Age of Sigmar RPG

[HorticulusTGA]

Other minor thing : Throggoths aren't from the Greenskinzs race. But they surely are with this faction. 

I also strongly suspect that the RPG writers had access to a map of a portion of Ghur  😍😍😍

Can't wait to see it. Maybe in the Gargant book. Or the "Siege of Excelsis"  one ! 

[Emmetation]

50 minutes ago, Ninelives said:

@Emmetation Sorry if this information is available somewhere, but I haven't found it so a couple of questions.

- Starter set, there's several mentions of it, but no ETA, do we have one? (at least for the PDF version).

- The core book mentions some pre-made characters available in the resources sections of the website, do we have an ETA for this?

Otherwise super pumped! I am going to try and set up a small party and hopefully we'll get some games in

Starter Set we're looking at July hopefully. It got a bit delayed with the shuffle of everyone moving to working from home. As for the pre-gens, we'll get them up next week!

[Chumphammer]

7 hours ago, Emmetation said:

We've spotted a few. Unfortunately this was introduced in the last export when I corrected some last minute typos and it messed up the kerning. We'll have an updated PDF next week.

 

We'll also have an errata form for any issues you spot. Thanks!

Np my dude. Every game has issues with conversion. Its a well put together book and the art is amazing. Great Job

[michu]

Question: Is it possible to make a non-soulbound party? Like classic "met in the tavern" style?

[Emmetation]

1 minute ago, michu said:

Question: Is it possible to make a non-soulbound party? Like classic "met in the tavern" style?

Yep. If you check the GM chapter there is literally a heading called "You Meet in a Tavern" 🤣

[Ninelives]

46 minutes ago, Chumphammer said:

Np my dude. Every game has issues with conversion. Its a well put together book and the art is amazing. Great Job

Yep, really enjoying it! But it would be great to have a chance at correcting them at least for the print version

[Ashendant]

8 hours ago, Emmetation said:

We've spotted a few. Unfortunately this was introduced in the last export when I corrected some last minute typos and it messed up the kerning. We'll have an updated PDF next week.

 

We'll also have an errata form for any issues you spot. Thanks!

What about lore inconsistencies. I've heard there's a few problems like Troggoths being labelled as Greenskin and Ignax being dead. Unless GW changed something and haven't told us I think neither of those are true.

8 hours ago, michu said:

Hysh is itself a sun, Other suns need Hysh to work. Therefore suns are dominion of Hysh. Not all stars are suns ( I know that it's not 

You said that Malerion is an embodiment of treachery - what better worshippers than backstabbing assassins. And I think Maleneth is more devoted to Morathi than Malerion so some exceptions are possible... 

We also known that Aqshy is also the sun, atleast of Ghyran.

[HorticulusTGA]

9 minutes ago, Ashendant said:

What about lore inconsistencies. I've heard there's a few problems like Troggoths being labelled as Greenskin and Ignax being dead. Unless GW changed something and haven't told us I think neither of those are true.

We also known that Aqshy is also the sun, atleast of Ghyran.

What's the source on Aqshy being the sun of Ghyran (why only Ghyran, then) ?

IIRC that got retconned in AOS2.

[Ashendant]

2 minutes ago, HorticulusTGA said:

What's the source on Aqshy being the sun of Ghyran (why only Ghyran, then) ?

IIRC that got retconned in AOS2.

Actually i've rechecked and is not definitive, but it was in Mighty Battles. https://ageofsigmar.lexicanum.com/wiki/Gates_of_Dawn

What was retconned?

[HorticulusTGA]

4 minutes ago, Ashendant said:

Actually i've rechecked and is not definitive, but it was in Mighty Battles. https://ageofsigmar.lexicanum.com/wiki/Gates_of_Dawn

What was retconned?

The sun is now Hysh for the other Mortal Realms. That retcons other explanations for the night and day cycle in the Realms. But of course some backwards druids can still believe Aqshy to be their sun, but its just their belief and not the common belief in Ghyran. Also that doesn't prevent the existence of other sun-like celestial bodies (like Sigendil or Ignax when it was still chained).

But as an AOS1 reference, I think we can treat this belief as non-consequential for the wider setting.

[Ashendant]

1 minute ago, HorticulusTGA said:

The sun is now Hysh for the other Mortal Realms. That retcons other explanations for the night and day cycle in the Realms. But of course some backwards druids can still believe Aqshy to be their sun, but its just their belief and not the common belief in Ghyran. Also that doesn't prevent the existence of other sun-like celestial bodies (like Sigendil or Ignax when it was still chained).

But as an AOS1 reference, I think we can treat this belief as non-consequential for the wider setting.

I don't remember the core rulebook for the 2nd ever saying that Hysh is the sun. The whole Ulgu-Hysh cycle was described as metaphysical relationship that adjusts the strength of the light of each of the realms suns.

[HorticulusTGA]

Uh. There never were references to "each of the realms suns" whatsoever.

About the linked  orbits of the two Realmspheres, it's not just "metaphysical", it's really two Realmspheres in the Aethierc void that shed light or darkness on the other Realms. Phil Kelly said it here in the video : "And as the Realms Light, Hysh, is in front of the Realm of Shadows, that forms day for the Realms."

It also p. 80 of the Core Book, and p. 110 explains that Hysh's light reach all the AOS cosmos. 

 

 

 

 

[LoopyZebra]

One of the things about a tabletop rpg is that you can modify the setting and lore as needed for your table. While it's harder for an established setting like AoS, I've changed minor details around in published RPG settings forever. The nature of the sun is something you can set for your table as you believe is correct - it's unlikely to have an impact on play and the stories you tell.

[LoopyZebra]

@Emmetation is there a release date for the PDF of the GM screen? I'd love to get more lore bits like the adventure hooks.

[Emmetation]

30 minutes ago, LoopyZebra said:

@Emmetation is there a release date for the PDF of the GM screen? I'd love to get more lore bits like the adventure hooks.

In the next few weeks. Shouldn't be too far off

[Ninelives]

I am a tad confused by an example on page 150 :

"Darach attacks and hits the Troggoth, getting 2 successes. His Kurnoth Greatsword deals 2 + S Damage, so he deals a total of 4 Damage. The Troggoth’s tough hide gives it a natural Armour of 2, meaning it takes only 2 Damage (4 – 2). The Troggoth’s Toughness is reduced by 3. "

Why is the Toughness not reduced by 2 ?

And is the "2 + S" meant to be "2 x 2" ?

 

[Emmetation]

18 minutes ago, Ninelives said:

I am a tad confused by an example on page 150 :

"Darach attacks and hits the Troggoth, getting 2 successes. His Kurnoth Greatsword deals 2 + S Damage, so he deals a total of 4 Damage. The Troggoth’s tough hide gives it a natural Armour of 2, meaning it takes only 2 Damage (4 – 2). The Troggoth’s Toughness is reduced by 3. "

Why is the Toughness not reduced by 2 ?

And is the "2 + S" meant to be "2 x 2" ?

 

Sorry yeah, that last line is an error. The Troggoth's armour was changed from 1 to 2 late in the game. I thought I had amended the example but I missed that last bit. The Troggoth's Toughness should be reduced by 2

[Ravinsild]

20 minutes ago, Ninelives said:

I am a tad confused by an example on page 150 :

"Darach attacks and hits the Troggoth, getting 2 successes. His Kurnoth Greatsword deals 2 + S Damage, so he deals a total of 4 Damage. The Troggoth’s tough hide gives it a natural Armour of 2, meaning it takes only 2 Damage (4 – 2). The Troggoth’s Toughness is reduced by 3. "

Why is the Toughness not reduced by 2 ?

And is the "2 + S" meant to be "2 x 2" ?

 

I believe 2 + S means 2 + successes. 

So basically any successes over the minimum required is extra damage. Assuming I understand this accurately.

[Ninelives]

3 minutes ago, Emmetation said:

Sorry yeah, that last line is an error. The Troggoth's armour was changed from 1 to 2 late in the game. I thought I had amended the example but I missed that last bit. The Troggoth's Toughness should be reduced by 2

Ok great! And the +S is meant to be a "times 2" correct?

Edited May 8, 2020 by Ninelives

[Emmetation]

No, + S is plus successes. So any successes you get are added to damage. 

[Ninelives]

1 minute ago, Ravinsild said:

I believe 2 + S means 2 + successes. 

So basically any successes over the minimum required is extra damage. Assuming I understand this accurately.

 

1 minute ago, Emmetation said:

No, + S is plus successes. So any successes you get are added to damage. 

Ohh I see, sorry my bad.  I thought the successes were multiplied by the damage value, 😅 with this example the maths were still working.

[HorticulusTGA]

Just now, xking said:

References to different suns were made in books, Ghur had an wild and predatory sun and the  gloomspite gitz battletome says something about multiple suns and other celestial bodies.  

As I said in the very post above, Hysh's Realmsphere being the sun of the Mortal Realms doesn't prevent the existence of other celestial bodies. It's just that they do not function as generic suns for all the Mortal Realms, only for portions of them, and in usually strange ways (like chained Ignax).

And if older fluff contradicts the new, updated AOS2 one, the later will take precedence, of course. 

[Ninelives]

Anybody would know why the Black Ark Corsair (page 50) has an asterisk (*) after the Silver Tongue Talent?

My understanding was that the asterisks come when there is a required condition (often skills) to have that Talent, but can't see any in the description of the talent page 89.

[LuminethMage]

11 hours ago, Ninelives said:

Anybody would know why the Black Ark Corsair (page 50) has an asterisk (*) after the Silver Tongue Talent?

My understanding was that the asterisks come when there is a required condition (often skills) to have that Talent, but can't see any in the description of the talent page 89.

I think you are right, either they forgot to add the condition or to delate the asterisk. I would ignore the asterisk for the time being. You could add this to their errata file, they'll try to update the PDF within this week if I remember correctly: 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd0dNjz_0WdCUe49Ys5XPDjfEEB9dNWwPCyl1E8yBcpxwIFZA/viewform 

[Ninelives]

4 hours ago, LuminethMage said:

I think you are right, either they forgot to add the condition or to delate the asterisk. I would ignore the asterisk for the time being. You could add this to their errata file, they'll try to update the PDF within this week if I remember correctly: 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd0dNjz_0WdCUe49Ys5XPDjfEEB9dNWwPCyl1E8yBcpxwIFZA/viewform 

Thanks for the link! I was waiting for it, did not know it was already live. I have spotted quite a few mistakes haha

 

@Emmetation actually, is there no way to submit more  than  one issue per form? I have started working on a Google Sheet listing them...  If I use the same format would that be okay to share with you guys?

Edited May 11, 2020 by Ninelives