OkayestDM

A lot of good advice here already, but I'll throw in my 2 cents. I often find that focusing on a single foot hero can help get me back in the groove, especially if I've been working on a lot of larger units or models. Another thing you can do is commit to just one goal when you sit down to paint (just the skin, just the metals, just the weapons, just the shields, etc.) 10+ whole models can be daunting with the amount of details you have to cover, even if you're not doing them all at once, but if you're only worried about the bows or spears, it's not so bad. Then you can keep going or wrap it up for later as you choose. Finally, I've also found that sometimes, you just need to take a break. I'm on one myself at the moment. It's your hobby, you're not doing something wrong if you step away for a bit.

I'd buy it in a heartbeat!

I'm with you there!

I honestly wasn't expecting the Morathi book to drop so soon! I've got a Stormcast and Cities army, and a friend who has Idoneth. I'm really excited to see what they do for the different armies! As a side not, it is generally believed or understood that Broken Realms is the AoS Psychic Awakening that will likely lead into our third edition. The new 40k edition launched with a huge update to 2 different armies. Are we expecting to see something similar here? Will the culmination of Broken Realms be the release of Slaanesh, and will their mortal forces herald in the new edition? Or do we think that Destruction will be taking center stage, and their armies will receive a substantial boost? (I certainly wouldn't complain if Ironjawz were hit with a big expansion!)

We should consider too that this may only be our first wave of new warscroll battalions. If they do a Destruction book that covers the siege of Excelcis, there's almost certainly going to be more for the Knights Excelsior.

I would be positively stoked if BoC got Ghosteater as a model. His story arc in Black Pyramid was so compelling.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the events of Morathi don't lead to a chaos centric Broken Realms book entitled "Slaanesh."

The whole "three sets of allegiance abilities" has me very intrigued. I can't imagine those all being exclusively for the Anvils. Could it literally be Warrior, Vanguard, and Sacrosanct?

This is one of the things I love about them from a design standpoint. They are a defensive army that is very efficient at killing their opponent. Bonereapers are mostly an attrition army - very hard to put down and slowly but relentlessly whittling your forces away. Lumineth are a bit more equalized in design, they can take a punch, but are also deadly in return. The army is very much a balancing act, which seems appropriate given their lore. I'm not too fussed abut this one either way.I find it a bit tedious that I have to remember a spell for most of my units, but it does make sense to me that Teclis would prioritize thisin his troops. I don't compare the magic dispensation for units in the Lumineth to that in Tzeentch because they operate on different principles. For Teclis, it's a fundamental power that all of his warriors should have. For Tzeentch, it's a shiny bauble to be awarded to some, denied to others, and used to tempt the rest - only the most interesting people should be allowed to play with his fire. I also don't think that it cheapens wizard units in other armies, it's merely the natural progression of a theme that has existed for a while now, and one that I think most folks saw coming. Sure, I guess I see where you're coming from on this one, but I feel that it's more a matter of personal taste than actual limiting of design space. Speaking specifically to the water element theme, they specifically chose the river. This still leaves elements like oceans, steam, rain, ice, snow, storms, etc available to them. Frankly, several of these are already in use as themes or elements on other factions and the design space doesn't feel all that crowded to me yet. This one, admittedly, really threw me. Not so much the fact that animals were incorporated as a theme - hell I've never even played WFB and I know that it was a major part of the High Elf asthetic - but more that they felt cows (yaks, whatever) was the right one to lead off with. I've since learned to embrace the decision, and actually really enjoy the lore reasons behind the design choices , but I personally feel it was one of the weaker design choices. That said, I'm cautiously optimistic that they couldn't throw me another design curve-ball as big a Aelf cowboys, and look forward to what future themes they will add. As to this interfering with other design space, I'm inclined to disagree with that. Generic human-looking soldiers populate the entire game (actual humans, loads of different aelves, stormcast, vampires, zombies) and I don't feel for a moment that any of that has grown stale. There's still plenty of room for unique design even within the same framework. Here I'm more in agreement with you. Aetherquartz is just Aethergold copy-pasted onto the Lumineth. I like the inclusion of aetherquartz as it's a fundamental part of the Lumineth society now, but I wish they had designed the mechanic so that it was unique to the faction rather than a carbon copy of something we have in another army. To me, it cheapens the experience for both factions. I was honestly far more pleased with the use of stances in the allegiance abilities and wish they had leaned more heavily in that direction.

I'm particularly partial to the idea of vampirates, but I also really want an infiltrate/infest/turn theme that would make them a real menace to the cities of order (at least in terms of lore and story.) If we get something like that, I'll be happy regardless of asthetic.

Regardless, it's a great write-up, and I'd love to see them go that route. I particularly like the idea for giving Neferatta an ability to force-redeploy an enemy unit, or force it to go into reserves, it's thematic as hell! The rules would have to be treated carefully so it doesn't become too punishing for the other player, but also can't be turned to their advantage (as in, the unit is lost or delayed and therefore cannot benefit from things like Stormcast or Living Cities reserves rules.)

Almost commented to that effect, but I figured the pun spoke for itself

To be fair, Hysh and Ulgu have always been depicted as the yin and yang equal-opposites realms, so the naming makes sense if they really want to hammer that theme home. I agree though, it's a bit obvious. Then again, I was pulling for "Gloomineth," so I'm not really in a position to criticize.

Here's a thought. Alter bravery so it has a value of 1-6, like hit, wound, and save rolls. (Maybe up to 8 to allow for bravery debuff builds, and/or maybe keep the +1 for every 10 models.) Every battle shock phase, if a unit lost any models that turn, it rolls a die for each model lost. Every roll that is equal to or exceeds the units bravery value results in a model fleeing. Change Inspiring Presence to allow you to reroll the dice rather than auto pass. This would be far more elite friendly (rolling fewer dice against a higher bravery value means you should loose fewer models) but still give options for armies that depend on hordes to mitigate losses where it matters (though not avoid them entirely.) Basically draw inspiration from the new 40k system, but with added AoS flair.

Aren't Seraphon keyworded as Daemons too though? (I'm not sure with the recent update.) In that case, daemon would just be a specific classification of spirit? Perhaps more common or "physical" than the Lumineth spirits of the realms?

Of course, you could add a rule that if a unit that is out of cohesion fails a battle shock test, you must remove models until the unit is back in cohesion before it makes its retreat move. Great way to simulate troops being cut down or routing during the retreat. Then just make sure that each army has or is given a way to select and remove individual models in combat.

Between the volume of attacks and the mortal wounds afterwards, 10 man unit of Evocators could probably do the job.

Yes, they are all part of the same unit, even though they are different models. You must always allocate wounds to pink horrors first. When there are no more pink horrors, you may then allocate wounds to blue or brimstone horrors in any order or combination that you prefer.

You made some very good and compelling points for how Strength and Toughness could improve AoS, and if the game ever did move in that direction, I'd be ok with it. That said, I'd have to agree with Kramer. While it could be a good change, it isn't a change that we need. Additionally, I'm concerned that introducing a new fundamental mechanic into the game would throw off the balance even further than it already is. Sure, the game isn't perfect as it is, but it certainly isn't broken. In fact, there's a lot of people who believe that it's in a really good place right now. There's always room for improvement, but the danger of adding more complexity to anything is tht it creates as much room to get things wrong as it does to get things right. Ultimately, it's not a bad system or a bad idea. I just don't have faith the GW would incorporate it well, and would rather deal with the devil I know than the devil I don't.

I've never used them myself, but I've heard that the Freeguild Greatswords are a good offensive elite infantry unit, and they shouldn't be too hard for you to match to your theme.

The short answer is yes, in general, any time a unit looses models due to damage inflicted from any source, it must make a battleshock test. AoS is a game of exceptions, however, so there are sometimes specific rules or situations that can override that rule. For example, Beasts of Chaos units need to be close to the herdstone in order to be sacrificed, and the herdstone has an aura that makes friendly BoC units immune to battleshock. If the unit being sacrificed is within that aura, you don't run the risk of having any models flee.

Speed is definitely a big drawback for them, and certainly inhibits their ability to serve as an effective anvil. Nevertheless, all of their abilities definitely prime them for that role. The speed of Hysh spell can help with moving them into position, but that requires relying on an unbindable buff. I imagine they'll be quite good once folks have gotten a handle on utilizing them properly but, like much of the army, they're a tricky business. On a side note, the +1 to attack command ability might actually be better spent on a mountain cow than on a unit of Stoneguard (definately better than a 5-man unit, probably better than or equal to a 10-man unit.) Especially if the stonemage is close enough to the mountain to keep him fighting at peak efficiency.

That's probably the best analysis of that model I've heard yet.It's a great model, but when it comes time to select heroes for a game I always pass him over for that exact reason. Even though I love him, other heroes just bring more to the table.

Back before the Sacrosanct chamber was released, I heard a lot of people refer to the Venator as a "bully unit". Even though you know he's not likely to successfully assassinate a hero, your opponent still has to take the fact that he might one-shot a support hero into consideration.

I was just reading about the Battlezone terrain line GW is releasing for 40k, and my first thought was that this would be an amazing format to release sets of realm-specific terrain for AoS. Tiles for the battle mat, an assortment of terrain pieces, cards with customer rules for certain terrain pieces or setups. It would be an amazing opportunity to really explore and reinforce the flavor of the realms on the tabletop, and I find the prospect quite exciting!