pseudonyme
-
Posts
545 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by pseudonyme
-
-
6 hours ago, Overread said:
I still can't decide if I want to go with a bone bone colour or something like black bones. Then there's the whole question of the internal skulls - bone colour as well (easy) or coloured bright for magic!
Inside skulls should be fluorescent whatever. Pictures are ******, but here is my Arkhan (working on the Morghasts now). For the ghost effect I more or less stole @BangDoll guide
More crappy pictures of my Arkhan http://www.jammerjun.net/tartofig/2019/04/08/arkhan/
-
3
-
-
For Soulblight, M’y bet is they will go Genestealer cult to be able to field humans ( if they ever release new humans). It would match the lore of vampires infiltrated in cities
-
3
-
-
Both in UK and France at least
-
40 minutes ago, Death Guard Dave said:
Although these new figures do look interesting and reasonably good, I prefer the old school undead look. Shambling hordes....
I do wonder if this range heralds the end (in a year or two) of the traditional, 'vanilla' (and therefore non IP protectable ranges) of more traditional units like black knights, grave guard, skeleton horde and zombies/zombie dogs?
I think I'll be picking up the rest of what I need for a large death rattle army by Christmas!
It's my guess. The infantry and cavalry look too much like Grave guards and Black knights. I don't see it in the short term though.
-
First, I love the models.
Second, I can imagine, in a distant future, that they will replace grave guards and black knights. They are too similar.concerning the far future of skeleton warriors, that’s another story
-
18 hours ago, eekamouse said:
Oi. I kind of like that idea. Just leave the game as it is now, but remove the 1 CP per turn. Still keep the extra CP for 50 points (and extra CP for Battalions and other special abilities).
Now priority is rolling 6D6 every turn for priority. You also get one Wild Dice per battle round just like in Warcry.
But, instead of Doubles, Triples, Quadruples activating specific abilities they grant you X command points for the round.
Double = 1 CP
Triple = 2 CP
Quad = 4 CP
-edit-
Or remove everything related to Command Points, and make the priority roll the ONLY way to get CP.
You either go first or you sow the whirldwind... theoretically.
I did not see someone already wrote what I was thinking about. The only limitation I would make is concerning additionnal commande points, as I would not want to have to manage too many. I would say that à double, à triple or à quad grant you 1 CP that you can sacrifice for the initiative. It makes the CP collection too unreliable.
-
16 minutes ago, chord said:
Personally I really enjoy the roll off for initiative. Adds some suspense to a game.
A move for the Warcry initiative roll could be cool because it allows mitigating a little the randomness of the roll. but it works in Warcry because of the wild dice that you can add to secure the priority. Question: what could be the AoS equivalent of the wild dice: a command point?
-
J'ai débuté il y a quelques mois au GW des halles.
-
1 hour ago, Jamopower said:
I believe Epic had a detachment based army building, where a detachment (of multiple units) activates at a time (might confuse the details, as it's been a long time I have played it) and the number of detachments is quite limited forcing the both players to have pretty even number of them. (I by the way hope quite eagerly that they would eventually reboot Epic.)
But yeah, it would require quite heavy rewriting. I also like the current system as well. It's far better than what was in WHFB and what is in 40k, but maybe some sort of CP based system to break the turn order would be fun and could reduce the downsides.
That said, I think one of the main advantages of the Age of Sigmar ruleset is how easy it is to tweak for your tastes (as can also be seen from all the expansions that GW releases themselves for the game). I can't see much problems house ruling the turn sequence to following:
Roll of initiative
Hero phase in initiative order for both players
Activation phase where each player activates one unit at a time and moves, runs, shoots and charges with them (I would perhaps allow only two of the above in a turn and give a +1 to hit shooting if the unit doesn't move). The activation could be random (drawing markers from bag) or there can be passes, or players can be given playing cards for each unit that they put face down on the table and then the units are activated in ascending order by revealing the cards, or whatever the players fancy.
Close combat phase as it is now.
End step where players roll for battleshock, etc. then a new turn.
The major difference on this would be that there are less close combat phases than normally, so maybe a second round of combat should be done to settle the ongoing combats after the first end step.
The game would be quite different, don't know if it would be better or worse, but this kind of tricks give the players more "gaming value" out of their models. We played 40k this way for some time and it worked fine.
The new 40k Apocalypse rule set is like that. And you could easily transpose that with the Meeting engagements / Warcry detachements.
Also, the Warcry initiative roll would be a good way to control the turn priority roll.
Anyway, talking about alternatives is basically talking about a different game
-
Thanks.
Even If I think it might be too tedious to manage and would hurt the flow of any game, I like the idea of alternating chunks of army points instead of units.
As an example you could divide the 2000 points in 10 chuncks of 200 points, with the ability to stack the unused points (if you pass or activate a unit of less than 200 points). So in your alternative turn you can either: activate X units which combined are less than 200 points and stack the difference, activate X units which combined are less than 200 points + your stacking points.
I like the idea but I guess the whole game should be rewritten from scratch 😅
The 40k apocalypse rules seems to be pretty fluid also.
Anyway, I am not against double turn, and as I heard in a more or less recent Warhammer weekly episode, I agree that the excitement of the roll is cool.
-
4 minutes ago, Jamopower said:
That is the main problem with direct one at a time activation alternating between players. Typically this is avoided by allowing the player with less units to pass the activation.
For example in The Batman miniature game, a match where one side has 10+ and the other has 3-5 models to activate works fine with the pass system.
Could explain what is the pass system?
-
I hope Meeting engagements and Warcry are they way to accustom the players to new ways
-
Good idea mate!
-
In the upcoming weeks, I will see if I can transpose the FEC 3 players battleplan in their first battletome.
Is there any other 3 players battleplan in AoS battletomes (old and new)?
-
Only objective based victory condition seems to be common sense.
For asymetrical ones, I guess it has to be taylored as the FEC Battleplan in their first battletome.
-
Are you saying that we even should work on specific 3 players victory conditions ? 🕵️♂️
-
39 minutes ago, CrabSlap said:
I'm thinking about basing each warband in the realm they're from.
Green vegetation for Splintered Fang, metallic for Iron Golems etc.
This. It will be red canyon for my Untamed beasts and l have no clud what I will do for my Iron golems (maybe the WD basing tutorial for chamon)
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, jam said:
@pseudonyme: you're making it difficult not to plunge into the game for god's sake...
Curious about how any 3 players games went too.
I don't know what you're talking about 😇
Will try to trick the wife into playing so that will be able to see by ourselves ✊
-
Funny that we both know what it will be without having à damn idea what it will be 😅
-
😊
So how was the games, were thé deployment good ?
-
On 8/15/2019 at 6:43 AM, Skyeline said:
All three finished, now with 50% less silly placeholder titles and 100% more accurate shields in the first deployment.
Bloody hell someone did it !!! (thought you were following your own topics by default).
Thanks mate, they look so much better now thanks to you 👍
As I said in my original Twitter thread, maybe change the first one to 9 inches instead of 9.3 😅
Anyway, this community is so cool.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, Lior'Lec said:
Some of us don’t do social media... well I don’t at any rate. Can we get that email address posted here please?
-
You should either wait for the faq, or use the email address Sam Pearson communicated for the faqs (look ais his twitter account)
-
Let’s say I had « some time » at work, and I decided to transpose the Triumph and treachery deployments for 3 players. I had to relearn how to do trigonometry 😅
So here they are, if anyone has any photo shop skills, it might look cool with the proper iconography.
Triangle is Dagger, Rectangle is Hammer and Octogon is Shield
My original tweet where I give at least 2 information 🙄
-
5
-
1
-
1
-
AoS 2 - Ossiarch Bonereapers Discussion
in Death
Posted · Edited by pseudonyme
My army made quite an impression at the geedub of you pal Julien
I also more or less stole your purple sun by the way 😇 (Mine is just brighter)