Huge miss for 3.0, praying for battletomes

[Lior'Lec]

     So the new Path to Glory campaign system is without a doubt my favorite part of the new edition. It is narrative matched play, which is how I prefer to play anyway, plus a very organic system for building your army. But I was massively disappointed when I couldn’t find an updated Anvil in either the 3.0 core or general’s rule books. My only hope now is to that they miraculously decide to include these rules in each faction’s battletome alongside the PtG rules or for a white dwarf article (which I’m afraid would fall rather flat).
     With the new PtG system a refined AoA for generic heroes would have been an excellent addition to our armies. Yes I know the AoA wasn’t balanced well for matched play but that is something they could have addressed with an update. My ideal system would have had a generic AoA like last year’s GHB in the core rules’ narrative section and then faction specific versions included alongside the faction’s PtG rules in each new battletome. White dwarf issues could in turn be used to add additional grand alliance specific options to the anvil for soup armies (I know they aren’t popular right now but this plus PtG could have made them attractive from a narrative standpoint).

    So while I’m praying, I don’t really expect to see my wishes come true, and this has started turning into a rant. Maybe I’m just here to vent and whine. Has anyone created (or started working on) an updated homebrewed revamp of the anvil to work with 3.0 matched play points? 

[Laststand]

Given that the last WD magazone included a destruction AOA builder and the issue before had a Soulblight one I doubt its gone or unsupported. 

[stratigo]

PtG is reminiscent enough of crusade that all the flavor is almost certainly coming in the battletomes. What we have now is the bland lunchmeat and bread, and all the sauce and spice is coming later. 

 

I'm not a huge fan because, well, like who is gonna play PtG without a battletome? So hope your entire group gets their tomes first cause otherwise PtG isn't taking off?

[Lior'Lec]

@Laststand     Maybe I’ve always been misunderstanding  how GW intends rules to be used. The way I’ve always understood it was once an updated GHB comes out anything that hasn’t been reprinted/updated in either the core rules or GHB is no longer “official” and cannot be used without opponents’ consent. That’s why Siege and Underground engagement rules have been printed two or three times each now. So with AoA not added into the core rules nor newest GHB they aren’t current or supported. And even if they were they still are not balanced for use with matched play points which the new PtG system is using. 

@stratigo    Uhm, I would. I think you’re partially right and wrong both at the same time as the base system has a bit of flavor all on it’s own now. Yes it isn’t much flavor, but there is enough for now and the battletomes will improve on this for each individual faction. Yes, I may prefer some of the faction specific options which are released in the battletome and may even decide I want to retire my general or drop an artifact to replace them. But I don’t see how any of this would or should prevent me from being able to use the basic system even before the tome is released. And remember it can be utilized  regardless of whether or not the opponent is playing a PtG campaign or cares at all. Even in tournaments. 

[Popisdead]

If you are playing narrative gaming what is stoping you from using Anvils of Apotheosis with new rules?  You aren't playing in a tournament gaming system.  

 

I'm confused how this is a huge disappointment and not a minor setback you could talk to your opponents about.  

[BadDice0809]

A buddy and myself started a PtG campaign. We use an Anvil hero as our warlord, and use Reown Points as a one-for-one for Destiny Points to upgrade them. The hero is "free" to take points wise but still costs a HERO/WIZARD/PRIEST/MONSTER slot. If one hero has more (spent) renown than the other, you subtract the totals and divide by 5 (rounding up) lower hero gets that many turns of "additional CP to be spent in this turn" in that particular game.

PtG has been really fun. We both deliberately took books not at risk of an update any time soon (FEC and KO), and will start a stormcast versus Warclans when their books drop. 

The 'plain lunch meat and bread' version is working just fine. I really recommend trying it out.

[Lior'Lec]

Hmm, hadn’t thought about doing it that way, mostly because some of the people I’d be playing with play straight matched play games. While I can play my PtG army against any matched play force (even in tournaments for those who see anything besides tournament play as “not really playing”) I cannot (currently) use the Anvil that way.  Which was one of the reason I hoped for a more balanced and focused anvil. I’ve tinkered around with some custom heroes for leaders but to play against other guys I need a vanilla general as well. 

[Neverchosen]

So I am just scratching the surface of 3.0 and I am really excited for Path to Glory but with settling in at a new job it is something on the back burner, also having completed a lengthy day I have no clue if what I am writing makes any sense. But I have a bit of question in relationship to Path To Glory. If I wanted to use it as the basis for a narrative campaign but I was content with my 2000 points army could I just build towards what I currently have, will I have to purchase additional models in terms of 'fitting' the criteria of where I am in my 'Path', or can I just run my army at 2000 points and use the rewards that are not specifically for adding further units?

[Howdyhedberg]

I skimmed through the narrative part in the core book yesterday. Does it say how you win a campaign? Could you lose territory?

 

Or is it up to the players how to win?

[Kamose]

4 hours ago, Howdyhedberg said:

I skimmed through the narrative part in the core book yesterday. Does it say how you win a campaign? Could you lose territory?

 

Or is it up to the players how to win?

So PtG isn't a campaign system that you can win. It's a system for growing your army and developing your units over time based on the games they play.

It's similar to Crusade in 40k and the way Crusade works is GW releases campaign setting in books or White Dwarf that your Crusade army can fight in. Those campaign settings may have win conditions or your gaming group could decide for themselves.

So PtG is all about your army's growth and the campaign books are all about the war they are fighting.

[Howdyhedberg]

7 hours ago, Kamose said:

So PtG isn't a campaign system that you can win. It's a system for growing your army and developing your units over time based on the games they play.

It's similar to Crusade in 40k and the way Crusade works is GW releases campaign setting in books or White Dwarf that your Crusade army can fight in. Those campaign settings may have win conditions or your gaming group could decide for themselves.

So PtG is all about your army's growth and the campaign books are all about the war they are fighting.

I see! But Path to glory in AOS 2 had a win condition right?

 

Thanks for explaining!

[BadDice0809]

19 hours ago, Howdyhedberg said:

I see! But Path to glory in AOS 2 had a win condition right?

 

Thanks for explaining!

Yeah it had one, I think it was 10 Glory Points?

You can easily get to 10 glory in a single 750-1000 point game in current PtG.

You can play PtG at 2k, just keep in mind you will have to tailor your starting territories to make sure you can even run your list (have enough HERO/WAR MACHINE/MONSTER slots as well as reinforcement slots). You could also keep your PtG army as the set list you have for 2k, and just spend all your Glory Points as recuperating your units, upgrading your territory, etc  while taking quests to unlock more spells and artifacts.

As other have mentioned their is no in built "win" condition- its something you determine with your group. Maybe you want play 10 games and see you has the most Glory Points. Or who has completed the most quests (that could be easy to game though). Or a combination of both.

[Nasrod]

Path to Glory has been miserable in my experience. Soulblight Gravelords, 2 games so far and I didn't even get to play in either of them. 

Game 1 I was surrounded and stuck in the center, and forced to split my army in half before the game began. Boingrot Bounders flanked both positions and rolled an 11 and a 12 on charge, Loonboss bolstered a block of 40 Grots on left flank, and Mangler Squigs smashed into Vengorian Lord. Since the opponent was allowed to set up within 7" of my units... about 630 points of my army were charged on turn 1 by 1000 points of Gloomspite Gitz. 6 wounds got through on my Necromancer (3" range attacks) amd rolled 2 1s and 3 2s. Instadead on turn 1 in a list of Skeletons and Zombies meant to be supported by him. Fun!

Game 2 was against Kharadaron Overlords, and there was an invader and ambusher to select. He was the Invader holed up in the corner and dropped Spell in a Bottle Soulsnare Shackles in front of his army on turn one...honestly the worst experience of Sigmar I have ever had. Literally "So, you spent 500 dollars on an army that has no ranged units? In 3rd edition? What are you, stupid?!"

I sure do feel stupid.