General's Handbook - Is it good enough?

[JackStreicher]

21 minutes ago, Beastmaster said:

It’s actually a risky strategy of GW, I think. People quickly get suspicious toward everything new if it gets ended after a short time.  People learn from experiences, especially bad ones.
As far as I remember, the whole idea of the last GHB was that it would last for years and only the booklet with the points would get updated annually? Wasn’t this even officially stated?

I don‘t think so.

IIrc they just claimed that points would be adjusted every semester.

[Nezzhil]

Anyone knows the legality of the White Dwarf battalions, Legion of Grief and the other stuff that didn't appear in the points booklet?

[rosa]

5 hours ago, Beastmaster said:

It’s actually a risky strategy of GW, I think. People quickly get suspicious toward everything new if it gets ended after a short time.  People learn from experiences, especially bad ones.
As far as I remember, the whole idea of the last GHB was that it would last for years and only the booklet with the points would get updated annually? Wasn’t this even officially stated?

I remember exactly the same...

But I can't remember, where this was from.

But I bet it was officially.

[zilberfrid]

On 7/9/2020 at 6:57 AM, JackStreicher said:

I am just feeling bad for mercenaries being gone. I bought models to play as mercs and now this... I am feeling really screwed over.

Is it certain they are no longer in matched play?

Mercenaries were a oddly timed. Blacksmoke lost their core a month after release, and Nimyard's lost its leader at that time (and unlike the artillery, the warscroll changed and you can't the required options for him any more).

It's a good idea, but not thought through front to back.

I really like the idea of making a few mercenary companies that can be in every army you build after that. You can have "your dudes" there, and they'll be in every game.

Edited July 10, 2020 by zilberfrid

[Landohammer]

The GHB exists as a balancing mechanism. Its primary intended purpose is to make Matched Play more competitive and fair. Thats what we are paying for and 6 years ago during WHF I would have KILLED for something like this.

The fluff stuff in GHB is just that. Fluff. Its essentially free content for the Open and Narrative play guys so maybe some of them will buy the book as well. 

So its not really fair to subject it to criticism. It would be like buying a Harry Potter book and getting a free poster but then complaining when then next Harry Potter book you bought didn't come with a free poster. 

My only complaint is shared with @JackStreicher in that Mercenaries don't appear to still be around. I don't think they should introduce units in  GHB if they plan on dropping them later. 

I guess I will be gluing some rockets to all my newly purchased (and painted!) cannons

[Kramer]

2 hours ago, Landohammer said:

 

The GHB exists as a balancing mechanism. Its primary intended purpose is to make Matched Play more competitive and fair. Thats what we are paying for and 6 years ago during WHF I would have KILLED for something like this.

The fluff stuff in GHB is just that. Fluff. Its essentially free content for the Open and Narrative play guys so maybe some of them will buy the book as w

 

I think you downplay the value of open and narrative way too much. And it doesn’t correlate with how the game designers have talked about it in their podcasts and live shows. Admittedly part of that is marketing but I expect it to close to the truth. They appear to consider that a big part of the succes of AoS and work from that as a basis. One of them even spoke about how they had three profiles on the wall with a person they felt fitted with that play style and making rules for them to enjoy. 

as for the value for matched play. I suspect you’re mostly right. But they might also intend to shake things up a bit. There is always something in there that’s set up to be gamechanging. Things like random realm rules, or meeting engagements. 

[Ravinsild]

If I could find people who weren't die hard competitive to try out open and narrative play I would but alas I'm in perma-tournament prep mode Although I have fun with that too.

I'm more like I'll just play anything. I'm even open to other full-scale fantasy wargames. I only know of 2 though. Kings of War and 9th Age lol.

[Kramer]

16 minutes ago, Ravinsild said:

If I could find people who weren't die hard competitive to try out open and narrative play I would but alas I'm in perma-tournament prep mode Although I have fun with that too.

I'm more like I'll just play anything. I'm even open to other full-scale fantasy wargames. I only know of 2 though. Kings of War and 9th Age lol.

Where you from? 

I'm currently playing a narrative campaign... no don't switch off. In which you just play a tournament with a set amount of rounds in your local club. The only change is you track progress on a campaign map. That way you can still tournament prepping, balls to the wall, competitive games. But you add a narrative element that's basically there to track who's winning. 

If it's a succes you can maybe reward players with a small advantage in game as a narrative result, and slowly after a few years, you have the narrative group that will scoff at netlists. muwhaahaha 😈

 

[Landohammer]

2 hours ago, Kramer said:

I think you downplay the value of open and narrative way too much. And it doesn’t correlate with how the game designers have talked about it in their podcasts and live shows. Admittedly part of that is marketing but I expect it to close to the truth. They appear to consider that a big part of the succes of AoS and work from that as a basis. One of them even spoke about how they had three profiles on the wall with a person they felt fitted with that play style and making rules for them to enjoy. 

as for the value for matched play. I suspect you’re mostly right. But they might also intend to shake things up a bit. There is always something in there that’s set up to be gamechanging. Things like random realm rules, or meeting engagements. 

Every player i have ever met, and every event I have ever attended has been solely matched play. 

Im sure the open and narrative guys are out there somewhere, but they arent attending weekly game nights or events in my region. 

Im not dismissing them, I just feel like the GHB is made for matched guys. 

[Kramer]

5 hours ago, Landohammer said:

Every player i have ever met, and every event I have ever attended has been solely matched play. 

Im sure the open and narrative guys are out there somewhere, but they arent attending weekly game nights or events in my region. 

Im not dismissing them, I just feel like the GHB is made for matched guys. 

Well I didn’t know they made the ghb especially for your region  

But hello from the other side I guess. But I feel 2/3 of the book is more than just ‘free stuff for the narrative guys ‘

but if that’s your local setting, I would highly recommend playing a game with the cities of death rules. They really make it a different tactical challenge without it being a lot more work. It really helps you develop new tactics due to  the crowded nature of the table and those transfer to matched play again. And it Isn’t super in-depth narrative stuff. It’s not much more than a elaborate scenario.  

[Joseph Mackay]

11 hours ago, Landohammer said:

The GHB exists as a balancing mechanism. Its primary intended purpose is to make Matched Play more competitive and fair. Thats what we are paying for and 6 years ago during WHF I would have KILLED for something like this. 

This is not true at all. The Generals Handbook is for all 3 types of play (Open, Narrative and Matched) and always has been. This misconception is why they started putting points in a separate booklet starting with ghb19.

also, the content from Generals Handbook doesn’t get removed by the new version unless It specifically says so (eg the battleplans and points). Everything else is still 100% usable unless stated otherwise. They’ve even said this when they released the ghb17, because they can’t reprint everything in the new version or it’d be bigger than the core book.

now, some of the content may over time no longer be valid (siege rules from the original GHB, have since been updated in Wrath Of The Everchosen) but just because ghb20 is out doesn’t mean the content from ghb19, 18, 17 or the original is no longer valid

[Joseph Mackay]

6 hours ago, Landohammer said:

Every player i have ever met, and every event I have ever attended has been solely matched play. 

Im sure the open and narrative guys are out there somewhere, but they arent attending weekly game nights or events in my region. 

Im not dismissing them, I just feel like the GHB is made for matched guys. 

Matched play is easier to arrange as pick-up games with people you aren’t familiar with at the local store or something, and Open/Narrative doesn’t really work for a tournament because winning isn’t the important part in Narrative play, however it can be done.

you’ll find most Open/Narrative games are played amongst a close group that all know each other well, usually in a private environment rather than at the store

[Kramer]

11 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

now, some of the content may over time no longer be valid (siege rules from the original GHB, have since been updated in Wrath Of The Everchosen)

Fully agree with your point. But were  there any differences in the siege rules? I looked at it and couldn’t find a single difference outside of the scenarios 😅

[Beliman]

8 hours ago, Landohammer said:

Every player i have ever met, and every event I have ever attended has been solely matched play. 

Im sure the open and narrative guys are out there somewhere, but they arent attending weekly game nights or events in my region. 

Im not dismissing them, I just feel like the GHB is made for matched guys. 

People should stop building a wall between all three ways of play.

I mean, when I play Narrative games, I'm still playing with Matched play rules too. Narrative/open games are just a new layer of rules that you can incorporate to your Matched Play games.

Use a Narrative battleplan in a Matched play game, upgrade one unit to "veterans" instead of using triumph (or give it to an underused unit, Vanguard-hunters are a good target), Set-up 2-4 chests and any hero within 1" can flip a card (from GHB2019) and see if there is anything...

All this things can be used in Matched play, just need a bit more work from both players. You need to know how many layers you want to play with and enjoy your games with a little extra flavour.

Edited July 11, 2020 by Beliman

[Joseph Mackay]

13 minutes ago, Kramer said:

Fully agree with your point. But were  there any differences in the siege rules? I looked at it and couldn’t find a single difference outside of the scenarios 😅

Haha glad I wasn’t the only one. Yeah when they were previewing that book they said the siege rules were updated but as far as I can tell it’s the same

[Baron Klatz]

They probably were referring to the faction updates for siege like NightHaunt not starving on defense and ignoring siege defense when on the attack like boiling oil.

Which I'm a big fan of with AoS. Instead of wildly changing things around and forcing up-to-date purchases between the 1st ghb, the Dreadhold battletome and the Wrath of the Everchosen just to know what's going on it's done in the same style as AoS itself, very similar to the original core rules with a few extra refinements and layers added to spice things up.(thus why I like to jump back and forth between playing AoS1 & AoS2)

15 hours ago, Nezzhil said:

Anyone knows the legality of the White Dwarf battalions, Legion of Grief and the other stuff that didn't appear in the points booklet?

Should be Matched Play legal still. I've seen a lot of competitive rule lawyers point out 2017-2019 White Dwarf rules and stuff like the Firestorm campaign rules as fully legal even years afterward(on which Firestorm got implemented into CoS).

I think they go Open and Narrative only when certain updates happen like the new Seraphon tome redoing the Sotek's Claw stuff which was in the early White Dwarf when Seraphon first teleported from the stars onto the scene.

[The World Tree]

 

I mean it is £16 and I get some scenarios that I will spend hours on. Easily worth the money. I'd always take more, but I don't think I have any huge complaints.

[zilberfrid]

1 hour ago, Baron Klatz said:

They probably were referring to the faction updates for siege like NightHaunt not starving on defense and ignoring siege defense when on the attack like boiling oil.

Which I'm a big fan of with AoS. Instead of wildly changing things around and forcing up-to-date purchases between the 1st ghb, the Dreadhold battletome and the Wrath of the Everchosen just to know what's going on it's done in the same style as AoS itself, very similar to the original core rules with a few extra refinements and layers added to spice things up.(thus why I like to jump back and forth between playing AoS1 & AoS2)

Should be Matched Play legal still. I've seen a lot of competitive rule lawyers point out 2017-2019 White Dwarf rules and stuff like the Firestorm campaign rules as fully legal even years afterward(on which Firestorm got implemented into CoS).

I think they go Open and Narrative only when certain updates happen like the new Seraphon tome redoing the Sotek's Claw stuff which was in the early White Dwarf when Seraphon first teleported from the stars onto the scene.

I disagree, but the text and implementation is unclear.

GW stated that for 40k, old stuff will get moved to Legends, and advises TO's not to allow them, and that AoS would get the same treatment.

But for AoS legends, none of the victims of last July are included yet. Nor are they in this GHB (if the pictures are correct). Also, for Freeguild, keywords have changed, which means there are probably things that won't work anymore (like Free Peoples' alliance abilities from GHB 2019).

It's probable you can still use allegiance abilities for stuff where the keywords were not messed up, but you're putting yourself on the clock for whenever they are included in Legends.

[Nezzhil]

2 hours ago, zilberfrid said:

I disagree, but the text and implementation is unclear.

GW stated that for 40k, old stuff will get moved to Legends, and advises TO's not to allow them, and that AoS would get the same treatment.

But for AoS legends, none of the victims of last July are included yet. Nor are they in this GHB (if the pictures are correct). Also, for Freeguild, keywords have changed, which means there are probably things that won't work anymore (like Free Peoples' alliance abilities from GHB 2019).

It's probable you can still use allegiance abilities for stuff where the keywords were not messed up, but you're putting yourself on the clock for whenever they are included in Legends.

Bretonnia, tomb kings, old aelves and dwarfs (free people), Forgeworld stuff(fimirs, dragons,...), greenskinz, gitmob, the Nighthaunt special edition and a few more things are in a Legends section in this booklet.

Edited July 11, 2020 by Nezzhil

[El Syf]

I’ve always found them worth it. Flicking through the new one today the only thing I’m peeved about is all the malign sorcery stuff getting squated. But Vhordrai is now da man! So swings and roundabouts

[Chikout]

It’s 8.30pm on release Saturday and still no reviews on YouTube. What’s going on?

[GrimDork]

I'm interested in playing some meeting engagements. I didn't pick up GHB 2019.

Does anyone know if just buying the GHB 2020 will be enough?

Are the rules for meeting engagements fully repeated in GHB 2020 or will I need GHB 2019 as well?

[JackStreicher]

For some reason the GHB 2020 costs only 12.99€ on the Azyr App? - bought

[Kramer]

6 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

For some reason the GHB 2020 costs only 12.99€ on the Azyr App? - bought

Oh now I’m tempted as well. Too impatient to wait for next week to pick up my hard copy. 😂

[schwabbele]

Yeah , was surprised that’s like half of last year I think. Bought it.