View Full Version : Gav Thorpe Author Notes (AoS)
Kyriakin
10-03-2016, 19:16
I'm sure this has been posted within existing threads since it popped up a few days ago, but it is interesting enough to warrant its own.
Gav Thorpe writes an interesting blog posting about the genesis of AoS, and then offers some even more interesting responses while engaging with the community in the comments section:
http://gavthorpe.co.uk/2016/03/06/warbeast-authors-notes/
It certainly makes more an interesting read. I am impressed with Gav's ability to respond calmly to a user who literally defines himself by his negative feelings towards AOS. (His username).
That specific user is rather tame. You can be sure there were loads of less... amiable ones that have been filtered out (and I'm not blaming him).
veterannoob
11-03-2016, 09:32
Yeah, props for dealing with and responding to all that, even the crappier ones. :confused:
Cybtroll
11-03-2016, 10:16
I think that what Gave says here emphatizies exactly what's the problem with AoS:
"If Warhammer was about anything (and if 40K has a central theme), it was about the struggle against Chaos representing our own fears and least desirable aspects destroying us from within. If Age of Sigmar represents anything, it is of our best traits straining to rise above our worst, the indomitable spirit to overcome (rather than stubborn refusal of the inevitable). Hope, not hopelessness"
AoS is GW attempt to create a PG-13 IP.
Bloodknight
11-03-2016, 10:52
AoS is GW attempt to create a PG-13 IP.
Since when is hope PG-13? Most people prefer playing the good guys and seeing them win (not my personal cup of tea, because I usually root for the bad guys as long as they're not dumb, but if you look around, most players tend to collect the forces of good or play them in PC games and whatnot). 40K is basically an outlier in that regard because it doesn't really have good guys.
veterannoob
11-03-2016, 11:15
Maybe the violence but lack of cuss words that come with it? :)
Kyriakin
11-03-2016, 14:26
I think that what Gave says here emphatizies exactly what's the problem with AoS:
"If Warhammer was about anything (and if 40K has a central theme), it was about the struggle against Chaos representing our own fears and least desirable aspects destroying us from within. If Age of Sigmar represents anything, it is of our best traits straining to rise above our worst, the indomitable spirit to overcome (rather than stubborn refusal of the inevitable). Hope, not hopelessness"
AoS is GW attempt to create a PG-13 IP.
Reminds me of the way WWE has its "Rise Above Hate" John Cena nonsense, while continuing to have everyone pretend to beat each other up in a wrestling ring.
The grumpy Generation-X are no longer the market for anything, with their WWF Attitude, WHFB and Nu-Metal (Generation-Y were transitional). Today is all about millennials, who have been programmed to show a happy/positive front - even if they spend their "secret" time cyber-bullying all-and-sundry. In short, youth culture seems "nicer" and more positive now - which I guess is a good thing - but there's a certain insincerity about it.
"When did mediocrity and banality become a good image for your children?" - Bill Hicks
Very interesting to read a reasonable, mature discussion of AoS and to get Gav's position.. I am also disgruntled, disappointed and 'bereaved', I am a painting and modelling rather than gaming fan, heavily inspired by the background, identity and motivations of the characters, and have been in love with Warhammer and 40k since 1993. I loved the Druchii of Naggaroth, the Tomb Kings of Nehekara, Skavenblight, Karak Eight Peaks, Zharr Naggrund etc. In my opinion, the place a race comes from defines who, why, what they are, and one of the participants in this discussion nailed it for me when he said something like the new setting feels too 'fictional', i.e Warhammer is not now a believable setting, everything's made of magic, no-one really dies, space and time are no longer meaningful constraints upon existence, where are the actual living populations and market places etc.. Of course, the stock response is 'wait and see', the new setting needs time to fill out and acquire depth.. Which does not satisfy or reassure me. I'm inclined to agree that as technology has allowed the production of more massive, overblown apocalyptic models like Nagash and Archaon they can sell, they felt they needed a bigger sandpit for such monsters, in which such apocalyptic creatures and events cannot break the setting's believability as there is none to start with. Anyway, before I start on the Stormcast, it's just nice to know Gav still talks sense and cares about all this, respect for the veterans eh.
Reminds me of the way WWE has its "Rise Above Hate" John Cena nonsense, while continuing to have everyone pretend to beat each other up in a wrestling ring.
I think there is indeed a very interesting parallel to be drawn between the WWE and GW. Not least , their complete tone-deafness of what their fans want.
AoS is GW trying to push the game the brass want to play. Remove points and balancing mechanisms, push the game as a "narrative" experience where having a good and friendly experience isn't just the main consideration, but the only one.
WWE has similarly a out-of touch old owner who push his superman fantasy wrestlers (Cena, Reigns) with their stale characters despite massive resentment from fans. GW even has their version of NXT in FW. (a smaller sub-section of the company with far less resources but one who get what their fans is interested in and tries to appease them, instead of creating what they want and then tell the customers they should like it).
Wargaming is similar to wrestling in that wins and losses don't really count, certainly not in the way they do in real sports, it's more about the experience and the story told. Still, having wins and losses matter 'in-universe' and to acknowledge them 'out-of-universe' (by attempting to create a balanced rulesystem for example) is very important to make people invested and to help them suspend their disbelief.
Cybtroll
11-03-2016, 17:09
My parallel with PG-13 was (in my mind) related to Marvel superhero movie specifically. There are a lot of movie where people shoot, use bow, sword and destroy entire cities without a single drop of blood on the screen.
And they sold, a lot.
Then, comes Deadpool, that differs mostly from other superhero movie for this exact issue: if someone shoot, there is blood. And, all of the sudden, the "standard PG-13 recipe for success" isn't so appealing anymore...
My guts tell me that GW moved too late to intercept a segment of the population that is ALREADY shifting preferences and behaviours...
The real issue here is that they take any possible shortcut, and so alienated their existing player base. With more effort, they could have pursued their target within alienating ex-customers (like me) that was expecting a shake (exactly like AoS) but nothereless has been sacrificed in order to follow one of the most elusive demographic in the market (and without a *********** market research, for god's sake!).
It's the missed opportunity what really bother me...
Rogue Star
11-03-2016, 17:22
Don't see anything new here, unless I missed something. Gav does nicely talk about the idea behind the AoS, but really it's basically obvious stuff: fresh new setting they can do anything they want with, and that GW wanted to take the Space Marine archetype and transplant it to fantasy setting. Really, AoS isn't any more childish or friendly than WHF was. The difference is AoS is a high fantasy setting, while WHF was very low.
That said, I'm not sure they're going about recreating the aspects that make Space Marines so appealing in 40K well, or if you can even 'force' it by just transplanting it.
Lars Porsenna
11-03-2016, 21:34
The difference is AoS is a high fantasy setting, while WHF was very low.
I would argue that both are High Fantasy, and that WHFB was never low fantasy. Dark fantasy (at times) but that is not the same as low fantasy. GoT is low fantasy. Aos, OTOH, is High Fantasy turned up to 11.
Damon.
de Selby
12-03-2016, 00:09
Cucumber eh? Not pancake...
Hellebore
12-03-2016, 02:34
Cognitive dissonance is a wonderful thing.
It's very hard to work on a project if you fundamentally can't like it. We are able to accept all sorts of things.
Khaines Wrath
12-03-2016, 12:12
I would argue that both are High Fantasy, and that WHFB was never low fantasy. Dark fantasy (at times) but that is not the same as low fantasy. GoT is low fantasy. Aos, OTOH, is High Fantasy turned up to 11.
Damon.
Agreed, WHF was never "low fantasy" and of all the very good reasons to not like AoS that false transition is not one of them.
Warhammer had fantastical beast riding knights, wizards that could cast apocalyptic spells, gods incarnate, real divine responses to prayers and appeals...for goodness sake The Foot of Gork spell has the literal foot of Gork come down from the heavens to stamp his warriors enemies.
Lord of the Rings, the proverbial poster child of high fantasy is lower fantasy by comparison.
True low fantasy is something like The Song of Ice and Fire series where things like magic and mythical beasts are a factor but neither central to the plot or inherently widespread.
The Empire, in comparison to Westeros, is fantastically vast in scale, swarming with beastmen, monsters, greenskins and the undead. Wizards of incredible power are everywhere, Priests can literally call on Sigmar for help, its armies have divisions of cavalry that ride on monsters, not horses etc.
Agreed, WHF was never "low fantasy" and of all the very good reasons to not like AoS that false transition is not one of them.
Warhammer had fantastical beast riding knights, wizards that could cast apocalyptic spells, gods incarnate, real divine responses to prayers and appeals...for goodness sake The Foot of Gork spell has the literal foot of Gork come down from the heavens to stamp his warriors enemies.
Lord of the Rings, the proverbial poster child of high fantasy is lower fantasy by comparison.
True low fantasy is something like The Song of Ice and Fire series where things like magic and mythical beasts are a factor but neither central to the plot or inherently widespread.
The Empire, in comparison to Westeros, is fantastically vast in scale, swarming with beastmen, monsters, greenskins and the undead. Wizards of incredible power are everywhere, Priests can literally call on Sigmar for help, its armies have divisions of cavalry that ride on monsters, not horses etc.
I think you overestimate how widespread the fantastical elements were in the Warhammer setting. Just because something was included in a WHFB armylist don't mean that it's something ordinarily people regularly encountered in their daily lives. In my impression, especially in the older background, for most people, these things were distant and could as well just be folktales to scare children and adults. Similar to the real-world tales of trolls and goblins a few hundred years ago. The difference being that in the Warhammer world suddenly that necromancer might actually appear during the night, raise the local graveyard and slaughter the village.
I posted this in the News & Rumours forum, but it fit's better here I think:
Well, it really depends - I just started reading A Murder in Marienburg. It's about Kurt Schnell, captain of the watch 'in the worst part of town'. A big part of Warhammer setting wasn't about huge armies etc. :)
The discussion of Wharhammer as a low/high/dark fantasy setting is quite dependent on what people put into the definitions.
I'd say also that the feel of Warhammer has been quite shifting between different editions. In the latter days, shifting more to the high/epic part and neglecting to also focus on the low/dark part.
While Warhammer has always contained a lot of components normally deemed high-fantasy, in the older background especially I never got the impression that those things had much of an impact on the common man. Sure, the world as such always contained Dragons, Elves, Necromancers and magic up the wazoo, but most common men could probably go their entire life without even laying their eyes on a elf or a dwarf.
I think the strength of the Warhammer world was that it contained a very down to earth low/dark fantasy world, but still had place for the more high/epic fantasy stuff.
Rogue Star
12-03-2016, 13:35
Got to second Zywus. While yes, WHF had fantastical creatures like the demigryph and Imperial Griffon... they weren't an everyday thing. You wouldn't see a farmer in the Reikland hitching up his farm-plow to a Demigryph to plant his crops for harvest, and likewise the average means of travel in the Empire was a horse-drawn stagecoach, not flying around on an Imperial Griffon. Not every town had a wizard, they had someone who likely dabbled, that was the idea of witch-hunters, to hunt down anyone that practised 'unapproved' magic - an Imperial Wizard needed to attend a college, for who knows how many years, pass tests, etc. There was certainly not one on every corner.
As Zywus notes, there were extreme elements, especially in later additions, but that was as increasingly strange creatures were added to the army books - the WHFRP provided the greatest amount of information on the day-to-day life of Imperial citizens and the lifestyle of the Empire - and even encountering a Beastman or Skaven in the sewers was a rare, noteworthy thing, it was mostly Chaos Cultists - rival human factions, etc.
Agreed, WHF was never "low fantasy"
Depends on the point of view, as Obiwan would say. Until 7th ed, the background made it quite clear that for your average Empire citizen (and let's be honest, WFB was really Empire-centered, if you had to turn WFB nations into characters of a movie, the Empire would be the MC), stuff like orcs, magics, dragons, monsters were very rare occurences. Things got weirder as you went farther from civilisatio, suddenly you have more mutants, and then you have beastmen in the woods, and undead, and when you get very far you'll have goblin tribes, orcs, etc etc, and very, very far in the north there's these loonies. But the Altdorf citizen, the Nuln one? He's never seen a greenskins, probably doubts dragons exist, and so on. That's how the fluff has served it ever since 4th ed, yes, until 7th ed hit the shelves. It made a point of telling that wizards were rare, and dragons even more so.The army lists have never reflected accurately how the fluff described the armies (certainly not all armies had a wizard, much less a lord level one).
Gorthor21
12-03-2016, 23:14
I might be going out in a limb and into the realm of subjectivity but the warhammer universe is very typical of the high fantasy novels that I have read. There is always a pseudo reality that the author creates to make the situations therein more believable and relatable but keep a strong degree of separation from reality. The age of sigmar setting is so beyond high fantasy in its degree of separation that it is an atypical example of epic fantasy. The characters are set in a place where the day to day is part of a long gone past seen through flashbacks and reminisces after the ravages of the age of chaos. In trying to pigeonhole settings into genres and subgenres really undermines the content therein. Authors make an effort to build on what they inherit with their own twists to be unique in an otherwise crowded room. The way in which any culture develops is by compounding upon the past to try and garner notoriety in each individual's case to try to be rememebered.
I know it's off topic but I believe that we should remember that literature grows progressively as with any other facet of culture. Warhammer has grown progressively just as any other long running series. If it weren't for WHR we wouldn't think of the everyday lives of the farmers and cobblers in the towns of Wessenland. The new setting hasn't been out for 30 years and to expect the same kind of treatment for a setting at is so radically different is asking too much too soon. In a way the apple of warhammer fantasy has become the orange of age of sigmar.
Greyshadow
13-03-2016, 00:09
Gav is brilliant isn't he. I think one of the biggest problems with GW is we don't get this kind of sophistication in White Dwarf anymore. Go back to an in depth monthly where we read about the sculptors and designers by name - bring back the 'games workshop' in Games Workshop'.
Khaines Wrath
13-03-2016, 00:11
I was afraid this would be the response. Because whenever this subject comes up its always "lowly empire peasant probably doesn't know what an orc is thus WHF is low fantasy".
That's a ridiculous notion.
1% of a single factions population ie: oblivious Imperial citizens, does not discount the rest of the franchise.
Especially from a narrative perspective people must see how disingenuous that is. Who here can honestly claim that the selling point for warhammer's ip was Joe the turnip farmer going about his daily work and then resting at the pub to talk with his friends about this conspiracy of a whole territory of the Empire being infested with ghosts and zombies?
I was afraid this would be the response. Because whenever this subject comes up its always "lowly empire peasant probably doesn't know what an orc is thus WHF is low fantasy".
That's a ridiculous notion.
1% of a single factions population ie: oblivious Imperial citizens, does not discount the rest of the franchise.
Especially from a narrative perspective people must see how disingenuous that is. Who here can honestly claim that the selling point for warhammer's ip was Joe the turnip farmer going about his daily work and then resting at the pub to talk with his friends about this conspiracy of a whole territory of the Empire being infested with ghosts and zombies?
It was pretty essential in order for me to care about the setting and make it feel believable and interesting. If there's nothing mundane and down to earth to contrast the spectacular stuff, nothing is special and everything is just bland.
The WHF setting as a whole wasn't "low-fantasy" by most definitions since there were indeed loads of otherworldly stuff around. But the setting had a lot of low-fantasy elements in it. I do find it a bit weird that Game of thrones comes up a lot as an example of low-fantasy in these discussions. That setting has dragons, giants, undead, wizards, people being brought back from the dead etc. It's not very common for the general population to be involved with, but a large portion of the books is covering just those "high-fantasy" elements.
Khaines Wrath
13-03-2016, 01:15
It was pretty essential in order for me to care about the setting and make it feel believable and interesting. If there's nothing mundane and down to earth to contrast the spectacular stuff, nothing is special and everything is just bland.
The WHF setting as a whole wasn't "low-fantasy" by most definitions since there were indeed loads of otherworldly stuff around. But the setting had a lot of low-fantasy elements in it. I do find it a bit weird that Game of thrones comes up a lot as an example of low-fantasy in these discussions. That setting has dragons, giants, undead, wizards, people being brought back from the dead etc. It's not very common for the general population to be involved with, but a large portion of the books is covering just those "high-fantasy" elements.
I can completely understand that, don't get me wrong. I too enjoy the lower fantasy elements. Imperial troops in general are compelling because of their underdog nature as simple squishy humans fighting impossible horrors and warriors with supernatural abilities.
I just don't agree those elements translate into the whole franchise being classed as low fantasy.
Your not wrong about GoT, it does indeed have fantastical elements. It would have to, otherwise it wouldn't be classed as fantasy at all.
How it differs though, aside from the White Walker aspect, is that most of the story has very little to do with magic or mythical beasts.
Take the two main story archs, Westeros and Esteros.
In Westeros there is definitely fantasy elements. Theres a handful of Red Priests with vague powers that occasionally manifests into genuine magic and of course there's the lands beyond the Wall which has giants, wargs and a horde of long forgotten undead hellbent on breaching the wall to ravage the kingdoms of men in the north.
But that's about the extent of it. The rest is court intrigue, civil war, political machinations, assassination and religious uprisings without a drop of magic or mythical beasts. Bar one particular assassination of course.
Now in Esteros, the major one there is dragons. But the focus of the story is an heir trying to maintain control of an ever fracturing and increasingly disobediant group of cities. The dragons are a symbol of her right to rule, nothing more and they become increasingly irrelevant as the show and book series goes on leaving us with the actual focus of the story.
Its about those quantities of elements that determines wether something is low or high fantasy.
Warhammer Fantasy is high fantasy with low fantasy elements.
A Song of Ice and Fire is low fantasy with high fantasy elements.
Interestingly the warhammer world and the game of thrones are quite similar in a way.
In game of thrones kings landing is extremely low fantasy, almost to the point that it need not be fantasy at all. The further north and east you go the more fantastical it gets. Similarly The Empire and Brettonia are a kind if medium low fantasy, but in North you have chaos exactly as it is in Aos. In the south it is undead, not so different from aos. In the West you have lush jungles and monsters are common place. The east is basically the realm of beasts. This is all very high fantasy.
What Aos lacks then, is that somewhat grounded central region. This is potentially Azyr. I would love to see a novel set there, dealing with the tensions between the cohabiting humans, Aelves, Duradin and Stormcast. Imagine a detective novel about the hunt for muderous stormcast driven mad by his reforging. It could be amazing. The biggest problem so far is simply that it is a war game. The fiction has been designed to give you interesting battles to recreate, not to explore the political subtleties of life in the mortal realms.
Interesting read and a sensible assessment of AoS. However, Gav's point that WFB started out "generic" just like AoS is hardly a justification for AoS. Firstly, it speaks poorly of AoS developers that their story is uninteresting when they had 30+ years of story development to learn from, utilize, and expand upon. Secondly, it only draws attention back to one of AoS's main criticisms - wiping out three decades of WFB lore development (and unnecessarily so). Thirdly, it suggests that it may take just as long for AoS to mature into something comparable to WFB's scope and depth. For AoS fans who are in it for the long haul, maybe this is an exciting prospect, but I am certainly not going to give GW the benefit of the doubt.
theunwantedbeing
13-03-2016, 18:35
Interesting read and a sensible assessment of AoS. However, Gav's point that WFB started out "generic" just like AoS is hardly a justification for AoS. Firstly, it speaks poorly of AoS developers that their story is uninteresting when they had 30+ years of story development to learn from, utilize, and expand upon.
I think it's a fair comment.
AoS is a new setting that has yet to be fleshed out sufficiently, just like Fantasy was when it first appeared or 40k for that matter.
You can't immediately have a couple of decades of developed fluff that the fans are all intimately acquainted with right of the bat, it takes time.
Come back in 3 years time and maybe things will be much better.
Or it'll be gone.
Either way win win for the haters :P
Note: I don't hate AoS.
I just don't care for the lack of rules depth or the new currently undeveloped world that goes with it, so I'm waiting to see if things improve or not.
I think it's a fair comment.
AoS is a new setting that has yet to be fleshed out sufficiently, just like Fantasy was when it first appeared or 40k for that matter.
You can't immediately have a couple of decades of developed fluff that the fans are all intimately acquainted with right of the bat, it takes time.
Come back in 3 years time and maybe things will be much better.
Or it'll be gone.
Either way win win for the haters :P
Note: I don't hate AoS.
I just don't care for the lack of rules depth or the new currently undeveloped world that goes with it, so I'm waiting to see if things improve or not.
I accept your point. Perhaps it was me who was being unfair, although it is still a painful reminder that the majority of WFB lore, a fine fictional vintage that was aged for 30 years, was reset.
jtrowell
14-03-2016, 11:06
A setting doesn't need 20-30+ years to feels interesing.
I remember reading about the Warhammer world in what was the 2nd or 3rd edition (a box set with 3 books, one with the rules, one with the bestiary with all units in the game, and one with the background I thing ?), and I was immersed with this world that was both like ours and very different.
It was a fantasy world with early gunpowder (a revolution at the time), giving humans some chance against the mystical forces aligned against them.
It had an age of exploration that was beginning, with explorators having found the new continent of Lustria
It had a Science fantasy feel with the slanns, at the time degenerated descendants of the original Old Ones (beforce being retconned as servants of the old ones) and the story of the gates at the poles
By being a deformed fantasy mirror of our own world, it had many elements that made me dream with the potential for countless stories.
In a similar way, when the Eberron setting for D&D was released during 3rd edition, I was in a similar way immersed since day one : intelligent humanoid golems ? They have been created to serve as soldiers in a civil war, and the war is just now over, leaving them emancipated ? They can learn magic and be wizards !! YOU CAN PLAY AS ONE ?!!! (and this is just one aspect of Eberron, my attention was in fact drawn to it by the D&D miniature of the Warforged wizard, later I learned to love the rest of the setting too)
The Eberron book was probably not much bigger that anyone of the AoS "fluff" books, but with only this first book I was already sold on the universe, the following Eberron books where simply a bonus, the core setting was already more solid with one book that AoS is with how many ?
Zenithfleet
14-03-2016, 12:34
In game of thrones kings landing is extremely low fantasy, almost to the point that it need not be fantasy at all. The further north and east you go the more fantastical it gets.
Just a quick comment re A Song of Ice and Fire (titles for the titles god :p )...
GRR Martin's world seems to be an unusual case in that it's a low fantasy world that used to be a high fantasy one, and which is slowly turning back into high fantasy. The past was much more fantastical, but the magic and weird creatures apparently dried up (it's hinted this might be because the dragons died out, or maybe vice versa). Now the old crazy stuff is coming back, with the resurrection of the dead and prayers suddenly working and whatnot.
Incidentally Martin has pointed out in interviews that magic in The Lord of the Rings (usually seen as high fantasy) is quite low-key. Gandalf doesn't fling fireballs around--he does one or two tricks with light and sometimes strives mind-to-mind with opponents, but mostly his power is more subtle, to do with inspiration and hope. As Martin says, he pretty much fights with his sword like everyone else.
Martin also reckons magic should be inherently unscientific and unpredictable, so everyone patiently waiting for the underlying magical rules of A Song of Ice and Fire to be revealed are probably out of luck. 'Weird stuff happens when the plot demands it' seems to be his approach.
I think the low fantasy/high fantasy/epic fantasy debate is slightly off-target but the basic idea is right.
In WFB, a battle between a regiment of Empire border guards trying to hold off an encroaching band of orcs felt like it had importance, because we were aware that there were normal people within the Empire who couldn't defend themselves, so the game felt as if it had consequences. If the border guard fail, a village gets burned down, people get killed. Even as a peripheral idea, that lends weight to a battle between your tiny plastic men and the slightly larger plastic uglies.
In AoS, everyone seems to be a super-powered killing machine - and if any of the killing machines die, they can just be rebuilt by Mr.Golden Throne. There doesn't seem to be any consequence to the games' results. That's not a problem of how high the fantasy is, though high fantasy can be a bit more prone to it - the problem is that when there's no stake in the fight, nothing to protect or die for, your wargame has to stand on it's rules, and frankly...well, AoS is never going to stand on it's rules.
I think the low fantasy/high fantasy/epic fantasy debate is slightly off-target but the basic idea is right.
In WFB, a battle between a regiment of Empire border guards trying to hold off an encroaching band of orcs felt like it had importance, because we were aware that there were normal people within the Empire who couldn't defend themselves, so the game felt as if it had consequences. If the border guard fail, a village gets burned down, people get killed. Even as a peripheral idea, that lends weight to a battle between your tiny plastic men and the slightly larger plastic uglies.
In AoS, everyone seems to be a super-powered killing machine - and if any of the killing machines die, they can just be rebuilt by Mr.Golden Throne. There doesn't seem to be any consequence to the games' results. That's not a problem of how high the fantasy is, though high fantasy can be a bit more prone to it - the problem is that when there's no stake in the fight, nothing to protect or die for, your wargame has to stand on it's rules, and frankly...well, AoS is never going to stand on it's rules.
Most of this though is due to the current releases - there are the "Angels" (Stormcasts), "Demons" (Chaos), and "Fighters" (Fyreslayers), but not even artwork of a settlement, a city, or a fortress except for those inhabitated by the aforementioned factions. Once there's more than just stories about the humans of the realms, there will be a feeling that something will be at stake - the lives of those who are threatened by Chaos, Orruks, Undead, and so on.
But right now, there's stories already - and "A Picture tells more than a thousand Words", so nothing sticks around for those who haven't read them.
I was going to said my opinion on the interview, but right now I will focus in this "high fantasy/low fantasy" thing going on
First: Warhammer fantasy was what I like to call the "fantasy buffet" that means you could find EVERYTHING under the sun, you want a high fantasy? look the asur and their strugle because their founder(Anerion aka: elf kratos) comit a huge mistake that split their people in two, the codex where always about huge clash in armies and epic battiles that range for epic(Dwarft,Elves and men) to dark(chaos winning, skaven running things,etc)
Low fantasy?: the roleplay game where the focus is low chararter, where facing a chaos knight where deadly and skaven instead of a swarn where thatn "thing" in the name that control things and their gone in their way to find to most basic job your chararter will be
you want a conan? there is the norse, or play a chaos maruder, you want to play like Elric? been a Elves, and so on.
The same happen with his grimdark counterpart WH4OK who have almost everything in sci fi: precursos(the cītan,old ones) the "tech so powerfull is magic"(necrons) psykers(eldar) and so own
Now where AoS fit here?...it dosent, it something is what I like to call:Methaphycal Fantasy, that means fantasy that goes even more into the who the cosmologic works and magic and the weirdness is crack up to eleven, good examples are planescape,spelljammer, exalted sometimes, nobilities, angel the torment, the more focus is to weird stuff and less to the mundane the better, AoS dosent even pretend is happen in a pseudo earth but stranges dimension where weird **** IS the norm
A setting doesn't need 20-30+ years to feels interesing.
I remember reading about the Warhammer world in what was the 2nd or 3rd edition (a box set with 3 books, one with the rules, one with the bestiary with all units in the game, and one with the background I thing ?), and I was immersed with this world that was both like ours and very different.
It was a fantasy world with early gunpowder (a revolution at the time), giving humans some chance against the mystical forces aligned against them.
It had an age of exploration that was beginning, with explorators having found the new continent of Lustria
It had a Science fantasy feel with the slanns, at the time degenerated descendants of the original Old Ones (beforce being retconned as servants of the old ones) and the story of the gates at the poles
By being a deformed fantasy mirror of our own world, it had many elements that made me dream with the potential for countless stories.
In a similar way, when the Eberron setting for D&D was released during 3rd edition, I was in a similar way immersed since day one : intelligent humanoid golems ? They have been created to serve as soldiers in a civil war, and the war is just now over, leaving them emancipated ? They can learn magic and be wizards !! YOU CAN PLAY AS ONE ?!!! (and this is just one aspect of Eberron, my attention was in fact drawn to it by the D&D miniature of the Warforged wizard, later I learned to love the rest of the setting too)
The Eberron book was probably not much bigger that anyone of the AoS "fluff" books, but with only this first book I was already sold on the universe, the following Eberron books where simply a bonus, the core setting was already more solid with one book that AoS is with how many ?
This. 30 years added individual stories and fleshed out details, but most of the framework, ie the setting, was there right at the beginning. Also, everone else seems to get it right! Read the first stories in Wyrd Chronicles about Malifaux. Much is missing, and the writing quality sometimes questionable, but the setting immediately draws you in. The setting for Freebooter's Fate was good out of the starting block, and several kickstarters have more engaging background blurbs in the kickstarter description than the fluff freely available for AoS. If a small operation can do a better job for a kickstarter campaign than the industry juggernaught can with several years' lead time there's no excuse. It's simply not good enough!
Sent fra min GT-I9506 via Tapatalk
Warhammer's fantasy 'level' has fluctuated considerably over the years. WFRP was definitely low fantasy; the End Times were nearer to high fantasy.
Drasanil
15-03-2016, 23:19
I was afraid this would be the response. Because whenever this subject comes up its always "lowly empire peasant probably doesn't know what an orc is thus WHF is low fantasy".
That's a ridiculous notion.
1% of a single factions population ie: oblivious Imperial citizens, does not discount the rest of the franchise.
Exaggerating much? If the empire consisted only of 1% oblivious peasants, it wouldn't have the resources to field armies, support the nobility or function as a state. If anything the vast majority of the empire's population falls into the oblivious peasant category.
Especially from a narrative perspective people must see how disingenuous that is. Who here can honestly claim that the selling point for warhammer's ip was Joe the turnip farmer going about his daily work and then resting at the pub to talk with his friends about this conspiracy of a whole territory of the Empire being infested with ghosts and zombies?
Some of the must fun I had were exactly in those types of situations in WFRP, where playing a literate knight and producing a piece of paper with a few seals on it was almost like magic as far as the typical bumkpins I was dealing with were concerned.
Warhammer's fantasy 'level' has fluctuated considerably over the years. WFRP was definitely low fantasy; the End Times were nearer to high fantasy.
Is less about when and more about why, mordheim is dark-low fantasy so depression it makes Game of throne look cheerfull, storm of magic is SUPER high fantasy with magic everywhere, a bestary full of magical beast(even some returns like zoat and fimir) the roleplay is more grimm than dark while codex are standar high fantasy(more the elves than everything else)
Now that we said that, my review of this interview:
First:
For example, the Stormcast Eternals. Even when I had been working in the Design Studio the idea of being able to translate the appeal of Space Marines into the fantasy setting had been something of an ambition, if not a specific objective. (Ironic considering Space Marines were partly created to capture some of the appeal that Chaos Warriors had in Warhammer Fantasy Battles at that time!)
Is good to see Gav being honest here, I mean we all know the space marine apeal in fantasy GW want to make but it haven for a lot of time a not writing thing going on.
irstly, I wanted to ensure that I didn’t approach the Stormcast Eternals in the same way as I do Space Marines. While they have similarities in image and archetype there are significant differences between them, particularly in terms of their self-identity and how they fit into the cosmology.
This is something it have to be done A LOT, as the idea they are just fantasy version of space marines feels bland and poorly thought, so is now the work of BL to make something here
I wanted to explore the cosmic nature of the background. This is a war between gods and great powers as much as mortal warriors. And thirdly, I wanted to explore the nature of the Mortal Realms, and in particular one we haven’t seen an awful lot of up until now.
As I said, this is methaphysical fantasy(or cosmologic fantasy if you want it) is less forgoten realms and more planescape or spelljammer, the weirdes and bigger, the better
Now about this comment
I think that many people forget what such lowly beginnings gave birth to the Warhammer World. In its first incarnation it was bland, generic fantasy with a skirmish system attached. As it developed it pillaged pretty much every fantasy trope and setting available, as well as plundering the medieval historical period. The background most closely associated with it, that of the Empire and the Old World, mostly came about through the Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay game. Throughout its permutations there have been fans and detractors of the Warhammer world and the prevalent tone at any given time, from those that preferred the effete snobs of the Bretonnians to those that loved the shiny Arthurian heroes take in 5th edition and back to the darker edge we gave to them post-6th edition. Orcs? Slapstick comedy for some, brutal barbarian horde to others. The Empire, sliding on a scale from dull Holy Roman Empire with the names filed off, to over-the-top magic and whacky engineering depending on who you listen to and when in its development. A worthless pastiche of seventies and eighties creation, or a genius blend of the best archetypes of fantasy and history? Everyone gets to decide for themselves.
I put this because I have argue A LOT here agasint the romantized idea of warhammer before being some pure creative endevour that come from greatest mind and know is lost because they didnt care anymore: the same exact thing people said about the lore waaaaaay before, and usually people excuse in "but before it have chararter/charm/whatever" it feel ike the D&D syndrome:everything that is new is horrible and sign they dont care, everything that come before is awsome, intersting and lost golden age....until something else come and the cycle repeat again.
Khaines Wrath
16-03-2016, 01:15
Exaggerating much? If the empire consisted only of 1% oblivious peasants, it wouldn't have the resources to field armies, support the nobility or function as a state. If anything the vast majority of the empire's population falls into the oblivious peasant category.
Some of the must fun I had were exactly in those types of situations in WFRP, where playing a literate knight and producing a piece of paper with a few seals on it was almost like magic as far as the typical bumkpins I was dealing with were concerned.
I reiterate the points of my earlier post.
1. A percentage of the population of a single faction that does consist of wizards, monstrous cavalry, an active god that responds to prayers and arcane warmachines does not make WHF low fantasy.
2. Peasants of the Empire are neither the focus of the game, the novels of black library or even the setting as a whole. You can make them so by all means but that doesn't change the fact that Elves roam the western seas, greenskins attack frequently, a territory of the Empire is overrun with the undead, theres a continent of lizardmen and theres a race of rat people living below the Empire plotting its destruction.
3. A fantasy setting having low fantasy elements does not make it low fantasy. Your attraction to the low fantasy elements does not make it a low fantasy setting. It is a high fantasy setting with low fantasy elements. AoS simply did away with the low fantasy elements which was a stupid mistake because it lost any sense of grounding it had.
Can a setting really be low or high fantasy by itself? I feel like it depends more on the actual stories told - obviously the Old World being destroyed and Sigmar hurting through space on a rock is about as high fantasy as it gets, while a mercenary warband exploring Mordheim is pretty damn low. To me, it's all about the scale of the story being told. I'm much more intrigued by a band of humans defending a village from beastmen than by some golden god engaged in a massive struggle with evil powers trying to take over the world. I find these massive, over the top stories to be dull and uninspiring, clearly conceived by a marketing team, not a creative team. What are these mortal realms all about? Who lives in them? What problems do they struggle with? Until I know that, I couldn't care less about the Sigmarines and their struggle with chaos. I like the idea that the new setting has limitless potential just like 40k's infinite universe, but it remains to be seen if GW is going to actually do anything compelling with it.
Can a setting really be low or high fantasy by itself? I feel like it depends more on the actual stories told - obviously the Old World being destroyed and Sigmar hurting through space on a rock is about as high fantasy as it gets, while a mercenary warband exploring Mordheim is pretty damn low. To me, it's all about the scale of the story being told. I
That depend is the setting allow that kind of thing, for example in warhammer gods aren like D&D so you cant have things like gods usurping other domains, Warhammer allow diferent ways of fantasy to play out, so is game of thrones(for example, Bran arc or Dany in the second book)
'm much more intrigued by a band of humans defending a village from beastmen than by some golden god engaged in a massive struggle with evil powers trying to take over the world. I find these massive, over the top stories to be dull and uninspiring, clearly conceived by a marketing team, not a creative team. What are these mortal realms all about? Who lives in them? What problems do they struggle with? Until I know that, I couldn't care less about the Sigmarines and their struggle with chaos. I like the idea that the new setting has limitless potential just like 40k's infinite universe, but it remains to be seen if GW is going to actually do anything compelling with it.
I disagree here, why I see the apeal of the small folk, the big thing in the setting is what they are trying to sell, Warmachine is jacks, Warhammer is the grimdark apeal, AoS is the huge,titanic conflict between gods, while I understand the need to be grounded a lit bit, it can become a derailing if we focus in a bunch of nobodies doing stuff.
Khaines Wrath
17-03-2016, 08:03
Can a setting really be low or high fantasy by itself? I feel like it depends more on the actual stories told - obviously the Old World being destroyed and Sigmar hurting through space on a rock is about as high fantasy as it gets, while a mercenary warband exploring Mordheim is pretty damn low. To me, it's all about the scale of the story being told. I'm much more intrigued by a band of humans defending a village from beastmen than by some golden god engaged in a massive struggle with evil powers trying to take over the world. I find these massive, over the top stories to be dull and uninspiring, clearly conceived by a marketing team, not a creative team. What are these mortal realms all about? Who lives in them? What problems do they struggle with? Until I know that, I couldn't care less about the Sigmarines and their struggle with chaos. I like the idea that the new setting has limitless potential just like 40k's infinite universe, but it remains to be seen if GW is going to actually do anything compelling with it.
Again, yes an individual story could make itself higher or lower on the scale. Though I'd argue Villagers fighting off Beastmen is already higher on the list than most low fantasy stories considering the Beastmen faction is an absolute menagerie of monsters and folk tales.
But again it doesnt change the fact that the setting, as in the the geographical and historical location of this particular franchise contains all the hallmarks of high fantasy in spades.
From a certain point of view, Warhammer is in fact post-apocalyptic SF. Advanced alien race uses science and 'magic' (high-end science including psionics) to terraform a world, introducing experimental species. Their science gets the best of them (the warp gates collapse), stranding survivors among their experiments.
But perhaps we're getting off the original point.
Khaines Wrath
17-03-2016, 11:14
From a certain point of view, Warhammer is in fact post-apocalyptic SF. Advanced alien race uses science and 'magic' (high-end science including psionics) to terraform a world, introducing experimental species. Their science gets the best of them (the warp gates collapse), stranding survivors among their experiments.
But perhaps we're getting off the original point.
Technically that's still fantasy, in the same way that Star Wars is technically fantasy. But that's a whole other topic regarding the sometimes contentious issue of what constitutes true science fiction.
Hellebore
17-03-2016, 11:29
I reiterate the points of my earlier post.
1. A percentage of the population of a single faction that does consist of wizards, monstrous cavalry, an active god that responds to prayers and arcane warmachines does not make WHF low fantasy.
2. Peasants of the Empire are neither the focus of the game, the novels of black library or even the setting as a whole. You can make them so by all means but that doesn't change the fact that Elves roam the western seas, greenskins attack frequently, a territory of the Empire is overrun with the undead, theres a continent of lizardmen and theres a race of rat people living below the Empire plotting its destruction.
3. A fantasy setting having low fantasy elements does not make it low fantasy. Your attraction to the low fantasy elements does not make it a low fantasy setting. It is a high fantasy setting with low fantasy elements. AoS simply did away with the low fantasy elements which was a stupid mistake because it lost any sense of grounding it had.
A percentage of the population? I would say that percentage would be around 90%.
If you actually counted up the number of wizards and heavy cavalry in the empire, along with all the other military fantastical elements, they probably wouldn't exceed the population of small Empire town.
Just as 1 million space marines is a stupidly small percentage of the imperium's total population. But they play a stupidly big role in the IMAGE of the imperium.
So the argument comes down to whether image is more important or not, imo.
Khaines Wrath
17-03-2016, 11:57
A percentage of the population? I would say that percentage would be around 90%.
If you actually counted up the number of wizards and heavy cavalry in the empire, along with all the other military fantastical elements, they probably wouldn't exceed the population of small Empire town.
Just as 1 million space marines is a stupidly small percentage of the imperium's total population. But they play a stupidly big role in the IMAGE of the imperium.
So the argument comes down to whether image is more important or not, imo.
Personally I'd say 90% is the polar exaggeration of 1%. But again this is missing the point entirely. We are talking about a single faction in a game consisting of lizardmen, skaven, 2 factions of undead, 3 factions of Elf, daemons, beastmen, ogres, greenskins, dwarfs and a whole other faction of humans living on the edge of a literal open realm of gods. All of them mostly prominent presences in the world and at the doors of the Empire.
Warhammer is High fantasy in both its presentation and its content.
Zenithfleet
17-03-2016, 11:57
Technically that's still fantasy, in the same way that Star Wars is technically fantasy. But that's a whole other topic regarding the sometimes contentious issue of what constitutes true science fiction.
To get even more technical, it's 70s/80s fantasy (there having been a vogue back then for providing a science-fantasy rationale to 'make sense of the magic' in an otherwise medieval-fantasy setting--think the early Dragonriders of Pern novels for instance).
And also parallel-world / alternative-Earth fantasy, another trend at the time (cf: the shape and placement of the Warhammer World continents and nations).
True low fantasy is something like The Song of Ice and Fire series where things like magic and mythical beasts are a factor but neither central to the plot or inherently widespread. .
ASoIaF certainly does not fit your standards for low fantasy.
Westeros is mostly mundane, yes, and so are the areas around Pentos that we've seen with Daeneris, but the moment you step out of those places, things are quite different.
North of the walls? Direwolves, giants, mammoths, ice spiders, elf-like creatures, undead, white walkers, shape-shifters, they can't all be dismissed because they're the usual suspects, on the contrary. North of the wall = High fantasy.
East of the Dothraki Lands? Valyria's red waste, which by the sound of it is Martin's own little Chaos wastes (just go read its description in the lastest book, when the ironborne ship sails near it). Magic isn't exacty absent, with the shapeshifters, the raising of the dead, Melissandre birthing some weird shadow assassin, etc.
We don't have any idea what the rest of the world is like, and by the looks of it, the farther we go, the weirder it gets.
What about the whole planet? I mean, the irregular seasons, that reeks (hahaha, Reek) of magic.
ASoIaF feels low fantasy only because we're seeing it from an era that is mostly human-centric, in a geographical position that is mostly human-centric. We'd know only Warhammer from books describing the age of the four emperors (that was four, right?), it'd feel pretty much the same. No chaos incursion, greenskins tame, and Von Carstein acting undercover. Mostly human versus humans. Not even colleges of magic. Those would be very GoT-like books. On the other hand, had Martin chosen to write aGoT (the first book) with Ygritte as one of the main characters, following the normal chronology of the series, oh boy would the outlook be different.
Again, WH is a what I call a buffet fantasy: is there so you can use as many type of fantasy as you want: the old ones and the lizard are "sci fi in a fantasy world" Chaos have almost four flavours(satanic overlords, lovecraftnian abomination, the pagan view of jerkass gods and moorick chaos vs order) Brettonia is clasical high fantasy knight, with the empire can range from a modern high fantasy(with steampunk, shcool of wizard,etc) but the roleplay game is really low fantasy
de Selby
17-03-2016, 23:37
People seem to define high and low fantasy differently. I think the more useful distinction is between what I'd call high and low perspective in story telling. To me, LOTR is a low-perspective fantasy because the story is from the POV of hobbits, not Gandalf or Galadriel. The Silmarillion has a much higher perspective. In ASOIAF the perspective is mostly quite low; we generally don't get POV chapters from even the human movers and shakers, let alone the unseen magical powers that are driving the backdrop story (of ice and fire). Marvel Comics is high perspective; the protagonists are the ones with the super powers.
GW mixes it up: much of the background is ordinary human perspectives on various unearthly antagonists, but we also get material from a higher or non-human perspective. The End Times moved to a higher perspective, with various backdrop characters becoming essentially protagonists of their own stories. AOS seems high perspective with all the characters and armies being supernaturals (I think some ordinary humans appear briefly in some of the books?). GW has also sometimes moved to a higher perspective on particular races in 40k; the Necrons used to be a vague horror viewed from a human perspective but these days we have stories about the individual Necron overlords, their powers and their foibles. They dance around the issue with their Horus Heresy books; should the story be about the Emperor and the Primarchs (high perspective) or about the people who have to live in a world with the Emperor and Primarchs (low perspective)?
Some people think the low perspective is more interesting and some the high. There doesn't seem to be much low-perspective material on the Age of Sigmar for the former group, so they don't like it.
To me, LOTR is a low-perspective fantasy because the story is from the POV of hobbits, not Gandalf or Galadriel.
I agree, it's difficult to make a POV that's lower than that of a hobbit.
I agree, it's difficult to make a POV that's lower than that of a hobbit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRq1Ksh-32g
More seriously, Low Fantasy is a very broad term, but I think TV Tropes has a very good checlist for it: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LowFantasy
So, let's see... Mundane setting. Gods, dragons, vampires, orcs, ogres, ratmen, mechanical horses, wizards, elves, dwarfs... yeah, the Old World wasn't mundane, that's for certain.
Cynicism. Unless you're named Gotrek or Felix, this is an incredibly cynical setting. Check.
Human dominance. Nope; orcs, beastmen and the undead are all individually a threat to the Empire.
Plot scope. While you could argue about wheter Warhammer even had a plot, the setting was about the perpetual threat of human extinction, albeit BL's novels covered far more local conflict. Let's give this one half a check.
Heroism. Mostly anti-heroes or villain protagonists, with a few true heroes. Check.
Methods. Combat, combat, combat. The Power of friendship is pulling your buddy in front of the Norseman who's swinging a sword at you. Check.
Tone. Darker (Chaos, Dark Elves, Beastmen, Daemons, Undead), and more comedic (Orcs, Ogres, Skaven). Check.
Sorcerers. Magic is bad juju in this setting. Check.
War. Except for the War of the Beard, and possibly some conflicts between the Empire and Brettonia (though I can't think of any) most major battles mentioned seem to be between Good and Evil. No check.
Total Low Fantasy score: 5.5/9.
Mike3791
20-03-2016, 18:06
Warhammer was definitely high fantasy. Even the average empire citizen knew about orcs and beastmen, as their villages were always in constant fear of being raided by them. Those were the "common enemies" of the empire.
Also as I become more of a fan of Star Trek, I can blatantly see how 40k based CW/Dark Eldar off of Vulcans and Romulans respectively. Same common ancestry, one is logic and psychic.. other is emotional and non-psychic. Borg=Necron. Some overlap with Klingon and Orc. Etc.
Imo Gav is right, AoS is no less silly then 40k. Image is certainly in the eye of the beholder.
Hellebore
22-03-2016, 22:24
You've got to separate perception from reality.
1000 years ago the average peasant truly thought that there were witches, trolls, goblins, fey etc.
The only difference between that peasant and an Empire peasant is that the empire peasant happens to be correct. But in their day to day life, believing something to be true doesn't make it affect you any more.
Aren't humans massively outnumbered by goblins, orcs, beastmen, and skaven?
I'm not sure you can really describe the Fantasy world as Low Fantasy when there are far more fantastical creatures running around then there are human beings.
Not to mention entire civilizations made up of walking skeletons, Lizardmen etc.
From the point of view of an Empire peasant this creatures might be myths, but when empire peasants make up 1% of the global population that just makes them the ignorant minority, just like (insert your own offensive remark relating to an ignorant subset of our own population).
Imo Gav is right, AoS is no less silly then 40k. Image is certainly in the eye of the beholder.
This may be true in a broad sense. But when I read the Age of Sigmar free excerpts on the BL website (for the novels they launched with the game), it was "Eye of Argon" levels of purple prose and bad writing. It was just turgid and comically bad in a way that most whfb and 40k fiction wasn't/isn't. I've read some of Gav Thorpe's books and he isn't that bad, so maybe his ones are better, but at least the initial wave of fiction was hilariously terrible, and that combined with people being upset with the loss of the developed whfb setting was a one-two punch that has given AoS a bad rep for quality.
Mike3791
24-03-2016, 15:40
You've got to separate perception from reality.
1000 years ago the average peasant truly thought that there were witches, trolls, goblins, fey etc.
The only difference between that peasant and an Empire peasant is that the empire peasant happens to be correct. But in their day to day life, believing something to be true doesn't make it affect you any more.
Are you calling my ancestors liars? ;)
This may be true in a broad sense. But when I read the Age of Sigmar free excerpts on the BL website (for the novels they launched with the game), it was "Eye of Argon" levels of purple prose and bad writing. It was just turgid and comically bad in a way that most whfb and 40k fiction wasn't/isn't.
It's always varied from author to author. Hopefully more novels from good writers add more depth to the franchise. "Warbeast" sounds like a good start, since it gives the individual Stormcast perspective. This is the first AoS novel I'm genuinely interested in, especially as being a fan of the Ultramarine series.
This may be true in a broad sense. But when I read the Age of Sigmar free excerpts on the BL website (for the novels they launched with the game), it was "Eye of Argon" levels of purple prose and bad writing. It was just turgid and comically bad in a way that most whfb and 40k fiction wasn't/isn't. I've read some of Gav Thorpe's books and he isn't that bad, so maybe his ones are better, but at least the initial wave of fiction was hilariously terrible, and that combined with people being upset with the loss of the developed whfb setting was a one-two punch that has given AoS a bad rep for quality.
This. I'm particularly put off by the naming direction they've taken, In the case of the Stormcast they seem to want to overload a model with endless extra titles based on their weaponry, organisation etc, to differentiate what are largely identical models with designations like Liberator Vindicator Persecutor Vigilator etc of the thunder strike demolisher brotherhood of the conqueror chamber of the Golden Grahams.. and as for the Khorne Bloodbound Bloodreaving bloodstoking bloodsnorting bloodbleeding bloody blood warriors..
Having said that, some on warseer have been joking about things like Canis Wolfborn on his wolf and his wolf claws and his wolf earrings etc for years, and I have a dark fear that if I'd never heard of GW until today rather than being hooked age 11, 23 years ago, I'd find all of 40k and old Warhammer as childish and silly as AoS..
I think we're on the same page here. Warhammer has always had a bit of Age of Sigmar in it, but Age of Sigmar is pretty much all Canis Wolfborn, all the time. :rolleyes:
I'm still waiting for the AoS equivalent of Skavenslayer/Lord of the Night. That said, I actually like the short stories they released around christmas (The Unending Storm, The Gift of Khorne, The Prodigal, Gorechosen, The Eighth Victory), but then, I like the Khorne Bloodbound in general.
Col. Tartleton
29-03-2016, 20:31
I'm glad to see this validates my theory that this was planned as far back as 7th edition and 8th edition was written intently with End Times and to a lesser extent Age of Sigmar in mind.
That specific user is rather tame. You can be sure there were loads of less... amiable ones that have been filtered out (and I'm not blaming him).
Hi,
Even the, erm, vehement comments were still civil even if they made assumptions I don't agree with. I've approved all of the ones I received - proof that it's possible to have quite drastic differences of opinion without resorting to attacks, trolling and bad language (even in wargames!).
Cheers,
Gav
I'm glad to see this validates my theory that this was planned as far back as 7th edition and 8th edition was written intently with End Times and to a lesser extent Age of Sigmar in mind.
Not 7th edition, nothing planned that far back. 8th? Maybe not when the rulebook was done but I think wheels must have started in motion not long after. Some of the thematic changes - more cosmic, weird terrain, more fantastical armies - emerged then.
Gav
Not 7th edition, nothing planned that far back. 8th? Maybe not when the rulebook was done but I think wheels must have started in motion not long after. Some of the thematic changes - more cosmic, weird terrain, more fantastical armies - emerged then.
Gav
So maybe around Storm of Magic then? That supplement was always a bit over the top for my taste, but I loved Blood in the Badlands, and I still want to get my old group together and use that book as a setting for a new 8th or KoW campaign.
I wonder if warhammer could have been saved somehow, I figure something could have been done with the ASoIaF craze, especially with the Bretonnians. A tight tournament system, and a separate skirmish system may also have helped.
Hi,
Even the, erm, vehement comments were still civil even if they made assumptions I don't agree with. I've approved all of the ones I received - proof that it's possible to have quite drastic differences of opinion without resorting to attacks, trolling and bad language (even in wargames!).
Cheers,
Gav
My bad then, glad people can have some self-restraint. Considering how polarizing AOS can be around these parts...
I've seen this assertion that WFB is low fantasy crop up a few times now. Just to make this clear for everyone, the difference between high and low fantasy is the world that the story is set in not how many fantastical elements it has nor their importance in the world.
High fantasy takes place in a completely fictional world with its own rules and physics where as low fantasy takes place in our world or the real' world.
So for instance, LOTR (the most prominent example of high fantasy there is) takes place in the fictional Middle Earth which occupies a completely different universe to our own. The most well known example of low fantasy that comes to mind at the moment however is Harry Potter which takes place in the real world (though whether you consider the 90's to be a rational world could be debatable) but with the inclusion of huge amounts of fantastic elements.
This places WFB (and of course AOS) squarely in the high fantasy genre along with the previously mentioned by other posters, ASOIAF by the way.
Sorry for continuing the off-topic and right after Gav himself joined the thread. Maybe if GT gives his own views on this I won't be so off-topic anymore:P
Col. Tartleton
31-03-2016, 10:53
Not 7th edition, nothing planned that far back. 8th? Maybe not when the rulebook was done but I think wheels must have started in motion not long after. Some of the thematic changes - more cosmic, weird terrain, more fantastical armies - emerged then.
Gav
I meant after 7th was "in the can" they were writing 8th as a lead in to an End Times (because Storm of Chaos was kind of mediocre) and then starting to piece together the early ideas of Age of Sigmar. 8th came out in 2010. In 2011 we had Storm of Magic. By 2013 we had Sigmar's Blood. All the while the army books seem to be setting up a lead in for End Times as best they could. 2014 was Nagash. Then 2015 was Age of Sigmar.
Thommy H
31-03-2016, 11:38
I don't think it's useful (or even possible) to define the fantasy genre along a high-low binary axis. There are dozens of fantasy genres and no two people agree exactly on their definitions, rather like music. If forced to name some categories and where the various Warhammer settings fit though, this is how I'd go about it:
High Fantasy (which might be divided into Heroic and Epic Fantasy, if you're so inclined) is the genre of good vs evil (or law vs chaos...) and quests to determine the fate of the world, or even the universe. Magic is powerful and usually only dangerous if misused for nefarious ends, though it may still be mysterious to the protagonists - chances are one or more of them will learn how to use it before the story ends though! It can be set on our own world too (note to the poster above: Middle Earth is Earth, not a separate universe). High Fantasy includes LOTR, Wheel of Time, the novels of David and Leigh Eddings, most classic D&D settings and Warhammer Fantasy Battle if you played High Elves, Lizardmen or Bretonnians in 5th Edition.
Low Fantasy is a genre where people are basically still people, even if they live in a fantastical place. Magic is an unknown force, dangerous even to experienced practitioners are rarely affects most people's lives. Good and evil aren't defined (despite what - possibly corrupt - religious institutions might claim) and if the alleged hero slaughters masses of Orcs he might have to atone for it, legally or spiritually. Gods are rarely seen, and may not even exist. The ur-example for these purposes is WHFRP, but others include the earlier Robin Hobb books and most Discworld novels (particularly those involving the Watch). You can see from these examples that Low Fantasy can exist even in worlds saturated with magic!
Swords and Sorcery is like Low Fantasy, but the emphasis is on adventurers of dubious morality. Magic shows up all the time, but it's usually only wielded by villains; often it's dangerous and corrupting. 'Good' magic might be divine or derived from natural or elemental forces, and has a distinct flavour. There is a lot of evil in Swords and Sorcery but rarely much good! The protagonists seek wealth or glory and are only coincidentally heroic. The classic example is Conan, but you'll also find it in D&D's Dark Sun setting and the Gotrek and Felix novels. It shows up sometimes as Planetary Fantasy (like John Carter of Mars), Swords and Sandals (Xena et al) and overlaps with High Fantasy in the early Discworld novels.
Comic Fantasy is Low Fantasy disguised as High Fantasy. Magic is silly and contradictory. Protagonists look like heroes but are really murderous thugs, and Orcs are unionized. Discworld started out like this but grew. Pertinent to this thread, WHFRP had aspects of this genre built in.
Pulp Fantasy is a bit like Swords and Sorcery, but adds in mechanistic magic which is often used in place of technology. Magic is an understood force and is integrated into everyday lives, even to the extent that non-practitioners can use it. PP's Iron Kingdoms and D&D's Ebberon settings are this, as are some later Discworld books, Phillip Pullman's novels and The Empire and Dwarfs of WHFB. Victorian, or Victorian-esque, settings fit here, as well as almost any fantasy genre with the '-punk' suffix. Weirdly, Harry Potter is a mix of this and High Fantasy.
Urban Fantasy has a modern setting, but is otherwise Pulp-, Low- or even High Fantasy. Shadowrun, D20 Modern's Urban Arcana settings and media properties like Hellblazer, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and True Blood belong to this genre.
Dark Fantasy or Gothic Fantasy is Low Fantasy that doesn't even pretend to be pleasant. This overlaps with horror a lot. If you spent time in Sylvania or Mordheim, you'll be familiar with this. A side-note is Cosmic Horror, more or less invented by HP Lovecraft, which is like Low Fantasy in a lot of ways, but normally has a modern setting and is concerned with the utter indifference and inscrutability of the fantastic beings that are encountered. Cosmic Horror shows up in WHFB in the form of the Chaos Gods and their maddening Realms.
Finally, a recent one: Cosmic Fantasy. This is like High Fantasy but adds in certain sci-fi trappings. Note that it's different from Science/Space Fantasy (like Star Wars) which has magic but calls it technology. In Cosmic Fantasy, magic is real and there are gods and monsters, but also planets, stars and even spaceships. Magic is very powerful, and usually safe in the right hands. Protagonists are larger than life (often literally), and battles concern the fate of the very cosmos. The genre was basically pioneered in comics, with examples including the New Gods series and, especially in its cinematic adaptations, Thor and his Asgard setting. D&D's Spelljammer setting broadly fits here, though in its scope it's often more Swords and Sorcery. This is also, finally reaching my point, where you'll find Age of Sigmar.
All IMO, of course...
Col. Tartleton
31-03-2016, 23:46
As an example in The Chronicles of Narnia the parts where they're in our world is Low Fantasy and the parts when they're in Narnia is High Fantasy.
I think even Gav finds it hard to defend some of the decisions by GW
Zenithfleet
01-04-2016, 14:42
Given the ongoing low/high fantasy debate (and thanks Thommy for the excellent rundown above :) ), it might be worth having a read of what Gav himself has had to say on the subject in the past.
F'rinstance, his 2012 blog post Elf Preservation Part 2 (http://gavthorpe.co.uk/2012/05/18/elf-preservation-part-two/). Some great points made there. Especially this bit:
"Warhammer has its cake and eats it. It has orcs and dwarfs and elves, and treemen and dragons and goblins, and daemons and vampires and giants and barbarians and sorcerers and necromancers and yes, even Halflings and dark lords. By the nature of its original purpose and slow evolution, Warhammer is chock full of pretty much every traditional and not-so-traditional fantasy trope one could throw at a world.
And it also has realism. It is gritty and dark, with themes of power and ambition (the lure of Chaos) as well as a blurred sense of good and evil. Heroes abound, of both the knightly charging-about-slaying-dragons variety and the more modern flexible-morality-fighting-to-survive kind. It has villains of equal diversity. And it does this with depth, humour and a very British sensibility. It is both High and Low fantasy, of epic battles and desperate sewer struggles."
The rest of the blog post is a good read too. (Though, erm, I can't help feel a certain irony when a Black Library author dismisses certain types of fantasy as 'drivel'. I'm not having a go at Gav's own work, and he can dislike whatever he wants, but yeesh, people in glass publishing houses... :p )
And in response I'll just throw in my own two cents:
Yes, one of WFB's strengths as a setting was and is its ability to accommodate practically anything. Want Egyptians? Have some deceased ones for extra Egyptianity. Steampunk? We got tanks and ratmen. Dungeon bashes? Come play in these old Dwarf holds. Sword-and-sorcery hardscrabble scavenging in the ruins of a spooky city? Sure, here's a comet we prepared earlier. Same with 40K: when they wanted to do Mad Max, they plonked some Orks on a desert planet and made Gorkamorka. The kitchen-sink nature of both Warhammer settings was, it seems to me, the point.
And it could have accommodated Age of Sigmar without breaking a sweat. People have suggested a partial apocalypse to knock over a few sandcastles without blowing up the whole planet, but even that wouldn't be necessary. Just set AoS in WFB's Realm of Chaos, fer chrissakes. Beyond the polar warp gate(s). The gods are always fighting each other, there's all kinds of weird ever-changing realms and landscapes, and presumably Sigmar's in there too, holding his own. Or was. It could have been an ongoing battle in the heavens/hells paralleling the worldly struggle. We could still have had Stormcast Eternals and whatever else the designers felt like making. I mean, the RoC is a wacky kinda place.
Whether or not the AoS background develops into something magnificent in time, GW already had a setting with 30 years of development behind it. Which they threw out. As far as I can tell, that's the main reason why many people are so angry about this whole AoS thing. Not the fluff's current quality or lack thereof. Not the rules. Not the Sigmarines. Not the round bases. Not that it's something new and different. Those would all be forgiveable or at least tolerable--if it hadn't replaced something old and beloved.
There was no need to destroy the village in order to save it.
So for instance, LOTR (the most prominent example of high fantasy there is) takes place in the fictional Middle Earth which occupies a completely different universe to our own.
As the drive-by nitpicker on this thread, I feel I should point out that this isn't strictly correct. LotR takes place in our own mythical prehistory, not a separate universe. The framing device is that Tolkien is merely 'translating' and 'editing' ancient documents that record the quest for the Lonely Mountain, the War of the Ring, etc. In fact, a lot of it is inspired by philological speculation and in-jokes (like our 'Hey Diddle Diddle' rhyme being a worn-down remnant of the song sung in Fellowship).
Drasanil
03-04-2016, 10:14
I've seen this assertion that WFB is low fantasy crop up a few times now. Just to make this clear for everyone, the difference between high and low fantasy is the world that the story is set in not how many fantastical elements it has nor their importance in the world.
High fantasy takes place in a completely fictional world with its own rules and physics where as low fantasy takes place in our world or the real' world.
So for instance, LOTR (the most prominent example of high fantasy there is) takes place in the fictional Middle Earth which occupies a completely different universe to our own. The most well known example of low fantasy that comes to mind at the moment however is Harry Potter which takes place in the real world (though whether you consider the 90's to be a rational world could be debatable) but with the inclusion of huge amounts of fantastic elements.
This places WFB (and of course AOS) squarely in the high fantasy genre along with the previously mentioned by other posters, ASOIAF by the way.
Sorry for continuing the off-topic and right after Gav himself joined the thread. Maybe if GT gives his own views on this I won't be so off-topic anymore:P
Leaving aside that you failed at LoTR rather spectacularly. Please, go forth and try to convince the masses that ASOIAF is higher fantasy than Harry Potter and see how far that gets you :shifty:
Leaving aside that you failed at LoTR rather spectacularly. Please, go forth and try to convince the masses that ASOIAF is higher fantasy than Harry Potter and see how far that gets you :shifty:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_high_fantasy_fiction?wprov=sfla1
You may want to check under M and R respectively before you get back on your high horse.
We've really reached the point when people actually take Wikipedia for granted?
There aren't any officially recognized 'institute of defining what is high- and what is low- fantasy' so I suppose anyone can have their own definition.
However, isn't it rather presumptuous to claim that the only thing that matters is whether the story nominally takes place in our own world and disregard any other considerations, such as if there are magical and fantastical stuff going on around our protagonists, basically all the time, everywhere?
Sure, if that's your definition, Harry potter would be low fantasy. But that hardly match with pretty much anyone else's understanding of the terminology.
ryng_sting
08-04-2016, 22:50
Hi Gav,
Long shot, but here goes.
One of the story threads left over from the End Times series was the fate of Araloth and the Haven.
Are you aware of any future plans to cover whatever it was that befell them?
Ultimate Life Form
10-04-2016, 00:06
Hi Gav,
Long shot, but here goes.
One of the story threads left over from the End Times series was the fate of Araloth and the Haven.
Are you aware of any future plans to cover whatever it was that befell them?
Yes, I have been wondering the same lately. I wonder how many people still desperately cling to the hope that there might exist a legitimate successor to the Warhammer world someplace, sometime. It might be some cruel last kick in the butt by GW though.
Hi Gav,
Long shot, but here goes.
One of the story threads left over from the End Times series was the fate of Araloth and the Haven.
Are you aware of any future plans to cover whatever it was that befell them?
Hi,
I am not aware of any plans. They doesn't mean they don't exist, I genuinely just don't know either way.
Cheers,
Gav
I'd ask the same question about Skarsnik, but I guess we shouldn't open the question flood-gates upon you :p
Hi Gav,
Long shot, but here goes.
One of the story threads left over from the End Times series was the fate of Araloth and the Haven.
Are you aware of any future plans to cover whatever it was that befell them?
I was under the impression that Belakor caught wind of them while spying in Athel Loren and tipped chaos off to corrupt/destroy them. In Book V Lileath (sp?) indicated she could no longer feel their presence.
Although in counter point they are taking their sweet time building out the "Where are the elves" in AOS. It is possible Tyrion/Malekith will shed some light on the haven during their story arc reveal which I'd assume will talk more about the fate of Slaanesh.
Cčsar de Quart
12-04-2016, 20:48
I was under the impression that Belakor caught wind of them while spying in Athel Loren and tipped chaos off to corrupt/destroy them. In Book V Lileath (sp?) indicated she could no longer feel their presence.
Although in counter point they are taking their sweet time building out the "Where are the elves" in AOS. It is possible Tyrion/Malekith will shed some light on the haven during their story arc reveal which I'd assume will talk more about the fate of Slaanesh.
If Be'lakor really destroyed the Haven, then it's the most useless plot thread in the whole End Times ranking of anticlimactic plot threads. I do hope they used it to some extent in the new setting.
I wasn't sold on the idea that the elf souls Slaanesh devoured were chilling inside of the Beast's belly. It kind of negates the whole fear of Slaanesh thing. If they did this in 40k it would kill one of the most striking ideas the Eldar are developed upon: they have to spend Eternity imprisoned in crystal shards or else they'll be consumed, destroyed, by a Chaos God.
That's terrifying. But having them spend time inside of Slaanesh? That's... several levels of stupid, narratively speaking. It destroys the essence of why Slaanesh was fearful to the elves.
I like that AoS went on to kill or weaken Slaanesh as a way to free the new Elves from them, that's allrgith. But going as far as remaking the concept into mere prison instead of utter oblivion... They could have avenged the Elves. That would have been fine. But not this.
**
I, for one, don't really care if the setting says this or that. All I want is that this new "Freeguild" thing is the new "old Empire" line and that they continue selling and making Empire miniatures. I've been waiting 25 years for new Knights on shining armour, God damn it! And I ain't settling for some overpiced chicken knights!
ryng_sting
12-04-2016, 22:09
I was under the impression that Belakor caught wind of them while spying in Athel Loren and tipped chaos off to corrupt/destroy them. In Book V Lileath (sp?) indicated she could no longer feel their presence.
I read it as something more ambiguous. We don't know for certain they got chomped, only that Lileath can no longer sense them. Given that Chaos has by this point done to the weave what a rugby team does to the men's toilet on a Saturday night, that the Elves took care to ensure Be'lakor couldn't slink off and blab about his find, and that Lileath has lost her powers...there's room for other interpretations. I find it more interesting to think their story will continue in some way. I'm not saying I'm right, of course; and it'd be entirely plausible if Slaanesh simply made a midnight snack of the whole bunch of them.
And sincerest thanks to Gav. Greatly enjoyed the Dark Angel trilogy, and I hope you enjoyed writing Asmodai's scenes in particular as much as I enjoyed reading them.
Hi Gav,
Long shot, but here goes.
One of the story threads left over from the End Times series was the fate of Araloth and the Haven.
Are you aware of any future plans to cover whatever it was that befell them?
That was hilarious. Reading through that I thought "here we go, a place where the elves and the greatest spirits of the heroes of Men (Grail Knights) can go and hide from the destruction of the Old World, to be found by Sigmar in the new world and used as the basis for AoS's Sigmarite faction of super-humans....and it's gone."
Definitely the point where the author realized he only had 10 pages left to end the book! On second reading through that set, it becomes apparent how extremely sloppy the ET series quickly becomes, especially the last book. Not that the quality of the first was amazing or anything, but either they lost the whiteboard that they were using to keep all their plot threads in line, or they cut 100pages from the final product.
Ultimate Life Form
14-04-2016, 04:04
As far as I understood it the End Times books were written by numerous authors who simultaneously worked on the series; even the same book. Plus, they had to meet pretty harsh deadlines. It's a textbook example of the right hands not knowing what the left hands are writing, and vice versa. One of them even admitted that he simply forgot to put Skarsnik into the final book, simply because so much was going on at once. It also explains the plethora of orthographic mistakes.
Of course this is no excuse for releasing a heavily flawed product, but GW never had any qualms sacrificing quality for quick money. We should be used to it by now. What I'm saying is, the system is to blame, not the individual authors. As a result I wouldn't put too much weight into anything written in the End Times. You may want to read great meaning into every single line like the author tried to convey some secret message or subtle hints but the truth is most of it is just filler material to meet the page requirement. There is no literary finesse or quality to be found or expected, sadly.
That being said, it's not a novel or anything, we didn't need "literary finesse" (I'm sorry, but it sounds awfully snobish :p). As a straight retelling of the events, I wish there actually had even less of that, and more retelling of more events. With the scope of the thing, we didn't need to have Gelt's inner thoughts, the feelings of skavens as they cross a mist-covered swamp or whathaveyou. On the other hand, hearing about what happens to the rest of the world in more details, or not have characters like skarsnik forgoten altogether, that would have been nice. Archaon should have been volume 6, and there should have been another volume somewhere in the middle (after Khaine, I guess), really.
Craze_b0i
15-04-2016, 14:37
I think that what Gave says here emphatizies exactly what's the problem with AoS:
"If Warhammer was about anything (and if 40K has a central theme), it was about the struggle against Chaos representing our own fears and least desirable aspects destroying us from within. If Age of Sigmar represents anything, it is of our best traits straining to rise above our worst, the indomitable spirit to overcome (rather than stubborn refusal of the inevitable). Hope, not hopelessness"
I had a problem with this as well. This stuff about best traits rising above the worst and indomitable spirit is hardly a reference to the common man, it's essentially talking about the martial prowess of a bunch of magically enhanced super-soldiers and pitching said magically enhanced super-soldiers as the solution to all human problems. It's basically the same premise as stuff like He-Man.
Ultimate Life Form
15-04-2016, 15:07
Now you know what the designers watched in their youth. Seriously, the many parallels to He-Man are just too obvious to ignore.
I have nothing against He-Man. It's an alright show for what it is. A fun cartoon for little kids. The same could probably be said for AoS. The problem is it replaced Warhammer. It's like cancelling Star Trek for Biker Mice from Mars.
Also one could argue that He-Man was indeed the story of a cowardly boy getting his stuff together to be the greatest hero of mankind. Granted, he was a prince and not a commoner, but a very sucky prince. And it is shown that usually he had to rely on his friends, and only together could they overcome the grave peril that would befall the land time and time again. Plus, He-Man had a face. A very memorable face, and also a very stupid hairdo. It is really a wonder that his friends never recognized him. I doubt there are many people in the universe with such a cheesy mullet.
Now compare that to the Stormcasts who all look like they might just as well be clone troopers... and are sent to the slaughter just as easily. It is kind of hard to care for them.
Kyriakin
15-04-2016, 18:40
I think there is indeed a very interesting parallel to be drawn between the WWE and GW. Not least , their complete tone-deafness of what their fans want.
AoS is GW trying to push the game the brass want to play. Remove points and balancing mechanisms, push the game as a "narrative" experience where having a good and friendly experience isn't just the main consideration, but the only one.
WWE has similarly a out-of touch old owner who push his superman fantasy wrestlers (Cena, Reigns) with their stale characters despite massive resentment from fans. GW even has their version of NXT in FW. (a smaller sub-section of the company with far less resources but one who get what their fans is interested in and tries to appease them, instead of creating what they want and then tell the customers they should like it).
Wargaming is similar to wrestling in that wins and losses don't really count, certainly not in the way they do in real sports, it's more about the experience and the story told. Still, having wins and losses matter 'in-universe' and to acknowledge them 'out-of-universe' (by attempting to create a balanced rulesystem for example) is very important to make people invested and to help them suspend their disbelief.
Definitely parallels between the edgy Golden Era of WWF Attitude/6th Ed. and the designed-by-committee, overly corporate PG output of the WWE and GW nowadays. Interestingly both of those edgy Golden Eras followed a mid-90s cartoonish period (GW's "Red Era" and WWF New Generation), which in turn followed a late-80s heyday.
So yea, many parallels between GW and the WWE/F.
By the way, Mantic are definitely TNA. Doing much the same thing, but on a smaller scale and with many disgruntled ex-workers from the industry behemoth. Anti-WWE/GW types will try to get them traction, but, frankly, both TNA and Mantic still produce an inferior product IMHO.
Definitely parallels between the edgy Golden Era of WWF Attitude/6th Ed. and the designed-by-committee, overly corporate PG output of the WWE and GW nowadays. Interestingly both of those edgy Golden Eras followed a mid-90s cartoonish period (GW's "Red Era" and WWF New Generation), which in turn followed a late-80s heyday.
So yea, many parallels between GW and the WWE/F.
Glad to see I'm not the only one seeing the similarities. Wargaming and wrestling fandom has a lot more in common than what first meet the eye I think. The whole concept of different wrestlers being pushed/buried is kinda similar to when armies get boosted/nerfed, either in rules or in the background.:)
By the way, Mantic are definitely TNA. Doing much the same thing, but on a smaller scale and with many disgruntled ex-workers from the industry behemoth. Anti-WWE/GW types will try to get them traction, but, frankly, both TNA and Mantic still produce an inferior product IMHO.
Maybe early TNA, but I think a better parallell today would be to have Mantic as RoH. At least If we view it as:
Models = Wrestler starpower/recognizability and production values
Rules quality = Storylines, booking and psychology
TNA does fit the ex-workers mold and initially was drawing in the disgruntled WWE fans who wanted an alternative, so for a while they were Mantic. But TNA eventually became a WWE-light who doubled down on the same problems WWE had with nonsensical story-lines and garbage writing becoming a second edition of WCW at it's worse basically.
In this way Mantic is more ROH. Mantic have a more appreciated rules system, but like RoH is let down by their bad production values, Mantic has a bad rep about their models, making many players unwilling to check them out even if they're getting increasingly dissatisfied by the industry behemoth. As long as GW has the best models (and at least gives lip-service to producing a rules system, i.e not just AoS) and WWE keeps the best wrestlers, the fans largely stays. Even though they get more and more disillusioned by their rules and their booking respectively.
In this analogy, I guess Privateer Press would be Lucha underground?
Glad to see I'm not the only one seeing the similarities. Wargaming and wrestling fandom has a lot more in common than what first meet the eye I think. The whole concept of different wrestlers being pushed/buried is kinda similar to when armies get boosted/nerfed, either in rules or in the background.:)
Maybe early TNA, but I think a better parallell today would be to have Mantic as RoH. At least If we view it as:
Models = Wrestler starpower/recognizability and production values
Rules quality = Storylines, booking and psychology
TNA does fit the ex-workers mold and initially was drawing in the disgruntled WWE fans who wanted an alternative, so for a while they were Mantic. But TNA eventually became a WWE-light who doubled down on the same problems WWE had with nonsensical story-lines and garbage writing becoming a second edition of WCW at it's worse basically.
In this way Mantic is more ROH. Mantic have a more appreciated rules system, but like RoH is let down by their bad production values, Mantic has a bad rep about their models, making many players unwilling to check them out even if they're getting increasingly dissatisfied by the industry behemoth. As long as GW has the best models (and at least gives lip-service to producing a rules system, i.e not just AoS) and WWE keeps the best wrestlers, the fans largely stays. Even though they get more and more disillusioned by their rules and their booking respectively.
In this analogy, I guess Privateer Press would be Lucha underground?
All this talk about wrestling just makes me think of one of my favorite Spoony quotes: "The burying of Daniel Bryan will continue, until you say you like Roman Reigns!" Or, in this case, "The burying of OldHammer will continue, until you say you like Age of Sigmar!"
More seriously, I'm not even sure what GW wants their fluff to be any more. As is, I feel like they're stradling this fence between the historical-account stylings of the old army books, and a BL novel, and all this 50/50 approach is doing is grinding splinters into their crotch (there's a metaphor in here somewhere *lights oil-lamp*). As for the novels themselves... eh. I always felt like BL was best when it churned out schlocky pulp-novels like Fleshworks or Skavenslayer. The AoS stuff they've produced thus far's mostly just left me cold, 'cept for a few Khornate short-stories I picked up. It's really kind of silly fun watching a Khornate champ's mounting frustration over not being able to perma-kill a Stormcast despite landing a killing blow several times.
GrandmasterWang
17-04-2016, 10:07
Loving the wwe analogy... it is very apt.
Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
hardly a reference to the common man
ether was fantasy, I mean your nation was founding by pretty thor, the leader where nobleman with super armor who fight in griffion, HOW is this related with the comon men?
I just fight hilarious how people atach to the underdog even when is clear it isnt at all, I never feel any "thing that resonate with the comon men" in fantasy at all.
The bearded one
26-04-2016, 01:42
ether was fantasy, I mean your nation was founding by pretty thor, the leader where nobleman with super armor who fight in griffion, HOW is this related with the comon men?
I just fight hilarious how people atach to the underdog even when is clear it isnt at all, I never feel any "thing that resonate with the comon men" in fantasy at all.
Tbh one of the things I enjoyed about (the way in which I perceived) fantasy was that the Empire's (the setting's go-to point-of-view faction) usual response to a problem like "A marauding horde of hulking greenskins wielding blunt meatcleavers the size of your torso just assaulted a nearby village!" was not to send in an army of superhuman warriors with magic armour, magic weapons and magic naming conventions.
Oh no, no.
Their go-to response to an orc raiding party is "send in the regiments of completely unremarkable regular dudes, with pointy sticks and puffy sleeves!" Raiding party's got trolls? "Send in additional stick-wielders! With feathery hats!"
Yes yes I know they got demigryph knights and stuff in the final edition - but even they are supposed to only be like 2-3 dozen strong across the country.
The core element of warhammer fantasy that I thought was really neat was that it's basically as if they plunked the holy roman empire in a fantasy setting, and then allowed them to keep fighting like the holy roman empire: pointy sticks, gunpowder, and class privileges. And the fact that the pointy sticks actually worked reasonably well, was very nice. It made the world feel grounded, despite the fact you'd come across increasingly high fantasy elements the further you looked outward from the empire. The solution to a drunken giant flattening villagers was still to poke it really hard with halberds. That, or decapitate it with a lucky cannon shot. Not by sending in the superhero wielding his magic hammer of wowness. We tried that, but warrior priest Gunther got stuffed in the giant's pants instead.
I must admit my first reactions to AOS were pretty visceral. They still are, to some degree. But at this point I've just decided to be kinda ambivalent about it, and maybe give bits that seem appealing/interesting a fair shot when they present themselves. But I share a lot of the problems other people have with it; it's so.. 'Epicy epic' with magicy wowy superheroes, but lacking depth so far.
That's a problem that is really compounded by the fact that presently it still feels like a warhammer milkshake where all these old warhammer elements (characters, factions, very context-specific units) were stuck in a blender and then they reappear all over the place in AoS, but completely seperated from their previous context. Some of these were actually explicitely murdered/destroyed in the end times. Someone in Gav's comments put the BIGGEST problem I have really succinctly when he said "The Warhammer world has been destroyed, and now the plot consists of various groups of nebulous figures floating around in spheres, in a universe that no longer has any structure or rules." I don't know what this world looks like; there's no solid structure to it at all, except that every place is a surreal magic wasteland where legions of high-fantasy warriors spring up out of the ground to battle eachother over intangible locations. Is there even a worldmap?
I just??? Don't know what to do with it?? I really want to try but.. It's almost like the very concept of 'context' itself got annihilated.
Maybe I should check back in a few years, when the world has actually coalesced into something tangible and fixed.
Yes yes I know they got demigryph knights and stuff in the final edition - but even they are supposed to only be like 2-3 dozen strong across the country.
And wizard of 8 diferent variaties, some of them with great stuff that shoot solar beams, the fact that each noble have powerfull sword, the freaking steam tanks or the hammer of sigmar, the guy who got there by killing a shoggot, defeating Nagash(THE LICH) and so own.
despite the fact you'd come across increasingly high fantasy elements the further you looked outward from the empire
That is the best understand I have ever see in this place, lets give a look:
-There is race of rat man beneah them that outnumber EVERYONE almost 200 to 1, but not only that they have super tech,super bio tech, freaking rat ninjas and whatever the hell pestilens are
-Elves-atlantis who uses magic in regular basis, have phoenix, lions and guy who live almost 500 years who battle their cousing who use Hydras,manticores and dragons who are lead by a 2000-years all guy in armour, that is not counting the other elfs in the super-duper magical fores
-We have Dwarft in the super duper fortress-vaults with other 200 years old with gold, mithil and other stuff battleing the green fungi men and rat man and with time, their evil cousing who unleash magical stuff at them.
Do I need to go own? because what you describe is a case of perception, it isnt grounded, it LOOKS grounded
there's no solid structure to it at all, except that every place is a surreal magic wasteland where legions of high-fantasy warriors spring up out of the ground to battle eachother over intangible locations. Is there even a worldmap?
To be fair that was the issue in regular warhammer for a lot of time, there wasnt nothing special in the world aside of "this is fantasi germany, chaos try to wack the place every now and them, you suck" and....that it, GW have not learn that lesion about doing the worldbulding necesary to a least know what things are what, instead throwing hint here and there, things like capital bulings, racial leaders and stuff would be nice, so far they are including but they have take to much and instead go right into the battle. that maybe is too much
The bearded one
26-04-2016, 18:34
Look I'm not really trying to argue warhammer is that much low fantasy (though there's enough low fantasy background available that you could do stuff like run RP adventures solving regular murder mysteries in empire towns if you wanted to), there's plenty about it that makes it high fantasy. AoS is several steps more high fantasy though.
But what I do want to argue, is that in warhammer the baseline of comparison is still regular unremarkable human soldier with his unremarkable pointy stick, and I don't feel like I have that baseline in AoS. Everything is epicy epic, which makes it all rather... meaningless. Is a stormcast powerful? I.. I guess? I dunno? Everybody has high fantasy levels of power. In 40k for example space marines' power is qualified by the fact they are ultra rare and most of the weight of warfare is born by normal guardsmen, to which the marines stand out in comparison.
Add to that, that there's a distinct lack of context and specifics about the realms in AoS. It feels like a massive empty sandbox in which factions rampage in circles at random. I don't know if there is anything in the realms to care about. Maybe they will get to actually filling in the world in the coming years, but at the moment it's not very interesting
Had they done the courtesy of putting in a simple worldmap in the first AoS book - even if they all just quickly made it up without any detail to these places - I'd feel like I have somewhere to start. Right now I'm just floating in the dark. There's a spaceship where stormcast eternals respawn, and some realms.
I'll check back in a year.
But what I do want to argue, is that in warhammer the baseline of comparison is still regular unremarkable human soldier with his unremarkable pointy stick, and I don't feel like I have that baseline in AoS. Everything is epicy epic, which makes it all rather... meaningless. Is a stormcast powerful? I.. I guess? I dunno? Everybody has high fantasy levels of power. In 40k for example space marines' power is qualified by the fact they are ultra rare and most of the weight of warfare is born by normal guardsmen, to which the marines stand out in comparison.
And yet the focus is always the marine ever to overcome things and the fan play the guard as batman style of "defeating everyone but they are still just a man" which is have become annoying in itself(I sill cant see how they stand that badly piece of fluff that is ollinaus pius)
And yet that is all perception, in Warhammer fantasy almost half of special chararter are noble, have some magical stuff and pretty much grater than life(and that is only in the human, more regular factions)
And we the other I kind agree with you, what we need are point of reference, like "this place is where Sigmar is, this other is Nagash,etc,etc" and the fill thing as they go
The bearded one
26-04-2016, 22:35
I think what I want to say is that (for example) a chaos warrior is a damn scary prospect, because we know how much beyond a normal man a chaos warrior is, and that's a matchup you will come across in warhammer thousands of times. ... Do regular humans still... do they still exist in AoS? Maybe? I have no baseline human connection. Even if 40k gives inordinate focus on marines, it doesn't completely exclude baseline humans from the narrative, and it makes use of basic humans in order to ground the story a little and to offer comparison to what's supposed to be impressive and powerful all the time.
If I didn't know better (I don't.) I'd think peasants were an endangered species in AoS. Do they have a wildlife reserve where they try to keep the species alive from the rampaging stormcast legions?
There are plenty of fantasy settings that are high fantasy in the style of AoS. And they're fine. Not my cup of tea, but whatever. But AoS replaced a setting that I did really love, while being its polar opposite in many regards, and that irks me. Shining gods of war obliterating a pack of river trolls isn't as fun an image to me as a spearmen levy trying to poke them to death really hard with elbow grease.
And I think a big sexy smexy worldmap should've been the first step for AoS. Give us something nice to look over. Cool maps with peculiar names to draw attentuon are always a good selling point for a fantasy setting.
I think The Bearded One has it. It's not so much what AoS is but what it has replaced. Warhammer was a very different setting, and fans of one won't necessarily be fans of the other. Perhaps the lack of detail in AoS would be excusable if this wasn't the case (early Warhammer's background was mostly vague), but the comparisons are unavoidable when it's intended as a successor.
The scale of the setting is itself a problem. The Warhammer world, large as it was (and mainly unexplored by background even after thirty years), had boundaries you could visualise. The cosmic nature of the AoS setting makes it feel too broad. What are the stakes? Does anything really matter?
(early Warhammer's background was mostly vague)
Not really, the Warhammer World was pretty much fleshed out from the get go (or at least within a year, or so). Of course, it was changed and retconned several times, but most of thw locations were in place, most of the factions were in place in some versions, and even the world history timeline...
Sent fra min SM-G930F via Tapatalk
Not really, the Warhammer World was pretty much fleshed out from the get go (or at least within a year, or so). Of course, it was changed and retconned several times, but most of thw locations were in place, most of the factions were in place in some versions, and even the world history timeline...
Sent fra min SM-G930F via Tapatalk
That's just wrong. The background for Warhammer (assuming we're talking from kind of 2nd edition onwards where things like the Old World started to form and through into 3rd edition) came about through lots of different books, roleplaying supplements and WD articles. Snippets in Warhammer Armies, for instance. Much of the metaphysical side and the nature of Chaos wasn't detailed until the Realm of Chaos Books came out (the third edition rulebook still had generic Demonology, for instance). The Winds of Magic and Impoerial Colleges were in article in WD first after Brian Ansell read Terry Prachett's Colour of Magic, after 3rd edition came out. And the Empire didn't really become the Empire we know until the WFRP series.
Perhaps you're thinking from 4th edition onwards?
Cheers,
Gav
Gav, you may well be right (I only have 4th edition onwards, played 3rd but didn't own it and was just a kid). However, that was 30 years ago. You of all people should understand how brutally crowded and competitive the market for fantasy and scifi products is now.
There is no time to just grow the Mortal Realms as a universe, iteratively, over 5 years - few of us have the time or inclination to give it that much breathing space. It needed to land and work from the start and IMO it doesn't.
TBO has voiced my opinion much more succinctly and politely than I could have.
ewar: but it wasn't just evolving back then, it also changed massively. Prior to 4th ed, do you know how the goblin wars started? In a brawl fight in a pub between a dwarf lord whose name eludes me and, I believe, a very different Grom to the one we later had. They were having a drink (you read that right) and they started arguing and it turned into a war.
I know that that is the history of the Old World - but that was then and this is now. GW can't say "Oh, well H.G.Wells had years to grow the War of the Worlds IP" as times have changed.
Nobody launches stuff half baked any more because we are all grown fat on mature, expansive, interesting fantasy universes. AoS is only one of those things (hint: it is not mature or interesting :) )
It may sound unfair to judge something so new, so harshly. But really, you get one chance to wow people. I, and many others, are not wowed. That ship has sadly sailed...
I know that that is the history of the Old World - but that was then and this is now. GW can't say "Oh, well H.G.Wells had years to grow the War of the Worlds IP" as times have changed.
Nobody launches stuff half baked any more because we are all grown fat on mature, expansive, interesting fantasy universes. AoS is only one of those things (hint: it is not mature or interesting :) )
It may sound unfair to judge something so new, so harshly. But really, you get one chance to wow people. I, and many others, are not wowed. That ship has sadly sailed...
I dunno, I wasn't exactly sold on AOS also, and I am pretty bitter over the Old World going kaput. But even so, after having some time to come to terms with that, and the fact that AOS will never really replace Warhammer Fantasy, I am somewhat open now to seeing the universe mature as its own entity, and progress into becoming a successor to the old setting.
Honestly, it was probably this model that really got me willing to give it chance though.
227217
I have literally wanted something that looks like this for the Chaos range since ever, and it was ironically Age of Sigmar that finally brought it.
Gav, if you're still here, can you please, please, please, please one day give a story to this mini?
"Previous Marauder Champion model from 6th edition looked at Khorne based units released in End Times of 8th, thought "wow, those guys look even sillier than me!" and sacrificed the rest of his unit to finally gain his dream of being da buffest der werz."
"Previous Marauder Champion model from 6th edition looked at Khorne based units released in End Times of 8th, thought "wow, those guys look even sillier than me!" and sacrificed the rest of his unit to finally gain his dream of being da buffest der werz."
Explain this to me, though, when did Warhammer ever have aesthetic subtlety?
227231
Explain this to me, though, when did Warhammer ever have aesthetic subtlety?
227231
That's true, but at least those models had something vaguely approaching human anatomy. That new guy has muscles growing out of his inner elbow - I mean, how the hell does he even move his arms?! He'd be the easiest champion of chaos to defeat ever, given his arms would always be stuck out rigidly straight from his body :)
Explain this to me, though, when did Warhammer ever have aesthetic subtlety?
227231
A new wave of realism and grit got introduced right before the 6th edition and continued up to the point the first plastic daemons of the 7th started replacing their metal counterparts that Juan Diaz made. After that Warhammer grew more stylised again, probably for IP concerns or something, I don't know. And then we have of course AoS with GW slowly easing in a new scale. Technically it's still the old 25mm scale as the larger miniatures evidently have small bits and pieces that indicate they're giants in their own world (like having 25mm skulls hanging around) but it would surprise me if GW ever made an actual 25mm size miniature for AoS again.
That's just wrong. The background for Warhammer (assuming we're talking from kind of 2nd edition onwards where things like the Old World started to form and through into 3rd edition) came about through lots of different books, roleplaying supplements and WD articles. Snippets in Warhammer Armies, for instance. Much of the metaphysical side and the nature of Chaos wasn't detailed until the Realm of Chaos Books came out (the third edition rulebook still had generic Demonology, for instance). The Winds of Magic and Impoerial Colleges were in article in WD first after Brian Ansell read Terry Prachett's Colour of Magic, after 3rd edition came out. And the Empire didn't really become the Empire we know until the WFRP series.
Perhaps you're thinking from 4th edition onwards?
Cheers,
Gav
I'm wondering, maybe you can answer, maybe not, but no harm in asking (and no harm if you can't or don't want to answer either): are you aware of any developments for a possible (canned) 9th ed, fluff-wise, that we could have seen if AoS had not been dropped?
Urgat, I think some things are best left unknown - I'm not sure I could cope knowing there is a version of the Old World on a drawing board somewhere.
I'm wondering, maybe you can answer, maybe not, but no harm in asking (and no harm if you can't or don't want to answer either): are you aware of any developments for a possible (canned) 9th ed, fluff-wise, that we could have seen if AoS had not been dropped?
I don't really know what the internal sequencing was, but the first we were told as authors was that the End Times were coming and Something Big would come after. Whether The End Times simply hastened some plans that were being laid down through the 8th edition books or not, I have no idea. There were themes and stories, like the elves, that started developing in the army books but by that point they may have been laying ground work for the End Times.
Right up until that point it had certainly been business as usual (I was just getting ready to start on the pitch for a Time of Legends series about the von Carsteins, and a Bugman's series).
Regarding the speed with which the Warhammer World developed, I'm simply pointing out that there was no big book of stuff that was magically opened and suddenly everything was there for the creators and gamers. I see the same whenever I look at new games IP - trying to create entire universes from scratch and thinking that pages and pages and pages of background does that, rather than shining a light on a few interesting parts and letting the rest grow.
In the fairyland of me being in charge when AoS was rolled out I would have published a lot less, if I'm honest. Wading through 200+ pages of lore to get caught up made me realise just how much better it is to start small and introduce stuff as you go along. I understand the reasons why it was done the way it was, with an existing customer base to address for instance, but it's better to start out inclusive and broad with a few colourful specifics than detailed and prohibitive.
Cheers,
Gav
That's true, but at least those models had something vaguely approaching human anatomy. That new guy has muscles growing out of his inner elbow - I mean, how the hell does he even move his arms?! He'd be the easiest champion of chaos to defeat ever, given his arms would always be stuck out rigidly straight from his body :)
If we're going to go into arguments of practicality, then nothing in the Warhammer range aside from the Empire, Bretonnia, and the more restrained parts of Chaos would have a chance of ever working in a real battle :)
Explain this to me, though, when did Warhammer ever have aesthetic subtlety?
227231
Back then.
227256
Back then.
227256
That's subtle, to you?
If we're going to go into arguments of practicality, then nothing in the Warhammer range aside from the Empire, Bretonnia, and the more restrained parts of Chaos would have a chance of ever working in a real battle :)
And dogs of war, and dwarves, and so on...
Problem is not if things could work in real world, it's rather can we believe in them.
And dogs of war, and dwarves, and so on...
Problem is not if things could work in real world, it's rather can we believe in them.
Oh God no. The Dwarfs are awful with their oversized warhammers twice as large as themselves, the winged helmets that would poke into the other guys when they made their shield-walls, their ridiculous double-bitted axes, their gauntlets with steel on the palms, etc.
In comparison to all that, I don't see what's so awful about Mr. Johann Headtaker.
Oh, and dual-wielding. Dual-wielding was an awful idea in real life and had no place in combat outside of regulated duels between rich noblemen, not actual soldiers on the field.
Urgat, I think some things are best left unknown - I'm not sure I could cope knowing there is a version of the Old World on a drawing board somewhere.
But I'd love to get snippet at things that could have been (dunno, new fluff/unit direction for the Bretonnians, stuff like that), because I could base house-rules on those old plans, I think that would be kind of neat.
I don't really know what the internal sequencing was, but the first we were told as authors was that the End Times were coming and Something Big would come after. Whether The End Times simply hastened some plans that were being laid down through the 8th edition books or not, I have no idea. There were themes and stories, like the elves, that started developing in the army books but by that point they may have been laying ground work for the End Times.
Right up until that point it had certainly been business as usual (I was just getting ready to start on the pitch for a Time of Legends series about the von Carsteins, and a Bugman's series).
Oh man, a Bugman's series :/
Thank you very much for at least taking the time to answer me :)
veterannoob
02-05-2016, 16:58
AWWWW, c'mon Gav! Some things best unknown, he said. Now I must carry the burden of knowing there would have been a Bugman series?! You wound me sir, wound me...Good thing I have some Bugman's XXXXXX to patch that wound straight up;) One day, I guess.:cool:
That's just wrong. The background for Warhammer (assuming we're talking from kind of 2nd edition onwards where things like the Old World started to form and through into 3rd edition) came about through lots of different books, roleplaying supplements and WD articles. Snippets in Warhammer Armies, for instance. Much of the metaphysical side and the nature of Chaos wasn't detailed until the Realm of Chaos Books came out (the third edition rulebook still had generic Demonology, for instance). The Winds of Magic and Impoerial Colleges were in article in WD first after Brian Ansell read Terry Prachett's Colour of Magic, after 3rd edition came out. And the Empire didn't really become the Empire we know until the WFRP series.
Perhaps you're thinking from 4th edition onwards?
Cheers,
Gav
No, I'm thinking the 2nd edition starter box. I haven't read the first edition, but the world is definitely recognisable from the 2nd ed starter box. Not denying that alot (or even most) of the richness of the setting came from different iterations over literally decades, but that's not the same as saying the background wasn't there from the beginning...
To reiterate: of course a 30 year developmenh time will allow for a unique dept, as different writers embellish and rewrite history. THAT was the reason the Warhammer World was so great; different versions used different perspectives, added and changed, and enrichened the setting. Especially nuances like the nature of chaos has developed a lot. But there still was a fully developed world from the beginning, or at least within a year, something that is completely lacking in AoS as far as I can see. My point was not that the background won't improve with time and embellishments through the years, it would (or will). My point was that the starting point for the Warhammer World was much more fleshed out from the beginning.
Sent fra min SM-G930F via Tapatalk
toonboy78
02-05-2016, 21:17
No, I'm thinking the 2nd edition starter box. I haven't read the first edition, but the world is definitely recognisable from the 2nd ed starter box. Not denying that alot (or even most) of the richness of the setting came from different iterations over literally decades, but that's not the same as saying the background wasn't there from the beginning...
To reiterate: of course a 30 year developmenh time will allow for a unique dept, as different writers embellish and rewrite history. THAT was the reason the Warhammer World was so great; different versions used different perspectives, added and changed, and enrichened the setting. Especially nuances like the nature of chaos has developed a lot. But there still was a fully developed world from the beginning, or at least within a year, something that is completely lacking in AoS as far as I can see. My point was not that the background won't improve with time and embellishments through the years, it would (or will). My point was that the starting point for the Warhammer World was much more fleshed out from the beginning.
Sent fra min SM-G930F via Tapatalk
did the 2nd edition have a starter set?
the first I remember is the 4th (elves + goblins) in 1992 released nearly 10 years after the first edition
did the 2nd edition have a starter set?
the first I remember is the 4th (elves + goblins) in 1992 released nearly 10 years after the first edition
Sort of. It did have a box with three books and paper cutouts. No models. Dunno about 3rd, I only ever got the books on their own, but might have been a similar set for that as well. 4th ed was the first proper starter set with plastic minis as far as I'm aware. But I think they had plastic kits earlier, something called warcast or something. Seem to remember an ad stating how it was superior to "regular" plastic minis...
Sent fra min SM-G930F via Tapatalk
4th ed was the first proper starter set with plastic minis as far as I'm aware. But I think they had plastic kits earlier, something called warcast or something. Seem to remember an ad stating how it was superior to "regular" plastic minis...
Kinda reminds me of another type of -cast that's also not advertised a lot these days:p
MarkNorfolk
04-05-2016, 07:52
Sort of. It did have a box with three books and paper cutouts. No models. Dunno about 3rd, I only ever got the books on their own, but might have been a similar set for that as well. 4th ed was the first proper starter set with plastic minis as far as I'm aware. But I think they had plastic kits earlier, something called warcast or something. Seem to remember an ad stating how it was superior to "regular" plastic minis...
Sent fra min SM-G930F via Tapatalk
The first plastic kits were kind of practise pieces, experiments. The 'Psychostyrene Dwarf' and the 'Drastic Plastic' Goblin (it might be the other way round). The real first plastic kit was the skeleton sprue, later added to with horses and chariots. 2nd edition was a three-books-in-a-boxed-set thing. 3rd edition was a single book. It was with 4th edition Warhammer (and second edition 40k) that we saw the 'two-player-starter' and individual books for army lists.
Cheers
Mark
I stumbled upon a SoL page showing the Dwarf, Orc, and skeletons you mention. (Also plastic Dalek Cybermen:cool:)
http://solegends.com/citcat88/0002plastics.jpg
The first plastic kits were kind of practise pieces, experiments. The 'Psychostyrene Dwarf' and the 'Drastic Plastic' Goblin (it might be the other way round). The real first plastic kit was the skeleton sprue, later added to with horses and chariots. 2nd edition was a three-books-in-a-boxed-set thing. 3rd edition was a single book. It was with 4th edition Warhammer (and second edition 40k) that we saw the 'two-player-starter' and individual books for army lists.
Cheers
Mark
This. More details than I could remember! Except there were more books in 3rd, but not required to play. Like Siege, Ravening Hordes, 2 Realms of books, etc. I would count them as part of the game, but as said, more like expansions for the core book...
Sent fra min SM-G930F via Tapatalk
Oh man, a Bugman's series :/
Thank you very much for at least taking the time to answer me :)
That is actually kind of sad to think about. The books that will never be written.
herjan1987
15-05-2016, 19:00
Gav, if you still read the comments, can you answer a question. If GW would have come to you, with the intention to ask you to write about Tomb Kings what would you have done with the topic?
Gav, if you still read the comments, can you answer a question. If GW would have come to you, with the intention to ask you to write about Tomb Kings what would you have done with the topic?
As a novel author, or bringing them into Aos?
Cheers,
Gav
Arnizipal
16-05-2016, 20:09
Explain this to me, though, when did Warhammer ever have aesthetic subtlety?
Watch the first minute of this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx8sl2uC46A). 227777
And then watch the rest because it's pretty funny.
MarkNorfolk
17-05-2016, 04:27
[QUOTE=tmod;7625257]This. More details than I could remember! Except there were more books in 3rd, but not required to play. Like Siege, Ravening Hordes, 2 Realms of books, etc. I would count them as part of the game, but as said, more like expansions for the core book...
Sent fra min SM
Ah yes. I was thinking mainly of the Warhammer Armies Book - one book with all the army lists in it! Those were the days. I loved Warhammer: Siege (impractical as it was), with the cowardly anecdotes of the siege specialist (personal fav: the giant gymnastics team). And how could I foget Realms of Chaos! Ravening Hordes was the army book for 2nd edition.
Cheers
Mark
herjan1987
17-05-2016, 04:51
As a novel author, or bringing them into Aos?
Cheers,
Gav
As novel author. I am asking because as far as I know there where no novels written about them. Excluding those books where they play a secondary role ( like Gotrek and Felix: The serpent queen ).
By the way are saying that they comming back in a new form?
As novel author. I am asking because as far as I know there where no novels written about them. Excluding those books where they play a secondary role ( like Gotrek and Felix: The serpent queen ).
By the way are saying that they comming back in a new form?
There's a short TK POV in my old book Blades of Chaos which gave me a nice taste for them - can't beat the image of hairy Norscan barbarians fighting Egyptian-style skeletons whilst carrying off heaps of loot!
I think I would have played it pretty straight with a novel - politics between cities that maybe have to ally against a common threat (Chaos, Nagash's followers, orcs perhaps?). I've always liked the idea that the Nehekarans try to ignore the fact that they are dead and it's all business as usual...
As for whether they made it to AoS, I haven't got any insider info I'm afraid. I hope so.
Cheers,
Gav
There's a short TK POV in my old book Blades of Chaos which gave me a nice taste for them - can't beat the image of hairy Norscan barbarians fighting Egyptian-style skeletons whilst carrying off heaps of loot!
I think I would have played it pretty straight with a novel - politics between cities that maybe have to ally against a common threat (Chaos, Nagash's followers, orcs perhaps?). I've always liked the idea that the Nehekarans try to ignore the fact that they are dead and it's all business as usual...
As for whether they made it to AoS, I haven't got any insider info I'm afraid. I hope so.
Cheers,
Gav
I'm excited to see how some of these things play out with Age of Sigmar and 40K, like:
1) Slaanesh - Do the Harlequins succeed and redeem him so he saves the Eldar race? What would a redeemed Slaanesh look like and how would the Dark Prince Redeemed fit in to the universe as a whole?
2) Guilliman - Horus, the greatest of all Primarchs, was corrupted after spending several weeks gravely wounded by a Daemon weapon. If Guilliman returns, he has spent 10, 000 years battling the wounds from a Daemon weapon. Is he corrupted? Can the Imperium take that chance, even if he doesn't appear to be?
3) Inquisitor Karamazov - I assume his name is a nod to the Brothers Karamazov novel, a classic novel that has an Inquisitor interrogating the returned Messiah to see if he is who he says he is. Finding that he is, Karamazov nevertheless deigns to kill him because the Church could not survive his return and he is loyal not to the ideals, but the institution.
4) Krakanrok the Black - Technically, he survived the End Times and was pulled in to the Realm of Chaos. Did he survive? Archaon, the embodiment of all 4 Chaos deities, betrayed the Dragon Ogres and slew their greatest champion, thus breaking their oath to keep the Dragon Ogres alive. Are the ones that refused to bow down to specific Chaos Deities now free? Can Archaon afford to let a race that is made mightier by storms and lightning turn against him to join a God of Storms and Lightning? Will Krakanrok the Black become a Godbeast in the employ of one of the other factions and can Dracothion forgive the war between Dragon Ogre and Dragon that is older than not just this world, but the World that Was?
Aaaah! So many questions!
If Krakanrok the Black turns on Archaon at the end, just like Archaon turned on the Suneater and ends up asleep while clutching the Everchosen's blade just like he was when Archaon found the blade, we will have returned full circle. I will cheer. Please, Gav - Make this happen. Archaon's smug face needs to wipe that stupid smirk off and seeing the first and greatest Dragon Ogre return on the side of... Gorkamorka because of beasts? Sigmar because of the symbolic link between them and lightning storms? Some third party that I haven't thought of? - Regardless, seeing Krakanrok the Black return as a Godbeast to counter Archaon's stupid faced Godbeast would make me cheer. Please make it happen!
I'm excited to see how some of these things play out with Age of Sigmar and 40K, like:
1) Slaanesh - Do the Harlequins succeed and redeem him so he saves the Eldar race? What would a redeemed Slaanesh look like and how would the Dark Prince Redeemed fit in to the universe as a whole?
2) Guilliman - Horus, the greatest of all Primarchs, was corrupted after spending several weeks gravely wounded by a Daemon weapon. If Guilliman returns, he has spent 10, 000 years battling the wounds from a Daemon weapon. Is he corrupted? Can the Imperium take that chance, even if he doesn't appear to be?
3) Inquisitor Karamazov - I assume his name is a nod to the Brothers Karamazov novel, a classic novel that has an Inquisitor interrogating the returned Messiah to see if he is who he says he is. Finding that he is, Karamazov nevertheless deigns to kill him because the Church could not survive his return and he is loyal not to the ideals, but the institution.
4) Krakanrok the Black - Technically, he survived the End Times and was pulled in to the Realm of Chaos. Did he survive? Archaon, the embodiment of all 4 Chaos deities, betrayed the Dragon Ogres and slew their greatest champion, thus breaking their oath to keep the Dragon Ogres alive. Are the ones that refused to bow down to specific Chaos Deities now free? Can Archaon afford to let a race that is made mightier by storms and lightning turn against him to join a God of Storms and Lightning? Will Krakanrok the Black become a Godbeast in the employ of one of the other factions and can Dracothion forgive the war between Dragon Ogre and Dragon that is older than not just this world, but the World that Was?
Aaaah! So many questions!
If Krakanrok the Black turns on Archaon at the end, just like Archaon turned on the Suneater and ends up asleep while clutching the Everchosen's blade just like he was when Archaon found the blade, we will have returned full circle. I will cheer. Please, Gav - Make this happen. Archaon's smug face needs to wipe that stupid smirk off and seeing the first and greatest Dragon Ogre return on the side of... Gorkamorka because of beasts? Sigmar because of the symbolic link between them and lightning storms? Some third party that I haven't thought of? - Regardless, seeing Krakanrok the Black return as a Godbeast to counter Archaon's stupid faced Godbeast would make me cheer. Please make it happen!
If Krakanrok decides to join up with anyone, it'll probably be with Chaos because of the whole oath his race made with them millennia ago.
Also, I'm reasonably certain that Archaon is an order of magnitude more powerful than Krakanrok now, seeing as how he's literally destroyed multiple worlds by this point. And also because the Chaos Gods apparently fear him now.
Watch the first minute of this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx8sl2uC46A). 227777
And then watch the rest because it's pretty funny.
I've been subscribed to the Bard for a year now, so I know that video well.
That being said, he was talking about overdetailling. Not aesthetic subtlety. You can be mildly detailed but still be over the top in design. I don't think anyone can say an Orc with an oversized head and a cleaver too large and thick to be of any practical use in battle really belongs in Low Fantasy :)
If Krakanrok decides to join up with anyone, it'll probably be with Chaos because of the whole oath his race made with them millennia ago.
Also, I'm reasonably certain that Archaon is an order of magnitude more powerful than Krakanrok now, seeing as how he's literally destroyed multiple worlds by this point. And also because the Chaos Gods apparently fear him now.
They didn't make an oath. They made a pact to live forever in exchange for their servitude.
The Chaos Gods broke that pact when Archaon slew the Suneater, because death, it should be noted, is not living and was brought about directly by the Chaos Gods' representative on that world.
A pact involves an exchange. An exchange Chaos expressly broke. Because Kolek was murdered under Archaons orders, and murder involves being dead and being dead is, as has been previously discussed, is not living forever.
We'll have to agree to disagree. I feel the Dragon Ogres will most likely not choose to side with the man who betrayed them.
Freak Ona Leash
18-05-2016, 01:24
They didn't make an oath. They made a pact to live forever in exchange for their servitude.
The Chaos Gods broke that pact when Archaon slew the Suneater, because death, it should be noted, is not living and was brought about directly by the Chaos Gods' representative on that world.
A pact involves an exchange. An exchange Chaos expressly broke. Because Kolek was murdered under Archaons orders, and murder involves being dead and being dead is, as has been previously discussed, is not living forever.
We'll have to agree to disagree. I feel the Dragon Ogres will most likely not choose to side with the man who betrayed them.
Oh come on. That can hardly be the first time a follower of Chaos killed a Dragon Ogre. Hell, I wouldn't doubt that the Dragon Ogres themselves have killed a fair few of their own number over the milennia. They made a pact for immortality, by which I think they meant immunity to death from natural causes. Chaos did that, but then made them all infertile, making them immortal but dooming the race in the process because at some point, they'll all die in battle, or from lightning overdose, or from falling off a mountainside while bellowing manfully into a storm...
herjan1987
18-05-2016, 06:16
There's a short TK POV in my old book Blades of Chaos which gave me a nice taste for them - can't beat the image of hairy Norscan barbarians fighting Egyptian-style skeletons whilst carrying off heaps of loot!
I think I would have played it pretty straight with a novel - politics between cities that maybe have to ally against a common threat (Chaos, Nagash's followers, orcs perhaps?). I've always liked the idea that the Nehekarans try to ignore the fact that they are dead and it's all business as usual...
As for whether they made it to AoS, I haven't got any insider info I'm afraid. I hope so.
Cheers,
Gav
Thanks Gav, for your thoughts. I think I will check the book out.
They didn't make an oath. They made a pact to live forever in exchange for their servitude.
The Chaos Gods broke that pact when Archaon slew the Suneater, because death, it should be noted, is not living and was brought about directly by the Chaos Gods' representative on that world.
A pact involves an exchange. An exchange Chaos expressly broke. Because Kolek was murdered under Archaons orders, and murder involves being dead and being dead is, as has been previously discussed, is not living forever.
We'll have to agree to disagree. I feel the Dragon Ogres will most likely not choose to side with the man who betrayed them.
Chaos champions have been maiming and killing Dragon Ogres for centuries. Hell, Egil Styrbjorn killed a Shaggoth and ate its heart.
http://warhammerfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Egil_Styrbjorn
And I have to say, that is an extremely pedantic interpretation of the Dragon Ogres' oath. They were probably made immortal or something by the Chaos Gods, so their part of the deal is already upheld.
Also, Archaon killed Kholek? What? Did this happen during the Skub Times?
[QUOTE=tmod;7625257]
Ah yes. I was thinking mainly of the Warhammer Armies Book - one book with all the army lists in it! Those were the days. I loved Warhammer: Siege (impractical as it was), with the cowardly anecdotes of the siege specialist (personal fav: the giant gymnastics team). And how could I foget Realms of Chaos! Ravening Hordes was the army book for 2nd edition.
Cheers
Mark
Good stuff
Was there more than one Ravening Hordes back in the 80s? Cause 2nd ed has copyright 1984, Ravening Hordes 1987 like the 3rd ed rulebook, whereas Warhammer Armies have copyright 1988 (like Siege unless I'm mistaken, and like the first Realm of Chaos book). I seem to remember Ravening Hordes being similar to its 6th ed counterpart, a paperback release to ease the transition to a new edition until the army book (s) could be released. 2nd ed had all armies in the base set....
T.
[QUOTE=tmod;7625257]This. More details than I could remember! Except there were more books in 3rd, but not required to play. Like Siege, Ravening Hordes, 2 Realms of books, etc. I would count them as part of the game, but as said, more like expansions for the core book...
Sent fra min SM
Ah yes. I was thinking mainly of the Warhammer Armies Book - one book with all the army lists in it! Those were the days. I loved Warhammer: Siege (impractical as it was), with the cowardly anecdotes of the siege specialist (personal fav: the giant gymnastics team). And how could I foget Realms of Chaos! Ravening Hordes was the army book for 2nd edition.
Cheers
Mark
Sent fra min GT-P5210 via Tapatalk
Also, Archaon killed Kholek? What? Did this happen during the Skub Times?
If I remenber, he grew too powerfull so Settra under chaos gods order kill him, beheading him and presenting his head to archeron, pretty damn metal if you ask me
If I remenber, he grew too powerfull so Settra under chaos gods order kill him, beheading him and presenting his head to archeron, pretty damn metal if you ask me
... how and why would the Chaos Gods order Settra to kill one of their servants? "Too powerful" how?
... how and why would the Chaos Gods order Settra to kill one of their servants? "Too powerful" how?
Why do the Chaos Gods need a reason for anything? Come on, it's in the name.
Why do the Chaos Gods need a reason for anything? Come on, it's in the name.
There's a difference between Chaotic Evil and Chaotic Stupid; they must have had a reason for suddenly wanting Kholek dead on the eve of their victory. And that still doesn't answer how the Chaos Gods commanded Settra to kill Kholek, or convinced him to do it.
There's a difference between Chaotic Evil and Chaotic Stupid; they must have had a reason for suddenly wanting Kholek dead on the eve of their victory. And that still doesn't answer how the Chaos Gods commanded Settra to kill Kholek, or convinced him to do it.
The Gods get their servants to fight each other all the time for their amusement. For all their infinite power, they're still monomaniacal entities whose thought patterns are, to put it prosaically, completely and utterly incomprehensible to mortals.
As for how they got Settra to do it, they decided to turn him to their designs after his defeat at the hands of Nagash. It didn't quite work out as you would expect, though.
Captain Marius
21-05-2016, 17:15
I read a lot of End Times stuff but never saw Kholeks fate, does anyone know where this took place?
The Gods get their servants to fight each other all the time for their amusement. For all their infinite power, they're still monomaniacal entities whose thought patterns are, to put it prosaically, completely and utterly incomprehensible to mortals.
As for how they got Settra to do it, they decided to turn him to their designs after his defeat at the hands of Nagash. It didn't quite work out as you would expect, though.
You wouldn't happen to have gotten this stuff about Settra offing Kholek from Josh Reynolds, would you? Because GW declared all that Josh claimed that wasn't explicitly in the books non-canon.
You wouldn't happen to have gotten this stuff about Settra offing Kholek from Josh Reynolds, would you? Because GW declared all that Josh claimed that wasn't explicitly in the books non-canon.
Possibly. But I vaguely recall Settra offering Archaon something's head in the last End Times novel.
Captain Marius
24-05-2016, 18:44
Im pretty sure Settra only appeared in his badass scene with Nagash, then disappeared to fight monsters or something...
jtrowell
25-05-2016, 14:36
My understanding (I didn't read the book) is that in the novel, after having been resurected by the Chaos God promising him everything he wanted if he killed Nagash, Settra marched from the ruins of his old kingdom to Middenheim where he faced Archaon, as if he was following the chaos gods instructions.
Archaon was at the time having problems with Kholek that proved to be refusing to follow orders and was being more of a liability.
So Archaon decided to kill two birds with one stone and sent Settra to kill Kholek in order to prove that he was worth his time as a, ally against Nagash.
Settra then fought for 4 days and then came back with Kholek head.
Of course, after than once he was finally face to face with Nagash, Settra then made a final speach about how nobody not even the big Fours ruled about Settra, promised Nagash that he would have his head someday but that for now he had better targets, he protected nagash by killing some big greater deamon and turned against the chaos force, killing a giant as a warming move ... and we never heard of Settra again since then.
This finish (as described second hand, remember that I didn't read the books) seems to be so perfect for the character (depsite all flaws of the second part of the End Times) that I would be very disappointed to have it not recognized as canon.
My understanding (I didn't read the book) is that in the novel, after having been resurected by the Chaos God promising him everything he wanted if he killed Nagash, Settra marched from the ruins of his old kingdom to Middenheim where he faced Archaon, as if he was following the chaos gods instructions.
Archaon was at the time having problems with Kholek that proved to be refusing to follow orders and was being more of a liability.
So Archaon decided to kill two birds with one stone and sent Settra to kill Kholek in order to prove that he was worth his time as a, ally against Nagash.
Settra then fought for 4 days and then came back with Kholek head.
Of course, after than once he was finally face to face with Nagash, Settra then made a final speach about how nobody not even the big Fours ruled about Settra, promised Nagash that he would have his head someday but that for now he had better targets, he protected nagash by killing some big greater deamon and turned against the chaos force, killing a giant as a warming move ... and we never heard of Settra again since then.
This finish (as described second hand, remember that I didn't read the books) seems to be so perfect for the character (depsite all flaws of the second part of the End Times) that I would be very disappointed to have it not recognized as canon.
Thing is, I'm pretty sure a lot of that is what Josh Reynolds posted about the End Times on AskFM or some such; stuff that he would have liked to do with the story if it hadn't been cut short, and which GW (being GW) declared non-Canon and told Josh STFU.
Edit: Here's a link to Josh, on the subject of Kholek - http://ask.fm/JoshMReynolds/answers/126423501279
jtrowell
27-05-2016, 07:53
Thanks for the precision, I had only second hand accounts so it's good to finally have the exact source, too bad as you wrote that it was made non canon, poor Settra, like our beloved Tomb Kings (and our Brets friends) really got badly treated by GW, as usual ... :mad:
The bearded one
04-06-2016, 16:12
Meh, they may have 'declared' it non-canon, but it's not like there's anything preventing you from treating it as canon anyway - one of the functions of something being considered canon is that it won't be contradicted by official material, and GW isn't in a position where they'd possibly be writing new contradicting material, because they're no longer creating new material for warhammer fantasy anyway.
Meh, they may have 'declared' it non-canon, but it's not like there's anything preventing you from treating it as canon anyway - one of the functions of something being considered canon is that it won't be contradicted by official material, and GW isn't in a position where they'd possibly be writing new contradicting material, because they're no longer creating new material for warhammer fantasy anyway.
And more important, GW clearly is not going to answer what happen in any other way, and since Josh was the one who write the last book he is pretty much the one who land the last blow to warhammer world, is pretty good tell us what happen, unfortanally if anyone have any question, we dont know
This finish (as described second hand, remember that I didn't read the books) seems to be so perfect for the character (depsite all flaws of the second part of the End Times) that I would be very disappointed to have it not recognized as canon.
Sounds like trash to me. I thought Settra was just some arrogant mummified not-Egyptian king, not a superhero wandering around delivering sick burns to everything in sight. They turned him into a comic book character. The whole End Times series is lame like that really and I don't like it at all. I'd take something like "The Empire at War: A Study of the Greatest Battles of the Empire" over the End Times any day.
Sounds like trash to me. I thought Settra was just some arrogant mummified not-Egyptian king, not a superhero wandering around delivering sick burns to everything in sight. They turned him into a comic book character. The whole End Times series is lame like that really and I don't like it at all. I'd take something like "The Empire at War: A Study of the Greatest Battles of the Empire" over the End Times any day.
Settra was THE tomb king, not just some story knock off but Sigmar in crack, fantasy have chararter doing thing long before comic book take the spot in that way
jtrowell
15-06-2016, 07:59
This.
While I found the character of Settra arrongant to the extreme, the thing is that even alive he was one of the greatest humans kings to have ever lived, comparing him to Sigmar (back when he was still a simple human emperor) is a good exemple and it was possible to both dislike the person and still have respect for what he did and was.
This.
While I found the character of Settra arrongant to the extreme, the thing is that even alive he was one of the greatest humans kings to have ever lived, comparing him to Sigmar (back when he was still a simple human emperor) is a good exemple and it was possible to both dislike the person and still have respect for what he did and was.
Something weird I have seen lately in this forum is the idea of reduce the epicness of some chararter like Sigmar and Settra, in part for their hated of AoS which I consider very weird.
blackcherry
16-06-2016, 10:02
The thing about Warhammer Fastasy was that it was that it swallowed up so many fantasy tropes and left enough to the imagination that people could fudge a few things if they didn't fit into their view of what the setting was like, even when it explicitly stated to be one way only.
I've met enough WFB players in my time that play down the high fantasy elements because they want to focus on the low fantasy stuff (and vice versa). But this approach does lead to some very interesting cognitive dissonance at times, such as the Settra example above.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.