Dawi not Duardin

This is a very good point. In general, they could be allied in some important sense without for that reason being culturally identical. Expanding on this, one thing that has not been discussed when it comes to soup is that you could have lore soup without having book soup. CoS and Stormcast are both Sigmarite factions, for example. Even though people are suggesting 'Dwarf soup' now, that doesn't actually necessarily imply that they will have the same book. There could be a Groundbound Underemperors faction consisting of different types of mountain holds that is allied with the Kharadron Overlords, but they could still be in different books. Perhaps they will have different relationships to Grungni (and Grimnir, etc) - the Kharadron could sign a contract with the Gods without themselves becoming religious in the sense that they worship them, whereas the Groundbound would worship them in a more traditional manner. That would preserve the distinctness of their respective lore and books while still unifying them.

He also works together very closely with the Kharadron in the latest Gotrek novel. I don't want to spoil too much here in case people haven't read it, but suffice to say the KO realize he's an important and inspiring figure there, and he seems unexpectedly happy to be working together with them. That gives me Dawi United vibes too.

I have no opinion on the rules question but I don't agree that it's insulting to merge the Dwarfs. It wasn't insulting to have one Dwarf book and three elf books back in WHFB. If anything, it just showed that the Dwarfs were more cohesive than the various elf factions. That just says something about the pointless elf infighting. They should have been united under Malekith all along. But, jokes aside, I think this is going to be a case where people will have different preferences depending on what they are familiar with. Personally, I even disliked the split of army book Undeed into Vampire Counts and Tomb Kings back in WHFB. That's in part because I like larger books. But I'll admit it's also the nostalgia factor. I personally don't have much of an emotional connection to the Fyreslayers or Kharadron or Dispossessed under Sigmar(!), but a Grungni-centered faction is meaningful to me as an old-school Dwarf player in a way these never can be. It's really the same thing as what attracts people to the Lumineth as High Elf proxies. With that in mind, it's probably going to be hard to please everyone here for GW. For any faction that ever was introduced, there's going to be someone who prefers it the way that faction was at some particular point. So I get that some people always will want the dwarf factions to stay apart, but... just expressing my own preference based on the above, Dawi United is what I'd like to see.

I agree with this, especially with the Warclans comparison. Warclans lumps together two older but very loosely connected factions, and now there is a third one being added. That's pretty much exactly analogous to what you'd get if you were to lump Fyreslayers and KO together then were to add a Grungni sub-faction. The most interesting question here to me is really what the Grungni faction will look like. There are some options. One serious possibility if you look at the latest rumours and the fact that Grungni forged the Stormcast is Dwarfcast Eternals, with Grombrindal as the equivalent of the Celestant-Prime (and maybe at some point Gotrek as Yndrasta?). You can also easily imagine a Golem-based faction - there is already talk of "Gholemkind", though it's a bit unclear just what that is. It could also just be honest Dawi with axes and hammers and guns and so much grim determination that even Chaos will have to buckle. I think this is what I really would want, to be honest. IMO the most appealing trait of the classic Dwarfs - which also made them my main army way back when - is their absolute integrity. It'd be cool to see a throwback to that. No more being Dispossessed, it's time to quite literally retake the realms. Or, of course, you could have some combination of all these possibilities - or something entirely different... Regardless of how it goes, I for one am all in favour of this. I like big army lists like Cities of Sigmar or Legions of Nagash - or, more classically, Orcs and Goblins or Empire army books. The mixing and matching you can do gives you the ability to customize your own force much more than what you can do with a smaller and more niche book.

Well, I wrote in the OP that you should take what I am posting here with a grain of salt. Of course what I'm saying is just a theory, and it's even a theory which is intended to be a hot take because it is fun to use to speculate rather than a theory which I'm presenting as something that's a serious stab at truth. (I've talked more about it with friends elsewhere than on here and they certainly don't seem to have minded some speculation.) But I'm absolutely not going to die on the hill that what I say in the OP or later in these posts is the full truth either: this is not a scientific article, it's a forum post for talking about fantasy lore. Having said that, I do think there is a clear case to be made for thinking that "Drogrukh" sounds a lot like a combination of the words "Drogo" and "Dothraki", with some additional letters added. You can see that just from how similar the letters in the words are. And there are also strong background reasons for thinking that there might be something there. First, the rest of the points mentioned in the OP - or, as MitGas called it, "the context of [my] theory." Second, a lot of other AoS concepts are riffs on more familiar fantasy ones, e.g. trolls are now "Troggoths" or "Troggs" and elves are now "Aelves", but those are obviously modifications of the words "trolls" (possibly with reference to Throgg the Troll King) and "elves." Third, it's no news that GW very commonly riff on other concepts from elsewhere, whether from real life or in fantasy settings. It wouldn't be surprising if they were to riff on some concepts from GoT given its recent popularity. So... again, while I don't think I'm making a 100% waterproof case here, there are at least reasons for being open to the idea and then playing with it.

UPDATE: Also, my apologies, I wrote Kragnos was a "Dothrukh", but he's apparently a "Drogrukh". Not that it matters for my point, though - that's clearly a play on "Drogo" and "Dothraki" regardless.

Thanks mate! 🙂 I'd love some more dragons back too. In particular, I'd like to see the speculation that Dracothion=Sotek confirmed. I'm sure old-school Lizards players might be sceptical, but it'd make sense as a way to tie Lizards and Stormcast together as Azyrites. I don't mind Kragnos per se though, personally. It makes sense that a single entity like that could come in and upset the Orcs in one way or another. Orc warbosses are often somewhat one-dimensional: whether they are Gorbad, Gorfang, Morglum, Grimgor, or more recently Gordrakk, they all just kind of bash heads and sometimes torture a human or a dwarf and that's it. I was always more of a fan of Goblin or Shaman characters for Greenskins - and say what you want about Kragnoss, but at least he stands out. But... Presumably he can pave the way for a return of more dragon characters or units as enemies? This would probably generate a lot of tensions with an Yndrasta-Kragnos alliance, though. We probably can't have it all.

Hey everyone! First post and thread on the forum! I'm dipping my toes into Warhammer again for the first time since around the Storm of Chaos debacle and for the first time as an adult. I haven't started up an army yet, but I've been following the new releases and lore recently, and I'm really falling for it... I'm an old-school Dawi player and fan (I used to be active on Bugman's Brewery 15-20 years ago!), so I am somewhat cautiously waiting to see what will happen with the rumoured Dawi United until I start building an army. Now, as I've been following the lore in some depth, I can't help but think about where things are going to go in it beyond Broken Realms and the start of 3rd edition. Hence, I thought I would start off with a Hot Take and speculate a bit based on it. I do however want to emphasize that I'm in no way affiliated with GW or "in the know" - I'm just someone who has had too much time on my hands while waiting for my Covid jab, so take what I say with a grain of salt. But still. So. What has struck me now is that it seems very plausible to think that Kragnos and Yndrasta are AoS Khal Drogo and Daenerys. Just think about it. Kragnos: Name sounds like "Khal Drogo." "Dothrukh" not "Dothraki" - potato, potatoe. Big, strong and brutish aesthetic. Half-humanoid, half-horse. ("The Stallion Who Mounts the World.") Leads force of barbarian-ish warriors. Destroyer of Dragons. Yndrasta: Look at the name "Daenerys Targaryen." If you play with the letters for "Daenerys" you get stuff like "Yndraaes". Add that up with the first two letters of "Targaryen", you get "Yndraaes-Ta". So the name looks a lot like a reference - though a bit more subtle than Dothrukh/Dothraki. Light/bright aesthetic. Beast slayer... or should that be tamer? Ally of Dragons (w. Dracothion, etc). So, again, I think it's very likely that Kragnos and Yndrasta are AoS takes on Drogo and Dany. But that takes us to the speculation side. We don't know what this connection is going to imply, as these characters are super new. But here are two options in the light of the background material here. Either GW keeps them as enemies because they like their settings to be turned up to 11 in contrast with more grounded fantasy or sci-fi. Or... more interestingly, they go all in on the GoT theme and have these two reconcile their differences. Possibly this will herald a Sigmarite-Kragnos alliance with this Valkyrie riding her centaur-pony all the way into 4th edition? Like, as a monster hunter, she'll be the only one who can best him, and they'll need to fight a greater threat (Chaos rising). They could even become the AoS equivalent of Vlad and Isabella von Carstein? Again this is speculation, but I hope you see where I'm coming from! Thoughts about this take? Or other thoughts about upcoming lore development in 3rd edition?