Enoby
-
Posts
3,119 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
41
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Enoby
-
-
Just got the book - I've not had a chance to properly look through it, but am I correct that they've missed out Slaves to Darkness as an option? The "Mortal" keyword only includes the Chaos God armies...
-
13 hours ago, Chaos Shepard said:
New Anvil of Apotheosis is basically the old Anvil of Apotheosis with very very few and minor changes to make it more compatible to the new addition.
Thanks
It's a shame that they haven't really updated it much. Not to go too off topic, but I think things like this can sour community's perception of rules. Same as battletomes where very little changes. It feels low effort and as if they only want to fix what's there, rather than improve it.
Old Anvil was good, no doubt, but they had the opportunity to allow more options for Ghur heroes, as well as things like 'narrative-only' options which could afford to be a little less balanced and more fluffy.
-
6
-
-
Anyone else not had their Thondia book arrive? I preordered it but it's not come yet. I imagine Easter probably got in the way.
For those who have it and have looked through it, how is Anvil of Apotheosis?
-
1
-
-
Glad we're back!
Also, for those who haven't already seen, the Incarnate and skeleton scenery are huge! The base is the same size as a Megagargant.
-
7
-
3
-
-
The app's been out for a good few months, and while it has been kept updated with new warscrolls and FAQs, and the addition of 2e allegiance abilities is nice, it seems to have relatively basic amount of functionality.
I thought it'd be interesting to go over the parts of the app that could do with some tweaks, changes, or additions.
Matched Play
For Matched Play, the core is there - points are available, and the list builder fully works with matched play.
What they could add is a game tracker, where you can enter the battleplan and track victory points turn. This would allow you to check the battleplan rules quickly and make it easier to keep track of points and what battle tactics you've used. If you could import your list from the listbuilder, you could track casualties and wounds too.
Potentially, if they felt ambitious, they'd allow functionality to track army specific things like the various summoning points.
In addition to this, a scenery generator would be useful.
Open Play
Open Play is a bit odd in that it's sort of the "anything goes" style of AoS, and so you would think it wouldn't need much support from the app.
I would argue this is untrue. In addition to the battle tracker (for open play games) and a collection of open play rules, a very useful function of the app would be a quick open battleplan randomiser. These wouldn't always be balanced, but would provide unique games with potentially interesting twists to them.
I think one of the reasons Matched Play is a dominant force is because it's the easiest to set up. Saying "just bring 2k" is universally understood by players, whereas Open and especially Narrative require more effort to start. Having an Open Play generated, perhaps with a suggested army split, would take some of the barrier away.
Narrative Play
This is the big one, in my opinion - and perhaps the game mode that could see the most use of the app. I'll break this into points:
- As above, a narrative game generator and tracker. A way to record game results would be especially nice here.
- An army roster, especially to write down glory points and for these to be automatically deducted when taking a new unit into the roster. Path to Glory is a mathematical system - everything revolves around numbers, including the territory and boons. Everything can be automated digitally. This would be a huge boon to campaigns, allowing people to properly track their roster rather than forgetting to add things or losing their sheet. Being able to name heroes, units, territories etc would be a given.
- A Anvil of Apotheosis creator. For those who play table top roleplaying games, you may well have a digital character creator downloaded on your phone. These are very useful to keep track of stats, as well as plan out what you're going to do. This rings true for Anvil of Apotheosis - the ability to create and save a hero from the ground up and then add them to your lists (complete with your own photo) would be a massive boost to the system. AoA in the past have required someone to find a warscroll creator and type it in manually, with the possibility of mistakes which require further editing. Either saving these or printing them off can leave them prone to being lost. With everything in the app (with the ability to print), this would increase the accessibility and longevity of the system.
- A campaign tracker. Like a game tracker, but with a clear goal in mind and a way to track multiple players.
---
Each of these, while they would take a while to add, would boost the qualify of the app considerably and bring it above Warscroll Builder or Battlescribe.
I think that's it for my list - what do others think?
-
5
-
-
10 minutes ago, Iksdee said:
Where did they say this? So much wasted potential with the app at the moment. Would love more stuff like that or something like a battleplan generator for open play/narrative/matched.
Unfortunately I couldn't say - it may have been an interview, or potentially just hearsay at the beginning of 3rd.
Regardless, I agree the app is currently wasted potential. It works fine, and that's good, but it could be so much more.
They said that there are three ways to play, so it's a shame the app doesn't support two of them.
-
1
-
-
Not quite a rumour (but kind of is), but a while ago they said they wanted the new app so they could properly support Path to Glory. I don't believe there has been any P2G support yet, but this new book would provide a fantastic opportunity.
Not only that, but if they could allow us to create and save our own heroes (with the option to add our own photos) using Destiny Points on the app then that would be fantastic. In fact, this is my number 1 want from the app.
-
4
-
-
5 minutes ago, Loyal Son of Khemri said:
I’m honestly surprised that GW hasn’t added daemon rats to the skaven line yet. It only makes sense now that the Great Horned Rat is the fifth chaos god.
I'm no expert on Skaven, but I thought the Verminlords were daemons? Could be totally wrong there, mind.
-
1
-
-
Sometimes I think this staggered hype thing that GW does draws attention to the fact there aren't many releases and diminishes hype from the product. I'm looking forward to seeing what's coming up, but the more "nothings" we get hyped for, the more it seems like they're scraping the bottom of the barrel for AoS.
Personally, I'd love some witch hunters.
-
5
-
-
1 hour ago, vorathian said:
This is a game based on European mythos, I mean you basically have Sigmar as Zeus/Thor. What would it be like if I moved to another country and demanded they make games to represent me? Serious question. I don't want to change what I like just to make someone else happy I'm sorry.
++Mod Hat++
As has been mentioned multiple times on the thread by other mods, drop the topic. Normally I would recommend starting another topic in the case of off topic discussion, but in this case I cannot see this particular comment producing a worthwhile thread that wouldn't have to be quickly locked.
-
2
-
10
-
-
In the core rulebook, there's a rule that states you can't include a model worth half or more of your army's total points.
I am certain there was an FAQ or rules update that made this not apply in the current GHB, but I can't find it anywhere.
Did I imagine this?
-
29 minutes ago, HollowHills said:
I don't want to open up a big off topic debate, but getting women and girls into the hobby has a lot more to do with culture and creating spaces that are welcoming rather than models.
I agree about not going off topic, and this will be my first and last thing I say about this, but I do think representation in models is important.
That's not to say that women will only go for all female armies or vice versa, but the choice to be able to see a bit of yourself in the characters is important. That's not to say a man couldn't play a female army/character (or the other way around), but people do tend to gravitate towards things more similar to them. This is especially the case in kids.
I can say that, from experience, I have really struggled to get into 40k because every single important Chaos character pretty much has to be male (and this is close to true in the Imerium as well, when it comes down to Primarchs who now seem to dictate the setting). I certainly don't dislike male characters, but I get more easily invested in female ones when I'm creating them. Having the option would really help me at least.
It's hard to explain without going really deep into it, but for me (especially when younger) representation was the number 1 thing that got me interested in something. When I was a lot younger (like under 10), my first experience with Warhammer was being told that the only girl characters were the "Witch Finders" (which I think were Sisters of Battle), but they sucked and the best faction was Space Marines, but women couldn't be them because they were too weak. I should say that this guy was 12-13, so not the pinnacle of maturity, but that put me off Warhammer for years.
However, you're right that the community is key - all the representation in the world wouldn't matter if playing a game with someone had a significant chance or harassment or bellittlement.
I think representation is good for getting people interested, but that only goes so far and the state of the community is what makes or breaks someone joining the hobby.
In both regards, AoS is far superior to 40k.
As for DoK, they don't really do anything for me - the lore doesn't grab me (but I do like Morathi) and the witch aelved/sisters of slaughter seem a bit too generic looking. Most of the women I know who play like Soulblight or Slaanesh, both of which are good for representation. Aelves are also pretty common.
-
16
-
4
-
-
I'm really looking forward to this book, and I'm glad it's a narrative focus. I've just got my fingers crossed that Anvil of Apotheosis is good.
I think, at the moment, I've put matched play on hold and narrative seems like my preferred way to play right now.
-
4
-
-
11 minutes ago, OkayestDM said:
To be fair, nothing is preventing players from just agreeing with each other to add in the missing keywords, particularly in narrative play. That said, I agree that it would be nice if a fair amount of thought went in to ensuring that every custom hero could have all the keywords they need
Oh yeah, I agree the vast majority of reasonable groups would let you take a keyword that made sense. I suppose my concern is less "will you be able to at all" (because it's an easy houserule) and more that if they've left the keywords off, would that be indicative of lesser quality control or less time/effort put into AoA.
There are also a small number of keywords that offer generic power ups - for example, Eye of the Gods in Slaves to Darkness and Greater Daemon in Slaanesh. While some groups would be fine just adding these on (should you want to make a custom Keeper of Secrets for example), others may argue that some keywords should cost points as they translate directly to buffs.
I've also found it's harder to sell people in my group on supplementary rules that need house rules, no matter how minor. I think a lot of it comes from the enthusiasm being sapped out of someone when creating a character, only to find out it doesn't work unless they get permission. Despite most of the time the permission is easily obtained, some players feel as if their hero was only allowed at the behest of others. A made up hero from AoA being unofficial shouldn't logically matter, but I've seen it dampen enthusiasm before.
23 minutes ago, OkayestDM said:but I wonder if they'll also have an "upgrade" system from existing hero warscrolls? If you're using a Chaos Lord on Karkadrach as your AoA hero, will you be able to build off of the official warscroll instead of designing it from the ground up? That would certainly be one way to solve the keyword issue.
I really hope so, it would be a great thing for them to include that would allow people to upgrade the heroes that already fit their character concept. Generic heroes like Chaos Lords can fit the bill for most Chaos Lord-like character concepts, and some players may bemoan losing the command ability for potentially little gain, so allowing someone to upgrade their generic chaos lord to be more unique would be a huge boon.
26 minutes ago, OkayestDM said:have very high hopes for this system, especially since AoA now looks like it will be expanded in all or most battlepacks that are released. I certainly hope they commit to it and do a great job!
I'm very much looking forward to it too. My worries come from the fact that some GW publications seem to vary wildly in quality - AoA is one of those things I'm just praying they get correct as it was one of the best supplementary rules ideas they had in AoS 2. If it's poor or just half finished then it'll be a big blow for narrative gamers.
I think my worries are partially there as Path to Glory 3e, while fun, feels half finished. Like they got the skeleton written and then ran out of time - small things like renown doing very little for your warlord (even though the narrative of P2G is that they're building their renown and army), outposts being a vestigial system, upgrades being about removing restrictions instead of getting stronger, and feeling too much like matched play in some areas make P2G 3e less appealing than it should be. This comes from someone who's 17 games into a P2G campaign - I've enjoyed it a lot, but it feels as if it would have benefitted from being its own book with more time dedicated to finalising rules.
-
3
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Maogrim said:
Always strange to see so few Legion of the First Prince, considering they have a stunning center piece and are said to be really good.
I think a few people are a bit cautious to get into Legion of the First Prince, unless they already play the Daemon armies and S2D. While it's not a "fake" army, it's not had its own battletome yet and that might make people cautious of such a high buy in that could end up down the drain should GW feel like it.
Of course, every army can get Squatted (or Chorf'd), but it's more likely if they've not had an official battletome.
-
2
-
2
-
-
One potential candidate would be the Contorted Epitome - not much survivability, but it's effectively immune to mortal wounds.
If we give it the Arcane Tome, it can be a three spell caster, rerolling casts, with a +1 to cast; the daemon spell lore isn't great, but we do have the options of healing or horde clearing. Overwhelming Aquiesence is also good as it allows the Incarnate to reroll 1s.
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, OkayestDM said:
The AoA looks to have about 10 pages of content, and is situated between PtG and Narrative play rules in the book. While not conclusive, this certainly seems to indicate that it isn't meant to mesh with Matched play (and honestly, I'm fine with that.)
In all honesty, as long as they have points (which they'd need for P2G), I think most people would be happy to use them in casual matched play games - which is the best of both worlds. Anvil shouldn't be made dry for fear of breaking tournaments, and the more narrative the abilities the better when it comes to making your own characters.
No one wants their unique hero to be less interesting and powerful than the generic equivalent, so I'm hoping P2G lets us fully explore character creation and doesn't miss out some potentially interesting inter-factional interactions (like necessary keywords being available).
I'd also love if you could properly upgrade these heroes in P2G using renown to make that more of an impactful mechanic for heroes (especially the warlord).
My biggest fear is that not enough thought goes into the Anvil and some armies just don't have heroes that can work properly. For example, in Slaves to Darkness, they don't just need access to the Mortal and Chaos keywords, but also potential access to Slaanesh/Khorne/Nurgle/Tzeentch as well as Daemon (for Princes), Eye of the Gods (very importantly), and Darkoath. I can see them forgetting 80% of those options (just allowing a god mark) which would suck and leave generic Chaos Lord as a better stand in for most characters.
Fingers crossed that the Anvil was a significant undertaking with lots of thought put into it, and not just a bone to throw narrative players written in a couple of days.
-
2
-
-
I think the Incarnate looks interesting, and does add some much needed rend to our lists, but it comes with a few downsides:
- No retreating for a good chunk of our army, which is often necessary
- As it can't be bound to our Uniques, so it'll give Glutos and Synessa a -1 to cast
- We don't have a great Hero to bind to the incarnate - either we have to look to S2D, which have no synergy so this effectively becomes a 600+ point model, or we stick it on a Lord of Pain and hide him
- Competitively speaking, I believe (from memory so I may be wrong) that Be'lekor is an ally as he lacks the Slaanesh keyword, so it's either this or him
Overall, it's strong and would help us with damage. However, we don't really have a good hero to attach it to as all of our good heroes are uniques.
It's worth a test, but I think this will be better in other armies.
-
2
-
-
Some good news, by the sound of it, is that KO had a Warscroll change in their White Dwarf - if we dare to be optimistic, we may see Slaangors saved.
-
6
-
-
5 minutes ago, Beliman said:
3 days until White Dwarf preorders and still 0 leaks.
What the heck is the PotatoCam thinking?It's odd because someone did leak the back page with the Slaanesh news, but didn't show anything else when they definitely could have. Someone must have it, at the least.
-
1
-
-
It would be a really expensive April Fools prank - artwork, animation, and voice acting is not cheap
-
5
-
-
1 hour ago, azdimy said:
We all remember too well the last white dwarf update for Slaanesh when everybody was saying the army was busted and we were given a sub faction that could summon twice as much. So yes, this is concerning
It's interesting that you mention this actually; it's a perfect encapsulation of the design team half understanding the issue.
On one hand, they heard the complaints about no mortals, and so introduced an entire White Dwarf to try and address this. So that was good.
On the other hand, they hadn't realised just how busted summoning was so it ended up being grossly overpowered.
It was probably the case that they just didn't realise the mechanical implications of Slaanesh but did consciously know what was wrong with the book (lack of mortals). If this next White Dwarf is written like that last one, then I have no clue what it'll include.
-
4 hours ago, zombiepiratexxx said:
From memory White Dwarf is written about 6 months in advance from comments that Lyle has made in the Editorial, obviously I am sure that they can swap some articles in and out as needed
Thanks for the info. Hopefully they'd have had enough info to go off when they wrote this update then.
My worry is that it'll have been written from the perspective of "oh, maybe Slaanesh will fare better in AoS 3 so we'll be light touch" rather than now where we've seen that AoS 3 didn't help (mostly due to the massive points hikes). If that's the case, we'll likely not see much at all.
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Jaskier said:
I don't think it'd be a much quicker turnaround than writing the GHBs (if at all) purely because of how involved their global printing/shipping process is, but I don't have any personal knowledge on the matter.
That'd be a shame - I've written magazines before and they usually have a month's turnaround, but they're much more locally based. I'm unsure if GW's print for magazines is all done in house and then shipped, or if the design is sent to be printed in each country (as magazines are much easier to print than bound books).
I can hope it's the latter, but it's likely the former. We can only hope that the writer realised Slaanesh's issues before this was created, and it wasn't written at the start of AoS 3...
It's a shame that they haven't really updated it much. Not to go too off topic, but I think things like this can sour community's perception of rules. Same as battletomes where very little changes. It feels low effort and as if they only want to fix what's there, rather than improve it.
Seasons of War Thonida - SPOILERS Narrative and Lore Discussion
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
Congratulations on the new job!
I'm only passingly interested in a lot of AoS lore, but I really enjoyed Thondia's - an enjoyable read with every faction that's involved coming out looking good.