What are you doing today hobbywise?

It's a damaged 3d print recast of an infernal guard champ. I replaced the damaged right hand with a new weapon hand from a chaos marauder, added a 5th edition chaos shield to the left hand and a banner pole to the back, topped off with a chaos standard.

 

Picture?

 

Still mucking about on-again-off-again with the map for my local group to have as our setting. Never actually made a map before... so this is an interesting experience.

Looking at it, and cogitating whether the icons I've used for settlements works, or if it is too much and I should just use circles and stars to mark cities and settlements and the like.



Keep in mind, this isn't a finalised thing, prone to change... But otherwise... What do ya'll think? Remove the faction flags? Change settlements (what I've put on) as something simpler?

Going to alter the font, that's a definite.

Also sorry about how... BIG it is...

 

Looks great to me, by no means too big, and I notice your factions have a bit of a Westerosi theme to them .

Is this a map for a GoT game or another game entirely?

Also, which map-making site did you use? I've used Inkarnate to make some maps and it's pretty good, though a lot of extra textures and map features are locked behind a paywall.

 

XD

By and large? It's going to be my local group's personal slice of Age of Sigmar, set in the Realm of Ghyran, to give us a place where narrative campaigns can actually feel personal to us. BUT... there is nothing to say other rulesets can't be used, particularly if we want to have battles in different scales; One Page Rules or Kings of War or even Fantasy Battles/Old World could be good for depicting more mass rank'n'flank battle.

The Westerosi shields are mostly placeholders... though I might keep a few.

I'm using Nortantis, though while it has some generic settlement markers, I've been placing my markers on manually in a basic image editor. I can't remember what made me pick it over Inkarnate... maybe the fact that it doesn't have a paywall for features? What you download is what you get... I have been looking at Wonderdraft though... sure I'll have to pay for it, but it looks nice to use.

 

At some point. Having some issues with my phone camera.

 

ust assembled some Claws of Karanak, debating what to work on next.

 

I've organized a 10.000 points battle for TOW WHFB 8th edition.

 

Oh I don't know, it's just updated rules... just got a few missing pieces that shall be fixed with due time. Once those missing links are inserted, maybe you'll have a game you'll happily call "9th Edition that has a weird alternate name that I won't use".

Time will tell.



Edit: Wow... that watermark blocking the quote... yeah, I'll not use that one again

 

Unlikely... but theoretically possible I suppose.

There are quite a few missing pieces.

 

It is 9th Edition - that much is obvious. The 'Legacy' factions are perfectly playable with the PDF lists opposite the base lists for the Big 9 in Ravening Hordes and Forces of Fantasy, and I'm still expecting them to eventually turn up with full Arcane Journals and the like later, once the whole political issue with the AoS team has died down - principally because GW would be dumb not to add them all in when they will gradually phase out more and more models for said factions in favour of AoS counterparts. As for missing parts, all it's missing are the more complex Magic Phase (which I'm personally happy to let slide in the aid of speeding up the game... and the new rules for Magic add further tactical complexity to Movement anyway so, if anything, tactical complexity has shifted to different areas of the game rather than declined), the super-spells (which pretty much nobody in the TOW scene misses), step-up (which is admittedly a shame to lose, but the new combination of removing attacks with casualties as per 7th and earlier alongside supporting attacks for infantry returning will be interesting to play out), especially Initiative-biased combats (good riddance to ASF and its re-rolls to Hit), cheesy character building (apart from ridden monsters, though they've been quite rightly toned down with the FAQ) and the much more significant faction imbalance 8th had, down to faction preference bias on GW's part and the End Times.

 

It is in the universe of WHFB. It is in the flavour of WHFB. But it is NOT a 9th edition of WHFB!!...

• almost half (43.8%) of 8th edition armies have not been fully carried over (demoted to legacy status, that GW themselves have directly stated as having no long term viability in the game)
• even certain mainline units (i.e. Skullcrushers, K'daai Destroyers, etc) are missing from the game
• one of the key phases in the game (magic) is pretty much a direct port from AoS, showing no resemblance to the magic phases of WHFB
• it carries a different name (The Old World), which is a direct statement from GW that it is something different and not an edition update

That said, it does share many similarities with previous generations of WHFB, but the gap between 8th and TOW is vast compared to 6th going on 7th or 7th going on 8th. You can't scrap nearly half the armies of the game and just pretend that it is a next edition.

Besides, you don't like 8th edition all that much, so why are you so desperate to link TOW to it?

 

Because a link to 8th is also a link to 7th, is also a link to 6th, etc etc as far back as you need to link it to the previous edition you cared for. Or at least I assume that's the logic

 

That sounds like a reasonable explanation.


The way I see, if one believes in the quality of the game, let it stand on its own merits. As is, it's too much of a deviation to be considered a natural edition change, and as such, any attempt to establish an unnatural link between the two comes off as a bit desperate.

 

May be demoted at this point in time, yes, but still perfectly viable to play as mentioned above (rather than given profiles but no points values as, for example, AoS 'Legends' units had for a long time). It's not as if GW said 'Screw you, we're getting rid of these armies and not including rules for them in TOW full stop'. They're still happy for players to use these factions in fun games at home with these fully-playable and points-costed lists, and all the non-GW tournaments I've seen have also treated these lists quite rightly as legal.

Moreover, GW change their minds all the time with regards to bringing things back, especially when it makes them money as reselling a load of older sculpts has proven to do. They directly stated a long time ago that Squats would never come back to 40K, and yet they've been revived as the Leagues of Votann. I no doubt imagine that they would have stated in 2015/2016 that the Warhammer Fantasy game and world would never see a return to the tabletop after they first brought in AoS and committed to it as one of their 'main games', and yet now it's here as TOW.

The future is absolutely not set in stone, and GW revoke their previous words whenever it suits them, especially with so many players continuing to campaign for these factions to return with the same support as the Big 9 and Cathay - they listened to us before when we wanted Warhammer Fantasy to come back, and it's in everyone's best interests for the 'Legacy' factions to return too... it's a no-brainer.

Though you're keen to try and use this to smear TOW's name, if I were you I'd keep watching and waiting for the very possible chance that I'll be proven right in time .

Said examples of units are Special or Rare choices that didn't even exist in Warhammer Fantasy before 8th Edition, and the Destroyer didn't even get an official model because AoS spoilt Warhammer Forge's party (such as it was... it was still very much a poor cousin to the 40K branch of Forge World). They are the very opposite of "mainline" (even if they were made strong/broken enough to be "mainline" choices in people's army lists). The amount of time those units have existed in Warhammer Fantasy's timeline is negligible (less than the 4 years of 8th Edition's lifespan as they were introduced some way into the Edition's duration, compared to the overall 32 year lifespan of Warhammer Fantasy plus the year and a half that TOW has existed), and they are hardly staples of the Warhammer Fantasy game and setting across its illustrious history. Moreover, in TOW's case this has been more than outweighed by a number of units for many factions from Editions prior to 8th making a return, and with the potential for many more new releases in the future. Different units have come and gone across Warhammer Fantasy's decades of existence, and no doubt that will continue to change.

Again, it's not as if magic has been universally constant throughout Warhammer Fantasy's lifespan - the system you love first began in 6th, remained the same in 7th and was extrapolated and powered-up in 8th, yet the game additionally had the card system in 4th and 5th. I also have a copy of the ancient 3rd Edition rulebook, and a quick look through reveals the Magic system there is not dissimilar to TOW with regards to casting. Wizards in that version of the game had a number of Magic Points that could go up to 12, and reduced in number each time they cast a spell, and casting a spell was simply rolling 2D6 and comparing to the Wizard's Magic point total - if the result was less than or equal to the Wizard's Magic Point total, the spell was cast, otherwise it would fail. Essentially a Leadership test in a way (much like Psychic Powers in proper Editions of 40K funnily enough), just against a decreasing Magic Point stat - and not much different to TOW's 2D6 and comparing the result to the casting value of the spell. Technically, then, TOW's magic has a heritage far older than AoS and does indeed show resemblance to the Magic Phases of at least one Edition of Warhammer Fantasy . Indeed I'm not surprised as some of the new Magic Lores - Elementalism, Necromancy, Battle Magic and Illusion - also come from at least as far back as 3rd Edition.

Not really - given that it's a similar sort of naming convention to Warhammer: The Horus Heresy and Warhammer: Age of Sigmar, I'd say it was more intended purely as a new means to differentiate it from those games that have both emerged fully onto the stage since the End Times (and from GW's desire to rename their company as a whole to just be called 'Warhammer' to increase brand awareness).

And there's the flaw in your thinking - because you're such a big fan of 8th (which is fine of course - if it floats your boat then by all means enjoy it ), you're purely looking at TOW from 8th's point of view. Yes, it's changed a lot of things that make it look a very different game specifically from 8th's perspective, but as @J.Logan correctly pointed out, I'm looking at it from the point of view of the wider legacy of Warhammer Fantasy as a whole. It's the same setting, 9 factions from earlier editions are still very much supported and new ones from elsewhere in the setting are being explored, the vast majority of the ruleset is very much recognisable as Warhammer Fantasy in one form or another, and models are on square bases with the rules still maintaining a healthy focus on rank-and-flank warfare. That's good enough for me to call it 9th Edition, my friend, even though you're so keen to try to convince me it's not (and let's be honest, before you were put off by some of the rules that you specifically weren't a fan of, you were as keen as I was to read the Warhammer Community articles prior to its release and compare and contrast it with earlier Editions of the game, as one could only do for an impending new Edition ).

I certainly wonder if, in the early 2000s, grognards who had loved 4th and 5th Edition Warhammer Fantasy said the same thing about 6th when it came out - a big reinvention of the game from the notorious 'Herohammer' era of 5th through toning down characters and Magic Item accumulation, shifting from the card Magic system to the Power Dice system, a huge aesthetic change from the bright colours and cartoony artwork of the 4th/5th era to the more muted and low-fantasy look that it has largely kept to this day, and no doubt many other alterations (I have to admit I don't have a 4th or 5th rulebook so can't comment on the full range of changes). Hell, GW saw it was such a big Edition change that they released a previous incarnation of 'Ravening Hordes' as the get-you-by army list book that invalidated all the 4th and 5th Edition books that preceded it.

Editions of a game can change more than simply building on what came before it, and if the existing system seems to have not worked out (as 8th seemed to have done in the eyes of many people I've seen on Facebook groups with a far less appreciative attitude toward it than yours), it is perfectly reasonable to assess whether a better approach is to make more drastic changes. As mentioned above 6th Edition seems to have been the previous incarnation of that very concept - and TOW is doing it again. Indeed one could class it as the beginning of the next of the big 'Eras' of the game:

• 1st - 3rd: The era of custom armies featuring random units from many races, non-Wizard characters with Levels, the Magic Point Leadership Test system, the lost stats of Cool, Willpower and Intelligence, the sketchy 80s art styles and no army books
• 4th - 5th: The era of the first boxed games and army books condensing the playable races into specific factions, some races from the previous era being filtered out, bright cartoonish artwork and colour schemes, Goblin Green bases, limited monopose plastic models and the card magic system
• 6th - 8th: The era of the more muted and realistic artwork, brown and red books, the original reinvention of the world into a Low-Magic setting before 8th turned that on its head, a growing number of plastic models, the Power Dice magic system, a few more new armies added, global campaigns and lore advancements (culminating in the End Times )
• TOW/9th onwards: The era of Arcane Journals and army list compendiums, blue books, re-examining a past theatre in lore, some older factions being given more limited support (hopefully temporarily), more new factions added, the 2D6 + Wizard Level/Power Level system and a return to Low-Magic

All the prior eras were brought to an end through a substantial change in the rules, presentation and game design philosophy that GW had at the time, and the previous big game-changers that were 4th and 6th Editions remain just as worthy of the accolade of 'An Edition of Warhammer Fantasy' in your eyes as any other - TOW has done the same thing as these aforementioned Editions have, and thus equally deserves said accolade.

I agree, and I could certainly discuss the merits of TOW by itself quite happily here, though I have a feeling you're not the audience most willing to listen, as of course you've already made your choice of game, as I have mine, and so any attempts to do so would be better done elsewhere in the forum .

I have no desire to link TOW to 8th Edition specifically in any other way than the fact that the former scratches my itch for a fantasy rank-and-flank game better than the latter. I simply wish to link it as another chapter in Warhammer Fantasy's overall story, an honestly quite natural desire that many others out in the world share now that TOW has revived the game, in comparison to your quite frankly desperate wish to try and convince others to play 8th instead of TOW and stem the flow of water into the sinking ship - you're the one using bold text and exclamations, an indicator of emotion potentially linked to desperation, not I :