Legacy Special Character conundrum

[Double Misfire]

Hi all,

I attended Bugman's Brawl, a rather excellent 1-day AoS tournament held by the 40kbrawl guys over in Salisbury and my first 2k event on saturday, where I was lucky enough to come second (/humblebrag).

Having only found out about the tournament three weeks in advance I wasn't left with much time to paint many new models for a competitive 2k list. In order to get the most out of my mostly Dispossessed collection of models, I checked with the TO in advance and used a couple of converted dwarf heroes I already had as Belegar Ironhammer and Ungrim Ironfist (who's command abilities work very well together thanks to grumbling Longbeards), both fairly obvious who they were representing (not!Belegar stood on an oath stone with a cool back banner and not!Ungrim a slayerish type), and explained to my opponents who they were supposed to be at the start of each game. My list also included Joseph Bugman, who I've used in almost every game of AoS I've played since launch, represented by an official Bugman model.

In my second game I was drawn against one of my regular gaming opponents and dearest friends who raised an interesting question the inclusion of legacy special characters in my list. He claimed that including dead special characters from the old setting spoilt his immersion in the game, even though I was using their rules to represent (hastily thrown together) surrogates.

I don't think anyone could have much issue immersion-wise with most non-special character legacy warscrolls, as there's no reason why something like chaos trolls, duardin miners or even skeletons riding chariots shouldn't exist in a setting as broad as Age of Sigmar's, but legacy warscrolls representing specific individuals, particularly ones with non-special equivalents (for example Tretch Craventail and a Skaven Warlord) offer a a difficult conundrum, not dissimilar to the current debate raging over Stormcast chapter traits. With a few exceptions like Teclis and Malekith/rion, these characters don't exist in the AoS setting (and if they do undoubtedly don't exist in their current form). 

 

If I were to continue using Belegar, Ungrim and Bugman's warscrolls successfully at matched play events what do you think the best way to do it, both clearly tying my army to the AoS setting, and making it obvious to my opponents what their models represented would be?

Option 1: Use the Belegar, Ungrim and Bugman models unconverted and painted in their "official" colourschemes with no doubt about who they might represent. Immersion-wise they could be duardin heroes with similar weapons, armour, fighting styles and drinking habits to their historical counterparts, fighting on the battlefields of the Mortal Realms thousands of years later, or my army could be a "historical" WFB one, similar to how guys like Gorbad Ironclaw and Vlad von Carstein could turn up on the same battlefield as Karl Franz back in the day. Probably the dullest option but also the most obvious one.

Option 2: Model and paint the characters up like force ghosts, similar to the similar to the ancestor ghosts who fight alongside (ironically) Belegar in Total War: Warhammer, based on the ancestor ghosts who slaughter and orc horde below Karak Eight Peaks in the Gotrek and Felix story "The Dark Beneath the World". Belegar gets decapitated by Queek during the End Times, so it would be neat to have his ghost modelled up with his head tucked under one arm, and his beard folded over his hand. A pretty fun option, but the idea of ghosts leading an army, or these characters spirits having survived into the Age of Sigmar might seem a little far fetched.

Spoiler

Option 3: Convert up my own AoS-era characters using the rules for Belegar, Ungrim and Bugman, made very obvious who they're standing in for by their wargear (oath stone, shield, hammer and back banner for not!Belegar; slayerish look, axe and dragon cloak for not!Ungrim, ranger hero with some kind of tankard for not!Bugman). A really fun option, but maybe a little too close to the bone in the current climate of turquoise Stormcast vs Stormcast I've already painted.

Option 4:  Option 3 with a side of option 2. Convert up my own AoS era characters using the legacy guys' rules, but have force ghost versions of the legacy heroes on hand in my miniature case incase an opponent strongly objects to the models I'm using (really not too much effort. I can't imagine three ghosts would take more than half an hour to drybrush).

Option 5: Stop using legacy warscrolls, nobody likes them. If I want to play competitively I should should drop the dwarfs and paint Kurnoth Hunters like everyone else. 

 

I'd be interested to know what any TOs think and where these options would fall in @Ben's TPs for WYSIWYG for TPs suggestion regarding Stormhost colours. Sayl the Faithless is a popular figure on the tournament scene right now, and technically an old WFB character (though how many people had heard of him before AoS I don't know), do many people use a different model to his official one to represent him and how does that go down?

[RuneBrush]

Sadly I couldn't make the event (which is a shame as it's not a million miles away from me).

My own opinion is that if there is a valid warscroll and matched play points, it's a valid option.  I'd probably go for the official models (painted normally or as a ghost) just to make sure I didn't come across as too beardy as it's currently a hot topic that people really have strong opinions on the subject.  That said if I'd played you, I wouldn't have had any issues  

[Arkiham]

 I dislike using compendium characters for the majority of my games as I feel it's time to move on.

Alot of those characters were dead before 8th but were still in 8th just feels silly to use them in aos 

"Oh it's that guy who died years before the end times happened randomly alive again "

But that's me. I'll still play against it, it doesn't bother me, it'll just be one of those things I say in jest as I see it.

 

[CoffeeGrunt]

Couldn't care less personally, though your friend is going to the wrong place if he's looking for narrative immersion, judging by my own experience of tournaments, at least.

[Turragor]

The realms are big and potentially full of reincarnations or spiritual warscrolls successors.

[Criti]

[KHHaunts]

1 hour ago, CoffeeGrunt said:

Couldn't care less personally, though your friend is going to the wrong place if he's looking for narrative immersion, judging by my own experience of tournaments, at least.

This would have been my point as well. TO are rarely designed with the narrative in mind. Its a compeition and until a model becomes "illegal" you should be able to use it when and where you like. Its like using a pieace of outdated sporting equipment if its legal its your risk at using it but its a tool to win the game.

If you were playing some great narrative event of WHQ game i would perhaps be a little more receptive (Or even just casual stuff) but since i feel that matched play rules restrict the narrative by making "pure bred" GW stamped force combinations more powerful through allgiance and battlaion abilities i have never felt that narrative has a huge place in the Torni scene.

This is all very much my oppinion but im sure im not the only one who feels this way.

[Galas]

I never understood the problem with using dead characters. More than 50% of my orcs and goblins characters were always dead in fantasy! And it whas stated in the rules. 0 problems when guys from distinct times fight, as you say. Just look At For Honor!

As for the "ley it go" argument... It is still legal? Yes it is. 

Reading these forums, im seeing very "restrictive" mindsets in players playing a game where "liberty" was one  of his more used points  vs the "restrictive old world"

I undertand the problem in pure narrative games. But matched play? To my inmersión is worse seeing sigmar's hammers vs sigmar's hammer than fight Settra or Grimgor

[Ollie Grimwood]

@Galas I strongly suspect the "let it go" is a bit of banter. Especially considering @Double Misfire has a Squat as his profile picture 

(or maybe not ?) 

[Criti]

21 minutes ago, Galas said:

I never understood the problem with using dead characters. More than 50% of my orcs and goblins characters were always dead in fantasy! And it whas stated in the rules. 0 problems when guys from distinct times fight, as you say. Just look At For Honor!

As for the "ley it go" argument... It is still legal? Yes it is. 

Reading these forums, im seeing very "restrictive" mindsets in players playing a game where "liberty" was one  of his more used points  vs the "restrictive old world"

I undertand the problem in pure narrative games. But matched play? To my inmersión is worse seeing sigmar's hammers vs sigmar's hammer than fight Settra or Grimgor

Funny you should say it that way.   I feel exactly the same... but the inverse. 

I have literally thousands of points of Compendium models that I have no interest in using anymore because I find them to be restricting us to the game that was. 

I love the ability to mix and match an army (incidentally, nothing in the Matched Play rules requires us to pick our whole army from 1 Alliance...but we've all accepted that restriction) but I prefer to look forward immerse myself in the new lore.  Hence, "let it go."

Also - Sigmar's Hammers vs Sigmar's Hammers has a fluff precedent.  Sigmar has a massive training arena in Azyrheim in which Stormcast engage in all out battle, to the point of killing one another.  The magic placed on the arena sees everyone revived and unharmed at the conclusion of thr "battles."

 

[Lucio]

I'm all for reusing legitimate rules but agree that it's a good idea to forge a new narrative for them. For example, Grimgor Ironhide (and to a lesser extent, a Black Ork Big Boss), are both solid characters but given how Black Orks have become the weakest of the Ironjawz, they need updated backgrounds.

So we have instead an 'Ard Nob and Ironhide, the toughest of the 'Ard Nobz, brutal examples of the leaders of the 'Ard Boyz who don't join a Megabosses protection detail as Brutes.

[Galas]

23 minutes ago, Criti said:

 

Also - Sigmar's Hammers vs Sigmar's Hammers has a fluff precedent.  Sigmar has a massive training arena in Azyrheim in which Stormcast engage in all out battle, to the point of killing one another.  The magic placed on the arena sees everyone revived and unharmed at the conclusion of thr "battles."

 

I dont know that bit of Lore. A bit in point to excuse stormcast vs stormcast but cool Lore nonetheles. Thanks!

And from the rest of your point, i can totally understand your point. Maybe is that i have no problem loving and combining (not all the time) thinks that I like. The summer 7 friends and I play a narrative campaing going from universe to universe (uncle tzeentch tried to conquer middle earth and the earth! ), and my Grimgor and his Warband claim the victory kicking Archaon and his ally Sauron inside mount doom was one of the most funniest and epic campaings of my life.

But i love quasi-historical-purist battles too!

And I had enter AoS being totally sure that in 2-3 years, the old world will be a thing of the past. And no problem! When the that moment come, ill had another unique universe to love!

I will no coment in my beloved black orcs being cheerleaders now T.T

Sorry for my english, my cellphone non stop autocorrecting things to spanish! It's infuriating

 

[CoffeeGrunt]

If you're okay with binning your Compendium units, it doesn't mean you have the right to impose that on others, any more than my disdain for the Stormcast aesthetic gives me the right to tell players to pick another army or I'll refuse them at local tournaments.

[Double Misfire]

2 hours ago, Arkiham said:

 I dislike using compendium characters for the majority of my games as I feel it's time to move on.

Alot of those characters were dead before 8th but where still in 8th just feels silly to use them in aos 

"Oh it's that guy who died years before the end times happened randomly alive again "

But that's me. I'll still play against it, it doesn't bother me, it'll just be one of those things I say in jest as I see it.

I agree, but I like using Dispossessed, and Ungrim and Belegar when fielded alone or together go a long way towards making the little guys halfway competitive in a matched play environment. If a generic Warden King or Dwarf Lord on shieldbearers were as good I'd use them over Belegar and Ungrim every time.

2 hours ago, CoffeeGrunt said:

Couldn't care less personally, though your friend is going to the wrong place if he's looking for narrative immersion, judging by my own experience of tournaments, at least.

Obviously they don't matter as much as winning games, but soft sports scores and painting points/nominations are a thing, with soft scores for WYSIWYG threatening to become a thing at some events in the wake of Stormcast chapters, so having a nicely themed army that looks and feels like a unified force and not coming off as a minmaxing gimp who leaves opponents with a bad taste in their mouths are both important concerns.

Do you have any personal experience of taking Settra or other old Undead special characters to events and anyone raising an eyebrow CG?

[Thomas Lyons]

I guess I don't understand why named characters can't be reskinned as current incarnations of that thing with the same rules.

If I lay down a Settra model, that isn't Settra.  Its the High King of the Crimson Monarchs who roam the Voidglass Desert and collect skulls to attach to their chariots.  This is fully within the lore of AOS.  If the model is WYSIWYG, then why does one care if I am using a ruleset of an old character?  Is the issue the old model itself?  I guess I just don't understand the concern.

[Criti]

43 minutes ago, CoffeeGrunt said:

If you're okay with binning your Compendium units, it doesn't mean you have the right to impose that on others, any more than my disdain for the Stormcast aesthetic gives me the right to tell players to pick another army or I'll refuse them at local tournaments.

This feels like a pretty strong overreaction.

Who here said they wouldn't play against them?  The original post asking for people's opinions on Compendium characters, and people have been sharing their opinions.

We all also can't forget that a large chunk of this game is the social contract.  We're agreeing to provide each other as enjoyable experience as possible every time we meet up to play.  And sometimes, that means compromise.

I started playing a Harbinger Chamber at 2k (pre-the new book).  It was absurdly powerful and jist started sweeping through my regular opponents.  After a few weeks, I initiated a conversation with them about it, and whether or not it was really fun to play against.  When my regulars clarified they didn't enjoy it, I said "no problem" and changed my list.  Now, they are having fun during our games again.

Another of our regulars was really struggling against a Morghast heavy army our Death player was running.  Our Death player changed it up and no longer uses Morghasts against that guy, but still uses them on me because they don't bother me.

Are those examples of "imposing will" on each other?  Or are those examples of people talking about what they do and do not find enjoyable about the game and compromising with each other?

And as far as "refuse them at local tournaments," I assume you mean "won't let them enter an event you're running."  If that is the case, I say go ahead.  That's your compromise in order to create a more enjoyable experience for you and it should be applauded that someone is willing to step forward and say "this is not how I want to play."

Just try not to forget that a social contract is about more than one person.  You maybe find that banning Stormcast in your area is something everyone is chomping at the bit for.  You may find that no one comes to local events anymore, too.

The important part is having the conversation.

If I

 lay down a Settra model, that isn't Settra.  Its the High King of the Crimson Monarchs who roam the Voidglass Desert and collect skulls to attach to their chariots.  This is fully within the lore of AOS.  If the model is WYSIWYG, then why does one care if I am using a ruleset of an old character?  Is the issue the old model itself?  I guess I just don't understand the concern.

I don't speam for everyobe, but for me, it's all about accessibility.  Getting games with new players is such an exercise in mental fortitude and patience in my neck of the woods that I want the game to be as accessible to people as possible.  The one local shop that does any sort of AoS promotion does so as an extreme backseat to War Machine, Malifaux, X-Wing, and Kings of War.  Hell... they even promote Walking Dead: All Out War more strongly than AoS.

So the last thing I need to be promoting is hard-to-get models (especially being in an area that likes to push company specific models for games).  I want newer players to see me playing, see me stop playing to engage them, invite them to play, and then show them the model kits.  I can't properly do that if I'm running a Spearmen heavy High Elf list... or a snake/Settra list... or *insert out of print Compendium model here*.

That's a terrible way, in my mind, to invite people in.  "Yeah, this model is really good... but you can't buy one."

[BaldoBeardo]

For context - Double Misfire is such a stunty purist he only paints plastic models under sufferance and gets all teary-eyed at the mention of the Perry twins.
As for "dear friend"... he has a talent for ephemeral (but very entertaining) apoplexy and his army selection was limited by which of his slaanesh conversions were acceptable at an all-ages affair.

In DM's case, you can't spell fluff without OCD... [emoji3]

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[CoffeeGrunt]

50 minutes ago, Double Misfire said:

Do you have any personal experience of taking Settra or other old Undead special characters to events and anyone raising an eyebrow CG?

I ran Settra at a couple of small local 2K tournaments using a proxy model I'd put together. No-one really brought it up, but this also had a Brettonia Ghoul army as well as a couple of other themed conversion lists, so the counts-as aspect wasn't too bad.

Another list was Empire with Compendium characters, and the tournament was pretty open about compendium.

26 minutes ago, Criti said:

We all also can't forget that a large chunk of this game is the social contract.  We're agreeing to provide each other as enjoyable experience as possible every time we meet up to play.  And sometimes, that means compromise.

You appear to be directing yourself at a completely different discussion, because I never said that was the case. I said that I believe to say you don't want to play a person on the grounds of an aesthetic or fluff consideration is silly, because that's a purely subjective thing you've decided you don't like and are imposing your view of the game upon another player because of.

Asking people not to play powerful models because you keep getting rekt is a different discussion entirely, it's one of noting that certain units simply wipe your army effortlessly, which is no fun for anyone.

I regularly have these conversations, both in general discussions we have at the store about units, and with players. It's part of the reason I don't tend to run certain units and only bring the VLoZD out for tournaments, because in the build I run him in he simply doesn't die without furious effort from my opponent.

But I wouldn't ever tell a player I don't want to play them in a tournament or casual play on fluff grounds. That speaks to a lack of imagination, not love of the fluff. Their fluff is their's, I don't have any right to force them to change it because it doesn't suit mine, and I wouldn't expect it in return.

In a game where Nagash can be slap-fighting Nagash in a mirror list, I'd argue that you'd want to remove all Special Characters if you're aiming to preserve the fluff. Otherwise you end up with Alarielle fighting herself, or Nagash inexplicably fighting a Vampire Lord which in the fluff he would cripple with a thought then set the Lord's own undead hordes upon him, such is his power and domain over Death.

[Thomas Lyons]

1 hour ago, Criti said:

I don't speam for everyobe, but for me, it's all about accessibility.  Getting games with new players is such an exercise in mental fortitude and patience in my neck of the woods that I want the game to be as accessible to people as possible.  The one local shop that does any sort of AoS promotion does so as an extreme backseat to War Machine, Malifaux, X-Wing, and Kings of War.  Hell... they even promote Walking Dead: All Out War more strongly than AoS.

So the last thing I need to be promoting is hard-to-get models (especially being in an area that likes to push company specific models for games).  I want newer players to see me playing, see me stop playing to engage them, invite them to play, and then show them the model kits.  I can't properly do that if I'm running a Spearmen heavy High Elf list... or a snake/Settra list... or *insert out of print Compendium model here*.

That's a terrible way, in my mind, to invite people in.  "Yeah, this model is really good... but you can't buy one."

I don't know that OOP models are not "inviting".  If you are trying to establish a community, using OOP models invites old warhammer players back into the hobby since it shows them they can use their old models.  I'm not sure what is less inviting: using OOP models that can't be bought off the shelf, or telling veterans they need to scrap their old model collection to start playing this game.  For new players, it shows them that they can reliably go buy a used army as their starter army and get into the hobby at pennies on the dollar.  To me, both of these alternatives are more inviting to new players than: "Hey look at my shiny models!  Want to play a game with me?  Awesome! Go spend $300, assemble everything and maybe we can play a game in a couple weeks."

Additionally, for me, using out of print models is a great way to open new players up to the depth that the hobby has to offer.  Like the rules but can't get the model?  Awesome, lets talk conversions and explore how to make a unit of what they're looking for, likely for a lot cheaper than current NIB kits.  If they want the model, they can go to the secondary market.  This is no different than MTG or any of the other games out there with OOP stuff.  The difference with this game is that conversions allow you to field old stuff rather than being force to buy originals at the secondary market price.  
 

[Criti]

There as some good comments here I want to reply to, but I don't want to send this too far off topic.  I will be quoting this in a new topic momentarily.  Hopefully, you'll read it and we can discuss.

[DrDemento]

My "other" vote was for as maximum freedom to use any appropriate model for compendium special characters (converted, any of the various official model versions, etc.).

this is most inclusive, gives the most options for list diversity in tournaments, and keeps old armies interesting at least until new battletomes give options that might reduce inclinations to use legacy heroes (and their pseudo-battalion like abilities where battalions are lacking - like Duardin/dwarfs).

The fluff concerns can be addressed in any number of imagination based scenarios suggested above (reincarnation, history repeats itself, etc.).  Why can't I have a disposed dwarf ranger hero who gives an infiltrate and healing ability? A slayer hero with the commensurate synergies, etc.?

my perspective is our group has returned to fantasy after 30 years!  Had a bit of 40k off and on since then but ultimately collapsed under the same rules burden that killed fantasy for us years ago. Since last year dusting off our old regiments of renown (Bugmans!), we've painted stuff that's been in blisters since 1987, AND bought and painted tons of new stuff - Fyreslayers, ironjawz, nurgle, aelves, dragons, terrain, Ogres, etc. 

options, freedom, imagination, inclusivity should be the guiding principles in my opinion.

thanks!

[KHHaunts]

Many of the old characters along with their models have become generic but kept their profles more or less the same. Why cant we do the same if its just an issue of narrative.

I do agree its important to move on but firstly it is legal.

secondly i heard someone above mention a viable narrative excuse for Hammer of Sigmar vs Hammers of sigmar . . . . . .That may well be true but if you can pass that off as narrative you can make one out of anything. And isent that kind of the point of AOS??

Thirdly. Few if any of the old units are OP and will soon become an option people use for personal reasons and not advantages.

Also do people feel the same about non character units? Because im planning to use my forest drake until GW stops saying i can.

[chord]

As somebody who knows nothing about WHFB, if you put down a specific compendium character it wouldn't bother me.  I figure they just live somewhere in the (near) infinite mortal realms. 

[Travis Baumann]

I am just getting back into GW/gaming after two decades out... I never quit WFB/40K over any unhappiness with it, just all my friends moved away and I had a lot of other stuff to deal with.

Recently I have gone to the Los Angeles GW store in Glendale and thought everything looked really cool but felt completely lost in the mythos and the new models.   I have spent some time on this forum and others trying to get a handle on the state of affairs and what is going on.  I also dug out my closets and found tons of old miniatures.  I have been cataloging and organizing them and then using the warscrolls site and the AoS app for fun to see if any of my old armies are still viable and even worth playing.

I have to say that off the bat, the old armies are hard to put together decent forces for AoS.  Most of the unit sizes are different now for example I have 12 Brittonian Knights and 24 archers but now they come in units of 8 and 16 respectively.  I have nearly 2000 points in a Skaven army that looks like it would get creamed by just about anyone.  A 2000 point army of Lizardmen made entirely of Skink archers (which don't seem to exist anymore) and Sauron warriors lead by a single Stegadon and Slann Priest (who is being carted around by four Saurons which also doesn't seem to exist anymore).  I have a decent Goblin/Ogre 2000 point army that I actually may give a go just for fun as Gobbo's and Ogres are hilarious.  I have 1600 points of High Elves that look mediocre at best and I have a decent number of Dark Elves and Chaos.

Some of these figures look freaking horrible and some have held up.  It seems everything has fallen into size escalation for the heroes and/or monsters.  I have the 1st edition Changer of Ways which is laughable.  I have the 2nd edition as well (still all metal but actually really cool looking) but now the new guy is 3-4 times bigger.  This goes across the board.. Nagash went from a normal model to a giant.  Airelle or whatever her name is was maybe the size of two figures and now she is bigger than a dragon.  I could see playing against or with some of these old figures as being underwhelming and or annoying to some people. 

I would love to get some gaming in on my older figures before committing to a new (and really expensive) army but I have to say, all of my old armies are heavy on rank and file, a few heroes (tons of musicians and standard bearers which don't seem to be a thing anymore) and really light on big 'uns, dragons, machineries of war, and proverbial death stars which I hate to say it, seems to be the focus of AoS from my fresh perspective.  I am ok with that game play wise, it looks to be really fun but seems aimed at "here is my $100+ centerpiece, here are a few elite units, and here is a bunch of other monsters/artillery/additional centerpieces" and that is daunting both financially and painting/hobby wise.

One of the things that concerns me in this thread and its sister thread, is mentions of painting to GW color schemes.  I have NEVER painted an army or figure like the official 'Eavy Metal/White Dwarf/Box art guides.  Part of the fun of the hobby for me is making the army your own and I always felt that is where the games really shine, provoking the imagination and creating all new armies.  The worlds are diverse and in depth enough where literally anything could happen.  Warp Gates are not linear in time or space so anything can happen and should.

I feel that named characters kind of take some of that away at times.  Its all cool for the fluff and stories but I would prefer where you make your own characters/heroes/wizards and then you could use any appropriate model for your general or arch mage or whatever.  It is odd to me that we would constantly see certain heroes and champions always doing battle, especially against each other but like I said, the world is presented in a way that there can be an imaginative explanation for anything.

So in short, yeah, it works to bring your Dwarf heroes into the setting.  Maybe they fell through a wormhole/warp gate.  Maybe they were summoned by their ancestors (maybe even by accident while their names were being invoked).  Sorcery.  Chaos.  The Warp.  Its all possible.

[KHHaunts]

12 hours ago, Travis Baumann said:

I am just getting back into GW/gaming after two decades out... I never quit WFB/40K over any unhappiness with it, just all my friends moved away and I had a lot of other stuff to deal with.

Recently I have gone to the Los Angeles GW store in Glendale and thought everything looked really cool but felt completely lost in the mythos and the new models.   I have spent some time on this forum and others trying to get a handle on the state of affairs and what is going on.  I also dug out my closets and found tons of old miniatures.  I have been cataloging and organizing them and then using the warscrolls site and the AoS app for fun to see if any of my old armies are still viable and even worth playing.

I have to say that off the bat, the old armies are hard to put together decent forces for AoS.  Most of the unit sizes are different now for example I have 12 Brittonian Knights and 24 archers but now they come in units of 8 and 16 respectively.  I have nearly 2000 points in a Skaven army that looks like it would get creamed by just about anyone.  A 2000 point army of Lizardmen made entirely of Skink archers (which don't seem to exist anymore) and Sauron warriors lead by a single Stegadon and Slann Priest (who is being carted around by four Saurons which also doesn't seem to exist anymore).  I have a decent Goblin/Ogre 2000 point army that I actually may give a go just for fun as Gobbo's and Ogres are hilarious.  I have 1600 points of High Elves that look mediocre at best and I have a decent number of Dark Elves and Chaos.

Some of these figures look freaking horrible and some have held up.  It seems everything has fallen into size escalation for the heroes and/or monsters.  I have the 1st edition Changer of Ways which is laughable.  I have the 2nd edition as well (still all metal but actually really cool looking) but now the new guy is 3-4 times bigger.  This goes across the board.. Nagash went from a normal model to a giant.  Airelle or whatever her name is was maybe the size of two figures and now she is bigger than a dragon.  I could see playing against or with some of these old figures as being underwhelming and or annoying to some people. 

I would love to get some gaming in on my older figures before committing to a new (and really expensive) army but I have to say, all of my old armies are heavy on rank and file, a few heroes (tons of musicians and standard bearers which don't seem to be a thing anymore) and really light on big 'uns, dragons, machineries of war, and proverbial death stars which I hate to say it, seems to be the focus of AoS from my fresh perspective.  I am ok with that game play wise, it looks to be really fun but seems aimed at "here is my $100+ centerpiece, here are a few elite units, and here is a bunch of other monsters/artillery/additional centerpieces" and that is daunting both financially and painting/hobby wise.

One of the things that concerns me in this thread and its sister thread, is mentions of painting to GW color schemes.  I have NEVER painted an army or figure like the official 'Eavy Metal/White Dwarf/Box art guides.  Part of the fun of the hobby for me is making the army your own and I always felt that is where the games really shine, provoking the imagination and creating all new armies.  The worlds are diverse and in depth enough where literally anything could happen.  Warp Gates are not linear in time or space so anything can happen and should.

I feel that named characters kind of take some of that away at times.  Its all cool for the fluff and stories but I would prefer where you make your own characters/heroes/wizards and then you could use any appropriate model for your general or arch mage or whatever.  It is odd to me that we would constantly see certain heroes and champions always doing battle, especially against each other but like I said, the world is presented in a way that there can be an imaginative explanation for anything.

So in short, yeah, it works to bring your Dwarf heroes into the setting.  Maybe they fell through a wormhole/warp gate.  Maybe they were summoned by their ancestors (maybe even by accident while their names were being invoked).  Sorcery.  Chaos.  The Warp.  Its all possible.

I ssuppose that links to what i think.

 

I agree that compendium armies ar hard to put together. andi almost agree that they should be.

I dont think the old models should get as much treatment as the new. or be preserved if they are standing in the way of new models (Such as changing keywords to assign units to new factions (Like black orcs to ard boys)

All i think is that if they arent hurting anybody and arent stupidly OP give them points and let people play. If some one manages to win with an underprivilaged retro army that dosent have any battalions and limited Synergy then i say well done them. I think that they need to accept that one day they are going to dissapear but i think its to early to impose that.

I love my Waderer forest drake. When they bring out a updated behemoth for wanders i will feel less sad about it but until then. It stays in my army.

The whole immersion thing IMO is silly as it really dosent take alot of effort to come up with some decent fluff. Particularly given the weak examples ive heard being given.