Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


RuneBrush last won the day on August 14 2019

RuneBrush had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,891 Celestant-Prime


About RuneBrush

  • Rank
    Lord Celestant

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. +++ MOD HAT +++ Pack it in. I've just tidied up a handful of rude comments and issued warnings as appropriate. Being offensive and insulting to other members will not be tolerated under any circumstances
  2. Weirdly I think from a game perspective, having more armies will ultimately help to encourage people to rethink how they write their lists. It'd be really embarrassing to create an army that blows away all of the latest hotness but then falls over as soon as a grot breathes heavy. Time will tell on that theory though! My own view is we're going to see something similar to what's happened in 40k. So a slow down in what we've had over the past year and a half and more in the way of campaign books that add one or two new characters/allegiances/rules etc. Possibly two or three new armies and between 2 and 6 revised battletomes - with a load of supplements that perhaps focuses on one slice of an existing battletome (e.g. adding a named character to a Legion of Blood army). I could also see grand alliance armies being removed entirely - we've recently had a trend towards certain armies that can include other units plus mercenaries, that should ideally help to scratch that itch of having mixed armies as time moves on. Will too many armies be a problem - I think it will for those of us that collect an army and never sell them as I fear we'll run out of space before GW runs out of ideas 😂
  3. Wouldn't have classed it as baiting. GW doesn't record/stream any of the seminars (it's kind of a perk of paying to go to the event) - it's one of the reasons when I've heard bits in a seminar I try and share them out when I can (like now!). In fairness "life of a playtester" would be a pretty neat WarCom article!
  4. The process was briefly outlined at the AoS seminar at the NY Open Day. Playtesters get a preliminary copy of an army, do some playtesting and pass feedback, modifications are made - this process goes back and forth until either everybody is happy or a set deadline is reached. Some slips do get through because the deadline may result in modifications not being passed back for anther round of playtesting (without a deadline some projects would never get finished). Also even though the playtester pool is fairly large, it's nowhere near as big as the hobbyists who play the game. Disclaimer: I am not a playtester!
  5. Funnily enough I can remember saying this back when it happened to me the first time around (think it may have been an FAQ on a Khorne unit). The downside I could see of doing this is that it could make changes to warscrolls occur even less often as there would be a direct financial cost to those making those changes. Although less ideal, having a printable version that is the same size & format as the changed one could be a half-way house, the PDF's online are great for printing, but you couldn't print one out and glue it to the front of the old warscroll 😃
  6. Probably one that needs to be sent to AoSFAQ@gwplc.com if it's not clarified in the KO battletome (I don't have it to hand) as the garrison rule isn't clear.
  7. Unless the KO book explicitly states otherwise, a unit garrisoned within a Skyvessel won't gain any abilities from that vessel. What are you thinking about it for?
  8. Best to worst 🤔 depends entirely on what you're looking for in an army really (including the type of event you play in) and what you as a general has a flare for playing.
  9. I think where we are with AoS is fantastic, there's loads of content out there, the background is developing all the time. As a hobbyist, not only is the hobby in amazing shape, but I also feel like my contributions count. From the point of view on improvements my own aren't actually that many. It does feel like there's a reluctance to wait until battletomes are released before seeing warscroll changes. Although I can see logic in this (both playtesting and customers who have bought the warscroll cards), I think sometimes a modified warscroll would do more to resolve issues that have arisen rather than point changes. For some battleplans, I feel at times there is quite a bit of disparity between the game being played and the end result. A game that ends with the victory points on 19-20 that was super close throughout, feels really bad with a simple major win for one person. I equally know from talking to lots of people that this is a divisive suggestion. Finally a book full of battalions would be amazing (plus clarified & consolidated rules on using them)! With the way the game currently sits, there's quite a disparity between armies that have a good selection of battalions and ones that don't. I don't mean this from a "this battalion is better than that one", quite a few battletomes have battalions locked to specific allegiances or conditions. That's it really. From a players perspective, I'd love to see a generals compendium released each year that contained all the playing aids you could possibly need - so battleplans, agendas, realm rules, command abilities etc on cards, but that's not so much the game as making things easier to play (at least for me).
  10. Yes it includes third parties - sort of. The value is distributor sales. This means it will include the amount of stock sold (at trade price) to the likes of Amazon and other publishers. We don't know how the GW store/BL relationship works, it's feasible GW stores have a trade price too, but equally possible that a sale through GW just goes straight into distributor sales at full RRP. Audible is dealt with on a royalty basis I believe, but I'd imagine it falls into the same figure.
  11. Just wanted to say thanks to @Chris Tomlin for running a brilliant event and all the teams for being excellent throughout the weekend! Our teams goal was to not come bottom, which we achieved as it contained a real mix of abilities and armies - which for an event as competitive as this one, struggled at times to cut the mustard. We did however learn a lot - special mention to team Bad Dice, run by @Ben who were our first draw. We were outclassed and we all knew it, but each of my team came away having learned something from a good game, for me this really emphasises that regardless of how competitive an event is both players in a game can actually have an enjoyable experience. For anybody who is toying with doing a team event, I would very much say to go for it. The team environment really changes the event experience, being able to get tid-bits of advice from other team members about what your opponent may attempt and how to defeat them can be a massive confidence boost. It's the first time I've experienced points capping for rounds too and am really impressed with how that worked and how it kept the placings super tight. Team Great Big Secret are certainly aiming for another punt at #Brotherhood2021 - new lists and more practice needed first though 😉 I am regretting being in work today and the alarm going off at 6am...
  12. RuneBrush

    Bravery Debuff Army

    I'd veer towards Legion of Grief. Although you can't run the Vampire bits, there are more bravery debuffs available in the army. Stuff with bravery 10 (a lot of stuff) will neuter quite a lot of the potential damage though
  13. I don't think so. Best bet would be to keep an eye on the #Brotherhood2020 hashtag on Twitter
  14. +++ MOD HAT +++ Can we try to keep this friendly please. GW staff are real people too and I've read a few too many pretty rude comments aimed at them...
  • Create New...