alghero81 Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 1 minute ago, Overread said: Right now I think that the new "cultist" keyword will replace the Mark ability. That way GW can publish the cultist details on the tome once; rather than repeating the "mark" ability on a dozen warscrolls. I agree and keeps also simpler to distinguish which slaves can get a mark and which not by saying only cultists can be marked. So which excel of the many going around got it right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoby Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 1 minute ago, Overread said: Right now I think that the new "cultist" keyword will replace the Mark ability. That way GW can publish the cultist details on the tome once; rather than repeating the "mark" ability on a dozen warscrolls. I wouldn't mind a name change, I'm more worried that they will become unusable in other god armies without allies. One of my favourite things about chaos is the amount of options they have to choose from; and I daresay some people will be very upset if they have bought and converted a lot of Slaves models to be of a particular god in that god's army. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kugane Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 42 minutes ago, Overread said: Does anyone want a Kidney? Or how about a bit of liver - or a lung! Fairly sure I can do without them in order to be able to afford next week! * Now that's a launch! Boxes of 20 surprises me, though I'm really excited to see the cavalry! We also finally get to see this guy *failing that I've got some high elf chariots and wood elves....... It might be best to convert that model a bit to have the energy connected to his hand. Two contact points are less likely to break. It looks super fragile otherwise XD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overread Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 I do love how we are seeing them reforming in battle - it really reinforces the idea that they are reshaped bone not just skeletons beaten into a new shape. Though I'm tempted to convert one - depending how its feet connect to the large skull I'd rather it were "floating" whilst casting its spell. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralZero Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 told you that those skelly contructs were probably boxed by 20 😛 (which suddenly put the feast of bones boxe at a far less value 😕) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nighthaunt Noob Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Overread said: Does anyone want a Kidney? Or how about a bit of liver - or a lung! Fairly sure I can do without them in order to be able to afford next week! * Now that's a launch! Boxes of 20 surprises me, though I'm really excited to see the cavalry! We also finally get to see this guy *failing that I've got some high elf chariots and wood elves....... Am I the only one that looks at these and thinks, damn this army would be so much cooler if they didn't wear armor? The guys manning the catapult also inspire this thought in me. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Explorator Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 I think this may be a contender for the greatest amount GW ever released in one week. Just wow. Actually feels rather overwhelming. 1 hour ago, Enoby said: I wouldn't mind a name change, I'm more worried that they will become unusable in other god armies without allies. One of my favourite things about chaos is the amount of options they have to choose from; and I daresay some people will be very upset if they have bought and converted a lot of Slaves models to be of a particular god in that god's army. There's about two things in AoS that could throw me into a full nerdrage. One would be loosing markable Slaves units, the other would be a full removal of Chaos Warriors as a unit. That being said, I can't see them removing mono-god keywords from Slaves after they went and added battalions so Beasts could be played in Mono-God allegiance just one year ago. However, even if they removed marks and made Slaves only markable by specific battalions, that would be a loss. Its a big difference of being able to take just a unit of warriors and having to cough up three units from a limited palette and a hero. But all in all, I am quite confident we will keep our Mono-God Slaves in some way. My fears for a upcoming Slaves tome revolve more around units being removed. I really like the lord on mount as a conversion project and as a finecast character its in a precarious position. But really, any lost unit stings. In that regard the precedent of Ogre Mawtribes is quite encouraging. But the precedent of Cities of Sigmar is not and makes me fear even for the likes of the Warshrine (another great modeling/conversion project). 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indecisive Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 wow, the spreadsheet was right, I'm honestly amazed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smartazjb0y Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 So if the spreadsheet's right what are we thinking those $65 Warcry Warbands are gonna be? Or is that a separate leak? I still find doubling the sprues and removing the cards unlikely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overread Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 It's the only surprising/confusing thing on the list. It's both equally a shock if GW chooses to double the content of the boxed sets just as it would be if they chose to raise the prices. Right now the warbands are priced pretty sensibly, or at least in line with everything else. A big $15 price rise would be worrying as that would suggest GW was ready to push everything up and thus far all indications are that Warcy is selling really well. At the same time if GW chooses to double the content that's a huge boon. It's just impossible for us to tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alghero81 Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 I can’t see a box having exactly double the sprues at that price and still the other box being available for Warcry. Why would I ever buy the single sprue box? Are the original cards mandatory in tournaments or can I show up just with printed cards? Cause that would be the only reason and even then I’m sure you can find online people who bought two boxes and have a spare set of cards to get rid of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overread Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 Just a thought - the paint pot holder is listed at $48. Now even GW in a fit of madness couldn't charge that much for a lump of plastic that holds 3 paint pots. So some of the prices might be retail bulk buying prices? Although I still don't think that really helps with the Warcry sets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitorsz Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 (edited) so the prices in that spreadsheet image.... What's up with those? Red painting handle $67.50 Spray stick $18 Paint Pot holder $48 5 pack of black painting handles $40 Considering a painting handle now is $10 (I'm assuming everything is USD here). Why on earth is the red one over 6 times more expensive? the 5 pack price seems fine. The spray stick seems a bit expensive but depends how big it is.... The paint pot holder for $48 seems absurd too.... $48 for a bit of plastic with 3 recessed circles? I don't usually complain about pricing but who the hell is going to buy a red painting handle at a 675% mark up? That's literally more than a unit of 20 Mortek Guard.... Edited October 27, 2019 by Inquisitorsz 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smartazjb0y Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 1 minute ago, Inquisitorsz said: so the prices in that spreadsheet image.... What's up with those? Red painting handle $67.50 Spray stick $18 Paint Pot holder $48 5 pack of black painting handles $40 Considering a painting handle now is $10 (I'm assuming everything is USD here). Why on earth is the red one over 6 times more expensive? the 5 pack price seems fine. The spray stick seems a bit expensive but depends how big it is.... The paint pot holder for $48 seems absurd too.... $48 for a bit of plastic with 3 recessed circles? I don't usually complain about pricing but who the hell is going to buy a red painting handle at a 675% mark up? That's literally more than a unit of 20 Mortek Guard.... Yeah the painting handle seems crazy...you can get a single red handle for $67.50 or buy 5 black ones for $40? That makes no sense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overread Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 It's why I wonder if those prices are trade prices for a set. So instead of GW selling them individually to the store they sell them in a block for X amount with a bit of discount. It might also be so that stores could use a spare copy for a tournament/local even prize pool or such. However that also means that the list is a confusing mix of trade and retail prices all in the same block. That or the prices are incorrect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indecisive Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 parts might be right but that doesn't guarantee every bit of it is right, could have some typos or mistranslations Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleboda Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 5 hours ago, Nighthaunt Noob said: Am I the only one that looks at these and thinks, damn this army would be so much cooler if they didn't wear armor? The guys manning the catapult also inspire this thought in me. I really like the armor. For decades the problems with skeletons armies have been their fragility and their "sea of bone" visual on the table. Making these armored constructs rather than ragged skeletons fixes both issues. 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 5 hours ago, Sleboda said: I really like the armor. For decades the problems with skeletons armies have been their fragility and their "sea of bone" visual on the table. Making these armored constructs rather than ragged skeletons fixes both issues. "problem" 🙄 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incineroar87 Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 5 hours ago, Sleboda said: I really like the armor. For decades the problems with skeletons armies have been their fragility and their "sea of bone" visual on the table. Making these armored constructs rather than ragged skeletons fixes both issues. Agreed so much here ! This is why I really love the aesthetics of Bonereapers as opposed to the mundane Nagash and Tomb King skeletons. Makes a big difference aesthetically and even in terms of gameplay looking at the new battletome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVenerableBede Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 15 hours ago, Enoby said: I wouldn't mind a name change, I'm more worried that they will become unusable in other god armies without allies. One of my favourite things about chaos is the amount of options they have to choose from; and I daresay some people will be very upset if they have bought and converted a lot of Slaves models to be of a particular god in that god's army. The fact that "some people will be very upset" makes it more likely that GW will do it. They are perverse like that. I have a load of Chaos Warriors and Knights I use for Nurgle and have zero interest in running a generic S2D faction if I'm honest, no matter how powerful the Battletome may be. I'd be one of the "very upset" if I were forced to sell them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCovenLord Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 (edited) 16 hours ago, Rogue Explorator said: That being said, I can't see them removing mono-god keywords from Slaves after they went and added battalions so Beasts could be played in Mono-God allegiance just one year ago. However, even if they removed marks and made Slaves only markable by specific battalions, that would be a loss. Its a big difference of being able to take just a unit of warriors and having to cough up three units from a limited palette and a hero. But all in all, I am quite confident we will keep our Mono-God Slaves in some way. See I would agree with this as I would prefer slaves be able to be marked and be very allegiance friendly with other factions (to act as mortals particularly for those gods without mortal options still). But GW has had a habit recently of adding things in one book and taking them away in another. A huge example is the mercenary cannons (sub 6 months ago) were added then summarily removed in the cities of sigmar tome. Lore wise skycutters were mentioned under a year ago in novel form and then sub 6 months ago were removed. They had a faction focus on basic orruks then removed them under a year from the articles publication as well. I have a hard time trusting GW not to change something like marks if they feel like it as they have had a notable lack of consistency. Edited October 28, 2019 by TheCovenLord 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralZero Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 I've ordered my boxes to an online webstore (not GW). Now, the waiting is stressing: will I get my boxes? lol (yes it was a super early order, but still...). This sh*t already happened to me for the looncurse box which I (fortunately) didn't get. Fortunately : just because it was to start a sylvaneth army which retrospectively was not a good choice for me. But now, the Feast of bones gives me the oportunity to start 2 armies that interest me. So, I'm praying the plastic god! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeryenn Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 6 minutes ago, GeneralZero said: I've ordered my boxes to an online webstore (not GW). Now, the waiting is stressing: will I get my boxes? lol (yes it was a super early order, but still...). Yeah, same here. I've ordered 2 boxes of Feast (think most of the stuff will be useful for 2k armies) and refreshed the site twice that day before preorder went online. Sadly with the Looncurse I had an argument with the very same e-shop but in the end they sent me my copy of the box. Guess they've learned their lesson as Feast was impossible to order later that day, probably after they had sold several copies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackdawGin Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 16 hours ago, Overread said: It's the only surprising/confusing thing on the list. It's both equally a shock if GW chooses to double the content of the boxed sets just as it would be if they chose to raise the prices. Right now the warbands are priced pretty sensibly, or at least in line with everything else. A big $15 price rise would be worrying as that would suggest GW was ready to push everything up and thus far all indications are that Warcy is selling really well. At the same time if GW chooses to double the content that's a huge boon. It's just impossible for us to tell. What if it's a repackage but they duplicate only some sprues? The Iron Golems for example have the Dominar and Drillmaster on one sprue, the Ogor Breacher and Armator on another with the Prefector/Signifier split between them. But, the three Iron Legionaries are all on their own sprue. What if we get an additional of that last one making the box: Dominar, Drillmaster, Prefector/Sgnifier, Breacher, Armator and 6 Legionaries? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still-young Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 8 minutes ago, JackdawGin said: What if it's a repackage but they duplicate only some sprues? The Iron Golems for example have the Dominar and Drillmaster on one sprue, the Ogor Breacher and Armator on another with the Prefector/Signifier split between them. But, the three Iron Legionaries are all on their own sprue. What if we get an additional of that last one making the box: Dominar, Drillmaster, Prefector/Sgnifier, Breacher, Armator and 6 Legionaries? I don’t think it works out so neatly for all the factions though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.