Monstrous Arcana

[Leonathion]

By redundancy, do you meen ruleswise or overall? I get that the book got a few beast that tamurkhan has as well. Trying to decide wether to buy or not...

[Darnok]

Both Tamurkhan and MA share the exact same binding scrolls for: Carmine Dragon, Toad Dragon, Chaos Siege Giant. MA includes scrolls for Bile Trolls, K'daai Fireborn, K'daai Destroyer, Bale Taurus - all of which have rules in Tamurkhan already. But it is somewhat nice to get a more general access to those.

I just wished for more new beasts.

[Morkash]

More beasties would've been great indeed, but even now most of them have a cool concept behind them and fantastic artwork, so I'm pretty much looking forward to each and every one of them as model.

[Darnok]

Aye.

And that little "1" on the book strongly suggests more Monstrous Arcana in the future.

[eldargal]

Not to mention the Warhammer Forge newsletter which stated 'the first in a new series of books' or something to that effect.

[zoggin-eck]

Just adding my voice to those impressed by the book.

Good fun scenarios (OK, I hope, as I haven't played them yet!), good artwork, stories and nice presentation all round. I especially like the artwork of monsters facing off against each-other. There's something nice about seeing the odd piece where there isn't a human sized focal point, like the stegadon vs, umm, whatever the scary thing is, is a cool piece (I'd love a poster for many of the entries). This is what Warhammer is all about, as far as I'm concerned, not complaining about imagined "tiers" or whatever. The simple "monster siege" scenario sounds a fun way of using a wall/castle set without being bogged down with siege rules (also cool!) and is fair for armies without artillery. I always imagined monsters being employed just as much as siege equipment in Warhammer anyway. Might have to suspend my belief more than usual, with the entire wall having 20 wounds, regardless of where you attack it from (I read this right, right?).

By they way, I'd forgotten how long ago the rumours for this book started! Nice to see the cover change, too.

Was the name change from "Arcana" to "Arcanum" because of the D&D series of books? I knew there was a reason I kept calling it "Arcana" and then noticed something was different when I bought it

[Urgat]

Both Tamurkhan and MA share the exact same binding scrolls for: Carmine Dragon, Toad Dragon, Chaos Siege Giant. MA includes scrolls for Bile Trolls, K'daai Fireborn, K'daai Destroyer, Bale Taurus - all of which have rules in Tamurkhan already. But it is somewhat nice to get a more general access to those.

I just wished for more new beasts.

There's the giant squig too, afaik. To my dismay it shares the same rules as the crappy tamurkhan one.

[Darnok]

There's the giant squig too, afaik. To my dismay it shares the same rules as the crappy tamurkhan one.

I've seen people claim that, but have yet to find the Giant Squig in Tamurkhan.

[Urgat]

I've seen people claim that, but have yet to find the Giant Squig in Tamurkhan.

It's in the campaign rules, the scenario against the night goblins, is what I heard.

[Morkash]

Yep, the Squig is in the scenario rules. I like the Colossal Squig, or more the fact that it works totally different from other monsters - most times monsters are either resilient or hitty, but always quite expensive. The Colossal Squig is relatively hitty (a bit, at least), but fast and really cheap for what it does.

The main problem in my eyes is that the model won't be cheap money-wise, because it's huge... but its ingame value is limited so people won't be buying it compared to, say, the Mourngul, Shard Dragon or one of the other beasties which may cost a similar price, but are "worth" more points.

[Urgat]

Yep, the Squig is in the scenario rules. I like the Colossal Squig, or more the fact that it works totally different from other monsters - most times monsters are either resilient or hitty, but always quite expensive. The Colossal Squig is relatively hitty (a bit, at least), but fast and really cheap for what it does.

Cheap? I've seen the rules, and heard of its point cost. Compare it to a mangler, and tell me in earnest that it can compare. It's both more expensive and less deadly, stomp or not.

[Chaos Undecided]

Though its one of the less inspiring monsters in game terms I'm interested to see how the Preyton turns out the artwork and the description of the beast in the fluff dont exactly match after all.

Might get hold of a Magma Dragon if its a decent model but hopefully not Emperor scale as I dont think my budget can stretch to that atm.

[Morkash]

I'm also very interested in a Magma Dragon miniature. What I'd like to see would be one similar to the pose of the right one on page 82/83, but size-wise between Warpfire Dragon/GW dragons and Toad Dragon/Emperor Dragons. Because currently all Dragons, despite there being 4 different variations of size fall in one of these categories (except the Zombie Dragon). I'd love to see a Magma Dragon on Arachnarok base to be used a Great Magma Dragon or maybe even Emperor...

What do you mean about the Preyton, Chaos Undecided, where is the missing match?

[kaimarion]

I picked up a copy of this book a couple days ago and it has got to be the best £32 I've spent in a long while.

The quality of the book itself is superb and warrants a purchase with that merit alone, add in the fact that there is some fantastic artwork, fun new missions and your onto one tome of complete win.

My only critism is that one or two of the monsters seem a little lackluster to the point of near liability because of their relatively high points cost and low damage potential/endurance especially when compared to some other monsters in the book.

[Chaos Undecided]

What do you mean about the Preyton, Chaos Undecided, where is the missing match?

The book describes it as having forelegs and body of a stag, leonine hind quarters and eagles wings whilst the pictured beasty has bat like forearm/wings personally I prefer the pictured image as otherwise it comes across as a confused Griffon reject.

[snyggejygge]

Well there's a pic of a WIP on it from Forgeworld open day:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1131330...85212540633106

so judge for yourself, imo it looks cool & is one monster I will get for sure, I like it both imagewise, fluffwise & gamewise.

[Darnok]

It's in the campaign rules, the scenario against the night goblins, is what I heard.

Just checked that too, and indeed it is. But no point costs ar given in Tamurkhan - you get it as some kind of bonus in that scenario - so I would consider it a "real" addition in MA.

[zoggin-eck]

so judge for yourself, imo it looks cool & is one monster I will get for sure, I like it both imagewise, fluffwise & gamewise.

Me too. I was happy to see that not every new monster had to be the biggest/scariest monster ever made. The mid-sized ones are my favourite, and fall into that "one more model wouldn't hurt" impulse buy, both in the game and buying the actual model, and painting project, so I hope they make more.

[loveless]

Well there's a pic of a WIP on it from Forgeworld open day:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1131330...85212540633106

so judge for yourself, imo it looks cool & is one monster I will get for sure, I like it both imagewise, fluffwise & gamewise.

I don't know what it does (I likely won't be getting MA for a while yet), but that thing is so cool that I just may have to get 2.

[Morkash]

I like the Preyton's background, because it slightly hints at an ancient part of Chaos: Self-Destruction. While not directly destroying itself, it ... let's just say there is a small advantage if it is harmed. It's nothing overwhelming but a nice addition and as others have said, both background and model are ace!