Loving the people upset about warhammer AOS

[Xaric]

Sorry people tzeentch said "lets change things up a bit" so anyway why are people so upset about the change's to use words like "this is not warhammer or this is not 9th edition its a new game... get over yourself this is 9th edition things change embrace or leave it helps us daemon players out a lot if its true about the round base's but what interest's me personally is these battle scrolls does that mean army books are going to be a lot smaller and cheaper? also the formation thing and alliance is more fluffy and I do enjoy themed and narrative games.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

There probably won't be army books as such anymore. I suspect - I have no evidence - that there'll be faction/narrative sourcebooks from here on out, a la End Times (but hopefully cheaper!) with a mix of rules (which will be in model boxes anyway), background, scenarios and storylines. Perhaps that's wishful thinking from me; it's what I hope they do.

[Xaric]

From my personal observation's the source books (rule book and faction book) will contain the following Fluff the art section and core rules that defines that army to be used in conjunction with the battle scrolls.

This gives us the benefit of possible future of loads of new models due to the model rules coming with the models no more huge tome to carry around with you also on that note no need to flip page's in the book to find the rules and stat lines of the models themselves also using the battle scroll as a sort of bookmark in the core rule book for rules that are hard to remember.

Downside is to get rules for the model you own you need to buy a new model unless GW are going to be nice about it and give rules to those who do infact own the models.

[odinsgrandson]

Word is, GW are going to be nice and give rules out for free for "all existing models."


People are upset (I feel legitimately) because the new game does not seem to resemble the game GW is replacing.

[40kGamer]

Word is, GW are going to be nice and give rules out for free for "all existing models."


People are upset (I feel legitimately) because the new game does not seem to resemble the game GW is replacing.

Absolutely... plus most people hate surprises like this too. GW communication is awful.

I also expect GW will make major changes to the model designs as they update/revisit armies. I doubt their IP police are going to stop with the silly names.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

It's not just "word is", it's confirmed in this week's White Dwarf. All rules for all existing models are going to be available on the GW website in their new form.

[Morgrim]

I am irritated because it looks like the army I play - aztec inspired dinosaurs with an interesting lore - is no longer around. Oh, sure, there are vague hints of reptilian mercenaries. But that's not the same. That's gutting the bits I liked and leaving the boring bits in.

I'm not going to make any judgements until I see the rules, but I don't feel that completely cancelling one game (WFB) after saying for months that it would not be cancelled is very honest. No, making an entirely new game that generously allows you to use pre-existing models does not count, it's still GW lying and we're still allowed to be miffed.

[BananaDynasty]

Word is, GW are going to be nice and give rules out for free for "all existing models."


People are upset (I feel legitimately) because the new game does not seem to resemble the game GW is replacing.

Should I consider myself odd that I found the previous edition of fantasy extremely boring? I can't be the only one.

[RGilbert26]

I'm loving the new game and the silly rules that are with some of the units. I'm also finding it very funny that people are rage quitting over AoS.

There's a guy at my local GW who essentially had a big strop over AoS and what did the Manager do? During his lunch break he went and bought the guy a Sympathy card :P

[Theik]

How is the new ghetto lore about aelfs and steamwork duardin (or something?) more fluffy than the old fantasy setting, which didn't look like somebody let a 7 year old child loose with a few extra letters for copyright purposes?