger cloak. Malign sorceries are also great narrative tools in themselves. I'm looking forward to more. 
I kinda hope they stop it with the "Duardin don't into magic" too, that was Dwarfs from the world that was, Fyreslayers are pretty magical beings tied to the magical realm of fire, I don't see why they can't harness the magic within them. Anyway, I digress, what I meant to say is that I hope these new models of spells that stick around are an opportunity to add things to armies that don't have spells. For instance Khorne's blood tithe brass skull meteor, now that is just asking to be a model that stays on the table.

So TL;DR realms are great for narrative play

[Ahriman]

To add another voice to the 'i love them' crowd, i love them!

I think the artefacts, spells and - especially - realm rules added a much needed narrative edge to games so they feel like they're actually taking place in the realms.

I can't talk to their showing in competitive play unfortunately, but one thing i will say about the fact you only ever see doppleganger cloaks ect is that the competitive scene can create an echo chamber making it seem like certain things happen 'all the time'.

My skaven army is from Ghur, and my packmaster has the Stonehorn Blade to represent Throt's thing-catcher. A purely narratively driven decision, but if that's what GW wanted when they designed them then they're working as intended from everything I've seen locally and at campaign events at WHW.

 

And realm rules are a godsend when writing campaigns.

 

TL/DR: narrative rocks, and these things make them even better!