AoS Age of Sigmar Rumours - Mk II. (Our new name)

Well, Exoatl is better than Waaghkin(seriously?) or Dawikorr, but really the new background sounds like a more boring version of our previous one which got casually retconned out of existence by all that "we had a fleet of space ships all along" nonsense. No sinister manipulations to further the grand plan, no tragic aspect of being stranded and cut off from the original creators of that plan, and left trying to fit it together from a few fragments. None of the historical conflicts with skaven and treasure hunters. Just sitting in the poles guarding the warpgates. In short, nothing of interest, and having unit cards isn't at all the same thing as them being a playable army, in fact the implied persistence of end times characters and units very strongly implies otherwise.

As for the rest, the lack of a movement stat is more than enough indication of the likely quality of the rules.

 

Having now actually read all that... I, uh, um, what? I don't even... I can't. I just can't.

There's some neat ideas in there (on the fluff side), and some stuff that makes me want to heave (on the gameplay side). What's described there is not a miniatures war game. It may be amazingly fun, but it's something new entirely. I don't know what to make of it.

I think I'm done rumormongering for a while. I'm just going to paint, and argue about rules until July. You guys have fun with this

 

I like most things in there. The rules look more streamlined and allow faster game play. Magic is a highly tactical resource. Choosing your patorn god gives some interesting flexibility, if done properly.

Two things I'm most worried about are the possible emphasis on small unit sizes and that one damn sentence: "Then you choose whichever unit you want – from every race." What the fudge? Like I said earlier, I hated the coalitions part of the End of Times. I sold my Tomb Kings partly because I didn't like the thought of being mushed together with the Vampire Counts. Now it would be free-for-all? Guess I'm a total racist as I like my factions segregated.

These rumours make me angsty and nervous.

 

I'm slightly put off by the new rules IF they are true. It seems like a HUGE change game wise. On the other hand we are not squatted which is nice.

This does open up to some exiting new scenery. With the new rules and smaller units, more realistic scenery that doesn't mess upp large unit groups sounds possible. I always wanted to build some sort of temple city for the lizzies.

This set-up with rules for all the units in the core rule book sounds like a gate way drug. If AoS goes well I can see them doing supplements and mini-dexes. A smaller book with rules for a few new units, as we have seen with the new Skitarii, Harlequins etc

In the end I am a more excited than worried about all these news in the end, I guess.

 

I really need to go into paint mode..... Reading all this makes me wonder even more. True it can open up wider choices for environments, I've had some good ideas for scenery sets but gameplay-wise it would be hard to manoeuvre around without cavalry tripping on a pebble.
I really can't wait for release or nearer the time. So much waiting on stuff at the moment.

 

Aaaaah...I'm not havin' it. All round bases? Nope. WAAAAAAY too many models for that. Pick anything you want? Nope. I'm not playing power-gaming, net-listers.

I get that they might have come up with a totally new game, but did you have to destroy the one we loved, GW? If they aren't going to be supporting it anymore, just say so and carry on with this new game. Don't leave me hangin' on a hope that my game may still see improvements.

 

I'm still not totally sure I believe these rumors.

Darnok (a very trustworthy person, IMO) posted this:
Just a few words of warning about those "Dakka rumours": they sound nothing like what I've been told so far. No overlap with things that I have heard about, but lots of things that where not in that. I can not go into more detail, but to me it sounds like somebody either got a lot of things wrong, or stuff has just been made up.

Just take with salt, fellas.

 

How much of these combat rules and mechanics...

...bear vague resemblance to OR are directly copied from The Lord of the Rings Game ??

Question stands whether this turns out to be a hoax or not. Also:

What is "a 1 inch 40k formation without any facing"? I don't play 40K at all, so I don't know that one.

 

There was a great game called Warhammer... this is not it! This is not it!

I can't really judge the new game based on an incomplete set of rumours, but this is definitely not 9th edition. If this turns out to be true, it is a completely different game. It may good, it may be bad, but it is not an edition to edition transition. The question becomes do you want to play a new game?

 

Hey I thought I would chime in as best I could..not a gamer but a painter and collector. There are some stranger rumours to from others claiming at length to have read or seen books relating to AoS and the 9th edition. I just read that in one of the games that things take place in a formless void..where models basically float to attack each other when u move..unless you can fly then u stand a better chance. Oh and it gets weirder or interesting depending on how u look at it..scenery also floats and moves..I assume a building then can float into your model and either kill it or cause an obstacle. Even more odd is that the new game system takes place on round tables..lol and we thought we would get squatted and got worried...now we need round tables to play on. Oh and apparently when you use magic, because you are floating, the power of the spell sends you moving backwards or off into another direction..if your model glides of the table from a spell...that model is destroyed in the void. Like I said I am not a gamer, but the poster of this new info again claimed to have seen a book, and listed a ton of rules,and stats. I will only believe these things when GW makes announcements..until then my lizards are happy and doing well since the end times lol

 

lol, sound like this guy (or gw designers) watched to many Chinese martial arts movies.

 

Yup lol I would not be able to stop laughing if the new gaming system really plays like that video.

 

Where did you read this wackiness?

NVMND. I think I found the dakka-dakka cray-cray (that's whut yew kidz call wackiness, yes?):

SOURCE LINK

 

The new rulebook for AoS only appears to give brief a summary of each faction and the world as a whole (given that the rumours are true), so I wouldn't lay down judgement just yet. I expect further expansion on the fluff will follow with further releases.

This is what I expect, and hope for if the lack of LM content is true.

Well, it does say "legacy" models are allowed to have square bases so it's not as if you'd have to re-base everything. I'm equally unsure about this "un-bounded" gameplay style however. Would rather hope we could avoid cheesey lists as much as possible.

Well, the stat-line intuitively looks the same besides a name change (Melee = WS, Range = BS, Might = Strength, etc.) and the absence of Leadership and Movement. I expect the lack of Ld values could be indicative of the "no more combat resolution". On the one hand I found that combat resolution added an extra layer of depth; something else that could be turned to your advantage or to plan against. However, I understand how dropping it could stream-line the game...

Yes. I would play it. I don't think I could effectively judge a new game system without..well.. playing a few games with it. If anything it's a new way to play. If it turns out to be horrible I still have 8th ed.

Talking about the validity of the rumours themselves, the post was in response to someone who was ostensibly quoting their GW rep. I can't understand why they would contradict their post (explicitly about mixed bases) as I don't see why GW would tell a rep conflicting information less than a month before the big release. I can, however, see confusion between rumour mongers where a) the ability to play very small-scale games could be confused with new skirmish rules, and b) a mixed base system could be confused with round-bases only but where "legacy" bases are allowed.

Also, the poster did say that he only looked at the beginning and end pages with a few in-between (see his post history here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/listByUser/0/96190/6.page). I don't think that's enough to create a cohesive picture or review of any new game system, so I wouldn't be surprised if this turned out to be half-truths.

Lol. This I find hard to believe. I honestly thought you were just making a joke until I discovered this rumour was actually tropsing around Warseer and Dakka. Ugh.

 

However, Waseer might have corroborated this rumour somewhat: