PDA

View Full Version : Welcome to the World of the Trewi, or, as we humans like to call them: Sylvan Elves!



9thWarrior
17-05-2016, 20:46
Welcome to the World of the Trewi, or, as we humans like to call them: the Sylvan Elves!
With great pride Fantasy Battles: The 9th Age presents to you the release of the Sylvan Elves Armybook.

An account by Thomas the Bard
By the hand of Mathys Dufour
Commissioned by Duke Regnaut of Aven

Repeatedly asked by the young of our great court to recount my tales, I have burdened my old age with the task of recording them for posterity, so they may live when I am gone. This I do to repay the kindness DukeRegnaut has shown me these long years. You may have heard songs, you may have heard stories and you may know the legends of the woodland fey, who dwell in hidden groves beyond the reach of men. A veil of mystery lies upon them from the frozen taiga of Oskland, through the dry shrublands of Arcalea, to the steaming jungles of Taphria. What testimonies exist are mired in superstition and fear, for glamours lie on the elven lands, and but a simple whisper of the horned hunters can drive a common man insane. So hearken closely to these words and doubt not their truth for they recount what I have seen. To that I swear by all the gods.

Please read on here (http://pdf.the-ninth-age.com/pdf/the-ninth-age_Sylvan_Elves_Army_Book_1-0-0.pdf)

227798

To our Background & Arts team: sometimes words are inadequate - you guys are amazing!

Asmodios
17-05-2016, 20:54
It looks amazing. The 9th age team continues to impress and i can't wait for the edition of more books. Going to have to spend some time after work tonight fully enjoying the book.

Zywus
17-05-2016, 21:45
Looks very professional.

Truly some amazing looking stuff being churned out by the 9th age crew.

2DSick
17-05-2016, 22:54
well that was a good read. BZ

theunwantedbeing
17-05-2016, 23:06
I wish they'de separate the special rules into rider & mount rather than tacking on a bracketed rider/mount only term.
Also it helps not to split the rules up across lines.

Not a huge fan of the artwork either, but it's fanstuff at least, even if one or two of them just seem to be edited versions of the GW wood elf artwork.

Also how do I pronounce Trewi?
Treh-wee?
Treh-why?
Tree-wee?
Tree-why?

It's as good as the Undying Dynasty book.

Giladisb
17-05-2016, 23:12
Not a huge fan of the artwork either, but it's fanstuff at least, even if one or two of them just seem to be edited versions of the GW wood elf artwork.


Can you please point out which ones since our artists did all the artwork from scratch :)



Also how do I pronounce Trewi?
Treh-wee?
Treh-why?
Tree-wee?
Tree-why?

It's as good as the Undying Dynasty book.


"Trewi is natively pronounced with short vowels. This is something English speakers will always struggle with, since English doesn't allow short rounded vowels, only short unrounded or long rounded, which is a distinction most language don't make."

So for those familiar with the phonetic alphabeth we have included how the Sylvan Elves name is spoken - /tre'wi/

For those not familiar with phonetic transcription, the best approximation for English speakers is "tre" as in "trek" followed by "we", like the pronoun. This will vary a little by dialect, but should be close enough for most people. Those whose native language is not English will probably have an easier time figuring it out - but the specifics will differ by language. For most Europeans, "Tre-ui" might be a better approximation."


Cheers

theunwantedbeing
18-05-2016, 00:00
Can you please point out which ones since our artists did all the artwork from scratch :)

Seems it's just the one image that I can find an obvious "influence" for coming from a GW image.

Page 12
Looks like they copied the image from the 6th ed wood elf book page 30.
The woman on the left isn't mounted but the positioning on both is virtually the same, clear inspiration in my opinion.

Page 5
I really like this map although it might be nicked from somewhere but I can't recall where, it could just be that it's a very visually similar thing to tolkein maps

The final piece on page 62 looks completely out of place as it's a totally different tone to the surrounding pages and the guy looks more like a chaos barbarian than an elf.


Cheers

Treh-wee it is :)
Certainly makes me interested to see what they come up with for the other elves.

Smooth Boy
18-05-2016, 00:31
This is even better than the Tomb Kings and that was to a very high standard. Very impressed.

Kakapo42
18-05-2016, 00:43
Hrrrrrrrrrmmmmmmm...

It's certainly a product of much effort and deserving of complement because of that, but I'm still not convinced. Even taking aside the continued lack of a Lore of Athel Loren analogue (one spell does not a unique spell lore make), I still keep thinking to myself "No, I like how Warhammer and the 6th edition Wood Elf book do that better" and overall it still feels too much like the accursed 8th edition Wood Elf book for my tastes.

The artwork doesn't help either. As great as it is (and it is very good), it's too colourful for my liking. I don't like colour artwork in tabletop books, I never liked it in... well, any of the GW books released in the last three or four years really, and I don't like it here. But that's very much my thing.

KariP
18-05-2016, 02:00
I'm very impressed, good work! I cant wait for KoE (Bretonnia) book :)
The warhammer community here is looking at 9th age now and people want to try it (as 8th and AoS are totally dead) and I have high hopes for it.

The bearded one
18-05-2016, 02:40
It looks very professional, I'm really impressed with the quality - there's some very nice artwork in there!

doomspittle
18-05-2016, 08:29
Looks amazing fair play, hopefully be getting my first game in this weekend. Well done.

StygianBeach
18-05-2016, 10:06
Some nice work there, the art is great the story writing is good, a few too many special upgrades for my tastes, but overall an amazing achievement.

Vazalaar
18-05-2016, 16:25
Impressive work and very professional!

Immortus
18-05-2016, 16:40
Looks awesome! saved it for a good read tonight :D

Niall78
18-05-2016, 16:41
Looks fantastic. Hats off to the 9th Age team and all the players putting in the ground work.

As a gamer it is heartening seeing these books rising from the wreckage of WFB - all created by WFB fans.

Giladisb
18-05-2016, 18:37
Page 5
I really like this map although it might be nicked from somewhere but I can't recall where, it could just be that it's a very visually similar thing to tolkein maps

This one was hand drawn with pencil, then scanned and retouched a bit by the editing team as we tried to make it as if the map was made by the author himself.


The final piece on page 62 looks completely out of place as it's a totally different tone to the surrounding pages and the guy looks more like a chaos barbarian than an elf.


It was partially intended to make him feel a bit out of place since this is the dreaded Forest King, with one hoof in this world and with the other in the veiled one.


Cheers :)

Ayin
19-05-2016, 14:25
Hrrrrrrrrrmmmmmmm...

It's certainly a product of much effort and deserving of complement because of that, but I'm still not convinced. Even taking aside the continued lack of a Lore of Athel Loren analogue (one spell does not a unique spell lore make), I still keep thinking to myself "No, I like how Warhammer and the 6th edition Wood Elf book do that better" and overall it still feels too much like the accursed 8th edition Wood Elf book for my tastes.

The artwork doesn't help either. As great as it is (and it is very good), it's too colourful for my liking. I don't like colour artwork in tabletop books, I never liked it in... well, any of the GW books released in the last three or four years really, and I don't like it here. But that's very much my thing.

If you don't like the Gaelic/tribal style and prefer Tolkien Wood Elves, and you don't like colour in pictures, a book with colour pictures about a tribal group of elves is not going to be something you enjoy.

Kakapo42
19-05-2016, 14:41
If you don't like the Gaelic/tribal style and prefer Tolkien Wood Elves, and you don't like colour in pictures, a book with colour pictures about a tribal group of elves is not going to be something you enjoy.

Actually I'm not fond of the Tolkien ones either. The Celtic/Faerie style Wood Elves from 6th/7th edition era Warhammer Fantasy (and the 6th edition army book's beautiful black-and-white sketch style illustrations) are where it's at for me. :cool:

It's still a stand-out effort though, just not really my kind of thing.

Buddy Bear
19-05-2016, 19:25
Out of curiosity, which armies have backgrounds currently being worked on?

Ayin
19-05-2016, 21:54
Actually I'm not fond of the Tolkien ones either. The Celtic/Faerie style Wood Elves from 6th/7th edition era Warhammer Fantasy (and the 6th edition army book's beautiful black-and-white sketch style illustrations) are where it's at for me.

I don't understand what about the artwork you don't like though, with the exception that some of it is in colour.

Giladisb
19-05-2016, 22:32
Out of curiosity, which armies have backgrounds currently being worked on?

All, as well as background of things that do not have armies to represent them since the next document the B&A Team will release is going to be the background section of the Rulebook.

Ayin
19-05-2016, 23:44
I'm very happy to hear that the rulebook is the next part to be done.

Having a strongly established and well developed core that gives all factions some level of description is incredibly important.

Khaines Wrath
20-05-2016, 03:16
While I don't have a huge amount of interest for 9th age, not for lack of quality Im just planning on sticking with older warhammer editions, the team behind this should be commended.

- the layout is excellent.
- the art is gorgeous.
- the fluffy sections are fun and characterful.

It really is a brilliant job and I wish you all the best with the game, I look forward to seeing my other favourite Ogre Kingdoms come to life.

Kingrick
21-05-2016, 16:40
Hrrrrrrrrrmmmmmmm...

It's certainly a product of much effort and deserving of complement because of that, but I'm still not convinced. Even taking aside the continued lack of a Lore of Athel Loren analogue (one spell does not a unique spell lore make), I still keep thinking to myself "No, I like how Warhammer and the 6th edition Wood Elf book do that better" and overall it still feels too much like the accursed 8th edition Wood Elf book for my tastes.

The artwork doesn't help either. As great as it is (and it is very good), it's too colourful for my liking. I don't like colour artwork in tabletop books, I never liked it in... well, any of the GW books released in the last three or four years really, and I don't like it here. But that's very much my thing.

it does have some of the 8th edition feel, but also they brought back much of the 6th edition feel as well. I think some of the upgrades allow your archers to be exactly what they were in 6th, the forest spirits are back to what they should be, and overall a lot of the options seem worth considering.

Spiney Norman
21-05-2016, 19:30
So what happened to Orion, Araloth, Drycha and Durthu?

Do you know how long I have been waiting for a set of rules that actually made Orion playable?

The kindreds are an interesting idea (reclaimed from 6th Ed right?) but if they wanted to go down that path I'm curious why they didn't go the whole hog and introduce new kindreds for the new troop types that have been added since 6th (wild wood Rangers, sisters of the thorn), it just feels incomplete to leave them out.

I think overall I actually prefer the separate character types in the 8th edition book for the shadow weaver and way stalker, it allowed them to be more tailored to fit the roll, especially in the case of the shadow weaver's access to shadow magic made him feel more than just a regular noble with tagged-on special rules. It's slightly annoying that the chieftain blade dancer has the same WS as the basic blade dancer troops for example, characters generally have better WS stats than their basic equivalents.

It seems like it would have been easier to add a 'priest of kurnous' hero character for the Wild rider theme than bring back the old kindreds system IMO since that seems to be the only difference (other than the shape-shifter which I don't really get at all).

Kingrick
21-05-2016, 20:48
as far as we are told characters will be in the future. The treeman lord represents Durthu quite well, unfortunately nothing to represent Orion right now, or Ariel. I would think even adding in a kindred that changed base size/stats to represent them would work okay.

Buddy Bear
21-05-2016, 20:51
I say rename Orion and Ariel to Oberon and Titania.

Teurastaja
21-05-2016, 21:38
This book is great. To be honest I'd gladly pay for it.
Stunning artwork, fun rules and interesting background. The 9th Age Team is doing amazing work.

Spiney Norman
22-05-2016, 00:06
I say rename Orion and Ariel to Oberon and Titania.

Haha, that's a great idea, I don't think Mr Shakespeare is going to pop up and claim that his characters have been infringed ;)

Giladisb
22-05-2016, 14:57
...

If you look through the book Forest King and Queen have new names :)

Geep
22-05-2016, 15:12
Do you know how long I have been waiting for a set of rules that actually made Orion playable?

I relate to this one all too well :( I remember back in 4th/5th when things tended to be character heavy, and even then Orion couldn't really stand up to the 'little guys' (even a regular tooled-up General could beat him).


I think overall I actually prefer the separate character types in the 8th edition book for the shadow weaver and way stalker, it allowed them to be more tailored to fit the roll, especially in the case of the shadow weaver's access to shadow magic made him feel more than just a regular noble with tagged-on special rules. It's slightly annoying that the chieftain blade dancer has the same WS as the basic blade dancer troops for example, characters generally have better WS stats than their basic equivalents.
I always liked the Kindred system of the 6th ed book, but you bring up good points. The book would get quite inflated though if you added in too many characters as their own entry (and you'd presumably want Lord and Hero levels for every character variant).


(other than the shape-shifter which I don't really get at all)
This guy's a throwback to really old Wood Elf beastmasters I believe (which only made it into 4th edition as the special characters Skaw and Gruarth. I was very happy to see them back in 6th, and it's great they're here too- though I'd prefer if they went 'full beastmaster' again and acted as the leader for a unit of bears, boars, hounds, wild cats or some similar animals.

Overall I think this book is excellent work- though I do prefer the core rules of 6th/7th, so probably won't be playing with it.

Spiney Norman
22-05-2016, 18:05
I always liked the Kindred system of the 6th ed book, but you bring up good points. The book would get quite inflated though if you added in too many characters as their own entry (and you'd presumably want Lord and Hero levels for every character variant).

I'd personally settle for a hero version each for wild riders, wardancers and Waywatchers, and make do, the 'defender' kindred looks particularly out of place in the 9A book anyway, it's obviously designed to mimic the eternal kindred despite eternal guard having lost their flavourful rules and been nerfed down to basic-elf-with-spear in the 9A book.

Going back to kindreds feels like a bit of a step back to me, because it's really just tagging a few special rules on to a basic noble, but then I really only started wood elves with the 8E book and it feels quite different to that book, as though the person(s) who wrote it didn't like what GW did with the army and wanted to regress it.


If you look through the book Forest King and Queen have new names :)
A pity they didn't also get new profiles ;)

Giladisb
22-05-2016, 21:12
All in due time :)

Kingrick
23-05-2016, 17:07
Just because kindreds is a rule from 6th doesn't make it a worse rule, I think it works fine, just as good as having multiple heroes really. They are just different ways of representing them.

morvaeldd
23-05-2016, 19:05
I wish there would be a consistent and complete model line for T9A to accompany army book release.

theunwantedbeing
23-05-2016, 22:55
Just because kindreds is a rule from 6th doesn't make it a worse rule, I think it works fine, just as good as having multiple heroes really. They are just different ways of representing them.

Going off the way T9A has tried very hard to condense things into a single entry where possible it makes sense to have kindreds not be separate characters.
It also stops character spam which is something they've tried to cut down on.



Now for a few negatives about the Sylvan Elves.

I'm not a fan of the long list of options they've given, it's a layout issue and it comes off as unprofessional.
It works nicely for things like the Treefather Ancient but that's because the long list of options is a centred and separate box.
Even that isn't without it's faults as it says "may take" before each option which is completely unnecessary, which it does across all unit entries.

I'm also not a fan of how they've not separated mount and rider special rules into their own categories, instead resorting to stating (mount only) or (rider only) after each rule which looks very sloppy in my opinion.

They've also not alphabetised the rules or made sure they fit without being split up across lines, again it's sloppy.

Also Sylvan Archers have 0-50 entry (Black Arrows) costed per model in a unit, despite the unit only containing at most 30 models.

The Undying Legion book also suffered the same layout issues.

SuperHappyTime
24-05-2016, 03:30
From the harshest of T9A's fluff critics:
Like the army book, the professionalism and artwork are great.
Love that we are finally getting fluff for T9A.
Dislike that it's taken so long to get only this far.
Loathe that it's again another "From ______'s perspective" and includes no general history lesson.

But it's a start.

Giladisb
24-05-2016, 14:38
Loathe that it's again another "From ______'s perspective" and includes no general history lesson.


T9A Background will not include God Perspective writing and all narratives will be done from the human point of view as writers are human. They will not try to go into the mind of an elf, orc or saurian since we cannot know their thought processes and views on things.

Also background is presented from the point of an unreliable narrator in order to provide the framework of the setting that individual players can then model and shape to their liking.

Maybe at some point in the future (4+ years at least) the approach gets changed but for now that is the path we have chosen.

Arrahed
24-05-2016, 15:26
Also Sylvan Archers have 0-50 entry (Black Arrows) costed per model in a unit, despite the unit only containing at most 30 models.


The 0--50 limitation is a unit spanning cap. You cannot take two units of 30 archers equipped with Black Arrows but you can take two units of 25 archers and then two more units of archers without Black Arrows.

theunwantedbeing
24-05-2016, 16:04
The 0--50 limitation is a unit spanning cap. You cannot take two units of 30 archers equipped with Black Arrows but you can take two units of 25 archers and then two more units of archers without Black Arrows.

And people say Age of Sigmar has stupid rules. :rolleyes:

Zywus
24-05-2016, 18:53
And people say Age of Sigmar has stupid rules. :rolleyes:
As long as T9A stay away from having people measure their beards and insulting each other for bonuses. Or give extra victory conditions to help 6 Nagash's when they face 10 goblins, I think T9A will manage to keep their lead in the rules quality department :p

Buddy Bear
24-05-2016, 21:55
As long as T9A stay away from having people measure their beards and insulting each other for bonuses. Or give extra victory conditions to help 6 Nagash's when they face 10 goblins, I think T9A will manage to keep their lead in the rules quality department :p

That's unfair. Maybe the goblins are members of a tribe which hunt Nagash's?

Zywus
25-05-2016, 00:10
That's unfair. Maybe the goblins are members of a tribe which hunt Nagash's?
I stand corrected. After all; a "device capture/bring down" a Nagash is no impossibility, right?

GrandmasterWang
25-05-2016, 11:32
I stand corrected. After all; a "device capture/bring down" a Nagash is no impossibility, right?
Where is the Black Gem of Gnar when you need it ?

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

andjo327
25-05-2016, 11:51
Or give extra victory conditions to help 6 Nagash's when they face 10 goblins

I have read this comment a few times. Have anyone seen this? Would be cool if any one have some pictures. I would love to see how the Nagash army is painted, I have never seen more than one Nagash on the table at the same time.

andjo327
25-05-2016, 11:57
Or is it just theoretical like you could stare att you opponent without moving until he gives up and you get a walkover.

I would love to see a painted 6 Nagash army though.

Zywus
25-05-2016, 12:49
I have read this comment a few times. Have anyone seen this? Would be cool if any one have some pictures. I would love to see how the Nagash army is painted, I have never seen more than one Nagash on the table at the same time.
Well, then your community clearly isn't taking full advantage of the freedom graciously given to you by GW. The reason few people own more than one Nagash is presumably because the WHFB straight-jacket dissallowed using more than one of a special character at the same time. Thankfully, I believe it's reiterated in the AoS FaQ that you are indeed not limited to one Nagash or one of anyone else, so there shouldn't be any complaints if you bring the Nagash team out to play.

I think a good color scheme for the Nagash army would be to have each one in a primary color, plus green, black etc. Like the power rangers.

andjo327
25-05-2016, 12:58
I believe it's reiterated in the AoS FaQ that you are indeed not limited to one Nagash or one of anyone else, so there shouldn't be any complaints if you bring the Nagash team out to play.

I don't know people have a tendency to complain about GW and make up their own rules, but that's fine and part of the game. I would love to play againts 6 Nagashes if I could borrow a few armies and have a suitable large gaming table.

Zywus
25-05-2016, 13:10
I don't know people have a tendency to complain about GW and make up their own rules, but that's fine and part of the game. I would love to play againts 6 Nagashes if I could borrow a few armies and have a suitable large gaming table.
It's indeed quite common for people to complain about opponents bringing "cheesy" and "spammy" armies even though the rules allow such armies to be fielded (it sometimes happens even when people are playing AoS).

I'm afraid we have veered quite a bit off-topic though so I guess we should end the tangent here. I do wish you luck in your endeavors of playing the Nagash gang.

theunwantedbeing
25-05-2016, 18:06
Yeah to get it back on topic.

Why are the special rules grouped into multiple groups?
eg.
Wild Huntsmen
You have
Elves Special Rules
Forest Walker (Rider only), Lightning
Reflexes (Rider only)
Which presumably are only for the elf and not his mount, but both the special rules have the (rider only) limitation on them, why?
There's also a layout screwup where Lightning Reflexes is split up over two lines, why?
Then you have
Special Rules
Light Troops, Frenzy, Ward Save (6+),
Devastating Charge (Rider only)
Which we'de assume are the general rules.
However this has one which is (rider only)
Does this mean the mount has Frenzy? I guess it does.

Why can't the rules be
Rider special rules
Forest Walker, Lightning Reflexes,
Light Troops, Frenzy, Ward Save (6+),
Devastating Charge
Mount special rules
Light Troops, Frenzy, Ward Save (6+)

No more (XXXX only) stuff, everything is clearer and not split up.

Giladisb
25-05-2016, 22:14
It was a decision done by the Layout Team. The exact reason I have not asked them, but I believe it has something to do with removing needless repetition where possible.

theunwantedbeing
25-05-2016, 23:25
It was a decision done by the Layout Team. The exact reason I have not asked them, but I believe it has something to do with removing needless repetition where possible.

And the reason for having some special rules cut in half across more than one line?

eg.
Forest Walker (rider only), Lightning
Reflexes (rider only)

Rather than

Forest Walker (rider only),
Lightning Reflexes (rider only)

Soundwave
26-05-2016, 05:12
And the reason for having some special rules cut in half across more than one line?

eg.
Forest Walker (rider only), Lightning
Reflexes (rider only)

Rather than

Forest Walker (rider only),
Lightning Reflexes (rider only)

It is the first attempt, geeez you are a ball breaker! Maybe next time round it will clean up a little better. I find it clear and concise, far more than the poorly written books of olde, wouldn't you agree?

Whirlwind
26-05-2016, 08:55
It is the first attempt, geeez you are a ball breaker! Maybe next time round it will clean up a little better. I find it clear and concise, far more than the poorly written books of olde, wouldn't you agree?

Yes I'd agree with this. We have to remember that 9th has been built up by some dedicated community members almost certainly around other elements of their life. It is not like they are asking for payment or profit and have done it out of the love of the hobby of mass ranked fantasy battles. To criticise needlessly on formatting issues seems a tad pedantic. Emailing them and highlighting the issues would be more helpful and I am sure they would be happy for your help.

Soundwave
26-05-2016, 10:07
Yes I'd agree with this. We have to remember that 9th has been built up by some dedicated community members almost certainly around other elements of their life. It is not like they are asking for payment or profit and have done it out of the love of the hobby of mass ranked fantasy battles. To criticise needlessly on formatting issues seems a tad pedantic. Emailing them and highlighting the issues would be more helpful and I am sure they would be happy for your help.

Indeed. I also must point out what an achievement the 9th age crew has pulled off. All the books(well little ones at least ;) .), rules and all the spells launched, battle tested and ready within a year? WOW.
Kinda irritates me when I see words like "finally" in reference to the project. It was a massive task and somehow it is complete and also ready to evolve from a solid base. Pretty amazing really.

Yowzo
26-05-2016, 10:54
Why can't the rules be
Rider special rules
Forest Walker, Lightning Reflexes,
Light Troops, Frenzy, Ward Save (6+),
Devastating Charge
Mount special rules
Light Troops, Frenzy, Ward Save (6+)

No more (XXXX only) stuff, everything is clearer and not split up.

So you propose duplicating every shared rule? Is (rider only) that much of an eyesore? The current approach takes less space, which is good in my book.

Also, probably you will remember the mess 8th had with special rules and mounts (endless discussions about MoK working on mounts or not). This way leaves no room for interpretation. If a mounted model has a rule, then all parts have it unless otherwise noted.

Having rules over split lines I agree should be corrected (space permitting).

Little Joe
26-05-2016, 12:15
Well, I for one am very happy. I don't need everything right now and really appreciate the tremendous effort put into this project.

It is more than many of us hoped for. It is ongoing effort at a crazy speed in adding content. These rules are actually playtested and by setting up a structure for reference and feedback I have full confidence in this transparent project. It is all open source should be.

As to this specific army book:
I found the storytelling nicely consistent, and I really like it being an account from a human perspective that is unreliable.
Army options are all valid and it is easy to build very different armies from one book.
There is a lot to choose from while at the same time it is condensed.
Great artwork to drive imagination.

And for the future? I think we are on to a winner here.

EDIT: Are there points I disagree on or possibilities I think missed? Sure, but let's stay realistic here. This is a whole reinvention of a gaming system within a year! Would it not be boring if we all agreed, discourse ensures future development. It's all part of the process.

Evil Hypnotist
26-05-2016, 13:22
From first look this looks excellent, a fantastic effort from people who have volunteered their time to make something for the community (something I think the detractors really should bear in mind).

My Army of the Oaken Crown is gathering, may the younger races tremble before it!

Chalaceador
26-05-2016, 13:34
Mine is also gathering...

sephiroth87
26-05-2016, 14:01
Once again, the artists and writers deserve congratulations. This is really nice.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

theunwantedbeing
26-05-2016, 19:49
So you propose duplicating every shared rule?
Is (rider only) that much of an eyesore?
Yes and yes.


The current approach takes less space, which is good in my book.
For my approach with each of the mounted units....
Wild Huntsmen - same number of lines required
Heath Riders - same number of lines required
Kestrel Knights - one less line required
Briar Maidens - same number of lines required


Also, probably you will remember the mess 8th had with special rules and mounts (endless discussions about MoK working on mounts or not). This way leaves no room for interpretation. If a mounted model has a rule, then all parts have it unless otherwise noted.
My way doesn't leave any room for interpretation either.


Having rules over split lines I agree should be corrected (space permitting).
If space doesn't allow for it then space needs to be found for it.

The actual fluff text suffers the same splitting issue.
Using the Epilogue as a particularly bad example.
The first two lines have words split and there are a further 3 on the same page.
There are 3 more on the next page and 9 more on the page after, with 3 of them being consecutive.


The effort put into the images, text and rules are fine and should be applauded.
But the formatting is lazy and the same effort has clearly not been made in that area.

Yowzo
27-05-2016, 08:55
Yes and yes.


For my approach with each of the mounted units....
Wild Huntsmen - same number of lines required
Heath Riders - same number of lines required
Kestrel Knights - one less line required
Briar Maidens - same number of lines required

Let's agree to disagree. To me it looks more streamlined to have a single special rules section rather than rider rules then mount rules. Add in spacing, and formatting and would take up too much space (or else look cluttered).

theunwantedbeing
27-05-2016, 10:06
Let's agree to disagree. To me it looks more streamlined to have a single special rules section rather than rider rules then mount rules. Add in spacing, and formatting and would take up too much space (or else look cluttered).

Respectfully, I don't think you have any idea what I'm talking about.

Yowzo
27-05-2016, 10:19
Respectfully, I don't think you have any idea what I'm talking about.

Rather the opposite. The wording needs to be consistent among books. Take WoC, for example.

Crusher Knights

Special rules
Chosen of the Gods (rider only), Magical attacks (crusher only), Fear

Under your model should look like:

Rider rules
Chosen of the gods, Fear

Mount rules
Magical attacks, Fear

Which, again, to me, looks cluttered and needlessly adds space.

Greyshadow
27-05-2016, 12:45
That is incredible work! I am astounded at what you have been able to achieve in terms of quality. This is really, really making me want to make the switch to 9th Age! Well done to all involved!

theunwantedbeing
27-05-2016, 12:51
Rather the opposite. The wording needs to be consistent among books. Take WoC, for example.

Crusher Knights

Special rules
Chosen of the Gods (rider only), Magical attacks
(crusher only), Fear

Under your model should look like:

Rider rules
Chosen of the gods, Fear

Mount rules
Magical attacks, Fear

Which, again, to me, looks cluttered and needlessly adds space.

I see, you do understand and I was just not following that you were meaning more than just the Sylvan Elves rules.
However,
You're skipping the whole "alliance" part of the WoC rules.
That would be integrated so it needs to be included to fairly compare the two.

Alliance:
Mark of True Chaos (Rider only)

Special rules:
Chosen of the Gods (rider only),
Magical attacks (crusher only), Fear

That's a total of 6 lines on the page, two of which are titles and one is a space between the two.
Mine would then be.....

Rider rules
Mark of True Chaos, Chosen of the gods, Fear

Mount rules
Magical attacks, Fear

That's a total of 5 lines on the page, two of which are titles and one is a space between the two.
One less line for my method, less repetition of terms and I'de argue it looks a lot clearer.

Yowzo
27-05-2016, 13:15
That's a total of 5 lines on the page, two of which are titles and one is a space between the two.
One less line for my method, less repetition of terms and I'de argue it looks a lot clearer.

Again: it needs to work for all armies like Empire DGK who don't have any racial rules and have mount only rules, or lizard raptor riders, and so on.

These are the sort of things that need to be consistent across books. It's OK if you don't like it but it's crystal clear which rules apply to each part.

theunwantedbeing
27-05-2016, 18:01
Again: it needs to work for all armies like Empire DGK who don't have any racial rules and have mount only rules, or lizard raptor riders, and so on.
And it does.


These are the sort of things that need to be consistent across books. It's OK if you don't like it but it's crystal clear which rules apply to each part.
I'de argue the rules aren't crystal clear.

Take the Saurian Ancients Taurosaur.
It lists Immune to Psychology, Stubborn and Impact hits(D6 +1) all as rules for the entire model.
So that means the skink riders (all 5 of them) get a bunch of impact hits each!
To be sure, we check the core rules for impact hits.
Ah, there's a bit saying it only applies to the mount.

And we've just wasted 5 minutes pausing a game to look up rules.
It could list (mount only) after those rules but that takes up additional space, additional space my method doesn't need.

Lord Dan
27-05-2016, 19:21
Say something nice about T9A, the unwantedbeing.

Go ahead, give it a shot.

Yowzo
28-05-2016, 10:16
Say something nice about T9A, the unwantedbeing.

Go ahead, give it a shot.
Where's the like button when you need it? [emoji16]

Yowzo
28-05-2016, 10:20
And it does.


I'de argue the rules aren't crystal clear.

Take the Saurian Ancients Taurosaur.
It lists Immune to Psychology, Stubborn and Impact hits(D6 +1) all as rules for the entire model.
So that means the skink riders (all 5 of them) get a bunch of impact hits each!
To be sure, we check the core rules for impact hits.
Ah, there's a bit saying it only applies to the mount.

And we've just wasted 5 minutes pausing a game to look up rules.
It could list (mount only) after those rules but that takes up additional space, additional space my method doesn't need.

Do you realise how incredibly unlikely that scenario is?

If you're the kind of player that can even for half a second think that a skink crew may have impact hits you deserve those five (do you really need 5 minutes to look at a single special rule?) lost minutes.

You should apply for the review team though. You're clearly into this kind of thing

ScruffMan
28-05-2016, 13:45
More English language mashups. It's all good other than the writing really needs to be proof read more. Looks very unprofessional, snaps you right out of it and at times is difficult to understand exactly what the writer(s) are trying to say. With the professional attitude that has gone into everything else in this game it's really baffling.

Soundwave
28-05-2016, 14:05
More English language mashups. It's all good other than the writing really needs to be proof read more. Looks very unprofessional, snaps you right out of it and at times is difficult to understand exactly what the writer(s) are trying to say. With the professional attitude that has gone into everything else in this game it's really baffling.

Well it is a community effort so if you want to de-baffle the situation, you could put your hand up over on the forum and do some proof reading.

Zywus
28-05-2016, 14:34
More English language mashups. It's all good other than the writing really needs to be proof read more. Looks very unprofessional, snaps you right out of it and at times is difficult to understand exactly what the writer(s) are trying to say. With the professional attitude that has gone into everything else in this game it's really baffling.
I think many of the contributers are not native english speakers (and certainly not professional writers) which explains why many little errors are there in the first place. That makes the need for proof reading extra obvious of course but since it's a digital and free publication, at least it's easily fixed after launch.

I don't frequent the T9A forum myself, but I assume there are some thread for each book where you can notify the team of formatting and spelling errors. If not, such threads should be created as it's the easiest way to collect such feedback and ensure the same errors are not reported multiple times unnecessarily.

Lord Dan
28-05-2016, 15:21
More English language mashups. It's all good other than the writing really needs to be proof read more. Looks very unprofessional, snaps you right out of it and at times is difficult to understand exactly what the writer(s) are trying to say. With the professional attitude that has gone into everything else in this game it's really baffling.
We have only a handful of native English speakers on staff. In fact I spent about a month on the Review Team before being moved over to the Advisory Board, and during that time I was the only native English speaker reviewing documents.

If anyone is interested, it's very easy to apply and we could certainly use the help.



I don't frequent the T9A forum myself, but I assume there are some thread for each book where you can notify the team of formatting and spelling errors.
There are, they're just not of much help until after release.

Zywus
28-05-2016, 20:21
There are, they're just not of much help until after release.
Of course. That's what I meant. Anyone noticing a formatting or spelling error can point it out the specific error on the forum (unless it has already been pointed out) and it can be fixed in the next update.

Asmodios
29-05-2016, 03:05
Say something nice about T9A, the unwantedbeing.

Go ahead, give it a shot.
I think you gave him an impossible task :p

theunwantedbeing
29-05-2016, 13:40
If anyone is interested, it's very easy to apply and we could certainly use the help.

How would somebody go about doing that?