RuneBrush

If that's the case the best solution is not to veer off topic please. Not particularly useful if somebody comes here and has to trawl through pages of jibber jabber to find the last useful rumour discussion...

+++ MOD HAT +++ And back to rumours please folks

Massive cat creature that randomly falls asleep, counting as impassable terrain and anything that flies over it gets swatted? Also if within 6" of the board edge pushes a model off the edge and it's instantly slain 😁

Fully expect the latter!

Already been resolved if you read back through the posts 😉

I think it's far to early to make the call. On the surface the snippets we've seen seem really powerful, but until we've have confirmation on command point generation and some of the other rules, we don't know how big an impact it will have. Currently I feel like we're watching a trailer for a film and we don't know if they've just compiled all the good bits together 🤣

I'd agree with that. I think this is one that needs to be experienced in the flesh before we condemn it. I know the 40k community had similar opinions when it changed in 9th ed, but didn't find it quite as bad in practice.

Am I the only one looking at some of these creative Tetris diagrams and thinking that they won't work when you factor in other units and scenery 😉

Been a while since I've been able to post anything on here - a combination of me not being a quick painter and painting a lot of non AoS miniatures over the past year or so! I am however now painting up my Cursed City box so thought I'd pop up the hero I finished off this weekend

+++ MOD HAT +++ Just in case you're not aware, we have a dedicated AoS 3 rules discussion thread. Could I ask/nudge people over to there rather than discussing the new rule reveals in two places (plus the rumour thread probably isn't the best place for it) - thanks! https://www.tga.community/forums/topic/28777-aos-3-new-rules-discussion/

I stand corrected on that one - must have been looking at an older warscroll when I checked earlier. VLoZD does have the keyword though. In truth I don't understand why there isn't a little more consistency in keywords - not like they're struggling for space in the box!

Sorry, I perhaps should have been more specific. In the context of Vampire Lords (i.e. the bit I quoted) it is the keyword.

I could see that all ignore damage rolls will now become ward saves - and you'll only be able to make a single save roll for each point of damage. Smaller board size is so that it fits on a dining table more easily. It also makes manoeuvring more important rather than less. You've less square inches to play in so a mis-measure here or there will be a lot more devastating! Armies are likely to shrink in composition too - no horde discounts and smaller max sized units. Lastly, shaving off a few inches overall also helps armies like Khorne that used to spend 2 or 3 turns trying to get into melee.

Battalions always refer to Keywords. VLoZD does have "Vampire Lord" as a keyword so can be included. If any named characters have "Vampire Lord" they can be included.

I'm 99% positive that on the 3rd there will be a wave of new Errata and FAQs to sort out some of the oddballs that are going to exist 😊 I think we could see bravery change and likely inspiring presence with it. Speaking hypothetically, I don't think you'd need to buff shooting units if they implemented a friendly fire mechanic. Part of the skill of a ranged army is making sure you're in the right place so that you can attack your opponent with impunity. I don't think it'd be any less one sided then a KO army sniping out all the heroes when playing against a Khorne opponent. The short interview with Ben Johnson talked about there being specific battalions for use in matched play. I'm sure this was repeated somewhere else too. I can't recall the precise wording (I'll have to rewatch the video at home), but it was pretty much read as confirmation that the battletome battalions wouldn't be usable in matched play. List building now is very premature though - I've a feeling the new matched play battalions may well work in a similar way to 40k detachments. Fully expect us to have this revealed to us over the next month

Sadly I think we'll find the short stories are finished now (we may be lucky and get a bonus one or two).

As an interesting aside, I remember talking to James at one of the GW Open Days. One of the things that the specialist games team deliberately do, is to make certain forces a lot less powerful and others more powerful. Blood Bowl is probably the most extreme example, where the halfling team is super hard to get a win out of.

I'm expecting something like "Hunker down - you may spend 1 CP if a unit is the target of attacks made in the shooting phase. Until the end of this phase, the unit gains +1 save / 6+ ignore damage roll / etc". Ah, sibling rivalry 🤣

Thanks for the info. We're going to see the Coven throne on the Mortal Realms magazine at some point, so worth keeping an eye out for that as a potential alternative supply

My brother is in a very similar situation and I'm not going to complain about not having stuff overhanging when I play! Means for you (and my brother) no more clubs or trying to scale battleplans down to fit your table! Lovely thought really!

I kind of agree with you but not for the reason you've suggested. I don't think rules are written specifically with the intention to sell miniatures, however rules do influence the sales of miniatures. The game designers don't have any involvement with the financial aspect of the business - they won't know how much a box of models is going to be going on sale for and some of the time likely don't even know how many you get in a box (see Dreadblade Harrows and Beasts of Nurgle as evidence for that). What we know GW does is to make the latest models attractive enough rules wise to want to add to an army and that does align with GW's need to drive sales (they're a business after all). However I don't believe there's some edict that comes down from on high, I think it's more wanting to give the latest cool model rules that match the coolness. Going to disagree with this one - I have two friends with Seraphon armies that don't have Kroak, one doesn't even have a Skink in it 😉 OK, I'll admit I'm being pedantic, the point I'm going to make is that it's really easy to forget about the hobbyists who play behind closed doors and we just don't know what they play or how many of them there are - I'm pretty sure they outnumber tournament goers by a pretty large factor.

I reckon the biggest impact will be one none of us are aware of, and that's more people playing on their dining tables at home 😁

Don't forget you also gain +1 bravery for every ten models in the unit. So in the above instance 17 would be counted as slain, but your (now) unit of 30 would also have +3 bravery.

Nothing specific. The current rumour as far as I can tell is that there are going to be changes for matched play battalions. There's one line of thinking that we may have generic battalions that work in a similar way to 40k detachments and the battalions in battletomes will become narrative/open play only. Hopefully we'll start finding out a bit more in WarCom articles in a few weeks.

I would agree with this. The game wasn't originally designed with "balance" as the core selling point and the quantity of releases means it's a self fulfilling prophesy of never being able to be balanced. That said, I do think that keeping an eye on power creep is one thing that can (and should) be done - although I have lost count of the number of times I've read claims of how new book X is going to dominate the game and it doesn't quite happen.