RuneBrush

Skeletons can indeed be a bit of a pain in the bum. In the past I've used them to shift the unit across the board and charge. Once I get to the pile in phase I'll start taking them off the movement tray as I can get them in more densely and it makes casualties a lot easier to remove.

It matters because that amount of income each month makes TTS a commercial venture and no longer something fan based - in the UK a turnover of £85k+ needs to be VAT registered so based purely on Patreon subscriptions TTS is considered a business. Within both the US and UK fair use rules, the commerciality of created content plays a huge part on if its creation is considered fair use or not.

+++ MOD HAT +++ Back onto rumour now please folks. I've already asked to avoid the sin/bin terms and people seem to have taken that as a reason to have a discussion about it

+++ MOD HAT +++ This ^. Comes across really bad for somebody to come across talk that their army is only ready for the bin.

It's a thought! Depending on how I get on with the bits I've started, I'll see how I fancy doing this. One of the things I'm trying not to do is to over commit. I've done it in the past where I jump into a project with both feet and get bored with it half way through and a load of my planned ideas go out the window to get it finished 🤣

Cheers. My intention is zombie lite initially as I know having lots of models to convert & paint will take me forever (always far too tempting to put extra details on). The plan is that the Terrorgheists will have some scenery added to the bases in replacement for the rocks - at least on the ones I build in the future. Big decision there is what scenery! The mausoleum works really well but has been done to death (ba-dum-tish), but I'm not convinced the sigmar themed terrain will look right. The Zombie Dragon isn't going to use the Terrorgheist kit as a base 😉

Just in case you've not spotted it, but @Overread and I are doing a "Tale of Two Moderators" challenge and I've gone for Soulblight Gravelords as my army 😁 Planning on a fairly monster heavy list, but with a few non-monster units so that I can do path to glory games without my opponent refusing to play against me! Current list is looking like: Yeah, it's not that inspiring yet 🤣 I've plans on a converted Vengorian Lord (or two!) and likely add another couple of Terrorgheist. Also have the Vargskyr and a Vampire Lord that may well be added for those lower end games. Feel free to contribute to the thread and make suggestions - not aiming for top meta but equally do want something with a bit of bite 🦇

The past few months have been slightly traumatic for two of the armies I collect for Age of Sigmar, seeing both my Legion of Nagash and Legion of Grief armies disappearing from the list of Pitched Battle options available in AoS 3. The mod challenge has given me is the perfect excuse to do something I have been wanting to attempt for some time – create a visually unique army that might stand a chance at receiving a painting nomination at an event (which has been on my hobby bucket list for a while). Posting my progress publically should keep me on the straight and narrow of getting things finished too. One thing I've personally found useful in the past is setting a few realistic but challenging constraints, so here's my initial ones for this project My army needs to have a solid narrative focus and be playable as both a Path to Glory force and a Matched Play army It needs to be playable in a GW store and at GW events, so I need to stick to Citadel miniatures & conversions Lastly there needs to be a conversion or two (possibly using the Anvil of Apotheosis rules) Deep down I knew that I had to create a Soulblight Gravelords army, not only would it ensure I continued the work of the Great Necromancer (all praise Nagash), but it also meant that I could continue painting my Cursed City miniatures and use the basing scheme I had invented for those - basing is one aspect I don't really enjoy and normally put off doing. Composition wise, I am aiming for something monster heavy. Not only have monsters have been given some nice boost in the new edition, they're also aesthetically striking on the tabletop. Another reason is that I'm a notoriously slow painter and large models mean I can use my airbrush to speed things along. I will need to include some non-monsters unit because a path to glory force containing just a Zombie Dragon and Terrorgheist isn’t going to win me any friends! As with Overread, I've actually made a bit of a start on the models (couldn't help myself), but not done any painting yet. My hobby desk currently contains ten Cursed City skeletons based and undercoated and a Terrorgheist assembled ready for basing. The crazy heat we've had in the UK meant that I've also started on my Zombie Dragon conversion - but more on that in a future post 😉

One tip (and I use it on my work computer) is on all Google driven ads there's a blue cross in the top right hand corner. That will generally give you a chance to send feedback on the advert for containing inappropriate content. If enough people do it, it'll prompt Google to check that the categories selected are correct for that advertiser.

Personal view is it'll be November 2022 or November 2023. GW normally has two big releases each year - one June/July time for a main studio release and then one in November for a specialist games release. This year the rumour mill is suggesting November will be an Age of Darkness (Heresy) box set with updated version of the rules. Ultimately it'll depend upon how much work was managed to be put in during the pandemic. The old specialist games/FW offices were packed in like sardines, so not a chance they could have been covid safe 😜 That said, GW is always able to surprise!

This is a bit later than originally planned, but myself and @Overread have decided to embrace "New Rules New Army" and we're each going to build and paint up a new AoS army! Because sharing is caring, we'll be posting up our progress on TGA and allow you to comment, cheer and make suggestions*. Our ultimate goal is to build our armies up to (at least) 2000 points and with luck meet up a Warhammer World somewhen next year** for a game or two. We're both fans of the Tale of Warlords format, so going to be following something sort of similar with a few odd changes. Firstly we're not setting communal goals, real life often throws curveballs and we're doing this as a fun hobby project. Next up, we've agreed that we'll be posting up regular progress posts to keep everyone up to date with where we are even if the visible progress may be small. * what have we let ourselves in for?! ** date may vary depending upon pandemics, plagues and other events

100% this. Quite a bit (if not all) of the concept art used by CA was created by Mark Bedford. I'm not 100% sure of his official job title currently but he's is effectually the head of design/concept for Specialist Games

+++ MOD HAT +++ Having just caught up, I think we're at the point where we're largely going round in circles and we're largely just discussing differing opinions. Will keep an eye on the thread, but if it doesn't look like it's going anywhere will lock it

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. That you've had to explain your own opinion on economics to a number of us suggests that it's not an opinion that is that common. Coming back to the new IP rules, pretty much it's GW's ball and they can tell us how they expect us to play with it. They're perfectly entitled to do this as the owner of the IP even if we don't agree with all the items. As I agreed with in an earlier post, I think we need to wait and see what happens going forward. I certainly expect fan films to be clamped down on, but beyond this who knows. Is this fair? No less fair than trying to make a business from somebody else's work.

I'm really struggling to get my head round the point you're trying to get over. What do you mean by make? My interpretation of make is producing a product that is sold. However by that definition there are loads of small studio businesses that will draw the design for a model, have it sculpted by a third party and then manufactured by a casting company. The sculptor will normally receive a one off commission fee, so will never see equal return if that model is really popular. In fact there are plenty of businesses out there that commission both the design and sculpt. In truth, GW is as much a manufacturer as it is a design studio - they have factories and production facilities that make physical products - it's not outsourced and we as consumers don't buy designs or ideas, we buy products. GW also doesn't hire people - it employs them. It's a small but huge difference.

+++ MOD HAT +++ Just tidied a few posts up (sorry if yours was one of them) as things were getting somewhat unpleasant. Please can we keep this thread on the topic of "Actual Games Played", it's fine to have a bit of discussion but there are plenty of other threads talking about specific mechanics and their impact on the game as an overall entity. We're focusing about the games you folks have played and how you found the new rules. Also as a reminder, please do not take it upon yourself to call people out - use the report function. Equally if you're about to post something that is unpleasant or rude, just don't.

And you couldn't replicate the same rune combinations on different weapons (jealous runes or something like that I believe)

Can't comment on the list much as I've not got any games in! One thing that is possible would be to make your zombie dragon so that the rider can be removed. The vampire is separate (and would recommend you leave them off to paint), and you could either put a pin in their bottom and a hole in the seat, or glue a small magnet in the two models. Would mean you can run it as either a zombie dragon on it's own (within the limits of a 750 game) or with the rider for bigger games. You could even paint up a "matching" vampire on foot for your smaller games as I think the points work out the same which would add a nice narrative element to your games

+++ MOD HAT +++ OK folks, can I ask you please to rein it in a bit please? Have read some pretty confrontational comments in here so far and not particularly impressed. Appreciate that some people have some very strong beliefs and it's natural to want to defend those beliefs. But let's put a bit of context here, we're talking about a shared hobby and there's no need to be aggressive when somebody's beliefs and opinions differ from your own. In short, stay civil.

Absolutely! However the future is a long time 😉 I'm not convinced we'll get much in the way of new Soulblight models this edition of the game - there may be a random hero appear, but can't see there being a second wave. That said we all thought the same about the Lumineth and were proven wrong on that.

My own take (currently - this will likely change). The Old World will arrive with a bunch of brand new miniatures, including a selection of plastic troops to cover most of the options and then resin bits and bobs. It'll be 25mm scale rather than heroic 28mm - will mean that you'll get scale creep in some ranges, but overall shouldn't be too jarring. I'm keeping my fingers crossed we'll see some old molds resurrected and things like the Fortified Manor be brought back to cater for scenery. Looking at the way the Age of Darkness has been done, you have an overarching set of rules and then each Black Book focuses on a specific engagement. I can see this transitioning into The Old World, but we'll get a small series of books (2 or 3) for each major engagement - bearing in mind some engagements lasted decades. These books will include all the main protagonists for the engagement, plus a few you might not expect. I think we'll get some kind of "catch up" book/books that will allow you to field your existing collection in games (similar to how we had the Grand Alliance and Index books). Not sure if this will be a generic set of rules or if it's going to be themed for the engagement in question - it could be there's a clever matrix on what you can and can't do. We're going to realise quite how far GW has come on in miniature design very quickly when we put down a 25 year old Orc next to one of the models designed for the new game. That said, I can see there being quite a few made to order releases.

I think most people who get preview copies get a set of T&C / NDA that will override the general IP rules laid out on this page. However it wouldn't surprise me to see those T&C be updated to prevent this in the future. Not really. This likely is to ensure that GW is actively protecting their IP which is something that US courts expect to see should anything ever an IP lawsuit be raised in the US. It's something that they were stung with in the past with the chapterhouse case. Simply going "yup, that's our IP, we created it 30 years ago and here's the book" isn't enough.

In truth, the IP rules hadn't been updated properly for some time, so it doesn't surprise me that we've seen some updates, especially seeing that we now have Warhammer+ on the horizon. It's split into two sections - guidelines and then infringements. My own interpretation is that GW is trying to ensure that people aren't profiteering off their IP - something that is actually pretty reasonable if we're honest. The new guidelines also now protect them from somebody creating a Warhammer fan site / YouTube channel and basically using it to slate GW or as a platform to push oddball political agendas. I also think this may have been influenced by the some YouTube videos about that basically spoiled every page of the AoS3 releases in their preview videos. For me the slightly worrying bit is that the guidelines prevent the use of imagery to be used basically for anything - want to use the AoS logo on a cheat sheet? Nope, not allowed. Want to use a really cool image as a backdrop on your computer? Nope can't do that either. These guidelines wouldn't be as worrying if there were some kind of "fan pack" you could download which included logos and other resources to use, but we don't have that. The other item that to my eyes is basically impractical is that one Infringement is unauthorised use of GW's trademarks - let's consider that and remember that Warhammer and Age of Sigmar are registered trademarks 🤔 However in reality the proof of the pudding is going to be seeing how GW actually applies these new IP rights. With luck they'll continue to take a light handed approach on the whole, but the new rules will give them a bit of additional clout on the odd occasion they need to bring the legal big guns in. From the perspective of channels doing reviews, I don't think anybody who's been given a review copy will have too much to worry about. Reviewers in general may need to be more careful with what they show - a review of a book that means the viewer doesn't need to purchase the product may well be frowned upon.

Must be honest I've every Space Wolves Codex and pretty much all the collectors edition's from when they came out. The original collectors eds were amazing - heavy duty box with cards, tokens and all sorts in there, the later versions have been a lot less impressive.

Who knows! The new rules have confirmed certain things, but there's still loads of bits that are unanswered.