The Rumour Thread

[michu]

8 minutes ago, Charles said:

I can’t see the Khorne FAQ I’ve refreshed a bunch of times 😔

Change to different setting (e.g. A to Z) and then back to "recently updated"

[michu]

And now we know that if our unit has less than 10 models during list nuilding, we can't add banners and musicians.

Q: Many warscrolls allow weapon options and other upgrades to be taken by ‘1 in every x’ models. For example, 1 in every 10 models in a unit of Blood Warriors can replace the unit’s weapon option with a Goreglaive. What happens if the unit has fewer than x models? A: The weapon or upgrade cannot be taken. For example, a unit of Blood Warriors with fewer than 10 models could not have a Goreglaive.

[Mutton]

2 hours ago, wwwwww said:

The artwork is stunning. I wonder if the flying creatures or (what look to be) smaller magmadroths down by the river will be released in years to come. Wishful thinking perhaps, but more firey beasts would get me on board with starting an army.

The army could stand to have some of those winged droths tearing around the battlefield.

[JPjr]

@michu I've noticed that's been a thing with recent battle tomes and updated warscrolls, not all mind but most it seems. to be honest I prefer it that way. It makes much more sense than older warscrolls where take it as read you could field a unit of 20 musicians or something ridiculous like that.

looking at the ones I have here Nighthaunt don't have those restrictions on their applicable units in their BT, so must have come in after that as it's in the Skaven and Gloomspite BT's. Generally speaking most I've seen where it's been 1 in x, x has been the min unit size anyway (again most but not all, Plague Monks  I notice are 1 in 20 but min unit size is 10).

Edited April 12, 2019 by JPjr

[Overread]

1 hour ago, bsharitt said:

So it looks like the Lord Slaanesh on damonic mount is now no longer available on the US store(i.e. not just temporarily out of stock). I suppose it's possible that he's just going to get rebased, but it's an old metal model that really looks outdated. Maybe the previewed Slaanesh releases weren't all they planned.

I would expect, based on past experience, for:

1) Lord of Slaanesh on demon mount
2) Herald of Slaanesh in resin
3) Masque in resin
4) Chaos lord of Slaanesh 
5) Keeper of Secrets.

To leave the store between now and when the new Battletome launches/goes on pre-order. All are older metal/resin models and whilst some have been replaced with the new wave of models, I'm doubtful that we will see any more models from Slaanesh other than those already shown in the preview. Don't forget that the terrain feature wasn't shown in photos, only in the video, whilst the twins with the mirror are shown but no name nor detail is given. Both would fit the "more to come" aspect of the hint they left without GW having any more actual models to show off. 
The only one we might see is a Herald on its own as we've not seen that. There is a herald and Prince kit so it might be the prince could make two forms and the herald could go on-foot from that. Other than that the only tiny chance is human slaanesh warriors, but I'd figure if they had them they would have shown them off then rather than hold them back

 

So if you want any of those 4 models I'd get them now - note the keeper is getting a big size upgrade with the new model so the current is more likely to be on size for a prince and could be a neat stand-in instead of the official prince model if you wished. 

Remember Skaven kept a lot of their metal models, but thus far for AoS that has been a gross exception to the normal. The only other army that might get similar treatment would be Gutbusters. A lot, however, depends on when those armies are getting updated models. Any big release wave will knock out a lot of older models; whilst any army that is getting the bare-bones Tome+Spells+Terrain is more likely to retain old models (though losing is still a risk). 

[Overread]

14 minutes ago, JPjr said:

@michu I've noticed that's been a thing with recent battle tomes and updated warscrolls, not all mind but most it seems. to be honest I prefer it that way. It makes much more sense than older warscrolls where take it as read you could field a unit of 20 musicians or something ridiculous like that.

looking at the ones I have here Nighthaunt don't have those restrictions on their applicable units in their BT, so must have come in after that as it's in the Skaven and Gloomspite BT's. Generally speaking most I've seen where it's been 1 in x, x has been the min unit size anyway (again most but not all, Plague Monks  I notice are 1 in 20 but min unit size is 10).

Also I think the majority of people were either 1 in every 10 (or box) or just 1 per unit in the real world. The rules were just lazily written in that regard originally. Personally I'd rather it was 1 per unit (save for some exceptions where, say, multiple banners would make sense) just like the leader for the unit. That way it visually looks sensible. It just looks really odd even with a unit of 30 if you've got 3 banners flying around. 

[Thiagoma]

1 hour ago, Overread said:

Also I think the majority of people were either 1 in every 10 (or box) or just 1 per unit in the real world. The rules were just lazily written in that regard originally. Personally I'd rather it was 1 per unit (save for some exceptions where, say, multiple banners would make sense) just like the leader for the unit. That way it visually looks sensible. It just looks really odd even with a unit of 30 if you've got 3 banners flying around. 

I always assemble 1 for every unit in case i decide to field it by itself in the future. Unfortunelly people will try to take advantage of a "hole" in the rules like it happened with the Icon on Namarti Thralls....

[Rogue Explorator]

3 hours ago, bsharitt said:

So it looks like the Lord Slaanesh on damonic mount is now no longer available on the US store(i.e. not just temporarily out of stock). I suppose it's possible that he's just going to get rebased, but it's an old metal model that really looks outdated. Maybe the previewed Slaanesh releases weren't all they planned.

If they do, they bettermake a replacement instead of just kicking out the unit. I'd sorely miss the old boobsnake. Besides, though dated, it is still a stylish champion and one that, due to there not having been a lot of Slaanesh mortal miniatures since the RoC era ones went oop, been rather iconic to how Slaaneshi mortals look.

There'd still be the generic Slaves Lord on Daemonic Steed to fall back to, but then such a move could forespell his eventual demise as well.

2 hours ago, Overread said:

Also I think the majority of people were either 1 in every 10 (or box) or just 1 per unit in the real world. The rules were just lazily written in that regard originally. Personally I'd rather it was 1 per unit (save for some exceptions where, say, multiple banners would make sense) just like the leader for the unit. That way it visually looks sensible. It just looks really odd even with a unit of 30 if you've got 3 banners flying around. 

I don't see a problem with the "as many as you want" approach to musicians and banner bearers. Bar the few cases where units can have different banners (which could be fixed by saying these units could contain only one type of banner) there is no mechanical reason to have more than one of either, but it does give players the option to do it anyway for their own option.

I'm no fan of taking away options from players for so small a gain.

[Overread]

@Rogue Explorator my view point is from two points:

1) Far from taking away a choice its actually giving players a choice by limiting them. See without any limits there would be no reason not to take a banner on every unit and an instrument on every unit. Sure you'd have to convert and sure it would look rather silly, but it would be perfectly legal and you'd have no mechanical reason not to take the unit like that. Gameplay wise you'd not be choosing to take those updates nor choosing where to put those models on the table to best minimise their loss; you'd just be playing the unit at its basic minimum.

2) As I noted above, visually its daft; mechanically its daft and lore wise its also rather daft. 

Therefore limiting them down to 1 per 10 or 1 per unit is far more sensible for the game. It makes it a choice if you take more than 1 per unit of 10; it makes it a choice in how you deploy and move them around the table; lose them and you've lost the bonus. 

I think its a positive and sensible change to the game that is basically dealing with something that was very casually written into the rules that, clearly, was intended to mean something different than how it was written. 

[Rogue Explorator]

6 minutes ago, Overread said:

1) Far from taking away a choice its actually giving players a choice by limiting them. See without any limits there would be no reason not to take a banner on every unit and an instrument on every unit. Sure you'd have to convert and sure it would look rather silly, but it would be perfectly legal and you'd have no mechanical reason not to take the unit like that. Gameplay wise you'd not be choosing to take those updates nor choosing where to put those models on the table to best minimise their loss; you'd just be playing the unit at its basic minimum.

I don't get entirely what you are trying to say here. I take it you saying that players would be compelled to model for advantage making every model a standart bearer or musician just to remove the possibility of losing them? Because that doesn't really compell me. There are cases in AoS where I really feel the rules as written force players to build their units a certain way to not actively hamstring themselves and I agree those are an issue. But I really don't see this a case of that. All in all, since the controlling player is in charge of removing models, its pretty hard to loose your musician and standart bearer until the very end. Overall, compared to the gameplay advantage, the modelling or financial effort of doing this is disproportionate and I can only see the sort of player usually referred to as "that guy" doing so purely for the advantage. You know, the sort of player that isn't fun to play against no matter the rules. Most certainly I don't see anybody compelled to stick surplus musicians in their units purely for the rules benefit, bar the cases where there are multiple different options for banners/musicians, for which I've proposed a softer "fix" above.

6 minutes ago, Overread said:

2) As I noted above, visually its daft; mechanically its daft and lore wise its also rather daft.

Whether it is mechanically daft is already discussed under your point 1).

As to what is lore wise and visually daft, that is up to the individual player when it concerns their own army and collection and no one else.

I see a lot of conversions, count-as, homebrew background, even some paintschemes and proposedly fluffy (non-competitive) army compositions I'd personally consider daft in one or both of these cathegories. But I sure as hell go railing against it or want GW to rewrite the rules to "fix" that. Because this is the players decision and I want that same freedom.

 

I don't usually put more than one of each musician and standart bearer in my units. But I do have some ideas for mortal Slaanesh where I would want to go the route of putting an excess of musicians and banner bearers into a unit or two. Because I think in that particular case I'd consider it entirely appropiate for a deranged bacchanal horde and for me it would break up the tedium of regular horde building.

 

The worlds of Warhammer being filled so to the brim with theatrics and lunacy, I would imagine there are other players who would want to do similar and the rules of AoS have supported that for a few years now.

 

 

It seems strange to argue about this, it is not a huge issue by itself. But the general idea of restraining modelling options just to make the game more "tidy" to some sensibilities, seeing how the issue in question is not gamebreaking and will rarely if ever play a role in deciding a win or loss,  just rubs me the wrong way. I am deeply rooted in the parts of the hobby of making the minis our own and I am always concerned when I see GW doing anything to move away from that.

[amysrevenge]

I think "daft" is a stretch.  There isn't a magic lore line where a blob of 60 moonclan grots having 1 banner is great, 3 banners is acceptable, but 4 banners is daft.

That said, I'm glad there is a printed maximum.  Put everyone on similar starting conditions where possible.

[Dirtnaps]

4 hours ago, Mutton said:

The army could stand to have some of those winged droths tearing around the battlefield.

I'd be all in for that, absolutely love the design of the magmadroths and if they follow a similar design I think they would look pretty damn good. They'd give the army some more much needed visual diversity as well, who knows maybe we'll see them sometime down the line in the next couple of years.

[Overread]

Those dragons are also twin winged it would seem which would add some neat dragon style variety to the AoS range. 

[Riavan]

The thing with making it so it's one banner per unit, rather than 1 per 10 (or whatever the minimum size is), that you won't be able to split up sizes of units and you'll have to buy extra boxes of troops to get a single extra model so you can do this.

Meaning for example 20 plaguebearers only having one standard bearer, means if you then change it to 2 units of 10, that you would need an extra standard bearer. Meaning you would need to buy an entire new box for one extra troop to fill out your unit.

Tbh I would quit if they did this. Not paying that much money and wasting stuff.

Edited April 12, 2019 by Riavan

[Barbossal]

Regarding the Slaaneshi Chaos Lord, Tzeentch still has the ancient fatemaster model which is just a Chaos Lord of Tzeentch on disc, so it's not wild to assume he could stay.

[Sleboda]

4 hours ago, Overread said:

limiting them down to 1 per 10 or 1 per unit is far more sensible for the game

It is effectively 1 per unit already, which is a real shame of the tournament scene in my area anyway.

Take bloodletters. They have two distinctly different banners, and each description matches the visual of one of the two that come in the 10-man box. So, you get two boxes because the Glory Days* are gone. Per the rules, with the (exactly) 20 models you bought, you can have one of each banner in your unit. All you have to do is build one of each. All good!

But wait.

You go to a tournament that has rules that despite what the rules allow, you may only have one of each command model in your unit. Uh oh. Guess you better buy another 10-man box just to build one spare guy to replace your legal second banner. Or. You know. You could just pick one banner to build in the initial 20 and be stuck. That way you are legit for all the gaming in your area.

 

*Back in the day, you bought blister packs of the command models and blister packs of a few regular model. Both of these were used to supplement the variably-sized units your books allowed and were added to the 5 or 10-man boxes of the unit you got. Now you buy in lots with no flexibility to be able to create variants such as different banners. I miss the old ways. I also miss 25 cent comic books and 90 cent gasoline.

Edited April 13, 2019 by Sleboda

[Chikout]

Just a heads up to say that all the updated fyreslayer warscrolls are on the GW New Zealand site. It will be interesting to see the new points because there isn't a single warscroll that hasn't been buffed in some way. 

[Riavan]

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

It is effectively 1 per unit already, which is a real shame of the tournament scene in my area anyway.

Take bloodletters. They have two distinctly different banners, and each description matches the visual of one of the two that come in the 10-man box. So, you get two boxes because the Glory Days* are gone. Per the rules, with the (exactly) 20 models you bought, you can have one of each banner in your unit. All you have to do is build one of each. All good!

But wait.

You go to a tournament that has rules that despite what the rules allow, you may only have one of each command model in your unit. Uh oh. Guess you better buy another 10-man box just to build one spare guy to replace your legal second banner. Or. You know. You could just pick one banner to build in the initial 20 and be stuck. That way you are legit for all the gaming in your area.

 

*Back in the day, you bought blister packs of the command models and blister packs of a few regular model. Both of these were used to supplement the variably-sized units your books allowed and were added to the 5 or 10-man boxes of the unit you got. Now you buy in lots with no flexibility to be able to create variants such as different banners. I miss the old ways. I also miss 25 cent comic books and 90 cent gasoline.

Thank God I've never seen a tournament do that here. Sounds like a hangover from the old whinging old world crowd.

[Rogue Explorator]

3 hours ago, Sleboda said:

It is effectively 1 per unit already, which is a real shame of the tournament scene in my area anyway.

Take bloodletters. They have two distinctly different banners, and each description matches the visual of one of the two that come in the 10-man box. So, you get two boxes because the Glory Days* are gone. Per the rules, with the (exactly) 20 models you bought, you can have one of each banner in your unit. All you have to do is build one of each. All good!

But wait.

You go to a tournament that has rules that despite what the rules allow, you may only have one of each command model in your unit. Uh oh. Guess you better buy another 10-man box just to build one spare guy to replace your legal second banner. Or. You know. You could just pick one banner to build in the initial 20 and be stuck. That way you are legit for all the gaming in your area. 

 

*Back in the day, you bought blister packs of the command models and blister packs of a few regular model. Both of these were used to supplement the variably-sized units your books allowed and were added to the 5 or 10-man boxes of the unit you got. Now you buy in lots with no flexibility to be able to create variants such as different banners. I miss the old ways. I also miss 25 cent comic books and 90 cent gasoline.

Or they could just give all banners for the same unit the same rules and allow players to choose which bit they like better. Seeing how these initially had the same rules when the kit came out, so those where thrown in to give players options.

Rules that compel players to model a specific way? That's one right there. One thing that annoys me in AoS that there are on and of phases where they give rules to every single bit in a kit. I like the two headed Tzaangor bit, for a unit leader or such, but I don't like building it for every one in five just so my units aren't suboptimally build.

 

I'll admit I'm getting cranky and of topic here though.

[Ggom]

Question about the battletome rumours: do we think a new Daughters of Khaine book will come out in the next year? I’m slow growing a DoK temple and will probably take at least 6 months to have something usable. Thinking about whether getting the current tome would be worth it.

[Future]

Dok tome will be around for a very long time 

[King Taloren]

Outside of GHB adjustments that people are wishlisting like crazy, there won’t be a new Daughters of Khaine tome for a few years. Probably not until after 3.0 comes out depending on how big a rules change they make then.

Edited April 13, 2019 by King Taloren

[Mayple]

49 minutes ago, xking said:

Do you have any evidence for this? Or are you just saying what you think?

Hold on, I'll sort that one out for you.

There's no evidence that there will be a new Daughters of Khaine battletome for years to come.

There we go

[EccentricCircle]

Daughters of Khaine was one of the books which came out just before 2nd ed hit, and was specifically stated to be a 2e book. It has the white spine and new logo, and in form it matches the subsequent books. Therefore it is widely considered up to date and unlikely to be revised unless there is a major release for the daughters, or and edition change. Make of this evidence what you will.

Edited April 13, 2019 by EccentricCircle

[Xasz]

As the others said, I doubt DoK will see a new book in the foreseeable future.

That being said, I'd guess they'll get the Tzeentch treatment this year (which was in a similar dominant position for quite some time).

Harsh FAQ and/or severe point changes through GHB.