Jump to content

The Lost Sigmarite

Members
  • Posts

    1,113
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

The Lost Sigmarite last won the day on September 4 2023

The Lost Sigmarite had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

The Lost Sigmarite's Achievements

Lord Celestant

Lord Celestant (9/10)

2.7k

Reputation

  1. New article made me realise, the studio built the rules of AoS4 the same manner I build my notes/revision sheets for exam time (#studentlife). Dividing the whole rule corpus into different "modules", going from the most basic to the most complex and advanced, just like a subject is divided into chapters and lessons of graduating difficulty. Using colour cosing for different things : this is something I personally use a lot to navigate my notes to know at a glance what is what. Same for symbols. Whoever designed to new edition knows what pedagogy is, because I think that shows. I find already more organised than the cluster#@€! that are the 10th edition rule set, that I personally didn't like because it didn't feel very organised (USRs in the middle, etc).
  2. I love this ! This is the exact same structure as a school subject. With the modules representing different lessons/chapters. Like : AoS class. Chapter 1 : core rules. Chapter 2 : commands, etc etc. Students and teachers who post here will definitely see why this is great for a pedagogy standpoint. It’s gonna be super easy to learn the rules, you would learn them “chapter by chapter” and if you have trouble with one aspect of the rules, it’s gonna be very easy to track down the section that’s causing you a problem with this “module” idea. Btw class, first AoS lesson starts at 9am on Monday, we’ll begin with the movement phase, make sure you bring your ruling tape !
  3. Yeah but like mini Incarnates because the minis are smaller than the one Incarnate we have.
  4. I don’t know. Warcry only has a handful of factions left to do new warbands (IDK, KO, Slaanesh, Skaven, Beasts, GSG), at the rhythm of 2 bands/3 months, by next year they’ll have to start doing new bands for factions that already have one.
  5. To be fair if they revamp the endless spells I’d like them to redo the “creature” ones (think gladewyrm, FS infernoth, the OBR bone bird, etc) into actual monsters with health points, a move stat, an attack profile… that you get to summon (ie a casting roll). It would make much more sense that what we have now of them being treated like regular endless spells when these are clearly living (or undead) creatures.
  6. Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t GW produce the endless spells in China instead of Lenton ? And that’s the reason they stopped releasing new ones at the end of 2nd edition ?
  7. Guys, calm down about about the squattings, removals and potential range refreshes. We have no clue about what the core rules of the new edition will be besides the small breadcrumbs GW gives us everyday on WarCom - and that's already enough to keep us talking here for hours. We don't know anything about new minis besides Skaven vs SCE (because it was annonced) and "Chorfs coming back sometimes in the next 3 years". Rest is just unhinged speculation. Remember, Rome wasn't built in a day and so is AoS. We can't have range refreshes for Cities, whatever happens to BOC, Malerion and whatever GW puts up all at the same time. Let them cook. So far, it has worked pretty well, because if not, you wouldn't be talking about it with excitement, right ?
  8. Opinion : redoing BOC as a Morghur/Gavespawn faction would finally give fans the Lovecraftian/eldritch abomination Warhammer faction most of them have been talking about online for some time now.
  9. And with that reassurance, we can finally put the BOC squatted debate to bed, for now. And going back to battleshock being gone, I think we'd still have something to represent morale and miniatures fleeing, but it'll be different. But my expectations for it are mitigated. GW has never quite managed to properly represent morale in their games imo.
  10. I like this too. It seems like “you get to pile in = you get to fight = you get to contest the objective.” Simple, effective, makes sense. I think GW is aware of this and whatever symbols they show, it will be readable and not some tiny slop of pixels.
  11. Another argument against it. Would you like to lose that many points on one single dice roll ?
  12. In translations of previous editions of 40k and WFB, wounds were translated as “health points”. I still have it in my old 40k 7th edition rulebook. That’s why I don’t see what the fuss is about wounds becoming health.
  13. “These abilities have clear sequencing: a Declare step and an Effect step, and their timing is written out, colour-coded, and uses symbols.” Crazy they took so long to implement such a basic idea. I use colour coding and symbols every time I have to learn or organise something complex at work and at home. Same for trying to divide processes. To think AoS took 9 years to adopt this system… but better late than never.
  14. Yeah I do think the same. It would still keep “Beastmen” in AoS while at the same time giving us something more interesting and unique, and crucially for GW, more easily protected by copyright. Remember, Warhammer works like alchemy : when GW takes something from their catalogue, they must give something of equal value : such is the law of equivalent exchange.
×
×
  • Create New...