What make the Old World and Mortal Reamls different?

[DarkBlack]

I'm hoping that this community can discuss this without creating a salt mine; please. Whether changing the setting as GW did was a good idea or not is an well discusses and moot point, let's please not get into that here.

I don't mean the actual "physical" differences or characters. I want to talk about what the setup of each setting offers the game and fluff.

How does each setting influence the game and theme and what does one offer that the other does not.

[Aeonotakist]

Definitely AOS setup enables more tactics. I think GW is looking for more dynamic play like Hearthstone or other popular games, not old fashined table top battle simulation.

Old World armies are just 'ordinary people' with ability to throw some magic like mordern army throw grenades.  We play 8th with a style of 'put right army in right place'.

But in AOS, due to the background, 50% of the armies can deepstrike, can tunnel, can teleport, can create terrains or move enemy models around. These all give you more possiblities in battle but they cannot happen in Old World theme.

 

On the other hand, the AOS theme of Mythology prevents people from taking themselves into the background. That explains why so many people were asking 'is there any ordinary guys?' 'is there any cities with people living in daily live?' 'How Stormcast eat and sleep' when AOS launched. 

To me, 'nobody can really die in AOS' makes all the sacrofice and tragedy scenes way less emontional.

 

[KHHaunts]

When it comes to making your own stories,  or there GW own stories or advancing the storline i felt that the old world was a little to small.

All the corners of the map were put into detail so to speak and as a result it was difficult to fit in personal narratives into the fluff and GW couldnt put many big battles in without them having huge implications on the setting OR fluff just started getting retconned left right and centre.

In contrast the 40K setting is SO huge that the most epic battles can take place with little effect. You could literally blow up a whole solar system as part of your narrative and everyone would just shrug and carry on with their lives. For me this is to big and is the reason ive become less interested in 40k fluff as their is "to much of nothing going on" what i mean is that very little seems to matter in the 40k setting and as a result just feels a bit of a mess.

 

However i feel that the Mortal Realms are an excellant compromise. The setting is large enough that people can fit in their stories and narratives and not have to feel like they are contradicting the setting. However there is still a chance for the mortal realms to be mapped out even if every town and city isent.  Meaning that if a Gotrek and Felix type novel appeared the Setting is still small enough that what these heros do can still matter. While allowing you to also wage earth shattering wars without (Vandus Hammerhand hunting for ghal maraz looking a mile either side of him and seeing a load of random battles as a result of the thousands of narratives people wish to input.

Also we have already been given the very vague age of myth and chaos to place our stories without wrecking the status quo.

Ive written a battle plan (Its actually in the downloads section) And unlike in WHFB i feel like the story could have happened at somepoint in the mortal realms history. Unlike 40k i feel like it mattered.

[shinros]

1 hour ago, Aeonotakist said:

Definitely AOS setup enables more tactics. I think GW is looking for more dynamic play like Hearthstone or other popular games, not old fashined table top battle simulation.

Old World armies are just 'ordinary people' with ability to throw some magic like mordern army throw grenades.  We play 8th with a style of 'put right army in right place'.

But in AOS, due to the background, 50% of the armies can deepstrike, can tunnel, can teleport, can create terrains or move enemy models around. These all give you more possiblities in battle but they cannot happen in Old World theme.

 

On the other hand, the AOS theme of Mythology prevents people from taking themselves into the background. That explains why so many people were asking 'is there any ordinary guys?' 'is there any cities with people living in daily live?' 'How Stormcast eat and sleep' when AOS launched. 

To me, 'nobody can really die in AOS' makes all the sacrofice and tragedy scenes way less emontional.

 

Funny enough stormcast do have to eat and sleep they actually make camp to rest several times in the black library novels. They are pretty much "order" chaos warriors. I do think due to the season of war GW are starting to develop the "ordinary" people. 

They made note before the time of chaos the realm gates where used for trade and such and because the realms are "Near" infinite it's like 40k where they don't have to worry about destroying a town like in the old world. The map of gyran just might be the only part that was mapped out and it's almost as large as the old world. 

I liked whfb fluff but it grew stagnant due to the armies not being able to do well anything with the world around them because it would upset the "status quo". 

As C L werner said the setting is more "grand" just like 40k now that's not to everyone's taste for a wargame setting I personally prefer it. I still think good stories can be done with it I mean lord of undeath, bladestorm and the audio drama series. 

Game wise how they changed it I personally feel it allows armies to do more unique things like Aeon said making tunnels, using terrain for unique effects etc. 

[CoffeeGrunt]

I still hope we see some sort of Freeguild group in the future. Khornate warriors were hunting people before Sigmar showed up, I'd like to see what the people who managed to hold out look like. Could make some really awesome knights and the like.

[shinros]

2 minutes ago, CoffeeGrunt said:

I still hope we see some sort of Freeguild group in the future. Khornate warriors were hunting people before Sigmar showed up, I'd like to see what the people who managed to hold out look like. Could make some really awesome knights and the like.

Well considering GW designed a new warrior priest with a gryph hound I am sure we will see free guild or a devoted of sigmar battle tome soonish. So I don't think GW have forgotten about the "normal" humans. 

Heck the devoted of sigmar had their own small story in the godbeast battle tome I think. 

[CoffeeGrunt]

That's promising. I like the idea of mortals under Sigmar's protection who haven't ascended. Perhaps they're more useful as human rather than being reforged, or perhaps they haven't proven their worth, yet.

That would be quite cool, actually. A Freeguild Hero, if it kills an enemy Hero, you may replace it with a Stormcast Hero as he ascends? I dunno if that would suit fluff, though, but it could be an interesting mechanic.

[shinros]

1 minute ago, CoffeeGrunt said:

That's promising. I like the idea of mortals under Sigmar's protection who haven't ascended. Perhaps they're more useful as human rather than being reforged, or perhaps they haven't proven their worth, yet.

That would be quite cool, actually. A Freeguild Hero, if it kills an enemy Hero, you may replace it with a Stormcast Hero as he ascends? I dunno if that would suit fluff, though, but it could be an interesting mechanic.

Perhaps they can do something like that for free guild but considering the divine magic the devoted of sigmar are pulling out they don't really "need" to ascended. Hell it was the warrior priest in the sliver tower novel that got all of them to work together to survive it was cool. 

Plus the war altar is dam scary in AOS. 

[CoffeeGrunt]

I've never come across it, so I wouldn't know.

[Soulsmith]

What I find for AOS compared to WHFB is that my battles feel like they matter more. Even outside of an official campaign, you can make up your own backgrounds with so much more freedom. The wins and losses have a more direct influence on my tribe I feel, as time actually moves forwards in this.

[CoffeeGrunt]

My army is founded on nihilism, so while I can't say it matters more, I do still feel more invested in the outcome.  

[Ollie Grimwood]

I feel AoS allows for a greater flexibility. So much more is possible both in the terms of the sheer size of it and in term of the magical nature of the "physics" of the realms.

The Old World had the chaos wastes, not than anyone other than chaos forces went there, but generally it was just various real earth like settings with fixed inhabitants. 

AoS also allows for the creation of so much more by the players themselves without fundamentally altering existing background. It also allows for a greater interaction between the races because of the more fluid nature of the Realms. 

The Old World provided an excellent setting for an RPG (and a lot of the depth people credit with was because of WFRP rather than WFB). AoS is a better war game setting 

[Tommy]

The Mortal Realms have a wide-open setting and an unfolding narrative. If they use those well things should stay very fresh. It was getting harder and harder for them to do anything new in the Old World.

[Gaz Taylor]

7 minutes ago, Tommy said:

The Mortal Realms have a wide-open setting and an unfolding narrative. If they use those well things should stay very fresh. It was getting harder and harder for them to do anything new in the Old World.

Problem they had with the Old Worlds was that it was far too small and boxed people into who could fight who. AOS dispenses with that and puts it on a 40K scale and you can argue it's bigger than 40K! I also like there is an unfolding narrative as it makes it easier for them to release new models or introduce new races. It was really difficult to do that previously as well as trying to fit in new ideas for things for a background which was 30 years old!

[CaptainNippon]

It is much harder to relate to anything in the mortal realms, because the "rules" of this new setting are so vastly different from the old world, which pretty much mirrored our own. It has the potential to become a nice sandbox with a bigger focus on the fantastical and otherworldly, but in its current form it's not suited for any sort of compelling narrative. Once the realms have been flashed out and a sense of geography has been introduced, that might change eventually.

[DarkBlack]

I think that the mortal realms also enable the epic fantasy "war of gods" setting and story. That setting in turn allows the bigger and more heroic models and battles. Therefore the way AoS is marketed and presented actually needs a setting like the Mortal realms, rather than the Old World.

[Aeonotakist]

3 hours ago, CoffeeGrunt said:

That's promising. I like the idea of mortals under Sigmar's protection who haven't ascended. Perhaps they're more useful as human rather than being reforged, or perhaps they haven't proven their worth, yet.

That would be quite cool, actually. A Freeguild Hero, if it kills an enemy Hero, you may replace it with a Stormcast Hero as he ascends? I dunno if that would suit fluff, though, but it could be an interesting mechanic.

Or maybe they don't ascends because they don't like it.

 

Being Stormcast means risk of lose your own personality and memory, which might be as bad as death in some people's opinion.

[Gaz Taylor]

3 minutes ago, Aeonotakist said:

Being Stormcast means risk of lose your own personality and memory, which might be as bad as death in some people's opinion.

I think this is something they may edge towards in the background and while not have a direct faction around this, may introduce characters who have had this happen to them. This is what makes Stormcast cool. Chaos Warriors give into their emotions and get more and more lost in them as they progress in the service of their gods. Stormcast go the opposite way and sacrifice it (and their humanity) in the service of theirs. In a way they are true heros  

[DarkBlack]

8 minutes ago, Aeonotakist said:

Or maybe they don't ascends because they don't like it.

Being Stormcast means risk of lose your own personality and memory, which might be as bad as death in some people's opinion.

As far as I understand Sigmar only turn people into Stormcast at what would be the end of their life otherwise.

He does not have as great a need for collecting great warriors, because he's expanding and not biding his time anymore.

Edit: This is interesting, but not quite on topic. Maybe continue in it's own thread?

[Aeonotakist]

18 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

I think this is something they may edge towards in the background and while not have a direct faction around this, may introduce characters who have had this happen to them. This is what makes Stormcast cool. Chaos Warriors give into their emotions and get more and more lost in them as they progress in the service of their gods. Stormcast go the opposite way and sacrifice it (and their humanity) in the service of theirs. In a way they are true heros  

Not exactly. If you have read Bladestorm, there are Stormcast who is in such urge of vengeance that they give away their humanity to trade for another chance from Sigmar. We'd rather say their hatred towards Chaos is the driving factor not the believe in Sigmar.

 

Adn some of them do doubt or even regret of doing that after they see how their comrades turned to be after reforge.

[Ollie Grimwood]

9 minutes ago, DarkBlack said:

As far as I understand Sigmar only turn people into Stormcast at what would be the end of their life otherwise.

 

Yeah that's how I read it. The having given your all against chaos (literally) seems to be part of the selection process for Stormcast rather than just being bolt hard 

[TerrorPenguin]

2 hours ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

 

The Old World provided an excellent setting for an RPG (and a lot of the depth people credit with was because of WFRP rather than WFB). AoS is a better war game setting 

Yeah this is how I feel, I don't know a huge amount about WHFB, but understand how it could feel a bit small, my only worry about AOS is that it could be a bit too big, if they never move the story on. But agree that for war gaming what you need is a big open sandbox.

A smaller world would feel a bit like a soap opera where stuff comes and goes but the equilibrium never really changes. I hope AOS doesn't become like 'lost' (sticking with my to analogy ) big ideas but not really going anywhere.

Anyway, I am completely happy with the stories the current fluff allows me to invent.

[DarkBlack]

1 hour ago, TerrorPenguin said:

A smaller world would feel a bit like a soap opera where stuff comes and goes but the equilibrium never really changes. I hope AOS doesn't become like 'lost' (sticking with my to analogy ) big ideas but not really going anywhere.

I got the impression that the Old World was designed to be stagnant, with several wars that are actually stalemates that could go on forever.

[Josh Meads]

I loved the tone , style and aesthetic of the old world. From Shadow of the Horned Rat/Dark Omen onwards, I absolutely adored it. Still do, and am slowly tryign to get all the novels.

 

In gaming terms, I organise campaigns between me and my usual 3 players, and it really goes more than 2/3 games, as Lizardmen fighting Chaos, fighting High Elfs fighting Dwarfs just doesnt make 'sense'. In AoS you throw that out, for better for worse, and seems to fit.

[Oppenheimer]

They turned it from fantasy to high fantasy. Crazy space dragons and floating islands.

I prefer Gothic fantasy but like the AoS rules better. Fingers crossed realm of death has something more down to earth in it.

I agree that stormcast aren't as interesting as the Empire used to be.