Sarouan

Well, it's more the context about saying "rules don't matter". Think about it : what really matters in the game, having fun or following blindly the rules ? More than one rule designer from GW has stated more than one time (including in the White Dwarf) than if a rule gets in the way of players' fun, it may be good to ignore it for the sake of the game being fun. So rules aren't an excuse for everything. They're just tools to be used in the appropriate situation, it shoudn't be an obstacle. Fact is : rules can't cover everything in a game as large as AoS. It's not just limited to a chess board with set cases. But there is a way to write and present them for sure so that they are easy to follow / find. We'll see how 3rd edition will be designed on that matter. From the few pages shown, I guess they put some effort into it. As for balance's value...we already have the answer with equal game mode, anyway.

Honestly, I wish the Endless Spells were all working like Seraphon Bound Endless Spells or the "Endless Prayers". I never liked the "every player chooses one Endless Spell once it's their turn" mechanism. Would rather have wizards taking control of the spell by, I don't know, using a special action during the Hero Phase instead of casting a spell and beating the casting value to "dominate and control it". That's why predatory spells are considered not worth it. Because you pay for it, you bother casting it and yet it can still be turned against you simply because the way rules work. If that's still the case in 3rd edition, I don't think people will keep buying predatory spells more than in the 2nd. When I first saw that name, I was wondering "who is that Krule guy anyway ?". So since then, I see them as "the boyz of Krule". Not that cringy in the end.

Come on, you know game balance is shifted everytime a new battletome comes out. New edition won't change that at all - especially when old competitive battletomes are still competitive, if not more, because the new toys don't change a thing to how they play or simply empower them more. What I like in AoS is its relative simplicity in core rules. Which is why I'm suspicious of introducing more rules into them. After all, for special rules, we have the unit warscrolls and army traits already. I just want to still play a game, not having to do my homework just to remember what to play when all the time like in 40k V9 and its horrible mess with special rules everywhere. Doesn't mean I think 1st edition was the best version of the game.

Only true if you have a competitive mindset. I don't need to have more rules to have fun, personnally. But I guess they need to add more than before to justify a new edition, don't they ? That's why I'm waiting to see the actual rules before getting really hyped about new edition.

*shrugs* If you want to think the shield / banner isn't Kragnos' face, then do so. Assume it's Mork's face instead. Or the Orruk Sun. Or whatever you decide it is. Who cares, anyway ? Once you bought the miniatures, you do what you want. And your opponent do the same with his own miniatures. So don't try to tell someone else what he doesn't want to. About the miniatures, I like the new style of the Stormcast Eternals to be honest. I also like the troops have mixed genders. But that's not enough to me, that's just a tease. I want to see what they'll really bring with the Stormcast Eternal Battletome. I wonder if they'll add "new" troops with ranged weapons (looking how Sigmar is nostalgic nowadays, maybe storm arquebuses and storm cannons ? ) or new cavalry. About the kruleboyz...really hard not to think "Mordor invades AoS", here. Even with the "not chaos dwarf hobgoblins". I guess they're cool and all, but yeah...the inspiration is very obvious here.

I don't know, honestly. The few flipped pages look like they wrote it "more technical", a bit like they did with 40k V9. It feels like it's more competitive oriented. What I'm afraid of is that they add a bit too many "toys" in the core rules like the heroic actions (I really do hope they were just talking about more "core" command abilities rather than actual new mechanism for heroes only, like in Lord of the Ring) or the monsters tricks during the charge phase. Same for "reactive" command abilities. I don't want to have a headache trying to remember all my army rules during the hero phase like in 40k V9. I mean, I'm a casual player, not a competitive one. I like to read rules, but I have my limit - and so do my game partners. Endless Spells moving during each hero phase...meh. That's not their problem. The problem is that the opponent can move them even if you bought the spell for your army. So I'm waiting to see WHO can move them at each hero phase before getting hyped about this. Waiting to see what the player choosing second for initiative really gain as advantages. For that, I'm actually curious to see the battleplans and their victory conditions. I'd like they use more the way AoS alternate turns between players into how they score points, so that choosing to play second is a strategic choice and not just a way to gain more command points. I'll be honest, I'm more interested to see what they'll do with narrative play.

Wonder why they bothered to give him a Wound characteristic at all. Basically, you can't pile-up wounds on him from one phase to another. Either you kill him or he suffers no wound. And yeah, as he is right now, you just need to concentrate on him in one phase. Guess that means he can basically ignore a few spells dealing mortal wounds in the enemy hero phase.

No, but spoiling the end like this is actually saying a lot for those who follow the story so far. It's a two-line summary, yes, and that's the beauty of it ! It looks like it was telling not much, but it was the opposite. That's why it was removed : it was a too perfect summary. 🤣

It was too much a spoiler of the spoiler ! 🤣

Not just that, they also spoiled Alarielle's actions are the reason why Kragnos got free. It's honestly the whole story of Kragnos book they were spoiling. 😂

Yes, it was really hilarious to see how they litterally spoiled the story of Kragnos while the book wasn't even on pre-order, and they backtracked in panic while reading the comments online about how much a spoiler it was. 🤣

Worth was it's worth, but the White Dwarf 464 is clearly stating there are more articles than the one on the heroes in it that will be coming in the next months. Since White Dwarf is made several months in advance, may mean we will still see something in it even if the game is not available anymore online.

Well, we already have chaos dwarves in AoS. Not just in the background, you can see their miniatures in some Warcry warbands. They are more faithful to their true beginnings, when they were just what their names suggest : dwarves who succumbed to Chaos. Chaos Dwarves at the time of Battle with their cult to Hashut...are something else, to be honest. They're not really Chaos Dwarves, more like Dark Dwarves like the Dark Elves were to the High Elves.

It's mostly the same than for squats or sisters of battle in 40k before they got remade. It's an army you rarely meet in game, especially now that Battle has died and FW has removed the chaos dwarves range. So people like to put them back on the scene whenever they have the opportunity. Those who are still faithful to Chaos Dwarves nowadays are true fans, so obviously there is a lot of love coming from them. Doesn't really mean the army when it was "alive" at the time of Warhammer Battle was really that good. I mean...I played them at that time before FW and they were quite...let's say "specific". Also horribly cheesy because everyone hated playing against dwarves in those days and Chaos Dwarves were basically dwarves but with everything they lacked : flying monsters, cavalry, magic and cheap cannon fodder units (the greenskins). I'm not nostalgic myself on that matter. 😘

So double turn is here to stay in 3rd edition. Sorry, those who hate this mechanism. Interview showed they were focusing on keeping the game core rules simple and clear, giving more tools/advantages to the player going second and talking about core battalions to keep some armies less "unbalanced". Hm, looks like the designers know what they're doing. What a shock !

Honestly, I'm all hyped for fimirs for Destruction. They need to expand the Grand Alliance with more armies than mere orcs and goblins. Kragnos is already showing it's not just about Gorkamorka and greenskins as "goblins and orcs" like you would expect. It would be good to have fimirs joining them.

Doesn't matter, they're still mentionned in AoS. People expecting skavens, goblins or orcs in this new "breed of evil" are gonna be disappointed, I'm telling you. Mainly because skavens, goblins or orcs aren't new at all. And for those saying "but fimirs aren't new as well !" : in AoS, as a new battletome, they totally are.

Yeah, the last trailer is totally about fimirs. Creatures of the swamp who use fog to hide them from the sun, and they tend to kidnap people as well (the nursery rhyme keeps saying "disappeared" for all soldiers). And yes, the map is litterally having a "fimir bay". Technically, fimirs are green so they can be called "greenskins" too. And in the first editions, fimirs were kinda associated with greenskins in general. Especially in Heroquest. So my bet is that fimirs are back, and they are Destruction boys !

Maybe that mysterious dwarf with white beard is both Grombrindal and Grungni. Maybe Grombrindal was always Grungni from the beginning. Maybe Grungni never left his people and was always at their side whenever they were in times of need. Grombrindal, the White Dwarf. Always hidden, always wearing many disguises, but still there when his people needs guidance the most. And the novels in the white dwarf never state this strange duardin who's never the same isn't a god. We just have his words from time to time, but never from the point of view of the narrator - always the character. He may be simply misleading the people he's speaking to with half-truths and double meanings.

I do think this book is a big deal too. It's not just "Nagash lost", the real big deal here is the necroquake is countered. This is a huge victory for the forces of light and life...and it will have a backlash, like Alarielle said. Having Nagash lose his necroquake means indeed he will lose his complete autority on the forces of Death. Meaning there is some room for others "demi-gods / gods" of death again. And I agree, this could be expected lore wise (the necroquake was seriously hindering the realms, after all, and its disappearance is also a good excuse to change rules a lot about, said, endless spells that aren't really that popular with players anyway ?), but still...this is clearly above Morathi in terms of consequences for the realms. Sure, Slaanesh's possible return is a big deal (to be honest, Slaanesh isn't fully free and for now, it more looks like he has a baby blob more than anything else) and sure Morathi becoming a goddess (Praise to Morathi-Khaine !) isn't a minor event as well, nor the loss of Anvilgard to Sigmar...but the necroquake being undone ? This concerns all the realms on a whole new level, including Shyish. This is definitely not Psychic Awakening material. Not even Wrath of the Everchosen (which ended in a status quo, again - yeah, sure, the forces of Death managed to build a fortress in Archaon's land and hold the door to Shyish, but it's not like it wasn't already eternal conflict anyway with Chaos). Here, we have a clear winner and indeed Teclis brought hope to the realms. Before, AoS was pretty grim. If it wasn't Chaos, it was Death. Now Death is being humbled a bit. And Nagash is a ****** anyway, I always hated him. It's good to see his bony ass to be kicked hard. Yeah, he will come back for revenge, as usual, but he lost hard. It's not just being banished after losing an AoS battle. His whole plan was completely undone. Litterally. About characters who may "die for good"...it wouldn't be so bad. I still think Arkhan will come back as an Ossiarch, but if he was gone for good, wouldn't bother me. I bet the rules to play him can still stick around for a while. And it's not like most AoS games do care about what character is living or technically dead...like we got the "new" rules of Anvilgard with explicit statement saying that you can still use the old rules in game (meaning it's a game in the past or representing a rebellious force). "Old" Arkhan rules may mean a shadow of it former self, another character entirely or just a battle of the past. Like GW made rules for old Warhammer Battle armies for AoS. And I think that's good. That means the lore can move on, not being stuck in an endless status quo like it was in Battle or currently in 40k. It needs to move on to keep being relevant, at some point. Allowing yourself as a designer to really get rid of named characters for good is also a way to do that. It means they're not a guarantee to be always managing to survive anyway because of plot armor. It's surely easier with AoS that has still a new setting to take better shape, but it's so good to see GW being really more free than in 40k or Battle about this. It really warms my heart.

I can't say I'm really cheated, since my Daughters of Khaine miniatures are thought as an ally force for my Cities of Sigmar and that I use them mostly in skirmish games like Warcry, but...yeah, I thought it was weird when they didn't put the new profiles in the Broken Realm: Morathi book. I suspected it was because a new battletome book was on the way with Hedonites of Slaanesh, according to the Shadow and Pain box. Now we see it was the case. What happened with Lumineth, I completely expected it. It was the same pattern than Adeptus Mechanicus at their time, with a book for skitarii and another for the priests, before they were reunited later in one whole book. It was obvious to me the army of light aelves has been cut in two waves. Sure, Covid-19 has messed GW's release plan more than one time, but this helps to remember there is no virtue buying according to the hype the day of the first pre-order. Collector edition, "exclusive" big boxes...these are just powder to the eyes. We can thank the leaker who announces the Soulblight Gravelords, since it's pretty clear it wasn't GW's intention to reveal them that soon. Just like Bloodbowl's new edition leak before the last Spike magazine for previous edition wasn't out already. Now we know they will come later this year, which can have an influence about what we may buy for Death Alliance in the coming months.

It's especially true when we actually don't agree about what is really the problem. What some view as imbalance may not be the case to others. Sometimes it's something having consequences not being aknowledged elsewhere, other times it's a matter of perspective. Identifying the roots of the problem and understanding the other point of view is important, especially nowadays.

I think there's an important point to keep in mind : not many players are actually able to buy a highly competitive top-meta army in an context where GW is far more reactive than in the days of WFB, when you could keep the same list for years. Having to invest hundred of dollars or euros in an army that may suck at the next errata / General Handbook isn't that appealing to a lot of players. And I think that's the point here : GW games need a lot of time and investment even not talking about the rules and practicing for tournaments. It's not Magic the Gathering where you buy the cards and there is nothing to do more with them, and it's easier to "throw them away" when they're not competitive enough anymore. Sure, I guess you can sell your less competitive army, but even so that's not what most players do. It makes sense the majority actually plays with what they have and want to play, rather than the ultimate optimized build talked in the forums. That, and the current pandemic shutting down most tournaments, forcing people to play with their close groups at best, may be more incentive not to use a dirty optimized list to lose your friends - and thus effectively not playing anymore. The risk is too high for wargames - it's not just dropping your deck of card and switch to another, it's an army of sometimes hundred of miniatures you built and painted for countless hours. Social contract in game still matters, thankfully. I believe that's the true reason the majority of players don't push such dirty lists too much. Those who do will soon enough learn the hard way there is no point if the said army is taking dust on your shelves because you have no one wanting to play with you. That's also why balance isn't that much important in GW games : the players actually do the balancing themselves, so that they still have an opponent to play against.

I think it's just a cycle - when one main GW game gets a new edition, it always feels like the other is neglected for a while, until the time it also gets a new edition and it's the first one's turn to felt neglected. We'll definitely get a AoS v3 and GW will unavoidably add new things to it / change a few mechanisms. Because that's the way they work and keep selling their rules. Of course it's needed to do that. See how many players are lost when it's not written by GW designers in the official rules. Joke aside, I bet that double turn will stay in the next edition and GW will focus more on the battleplans' victory conditions giving more incentive to choose second player on the initiative roll.

I think you're too focused on the double turn mechanism, NinthMusketeer. Fact is, there are plenty of situations in AoS where dice decide the results instead of your pure skills. Double turn is just one of them. Like Kramer said, there are plenty of more dice rolls actually deciding your loss or victory - it's just that blaming the double turn is easier. I don't think double turn in itself is a negative thing in AoS rules. I believe it should stay - I just wish like others to have more battleplans giving a real choice about having a double turn or not, giving advantages in the victory conditions to the second player. If all battleplans work like this, then going second when you win the roll will become a true strategic choice. I think that's what GW will do for the next edition, just like they did change victory conditions for 40k's missions to put less incentive on the destruction of the opponent's army alone. Besides, I guess this topic has become "Should Double Turn Exist At All ?" instead of talking about the power creep in AoS. I don't mind, but I feel it would be better suited to another topic dedicated to it.