Jump to content

MechaBriZilla

Members
  • Posts

    252
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MechaBriZilla

  • Birthday 10/22/1976

Recent Profile Visitors

930 profile views

MechaBriZilla's Achievements

Dracothian Guard

Dracothian Guard (7/10)

147

Reputation

  1. I made a post in the forum thread recently, that I felt really articulated my own fascination with the fluff side of the Age of Sigmar and the Mortal Realms in which it is set. So I thought I'd rework it a bit, and put it up on my blog as well. Let's be honest, I'm in a bit of hobby slump at the moment (I've been playing too much WoW), so at the moment, my thoughts are all I have to offer the community at large. What follows is an edited version of my original post. So, if you've read that post already, I apologize if it is slightly redundant. As Age of Sigmar grows and progresses, what I'd really like to see if for it to remain a fluid setting. One of the major issues I had with WHFB was how stagnant the world was... Don't get me wrong, I like 40k, and until recently, it's been pretty stagnant too. I had other issues with The Old World as well, but I'm not going to go into that now. I know it has it's adherents, and I have no interest in stepping on their fun. Anyway, In AoS I'd like to see major characters rise and fall, factions shift over time, and maybe even changes to the Grand Alliances. A living setting would benefit the game greatly, and so far, that seems to me that this is what GW is doing anyway. I mean we've already seen a Nurgle general go over to the Stormcast, and we can only begin to hypothesize what the end result of multiple reforging will be on the Stormcast. It seems each reforging also purifies the soul of the Stormcast who goes through it. By that I mean, that their core trait, whatever that may be, begins to dominate their personality. The things that may have moderated that, their previous memories, become harder and harder to access, and what's remains is their core, or perhaps their soul. Be it for good or bad. I feel like one of the defining characteristics of the setting is the feeling of potential and vastness. There is no indication of how big individual realms are. It appears in the fluff, that each realm may even contain multiple planets (or maybe even entire star systems), and they certainly contain any number of pocket realms. In any case, what we do know is that the realms are vast, and even an individual realm can encompass a multitude of different takes on the realms theme. Ultimately, that makes me feel like there can be any number of factions/races/organizations/etc. that could exist in the realms, and that even though a specific faction, such as Sylvaneth seem to have a 'home' Realm, Ghyran, there could be any number of versions of Sylvaneth living in all of the realms, and taking on the aspects of that realm. Personally, If i did Sylvaneth, they would come from Shysh, and lean toward the end of the life cycle in appearance. I've already considered modeling an undead Treelord, though I'm uncertain what warscroll I'd apply to it or how to create a balanced custom warscroll for use in friendly play. I feel like all of the factions that are a part of AoS add to the feeling of vastness in the realms. They could be from anywhere, each could be used to create many different sub-sub factions. This makes modeling and painting possibilities endless. You want your Sylvaneth to have blue, orange, or plaid bark... Ok! (Any plaid Sylvaneth inspired by this line must include bagpipes in some way.) Go for it! It's possible. Zombie Gargants! Why the hell not! To me, the themes and feel of AoS comes from conflict. The Grand Alliances, realms, factions, races, etc. just provide the framework in which the conflicts take place. GA's representing various 'truths or forces' within existence/or mortal life, that are all present in our own lives, with the moral values removed. Order, Chaos, Death, Destruction. Each could be good or evil, depending on how they are moderated, but none of them are good or evil in their purest forms. Although, personally, if I were to have formed the Grand Alliances myself, I may have only gone with Order and Chaos. To me Death and Destruction, though they are my two favorite GA's, would fit better as aspects of both Order and Chaos. As they are now, I feel that Death could really be Order carried out to it's ultimate failing, but it also fits well with Chaos as death most certainly can be random in it's application. Killing those who should not die, and allowing to live those whose time should have been up many years (centuries, millenia...) ago. Destruction is the same imo. Destruction on behalf of Order would be the razing of incongruous growth or natural formations, to make way for the pure. For Chaos, it's just a part of the cycle. Chaos is so many things. Good and bad. Without chaos, there is no change, nothing new. Things are built, and as a part of Chaos, destroyed. No reason needed. So much like concepts of Good and Evil, Death and Destruction fit neatly into Order and Chaos. This in fact, has been at the root of one of my pet theories regarding the Tomb Kings. That they will return, but rather than as a part of GA Death, which is ruled by Settra's Arch Enemy, they will return as a part of Order. What are the Tomb Kings, if not orderly? Everything and everyone has their place in the Tomb Kings world. At the end of the day, I think we all (if somewhat pridefully) are here because we hope to participate and have an impact on this community. For my part, I would love it if this post becomes a bit the philosophy behind the game and how we all (especially GW) approach it, but I also don't want to fool myself into believing that I am some genius who knows exactly what AoS should be, or how everyone should play it. So, if you find yourself reading this, let me know what you think... What do you like? Have I said anything that would ruin the game for you? Does any of this resonate with the way you see our game? In them meantime, this is all Head Cannon. Here is the thread where the original post appeared, in case you are interested. Repairing the Lore
  2. When did Silver Tower get released in relation to All Gates? Just wondering if it could have been pointing to that, and not necessarily anything else? Not that there couldn't be Tzeentch release, and certainly that's what the rumors all seem to point to, but seeing this... Makes me think of the board game more than another campaign. Of course, how cool would it be if they could link the board game to the table top war game?
  3. I'm working on another blog post and intend to post some more WIP skellies and Necromancer soon. But, Since it's been a bit, I figured I'd drop some picks of another of my favorite armies. I'm on and off with Tomb Kings.... I wanted to make an army of them for WHFB, but had problems staying motivated for a number of reasons. Among which were the rules bloat, balance issuse, the number of models needed to play, and not having the time to play... Once AoS hit, I still wanted to finish my army, but I find it difficult. There are still units I need, but the expense of purchasing them has gotten ridiculous. So, again I find it hard to get motivated to paint my Tomb Kings... I'm sure I'll finish them up someday, but I'm not so sure they will ever really see the table, which is a damn shame.
  4. MechaBriZilla

    Mourngul

    Love what you've done here. I'm not a huge fan of the Morngul model... But your work might change my mind.
  5. This is an excellent point. In a way, the mystery behind the releases may even bring the community together a little more.
  6. Fair points... But I'm relatively certain Death should have gotten the update, and the update was ****** anyway... Seriously though. I understand what you mean, and don't necessarily disagree with you. But I also feel like that is somewhat a product of GW's previous standard operating procedure, which 40k is still suffering from. AOS has many differences in it's mechanics and presentation that I think will limit it's exposure to those issues. AoS doesn't have killer armies. There is no Eldar here. Most armies can pull out wins if lists are built well and played well. AoS has smaller armies. Meaning I can have a few favorite armies. AoS Grand Alliances encourage you to be interested in at least (theoretically) 1/4 of the AoS world... Although at this point, Death and Destruction lag behind in updates and armies, I don't suspect this will always be the case. AoS has more ways to play. Not everything in AoS is about the competitive player. Meaning that as long as they continue to put forth armies who at least seem like the writer(s) of their battletomes cared about them, there should be generally positive reception. That's all I can think of for now. But at the end of the day, I guess my main thrust is that GW has been making the move toward being a more customer focused organization, and that can be nothing but good for them. Visibility in terms of releases can't really hurt them I don't think. I'm not suggesting they go as far as FFG with months lead on what is coming out, but I think a few weeks lead up, with a couple of articles discussing mechanics and fluff would be well received in general. Also, if you are correct about this, what does it say about GW that the only way they can get people to buy their latest product is if they keep what you really want hidden away, so you have to get your fix somewhere else?
  7. Not sure I agree with this. Take a look at Fantasy Flight. They announce things months in advance. Then do 4 or 5 preview articles to boot. They don't give specific release dates, more like time frames. i.e. an 'on the boat status' means it's still about 2-3 weeks from the store shelves. iirc. FFG has a great relationship with their customers. I mean, just look through their forums. You will see very little FFG bashing in there. Anyway, they are always going to hear about how they are biased. That's just how things work. Unless they change the way they do releases to be more like Warmahordes, and release new models for all factions at once, they are never going to get out from under that. And even if they did change their release planning, they'd still get it, because reasons. Anyway, all of that said. I really like the direction they've been going, except for the fact that they hate Grand Alliance Death, my proof is reasons. Seriously... Where are my Deathrattle and Soulblight at?
  8. Thanks!!! Ok, here is where I get embarrassed. I was thinking more of my color scheme than I was thinking about the wood... Truthfully, I'm trying to keep my pallet limited for the skellies. I want them to look good, but there are likely to be a lot of them, and I don't want them to take forever to paint. So, considering that, I guess I have two options, the first is that I could figure out a different way to paint the wood... I'd likely go graveyard earth with either a Nuln oil or Agrax Earthshade wash to keep it dark and not draw too much attention... Or, I could just make up a story as to why the wood in this part of the realms is just back. I still intend to use the blue highlights on the black, since I'm emulating a specific comic book technique here, so I'm not so concerned about realism. Thoughts?
  9. Thanks! For whatever reason, I never seem to get the GW base paints thinned enough. Not sure why that is... But that is part of what is going wrong with my flames for sure. Thank you for the encouragement, I'll give the glaze a try. I have Guilman blue, which I think should be the correct glaze color. Yup, these are the GW Deathrattle (used to be Vampire Counts) Skellies. You may be thinking of the Tomb Kings Skellies. They were not great. I mean, they had their charm and all, and I liked them... But not because they were great models. These in particular are from the Start Collecting Deathrattle box. But should be exactly the same as what comes in the Skellies box that you can buy separately. Anyway, you might be thinking of these: These are some old photo's of my TK skellies. Top are color test photos. Bottom is some WIP.
×
×
  • Create New...