Azamar
-
Posts
377 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Azamar
-
-
28 minutes ago, madmac said:
Reading the Sprues and Brues breakdown of the new content (Not going to watch a one hour video for rules content I already mostly know) and man they did not throw Lord Regents any extra bones.
Command traits are basically +1 CP, Reroll one die in combat once per turn, or refund CP on a 6
Artifacts are +1 Quartz, Run and Charge, and +1 cast/unbind
So many CP perks for an army/model with no useful command abilities, and nothing really useful in general. Second look at Great Nation artifacts, I guess.
The more I think about it, the more unhappy I am with the Regent probably than any other new model. Beautiful model, but just doesn't do anything really. No army support abilities, weak combat profile, a warscroll spell that's mostly redundant...sigh.
It’s a beautiful model and only 150 points- I’ll find room for him!
-
I’m painting really slowly this past year but pretty happy with how my colour scheme is turning out. Looking forward to seeing if it works with the new models
I'm finding their faces difficult, although I’m pretty pleased with how the cathaller’s turned out.
-
10
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, woolf said:
It reminds me a lot to when OBR dropped, iirc there was a thread called something like "OBR hideously overpowered" that was basically a wall of complaint against petrifex, a bit similar to the current "Lumineth victims thread" that is up now. I'm sure it will blow over, and if there is something in particular (as was with Petrifex) it might get nerfed.
Go back far enough and you’ll find threads like that for most of 2.0 books- I particularly remember one about gloomspite (or specifically the bad moon allegiance ability) and how it was going to ruin everything.
Although the Lumineth one is pretty toxic even by the standards of that kind of thread, and I kinda wish I hadn’t looked at it. -
32 minutes ago, LoonKing98 said:
New LRL player here. My wonderful girlfriend got me a box of Wardens for Valentines day. Do y'all recommend painting the shields separate from the rest of the miniature before attaching them?
I definitely would, yes. They’re pretty easy to attach afterwards. I also paint the swords separately.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:
Psh... give them the statline of a Gnoblar and the points cost of a Retributor and I would still play them if I jump into LRL. 😆
And people would probably still want them nerfed.
but yeah, these guys (and the loreseeker) are instant buys for me
-
3
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, sandlemad said:
Yeah, greenskins have been in two separate WHFB starters (orcs vs empire in 6th ed and night gobbos vs dwarves in 7th ed) as well as in two starters for 40k. It’d be a classic.
Also fantasy 4th edition, which was high elves vs night goblins
-
4
-
-
I think the spirit of Durthu’s high points cost like reflects the fact they can be teleported from wood to wood and get in the enemies face quickly- they’re much harder to avoid or pin down than a spirit of the mountain. Not to mention that they’re generic heroes, so can benefit from artefacts and command traits, which can considerably buff them (a winter leaf durthu could, once per game, pile in and attack twice for example with 6s turning into 2 hits. near a wyldwood that’s absolutely terrifying). Plus there’s ways to heal them, keeping one in the fight longer- I’m not sure that can be done with the battle cattle.
I’m not saying Avelanor isn’t better mind you, but bearing the above in mind I’m perhaps not surprised there’s only 60 points in it.
Sylvaneth do seem to be on the weak side overall. Having pretty much all their allegiance abilities tied to wyldwoods, not to mention abilities on multiple warscrolls, means how well you can get by is tied to how many wyldwoods you have and can deploy. I was lucky enough to get a couple of the old woods super cheap- I wouldn’t get nearly so much mileage out of Durthu or dryads if I only had one.
The biggest problem in future IMO is the abilities for the Giants that let them destroy terrain- a minor inconvenience for most armies, but for Sylvaneth that starts to block most of their abilities. Worse still, the wood remains on the table, so not only can you not replace the wood at that spot, you then have one less model you can place down elsewhere. Only one model in one army at the moment (although I know it can be used as an ally) but if that kind of ability starts appearing for other factions that’ll be pretty devastating for Sylvaneth
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Mattrulesok said:
I had a feeling it was going to be a pronoun issue. That's disappointing, I do wonder if that is a weird holdover from the old Lizardmen faction. Either way it's bad writing, if your written lore is that these creatures are asexual then they should be written as such, it's basically the same as writing a story about vandus hammerhand (for example) and constantly using female pronouns.
I do personally still feel that it is a lore issue that needs fixing rather than female seraphon models, as I feel if you code a female seraphon you are now implying all others are male (plus I'm a little worried they'd just stick b r e a s t s* on a lizard) but I respect where you're coming from.
*I can't believe that word is banned by the filter
I don’t think they’re asexual now that coalesced seraphon are a thing- they have spawning pools which likely needs males and females to work.
In my mind though, if you saw a lizard or frog in real life you’re probably not going to be able to say whether it was male if female at a glance unless you had specialist knowledge. Much of the time any difference between male and female is something subtle like the length of the head or the shape of the tail after the cloaca.
Seraphon aren’t real world lizards, but I’m not aware of any reason why they would be different in this regard. There probably won’t be obvious differences in their shape or their voice. So regarding that Saurus oldblood over there, you’ll most likely need expertise, specialist equipment and a suicidal death wish to determine its gender.As far as lore goes, it sounds like they typically default to using male pronouns, which is problematic but perhaps not surprising. A mammalian observer probably can’t tell the difference anyway, in this case considering them male until proven otherwise, and the lizard is too busy trying to eat said mammal to care whether it has been misgendered or not.
To try and tie this in with the OP- how could Seraphon help with a better representation for female models? The differences don’t translate across particularly well, and giving them typical recognisable (by human standards) female characteristics I fully agree would be terrible. Perhaps something like a different crest shape or size (or colour) might work.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, Rhetoric said:
I got into AoS with Deepkin, and seeing even the moderate levels of female representation in the army was a breath of fresh air after not being involved with GW products for 12 years. I think the Reavers are 50% female, Thralls are 40%, Akhelian Guard are 33.33%. The Tidecaster is an amazing miniature. I think GW is doing a good job of bringing for female representation into AoS, but there is a lot of work to be done.
It always seems that elf kits lead the way for gender balance, as the older dark elf infantry kits had a similar mix, and elder guardians too going back 10+ years. Its also true of newer kits like eternal guard and the lumineth (it’s really subtle in the latter case but there are female torsos in the warden kit).
why only elves and not humans and dwarfs is odd though. How many female Order hero models in AOS aren’t aelves?
-
3
-
-
Here’s my attempt. Maybe that tiny dragon will grow at some point...
-
4
-
-
14 minutes ago, dekay said:
Is anyone else disappointed that there's no real method of building a character on non-monstrous mount? The closest thing to it is buying all the speed upgrades you possibly can and a minor beast to simulate the mount's attacks, but it's pretty ridiculously expensive. I know that game is moving away from those, but there are still some left (Vampire Lord, Scar Veteran, Terradon Chief, Skullmaster even).
There’s a mounted beast option between minor beast and monstrous beast?
-
4 hours ago, Icegoat said:
Has anyones noticed how big these aelfs are 8 foot if we are going by them next to the freeguild or the freeguild models are now so undersized as to make them hobbits. Either way this aelves are big.
Not especially. There’s been a bit of scale creep since the older high elves, but they’re a comparable size to currently available COS aelves, just with a wider base filled by their stance
-
1
-
5
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Ghoooouls said:
Nagash cant do this, both morghasts and the immortis guard can take nagashs wounds, but the roll for nagash to shrug the wounds to them is *before* allocating wounds. Since ward saves are done when allocating a wound and then negate them, nagash only gets his armour save, then shrugs the wound to his guard, who then *do not* get an armour save, but *do* get their own ward save, as you allocate the wound to them.
For instance - nagashs 4++ is done 'each time you allocate a wound to this model' - seeing as the roll to shrug off the wound to his guard is done 'before allocating wounds', he cannot do both his ward save and the shrug.
But what nagash could do before this rule is have a 2+ rerolling 1s save, then a 2+ shrug onto immortis guard who have a 5++ from the spell ossiarch have, then a 6++ from their allegiance ability. If nagash failed the shrug and rolled a 1, he would then get a 4++, a 5++ from the spell that targets the caster and then a 6++ from allegiance. He can then also heal himself and his guard for 3 per turn automatically. I'm glad this rule is being introduced!
Sorry that was a bad example then (and means I didn’t spot it was wrong when I was on the receiving end it). But my point was that you can still make an armour save, then use an ability to ignore each wound suffered.
Fwiw, I totally agree negating a wound isn’t the same as deflecting it to another friendly unit, so you can still make both with the new rule. That was just the biggest (albeit incorrect) number of stacking rolls I could think of.
-
4 minutes ago, TimeToWaste85 said:
The way it’s written you get armor save AND disgustingly resilient. You just can’t add more than that. Pretty sure people are mis-panicking.
Precisely. If that’s legit you get one roll to negate after wounds have been allocated. But all armour saves are made before wounds are allocated. It won’t affect the majority of wound/mortal wound negating abilities, but cuts back on stuff like Nagash having 2 attempts to negate a mortal wound, then being able to pass of the mortal wound to a morghast and attempt to negate it again.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Bob said:
Really like that scheme! What colours did you use for the outer robe? One of the contrast paints thinned down?
Thanks! It’s Celestra grey, ulthuan grey then white scar shaded with very diluted drakenhof nightshade. I’ve seen (in one of Duncan’s videos) that the fang with lots of lahmian medium might make a better shade though
-
8 hours ago, Maturin said:
Hey guys, can anyone of you post a comparison picture of LRL spearmen vs HE spearmen please ?
To my great shame I bought the box, still waiting for it to arrive. Won't have time to build it before october.
I'm wondering if those wardens could be a viable replacement for decrepit HE spearmen.
Cheers
Here you go
-
1
-
-
Finished my first warden. Bit of a test colour scheme but I like it well enough to do the rest the same way, although white clothes are a bit tricky.
no particular great nation as I probably won’t focus on just one to start with.
-
8
-
-
Got my box today- consider me hyped!
it does feel like half a release though. Interesting lore titbit- aelves Attune themselves to the landscape elements in turn, with river (ydriliqi) being easiest to master, then mountain (Alaithi), wind (Oreali) and finally Zenith (Thalari). This means the most numerous of elementari warriors are actually the river rather than the mountain, even though we haven’t seen them yet...
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:
Have you read the same Teclis warscroll? He's absolutely ridiculous.
4 autospells at cv10, 1 autodispell in addition, 1 autounbind, +1 cast/dispell, unbind, 4+ unaffected by endless spells or enemy spell and deal d3 mw to enemy in what starts at 16", spells+ 5+ ward save in 18", d3 mw for every enemy unit in 18" on 2-4, d6 on 5-6.
Not to mention making the enemy pay more CP, all units dispelling, mortal wound output (5-6 to hit for spears, archers and cav gives mw with the spell) and staying power.
Moving battleshock to enemies is also unfun.
So if you use CP, magic or are affected by mortal wounds, you're not going to have a good time.
Khorne or Fyreslayers seem about the only bets.
There’s a lot of Alpha striking lists that could take him down In one turn. As a KO player I can see something like 10 thunderers in an ironclad being an absolute nightmare for someone fielding Teclis, as that’s a lot of points gathered on one place. He’ll make Nagash and Tzeentch armies sad though.
-
2
-
-
Only deepkin as allies? That’s a shame as I was hoping to combine with the COS elves
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, Still-young said:
It’s not new, I’ve definitely seen it before, although I dunno where.
It’s a wild rider, so possibly from an old warhammer armies: wood elves?
-
7 hours ago, Chikout said:
The complaints about Teclis are interesting. The hammer pants thing, I can see, and the coif around his neck is something also worn by nuns. The constipated thing is something I just don't get though. He looks arrogant.
As for the pose part of the problem is the 3d nature of a physical model. He is actually quite a way in front of Celenar with his cloak and topknot streaming out behind him.
He is also leaning forward slightly, with his chest thrust out. None of this comes across in the font on photo. The physical model with Teclis in the foreground and Celenar behind, should have a better balance than the photo suggests.
I will definitely try to see the model in person before I decide whether to order him or not.
Still looking forward to seeing Tyrion. I was just checking the lowdown article and he is namechecked seven times across four of the articles. He is explicitly said to be a Lumineth god.
If I was planning a reveal of the Lumineth featuring two gods I would absolutely reveal one at the beginning and the other last, so here's hoping!
I agree- first time I saw Teclis’ model it was a case of “not sure about you, but I like your cat” (like most people I know really)
But having seen a few different angles in those videos his face and pose look much better- I think the reveal image wasn’t the best angle in hindsight and makes the whole model look more flat that it really is.
-
28 minutes ago, Schulzy said:
So what's everyone's opinions of the total range, do we think this is all there is? Does anyone else think Tyrion is still to be revealed within the range?
There’s at least one more model not officially revealed (veiled lady) and I’d be surprised if that’s the only one.
-
11 minutes ago, ArchaicArc said:
have we got this one yet? Any ideas? Any other rumour engines floating around?
Some kind of bridle perhaps?
Aos 2 - Lumineth Realm-Lords Discussion
in Lumineth Realm-Lords
Posted
The calligrave might get some use from it still, especially if he has some sword masters to keep him alive