Saturday, August 1, 2015

The Sinister Secret of Sigmar

So I have been thinking about Age of Sigmar so more.  I have seen some more reviews by people and it seems to me that the people who appear to like it are 40K players looking for a simpler change of pace from that.  It is not that 40K is really overally complex, it is more that they are just piles and piles of special rules on special rules. Sigmar is really just 40K stripped down to the bare basics and pushed onto the existing fantasy range.  Other than measuring to the models which is really makes things way more complicated if actually done, the rules are fine for having something to do with your models.  The core rules certainly do not have much replay value, though.

What about the warscrolls?  This is were all the depth of the game is as every warscroll has 2 or more special rules.  All the shields do different things, I am not sure but it also seems like banners, musicians, and unit leaders are not uniform in their effects.  The special rules are better structured than 40k and most of them link up directly to a core mechanic so giant FAQs probably will not be needed.  So this is not good or bad just one way of building a ruleset in a general sense, but it is the best way for GW to build a ruleset.

GW is and has been for a long time a Models first company.  The rules are to support the purchase of the models not to allow you to play the game.  A core game that is tactically deep with lots of options in the rules provides lots of different play experiences for a single configuration of an army.  Age of Sigmar is certainly not that.  All the differences come from fielding different models.  So for the game to have continued play value you pretty much have to constantly buy more models or it will get pretty same old same old fast.

You can see this in the new Paladins which can be made into 3 different and distinct units.  Essentially the same unit with different weapon special rules but the weapons restrict to different units.  No mixing and matching.  One weapon is awesome against monsters allowing a single model to generate like 3d6 wounds.  Another is awesome against hordes where the model can attack each opponent model within 2 inches (remember this is model to model so that long axe sticking out the side might allow you to hit 2 or 3 extra guys compared to the base).  The last one deals Mortal wounds when hitting on a 6.  Each of these are good for very different occasions but the beauty of AoS is that without lists/points and advantages for deploying fewer models and units if you own all three you only deploy the one or two that matches the opponents forces.  Clear Pay to Win advantage.  Ofcourse AoS is not about winning but having fun so no one would do this type of thing right.  It is just good to have options, but you have to pay for them just like GW wants.


  1. These are all very good points. >_>;

    I think you're right, and that AoS is not intended for children at all. It's more like the ultimate cash grab, where instead of balancing custom forces with point values and random scenarios you are expected to pay $75 every month for new scenarios, along with new models to use in them.

    I'm not sure how much variety there is to the game outside of doing that. Anyone can write their own scenarios or come up with their own ways of balancing them, but the game itself gives you zero help with this. You're on your own unless you buy more stuff.

    1. I have not seen any of the per made book missions. Is there a lot of take this battalion vs that battalion in it. I personally think X-wing could use a lot more of those type of missions.