So how does everyone feel about Age of Sigmar?

[overtninja]

I'm a big fan of the game, it plays like I imagined WHFB to be when I first got into the hobby like 15 years ago. I get to play big tree monsters and my old elves, and it's an enjoyable hobby outlet. Also, I play with an active, encouraging community which is worlds different than the sorts of folks I used to encounter in pickup games of WHFB. A good community is really important to the health of the game and hobby, so I'm happy that where I am it's a fun game to play.

[Grimrock]

5 hours ago, tripalreno4 said:

I haven't really been paying attention to the Warhammer universes for awhile, but was shocked when Warhammer Fantasy was wiped clean. How does everyone feel about Age of Sigmar, and what do people play now for their Warhammer Fantasy fix?

The game is great, much more fluid and thematic while the nuances provide a lot of things to master. Scenarios are also an incredible improvement over old warhammer games and are a huge boost to tactical play. Honestly I can say I don't think I've ever wanted to play Fantasy after I got into AoS, the game is just so significantly superior. I do miss the lore and quirks of some armies I guess, but not the game. 

My only gripe currently is the way they organize the rules. The core rules are simple and well made, but the actual rules for playing an army are needlessly complex and can be scattered around in too many books. There's the GHB, your army book, possibly a supplement like Wrath of the Everchosen or Malign Sorcery, White Dwarf, campaign books, and of course FAQs and Designer Commentary. For example if I want to play my Nurgle army I need 6 separate documents, 4 of which cost money. Then with the way GW is regularly releasing massively overpowered books and then nerfing them into the ground, you can't trust anything you buy will be worth playing within 6 months. Generally it's made me pretty jaded towards new armies and entirely uninterested in promoting the game with friends. I enjoy the game so I'm pretty much  stuck with it, but I wouldn't want to get anyone else into the same mess.

[TMS]

I'm torn, to be frank.

Keeping a long story coherently short, I like AoS as a game but dearly miss the setting and the look of Fantasy. I play both games with separate groups and while AoS is the more vibrant and alive I play it mostly with metal and plastic miniatures from the 1990's and 2000's (peak aesthetics). I use square bases coupled with some nifty magnetized converters to turn them into rounds which has worked great so far. Going back and forth between AoS and Fantasy isn't a big issue since the two don't step on each others toes as games, especially not since I can still use the same miniatures between them.

I'm still waiting to be swept off my feet by a new AoS release which could pull me wholly into it but the current miniature trends don't capture me.

The future Old World project is also interesting of course but it's too far off for me to get invested in.

[Fairbanks]

2 hours ago, Fairbanks said:

Gamewise it blows WFB out of the water. The old rules were so clunky and bloated that it took 3+ hours to play a big game even with veteran players.

You know what, I still haven’t done enough justice to the rule system.

The four page rules + GHB were so good, they turned 40K into it.

[Fairbanks]

2 hours ago, Fairbanks said:

Gamewise it blows WFB out of the water. The old rules were so clunky and bloated that it took 3+ hours to play a big game even with veteran players.

You know what, I still haven’t done enough justice to the rule system.

The four page rules + GHB were so good, they turned 40K into it.

[Baron Klatz]

Yeah, that's always a fun thing to see pointed out on reddit when someone quips "at least they didn't turn 40k into Age of God-Emperor",  they totally did(rules, progressive plot & copyright names all) they just didn't mess with the title. So now AoS' explosive success brought it's sci-fi brother back up top.

Also two things I forgot to put were that AoS has more appealing qualities to me because it's frequently updated to keep a good balance where even the "broken" new stuff doesn't dominate tourneys but instead we see a healthy mix of all factions from Fyreslayers to Beasts of Chaos high on the lists.

And second is the great lore balance where they both keep putting out the up-to-12 battle of the gods stuff where even right now we get a realm of vast continents floating on seas of solar energy ruled by glowing magic stone aelves that commune with the realm and it's titanic spirits, their by-product eldritch chasms with crying faces & have magi-tech clone armies while also expanding the grounded stuff as we see their city lives of dealing with foreign mortals, one of the more mundane uses of the aetherquartz to work late at night and even how the spent stones can be pawned off. And it's all done within the endless scope of the expanding realms so not matter how fleshed out they make it there's limitless room in every realm for both GW and fans to keep creating new stuff without clutter be it new races, maps or even deities like the God-beasts.

It's just fantastic all-round.

 

Edited July 14, 2020 by Baron Klatz

[Nos]

As per most GW products the rules are a mess, its neither simple and flowing and elegant like the best Skirmish games or rich and deep like most of it's obvious counterparts such as MTG et al, but it's far more accessible than anything else they've made besides LOTR back in the day

The Lore itself veers from pretty good to really dumb and is mainly passable. What Warhammer has lost in the rich cultural and political flavouring of the Old World it has gained in offering an amazing playground for hobby creativity. You can make up any background for any project without being in fear of it not fitting the wider context of the Mortal Realms. 

Aesthetically speaking the armies are exciting, creative, and many of them are served by extraordinary models.  It's very exciting to see GW evolve the obvious (and wonderful) Tolkien inspiration of old Warhammer into something recognisable but also innovative and interesting. It's essentially a meld of Old World and 30 and 40K but that's no criticism.

Re collecting, theres a really viable option within army building of taking loads of troops, or a few monsters and not much else, or anything in between. With Warcry off-shoots and Start Collecting its cheap and easy to get a foot hold but as per GW the extraneous nonsense quickly makes it quite an investment if you want to play with an army. Like still minimum £200 outlay for a 1500 point army for pretty much anyone. But again, that's all GW  not AOS specifically.

But it's an evolution from Warhammmer and is being steered with an increasingly assured hand and going somewhere really interesting. Warhammer has lost nothing from the Old World dying honestly- in many ways the Total Warhammer license is as powerful a means of engaging with the Old World as any previous edition was, and far cheaper and less time intensive too- and and I'm glad AOS exists. 

Just dont expect it to be a big revelation game wise. At best it's a pleasant and engaging way to spend an evening. At worst, utterly opaque, antiquated and open to hilarious exploitation for those so inclined. But again- that's just GWs way.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Nos

[Dankboss]

AoS as a game is excellent, but to me the lore is lacking. While I never played Fantasy battles, I did know the lore, of which I much prefer as I found events had more meaning than, for example, some random city I've never heard about before being destroyed before it could be established as a thing. GW seems to like listing off a bunch of unknown events in unknown places to establish how powerful something is, or how bad something was. But if a county in the Empire got torched, It'd actually register with me. I think the lore of AoS is too big in scope for my liking.

I think a combination of AoS game and mechanics, and Old World lore would have been ideal for me. As it stands, I'm pretty much 100% satisfied with AoS overall.

AoS lore is certainly getting better.

[Hannibal]

I quit WHFB with the release of 8th edition when suddenly I had to buy 100+ additional models to stay in the game with my armies. Increase of points being played, increse of numbers per unit to get all the rules benefits was horrible.

When AoS was released I was pretty interested in the game but it was hard to find people who wanted to play that game. IMO the lore of AoS is still kinda goofy, but on the other hand GW at least tries to give as a fresh setting.

And all those new armies are pretty nice when it comes to background and models. These days I´m more of a collector becuase it it still isn´t easy to find someone who wants to play the game.

Overall I think that AoS is the best WHFB GW ever created and I hope that the player base will increase. One huge advantage of AoS compared to 40k is that GW refuses to release rules over different books like they do in 40k. In AoS you really only need your battletome nost of the time.

[Clan's Cynic]

8 hours ago, tripalreno4 said:

How does everyone feel about Age of Sigmar

Right now it's in a better place than 40k is and will likely remain so given that 9th looks to be building upon the bloat that 8th initially sough to wipe the slate clean of and later doubled down on.. That said, I still vastly prefer Fantasy as a ruleset and setting so I am looking forward to The Old World now I don't need to carry a chip on my shoulder about it (unless GW tanks it right away).

The only real comparison between AoS and Fantasy is a few units being carried over and 'technically' being set in the same universe as beyond that, it's more like a melee-heavy 40k than anything resembling WHFB.

The lore for AoS is improving, but to be fair, the barrier for said improvement was so low it was buried beneath the earth.

8 hours ago, tripalreno4 said:

what do people play now for their Warhammer Fantasy fix?

I've been playing CMON's A Song of Ice & Fire . It's a fantastic, pretty damn fast paced, well balanced (except for certain Stark lists) rank-and-file game that is perhaps the most fun I've ever had with a tabletop wargame before. It's not overly expensive either compared to some non-skirmish offerings on the market. The Old World could definitely learn a lot of lessons from it. The models are far more grounded for obvious reasons but still have plenty of character, particularly in the different faction designs. The Tactics Board adds a good level of depth and Alternating Activations means you're never sat there bored looking at your phone.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Clan's Cynic

[Popisdead]

8 hours ago, tripalreno4 said:

I haven't really been paying attention to the Warhammer universes for awhile, but was shocked when Warhammer Fantasy was wiped clean. How does everyone feel about Age of Sigmar, and what do people play now for their Warhammer Fantasy fix?

... AoS?  hah.  What did you expect people to say here?  

RnF in a modern age of gaming is old man gaming.  

[JackStreicher]

Imo the game was fun up until a few months ago in which the quality of rules has dropped into the mariana trench. So much so that the fun while playing has been absent. 
still better than 8th of 40k though 🤷🏼‍♂️
* and better than WHF 8th

 

as for the fix part:

the universe of AoS is growing and already had some very amazing factions (Legions of Nagash, Idoneth Deepkin, Citirs of Sigmar)

Edited July 14, 2020 by JackStreicher

[Tiger]

It's a Fantasy game that my group agreed to play. WHFB/KoW simply has certain elements that I enjoy seeing, AoS simply isn't to my liking, the lore direction in particular.

[a74xhx]

I'm shocked that people on an AOS forum generally prefer AOS to WHFB.  Who would have thought it?

[Clan's Cynic]

3 minutes ago, a74xhx said:

I'm shocked that people on an AOS forum generally prefer AOS to WHFB.  Who would have thought it?

You've obviously never been to DakkaDakka.

[TMS]

2 hours ago, Nos said:

...

The Lore itself veers from pretty good to really dumb and is mainly passable. What Warhammer has lost in the rich cultural and political flavouring of the Old World it has gained in offering an amazing playground for hobby creativity. You can make up any background for any project without being in fear of it not fitting the wider context of the Mortal Realms. 

...

There's an interesting dichotomy between the openness and closedness of a setting, in something I'll call weight. An open setting truly is free but provides little weight, and vice versa for a closed setting. What's better comes down to personal preference but integrating my own story into an established area and timeline motivates me much more than something where I'll have to come up with the entire frame as well, making it somehow feel more... intangible?

I could provide you with a timeline of happenings and places unique to my Fantasy army and you would be able to follow along on an official map of the old world and cross reference it with established major events. This kind of weight gives it more merit in my eyes and I hope AoS will eventually offer the same opportunity.

Edited July 14, 2020 by TMS

[Overread]

@TMS I agree and its why I really hope GW starts to give us a dating system. That coupled with maps at least of the interior of the realms and the key locations would let us get an idea of the geography of each realm. WE can then tell if a major city is lost in the lore of the weight of a huge military campaign. Right now whilst the stories themselves can be epic and great, they do lack some of the unity of the Old World and a relation to each other. 

 

[a74xhx]

3 minutes ago, Overread said:

@TMSI agree and its why I really hope GW starts to give us a dating system. 

Totally read that wrong at first. Hot Aelves are looking for single Duardin in your area.

[TMS]

@Overread Yeah and I think it could be done in a way to cater to both ends. Some areas could be in focus and detailed with rich history while the true vastness of the realms provide the open canvas, creating both a micro and macro scale to suit your needs.

[Overread]

2 minutes ago, TMS said:

@Overread Yeah and I think it could be done in a way to cater to both ends. Some areas could be in focus and detailed with rich history while the true vastness of the realms provide the open canvas, creating both a micro and macro scale to suit your needs.

Indeed same with the dates - give it a few hundred years of post-AoS confusion and then usher in an age where Sigmar's influence is enough to put some order to the realms through the power of clocks and time. 

[gjnoronh]

I'm an old player - I started with WFB 3rd ed in 1990 or so and played every edition up until the current date.  

AoS is great - in lots of ways the armies play more like their fluff says they should then they did for the last few editions of WFB.  (I.E. in 8th  the most effective orc army was all artillery and Foot of Gorgkin level 4 shaman sitting in the deployment zone until they need to countercharge something) 

The rules are generally straightforward but provide a lot of appropriate flavor for each army.  

I highly recommend it if you haven't played.

 

Addendum note this is coming from a guy who played a lot of high level competitive WFB in 6th-8th and have won every award from Overall to Best General to Best Painted and Best Sports at 25-100 person events.   I played a ton with some of the best players in the US including most of the US ETC team through it's WFB era.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 15, 2020 by gjnoronh

[shinros]

In terms of rules and lore I prefer AOS, while 40k in my opinion is going downhill. So far to me it looks like 9th is going to be more of the same. I've played fantasy, overtime I grew to dislike the setting because I realised how static the factions were in terms of interaction. Also let's not get started on the rules, AOS had a bumpy start but overall it's in a good place in my opinion. 

[zilberfrid]

I have no thoughts about Fantasy, started 13 months ago.

 

• I like the detail of the models.
• I like the design of much of Tzeench, much of Cities, much of Gloomspite, all of Kharadron, and a few loose other units
• I like the core rules, and the fact that warscrolls are freely available.
• I like the majority of the community.

 

• I don't like the scale of the models, scale creep made them way too big for internal and external compatibility.
• I don't like the need to break the core rules with half of the battletomes.
• I don't like the way most factions are tied to a single god.
• I don't like exaggerated shoulderpads (Ironjaws, Stormcast, Chaos warriors).
• I don't like the need for superfluous words, like realmlords, overlords, eternals, of sigmar etc.
• I don't like the trend of ramping up power in new factions, and compensating with points drops, which increases cost of entry for older armies.
• I don't like the exclusion of Cities in Warcry, Underworlds and path to glory.
• I don't like the pricing of the heroes. For the detail, units are generally not much more expensive than other brands, but heroes are ridiculous.
• I feel diversifying the range is going at a glacial pace.
• I don't like GW's communication about dropping their products (culling of July 2019, Chaos Familiars, Forgeworld).
• I dislike most of the BL I have read (however little that was), with only a Kharadron book being actually enjoyable. This can easily be state of mind, because I wasn't feeling well when I read them.

 

Overall, I'm waiting to see if the attachment to GHB 2020 is interesting, but I'm mostly out of Warhammer and have gone to greener pastures. Or, Frostier, to be precise.

I'm not sure if the FAQ can save AoS for me though.

Edited July 15, 2020 by zilberfrid

[Nos]

2 hours ago, TMS said:

There's an interesting dichotomy between the openness and closedness of a setting, in something I'll call weight. An open setting truly is free but provides little weight, and vice versa for a closed setting. What's better comes down to personal preference but integrating my own story into an established area and timeline motivates me much more than something where I'll have to come up with the entire frame as well, making it somehow feel more... intangible?

I could provide you with a timeline of happenings and places unique to my Fantasy army and you would be able to follow along on an official map of the old world and cross reference it with established major events. This kind of weight gives it more merit in my eyes and I hope AoS will eventually offer the same opportunity.

I agree up to a point. I used to love making my Old World armies something with weight and associated context. As a teenager with hours of free time for it a day it was very satisfying not just to build my own narrative but also to pore over army books, WD's, novels etc for inspiration.

Now as an adult with associated responsibilities and shortage of time I use making models, units, warbands etc as an outlet for my broader interests and cultural inspiration and AOS is far more suited for it.

An Old World project by me now would feel sort of weightless and intangible because I dont have the time to research the world and create the heft to my projects that its rich narrative befits.

Most AOS lore on the other hand, by either GW or hobbyists, is just superlatives attached to vague amorphous goings on with tepid metaphysical smudgings in place of geopolitical parameters. 

The bigger it gets the worse it gets too. It suffers from 40k in that respect, in which Space Marines regularly exterminate planets of a billion people or whatever. What should be massive, dramatic events become punctuation and theres no scale to grip you as it's just inconceivable and distant.

In the myths on which AOS are based this is fine because said occurrences are not the point, they are  basically the staging point for a meditation on either some aspect of the human condition, or the nature of the divine etc. But in AOS they *are* the story. Impossible to really connect with as meaningful. Almost entirely without character in the traditional literary sense.

But if you embrace that absence of purpose it can be very liberating from a hobby perspective. You can make what you like without being shackled by any need to justify what it is or how it fits. 

My current project is Kurnothi Aelves. There is no story to it. None of them have names. They arent based in any realm or event or adjacent to or inspired by any plot development or indeed lore at all. I am basically converting and painting an army that has a sort of pagan wood elf aesthetic from an imagined 80's metal gatefold LP cover. It's all feel. 

Its actually an army I've had in mind for well over a decade but in Warhammer I could never get round the need to make it narrativley appropriate and I could never do that to my satisfaction meaning despite collecting certain models for it I never actually started the process of painting.

Now I'm painting a passion project made up solely of minis picked and converted solely because they look cool together. For me AOS is far more rewarding to my hobbyist bone for that reason even if my writing instincts are left utterly cold by it.

I also like the more "heroic" scale on respect to my own, measured and slow painting habits. Nothing looks better than a huge varied regiment in all its regalia and character but I've always hated assembly batch painting.

You can still create something nearly as impressive  with a unit of 5 dynamically posed, well based and positioned elites though. 

Edited July 14, 2020 by Nos

[Wraith01]

I discovered Warhammer through Age of Sigmar, when it launched, and loved everything about the game. I have 6 full 2000 point armies and most of the books.

It baffled me that some people didn't like the game and most of the stuff they criticized  was just plain wrong (like Stormcast being empty suites of armor, when in the first book that came out they have 2 Stormcast leaders talking to each other with their helmets off).  But the people at my local gaming store where on board with the new game and the new system so  there was no vitriol from  toxic Warhammer Fantasy "fans" (like the people burning their armies online).  2 of the guys at my store had been on MiniWarGaming YouTube battle reports in the past. In them found a small community that was inviting and excited to learn the new system.  There were only 8 guys when I joined and one of them owned the store, but we grew to around 12 by the time I moved to Florida, 2 years later.  More people were interested once the Generals Handbook came out and honestly the game has just gotten better and better. I especially love the fact that even though GW has added a bunch of new rules and stuff it's all pretty much choose what you want to use to play.  I still demo the game with the original 4 page rules. 

Anyway GW is working on a new game called Warhammer: The Old World, it might be a return to the style of Warhammer Fantasy or it might be something new...