Awesome rundown... THANK YOU! That 's disappointing. I really don't like the sound of that. I wonder why GW would choose to do that? Are the Lizardmen not popular enough? A living rule set sounds better (at least personally, with what little ["no"] experience). Why do you like a discontinued one? This is something useful to consider. I'm definitely not married to any one single game, so this consideration is important.
@- Q - before you get too despondent about TOW, consider this more open-minded perspective. The main reasons why GW decided to start off with a reduced number of factions getting full support (9 - Bretonnia, Dwarfs, High Elves, Empire, Wood Elves, Tomb Kings, Beastmen, Orcs & Goblins and Warriors of Chaos) are likely to be: To make the game easier to balance (9 factions are a lot easier to balance than 16 to start with, and if the legacy factions do return then they can be gradually returned to the game one at a time, again making it easier to balance each faction with the existing ones) To give the game greater lifespan (if all 16 previously-supported Warhammer Fantasy factions were released all together at the start, as some were hoping for, there would be a significantly reduced scope for future releases - GW would have to consider releasing brand new factions made up of the more niche armies of the Warhammer World a lot earlier on, which would be risky financially for a game that's still in the stage of getting off the ground, whereas with the approach they've taken they have a lot more to choose from for future releases) Less of a financial gamble - resculpting and rereleasing models for 9 factions, and making Arcane Journals for those 9, is a lot less of a financial expenditure than doing the same thing for 16 factions. It was clear to see that during its development GW weren't entirely sure on whether TOW would be a popular game and so were tentative about its release. However, fortunately the game has been proven to have become a massive hit - they themselves have acknowledged that - so with this in mind they will likely be willing to invest more in the game. Yes it is true that the other Warhammer Fantasy factions (Lizardmen, Skaven, Ogre Kingdoms, Daemons of Chaos Dark Elves, Vampire Counts and Chaos Dwarfs) are currently restricted to PDFs that allegedly won't be getting any future support, but bear in mind that eventually GW will have finished releasing all the models they can for the main 9 factions, and that in order to keep TOW alive and kicking they will look around for something new to release for it, and of course one of the ways they can do that is to reintroduce the 'legacy' factions. More than likely if they do this, the rules they will release for them will invalidate the PDFs anyway. I'm pretty confident that the PDFs are simply a placeholder to last for two or three years until they finally decide to bring the 'legacy' factions back in full. One key thing to bear in mind in the past few years is that GW have regularly gone back on things they've said in the past, and have brought several long-lost factions back from the dead (Genestealer Cults, Squats/Leagues of Votann, Bretonnians, Tomb Kings) or near-death (Sisters of Battle), to very warm fan reception. Even if it was purely for extra financial revenue rather than to do these armies justice, it's still clear to see that GW will do all sorts of stuff if enough money can be gained from it, so I reckon that as long as TOW's playerbase keeps supporting it financially, there will be sufficient financial motivation for GW to restore the 'legacy' factions to fully-supported status. It may well take a while, but it'll reward those who are patient enough. Again, we don't know what GW fully plan to do with the legacy factions, so saying that Lizardmen will definitely be discontinued when it is still largely conjecture. The one piece of evidence this is based on is GW killing off Warhammer Fantasy era factions (Bretonnians and Tomb Kings principally) in the early days of AoS, but consider that there are significant differences: In the PDF lists for 1st Edition AoS, the rules given to legacy models and armies were deliberately half-arsed with no points values for a long time. By contrast the TOW army list PDFs are effectively identical to the army lists for the 9 main factions in the two army list books, and seem to have been designed to balance rather well with the other factions - if GW really wanted to dissuade us from playing 'legacy' factions, they wouldn't have put that much effort into it. They would likely have said something along the lines of 'unfortunately we don't plan to release rules for these factions for TOW, but we will continue to support them in AoS', to try and lure the players of these factions over to AoS. From the start AoS lore deliberately excluded the factions GW really weren't interested in supporting in the game - Bretonnians and Tomb Kings in particular did not feature. By contrast the TOW rulebook still regularly mentions the legacy factions in the background lore - if GW really wanted us to forget about the 'legacy' factions entirely, I severely doubt they would have bothered to do this because they would know people would ask "why can't we play these then?". They would have tried to more deliberately centre the lore around the Empire and the Old World and keep any references to the 'legacy' factions obscure to try and dissuade any interest in them. Something else for @- Q - to consider is that while AoS is definitely the most 'alive' ruleset, one could also say it is 'too alive' - GW are relentless in releasing updates for their favourite two games (AoS and new 40K). Even if he does choose to wait until 4th to get into AoS and eventually gets himself a 4th Edition Seraphon Battletome, that book will also be invalidated in around 3 years' time when 5th Edition will inevitably come out. To make matters worse, to get into AoS seriously you'd have to be willing to invest in a £30 General's Handbook every year on top of that. By contrast, it's very unlikely that TOW would require a yearly scenario book to be bought (most other Specialist Games don't to their credit), and a second edition will not come out for a good long time now (if ever), so all @- Q - would need would be the rulebook and the PDF list and he'd be ready to go. Similarly all he'd need for an earlier edition of Fantasy would be the rulebook and the Lizardmen army book for that edition.
there are many reasons why a discontinued system is good. For example: - no changes every 6 months in rules / abilities. You will never be at risk of unpleasant and unwelcome changes. Especially if you buy 12 ripperdactyls only to have them nerfed to the ground - rules stay the same. you have time to master every commas, no more need to learn a new set of rules or warscrolls, only to forget something important in every single game. And once you start to improve... BAM! rinse and repeat ad nauseam. - Points value won't change every 4 months. You'll know them by memory and making lists will be much easier. there are also downsides, of course: Is your favorite faction low tier? It will remain so, there's no hope for you. Is there something in the core rules you don't like? they will irk you forever.
Conjecture?!!? Let me define it for you: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/conjecture You make it sound like I have no evidence to back up my claim. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on what side you're on), that is not the case. I based my statement on direct evidence straight from the source, Games Workshop: https://www.warhammer-community.com...-the-past-and-future-of-a-stone-cold-classic/ The important bit is: "More about this in the coming weeks, though please note that they won’t be considered legal for tournaments, and won’t receive ongoing support. If you want to come on this long-term journey with us, the factions in the Forces of Fantasy and Ravening Hordes books are the ones to collect and play – and we want to be pretty clear about that" If that is conjecture to you, then what does definite proof/information look like? Does Games Workshop have to bust down your door in the middle of the night armed with assault rifles and steal your legacy army miniatures from you? An example of conjecture would be the narrative you presented on how the Lizardmen might receive updates in the future, despite Games Workshop (the company that owns and produces the game) explicitly stating otherwise. Is it possible that they could change their mind in the future?... it certainly is possible, but at the moment we have no evidence in support of it, and direct evidence opposing it. Hence, your rationale for the legacy armies being brought fully into the fold is based purely (and definitionally) on conjecture. At best I'd replace the term "open-minded" with "hopelessly optimistic" and at worst, with "misinformed". The evidence provided above is ironclad. It may not be what you wish it to be (or even what I'd wish it to be), but it is the undeniable reality of the situation as it currently stands today. @- Q - : as a new member to the forum you won't know this, but @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl and I vehemently disagree on 99.9% of all things. If I say "A", he says "B". If he says "North", I say "South".
@Killer Angel does a good job listing the advantages, I agree with the points he stated above. I would also add, that having a living ruleset also runs the risk of GW axing your faction from the game. Just today, we saw this announced as it pertains to Beasts of Chaos and Bonesplitterz, both of who are being essentially being erased from the game of AoS. In years past we saw the Bretonnians and Tomb Kings relegated to AoS legacy army status. That's true, but in the case of WHFB 8th edition, everything is already know. Someone getting into the game now, can do so fully informed in regards to the core rules as well as their chosen faction. In the case of the Lizardmen for instance, we know them to be a solid mid-tier faction. There is plenty of information on our forum detailing the strength/weakness of each and every aspect of our army book.
That makes sense. I never would have guessed that releases were that frequent. Every 4 months sounds like it would be tough to keep track of. So all things considered, do you prefer a living or discontinued rule set? Do the pros outweigh the cons?
usually for 40k / AoS it's 4 months for points changes, 6 months for rules updated. I personally like a supported rule set, but not with that pace of changes. 1/year should be enough to deal with the issues.
You're right, yearly updates seem much more reasonable. And if you had to choose between the frantic AoS 4/6 month update cycle or a discontinued ruleset, which would you choose? (being trapped between the proverbial rock and a hard place)
Not me. I've got 50 painted and converted Chaos Marauders that I would never field now. And that was in a 4 to 5 year update cycle. 3 times a year sounds horrendous.
They were a staple unit under the 7th edition book but became over-costed and uncompetitive in 8th. It's one of the risks in any update. Units (and armies) can rise and fall in power. It really sucks when significant time is invested in those units. Modern day GW presents even greater risks since they seem perfectly willing to remove units and even entire armies from the game.
It is horrendous, but sometime it is also gives you new toys. A new codex is always exciting. The really bad part is the discontinued models / armies. That's a unforgettable sin
And it's only going to get worse. GW are producing new models at an unsustainable level. I remember being able to go into a GW store back in the day and pick up any model for any of their games, right off the shelf. Now there are online-only models, made to order models, limited edition models and eliminated models/units/armies. It's no surprise really. GW don't make any further money off a model that you've already purchased in the past. Eliminate it and sell something new. Just like how microtransactions plague the video game industry, miniature wargaming (at least those involving GW) will have to suffer with this. At the end of the day it's the consumer base's fault. If they stopped buying GW would change course.
The fact is: consumers' base doesn't have a hive mind. Consumer #1 : i'm tired of follow the releases of AoS, i'm gonna stop buy them. Consumer #2: wow 40k is good but those AoS miniature are fantastic! guess i'lll start fantasy too. Consumer #3: they squatted 80% of my Stormcast models. Yeah, goodbye AoS. Consumer #4: i was tempted to buy some SCE, and wow! look at those new models!
Wargame community is extraordinarily slow to react and lack any sort of unity. It can't be compared to other mediums like movies/tv because in that case, they garner significant backlash because their incessant push of wokeness results in a shitty product. However with GW, their product, the models, are still top notch. It's only their business practices that are extremely shady. The closest approximation I can think of was when CA upped the price of their TW: Warhammer DLC, resulting in a pretty significant and unified backlash. It might be some time until we ever reach that in the wargaming community proper, but then again, everything has a tipping point. The question is, can GW strategically skirt that tipping point without ever falling over?