Jump to content

Age of Sigmar: 4.0 What would you like to borrow from 40k 10th edition?


Beliman

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Clan's Cynic said:

I agree, but unfortunately I think we're beyond that point with the 'very real actual 100% full' Nagash getting lasered to death. 

Although I suppose they could just retcon it and say the 'magic backlash' was enough to make him take a breather, even though it was "just a powerful aspect of him."

What I meant is the versions WE get to field are just aspects. Or give us rules for both, whatever works! But yeah, Nagash & Arkhan are currently at 'astral projection' status when they take part in battle as per the most recent Gravelords tome.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, NinthMusketeer said:

I would honestly prefer AoS transfer its gods to 'aspect-tier' where the model is representing a single 'projection' or avatar of the god rather than the god themself. That way it would make narrative sense to dial back their abilities and get them into the ~500 point range of performance and cost.

Agreed. In addition GW could release several models of a single god: Aspect of war, aspect of death and the real god for 1k+ points (just as an example)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few more faction focus and a few more rules that I think are fun to play with.
It seems that each model/unit can only attack with one weapon of their chose (it should be tweaked for mounts in AoS), but there is a mechanic tht let's you use another weapon if that weapon has Extra Attack USR:

Spoiler

kLIV1Bx2F4l3puZE.jpg

It seems nice to have multiple weapons and chose the best one to attack. There is a bit of a problem because AoS has "Damage output" and that's what matters, but I hope that weapons and units have more specialized profiles.

40k still have two basic defense stats with Armor save and Ward Save (not the same as AoS) and a unique USR with FNP (our Ward Save). That remind me about some other wargames that have Armor and Evasion and they work pretty well. It can open up the possibility of specialized units/profiles without having Str vs Th.

Btw, it seems that magic is completely "automatic". You have a "magic" weapon and/or a permanent passive ability (Phantasmagoria and Mesmerising Form):

Spoiler

3rUHqOfCIVSw2mAw.jpg

Btw, I really like the new Combat Patrol system. If it can be a bit balanced and fun, it could be really good for the whole game with faster and cinematic gameplay:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/05/09/ways-to-play-warhammer-40000-combat-patrol-is-fast-and-fun/

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

Btw, I really like the new Combat Patrol system. If it can be a bit balanced and fun, it could be really good for the whole game with faster and cinematic gameplay:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/05/09/ways-to-play-warhammer-40000-combat-patrol-is-fast-and-fun/

Totally agree, the new combat patrol system looks like a great take on small points games. Fixing the lists and customizing the rules for internal balance makes so much sense, and combining that with free rules online and cards solves so many issues for newer players. I don't think it'll be a mode for veterans to play over and over and there are potential flaws, but it's the best system I've ever seen for introducing new players to a game over my 20+ years of varied wargaming. I'm super excited to see all the rules and try it out.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I do not think AoS due for a reset like 40k when it does land I hope;

1. Remove every single dice roll for heroic/monster actions. Just make them interesting and only ONE can be used per turn because if everyone's a bloody hero all the time, what's so heroic about these actions? Rename them to Routine Actions instead. Also, saves time as you don't have to play checklist-hammer. Naturally, some units who pointlessly had their abilities turned into heroic actions would have that change reverted back to a warscroll ability.

2. Split mortal wounds into Arcane Wounds and Mortal Wounds. Arcane Wounds stay the same as Mortal Wounds and Mortal Wounds become something else (such as modifier to save). One extra rule but it would be a...

3: USRs, which means they'll be super easy to remember. As a bonus, another tool for the designers to make things which doesn't have to be all or nothing. Ideally though, MWs on "normal weapons" should be avoided as much as possible and be reflected in the weapon's profile.

4. Simplify degrading profiles to "If X unit has Y wounds or less" apply effect Z.

Overall, I want to kill as much useless dice-rolling and time-wasting actions who provide very little impact on the game as possible. There are already armies with hero/magic phases which drags on and on, we do not need to add even more layers to that.

Edited by pnkdth
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2023 at 8:21 PM, Aeryenn said:

Currently, AoS rules seem so much better to me than what 40k had to offer. Only getting rid of double turn would make this game better. I don't want anything more.

I’ve been enjoying 40k a lot more then aos lately.

but I do must admit, I haven’t been playing any competitive games, just some fun beer and bretzel games with some of my buddies

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

I’ve been enjoying 40k a lot more then aos lately.

but I do must admit, I haven’t been playing any competitive games, just some fun beer and bretzel games with some of my buddies

10th is looking really nice too. I was kind of worried about the reset but most, if not all, of the factions so far looks like they've retained a lot of flavour. My favourite so far has to be Daemons with The Shadow of Chaos as an opposite to the 'nids Shadow of The Warp. Love how it both reflects the sheer madness of a daemonic incursion and also its sustaining energies as you try to spread its influence over the board.

For me 40k and AoS is two sides of the same coin. Striking similarities yet different in key places. Good to alternate between (as well as other games of the tabletop variety).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind to see characters joining units. The main question is, what units can the heroes team up with? 40k has a bit of a problem because they have Thougness and movement and both units and heroes need to be on par. But AoS don't have this type of problems. We wouldn't need an extra label of rules like Galletian Champions or Look Out Sir anymore.

If AoS has something like USR, We could have something like Behemoth Skin [-X]: Substract X from Wound rolls for our Monsters. And because of that, we could have a side-mechanic to deal (and play) with, like Anti-Monster [X+] (always Wound on a X+ roll) for some Artillery and weapons like Beast-Smasher, Drill Cannons, etc...).

Talking about Artillery, something like Blast (+1 attack for every 5 models the target unit has) for catapults could work.

And I really hope to see some rules-unification in the future. Chariots, monsters and cavalry could have Impact Charge [X] (X mw after charging). Lance weapons could add extra MW if needed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Beliman said:

I wouldn't mind to see characters joining units. The main question is, what units can the heroes team up with? 40k has a bit of a problem because they have Thougness and movement and both units and heroes need to be on par. But AoS don't have this type of problems. We wouldn't need an extra label of rules like Galletian Champions or Look Out Sir anymore.

If AoS has something like USR, We could have something like Behemoth Skin [-X]: Substract X from Wound rolls for our Monsters. And because of that, we could have a side-mechanic to deal (and play) with, like Anti-Monster [X+] (always Wound on a X+ roll) for some Artillery and weapons like Beast-Smasher, Drill Cannons, etc...).

Talking about Artillery, something like Blast (+1 attack for every 5 models the target unit has) for catapults could work.

And I really hope to see some rules-unification in the future. Chariots, monsters and cavalry could have Impact Charge [X] (X mw after charging). Lance weapons could add extra MW if needed.

It would probably be easier if they just added a toughness strength system into the game.

But I do get your point and it would be awesome, if we got those kinds of differences into the game.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Others have mentioned already, but I’d love an AoS “Vanguard” (or start collecting) rules format like the upcoming 40k combat patrol.

The old Meeting engagement rules never really took off and weren’t updated to 3rd. To have a smaller scale option would be great for grabbing a vanguard box and throwing down for a quick (hopefully balanced) battle. Great for gaming whilst still collecting/painting a new army or for introducing new people. Could even be fun for a small tournament as well?

My hope is that with a fixed army selection, GW should be able to balance the boxes easier than the vast choice of options of tomes/units/artefacts. Knowing GW tho, it would likely never get attention after the initial release and balance issues would never be addressed🤷🏻‍♂️

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rules leaked. It seems that there are some things that maybe AoS 4.0 could use, or at least, edit them as if they were basic Core Rules (some of them already are):

  • The whole Rulebook ankowledge the diferent subphases and has a diagram for all of them. As an example, Fight Phase has two subfases: Fight First and Remaining Combat (note: Charge give you Fight First,and some abilities can turn this off, I like it).
  • There is a "Remaint Stationary" move. A unit moving 0" count as not Remain Stationary. Not sure if AoS needs that, movement phase already has a lot of weird interactions in the movement phase.
  • Retreat has a rolling phase when you could lose models on if you roll less than 3 (Desperate Escape Test), but you can pass over enemy models in doing so.
  • Units can pass over terrain that has heigh of 2" or less.
  • Save rolls can't never be improved by more than +1. Not sure if the remaining bonus are still valid to remove Rend points like AoS.
  • No split damage.
  • A Challenge Stratagem! Characters in units can target other attached Characters. AoS being a game with a lot of Heroes, I can't believe that we still don't have something like this.
  • Lance USR: When a unit charges, add +1 to Wound. Yeah... that belongs to AoS units, not 40K! Wtf dudes!

There is a lot to unpack, but I'm looking at things that maybe can be tweaked for AoS.

Edited by Beliman
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/17/2023 at 6:19 AM, Beliman said:
  • Units can pass over terrain that has heigh of 2" or less.

I think this highlights an issue that AoS has had for a long time that 40k seems to be way better at. The integration of terrain in such a way that it provides benefits to armies without unduly hindering the active gameplay. Another big part of this is the breachable rule in 9th edition (although this may or may note be gone in 10th). This has been a problem going all the way back to fantasy where you would get a couple pieces on the perimeter but very little in the center because actually playing a game with terrain was a nightmare. It's better now than it was then, but it's still really annoying to actually try to use big line of sight blocking terrain. A little more nuance and small rules like this one or breachable would go a long way to encouraging the use of lots of terrain. 

Just to clarify I'm not saying 'I don't want to have to think tactically about moving around terrain and using it to my best advantage', my issue is the way models interact with terrain is unintuitive and awkward. An infantry model climbing a tree or a building is fine, but why is it possible for my Exalted Bladebringer Chariot to do the same thing? When I move through that patch of fallen logs why do I have to measure up one inch, over 1.5 inches, down a half an inch, over 0.25 inches, up 1 inch, etc. How does it work when I want to climb a building with an overhang directly above my models? Why can't I use that doorway on the building that is the same size as my model when it's slightly thinner than my base? Having a few rules that clean up interactions and make terrain more useable was one of my favourite parts of 9th edition and hopefully will continue into 10th. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NinthMusketeer said:

In regards to point #1, do you mean like the fight sequencing section in the AoS core rules?

Not exactly. AoS has a Fight phase with Pass, Pile In and Combat/Attack Sequence with some added rules like Fight First and Fight Last.

Warhammer 40k has a Fight Phase that has two subphases: Attack First and Remaining Combat. And both of this subphases has Pile In, Attack Sequence and Consolidate.

It seems and probably has the same gameplay, but addes rules over another layer of rules and exceptions will be a problem. Make it simple and easy.

Edited by Beliman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Beliman said:

Warhammer 40k has a Fight Phase that has two subphases: Attack First and Remaining Combat. And both of this subphases has Pile In, Attack Sequence and Consolidate.

Isn't this exactly as AoS core rule 12.5?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Marcvs said:

Isn't this exactly as AoS core rule 12.5?

12.5 is not even a phase, it's an explanation to how 12.4 should be played, and 12.4 is an effect from some abilities.

In other words, Fight First from 40k 10th edition is a main subphase above attack sequence. In AoS is an effect that ignores some core rules (1.6.1 and 1.6.3). 

Imo, even if they have the same gameplay, they are both treated diferent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

12.5 is not even a phase, it's an explanation to how 12.4 should be played, and 12.4 is an effect from some abilities.

In other words, Fight First from 40k 10th edition is a main subphase above attack sequence. In AoS is an effect that ignores some core rules (1.6.1 and 1.6.3). 

Imo, even if they have the same gameplay, they are both treated diferent. 

The leaks I have seen describe Fight First as a "step" of the Fight Phase (not as a phase or subphase) and Fight First is described and explicitly presented as an ability, so I feel we're discussing a cosmetic/layout difference and not much else -other than the normal differences between two systems, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Marcvs said:

The leaks I have seen describe Fight First as a "step" of the Fight Phase (not as a phase or subphase) and Fight First is described and explicitly presented as an ability, so I feel we're discussing a cosmetic/layout difference and not much else -other than the normal differences between two systems, of course.

Layouts are not just cosmetic. They are a canvas to organize the information within a hierarchy and that's exactly my point.

I suppose that we are talking about the same, it's just that I give more weight to how it's presented and the hierarchy within the Core Rules than you, maybe because that's part of my job.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not played enough 3rd Ed to have a detailed analysis on what to draw from 10th, but I think some heroes leading units would be a great idea. I'm tired of trying to pinpoint my foot heroes placements in the movement phase to make sure the auras are good and all the units are buffed. With a new "challenge" heroic action. 
Obviously AoS is much more hero centric than 40k because it's a fantasy game, so I would still expect solo heroes to be more numerous than in 40k. 

Streaming down heroic actions and monstruous rampages into separate pages you can quickly look at in game instead of scrolling through the rulebook.

And a visual overall of warscrolls. I think they are fine in the sense of how stats are organised on them, but I really, really don't like their yellow "fake parchment" hue anymore. I'd prefer something more readable, like black text on a fancy white/cream backdrop. 

Edited by The Lost Sigmarite
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Neverchosen said:

I feel like 40k will have the growing pains of these rulesets and we will get the more refined version. Which works for me as I prefer AOS. 

I had a similar hope with the terrain rules or crusade from 9th edition but they never really seemed to materialize when 3rd was released. I don't know what it is, but the 40k guys seem pretty happy to grab ideas off of AoS (like they did when 8th was released and massively simplified) while the AoS team doesn't seem to do the same. Maybe it's a timing thing... like 9th was released a year before 3rd so maybe they didn't have time to incorporate the good ideas. I guess there's still a chance we'll see some of 9th used in 4th when it drops next year, but I'm not really holding my breath. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/17/2023 at 2:19 PM, Beliman said:

There is a "Remaint Stationary" move. A unit moving 0" count as not Remain Stationary. Not sure if AoS needs that, movement phase already has a lot of weird interactions in the movement phase.

I remember this exact distinction coming up for me in the past in a rules problem in AoS. It's good to see it clarified. Chances are it won't matter for most casual (or even competitive) games, but when it does, it's good to have the mechanical tools to solve it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another Faction-Focus, and another look at some interactions with the same Core Rules:

Spoiler

ubUkAiRN0Xz2XxD1.jpg

We know that Battle-shocked units is debuff that disable the ability to capture objectives, can remove models if your unit retreats and can't recieve any Stratagem (Command).

What we didn't see is more interaction with this mechanics until now. Chaos Knights faction has some interactions with Battle-shock (they are buffed if they target some battle-shocked units) and new abilities to trigger another Battle-shock test out-of-phase, like Vortex Terrors:

Spoiler

tgUHNJauLfSE6fTv.jpg

What do you think? A bit complicated for AoS or maybe it could be tweaked to have another core mechanic that let's us play a diferent game than kill the unit and take their objective?

Edited by Beliman
Grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...