Tervindar

Definitely, although hope they don't add too much because then it will turn into some bloat, but everything is concise enough that it shouldn't matter for adding a few rules.

OPR is truly fantastic and I really hope that it continues to get the traction for it. Obviously won't have the huge marketing department as GW, but I think peoples eyes are being opened to their free systems. AoS should have been closer to it from my opinion. I don't know that I'll be doing much with AoS anymore going forward, as just the general rules bloat and the increase prices has essentially killed my group, especially for book purchases that are outdated fairly often. I'll continue to stand on the hill about having actual gameplay rules being free, but will never happen, while if folks want the extra buy in, just get the battletome as an optional purchase. Just can't justify spending $50 for various books anymore.

Agreed, I still feel battle tomes should be an optional buy while the base army specific rules and ability are all accessible for free. If you want the extra fluff, P2G, etc. then the book would be for you. I know of various people that haven't started the game, simply because of having to purchase books often.

Oathmark looks extremely interesting and on the list to try. Doesn't seem overly "killy". There are plenty of companies that have rules that can use GW models for it, Kings of War, OnePageRules, etc. Otherwise, Parabellum Conquest from my opinion does it the correct way for a modern game system, rules, army books, etc are all free to use along with an army builder.

There isn't much substance here; there is no benefit what so ever to go this route. Sure the company is free to publish their systems and products anyway they want, but then they are also not above being criticized when some practices are taking advantage of consumers. The sunk cost fallacy is definitely alive and well for GW followers, who are unable to criticize an anti-consumer move. Would be interested to see what % of new folks coming into the hobby are actually purchasing some of this stuff compared to existing customers. I was looking at GW as a whole for the last few years with rose tinted glasses, and I was an avid defender, but some of these choices are very anti consumer compared to other companies who provide rule sets and supporting materials for free. I would suspect if GW were to roll this out as a brand new company today, it would not do very well compared to others, but since folks have been following it and invested into it over 30 years they are more likely to oversee potential criticisms. Also for reference, I have done my fair share of investing, I have a full WHFB Empire, Lizardmen; AOS: Beasts of Chaos, Idoneth Deepkin, Nighthaunt, Gravelords and started doing KruleBoyz but not anymore given the price increase of battletomes, and generally not enjoying the specific ruleset. The models themselves are definitely great, that can't be argued with.

Sure, for the base core rules, but there really is not reason why the army battle tomes can't be free. Just give folks the option to buy the book if need be. That would be really open up the system for more folks, instead of having multiple books.

Controversial topic, but why not just release free rules that for armies like most other game makers. Seems like GW is stuck behind the times on this, can still provide the battletomes to purchase but just put the required army rules for free.

I still wish we had a darkoath line...for years i was looking forward to it with the chieftain and war queen. A new mammoth, skinwolves etc, like norsca of sorts.... ugh.....

Does this mean we will get Kruleboyz cavalry now? *crosses fingers*

Totally agreed, the saurus guard poses fit what they do imo. I'm still saving for the day this happens, if it happens, with a new kroak it can only give me hope....

Please replace saurus, knights, and kroxigors, and some of the finecast heroes..... any year now! of course, skaven too.

Not sure how they are going to do it, but it could be a good idea for them to release movement trays that have inserts of round or square bases, similar to what conquest does. Have a set standard of sizes for them, and allow for either basing method. Just pondering how they may do it.

Have there been any rumors for an updated BoC battletome? or mostly wishlisting.

I love the vulture so much! I really hope we get some KRB's cavalry as was rumored before. Need moar Gnashtoofs!

This would actually be super cool, modify the rules to account for flanks charges etc alongside potentially a IGOUGO system. I would be all for that. Everytime I play ASoIaF or PB:Conquest i always think it would be sweet if AoS could have a rank n flank side.

ahhh, i suppose my post was more so wishful thinking

Are there any new cards with Seraphon? cant wait for the ogor hunter though.

A kroxigor and some skinks or a temple guard would be amazing. So many different ways a warband could go.

Oh man lmao, that would hurt. My dino's are itching to come out and play.

I know, i'm dying for anything Seraphon related.

Slaneesh looks awesome, its a shame no new Seraphon battletome yet.

I hope that rumor was true, but i'm not holding my breath now. I was super excited for the prospect of a new lizard men book/spells. 😪

@Ndabreaker have you heard if they will be reworking the allegiance abilities and most of the warscrolls for Seraphon?