Age of Sigmar RPG

[Emmetation]

13 hours ago, Euphanism said:

I am so looking forward to this. My group was talking about starting up a new game after our current D$D campaign ends, but most of them came into Warhammer during AoS, so the Fantasy setting isn't really 'home' for them.

I think this is true for a lot of people. Age of Sigmar has seen a huge influx of new players, many of whom have never played an RPG either, so its our chance to introduce a lot of new people to the hobby.

12 hours ago, EccentricCircle said:

I'm massively looking forward to this. I've not yet had a chance to play 4e WFRP yet, but i've liked what I've read so far, and the book is beautifully illustrated! I'm very keen to see what you can do with the cosmic scope of the AoS setting. Its a shame that the two RPGs won't be compatible though.

What are you're plans to support the games going forwards? You've definitely got the potential for some planescape style realm books for the AoS line, Do you plan to maintain both game lines in parallel, or will the AoS RPG be the flagship? I'd be keen to read sourcebooks for either setting, but would think that there would be a fair bit of overlap when it comes to things like bestiaries, or sourcebooks on the Realm of Chaos.

We have a long roadmap for our product plan. There's so much scope in the Mortal Realms its difficult to decide what to focus on! Shortly after the corebook launches we'll have our Starter Set. Following that we'll have adventure books, campaign books, and then supplements to support those books. Plus character options, more monsters... there's a lot! We'll be doing a lot of PDF releases as well, so there will be a steady stream of content coming. 

We will absolutely maintain AoSRPG and WFRP. Obviously there is a huge bond link between WFRP and AoS, but they are different lines manages by different teams (though obviously we work together too!). In the same way that Age of Sigmar wouldn't affect our work on Lord of the Rings, it also won't affect WFRP. Those folks have a lot coming down the pipe!

5 hours ago, Realmhead said:

Add me to the excited list! Have you decided what kind of tone you want for this game? Is it going to be gritty like the Fantasy rpg, heroic? Or something in between?

I find myself debating whether I want a huge estuary, or a robust ruleset for creating and customising enemies. I want Hyshian Treelords  with prismatic leaves that blind the enemy, or an Aqshy fellwater troggoth that vomits lava instead of stomach acid. 

In short, since the mortal realms are so vast, we'll need the ability to easily get exactly the monsters we need for our campaigns.

Tonally Age of Sigmar is heroic fantasy . While in WFRP you are scrounging for everything you get, in AoSRPG you'll already start as a hero. When speaking to people I always say that the question in Age of Sigmar isn't if you'll win, how much can you win and keep winning.  You can defeat 3, 4, 5 or more foes but eventually you're going to be overwhelmed. To me there's also a  huge element tragedy or sorrow to the setting, so we want to let players tell those personal stories. You will be taking on the role of heroes who are tasked with maintaining hope in a bleak world. How long can you keep going before it becomes too much?

For monsters, and the rules in general, we are building a toolbox that GMs and players can use. You can plug in as much or as little as you want, but its built to allow you to create those permutations. As was mentioned, we could release half a dozen monster books if we wanted, so we need to ensure people have the tools they need to customise their game.

[Emmetation]

4 minutes ago, Asensur said:

Will the system support the use of models?

Will the system support the no use of models? 

Yes 

[Klamm]

This looks awesome, I can't wait to learn more. 

I have two questions, not sure the extent to which you can answer:

What's the philosophy when it comes to maps? Maps have been a contentious thing since the release of AoS. Some love the almost surrealist stuff prevalent in the early books, others prefer more traditionalist maps, so I'm curious what degree of territory you plan to map and in what style?

While I know you're focusing on Order factions, is there any mechanic for morality? Will the rules allow for a character who worships, say, Nagash, or other corruptions? 

[Emmetation]

1 hour ago, Klamm said:

This looks awesome, I can't wait to learn more. 

I have two questions, not sure the extent to which you can answer:

What's the philosophy when it comes to maps? Maps have been a contentious thing since the release of AoS. Some love the almost surrealist stuff prevalent in the early books, others prefer more traditionalist maps, so I'm curious what degree of territory you plan to map and in what style?

While I know you're focusing on Order factions, is there any mechanic for morality? Will the rules allow for a character who worships, say, Nagash, or other corruptions? 

For maps, like everything, it has to serve story-telling. Maps can be great for looking at something and going "I want to go there!". We take it from the point of view of an in-world cartographer. How would they see it? We aren't going from an omniscient, almost satellite view, its the realms as the people there know and understand it.

For morality, it always works better more holistically rather than something like "alignment". And you can serve any god you want... maybe just keep it hidden from the Order of Azyr

[EccentricCircle]

4 hours ago, Emmetation said:

We have a long roadmap for our product plan. There's so much scope in the Mortal Realms its difficult to decide what to focus on! Shortly after the corebook launches we'll have our Starter Set. Following that we'll have adventure books, campaign books, and then supplements to support those books. Plus character options, more monsters... there's a lot! We'll be doing a lot of PDF releases as well, so there will be a steady stream of content coming. 

We will absolutely maintain AoSRPG and WFRP. Obviously there is a huge bond link between WFRP and AoS, but they are different lines manages by different teams (though obviously we work together too!). In the same way that Age of Sigmar wouldn't affect our work on Lord of the Rings, it also won't affect WFRP. Those folks have a lot coming down the pipe!

That is excellent, I shall look forward to seeing what you've got planned for us!

I suspect I already know the answer to this question, but is there any plan for GW to support your RPG with miniature releases? Great as the Warhammer ranges are, they don't lend themselves very well to rag tag bands of adventurers, drawn from various factions and backgrounds. It would be great if GW could put out more sets like the RPG focused Adventurer lines that started it all, so that we've got plenty of options to use. It would be slightly ironic if we end up using figures from Reaper, Otherworlds, or even D&D to play the Warhammer RPGs!

[Overread]

I think the quickest way to link the RPG to the tabletop in terms of using models would be for Cubical 7 to use the Underworld models as a base for some party characters. They don't have to keep the party names nor character names; but can certainly show them as an example and then build profiles using the character creator around them. That way they can show players how they can use regular normal models already in production and how they can be fit into the games character creator and campaign system.

 That lets them be fully independent of GWs production of models, which might never come or might come only after a very long period of time. 

 

[Gooterspooch]

I know this thread is more about the aosrpg, but do you have any information on upcoming expansions/supplements/adventures for WFRP 4th Ed? Also how do you plan on dealing with "evil" factions like Idoneth or DoK?

[Emmetation]

27 minutes ago, Gooterspooch said:

I know this thread is more about the aosrpg, but do you have any information on upcoming expansions/supplements/adventures for WFRP 4th Ed? Also how do you plan on dealing with "evil" factions like Idoneth or DoK?

Howdy,

I can't speak about Idoneth and DoK just yet, but we have plans to support "unconventional" (i.e. evil) characters in the future, but some may not make it into the corebook.

For WFRP, those guys have a huge roadmap ahead. Next up I believe is one of the first adventure books, and then I think its the "HD Remake" of Enemy Within.

[EccentricCircle]

1 hour ago, Overread said:

I think the quickest way to link the RPG to the tabletop in terms of using models would be for Cubical 7 to use the Underworld models as a base for some party characters. They don't have to keep the party names nor character names; but can certainly show them as an example and then build profiles using the character creator around them. That way they can show players how they can use regular normal models already in production and how they can be fit into the games character creator and campaign system.

 That lets them be fully independent of GWs production of models, which might never come or might come only after a very long period of time. 

 

That would be a good approach to take, there are some very characterful models in there, but I do think there is space for essentially "Civilian adventurers" particularly for WFRP, where a character is less likely to be a soldier in a specific army, but probably just a random guy or gal who has ended up over their head somehow.

[Overread]

Daughters of Khaine are not evil! I assure you all those hearts are donated freely by the weak, the meek, the feeble and the fallen in battle! It's not the fault of the sisters that many in the Mortal Realms are just not as gifted as those who follow Khaine. 

 

Interestingly I see DoK and Idoneth as closer to neutral than pure evil, yet both forces are capable of more evil acts than many order factions. Idoneth are just soul-vampires (essentially) who are also somewhat shunned, hated, feared and also very cautious themselves in how they hide up. 

Whilst DoK are mostly just obsessed with the simplistic concept of survival of the fittest in terms of strength and skill in battle. And hearts, or at least the queens like hearts a lot.

[Overread]

3 minutes ago, EccentricCircle said:

That would be a good approach to take, there are some very characterful models in there, but I do think there is space for essentially "Civilian adventurers" particularly for WFRP, where a character is less likely to be a soldier in a specific army, but probably just a random guy or gal who has ended up over their head somehow.

Oh very much agreed and I think even in the world of AoS there's room for mortal warriors. Heck take at a look at Malazan Book of the Fallen - many of the top characters in that are not gods/demigods/gifted but regular sappers and warriors - highly trained after years of brutal war; but essentially normal people who rose to a position of power through skill, practice and dumb luck at staying alive. 

[kreggurree]

This all sounds very exciting and I look forward to using it as a setting source book, irrelevent of if the rules are my cup of tea.

On that, where would you place AoSRPG on the scale for level of crunchiness (rules and technical complexity)?

WFRP and the fantasy flight 40k games were all very crunchy, as much as I enjoy the tactical gameplay of a game like pathfinder, wargaming scratches that itch so I prefer to run more narrative focused less crunchy systems.

Edited January 18, 2019 by kreggurree

[Emmetation]

5 hours ago, kreggurree said:

This all sounds very exciting and I look forward to using it as a setting source book, irrelevent of if the rules are my cup of tea.

On that, where would you place AoSRPG on the scale for level of crunchiness (rules and technical complexity)?

WFRP and the fantasy flight 40k games were all very crunchy, as much as I enjoy the tactical gameplay of a game like pathfinder, wargaming scratches that itch so I prefer to run more narrative focused less crunchy systems.

Definitely significantly less crunchy than both of those. Out of the box I would say probably even less so than 5e DnD. The core mechanics are simple and easy to grasp but we have a toolkit of optional rules you can plug in to add complexity to your taste. Our goal was to make an easy to play, welcoming RPG that allows for a tonne of customisation and personalisation for those that want it. I know that spiel gets peddled a lot but I think we are very close to achieving our goal.

[MacDuff]

I have a feeling this thread is going to get very long, if you can stand it.

[Emmetation]

1 hour ago, MacDuff said:

I have a feeling this thread is going to get very long, if you can stand it.

I can take it

[MeridarchGekkota]

Posting to watch!

[Icegoat]

It's a real shame GW have not updated the freeguild faction in time for this rpg. Without a proper human order faction to collect and follow in age of sigmar am rpg playing is one will feel almost historical. 

[MacDuff]

Check out the City of Secrets book. The normal humans feel well grounded, and model conversions seem a good way to move beyond the feathered-cap Empire guys of lore.

[Mykah]

On 1/18/2019 at 1:02 AM, Emmetation said:

Tonally Age of Sigmar is heroic fantasy.

Do you guys have plans to include Malign Portents?

[Aelfric]

On 1/18/2019 at 8:02 AM, Emmetation said:

You will be taking on the role of heroes who are tasked with maintaining hope in a bleak world. How long can you keep going before it becomes too much?

Does this mean there'll be something similar to the old Cthulu insanity points system ( always loved that element!).

Also, a couple of other questions; Will the non-battletome armies be available as characters in the core book or will they be available in later supplements - obviously, given the diversity, you can't be expected to make player characters available from all races from the start.

Also, will you be making available races mentioned in the lore, but not playable on the tabletop(yet).

You mentioned using a multiple D6 system.  Is this similar to the old Star Wars RPG system? (which I enjoyed)

I could ask many questions but will desist (for the moment).  I've been looking forward to this for a long time, but please don't rush - I'm happy to wait for a workable, elegant system.

PS sorry couple turned into three.

[Lucio]

Whilst I love the idea of an AoS RPG, I'm concerned that the product  that arrives will share too much in common with WFRPG, which is an outdated, overly complex system compared to the more modern, streamlined systems such as D&D 5th and Savage Worlds.

 

Concerns about the system aside, the game's been in development since shortly after the initial release, has the new setting approaches and thoughts from AoS 2 made it into the setting? It's a massive tone difference from the Realmslayer War to the Soul Wars, and the setting matured a lot.

 

Final thought is how much of a human-centric focus does the game have? The factions most suited to an RPG haven't really been fleshed out, beyond the excellent Callis and Toll novels and the Malign Portents shorts. We know a little about the cities, and the Duardin pop up but the Aelves aren't really "done"

[Emmetation]

11 hours ago, Mykah said:

Do you guys have plans to include Malign Portents?

Yep. The game is set after the events of the Necroquake. There are some optional rules that will utilise some of the weirder/more fun stuff from Malign Portents.

10 hours ago, Aelfric said:

Does this mean there'll be something similar to the old Cthulu insanity points system ( always loved that element!).

Also, a couple of other questions; Will the non-battletome armies be available as characters in the core book or will they be available in later supplements - obviously, given the diversity, you can't be expected to make player characters available from all races from the start.

Also, will you be making available races mentioned in the lore, but not playable on the tabletop(yet).

You mentioned using a multiple D6 system.  Is this similar to the old Star Wars RPG system? (which I enjoyed)

I could ask many questions but will desist (for the moment).  I've been looking forward to this for a long time, but please don't rush - I'm happy to wait for a workable, elegant system.

PS sorry couple turned into three.

Insanity point system - not quite. It won't be "you are 17 points of crazy" but there will be a way to measure decline. It'll be a little more holistic or abstract.

Non battletome armies, and races/species - unfortunately I can't share details right now. But soon!

D6 system - It is Attribute + Skill but that's probably where a lot of the similarities end.

Amount of questions - No problem

3 hours ago, Lucio said:

Whilst I love the idea of an AoS RPG, I'm concerned that the product  that arrives will share too much in common with WFRPG, which is an outdated, overly complex system compared to the more modern, streamlined systems such as D&D 5th and Savage Worlds.

 

Concerns about the system aside, the game's been in development since shortly after the initial release, has the new setting approaches and thoughts from AoS 2 made it into the setting? It's a massive tone difference from the Realmslayer War to the Soul Wars, and the setting matured a lot.

 

Final thought is how much of a human-centric focus does the game have? The factions most suited to an RPG haven't really been fleshed out, beyond the excellent Callis and Toll novels and the Malign Portents shorts. We know a little about the cities, and the Duardin pop up but the Aelves aren't really "done"

In relation to WFRP - I love WFRP but AoSRPG is a brand new system built to support play in the Age of Sigmar. As mentioned in another comment, complexity level probably starts lower than D&D 5e with the option to add complexity as the game progresses.

EDIT: Sorry my keyboard is acting up.

The RPG is set after 2nd Edition and the events of the Necroquake.

And on human-centric PCs, unfortunately I can't share right now.

 

Hope that helps!

Edited January 20, 2019 by Emmetation

[HorticulusTGA]

So you said earlier (or on Reddit) that, for the worldbuilind part, you'll focus on a "in-universe" point of view. 

What is in this regard really needed is maps (and fluff) for Azyrheim, and Hammerhal Aqsha and Ghyra, notably if the narrative follows an in-universe, Order-based point of view.

I still hope there will be larger maps, based if possible on the "astral charts" designed by GW in AOS2 Core book. (I'm a total fan of AOS since its launch in 2015, and I am hugely pleased with AOS2, but ONE thing I was disappointed with is the lack of maps for Azyr, and Ghur in the Core book - despite the huge tease about "loads of maps" we had - Hysh and Ulgu I can understand (more or less) since they are not well explored yet, but for Azyr it's a great shame). 

Anyway I'm really excited by all the news, and frankly, thank you for reaching out @Emmetation !  

[HorticulusTGA]

I'd like to explore Azyrheim, the Sigmarabulum, and crazy cities like Hammerhal in the RPG !

 

[michu]

@HorticulusTGAI think Hammerhal could be a setting for Starter set like Ubersreik is for WFRP4. It's the most developed Free City in AoS thanks to WHQ.