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

Terrain and the immersion question.

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, Malakithe said:

 Or even crazier sill a Runemaster sucks it into a lava hole then shoots it up to the surface somewhere? 

The skaven have gnawholes

 

The Fyreslayers have volcano tubes that pass through the realms!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for most factions, whether or not terrain is immersive just comes down to your interpretation of how it is used by it's respective army, Personally here's how I justify the grand alliances having their terrain features:

Chaos: the majority of chaos factions would be summoning in buildings and shrines like how the chaos marines would build their bases in the old Dawn of War games
Order: along the same lines as above but more called down in a flash of lightning or something similar to deep striking
Death: raising the ruins of some long lost or dead civilisation to suit their needs
Destruction: bit harder to justify as the only terrain piece we've seen is for gloomspite, but nomadic esque stuff, such as mobile shrines to gorkamorka, butcher shops etc

GW themselves make it even more thematic when you break it down into subfactions:

Idoneth's boats being part of the aethersea they need to conduct their raids
Sylvaneth summoning in their wildwoods to make the battlefield more advantageous for themselves
Maggotkin using Nurgle's twisted magics in a parody of the sylvaneth to grow their gnarlwoods
Herdstones being territorial markers for the beasts of chaos which they go to reclaim every so often

The only terrain pieces I have trouble justifying being on the battlefield from a lore/immersion point of view are the Loonshrine and charnel throne, simply because I don't really know the lore behind then.  Point is though I really think that whether or not terrain pieces fit onto a battlefield all comes down to the lore behind them, and in that case we will just have to wait and see with the new stuff!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kenshin620 said:

The skaven have gnawholes

 

The Fyreslayers have volcano tubes that pass through the realms!

Gnaw holes split reality. Lava tubes would be physically limited I would think..unless is like magic teleporting portal lava

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Malakithe said:

Gnaw holes split reality. Lava tubes would be physically limited I would think..unless is like magic teleporting portal lava

We have probably heard of weirding things in AoS so far than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine the fyreslayers build the forge every time they camp. Hammering ur gold into their flesh in order to power them up for battle is a key part of their identity, so presumably they would want a forge somewhere near the front lines. The roman legions used to build a walled camp every single time the camped anywhere and they were just regular humans not a whole army of Duardin within an innate understand of engineering. I imagine this particular kit is a mid point between the kind of forges they might have in their own territory and something they might take on campaign with them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the Romans build their sandal repair workshop within the camp, or 100 meters from the enemy lines? I’d imagine it’s a tough call between wanting your sandals fixed quickly, and having all your cobblers butchered by barbarians.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people are getting hung up on a logistical points of view, in a totally abstract very high fantasy world. I love all the new terrain pieces, long may they continue!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think the key thing to remember about all of the scenery pieces is not to overthink things.  A forge on the battlefield does seem pretty peculiar - but equally so did the old Anvil of Doom, a massive throne, herd stone etc.  Ultimately it's a fantasy game and things that we would find impossible to do in real life are fairly mundane in the Mortal Realms.  Let's be honest, most people would likely die from shock if they had a red hot metal rune hammered into their body!

I'm looking forward to seeing the explanation of the forge piece - what it does and likely how it got there.  The new Khorne piece basically erupts from the ground so the background guys do invest a bit of thought into things 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AaronWIlson said:

I think a lot of people are getting hung up on a logistical points of view, in a totally abstract very high fantasy world. I love all the new terrain pieces, long may they continue!

High fantasy worlds still need to stick to their own internal logic, and some of these terrain pieces are stretching this logic to breaking point just to get a sale, and all the explanations basically boil down to “a wizard did it”.

If anything high fantasy worlds are more easily pushed to the absurd and need to be handled with a delicate touch. As someone who loves the setting and most of the terrain bits I am worried, as a customer, that things get too silly and the setting is damaged as a result, just cause GW have found a lucrative revenue stream.

The fireslayers terrain piece could have been a good idea, but instead feels thoughtlessly chucked out “yeah a forge is dwarfish, who really cares?”

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Luke82 said:

Did the Romans build their sandal repair workshop within the camp, or 100 meters from the enemy lines? I’d imagine it’s a tough call between wanting your sandals fixed quickly, and having all your cobblers butchered by barbarians.

I always imagined the deployment zone to be somewhere near base camp and the centre of the board to be what you would define as the front lines.  As I said in the op the game board needs a certain amount of abstraction in terms of scale in order to be believable.

Another way of thinking of it is that for the fyreslayers the forge is more like a triage tent than a cobblers. It will be interesting to see if the rules support this theory. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Think the key thing to remember about all of the scenery pieces is not to overthink things.  A forge on the battlefield does seem pretty peculiar - but equally so did the old Anvil of Doom, a massive throne, herd stone etc.  Ultimately it's a fantasy game and things that we would find impossible to do in real life are fairly mundane in the Mortal Realms.  Let's be honest, most people would likely die from shock if they had a red hot metal rune hammered into their body!

I hear that argument about the Anvil all the time and it‘s not right:

is something okay and fine because it was done in the past? Is that a solid justification? I think not.

the internal coherency of the AoS Universe is simply hammered into the dust in order to sale more terrain pieces, neither „it‘s a fantasy Universe“ nor „magic“ justifies it at all. It simply makes no sense and if you like the immersion, the feel and the story of the game this terrain really hurts the eye due to it having no reason to be at the front line. 🧐

As mentioned before: The terrain is super cool, but not in the way we have to use it. They could have Introduced new matched play mission which force you to buy the terrain:

-Defence of the forge: one player attacks, one player defends. Defender gets the forge.

-Attack at night: Player 1 is attacked in his camp, he can use his faction terrain

-Preparing for war: both players have encampments and meet „old school“ on the battlefield: both players can use their terrain

🤷🏼‍♂️

It‘s simple. GW‘s solution to force us to buy terrain is sloppy and badly implemented.

 

GW is a business afterall and if we just accept everything they do though it hurts the game in one way or the other then they‘ll continue with adding goofy unfluffy must-buys.

Edited by JackStreicher
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t actually played with any of the terrain yet, but I understand the immersion argument.

I think the specific built-in buildings like herdstone, loonshrine etc. feel a bit video gamey, like it pops out of the ground in a rts. I would rather if they had designed it so that it seemed more improvised: a ruin desecrated with a khorne symbol and some skulls for instance instead of an altar that seems to belong in a temple. Or a loonshrine that is actually floating towards the bad moon, that the grots are holding on to with ropes. Wyldwoods, gnawholes and so on feel more « acceptable » to me. 

Personnally some of this terrain just feels a little less right and I completely get why it upsets people. When it’s too « built » it feels like the army aren’t battling in vast, wild territories and it kind of puts a damper on some ambush scenarios etc. whereas holes and woods add to the narrative of the battle.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The battleplans in matched play are all described as pitched battles. None of the scenarios that have been described as problematic are described in matched play battleplans.

I think an interesting solution which GW could use in the future is to build battleplans which take advantage of scenery in interesting ways. An ambush battleplan where the defender gets to use their scenery but the attacker does not for example. 

This would be a pretty cool way to use the narrative section of the next ghb and might answer some of the complaints people have.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Chikout said:

I think an interesting solution which GW could use in the future is to build battleplans which take advantage of scenery in interesting ways. An ambush battleplan where the defender gets to use their scenery but the attacker does not for example. 

That‘s what I wrote two posts above xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I don’t really care about the abstract nature of the worst offenders once it begins but the latest terrain is certainly an instance (admittedly probably the only one in AOS at present) of GW pushing stuff to sell I think. 

The biggest issue for me is that it’s increasingly pretty dull in respect to how it simulates the character of a armies. Wyldwoods and Gnarlmaws really enhance their faction and encourage you to think around how to use them and interact with several phases of play. They make Nurgle surprisingly fast and empower their summoning, and Wyldwoods make the board increasingly hostile and ambush prone for non-Sylvaneth. Great! 

Whereas Idoneth boat gives a 6 FNP to an army with an already strong ressurection element and cause a few MW’s every now and again. Meh. Feels pretty by the numbers.

Edited by Nos
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is so much stuff in a tabletop game that breaks immersion. 

We play on a 6x4 every time. 

Named characters on either side of the table. 

I dont get this thread, that will annoy some people. If u want 100% immersion play a video game or go larp. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Killamike said:

There is so much stuff in a tabletop game that breaks immersion. 

We play on a 6x4 every time. 

Named characters on either side of the table. 

I dont get this thread, that will annoy some people. If u want 100% immersion play a video game or go larp. 

All you mentioned has nothing to do with immersion as long as everything is coherent in itself.

Larp isn‘t that immersive if the other attendants are awful actors. Video games try to immerse you, but it‘s not a given (mass effect: Andromeda failed at that)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Question for the folks who think this is all a load of stupid, baseless complaining; How would you guys feel if from now on every AoS table you played on had to contain some 40k sector mehcanicus terrain? It’s looks awesome, it doesn’t change the way the game works, and you can say a wizard raised it from the Realm of Chamon in your head canon if you wish. Genuinely curious if this would affect people’s enjoyment of their battles.

Edited by Luke82
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't bother me.  I have played on those tables.  In fact I played on that table a couple weeks ago.  I've also played AOS games where my opponents had 40k tanks representing monsters.  I don't really care about models or terrain.  I'd be happy to play with cardboard pogs and the warmachine mouse pad terrain if I had to *shrug*

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

Wouldn't bother me.  I have played on those tables.  In fact I played on that table a couple weeks ago.  I've also played AOS games where my opponents had 40k tanks representing monsters.  I don't really care about models or terrain.  I'd be happy to play with cardboard pogs and the warmachine mouse pad terrain if I had to *shrug*

That goes to show the diversity of players lol. Personnally I don’t really care about using the official rules but I’d hate to have minis and terrain that don’t fit an overall theme... a bunch of stormcast charging a land raider would really depress me 😂

Share this post


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

ut equally so did the old Anvil of Doom, a massive throne, herd stone etc.

The anvil of doom was a weapon. Shaped like a weapon... of doom :D 

massive throne, I agree

herd stone 50/50. That one fits the lore of beastmen being ‘nomads’ and bringing their herd stone with them. Especially after reading the Gotrek novel, where old world beastmen carried an immense stone with them, granting the shaman even more power. 

But your right it’s all down to where your  suspense of disbelief breaks. 

Share this post


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

There is so much stuff in a tabletop game that breaks immersion. 

We play on a 6x4 every time. 

Named characters on either side of the table. 

I dont get this thread, that will annoy some people. If u want 100% immersion play a video game or go larp. 

I think the last bit is the point isn’t it? I agree with you if it’s 100% AoS isn’t for you. But 80%, 60% 40%? Not to mention the subjective nature of the term And experience of immersion? It’s subjective, just accept it. 

8 hours ago, Luke82 said:

Question for the folks who think this is all a load of stupid, baseless complaining; How would you guys feel if from now on every AoS table you played on had to contain some 40k sector mehcanicus terrain? It’s looks awesome, it doesn’t change the way the game works, and you can say a wizard raised it from the Realm of Chamon in your head canon if you wish. Genuinely curious if this would affect people’s enjoyment of their battles.

Actually quite cool AoS table probably... just a shame if the a player has to bring it to every battle because it boosts their chamom wizard a bit ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I look at the question of immersion from the beginnings of Warhammer, or at least since the release of the Realms of Chaos books.

In Fantasy, daemons and chaotic mortal champions have always had a chance of carrying what some here would consider "immersion breaking" equipment.

A Khorne champion has always had a chance of carrying a chainsword or bolter pistol. It was one of the possible rewards or mutations (well not always, but for a long time).

Having some 40k piece of terrain could just as easily being something spit out by some sort of rift.

To me this does not break immersion, it adds mystery and wonder.

Edited by Choombatta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played on a 40k terrain table the other day with my Clan Skryre army and we just decided that it was the Skaven Tech Cave. It was great fun, the maggotkin had discovered its location, etc etc. 

Also, with regards to the skull altar, in the battle tome it does talk about one rising from the ground after a particularly heinous sacrifice. I'll try and find the passage later and post a picture.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it comes down to whether you can accept the reason for it being there or not and, at present, I believe that most of the explanations are good enough based on the things that I am already accepting. I don't think we've been told how the Fyreslayers bring their forge to battle, but even if it's just that they carry it with them and drop it on the front lines due to the benefits it provides them, then that is good enough for me. Your typical Fyreslayer army has over 100 troops, so I have no problem accepting that they would carry this giant hunk of metal, the fuel and whatever else it requires in order to empower their runes (or whatever it does). In fact it makes perfect sense to me that they would bring this item with them, if it provided them an edge in battle and they have the means to do so.

If the Roman cobbler provided an aura buff to the Roman troops wearing sandals, then you had better believe that they would be on the front line. Conversely if the Fyreslayer forge provided no benefits to it's army, then it wouldn't be on the front line. Although we are yet to see the rules, I think it's fair to say that this is not just a simple forge where some Fyreslayer blacksmith carries out his daily business. He is not fulfilling his daily orders for drinking goblets, nails or repairing axles on the battlefield, he is providing a strategic benefit to his army, so he is in exactly the right place.

The same is true for all of the terrain pieces in my opinion. Why wouldn't a Beast of Chaos army enlist it's Ghorgons or hosts of Gors to carry a huge magical rock with them given the benefits that it provides and that they have the manpower to do so? Why wouldn't an FEC army get 20 undead ghouls (that don't get tired) to carry a throne with them? and why wouldn't a magical sea that makes sharks swim through the air also call a ghostly shipwreck to the battlefield?

For me it's harder to imagine why these terrain pieces wouldn't be there than why they would.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...