Thoughts on 4.0's New Rules

[JackOfBlades]

4 hours ago, Baron Klatz said:

Yeah, the main reason the World-that-was vampires were so broken is because they Were the lynchpin of the army.

You killed the vampire and the whole army literally crumbled away without their presence. So had to be super hard to even hurt.

In AoS not only are there entire warbands of vampires & common cavalry squadrons of Blood knights but the units themselves like skeletons are very self-sufficient(many actually being sentient skeletons from a Deathrattle kingdom that joined up with the vampires to protect them from the Ossiarchs who want to turn basic skelies into golem parts)

So the vampires are watered down as there’s already so many of them instead of one or a handful being a super rare sight(on the contrary there’s entire empires of them in Shyish, I imagine eventually we’ll see a proper vampire infantry unit too. We already technically have some)

But we can get insane legendary heroes like a buffed Radukar since they’re heroes of heroes and close to nigh on gods of power.

Similar situation for chaos champions now and we’re even seeing new Stormcast legendary heroes with near a thousand years  of deeds & experience turned into units(Reclusians)

it’s the whole “everything’s special so nothing’s special” thing at work so the pros & cons of that are pretty much up to your tastes and which aesthetics you prefer.

I dont really agree, in WHFB there was already a power range of vampires. You had non-heroes like blood knights at the bottom, then thralls, then counts, then lords, dont see why you cant have the same thing here. I also personally strongly dislike the move of making special characters crowd out generic characters.

[Beliman]

2 hours ago, Tonhel said:

Which is fitting for some heroes, but not for all. Which is the case now. 

With the USR and abilities, I hope that GW find a way to make Heroes more interesting.

 Btw, I'm sad that there is no Challenge command.

[MitGas]

2 hours ago, JackOfBlades said:

I dont really agree, in WHFB there was already a power range of vampires. You had non-heroes like blood knights at the bottom, then thralls, then counts, then lords, dont see why you cant have the same thing here. I also personally strongly dislike the move of making special characters crowd out generic characters.

Adding to this, I don‘t like that the strongest chars are always the centerpiece minis. I know, it‘s cinematic but I like when a hero doesn‘t need to ride something in order to be a true menace. It really does the supposed power of some heroes a complete disservice. There are very few exceptions like the Warboss or some FEC hero but Chaos heroes feel too weak in general, can‘t speak for Vamps now but they used to be extremely strong back in WHFB as well. It‘s kinda like with grots being so deadly en masse that they make very short work of Chaos Warriors which does not represent those units well, in old WHFB 60 grots wouldn‘t have killed a unit of twenty CWs in a round or two. 
 

I don‘t know a solution but I wish they could reflect the background better with their rules in some cases. Not something that ruins anything for me but it‘s sad that our heroes aren‘t really cool anymore. I don‘t want to field named chars! I want my own heroes/villains. 🤗

[Baron Klatz]

2 hours ago, MitGas said:

in old WHFB 60 grots wouldn‘t have killed a unit of twenty CWs in a round or two. 

Well in the world-that-was 60 grots & 20 warriors didn’t represent your entire armies either. 😄

The AoS scale for that would be 15 grots vs 5 chaos warriors who definitely could kill off those mean greens.(by AoS4 max now it’s 40 grots vs 20 chaos which is an easy win)

Same with the vamps that it’s just a different system. It’s no longer super guy surrounded by weak chaff. AoS is medium leaders(unless a big beast) supported by medium hordes with a legendary in the “Lord” bracket.

So I don’t think there’s a real solution here beyond just knowing they are apples & oranges to eachother in which different taste you’re going for.

Big grindy battles with lots of nuance & charts or quick mass skirmish where everyone’s more equaled out.

If they buff regular heroes to be too tanky & killy to where they can solo half an army then in a game with 50 or less models it’s gonna dive into HeroHammer real quick.

Best case scenario so far from the current reveals is heroes can either join units or have a bubble around them that uses them the units as a mobile health bar so the heroes can do more without dying to all the equally dangerous stuff blowing up the realmscapes around them. Otherwise they just gotta remain bubble buffers that look cool.

Edit: though admittedly that’s probably not happening since we saw a Khorne hero can take even more heroes. If super killy and can be made into dance sponges they wouldn’t have allowed that much spam already.

Edited April 21 by Baron Klatz

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

4 hours ago, JackOfBlades said:

 I also personally strongly dislike the move of making special characters crowd out generic characters.

Yes, that irks me too. From a lore point of view, it seems silly that Archaon or whoever turns up for every minor skirmish that goes on. Plus I like creating my own heroes, giving them names and backgrounds and whatnot. 

Admittedly I'm in the middle of painting up Glutos at the moment, so I obviously don't dislike named characters that much. But I'm not intending to use him in every game. 

[Beliman]

3 hours ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:

Plus I like creating my own heroes, giving them names and backgrounds and whatnot. 

Sadly, AoS is not designed to build your dudes.

[Skreech Verminking]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

Sadly, AoS is not designed to build your dudes.

Really isn’t but hey old world has some awesome customization options for generic heroes

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

5 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Really isn’t but hey old world has some awesome customization options for generic heroes

Yes, yes... so everyone keeps saying. 

I'd be happy if the Anvil of Apotheosis was made a more permanent feature. Just for non-competitive games. 

 

[Chikout]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

Sadly, AoS is not designed to build your dudes.

There are literally rules in AoS to build your dudes. GW haven’t talked about path to glory yet apart from one line that says it focuses on hero progression. It’s a little frustrating to see people complain about the fact that matched fans have made to game less characterful while ignoring this other side of the game that’s specifically designed for players who want something different. I’m not saying that the new path to glory is going to be amazing but it’s weird to ignore it completely when talking about the potential issues with the new edition. 

[Davariel]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

Sadly, AoS is not designed to build your dudes.

This is very true. I don't mind the current foot hero paradigm from a gameplay perspective - I think using small heroes as buff pieces works well and is reasonably intuitive and simple. I do get the feeling that it limits the narrative of the game a bit, though. Non monster/special characters feel a little... peripheral sometimes, and personally I find it harder to get invested in stories about largely interchangeable buff heroes who don't have much room for, well, character.

You can use named characters, of course - and their rules generally do a great job of feeling strongly unique and characterful - but that in turn makes the setting feel a little small, like in all the vastness of the Mortal Realms, only the same handful of characters in each faction are ever doing anything.

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

4 minutes ago, Chikout said:

There are literally rules in AoS to build your dudes. GW haven’t talked about path to glory yet apart from one line that says it focuses on hero progression. It’s a little frustrating to see people complain about the fact that matched fans have made to game less characterful while ignoring this other side of the game that’s specifically designed for players who want something different. I’m not saying that the new path to glory is going to be amazing but it’s weird to ignore it completely when talking about the potential issues with the new edition. 

 I love the Path to Glory rules. Trying to get people to play along with it has proved difficult though. I'm surprised at how many players just ignore it entirely. Glad it's not disappearing. 

[Flippy]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

Sadly, AoS is not designed to build your dudes.

This is half-true. People complain because they feel that AoS is just a small step away from enabling this option and for some reason the designers are not willing to take that step.  The newly revealed Weirdnob Shaman is Wizard (1). Would it break the game if there was “Wizard (2) + 30 points” written on this warscroll?

[Beliman]

41 minutes ago, Flippy said:

This is half-true. People complain because they feel that AoS is just a small step away from enabling this option and for some reason the designers are not willing to take that step.  The newly revealed Weirdnob Shaman is Wizard (1). Would it break the game if there was “Wizard (2) + 30 points” written on this warscroll?

Anything that let your character be diferent than a "completely generic one" is an small step to be "your dude". I'm all for it, but it seems that AoS is not ready for that little step.

52 minutes ago, Chikout said:

There are literally rules in AoS to build your dudes. GW haven’t talked about path to glory yet apart from one line that says it focuses on hero progression. It’s a little frustrating to see people complain about the fact that matched fans have made to game less characterful while ignoring this other side of the game that’s specifically designed for players who want something different. I’m not saying that the new path to glory is going to be amazing but it’s weird to ignore it completely when talking about the potential issues with the new edition. 

Yeah, I know, but it's not an option here. Pick up games (maybe 1 in a month) is what I have. 

Edited April 21 by Beliman

[Lucentia]

I guess I'm in the minority on this, perhaps, but for me 'my dudes' is something that has always mostly been something you do in your head, rather on the table.  Like, even in WHFB, a game with a reasonable amount of extra options for your heroes, the leader of my ogre army was Frigga Blackfoot, a bruiser BSB who'd chewed off her own frozen leg so that she could use it to club a poisonous drake/monster to death whilst trapped beneath a treacherous glacier (amongst other bits of back story she'd pick up along the way) but none of that was represented for her mechanically, there was no 'sky-iron peg leg (10pts)' weapon option you could take, or whatever. 

And the same has kinda continued to be true for my through AoS, I don't feel like I need to points buy extra wizard levels or a smiting sword of +1 attack to make my guys feel unique (Maybe partly because they still wouldn't be, if everyone's playing with the same set of options) that sort of personal narrative is something that exists better off table in my mind, like choice of paint scheme, or how you want to theme your bases, or what pet units you always like to bring, that kind of thing.

[Flippy]

17 minutes ago, Lucentia said:

I guess I'm in the minority on this, perhaps, but for me 'my dudes' is something that has always mostly been something you do in your head, rather on the table.  Like, even in WHFB, a game with a reasonable amount of extra options for your heroes, the leader of my ogre army was Frigga Blackfoot, a bruiser BSB who'd chewed off her own frozen leg so that she could use it to club a poisonous drake/monster to death whilst trapped beneath a treacherous glacier (amongst other bits of back story she'd pick up along the way) but none of that was represented for her mechanically, there was no 'sky-iron peg leg (10pts)' weapon option you could take, or whatever. 

And the same has kinda continued to be true for my through AoS, I don't feel like I need to points buy extra wizard levels or a smiting sword of +1 attack to make my guys feel unique (Maybe partly because they still wouldn't be, if everyone's playing with the same set of options) that sort of personal narrative is something that exists better off table in my mind, like choice of paint scheme, or how you want to theme your bases, or what pet units you always like to bring, that kind of thing.

Still, mechanical customisation helps, as do various assembly options- and both are largely missing from AoS.

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

1 hour ago, Lucentia said:

I guess I'm in the minority on this, perhaps, but for me 'my dudes' is something that has always mostly been something you do in your head, rather on the table.  Like, even in WHFB, a game with a reasonable amount of extra options for your heroes, the leader of my ogre army was Frigga Blackfoot, a bruiser BSB who'd chewed off her own frozen leg so that she could use it to club a poisonous drake/monster to death whilst trapped beneath a treacherous glacier (amongst other bits of back story she'd pick up along the way) but none of that was represented for her mechanically, there was no 'sky-iron peg leg (10pts)' weapon option you could take, or whatever. 

And the same has kinda continued to be true for my through AoS, I don't feel like I need to points buy extra wizard levels or a smiting sword of +1 attack to make my guys feel unique (Maybe partly because they still wouldn't be, if everyone's playing with the same set of options) that sort of personal narrative is something that exists better off table in my mind, like choice of paint scheme, or how you want to theme your bases, or what pet units you always like to bring, that kind of thing.

I absolutely agree. To my opponents my Keeper of Secrets is just a Keeper of Secrets. In my head-canon (to borrow a term) though it is Vythaac-Zel, the Grand Vassagonian of Endless Greed. 

[JackOfBlades]

16 hours ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:

Yes, that irks me too. From a lore point of view, it seems silly that Archaon or whoever turns up for every minor skirmish that goes on. Plus I like creating my own heroes, giving them names and backgrounds and whatnot. 

Admittedly I'm in the middle of painting up Glutos at the moment, so I obviously don't dislike named characters that much. But I'm not intending to use him in every game. 

Yep. And Glutos is a perfect example of what i mean as unlike Vhordrai there isnt even a generic variation of Glutos' rules.

9 hours ago, Lucentia said:

I guess I'm in the minority on this, perhaps, but for me 'my dudes' is something that has always mostly been something you do in your head, rather on the table.  Like, even in WHFB, a game with a reasonable amount of extra options for your heroes, the leader of my ogre army was Frigga Blackfoot, a bruiser BSB who'd chewed off her own frozen leg so that she could use it to club a poisonous drake/monster to death whilst trapped beneath a treacherous glacier (amongst other bits of back story she'd pick up along the way) but none of that was represented for her mechanically, there was no 'sky-iron peg leg (10pts)' weapon option you could take, or whatever. 

And the same has kinda continued to be true for my through AoS, I don't feel like I need to points buy extra wizard levels or a smiting sword of +1 attack to make my guys feel unique (Maybe partly because they still wouldn't be, if everyone's playing with the same set of options) that sort of personal narrative is something that exists better off table in my mind, like choice of paint scheme, or how you want to theme your bases, or what pet units you always like to bring, that kind of thing.

Yes, there will be a limit to how much you can bring your fantasy alive and thats no problem. I dont think anyone expects their generic character to have completely unique equipment or rules compared to every other player's generic character. But i do think GW needs to do a more professional work of designing and balancing the various equipments, artefacts, traits and spells.

In 9th edition 40k you had so many choices to make for your keeper of secrets, which exalted upgrade? which warlord trait? which artefact? which spells? In the invaders subfaction of hedonites by contrast, there are hardly choices to be made among the command traits and artefacts and no exalted upgrades at all. And one of the primary complaints of 40k players seems to be that that's gone from the 10th indexes too now, and all you can do is imagine.

Edited April 21 by JackOfBlades

[Baron Klatz]

10 hours ago, Chikout said:

There are literally rules in AoS to build your dudes. GW haven’t talked about path to glory yet apart from one line that says it focuses on hero progression. It’s a little frustrating to see people complain about the fact that matched fans have made to game less characterful while ignoring this other side of the game that’s specifically designed for players who want something different. I’m not saying that the new path to glory is going to be amazing but it’s weird to ignore it completely when talking about the potential issues with the new edition. 

This. That’s probably the best compromise they’ll ever do for AoS.

Narrative for Path to Glory (& hopefully Anvil of Apotheosis) to customize characters in friendly campaigns and narrative events which can help encourage kitbashing to make “ur dudes” 

Then it’s a easy hop over to Matched Play using those models, which though balanced like all the others, you know the stories to and can take pride in that.

Like I was just watching Crendor does Warhammer on YouTube and he has a new video today about AoS4 rules & flavor and I agree with him saying “flavor does not mean more options”, because more often than not those are all illusions of choice as people take the best meta ones anyway despite having like 40 different magic item options.

A rough lesson GW learned back in AoS2 with Realm Relics when you could give your heroes choices between like 60 different Realms flavored power-ups but everyone just taking the main most powerful 4, which is why options got watered more and more down over the years.

So just avoiding that whole mess and putting it in Narrative would be the best strategy in my book. Flavor players get what they want and Matched balance isn’t warped.

Edited April 21 by Baron Klatz

[Tonhel]

1 hour ago, Baron Klatz said:

because more often than not those are all illusions of choice as people take the best meta ones anyway despite having like 40 different magic item options.

I don’t agree. I don’t do tournaments and don’t care about the meta. I chose magic options that fit the hero I am creating. Not cooking up an uber build. Btw the illusion of choice is still a lot better than no choice and rather bland hero’s.

[Sarouan]

On 4/20/2024 at 9:03 PM, Tonhel said:

That's an extreme example and certainly not what I want for foot heroes. It says enough about the AoS design team that they can only make weak foot heroes or extremely overpowered ones.

That's not true. There are heroes on foot that can really shine in battle, but the thing is : they're not meant to fight everything. Meaning they have strong and weak points, thus they can be countered with the right tool. Gotrek is meant to be fighting everything and still surviving because that's his core design - not because the design team can only do "weak heroes or OP ones". He's OP on purpose, that's what he is.

And yes he's not very fun to fight against, since the real counter against him is to make sure he's wasted on a meaningless battle (basically ignore him). That's what happens with untouchable god characters in game designs : they're not very fun because they inherently have a very easy way to play and counter them that's way too much one-sided. I'll take instead the "weak AoS hero" every time, personnally.

[Tonhel]

27 minutes ago, Sarouan said:

That's not true. There are heroes on foot that can really shine in battle, but the thing is : they're not meant to fight everything. Meaning they have strong and weak points, thus they can be countered with the right tool. Gotrek is meant to be fighting everything and still surviving because that's his core design - not because the design team can only do "weak heroes or OP ones". He's OP on purpose, that's what he is.

And yes he's not very fun to fight against, since the real counter against him is to make sure he's wasted on a meaningless battle (basically ignore him). That's what happens with untouchable god characters in game designs : they're not very fun because they inherently have a very easy way to play and counter them that's way too much one-sided. I'll take instead the "weak AoS hero" every time, personnally.

Can you give an example? As my Chaos Lord, who I think should be able to fight a lot of different opponents gets his ass kicked by almost everything.

Edit: Imo he is a master in hiding and avoiding combat. Making the gods really proud.... 

Edit2; I am really curious what foot heroes you are talking about 😄 As most of the foot heroes have more or less the same statline. So if it is not correct, would love to see some examples. 😉 

Edit3: Also in 4th no dividing attacks anymore (so if there is nothing else added ruleswise). Foot heroes (or all heroes) are more vurneable than before.

Edited April 22 by Tonhel

[Marcvs]

11 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

would love to see some examples. 😉 

Light of Eltharion

Sigvald

 

to some extent: Bastian carthalos, the Celestant Prime, the Akhelian King (with the right setup)

on the cheap end: Grimwrath Berzerker

[Skreech Verminking]

2 minutes ago, Marcvs said:

Light of Eltharion

Sigvald

 

to some extent: Bastian carthalos, the Celestant Prime, the Akhelian King (with the right setup)

on the cheap end: Grimwrath Berzerker

Gotrek

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

21 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

Can you give an example? As my Chaos Lord, who I think should be able to fight a lot of different opponents gets his ass kicked by almost everything.

Edit: Imo he is a master in hiding and avoiding combat. Making the gods really proud.... 

 

You can find a lot of solid unique melee heroes in AoS. Off the top of my head, I like Sigvald, the Light of Eltharion, Kurdoss and Radukar the Beast.

For generics, there are fewer of them. The Ogor Tyrant is pretty good. A Megaboss on foot is certainly pretty fighty. The FEC Royal Decapitator is pretty scary, too. But in general, you will find few generic normal-sized dudes on 32mm bases who are worthy anything in combat. I think there are a few more in Fyreslayers.

EDIT: I would appreciate if we opened a separate "griping about how chaos lords are too weak" thread, by the way.

Edited April 22 by Neil Arthur Hotep

[Baron Klatz]

Well small shift. How we think Seraphon are gonna be handled between Starborne & Coalesced? Looking at Blades of Khorne it feels like they’re gonna keep that flavor.

So my guess is Battle traits split between the 2.

starborne: “Beamed down, Deploy units into the Celestial Realm to be summoned by Slann  or Star priest keyword units.”(wee bit more restrictive than Stormcasts who can pop units down anywhere instead as they combo’d their traits for it)

”Ethereal, all infantry & cavalry units gain the Ethereal trait.(all Hits against them become 4+ & gain a 6+ Ward)

Coalesced: Bites & Scaly skin are back for extra attacks & saves to the big bois.

 

(also saw the green highlight conversation in rumors. I say it’s just color coding. It’s on too many different Warscrolls to have any significance)

Edited April 22 by Baron Klatz