someone2040

At the end of the day, I think 2 wounds or whether 160 is too high for them is a moot point. When you write rules, you need to fit into the existing ecosystem of the game. Foot Knights aren't dismounted Grail Knights. There's no justification for giving them an extra wound, as they're not really any tougher or any bigger than an ordinary Knight off his horse (and Knights only get 2 wounds because they are on a Horse). There are plenty of other elite infantry in the game that are also 1 wound. Greatswords don't have 2 wounds, nor do Swordmasters, Black Guard, Executioners, Bestigors, etc. Chaos Chosen don't have an extra wound over Chaos Warriors. They all show their 'eliteness' by having a better weapon profile and additional abilities. All of these 1 wound elite infantry units are all in the range of 140 to 200 points for 10 models. So Foot Knights while being 1 wound, have to fit into that also. They are clearly at least on par if not better than Greatswords, so can't really be any lower than 150 or 160 points. They are probably not quite as good as Swordmasters or Executioners due to not naturally hitting on 3's, so 160 points sounds right. Even if all these 1 wound elite infantry units are overpriced in game (they might be), you have to fit the ecosystem. Otherwise it just looks like you're writing house rules that aren't objective, and favour your 'army'. Also, even if it was justified for 2 wounds, they'd then need to cost at least as much as Blood Warriors.

Edit: Directed at CayseyMax I think you need to be pretty careful about such analysis and be a bit more objective. Ardboyz are a pretty competitive unit at 180 points, but they don't really have any special abilities other than the fact they can mix weapon types in the unit and having 2 wounds each. There are plenty of other elite 1 wound infantry units at the 160/180 point price range that don't have 2 wounds but make up for it with a flavouring of special rules. Units like Swordmasters, Black Guard, Executioners, etc. There's also no reason why Foot Knights should have 2 wounds. Similarly why should Pegasus Knights have rend -1? There's nothing on the kit that makes it seem like Foot Knights are tougher or Pegasus Knights lances are more special than regular lances. Those are things you need to consider and justify, and sometimes the solution is not to change statistics, it's to reduce points instead if necessary. Currently, GW think 1 wound elite infantry should be priced in the 140-180 range. Foot Knights fit the bill, and should also be in that range, and being superior to Greatswords should probably sit at the 10 for 160 mark. It's for similar reason you can't just say "Grail Knights are ******, they can't beat 5 Brutes!". Well, Grail Knights have a lot of advantages over Brutes. You can't just sum up combat profiles to determine points. Grail Knights are more than twice as fast as Brutes and have +2 bravery over them (a huge issue most people have with Brutes), those are not things you can easily discount and perhaps Grail Knights won't beat them in a straight up fight (Although, I suspect the Grail Knights would go in and skewer a bunch of them on the charge and cause a bunch more to flee. Then you've also got to think that the allegiance abilities also provide some additional synergies to grail knights which makes them even better and have arguably fairly easy access to re-rolls in the damsel/enchantress synergy. I can tell you now I'd love to have Grail Knights (possibly even Breton or current version) in my Free Peoples list.

The Foot Knights are basically identical to Greatswords except they get 2 extra abilities and an extra point of bravery. IMO the musician/standard bearer changes really just balance each other out, where the Greatsword standard is better if you take larger units. Righteous Indignation is reason enough to know they should cost more than Greatswords, as the ability to pile in and attack before removing a model with an elite infantry statline is super good. The fact they get Holy Fervour is just icing on the cake which occasionally puts out some rend -2 attacks (Although even that can be buffed with the Enchantress spell).

Here are my own comments on the document: Battle Traits I like Protection of the Spirits (coincidentally, my version is pretty similar except units lose it if they retreat/flee due to battleshock). I think it's fine to have something that's situational, I don't feel it's the main focal point of the allegiance abilities anyway. Personally what I would've liked to see (even if they are not the 'goto' trait/artefact) are ways to increase the power of the Protection. When I created my own Bretonnian ones, I had a trait that effected the General himself, while a one-use artefact which boosted all nearby units. I have mixed feelings about the Lady Wills It. Something about it doesn't feel quite right to me. Maybe it's the name, maybe it's because it feels like one of the 'bandaid' fixes for medium cavalry. Dunno. Maybe it feels right when it's played in game, but on paper to me it doesn't feel right. Really like the Favour token concept. I think if anything, what you'll want to do is make sure the wording is crystal clear. At the moment it's not clear if you use it at the start of the phase, or right before a unit attacks/makes saves/charges/etc. Command Traits They all look fine to me. As mentioned above, I think you could've probably put in an increase in some form to the Generals Spirit Protection save. Lore of the Lady Fair Tailwind - Would suggest to simplify it that the unit just adds D3+1" to their movement value until your next Hero phase. That way it feels right, since the tailwind would surely help whichever direction they are going. I guess if this was a Wind Blast, then I would understand pushing units around, but the theme doesn't feel that way. Entanglement - This is super powerful, and perhaps could even argue that a casting value of 6 may be too much. In essence, you're almost shutting down an enemy units movement and charging opportunities potentially for 2 of their turns (of course, it could also end up being 0). I'm actually not sure that this is a healthy spell for the game in it's current state. Something potentially not as 'oppressive' would be to reduce the units move and charge distances by D3". Glimpse of Fate - Honestly feels a bit boring. A more interesting 'foresight' ability might be that unit can use one Favour of the Lady ability for free until your next hero phase. IMO actually more thematic as there are many ways you can change your fate, not just by smashing the enemy better. Nature's Wrath - Not fussed. Dunno how it compares to similar Sylvaneth spells. It may potentially be one point too high in casting power, but can see it being quite powerful. Strengthen Spirits - Really dislike this spell. Spiritual strengthening to me doesn't scream 'increase armour even more!'. Would much rather this was just a 'bonus save' instead. Revivify - You probably need to be clearer on how this interaction works, as I assume you should heal models then revive models first? Steed Traits I think it would've been nice to have different traits for the different mount types. Artefacts It feels weird that the Morningstar has a defensive ability when it's a weapon (althought I kinda get where it's coming from). Think it would've been better off on a re-imagined Armour of the Midsummer Sun. The Silver Mirror is super good IMO and I wouldn't it. Any ability that can automatically unbind is very useful. Warscrolls I really feel it's weird to add back in the named characters. Embrace Age of Sigmar. Those heroes no longer exist. The Bretons or whatever you want to call them, should be some form of AoS faction and exist solely within the Age of Sigmar. So feel like it's a real step backwards to change them back into named characters. The Lord on Demigryph command ability feels a bit good. Personally I would make the ability one or the other. Don't make it like the Lord on Warhorse +1. I get that they have different attack profiles (Which is kinda another weird thing between the 3 Lords), but I personally dislike command abilities that do everything the lesser one does + more (Order Draconis has the same issue). Paladin's Heroic blow might be a bit good and is probably far more reliable than actually doing your regular attacks. Would have to do the maths, but that's my gut feel. Not quite sure why the Paladin Standard Bearer works better on Peasants than Nobility. Is there a thematic reason behind this? Not really sure I like that Questing Knights cause enemy Monsters to suffer -1 to hit them. The way I always saw them is that they're eager and ready to slay monsters, not that Monsters are frightened of them. I personally don't like the idea of including Demigryph Knights in Bretonnia. They're an Empire/Free Peoples thing, and I dislike crossing them over. Bretonnia also already has Pegasi that fulfil a monstrous cavalry role. That's just my 2 cents though. I like the extra wound on Grail Knights, although it potentially could've been represented by something else also. Personally I would simplify the Pegasus Knights sweep over the lines. There seems to be a lot of writing to basically allow them to go wherever they want with those 6". Or if you want them to do that, change it so instead of a double pile-in and attack, at the end of the combat phase if they charged that turn you may move each model D6". Massed Accuracy is completely unnecessary on Peasant Bowmen. They already have an ability which gets better with more models you take (generally units only get one ability that increases they increase in size). Battle Pilgrims prayer needs a wording fix, should affect 'that' unit rather than 'this' unit considering you can effect other PEASANTRY units. I would probably simplify the Reliquae. Just give the unit +1 bravery and NOBILITY keyword while the Reliquae is alive. Feels a bit weird to get bravery from nearby heroes. Mounted Yeomen feel like they've got a few too many rules. Most fast cavalry units get ONE of scouting, hit and run, swift volley. Feels like you're trying too hard to make them 'good'. I would just revert them back to their compendium scroll. I would consider decreasing the Woodsmen's armour save to 6+. I doubt that they are very armoured moving through the woods (To put things in perspective, Free Peoples Archers are also 6+, while Freeguild Guard are 5+). My suggestion for the Foot Knights would be to have them always hitting on 3+ and get rid of Redemptive Resolution. At the moment it feels like the unit has a special ability too many. Ahh I see, you've got buffs baked into the Protection of the Spirits based on the Blessed Lake warscroll. Seems cool, not sure that the Lakes come with them when they're on the move. Personally I think it should just be an optional warscroll that makes for cool narrative games, but not part of the matched play army because of that. Battalions Didn't really read through these. Points Skimmed through these, but at a glance look pretty in line with the Free Peoples stuff and probably good enough for playtesting. The one thing I will mention is that the Lord on Warhorse may be a bit too cheap. He has a very competitive offensive profile even without the Pegasus IMO. Would consider pushing him up to 120. I don't really know where the Collegiate Arcane allies comes from. I'd probably just leave them out unless there's some kind of fluff justification that backs it up. Those are my thoughts anyway. I think they'd honestly be on a pretty similar power level to Free Peoples which I think is a good thing to aim for IMO.

What's actually changed in those pdfs? At a glance I can't really tell.

I don't necessarily think the Nurgle release disproves that they don't like remaking existing models. It's just I think they definitely carefully choose when they want to remake stuff. It hasn't really come up so far in Age of Sigmar, because you know, most of the factions have been new (Stormcast, Fyreslayers, Overlords, Ironjawz) or expanding factions that already have a lot of plastic (Khorne, Tzeentch, Sylvaneth, Maggotkin). Overall though, I think the Nurgle Daemons stuff were pretty obvious to do. Greater Unclean one was a pretty old model now and super unimpressive for what should be a centrepiece of the army. Beasts of Nurgle were the only finecast unit left on the Daemon side (Other than Epidemus who is a special character). So both made pretty good sense to get done in plastic. I assume Slaanesh will have a similar upgrade as well if they ever get redone, new Greater Daemon and Fiends as they're the only real finecast units left other than special characters for the Daemons. So yeah, I don't think they'll be redoing every kit from the 6th edition era. Most of those kits belong to the factions that are unlikely to see an update anyway.

So there's an easy set of rules to pick up when it comes to Skirmish units: Only plastic models are given a renown value Renown is points per model divided by 5 (Rounded). The maximum renown a model has in Skirmish is 28 (Probably is really 30, but nothing ends up at that value) Most renown costs are based on an earlier iteration of the GHB2017 points (Which explains why not all the renown costs follow rule 2 precisely). So the Chaos Sorcerer Lord breaks rule 3, since it was updated in the GHB2017 to be 160 points (Which resolves at 32 renown). In my opinion, it's weirder that the Orruk Warboss didn't make it into Skirmish. As he falls in at 28 renown. Makes me wonder if they were considering upping his points under GHB2017 at some point. Another oddity are the Morghasts, since they come in at 22 renown per model. Otherwise pretty much everything in the renown list matches those 4 rules.

Perhaps. I think this is not a very elegant solution though, as I get the feeling some factions are going to cross over into multiple legions. Deathrattle for example, I think you'll find in all 4 legions (Nagash, and each Mortarch). Does that mean they should basically have 5 faction keywords (Deathrattle, Nagash, Night, Sacrament, Blood)? Seems like a lot of keywords to add onto a warscroll. And I expect that Nagash's legion is going to be ALL Death. So to me, it makes more sense that they're defined similarly to how they did the Great Cities, by mentioning keywords and unit names.

I mean, in a way I'm glade that Flesh-Eater Courts aren't going to be in there. None of the existing Mortarchs make sense to lead the Flesh-Eaters, only the return of Ushoran himself would make sense to lead them. And that's certainly not going to be happening in Battletome : Legions of Nagash. My prediction would be that the allegiances are going to end up being like the Great Cities allegiance abilities, but done to a higher level. So hopefully there'll be more unique rules, artefacts, command traits, etc for each Mortarch Allegiance and a list of the models/keywords that can be added into that allegiance. But something that's a bit odd, is how do you decide which factions serve under what Mortarchs? I think it's simple enough that Soulblight don't serve Arkhan, but how do you decide who uses Deadwalkers or Nighthaunts? Perhaps Neferata doesn't use Deathmages? Dunno, there aren't actually that many Death factions to shift around. For example, it could be something like Night : Mannfred, Deathlords (Except named characters), Deathrattle, Deathmages, Deadwalkers, Soulblight, Nighthaunt Sacrament : Arkhan the Black, Deathlords (Except named characters), Deathrattle, Deathmages, Deadwalkers, Nighthaunt Blood : Neferata, Deathlords (Except named characters), Deathrattle, Nighthaunt, Soulblight And in particular, I wonder if they're going to need their specific named character to be a part of the allegiance or not.

Haha I guess I'm used to the Freeguild Generals with the fluffy hats and not so much on the facial hair side of things (Although... that being said I probably should know better since I do have the dude with huge moustache with pistol and hammer). That being said, in relation to the Warrior Priest above. It's a bit of a shame that the pose is so.... similar, identical almost. Think it would look a bit clowny to have them both in the same army.

I would probably say Devoted of Sigmar rather than Freeguild General... I mean look... I found his bald brother!

Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against Made to Order. Likewise wish they'd do it a bit more, and not necessarily related to 'faction of the month'. I just remember there was at least one occasion where the only thing on pre-order for the week was Made to Order. Stuff you weren't going to get for a month anyway while they take in the orders and start printing them out. Anyway, back to rumours. A bit disappointed that the Order herald is a Stormcast, but not surprised. They are Sigmar's chosen after all, and it makes the most sense. The only other thing that would've made sense is a model to be tied into a new faction release (like Light or Shadow Aelves), but since they're probably not on the immediate horizon I guess we'll live with a Stormcast. That being said, I do like the model, and interested to see what his rules will be in game.

What I find good though is that it seems the Nurgle release will be done and dusted in about 2-3 weeks. It won't be dragged over the entire month of January, which means there's plenty of time for goodies to roll in. One of the things I was particularly disappointed in last year were 'no release' weeks. What I mean by those are weeks devoted entirely to stuff like Made to Order, Skirmish coming out with boxed sets, allies sets, etc. Those weeks didn't have any new models come out at all (and sometimes multiple weeks in a row), and while a good boxed set bargain is good, it's not new content. So I'm hoping they churn out the models from week 1 next year.

Personally @Nielspeterdejong I feel your points costs are definitely on the 'too cheap' side for the most part. There's no world in which Grail Knights and Questing Knights should be cheaper than Dragon Blades (Which IMO are already priced quite competitively). They have a far better attack profile due to having inbuilt rend, and that's before any of the kickbacks kick in. I have no clue about the characters, but I suspect that the King on Hippo at 280 points is too cheap compared to a General on Griffon. Sure, the King lacks 3 wounds and the attack profile isn't as great, but what you are getting is a lot of utility around healing wounds, unbinding, re-rolling hit rolls, re-roll saves of 1 on charge, and ignoring battleshock. Especially if you add on allegiance abilities (that don't necessarily overlap with every banner option in the list) the battleshock immunity could be quite key. Personally, when I developed my own homebrew Bretonnian allegiance abilities, this is where I landed: Unit Min Max Points Battlefield Role Notes Field Trebuchet 1 1 200 Artillery *Knights Errant 5 20 110/400 Battleline *Knights of the Realm 5 20 120/440 Battleline *Men-At-Arms 10 40 70/240 Battleline Bretonnian Lord 1 1 140 Leader Damsel 1 1 100 Leader *King on Hippogryph 1 1 360 Leader Noble Champion 1 1 80 Leader Noble Standard Bearer 1 1 80 Leader Enchantress 1 1 160 Leader *Sacred Protector 1 1 180 Leader *Battle Pilgrims 5 30 40 *Grail Knights 5 20 160 *Mounted Yeomen 5 20 90 *Peasant Bowmen 10 30 100 *Pegasus Knights 3 12 160 *Questing Knights 5 20 160 Allies: Stormcast Eternals, Sylvaneth, Wanderers I think the above points would be quite fair with the Order allegiance abilities (Although of course, there's room to tweak. It's hard to judge some of the characters for example and sadly a lot of banners overlap with the generic Order trait anyway). That's before you put the icing on the cake of actual Bretonnian allegiance abilities which will be better than the generic Order stuff.

The Mordheim Elf mage is one of the coolest figures to come out of Specialist Games IMO. One can only hope that they perhaps bring it back at some stage, although you're possibly right, he might look a bit small compared to the current Elf range. And your paint job on those figures are superb, really does them justice.

Only took me just over a month, but since I finished Steelhearts Champions today figure nows a good a time as any to post up my warbands. The Bloodreavers were really fun to paint honestly. Each Reaver has a different skin recipe which is definitely something I wouldn't be doing working on an entire army. The only thing I'm unsure about is the black helmet on Arnulf, doesn't quite seem to work and thinking I should've stuck with the red on that one. My favourite is definitely Targor though, just love his pose and he was the first one I completed. Runner up would be Saek since I enjoyed blending the skull masks back into the black and think it came out really well. Steelhearts I kinda smashed out in the last day or two. Really needed to get them off my painting desk so I can refocus on getting my Free Peoples army ready for a tournament in a month.

Absolutely agree. There's not even something 'extra' that disginguishes him as a special character, it has generic hero written all over his rules. Even Vandus and Khorgus Kul got upgrades when they got special character warscrolls. Super disappointing, I really don't get it. If they want him to be a special character, then give him special rules and make him stand out.

An interesting thought! Here's a question to ponder on. Have we actually seen any artwork of Order fighting Order? I would guess no, because at the moment they're led to be the 'Unified heroes fighting back'. The reason I ask the question is, we've seen artwork of tentacled beasts and the like attacking Kharadron Overlord ships, and the common thought is that these beasts may be related to the 'Shadow Aelves' or Cthulu . If they are truly part of a different alliance though, I'd much rather Death than Chaos. While the Cult of Slaanesh is definitely cool and interesting, it's been done before. So I'd like to see perhaps some Aelves (perhaps Malekith even) have made a pact with Nagash to prevent Slaanesh supping on their souls. Of course that being said, we don't really know what's going on with Slaanesh, who knows, maybe more will be revealed in the new year to go along with it. That being said, I probably wouldn't put any money on the Shadow Aelves being non-Order. It doesn't really make sense when you've got factions like Darkling Covens and Daughters of Khaine running around inside Order (Who would also be prime allies candidates for Shadow Aelves).

Hmm... So what I think people are potentially overlooking is that Order has been long rumoured to also have a 'dark side' coming, that being the Shadow Aelves. The Dark Aelves have never really been traditional good guys (or really, good guys at all to be honest!). So I think the Shadow Aelves probably fit right in with the Malign Portents. Also is it a potential hint that they state the logo is 'gloomier' which is synonymous with shadow as well. To be honest, given how long the rumour engine pics have been around for the Shadow Aelves I wouldn't be surprised if they're one of the big releases in the first 3 months of the year. Which makes me wonder if yet again it's going to be a front loaded year for Age of Sigmar (Given we have rumours of Nurgle, Shadow Aelves and at least some form of Death). Overall bring on 2018!

Sweet looking Stormcast. I'll be sure to post up a picture once I finish my Garrek's Reavers. Currently just the main man Garrek himself (The other main man Saek I actually painted 2nd, as when I started painting them I hadn't actually played or read any of the cards). So just Garrek and all their bases to do, so close yet so far.

This is the one time of year that I don't mind we're getting a 'new Stormcast' model. I mean, it's December, generally we don't expect much in terms of new model releases and the like during December. So a one off Stormcast doesn't fuss me, they're the poster boys, and GW wants to sell models going into Christmas, so makes sense to release a new model that'll sell like hotcakes. For similar reasons, I'm not super fussed that 40k is getting attention. We already knew that 2 new codexes were coming out for 40k, a little surprising they're getting models, but it is what it is. I think it would've been super nice to see a battletome for a faction that can be bought across 'as is', say Free Peoples, Gutbusters, Greenskinz or something like that, but perhaps that ship has sailed with AoS. Perhaps that's just me 'accepting' fate that the back half of 2017 is disappointing, and just accepting it. As to the actual model. Not really a fan, hoping it comes with a helmet version because the whole brick faced stormcast don't really do it for me. But given it looks like the hair might actually be moulded into the shouldpad, not so sure that's the case.

Interesting, Xoantica definitely sounds like old school Lizardmen (or new school Seraphon). Wonder if it's a hint that they're not just the imaginations of Slann as proposed (or potentially imaginations run wild). City of Secrets was cool, but way too short. Need me a proper meaty Witch Hunter novel.

Yeah, I'm a little surprised that so many people are playing it wrong (myself included). The first game I played, my friend pointed this out, and basically got overruled by the GW store manager (even though it's quite clearly printed that way). Will definitely be playing it correctly in future (Although, in the 2 games I've played so far, it's not as if we've had a huge amount of room to configure the boards anyway). I really don't think the terminology 'places' should be used here. The loser just chooses a board, the winner gets to place both boards on the table in such a way that it meets the requirements (grids line up, at least 3 hexes).

Will be arranging my entry and flights shortly. Looking forward to my first Cancon (and getting trounced a ton!)

Well, I haven't read the later few books, but I definitely thought he was supposed to be the reincarnation of Grimnir or something. The same Grimnir who has made his appearance in AoS, and gone and fought a big huge godbeast before being shattered into a million shards of Ur-gold. So I dunno? Does Gotrek even make sense in that respect? Either way, I'm sure they'll come up with their own way to spin it. I just don't know if it was really necessary to bring Gotrek into the mortal realms. Plenty of other stories to tell.