So how does everyone feel about Age of Sigmar?

[NinthMusketeer]

47 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

Both of those also raised a lot more questions but that's getting off topic. I think the point is some people just prefer a more grounded setting where nearly every question can be answered.

Do you have an example of such a setting we can compare to?

[Grdaat]

Just now, NinthMusketeer said:

Do you have an example of such a setting we can compare to?

There's a setting this one replaced and which is making a return you might have heard of...

[Beliman]

27 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

Should probably get back on topic after this, but so long as we're temporarily jumping off we might as well commit to it.

We should start a new topic really.  It's nice to talk about this without starting a pointless war betwen "I like X so it's better than Y" vs "I like Y so it's better than X".
Not sure if we are going to find any answer really but we can try .

[Grdaat]

8 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

See, that was not what I was doing. At all. Now you are just bending it into something else and making this toxic, for no reason. If you disagree, just disagree. If you don't understand, just say so. There is nothing wrong with that.

I think maybe Grdaat's take-it-all-literally responses may be throwing things out of context, too. It is one of the problems with sarcasm in a text-based discussion. Rest assured that once jokes are put aside no one actually believes that a bit of fluff is literally analogous to the price of miniatures, that the people of Greywater literally eat invasive plant growth to keep it away, or that fluff-skeptics literally care about the refraction rate of Aqshian crystal.

I was not being fully sarcastic (just mostly), and my points about the hobby store compared to 40 Starbucks were honest (if a little absurd). If I know the stakes, it's easier to get invested, simple as that. If you keep making it seem like there might be a big change because a city might falls in the same setting where a new Empire gets eaten by the Ogors every Tuesday, well I think you can see why it's hard to take that seriously.

This is why I stated earlier that by upping the scope they ruined the scale. It's like trying to get invested in the life of a fly amid a million other flies.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Grdaat

[Grdaat]

Just now, Beliman said:

We should start a new topic really.  It's nice to talk about this without starting a pointless war betwen "I like X so it's better than Y" vs "I like Y so it's better than X".
Not sure if we are going to find any answer really but we can try .

I honestly don't think anyone's doing that, the worst this got was whether or not something was retconned.

[Beliman]

1 minute ago, Grdaat said:

I honestly don't think anyone's doing that, the worst this got was whether or not something was retconned.

Completely agree, that's why I think it could be healthy for our forum (and mods) to discuss in a post dedicated to that.

[zilberfrid]

8 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

See, that was not what I was doing. At all. Now you are just bending it into something else and making this toxic, for no reason. If you disagree, just disagree. If you don't understand, just say so. There is nothing wrong with that.

I think maybe Grdaat's take-it-all-literally responses may be throwing things out of context, too. It is one of the problems with sarcasm in a text-based discussion. Rest assured that once jokes are put aside no one actually believes that a bit of fluff is literally analogous to the price of miniatures, that the people of Greywater literally eat invasive plant growth to keep it away, or that fluff-skeptics literally care about the refraction rate of Aqshian crystal.

Noted. My reply was a bit middle of the night. Sarcasm detectors lose their accuracy past 3:00 AM.

As an aside, I am the sort of person that, when reading that in heaven "Seven suns shine, each as brightly as seven suns" wants to know the power of the holy airconditioning, starts imagining how that must feel with a migraine, and looks up whether hell or heaven is hotter (barring divine cooling).

[Grdaat]

6 minutes ago, Beliman said:

Completely agree, that's why I think it could be healthy for our forum (and mods) to discuss in a post dedicated to that.

We're pretty much over it already though, there isn't much more to say. It would just be a bunch of reposts unless you want to open it up to more retcons, but if you do that I think it would turn into a cesspool pretty quickly.

A lot of people would get mad at the retcons, and then others would be mad at people who are mad at the retcons.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Grdaat

[NinthMusketeer]

3 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

I was not being fully sarcastic (just mostly), and my points about the hobby store compared to 40 Starbucks were honest (if a little absurd). If I know the stakes, it's easier to get invested, simple as that. If you keep making it seem like there might be a big change because a city falls, in the same setting where a new Empire gets eaten by the Ogors every Tuesday, well I think you can see why it's hard to take that seriously.

This is why I stated earlier that by upping the scope they ruined the scale. It's like trying to get invested in the life of a fly amid a million other flies.

Wait, earlier you said this:

"Except 40k has very critical planets we know to be unique, that isn't the case for AoS because it's intentionally poorly defined to give its writers as much freedom as possible."

Literally replace "40k" with "AoS" and "planets" with "cities" to have you perfectly destroy your own argument. You are telling me that was not sarcastic? You say AoS is poorly defined to give writers freedom, which is again the same as 40k; the overwhelming majority of planets we know nothing about!

[Grdaat]

3 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Wait, earlier you said this:

"Except 40k has very critical planets we know to be unique, that isn't the case for AoS because it's intentionally poorly defined to give its writers as much freedom as possible."

Literally replace "40k" with "AoS" and "planets" with "cities" to have you perfectly destroy your own argument. You are telling me that was not sarcastic? You say AoS is poorly defined to give writers freedom, which is again the same as 40k; the overwhelming majority of planets we know nothing about!

Which city is AoS's Terra/Cadia/Fenris/Armageddon/Baal/Ultramar/Vigilus? 40k gives reasons for why their major planets are important, each contributes to those around it whereas AoS's cities are just cities. If they're destroyed, they're replaceable. The same isn't true of the planets I mentioned, just look at what happened when Cadia fell.

AoS is like 40k if there were no major planets.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Grdaat

[zilberfrid]

3 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

Which city is AoS's Terra/Cadia/Fenris/Armageddon/Baal/Ultramar/Vigilus? 40k gives reasons for why their major planets are important, each contributes to those around it whereas AoS's cities are just cities. If they're destroyed, they're replaceable. The same isn't true of the planets I mentioned, just look at what happened when Cadia fell.

AoS is like 40k if there were no major planets.

When Cadia fell, no faction was gone, and Cadians are still quite numerous in the store (8 sets starting with that name).

Now I don't know what's right. I hate removal of warscrolls, but I also really can't care about a book that's written as high stakes, when the result either doesn't matter or is predetermined so as to not upset existing factions.

[Grdaat]

6 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

When Cadia fell, no faction was gone, and Cadians are still quite numerous in the store (8 sets starting with that name).

Now I don't know what's right. I hate removal of warscrolls, but I also really can't care about a book that's written as high stakes, when the result either doesn't matter or is predetermined so as to not upset existing factions.

Why would you need to kill a faction to make a drastic change? That sounds like you're shifting the goalposts because it has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

The second point I agree with you on, and that's also exactly my point in AoS. In 40k for example, if Guilliman gets his head cut off then that's it, he's gone for good. In AoS when the Celestant Prime died, we weren't able to see him fighting during the time  he took off to get better. With that in mind, why care about a fight between him and Olynder? Both will be back next week regardless of who wins.

This was also something I went into detail on in my first post on this thread.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Grdaat

[Beastmaster]

I often wonder why the being invested in losses issue seems to work better with 40k. Maybe because the whole Grimdark one minute til midnight trope makes the loss of each planet count? The Imperium is shrinking, while it feels like the Realms are expanding. Also, the planets often fully depend on other planets in the vicinity, just to be able to feed themselves. 

[NinthMusketeer]

21 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

Which city is AoS's Terra/Cadia/Fenris/Armageddon/Baal/Ultramar/Vigilus? 40k gives reasons for why their major planets are important, each contributes to those around it whereas AoS's cities are just cities. If they're destroyed, they're replaceable. The same isn't true of the planets I mentioned, just look at what happened when Cadia fell.

AoS is like 40k if there were no major planets.

No, that just is not true. The AoS fluff often goes into a good amount of detail as to why specific locations are important. Hell, the CoS battletome is essentially 'cities that are important: allegiance abilities'.

[zilberfrid]

9 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

Why would you need to kill a faction to make a drastic change? That sounds like you're shifting the goalposts because it has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

The second point I agree with you on, and that's also exactly my point in AoS. In 40k for example, if Guilliman gets his head cut off then that's it, he's gone for good. In AoS when the Celestant Prime died, we wouldn't be able to see him fighting while he took the time off to get better. With that in mind, why care about a fight between him and Olynder? Both will be back next week regardless of who wins.

This was also something I went into detail on in my first post on this thread.

I think, in AoS, at one point the whole of Cities will get squatted in lore, but that's more because GW doesn't like it and would get rid of the faction. Probably.

That would make books consequential, but it's a business decision with a few books as additional income.

Contrary, when planning the fall of Cadia, it would be an excellent timing to replace the Cadian sets with others. The Cadians already made would be the guards in service off planet, but slowly, they would stop being the majority. That would give an excellent in-lore reason to update an aging line. They didn't. They didn't even change the name of the unit.

As for named characters, it was my understnding that they only very rarely truly are in danger. Most are just miraculously victorious or saved.

Edited July 16, 2020 by zilberfrid

[NinthMusketeer]

8 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

Why would you need to kill a faction to make a drastic change? That sounds like you're shifting the goalposts because it has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

The second point I agree with you on, and that's also exactly my point in AoS. In 40k for example, if Guilliman gets his head cut off then that's it, he's gone for good. In AoS when the Celestant Prime died, we weren't able to see him fighting during the time  he took off to get better. With that in mind, why care about a fight between him and Olynder? Both will be back next week regardless of who wins.

This was also something I went into detail on in my first post on this thread.

How is that different from a fight between Abaddon and Calgar? We know from the onset both of them are going to somehow survive, at least AoS allows some characters to actually go down in combat without needing to invent some plot contrivance to save them.

[Grdaat]

Just now, NinthMusketeer said:

No, that just is not true. The AoS fluff often goes into a good amount of detail as to why specific locations are important. Hell, the CoS battletome is essentially 'cities that are important: allegiance abilities'.

And none of those cities are irreplaceable. None of those cities are places that cannot be rebuilt, or hand waved away by having a near-identical city revealed just a mile down the road should they fall. Because of this, those cities are still just places, not places of importance.

[NinthMusketeer]

Just now, Grdaat said:

And none of those cities are irreplaceable. None of those cities are places that cannot be rebuilt, or hand waved away by having a near-identical city revealed just a mile down the road should they fall. Because of this, those cities are still just places, not places of importance.

When Glymmsforge was overrun and Katakros released, they can't just 'rebuild' him back into his box. When realmgates are corrupted or destroyed, that can't be reversed. Shyish is now slowly being pulled into the Nadir, no amount of walls will fix that. I could equally say 'none of those planets are irreplaceable, they can just rebuild on another planet or space station, or maybe there is a near-identical planet a system over should they fall.'

Also, you never did provide an example of a setting that is fully fleshed-out.

[Grdaat]

5 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

I think, in AoS, at one point the whole of Cities will get squatted in lore, but that's more because GW doesn't like it and would get rid of the faction. Probably.

That would make books consequential, but it's a business decision with a few books as additional income.

At least then it would feel like there were actual stakes to a conflict.

Quote

Contrary, when planning the fall of Cadia, it would be an excellent timing to replace the Cadian sets with others. The Cadians already made would be the guards in service off planet, but slowly, they would stop being the majority. That would give an excellent in-lore reason to update an aging line. They didn't. They didn't even change the name of the unit.

They don't really need to so long as they explain in-universe why Cadians act and are recognized as Cadians, and they did just that.

Quote

As for named characters, it was my understnding that they only very rarely truly are in danger. Most are just miraculously victorious or saved.

That depends, while it's not often that it happens, there have been many characters killed off who were prominent in the lore, on the tabletop, or both. One of the biggest examples that comes to mind is Aun'Va.

4 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

How is that different from a fight between Abaddon and Calgar? We know from the onset both of them are going to somehow survive, at least AoS allows some characters to actually go down in combat without needing to invent some plot contrivance to save them.

Because both Abaddon and Calgar can die permanently, the Celestant Prime and Lady Olynder cannot.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Grdaat

[NinthMusketeer]

Just now, Grdaat said:

Because both Abaddon and Calgar Evan die permanently, the Celestant Prime and Lady Olynder cannot.

At this point it is clear to me why you find the AoS fluff so vague; you have not read it. I'm out.

[Grdaat]

Just now, NinthMusketeer said:

When Glymmsforge was overrun and Katakros released, they can't just 'rebuild' him back into his box.

Except they could just break Katakros and put him in a new box, therefore reversing it.

Just now, NinthMusketeer said:

When realmgates are corrupted or destroyed, that can't be reversed.

A) the Seraphon showed you can make new Realmgates, and B) you can bar Realmgates shut, which is what Sigmar did.

Just now, NinthMusketeer said:

Shyish is now slowly being pulled into the Nadir, no amount of walls will fix that.

The places within Shyish are moving to the Nadir, I've never seen anyone say the realm was shrinking. This also goes with what I was saying about how the cities are disposable.

Just now, NinthMusketeer said:

I could equally say 'none of those planets are irreplaceable, they can just rebuild on another planet or space station, or maybe there is a near-identical planet a system over should they fall.'

No you cannot, look what happened when Cadia fell for example. If Terra fell then that's it, humanity's screwed, the Imperium's over and safe FTL travel is permanently gone for them. That you think Terra of all places is not irreplaceable blows my mind.

Just now, NinthMusketeer said:

Also, you never did provide an example of a setting that is fully fleshed-out.

I wonder what setting AoS replaced and is coming back I was referring to...

[Grdaat]

5 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

At this point it is clear to me why you find the AoS fluff so vague; you have not read it. I'm out.

Do you think the Celestant Prime and Olynder can permanently die? If so I've got some news for you about the battle that happened right before Katakros was released, as well as the end fight of Wrath of the Everchosen...

Also if you think that I haven't read the lore then you haven't read the thread.

EDIT: It's also very poor form to accuse somebody else of not knowing the lore, right after you say that Terra in 40k is a replaceable planet, and that it wouldn't matter if it was destroyed.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Grdaat

[Beliman]

What makes Cadia and all this planets so important? I'm starting war40k and I really like what I'm reading.

[JPjr]

28 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

I wonder what setting AoS replaced and is coming back I was referring to...

a setting that, let's be honest, was developed & made up and retconned numerous times over the course of decades, and still had ridiculously large gaps in it.

I love the old WHFB setting, I still engage with it all the time via WFRP but it wasn't some perfectly thought out thing that arrived on day 1 as a perfectly conceived concept with all its history and lore in place, as flawless as if it was communicated to Rick Priestly by god himself. and carved on tablets of stone, obsidian stele, a flaming book or some golden plates.

I mean ages ago I posted a picture of the map of the old world, released around the same point in time of WHFB as we are now into AoS and it was, let's say, still a work in progress... and then, just to take one small example, 20 or 30 years into the game they could barely figure out amongst themselves whether Albion, a country based on the place the people making the game actually lived in, was 1 island, several islands or even existed on maps.

Edited July 16, 2020 by JPjr

[zilberfrid]

37 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

1. At least then it would feel like there were actual stakes to a conflict.
2. They don't really need to so long as they explain in-universe why Cadians act and are recognized as Cadians, and they did just that.
3. That depends, while it's not often that it happens, there have been many characters killed off who were prominent in the lore, on the tabletop, or both. One of the biggest examples that comes to mind is Aun'Va.
4. Because both Abaddon and Calgar can die permanently, the Celestant Prime and Lady Olynder cannot.

1. Yes, it would be a score for books. It would also push many people out of AoS, because their faction was removed. I'd say the books matter less than the people.
2. I don't know a lot about 40K. You might be correct. Still a missed opportunity for a line refresh.
3. As said, I am not well versed in the lore, but in AoS, for non-seraphon, non-stormcast order and destruction, dead is dead, and even stormcast souls could be taken.
4. They can get destroyed, it's just harder.