Tervindar
-
Posts
98 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Tervindar
-
-
2 hours ago, EntMan said:
I haven't played it yet but I like the look of onepagerules. Added bonus it looks like their 'medieval fantasy' and 'future fantasy' systems are compatible. I'm old enough to remember my first foray into Rouge Trader and Fantasy Battle where it only took agreement on a few rule tweaks before my space marines, imp guards and squats could battle my friends fantasy army. Fun times.
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the general rules bloat and the increase prices has essentially killed my group, especially for book purchases that are outdated fairly often.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.
-
5
-
-
7 hours ago, SugarWaterPurple said:
Correct me if I am wrong but it should be that if I pay for the app, I don't pay for the battletomes. If I buy the battletomes, I technically don't need to get the app. When you no longer pay for the subscription, you lose access to the battletome information...I don't see the issue here nor the need to double gouge. I am trying to be optimistic here, but as a new player I feel like GW is charging me left, right, and centre for things that should be free. You are charging for miniatures; charging for rules seems so...backwards?
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.
-
1
-
-
36 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:
May I suggest Oathmark as a place to get rules?
It's rather quick to understand and has a very interesting army creation/campaign mechanic where you build your kingdom.
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.
-
2
-
-
23 minutes ago, Sleboda said:
Oh no! Say it ain't so! A highly successful, multi-national, decades-lasting business that spends its resources (time, money, etc.) producing a product wants to exercise its rights to control how that product is obtained by others and to choose how it feels is the best way to recoup its investment in those products.
Don't they know that they've only lasted this long due to luck, and that if they just did what some customers think they should do they would be able to stay in business?
Grr.
I get that people like free stuff, and I get that we may have ideas about what we think a business should and should not do, but man, somehow, some way, GW has managed to be insanely successful forging their own path despite not doing every little thing that complainers want them to do.
I was one of those complainers when Warhammer was replaced by AoS. I even quit the hobby for about a year after having been in it for about 30 or so. But you know what? They made the right decision despite me being 100% convinced they were stupid at the time.
I think I'll trust them to know what is best for their long term health and for the success of Warhammer. If nothing else, their stock value pretty much pays for my hobby purchases, so that's a strong indicator to me that they are doing what I, as an investor and hobbyist, want.
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.-
4
-
-
40 minutes ago, Gotz said:
Core rules are kind of buried, but can still be downloaded from the website, but you need to subscribe to the newsletter.
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.
-
2
-
1
-
-
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.
-
14
-
-
2 hours ago, NorthernNurgling said:
I heard today that the October Chaos book is Darkoath...
But the voices in my head say a lot of things. And I found a FW mammoth yesterday so....
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.....
-
5
-
1
-
-
Does this mean we will get Kruleboyz cavalry now? *crosses fingers*
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, KingBrodd said:
This would put Seraphon in the best place. A new Saurus Oldblood or new named Character and the Faction would be perfect.
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.
-
8
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1
-
-
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!
-
2 hours ago, JackStreicher said:
I hope all they‘ll do is sell Regiment bases in which round bases fit so you can play with your round base models VS squares (pretty much what ASoIaF is doing right now)
and then add a cleaner, simpler version of the 8th Ed rules for humongous battles.
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.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Beliman said:
From what we know, nothing points to a Seraphon band:
-Kurnothi
-Beast of Chaos
-Gitmob
-Beastclaw Raiders (hunter)
-Orruks (Ironjawz)
-Nurgle
-Flesh Eater Courts
-DoK (SoS).
P.D: Goblins without armor too. Maybe part of one of this warbands? But no serpahon....shame.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.
-
3 hours ago, Carnelian said:
Imagine if there is a new range of seraphon models but they're all just reptile leather adornments for other models...
Oh man lmao, that would hurt. My dino's are itching to come out and play.
-
1 hour ago, ageofpaddsmar said:
@Thomas Lyons any seraphon news please
I know, i'm dying for anything Seraphon related.
-
Slaneesh looks awesome, its a shame no new Seraphon battletome yet.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Icegoat said:
But what do we do now if in two months lizard men and their spawning pool is released???
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?
The End of Free Warscrolls
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
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.