Ferban

In the reveal when they were first announced (Warhammer Fest?) I thought they said explicitly that it would be human-centric. I don't think that means human exclusive, but my guess is that the new sculpts will be all or nearly all human models. Maybe you'll still be able to bring in dispossessed and aelfs. If it's more pan-Order, that would be cool, too.

I'm almost positive that I read somewhere that the units within a Skyvessel do not count toward the number of models on an objective. But I've looked through the FAQs and can't find that info now. Did I make this up or can I just not find that rule? Thanks!

For the starter box of Warcry, we got two new warbands in the box, but then another sold separately (Legionnaires) and the monster guy. I'd love to see each new quarterly box also have a companion warband sold separately. It would be a great opportunity to flesh out more warbands.

I grabbed it when I bought some paints and picked up the new Warcry. They tossed it in the bag. No in-store building or painting required.

Total casual player, here. So I'm not sure if they are good or bad for the tournament scene. But for me, I really like battle tactics. It gives you something to do other than stand on an objective or kill the opponent. Adding in those layers is fun. And it also gets you thinking about future turns. What battle tactic can I do now? What will set me up for my next turn? I like that. I'm less enthusiastic about grand strategies. They are fine and all, but I feel like they too firmly lock me into a particular play style or objective before I've even seen my opponent. I'd rather respond to the situation on the table (which is why I like tactics). But Grand Strategies aren't terrible. We still use them. Maybe I'd like them better if you got to pick them after seeing your opponent's list? As for improving their implementation, I would strongly limit the amount of battletome specific battle tactics you could use in each game. Maybe one per game? I like that the battle tactics in the new GHB are a little more difficult to achieve. And some battletomes (DoK, I'm looking at you) have several that are basically completed during list building and are not responsive to the battlefield. I think that's not as fun as those that require you to assess the current state of the battlefield and make a choice from there.

My knowledge of rumor engine history is weak. Do they often take the picture at odd angles?

The August White Dwarf doesn't have a Tome Celestial. Since Ogors and Gitz are the only ones without one (other than LRL and Tzeentch) and there are two destruction tomes coming, I'm hoping that's evidence that Ogors and Gitz are the new books. I love you, Sons players, but I think Gitz and Ogors need it more.

It looks available on GW's site. Search for "Malign Sorcery". Most of the generic endless spells come in that box.

I came to the Mortal Realms in 2020 (COVID hobby) near the end of 2.0. So that may color my perception of things. I didn't play in the world-that-was and so have no memory or nostalgia for it. That said, I think the lore has (mostly) successfully walked a tight line between having concrete events with "canon" events and leaving the world open enough for players to tell their own stories. The lore feels an awful lot like RPG supplements that throw out a lot of settings and hooks but ultimately leave it to the players to decide where they will interact and what stories they will tell. I thought Enoby's rundown on the first page was great. I wasn't reading those stormcast stories, but I agree if they consistently just showed up and punched people in the face, that would be pretty underwhelming. Many of the stories I've read of them (including in Thunderstrike and other stories) generally has them barely saving the day and generally at great sacrifice. So I've enjoyed the stories I've read. (The Dominion novel is somewhat of an exception). I tend to think of the huge setting as a net benefit. I can set my warriors up in any ol' place in the Realm of Fire (doesn't even have to be in the Parch) and I'm good to go. And everything in the Realm is infused with fire, I have to think that there are parts of the land that are arable. Maybe you can't grow rice (which takes a lot of water), but plenty of crops might grow and there are sure to be plants native to Aqshy that are edible. The large realms are great for the Path to Glory narratives and for anyone who wants to build significant head canon. I toyed with the idea of getting into 30k because that starter box has a lot of models. But there is so much "canon" about how guys have to be painted and what iconography they wear, etc. It felt like I'd have to do a whole research project just to get my guys painted "right." I definitely don't have that issue with the AoS. As for the story moving forward, by necessity it has to move forward in such a way that it doesn't invalidate people's armies or eliminate units. If it did, there would be wailing and gnashing of teeth (or teef). So with that restriction in mind, I think BR was overall positive. Anvilguard becomes Har Kuron and the Stormcast and DoK have a strained relationship. Rather than being allies, they now merely have a common enemy in Chaos. This is a great hook that could be explored in novels and maybe might lead to DoK aligning with Malerian's dark elves (when they arrive) against Sigmar. So it could be the seed to a greater conflict later. Belakor breaking the skies was cool, and that resulted in Grugni coming out to forge better armor for the Stormcasts. So, while it has little impact on gameplay, it does show that Chaos and Order are escalating the war. The only negative for me was Kragnos and Excelsis. Excelsis was nearly decimated, but ultimately it seems mostly fine? And Kragnos wanted to destroy Excelsis because it was civilization built near his homeland. But he gets teleported away and he's ... just fine with it, I guess? Maybe that gets more explanation in the Kragnos book, which I have yet to read. If Anvilguard was going away, it seems to me that Excelsis probably should have as well. You could have had the "survivor of excelsis" if you wanted to have your CoS army from there so that you could keep the rules. But it would be a great change and open up narrative opportunities if the Spear of Mallus was destroyed or maybe broken and carted off to various Orruk/Ogor/Behemat/Gitz camps. But with that gripe aside, I think the lore is moving forward at an appropriate pace and I'm looking forward to the next big shakeup. Probably right around the time 4.0 launches.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who was a little disappointed with today's reveals. Don't get me wrong. I thought what we saw today was cool. The new skaven model looked neat, I really liked the Sylvaneth units and the Ogroids are cool. The tease of the new GHB and Cities/Dawnbringers are fine, but didn't really have enough to get excited about. And I like the SBG and KO models well enough, I suppose. Maybe it's because I don't play StD, Sylvaneth, or Skaven. So there just wasn't a lot for me personally to get excited about. But even when that happens, usually the reveals give us some new direction about where the story is headed or the direction of the mortal realms. And that advancing of the story or additional grist for PtG is always exciting to me. But there was very little of that, outside some vague descriptions of the GHB. Oh well. They can't all be bangers. I am happy for the people who are excited by the new models, though. The big question is, will Warcry just get two new specific warbands, or will it be a Red Harvest style release, or will there by a 2nd edition? Tomorrow's reveal will be interesting.

So let's say I cast fleshy abundance or the Glottkin spell to raise the wounds characteristic of a unit. Then a model is taken down to one wound. When the spell ends, it would die. But, if the spell lasts until my next hero phase and, at the start of the phase, I can heal with disgusting resilience, does it still die? In other words, could they heal before the spell ended and thereby stay alive with one wound? My thought is no, they would still die. The spell lasts "until the next hero phase" and the healing doesn't happen until the "start of the hero phase." So, it would seem the spell ended (and the model died) right before they could have been healed by disgustingly resilient. Do I have that right?

I got a digital copy on black library. It's super good. Not just the story, but the writing is solid and rarely relies on the reader knowing outside lore.

Just wanted to comment that I think the boxes are actually fairly new player friendly. You get enough for small army engagements (enough to move around multple units, but not enough to be overwhelming). You get some basic army rules. You get warscroll cards and tokens. And with Arena of Shades, you even get a core rulebook. It seems like they are targeting these boxes for new players. And if you really only want the new hero or one particular side, you could always just wait. They almost always sell those "exclusive heroes" separately after several months. And, in Dominion and Soul Wars, you got better units later (Now you can get Gutrippaz with musicians and banners, for example. Or boltboyz with a leader). So waiting might even be beneficial in that sense.

Totally agree. I much prefer video painting guides. But GW doesn't have a video for every model. So having suggested paints and schemes on the back of the box seems like a no-brainer.

I don't mind unique rules on named characters. The reason they have big stories behind them and tons of lore is precisely because they do more than a generic character of the same type or class. Guardus wouldn't feel like Guardus if every Lord Celestant gave a 5+ ward. As long as they are pointed correctly (which is a whole 'nother issue), I think unique abilities bring good flavor. And they make those characters feel special on the tabletop.

So, in AoS 2.0, all of the models came with an instruction booklet (of course). But on the back of the booklet, there was always a nice color picture of the model and a list of what paints were used on which parts. It didn't discuss all the details, but it gave you sort of a rough idea of how to create the same look. And, for me, I used it as a jumping off point when painting. I don't like to follow it exactly, but it often gave me a starting base from which to go. But with the 3.0 models in the red boxes, they've stopped doing that. Instead, they just have a link to the citadelcolour.com/guides. But when you go there, there isn't a guide for every model. It's essentially just what they've put up on youtube over the years. So now, when I buy a new model, I don't get that guide. Luckily, I'm far enough into the hobby that it isn't as big a deal as it was when I first started painting. But did they ever announce why they stopped providing that info? It seems like good info and definitely promotes their paint line. So I'm not sure why they'd stop.

Thanks for your perspective! Although I don't feel the same, it's always good to read different views. Although I play Narrative and Matched play, I do so very casually and locally. I don't follow the "meta" trends and I don't net list. So maybe that colors my perspective. And, I've only been in the Warhammer hobby for a couple of years (picked it up during lockdown), though I've been an avid boardgamer for many, many years. But I actually really like the direction the Battletomes have gone so far. SCE and Nurgle both feel flavorful to me - especially Nurgle. With SCE, and it's bazillion warscrolls, you are going to have some stand-outs and some duds. But even with the relatively modest number of Kruleboyz, Ironjaws, and Nurgle, almost all of the scrolls seem to have a use. None are just utter duds (although, I understand competitive players might disagree). I also like that the sub-factions tend to layer up an additional rule. Almost like your army has an extra adjustable battle trait. To me, it makes the armies feel more cohesive rather than loosely aligned hodge-podges. Which makes sense for SCE and Nurgle. But maybe wouldn't be as good for Cities or some other factions. I don't play Fyreslayers or IDK. So maybe those tomes are terrible (I don't have the knowledge or experience to opine). But with the first three, I've been very pleased at how they have turned out and how the warscrolls and battle traits tend to reflect the lore. Are there some mismatches or misses here and there? Sure. It's not perfect. But I really prefer all three (SCE, Orruks, Nurgle) over their earlier tomes in terms of flavor and internal balance. I feel like the Core Rules are a significant improvement over 2.0 and that the new battletomes have been a very positive direction. If there is any negative, it's that only a few factions have received new tomes and some are using rules from an older design philosophy that I don't prefer. And Path to Glory has been amazing! If you want a way to tell a story and get involved, that is it. You can create a whole backstory about your warband and tell their rise to prominence - along with their victories and setbacks. My matched play games are fun, but they are one and done. My PtG experiences have all gotten me super invested in the game and I've very much enjoyed that experience - even when the battleplan or matchup puts me at a competitive disadvantage.

I've played dozens of games 1k and below. Especially with Path to Glory. I think if you were trying to bring a hyper-competitive list, it would feel very unbalanced. But with narrative focused games, I've had a blast every time. And I agree that the shorter game time can mean the difference between getting Warhammer to the table or not playing at all.

I've really enjoyed C.L. Werner's books. Lady of Sorrows and Iron Dragon were both excellent. I'm currently reading g Gloomspite and the writing of Alan Clark is descriptive and impressive. Probably gonna seek one of his out for my next book.

I started an SBG force at the tail end of last year. So that became my "new army" for this year. Painting 80 zombies is no joke. Any individual model isn't painted to my usual quality. But on the table, the quantity you see has a quality all its own.

Disclaimer: I play equal amounts of matched play and PtG, but only locally. I haven't played tournaments and I have no interest in chasing the online meta. Tournament players can feel free to disregard my thoughts since I'm clearly not playing "real" AoS. I think the turn priority roll is, on balance, good. Could it be better? Sure. I think switching to an alternating activation would probably be ideal (though that brings its own problems as people pointed out above). The priority roll creates uncertainty that must be played around. Ideally, you have to set yourself into a position where getting double-turned is not an auto-loss. That adds strategy and tactical considerations. Plus, like others, I think that it rarely seems to swing the game. If you're losing and get doubled, you're just going to lose faster. And that's OK. No one should be sad that they lost in an hour rather than after two hours. And if you're winning and get a double, same thing. But if you're losing and get a double, it may just get you back in the game (although, if we're being honest, it can help but it's not as impactful as some have claimed). A change I might make is having the players score at the end of a battle round, rather than at the end of their turn. I think this would provide a lot of benefit to going second and may reduce the benefit of the double. Again, if you're talking about the hottest meta list (oops, all dragons!) going up against an army that struggles (e.g. Khorne), getting doubled is going to widen the disparity. But if we're being honest, Khorne was already going to lose that fight. So having it happen quicker isn't necessarily a negative.

Just wanted to give an update. I had a chance to play two sessions of Hinterlands with my kids (ages 9, 7, and 5). It went remarkably well. My oldest is my main gaming partner, so he was all about it. But the two younger ones had a blast living out the story and spending time with dad and their older brother. I picked the Lord-Relictor as my hero, since that gave me access to some nice healing I could spread throughout the party. And one of my kids picked the Kinght-Judicator so that they got some Gryph Hound friends. The other picks were a Melusai Ironscale and a Bloodwrack Medusa. The battleplans were, perhaps, just a little bit repetitive, but overall pretty fun. And the cooperative nature really helped to keep everyone involved and feeling good. Since there was no "loser" all the kids were pretty happy. Overall, it was a good experience and the kids are asking to play even more. If you're looking to introduce wargaming to younglings, I think this is an excellent approach.

So I was perusing through some of the W+ vault and found an issue of White Dwarf that provided some co-op rules. It's not a full game and probably only marginally balanced (plus written for AoS 2.0). But it looks fun-ish and seems like a great way for my 7 year old to play (she's been wanting to play, but it's a little beyond her just yet). Anyone try this out or have some experiences or stories to share?

I completely agree that some warscrolls just don't seem to do what they are intended to do. I think that is an issue that can and should be updated with warscroll updates. A good example was Pink Horrors being too good (still seem pretty good) and the changes to make some of the Nurgle demon heroes more relevant. But, I generally think that Warscroll changes should be infrequent. As noted above, a warscroll change can (much more easily than points adjustments) lead to some unintended consequences breaking other parts of the game. And I could definitely see it causing confusion for players who aren't as up on the changes being told about warscroll changes mid-game at their local shop. I also think warscroll changes could could lead to a real feel bad moment. If you ran out and bought a particular unit because it did some cool thing that you wanted as part of your overall strategy, and then the warscroll was changed to eliminate that ability, that could be a feel bad moment. It might make you feel like you wasted the time, money, and effort. And, undoubtedly, it would fuel accusations (which might or might not be true) that GW was nerfing old warscrolls in order to sell new models. I think warscroll adjustments should be targeted to the most problematic units (either too good or too irrelevant) and should be done only very rarely. Otherwise, I think reserving significant warscroll changes for a battletome refresh (2-3ish years apart?) is about the right frequency.

The Dominion novel was ... ok. It had some really cool moments (the tower scene, the epilogue, and others), but some of the stuff didn't make much sense. And, (let me stress that this is entirely subjective and a personal opinion) I didn't find Niksar all that likeable. In fact, he made some fairly despicable decisions early on that really cast him in a bad light going forward. I also didn't like the Dawnbringer much, or the Knight Arcanum. Or Niksar's weird friend (Ophelia?) who seemed to show up only to help advance plot points. However, if you liked it, I'm glad you enjoyed it! We don't all have to like the same stuff. Also, I'm not a literary critic by any means. I just like what I like. For me, I would put my top three as Overlords of the Iron Dragon, Lady of Sorrows, and probably Thunderstrike and Other Stories (in no particular order). The last one is a collection, but almost every story is a fun read. I ordered Stormvault as an ebook on Black Library. Haven't started it yet, though.