.png.c4cd56aa94a5cf56b3b9b815c91c0d2c.png)
Rogue Explorator
-
Posts
632 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Rogue Explorator
-
-
Personally, I think they might have one tribe hailing from both Hysh and Ulgu, as it would play well with the duality of those two Realms.
But if they entirely leave one out I think it'll be Hysh. Though according to the 2nd edition rulebook that Realm is actually pretty badly corrupted and thus should have a warband, it is also the Realm GW has been most reluctant to show, propably saving it up for something major, so it stands to reason they'd play it close to the chest this time as well.
-
Rumor Engine looks like another Endless Spell to me, as, if you take away the paintjob, it looks simple in shape for an in-house production to me. The scales are just simple squares after all, even if it turns out much smaller than it seems, GW can do better in their own production.
-
25 minutes ago, ElectricPaladin said:
Well...
They aren't any Earthly language I recognize. Is anyone here familiar with the letters of any of GW's imaginary languages? Could it be Dwarven, Elvish, or Chaos runes?
I think the closest match is the scribbling on Stormcast and terrain.
Now, so far I think we've only seen it on Azyrite stuff, but I think it might actually be a sort of common tongue rune system dating back to the Age of Myth. In that case Death would use it as well (while Chaos and Destruction wouldn't, both still ousing their own dating back to the World-That-Was).
So we have the possibilities of it being censure by Sigmar or Shyishian. I lean towards the later since it looks a bit less stylised than the Azyrite stuff, but that might just be my perception or the low resolution of the image.
-
32 minutes ago, Overread said:
Those sound fun for narrative and campaign games!
Agreed, if I had a gaming group or regular opponent with whom a narrative campaign could be pulled of I'd be all over Forbidden Power. Which I'd guess is actually the primary target group for Forbidden Power.
It's just not a very large group (and not a very purchase happy one, I suspect) compared to matched play, so they tend to throw in mp content into everything to boost sales.
-
9 minutes ago, Dirtnaps said:
New rumour engine, can't be sure but it might be some kind of chest plate I reckon. It's a really weird design if it is though.
They teased enforcers (aka. not-Arbites) for Necromunda. This is consistent with Forgeworlds style for more advanced forces in the hive, imo, so that's my bet.
Edit: Also looks painted with combat damage. Which is something FW does but GW usually doesn't on this type of mini.
-
1
-
2
-
-
According to the unboxing, Forbidden Power introduces the Legion of Grief lead by Olynder as new Legion of Nagash. So we can likely put the idea that a future Legions of Nagash book completely divides LoN and Nighthaunt to rest.
Also the wording is that the new terrain piece is "available to any army", so I might not have been of-base that it is army deployed terrain like the faction specific terrain pieces.
Also interesting to see the Excelsior warpriest in the mix of the Order campaign faction.
-
9 minutes ago, Double Misfire said:
Eldyra. Easy mistake. Read on to End Times: Khaine.
It's revealed that she was never made a vampire, but that Nagash being resurrected as an Incarnate had caused her to become the reincarnation of/new elven goddess of death. Eldyra and the von Carstiens only thought she was a vampire long enough for Lileath to turn up and reveal this.
Still means that some of those who would be in the best position to know thought elven vampires entirely possible.
-
6 minutes ago, armisael said:
The Penumbral Engine looks very ”Stormcast” to me.
Well, I'd say it is Azyrite, like most the terrain, so some parallels are inevitable.
Mostly I think it looks like a retread and redesign of the Numinous Occulum. I wonder what its place in the gameplay and lore is, it must be pretty central to one or the other to come with the box.
Maybe it is an generic "place at the start of the game" piece for armies that don't have one and/or you can replace your faction specific piece with it if you want?
3 minutes ago, Overread said:I have to agree this kinda should have been told yesterday even if its jumping the gun on the community site - esp since mercenaries is shown t obe in the generals handbook so we actually know nothing of what is in Forbidden powers save for the new spells
That said GREAT NEWS! New stuff coming right now! It's also neat to see if not held up by the trade issue. This possibly suggests that the trade issue has held up one container not all trade containers so it might be that Sylvanath is the only one unlucky to be stuck in limbo.
Which still makes me wonder what the holdeup was then. The WD (at least in German) outright states it as "last months release" and it has been an unusually long gap from being announced in full and "comming soon" to the actual release.
-
Quite happy to see the arrival of Forbidden Power at last. We propably won't find out the full story about whom Nagash wants to free just yet, but I'm hoping for some tasty lore nuggets.
-
Regarding the possibility of a new Death release, one thing I think that can be talked about is that it might have a very different look.
Nighthaunt drew heavily on the design of the old Vampire Counts and looked very tattered overall. The Rumor Engine teasers pointing to Death look like they draw more heavily on the Endtimes era release (a.k.a. Deathlords) with the Nagash like Tendrils and a rather ornate Spine deco on the skythe. This points to something new, since it doesn't really mesh with the existing kits aside from Deathlords, which I can't see being retreaded as a Solo faction.
That being said, nothing is pointing to more than one model at the moment, likely a new Mortarch with the Forbidden Power hints. So it could be nothing but an existing faction (and existing models-then likely Deathrattle, who are almost all modern plastic designs) split of with a new leader or a retread of LoN.
That said, if it is a major size release with the more baroque style of Deathlords, I'm in trouble. That's pretty much what I wanted fro Death since I got into AoS and, but I am already set on Warcry (at least the models) and invested in Chaos right now.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, RexHavoc said:
They are there. Warcry was in the video for sure, but the GHB was on there too.
Ok, so I was apparently to busy cringing to notice the date in that video. I'll absolutely take the fault there.
The GHB isn't on the blog though, however, it is on the pamhlet shared by the agregators, so not left to word of mouth either. So there's a criticism I'll take back.
-
3 minutes ago, michu said:
But they actually put those informations in the live blog...
Huh? You got me double and tripple checking, but I still don't see any timetable for GHB and Warcry on the liveblog, only the paints.
-
6 minutes ago, Austin said:
It is interesting that he heard at least one, and Sprues and Brews heard "one", makes me think GW should have included that info in their wrap-up.
Same for the release schedule talk. For the record: GHB-June; Warcry Juli. In their own interest, that's not info GW should leave to word of mouth via a third parties.
Interestingly still no eta. for Forbidden Power and terrain, more fuel to the idea that it was hit by the same issue as Sylvaneth.
-
2 minutes ago, JPjr said:
So much saltiness here you’d think they’d unveiled new IDK Dead Sea Warscrolls...
Well, I think it's because this is the Warhammer Fest preview. That should propably be the biggest Preview of the year, but this one rather pales to some of the others we had this year. This would have been an excellent round of reveals on a smaller event or if 40k had the big thunder. But neither is the case here.
-
4
-
-
3 minutes ago, Kronos said:
I’m quite happy with the reveals thus far, but there has been a lot of chaos bits and bobs for modeling as opposed to gaming which is my bag, which I can see why people maybe a little let down.
That Larp trailer was quite tastelessly Cheesey I have to say. After the beutiful an8mation trailed they did for things like a Gloomspite and DoK I’m suprised they didn’t do more along those lines, the DoK one 8n particular near gave me goosebumps when she shouted.
Yeah, the visuals where rather cringeworthy (and not in the intentional way GWs promo tends to be). I did like the voiceover though.
-
I really hope there is more on AoS, otherwhise this is a very lackluster round of previews, particularly for Warhammer Fest, not just on AoS, but altogether. Maybe they thought the contrast paint would be received as a bigger deal than it seems to be?
Except for the Warcry band, everything else has been shown already, at least quite explicitly teased already or barely qualifies as a teaser. I think apart from Warcry we are looking at a pretty thin summer this year, with mostly splash and book releases.
I guess with their own production struggling to keep up and now the plan B of putting out more China produced material being stalled as well it is inevitable. I bet they would have announced another battletome/terrain/Endless Spell release if they could have gotten out Forbidden Power and Sylvaneth.
On to the AoS stuff worth talking about.
I really like the Splintered Fangs. People have been calling them Slaaneshi and they certainly look the part, but no icons and no word on them being monogod, I'll assume they aren't. Just as the Iron Golems look Khornate at first glance but aren't neccessarily.
Wish they had shown more, both miniatures of the warband and an outlook at the gameply, on wich we are still entirely in the dark. Nice to see an aelf in there though, just wish they gave the untamed beasts an actual beastman.
The Underworlds beasty looks neat and like it belongs to a new faction. Aside from that it is really hard to place. The overall look would have me guess aelves of Hyish, but the tail end looks corrupted and the armour bit rather unsophisticated.
Offering up a smaller scale matched play variant is good news for the likes of me who seriously struggle building larger forces, but that doesn't mean it will be widely enough adapted to actually get a pickup game.
Cityfight/ruinfight rules seems geared towards the terrain previewed with warcry. Would have been a great opportunity to show of that terrain, sadly that too, was missed.
-
I know, not AoS. But the Skitarii transport video is propably my favorite teaser by the Community team so far. Guessing that's where the hatch rumor engine picture will show up.
On to the AoS stuff.
We've seen both revealed items before, but we now have better pictures.
I really like the terrain, I think its a great fit for the Mortal Realms and it follows a style I really enjoy. I also really like that it was designed with gaming in mind, though apparently that still does not include stairs you can place an infantry miniature on. Granted, that would very wide stairs with the size of bases these days, but that wouldn't exactly be out of the question on grandiose temple architecture. It does not do much to take the battlefield into the vertical, but we know from the first Warcry reveal that something is coming for that as well.
The Untamed Beasts don't particularly interest me as a Warband, depending on their AoS rules, they'll either serve as conversion fodder or to fill out my Chaos forces (if they are markable I think some smashing Slaaneshi mortals could be build from them).
What I really do like about them is that, while the leaders and elites are the usual super muscle men, they also have, while still quite muscular, but more scrawny and mishappen members. Guess the stronger members eat much better than the rest.
I think the description as " straight from the pages of Slaves to Darkness" is off though. They certainly have a very oldschool barbarian look, but the helmeted great weapon wielders and the first leader type are the only ones resembling any old "Realms of Chaos" artwork or miniatures from the era, to my recollection.
-
9 minutes ago, Mungrun said:
Kemmler? If he returns he will be probably a Mortarch too
Was never really an ally though. In fact he never interacted directly with Nagash.
He did work with Arkahn, but only to betray him to Chaos (only to fatally learn Krell was working for Nagash all along).
Are we sure it said ally? I don't think Nagash ever had one of those in the World-That-Was.
-
2 minutes ago, Still-young said:
All this means is that Warcry is already announced, and Darkoath/Slaanesh Mortals aren’t. They don’t talk about things they haven’t shown in some capacity.
I'd say it is a pretty clear denial by GWs standart. They normally go with a "can neither confirm nor deny" answer and this is not that. They where specifically asked about Slanesh Mortals and Slaves and said "stop looking". Warhammer Community don't normally know what is coming and what isn't, but I think in this case they delivered an answer from on up, simply by virtue of how atypical an answer it was as opposed to the usual "You never know, wait and see".
If we want to go complete speculation, I feel they actually have been caught off-guard by Chaos fans still asking for mortals with Warcry announced.
Particularly the idea that specifically Slaanesh Mortals may still be coming at this point seems rather preposterous considering there is a Battletome with by now known content coming without them.
Are Slaves in general still possible for a bigger release beyond Warcry and a BT? Sure, until there is a Battletome we never know.
But all indicators stand on "don't get your hopes up".
-
Just a small add to my above post, I actually wouldn't have it any other way.
Yes, it is frustrating to wait for updates and army expansion that just don't come along and then when they finally do, don't deliver what was "needed".
But all that is down to the above mentioned "Miniature design first, all other considerations later" philosophy. And ultimately I am here because I think the design team delivers smashing work and think that is down to the great amount of freedom that, by all accounts, is afforded to them. And propably some serious peer review and quality control. By all we know, Chaos Warriors may have been redesigned many times over since the last kit, but just never greenlit for production.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, HorticulusTGA said:
I'd like to discuss this statement that popped here a while back.
I really do not think the future Slaves to Darkness release is or was mistaken for Warcry.
1) STD (i.e. Darkoath) have to receive a "full" army release sometimes. Why ? Because Maraudeurs and Chaos Warriors, the core of that range, are really outdated. Because STD got a Malign Portent Herald, a Warhammer Underworlds warband, and even a new Heroes before that. They also features in many old and new artworks and books. We already have an established style for the new Chaos Undivided kits (Chifetain, Warqueen, WHU bands, artworks).
2) Warcry was said to be (at the last seminar) a new, distinct IP, with it's own coherence and aesthetic. It is, as of now, 6 chaos warbands of equivalent size, with around 8-10 models, for Chaos Undivided (like Darkoath), but tied to some Mortal Realms (unlike Darkoath) - with Skirmish multi level scenery and Chaos creatures thrown into the mix (Furies, chaos dogs, chaos chicken, probably more further down the line). It would make no sense IMO that the new STD-Darkoath range was, in fact, just 6 infantry boxes of the same sizes and of the same composition, not looking like the already existing artworks and models. No warmamoth equivalent, no characters, just 6 more or less naked barbarians ? Too strange.
3) The story : "We got the models first than made up a new rules system for them" was revealed in the last few months : it's the general way GW operates (models firsts, rules and fluff later) and was the origin story of Warhammer Underworlds. But a Skirmish game is not an unusual sort of game and was something long asked for, and with Kill Teams success, and since Hinterlands and GW hiring Sam Pearson aka Bottles, we knew they were working on something like this for AOS.
I'm not saying STD and Warcry are not related, they are. They represent different takes on the Mortal armies of Chaos Undivided, assembling before Archaon for his counter offensive to take back the Mortal Realms from Nagash and Sigmar. But I think they are two different lines product-wise. STD-Darkoath will get their own release some day, like Sacrosanct, Nighthaunt and Gloomspite Gitz, even if it's a smaller one than those 3 (because the Chaos range is already quite good, and because Chaos already got Skaven, Slaanesh and Warcry in 2019).
TL;DR : In fact, the idea that "Warcry = the new SDT release" just comes from doomsayers or Chaos haters
(and I'm in noooo way a Chaos apologist whatsoever 
)
It comes from GW statements that said "No Darkoath coming because Warcry" (this one admittedly only delivered via third party, but confirmed by multiple sources) and "If you want Slaanesh mortals, wait for Warcry" (Warhammer Community account).
We also already know Warcry warbands will get AoS rules to be used in Slaves to Darkness as well.
As for it making sense because of outdated models, all the armies already having gotten Battletomes with outdated models or extremely limited model range tells us clearly that GW does not believe in that.
You also somewhat contradict yourself. You aknowledge that GW always does miniature design before all other considerations, then say a Slaves release must come because of none-design reasons.
Maybe we are lucky enough that a Slaves to Darkness Battletome does not come alongside Warcry. That would leave the Door open to a real Slaves/Chaos Warriors update some time soon. Maybe Warcry actually includes actual Chaos Warriors in some way and we get a new kit that way (they never said warbands where the only releases for Warcry after all). It's come to my attention that Varanguard have the same gauntlets as well and predicting GW has been like herding cats the last few years.
But I think the most likely scenario is a Battletome with the usual company pieces sometime when the warbands finish releasing and that we will be lucky if the warband rules for AoS translate into actually effective markable units.
Every other expectation likely just leads down the same old road of hyping ourselves up for disappointement, as last seen with Hedonites ("Certainly they have not shown everything" "They wouldn't release without mortals" "Look, art with mortals, they are coming!" - Nope, we actually lost mortal options and gained none).
-
26 minutes ago, HorticulusTGA said:
Speaking of rumor engine : a new one !
Clearly some new Chaos Warriors properly aosified
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/04/30/the-rumour-engine-29th-april-2019/
As much as I'd like to believe that, I think that gauntlet is more Chaos Space Marine, I have the current sprues at hand and it's a match. Together with some other Rumor Engines there is another wave of CSM and/or Emperors Children this year.
I think on Darkoath/Slaves to Darkness GW has been as clear as they ever can be on future releases: Whatever is part of Warcry and nothing extra for the time being.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Overread said:
Partly because it helps make them not be near a "required purchase" for a good/strong army. And partly because Shadspire is a side product line. Those warbands could be lost if GW closes down shadspire as a side game and decides to either remove it totally or do something different. As such those models might well be removed from sale.
It's much easier to do that if they had nice rules but were not game changers and thus they can more easily just move into being alternate sculpts for leaders by those who already own them; and those who don't own them before they go out of production are not left feeling like they've missed a powerful trick in not having the chance to buy them.
Of course one would expect GW not to remove them if they closed shadspire and to just keep the moulds casting up models for AoS.
I think a subtle third reason is that whilst they are named heroes they are not "heroes" of the primary lore and setting as such. Essentially they are minor heroes (by and large, some might be bigger names within specific armies). That said this status is subject to change and they could rise up to become major story players.
To add to that, there is the factor that most Shadespire models do not need bespoke rules to be fielded at all, Mologs warband being the major exception but can just as well be fielded as alternative sculpt for existing characters or be mixed in with regular units.
Furthermore, as unique units, they don't even have any lore rationale for being on the battlefields of the Mortal Realms, canonically being stuck in Shadespire for good.
Last, they are just not created with use in the main line in mind, let alone matched play. This is actually the great strength of the warbands from a miniature design perspective, as it allows GW to release miniatures that represent their factions from a different perspective without care for the usual constraints.
Using them to stuff holes in a factions current lineup would run cross to their other purposes and could easily result in forced nonsentical rules or even worse, take over as guiding principle of their design, all the while never measuring up to a proper update for a faction.
Ultimately, the primary purpose of the warbands bespoke rules and matched play points is to allow players, particularly beginners who might have them as a gate way purchase and need to fill out their points, to use them without modification if they want to. Nothing more. They seem to do that quite well from the looks of it, much better than those for Blackstone Fortress do in Killteam and 40k, which I'd say are quite horrible, at any rate.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Sleboda said:
It is effectively 1 per unit already, which is a real shame of the tournament scene in my area anyway.
Take bloodletters. They have two distinctly different banners, and each description matches the visual of one of the two that come in the 10-man box. So, you get two boxes because the Glory Days* are gone. Per the rules, with the (exactly) 20 models you bought, you can have one of each banner in your unit. All you have to do is build one of each. All good!
But wait.
You go to a tournament that has rules that despite what the rules allow, you may only have one of each command model in your unit. Uh oh. Guess you better buy another 10-man box just to build one spare guy to replace your legal second banner. Or. You know. You could just pick one banner to build in the initial 20 and be stuck. That way you are legit for all the gaming in your area.
*Back in the day, you bought blister packs of the command models and blister packs of a few regular model. Both of these were used to supplement the variably-sized units your books allowed and were added to the 5 or 10-man boxes of the unit you got. Now you buy in lots with no flexibility to be able to create variants such as different banners. I miss the old ways. I also miss 25 cent comic books and 90 cent gasoline.
Or they could just give all banners for the same unit the same rules and allow players to choose which bit they like better. Seeing how these initially had the same rules when the kit came out, so those where thrown in to give players options.
Rules that compel players to model a specific way? That's one right there. One thing that annoys me in AoS that there are on and of phases where they give rules to every single bit in a kit. I like the two headed Tzaangor bit, for a unit leader or such, but I don't like building it for every one in five just so my units aren't suboptimally build.
I'll admit I'm getting cranky and of topic here though.
(and I'm in noooo way a Chaos apologist whatsoever 
)
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
It seems clear that aside from the eight gods (maybe nine, depending on how Teclis is counted) of the Realms and the gods of Chaos, there are, or at least at some point where, possibly countless lesser gods in the Mortal Realms.
Sadly we only have bits and pieces about them.
We know from the lore on the gods of Death that for the most part these are raised through belief. This does pose an interesting question to cases such as Morrda. Are gods that resemble or are even identical with gods from the world that was survivors, where they ressurected or are they completely new beings produced by the belief of survivor from the world-that-was? Whichever it is, it doesn't seem to work for the original aelven deities, seeing how Mathlann and Khaine remain dead despite a strong base of worshipper. In Khaines case that might be because of Morathi, but Mathlann is deader than dead as the Idoneth aknowledge.
We know there where a lot of minor Death gods and Nagash killed and absorbed most of them. We also know other minor gods where around. In some cases godsbeasts are acual gods as well (like Dracothion). It was never stated outright, but imo it's implied that at least some of the great monsters slain by Sigmar, Grimnir and Gorkamorka in the age of myths might have been less pleasant gods.
Most minor gods are propably gone after the age of Chaos, but at least a few might still be around.
I guess they can be ressurected. The Hedonites Battletome has an interesting tidbit about a Pretender Keeper of Slaanesh trying to ressurect and wed a dead Godess of Plenty to spawn demigods.