Moldek

Well @Rodiger I think you’re doing the right thing. To me the hobby is becoming much more affordable now that I only buy stuff I intend to paint & play with immediately. I’m not buying anything for a discount, a bundle or because it’s new and shiny. I’m not filling my closet with nebulous future armies that will never see the light of day. Sure I’d probably buy more if it was more affordable, but passed that first impulse of « I want it », I’ve never looked back weeks later and thought « if only I’d bought that battlebox! ». I don’t think what GW is doing is really out of the norm. I don’t think it’s particularly good either! This kind of releases prey on FOMO and « whales » ready to buy anything as soon as it’s released, be it from a scalper. I’m not a big fan of such consumerism; what i value in the hobby is creativity, DIY, friendship and community. I just don’t want to waste too much energy in all this; I have no way to influence GW other than how I spend my money. So I don’t spend it when the price is too high, and I know that my happiness will never be really impacted because I couldn’t afford some toy soldiers. I do hope they keep releasing some affordable stuff though. But to me the prices are a blessing in disguise, as they forced me to ask myself what I value in the hobby. (that’s the end of my TED talk, thank you for coming)

To be honest I’m not sure I share your confidence! It is entirely possible that they haven’t even decided what type of base they’ll be using. To me the « square » stuff could just be a cheeky call out to the Warhammer of old; not necessarily an annoucement of future designs. Guess we’ll have to wait and see! (Or continue writing walls of texts of baseless speculations) 😅

While I agree that it would be a huge mistake to tease about square bases and end up with round ones (if only because they’ve become symbolic of the opposition between fantasy and aos), marketing teams in all kinds of companies have been known to play fast and loose with this kind of teasers. If I remember correctly the video said something like « everything comes around, even squares ». So it might be a way of saying that the setting associated with square bases is coming « around » and being converted to round ones. using square bases in my opinion would be bad because it would hinder cross compatibility between the 2 ranges. I’d much rather they’d put the Old World minis on smaller round bases and have square movement trays. Especially given how insanely expensive GW sells their bases. I can’t believe I wrote 3 paragraphs about bases but here we are lol.

Can we please not get into a fantasy vs aos match, especially based on the idea that one is good and the other bad? Especially while getting upset at the completely imaginary harm that one would do to the other?

@Dead Scribe I think it’s true that not everyone wants to paint a bunch of troops. That said AoS armies are still quite a lot of work, and I doubt that’s the main factor here. Visually AoS draws more from modern high fantasy aesthetics such as Mtg, DnD etc and that plus the simple core rules has played a big part. But I think your gaming group should hold their horses; we have no indication that the rules of Warhammer Old World will be similar to Fantasy... The savvy thing to do would probably be to build an army around demons, skaven, empire or some other faction that could easily work in the two settings; that way even if half your friends switch systems you still might get some games in Edit : (not directed at anyone specific) I think people should also remind themselves that there’s no 2 sides called « AoS fans » and « WFB fans ». I’m pretty confident that the intersection of those groups is the majority of the players.

The story so far: In the beginning Warhammer was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Honestly I don’t get how people react so negatively to this news. How is more options so bad? Why worry so much about people ditching AoS in at least 3 years? That’s 3 years of games you could be having, that’s enough for anyone to build and play an army and have fun with your friends. It’s crazy to me how much complaining about the past (Fantasy sucked, GW let it sink), the present (AoS sucked, is pay to win, is unbalanced) and the future (Fantasy will suck, AoS will be destroyed, we can’t do anything while we don’t know how it will be) goes on at the same time. Where are the people who are just having fun with it? I understand everyone’s venting, and to be clear that’s also what I’m doing 😅 But yeah, it baffles me how such a vague and (to me) pretty positive announcement turns into doomsaying so quickly...

Totally agree; I’ve lost count on the number of times I’ve read people lamenting the lack of communication from GW, or the sudden new releases that triggered fear of missing out, or the lack of visibility in their release schedule, or that they don’t listen to the community... Announcing this early allows them to gauge reactions, anticipate pitfalls, see what people want / fear... they’re listening to us. I also don’t believe it’s a cynical cash grab. Sure they have determined it should be financially viable before deciding to invest millions into it; but I have zero doubt that it will be a labor of love for the designers, writers and artists involved. They are as nerdy as we are Finally I agree that a « historical » approach focusing on different periods of warhammer history would be the most interesting and easy to add to.

What I’m really hoping for is that they build up to a huge campaign in AoS while the old world release is approaching. In the end, Sigmar himself takes down Archaon and rips out his heart. This sacrifice gives him the power to accomplish what has been his plan all along ; the 9 realms turn into a maelstrom of magic energy, then collapse into a single planet. Years pass as the various gods wake up and their people develop their civilizations. Then they reveal that all support for AoS is dropped: there’s a new edition, warhammer Old World. With that classic rank and file, square bases vibe that everyone loves, and no more new factions... let’s do it. Let’s go full circle. 😂

@Shankelton you make some good points. The different bases is really something that has the potential to cause trouble, they better cover all their... hmmm... bases. I don’t know what the rules and models will look like, but one thing is sure: there will be salt. So much salt...

I was just now checking if it had already been posted lol. Talk about a surprise! I’m honestly blown away by how much stuff GW is putting out these days. Marketing considerations aside, I think this shows that a lot of people in the studio grew up on warhammer and that there was no lack of enthusiasm to start something like this. I wonder what the game will be like. The parallels to 30k suggest a big army battle game, and I’m sure they will try to recreate the feel of the ranked manoeuvers of warhammer fantasy. Wonder if some armies will stay playable in both formats. A lot of AoS armies would still fit right back into the old world. Maybe... I dare not say it... maybe Brettonia and Tomb Kings will come back? Now the wait begins 🙂

@soak314 sounds like a really cool idea, your players are lucky! I like the concept of permadeath, actually just today I was thinking about a "survival" Warcry campaign where you start with a full 20 guys roster, but can never replenish, and the odds of death are a bit higher... but I digress. Aren't you worried that some warbands may be more hurt than others? Like Stormcast for instance have a lot of wounds, so they could tank a lot of damage and come out intact whereas a more fragile warband will have several dead for the same damage received. Maybe have the wounds lost carry over the next round, rounding up to ten : that way a 20-wounds model that ends the game with 3 wounds left will start the next with only 10 wounds, but a 10 wounds model will always start a game with his full health. That might be a lot of book keeping though. I think the idea of having dead players controlling monsters is really cool, I'm not so sure about them being really OP though. If I got eliminated that way, I think I'd feel frustrated; it kind of takes the focus off of the 2 players still fighting for survival and puts it on the huge monster. Maybe you could have different tiers of monsters : round 1-2 the dead players only get furies, hounds and raptoryxes ; turns 3-4, you have your razorgors, mercenaries that join in, and on the last round it's full on monster mash? This way you keep ramping up the pressure. All in all, I think the key will be to make it possible (if unlikely) that a warband could get to round 5; if 80% of players are wiped out in the first couple of rounds that may put a damper on things... Just a couple of thoughts, I hope you'll keep us posted on this event.

You could simply have the territory not give advantages - for instance you need to hold 12 territories to win. Or you make them give very small bonuses, like +15 pts in your army per territory, or a re-roll per game if you have more territory than your opponent.

I think the llama has great potential, with a creepier paintjob and possibly a face swap. I wish they didn’t give him armour though, a bit too much in my opinion. I wonder if the ogroids will slowly replace bullgors in the fluff? I agree that it’s weird that they would create an entirely different race of horned, hooved giant monsters... Given the size of these lads I’d expect them to be similar to the other monsters; you can have one on your roster once you’ve beat him. Gotta be pretty expensive points wise...

@Eldarain that seems to be a common problem. Between people who can’t pass up an opportunity to cheese and people who just happen to be good at list building / tactics... Do you know at least 1 or 2 players that share your approach? I think you could probably start with just people you know will have a healthy attitude and go from there 🤔 To be honest I’m not the most experienced when it comes to all that, I mostly tend to convert my non-wargaming relatives. They usually have a pure mind, untouched by cheese and aware that it’s a game of pretty toy soldiers.

See to me at least that’s almost a positive. Probably not what GW intended... I find stacks of unpainted sprue to be pretty depressing, but the prices make it easier for me to restrain from impulse purchases and « earn » them by painting enough models before...

It’s probably a bit out of the scope but I guess if you set your game in the mortal realms it could work. Or really just do it and we’ll see if it’s a problem; it’s not like this is the main hub of the forum 😂

So we have an ogroid warrior and an hypnotic lama-horse. What do you think guys?

@VBS very interesting, especially the skirmish game. I’d love to see your system. Maybe we should make a game design thread!

@Beastmaster asymetric battleplans are a great idea, and I think a great way to emphasize the interest of narrative. For instance if one player has a smaller force and must try to defend their territory for as long as possible, while their opponent can respawn their units. The defender already knows he’s going to « lose », but there can still be tense and tactical moments. Fighting environments like tunnels can be a great way to add some flavor to a battle too. I’ll definitely check out border town burning! @Tropical Ghost General Your narrative night sounds super cool. The opportunity to play weird lists or models that wouldn’t perform well in competitive play is really nice. I think it’s cool to take some of the pressure off of having only super efficient units, and being able to play with your cool toys. I want to see silver towers heroes vs 1000 pts of clanrats haha. I’ve always liked smaller battles, I feel that a 500 - 1000 pts army can more easily feel like « your dudes »...

@EccentricCircle those are all great ideas! It does seem like a lot of commitment, and a lot of work for you. Maybe you could start with a very light core and build it up as the people you game with get into it? For instance write a custom scenario where 2 armies come upon each other in the ruins near a realmgate, and are attacked by a npc faction (played by you). Have a couple of secret objectives for each player maybe. Just get the ball rolling and build on what the players like. I think with narrative there’s a balance to find between having solid « systems » and emerging narrative. Your opponents might get into it more if it starts as a normal game or campaign with a story. They get attached to their characters, rivalries form, then you reveal an awesome campaign map... I’ll be in my bunk.

@EccentricCircle that’s so cool. I think goblins are the only faction where I like all the models, no matter the era. For a generic fantasy creature, warhammer goblins actually have always had a strong and consistent identity. On other news, this whole discussion inspired me to start a thread in the hopes of reviving (reforging?) the narrative / open subforum. Let’s make ourselves heard! After all we’re supposed to be the talkative ones! @JPjr @VBS I’m counting on you (and everyone else of course, this is not some old boys’ club...)

Hey everyone, There was an interesting discussion on the general hobby chatter thread. Basically people mentioned the general feeling that competitive play is the most visible side of AoS (on this forum and most other places) and seen by a lot of players as the only « right » way to play Warhammer. Rather than whining and bitching about this, there is another way. We need to talk about it. We need to get threads on the home page. We need to share and discuss and comment. We need to get the word out! So here is a topic to freely discuss anything narrative / open play related. Obviously we can create topics about our ongoing projects and so on, but this one can be the hub where we share half-assed ideas, ask quick feedback on scenarios, explain our newest houserule or daydream about the hobby. I’ll start : due to lack of opponents I’m not really playing AoS proper right now, but I am really into warcry. In a couple of weeks I’ll be flying to spain to have a one-day mini campaign with an awesome painter / converter. I am writing the scenarios and converting an undead warband; I’ll definitely post more about it as the deadline approaches... So what’s going on with you?

Well if a couple of you are interested, I’m down to commit to posting regularly on the narrative subforum. Let’s make it happen

@JPjr I totally agree once again. Too bad we’re not neighbours as I think you and some of the people on this thread could form a gaming group tailored to my tastes I also agree with @michu that your (awesome) game mode idea won’t probably clear up any confusion. To some people hearing « narrative AoS » is like hearing « narrative poker » or « freeform boxing ». It just clashes completely with what the point of the game is to them. The only thing to do is for narrative players to stay active in communities, share our vision and remind people that it’s not all competitive. @Pariah I haven’t worked much with balsa, but I’d advise either a mix of pva and acrylic craftpaint as a basecoat, or just seal with pva if you want to spray the base color. Although you should check other sources too! @JPjr the terrain looks cool, I actually bought a halloween decoration with the same idea