The Rumour Thread

[DaCapo]

+1 -1 modifiers capped would mean rend -2 and -3 is kinda useless no ?

[Eldarain]

3 minutes ago, DaCapo said:

+1 -1 modifiers capped would mean rend -2 and -3 is kinda useless no ?

If it's the same as 40k it would be specific modifiers (to hit, to wound etc)

[Aturox]

I was expecting more from that announcement aswell 🤧

But i heard that nothingham is stocktaking till 10.5. So it seems that upcoming releases might be after that date...😬

[Acrozatarim]

If this is legit and Stand and Shoot is coming back, I suspect we'll see it combined with bigger limits on shooting and melee in general.

[Feii]

1 hour ago, DaCapo said:

+1 -1 modifiers capped would mean rend -2 and -3 is kinda useless no ?

I see a lot of people have this misconception. The raw value on the warscroll wouldnt be capped at 1. It means that rend -2 would be capped at -1 if affected by any number of negative modifiers or at -3 if affected by positive ones.

 

 

not sure what they do with artifacts because in thr 40K you replace an existing data sheet profile with them. 

[Enoby]

2 hours ago, PraetorDragoon said:

While the rules have often been a hit and miss, I like the sense of theme that various Battalions provided. I doubt a generic monster Detachments will give the same feel as the Royal Menagerie.

Yeah, this is my worry - I wouldn't mind the changes to battalions that much if they weren't what made some builds viable. I think the bloodthirster battalion is probably the best example. On their own, a bloodthirster isn't great but they're pretty nasty in that battalion and I reckon these thematic armies will drop off when these battalions are removed. 

Besides Depraved Drove, this doesn't really affect my lists much, but it does suck for those who want to run fun themed things like squig lists, bloodthirster monster mash, or some cavalry armies. 

[xking]

Check in out https://ageofsigmar.lexicanum.com/wiki/Karaznethil

[DaCapo]

19 minutes ago, Feii said:

I see a lot of people have this misconception. The raw value on the warscroll wouldnt be capped at 1. It means that rend -2 would be capped at -1 if affected by any number of negative modifiers or at -3 if affected by positive ones.

 

 

not sure what they do with artifacts because in thr 40K you replace an existing data sheet profile with them. 

 

Sorry but I didnt get it ?

I mean it's not totally useless but really situationnal no since you cant go more than rend -1 🤔

[Aturox]

5 minutes ago, DaCapo said:

 

Sorry but I didnt get it ?

I mean it's not totally useless but really situationnal no since you cant go more than rend -1 🤔

I think its only capped to -1 if its not on the warscroll or stated by an artefact.. So if you have -2 on your charge regulary you cant add anymore rend by using items or abilities but it wont get reduced to -1

[KrispyXIV]

6 minutes ago, DaCapo said:

 

Sorry but I didnt get it ?

I mean it's not totally useless but really situationnal no since you cant go more than rend -1 🤔

Unless it's significantly different than 40k, I expect the caps to modifications will only apply to dice rolls - and Rend itself will likely modify save values directly (as opposed to the roll), or have some other exception to allow it to function like it does now. 

There's more or less zero chance Rend -2 or -3 won't function exactly as you'd expect them to now.

[Morglum StormBasha]

All the changes mentioned in the list lab video seem reliable based on what I’ve heard.

They’re also significantly changing unit size limits so that only certain units can be taken “overstrength” ie more than their base unit size. So hordes will largely go outside of some battleline.

[DoctorPerils]

3 hours ago, boyadventurer said:

Where were these big model previews we were supposed to get this week? The Slaanesh ones were the usual Monday preview, so was it really just the one Ork boy?

I think they said the "coming weeks" so there may be more next week 🤞

[Deakz28]

23 minutes ago, DoctorPerils said:

I think they said the "coming weeks" so there may be more next week 🤞

Yea they did, but the also said about what we can expect this week, and they’ve only given us, well what we would normally get so here’s hoping we get more, if not Monday will have a reveal or two, kragnos will show in sure, or it’ll be a soulblight model 

[Chikout]

4 hours ago, Morglum StormBasha said:

All the changes mentioned in the list lab video seem reliable based on what I’ve heard.

They’re also significantly changing unit size limits so that only certain units can be taken “overstrength” ie more than their base unit size. So hordes will largely go outside of some battleline.

I really hope this is true. I think the horde discount was probably the worst change in 2nd edition. 

As for the new models, I think the "big" meant important. We did get three separate reveals this week. Next week we will hopefully see Kragnos and we will probably get a new sisters reveal. The 40k side of things seems to be alternating. We might get another bit of Soulblight info as well. 

[Indecisive]

I somehow got the 3.0 corebook dude... are they even a known rumour source?

[Blueraven84]

40k style strength and toughness rumours. Wonder if these have any truth in them. Would mean bigger edition change than expected if true.

[Incineroar87]

The list lab dude's sole credibility stems that he states he got the Lumineth and Gargant battletomes early and mentions his source is equally as reliable which tells us nothing. A lot of what he says already overlaps with what we already knew from the other AOS 3.0 leaks. Perhaps the source is the same hard to tell or he is simply piggy backing off the original leaks?.   He does promise to go over some of the rules in detail soon so time will tell.

[KriticalKhan]

1 hour ago, Blueraven84 said:

40k style strength and toughness rumours. Wonder if these have any truth in them. Would mean bigger edition change than expected if true.

Is this a RUMOR rumor or one of those "someone saw a ******-post on 4chan and posted it somewhere else" rumors?

[Greyshadow]

I like the sound of these changes actually. Especially the Battalion and charge reaction one. Some controls on stacking with these reactions seems like a good idea too. Interesting times ahead.

[Mutton]

3 hours ago, Incineroar87 said:

The list lab dude's sole credibility stems that he states he got the Lumineth and Gargant battletomes early and mentions his source is equally as reliable which tells us nothing. A lot of what he says already overlaps with what we already knew from the other AOS 3.0 leaks. Perhaps the source is the same hard to tell or he is simply piggy backing off the original leaks?.   He does promise to go over some of the rules in detail soon so time will tell.

I was also extremely skeptical, however, after doing some minor research, the dude was apparently a guest on TheHonestWargamer's show, and is a somewhat well-known player. I'm now less likely to believe he would make such brash claims without some degree of certainty. After all, he's risking his entire reputation on them.

Edited April 24, 2021 by Mutton

[Blueraven84]

2 hours ago, KriticalKhan said:

Is this a RUMOR rumor or one of those "someone saw a ******-post on 4chan and posted it somewhere else" rumors?

I have that feeling too that it's closer to wishlisting than actual rumour.

[JackStreicher]

10 hours ago, Morglum StormBasha said:

All the changes mentioned in the list lab video seem reliable based on what I’ve heard.

They’re also significantly changing unit size limits so that only certain units can be taken “overstrength” ie more than their base unit size. So hordes will largely go outside of some battleline.

Seems weird to me. Adding restrictions to AoS usually isn‘t GW‘s style. It‘s been a rather open Ruleset so far.

[Gaz Taylor]

1 hour ago, Mutton said:

I was also extremely skeptical, however, after doing some minor research, the dude was apparently a guest on TheHonestWargamer's show, and is a somewhat well-known player. I'm now less likely to believe he would make such brash claims without some degree of certainty. After all, he's risking his entire reputation on them.

Like with all rumours, take it with a pinch of salt.

Also remember it’s a take on what the guy liked from what he has seen. So it’s stuff he was focused on and slightly out of context as you don’t have all the info. Let’s see what happens over the next few weeks😉

[cyrus]

5 hours ago, Indecisive said:

I somehow got the 3.0 corebook dude... are they even a known rumour source?

It seems more " I wanna be a rumormonger " .

Battalions and charge reactions changes look really weird to me : not AoS style imho. 

 

[zilberfrid]

51 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

Seems weird to me. Adding restrictions to AoS usually isn‘t GW‘s style. It‘s been a rather open Ruleset so far.

Newer armies have lower modelcount, and they want to keep selling them. This allows them to use less material and charge the same price. This could help that.

Changing the batallions is stranger to me, because that would reduce flavour while balancing the game.

Edited April 24, 2021 by zilberfrid