Age of Sigmar - a rough diamond?

[Torben]

So last night, me and Dijit (Duncan) had a game of Age of Sigmar to see what all this fuzz was about.



The results were rather interesting. Both of us were quite skeptical whether or not the game would actually be any fun, but having played it I have to say that it was one of the more satisfying gaming experiences that I've had with anything that Games Workshop has produced for quite some time!

I wrote up some more here: http://scatterbrainedwargamer.blogspot.dk/2015/07/first-game-of-age-of-sigmar.html

[nic-e]

I think rough diamond is a great way to put it. I look forward to expansions and campaigns, and for once i can say i'm interested in picking up a games workshop starter set with a view to actually expanding beyond it and not just painting it for fun.

[dijit]

As i mentioned in another thrwad on age ofsignmar, I am very surprised to be pleased with the results. I hadn't expected anything good to come from GW ever again, but this seems a swing in the right direction. The rules played a little like God of Battles, and are straight forwards and quick to learn. However, there does seem to be little tactical nuances, with having units (particularly heroes) supporting larger units, and other smaller rules here and there. The fact you can take whatever is on your shelf and put it down, gave the game a bit of a realms of chaos feel, I fielded High Elves with orc and goblin mercenaries and a renegade Dark elf. There's nothing to say you can't do an of that at all. Plus the rules are free so nothing to complain about.

[Momotaro]

Great writeup and good to hear that it's a bit of fun with some thought required. 

[Luddite]

I've downloaded, but haven't played yet.  However, I did watch a trial game between two experienced WFB players.

Player 1: Felt they were OK, but not really as good as other similar 'styled' sets out their (like WarmaHordes).

Player 2: Utterly and vocally hated them.

I'll be giving things a go myself to see how they do work in practice (awaiting Dan Mersey's Dragons Rampant), but I have two immediate concerns - balance without points, and measuring model-to-model, rather than base-to-base.

In the game I watched, they abandoned this and measured base-to-base.

None too sure about rules like the 'impressive moustache' thing either...

[dijit]

Yeah, we ended up measuring base to base too.

[Drachenklinge]

I am a bit confused, too. Have heard and read both sides (more from the other side, though ^^) and still not sure, what to think about. I am really angepinkelt, that they took my fluff ... LOVED the dwarfs, still do.
The fluff now? Millenium into the future, nothing as before, but, hey, a warscroll of Bugman, the famous dwarf. Where does he come from? Spawn? Reincarnated? Held in cryostasis?? It just doesn't fit.

But reading the rules and scrolls - beside the wannabe fun-spreading-rules of longer beards and kneeling down, etc - they just sound good. Making me interested and curious.
Why not these rules, a bit more thoughts into it about balancing and keeping all the fluff, developed a bit into an advancing story?

I will definetly try out the rules, but still am angepinkelt about the fluff.  

[TWD]

I am a bit confused, too. Have heard and read both sides (more from the other side, though ^^) and still not sure, what to think about. I am really angepinkelt, that they took my fluff ... LOVED the dwarfs, still do.
The fluff now? Millenium into the future, nothing as before, but, hey, a warscroll of Bugman, the famous dwarf. Where does he come from? Spawn? Reincarnated? Held in cryostasis?? It just doesn't fit.

There is a reference somewhere to the warscrolls for the Old World armies being "from the world that has gone"
i.e. they allow you to play "historical" games.
So Bugman doesn't exist in the Age of Sigmar, you're playing a game in the old world using these new rules.

[Hobgoblin]

I'll be giving things a go myself to see how they do work in practice (awaiting Dan Mersey's Dragons Rampant), but I have two immediate concerns - balance without points, and measuring model-to-model, rather than base-to-base.

In the game I watched, they abandoned this and measured base-to-base.

None too sure about rules like the 'impressive moustache' thing either...

I've also downloaded them and am also eagerly awaiting Dragon Rampant. But I don't think I'll play AoS. I really dislike miniature-specific rules, which is why the likes of SBH or Lion/Dragon Rampant will always resonate much better than me than anything that tries to tie in with a specific IP.

I haven't played Warhammer for 25 years or so, but what was great about its early incarnations was how vague and generic the background was. If you look at first edition (the only one I own at the moment, though I started on second and received third rapturously at the time of its release), it's wonderfully non-specific about background: if you have dwarfs, goblins and wizards, the scenarios in the book fit in seamlessly. And in the first- and second-edition scenarios and material, most of the specifics were generic or evocative of other settings in themselves: Grom was the "Paunch of the Misty Mountains"; there was a "War of the Dwarfs and the Goblins"; and so much else echoed real-world history. And then there was all the (acknowledged) Moorcockian chaos stuff.

Now, some of the things GW developed were great: the Slann, the Skaven, etc. But they were (a) still somewhat generic (c.f. Bullwuggs and Fritz Leiber's rat-people) and (b) "droppable in" (what fantasy realm would not have room for some far-off frog people or some hidden rat-mutants?).

In contrast, the AoS stuff looks uniformly overblown and specific (I can't think of many generic equivalents to those space-marines-with-hammers types, for example). To say nothing of all those dreadfully oversized weapons ...

One thing I do quite like, though, is the unit-by-unit deployment, with the forces limited by when each player decides to stop. For me, one of the most important things in any wargame is the ability to set it up really quickly. For that reason, I love SBH, with its simple points totals: if my son and I want a 400-point game of lizardmen vs goblins, we can do the totals as we take the miniatures out of their boxes: two lizardmen are roughly 100 points, as are four orcs, etc. Lion Rampant is even simpler in this regard, as the basic units cost 1, 2, 4 or 6 points (with occasional 1- or 2-point modifiers for abilities). So it takes no time at all to draw up your forces. I can see that the AoS system could work similarly well - you don't even need to think about the composition of your force until you've deployed most of it.

On top of that, I think asymmetrical games are often the best. So a system that builds that in strikes me as a good idea.

[Justizius]

I think the new fluff is cool. It feels more Elric than Middlearth. 
Its years since I played Warhammer Fantasy the last time, I
never liked to punch around these regiments. But I will give
AoS a try, becouse as I have to confess I really like the new
style and the miniatures.

[Psychoflexible]

Another thing you don't have in english is the crappy translation into french: All the name in english and the sentence in french. It is anoying to read and remind me that GW fired all people who work in French studio, translaters first to cut their cost and don't pay taxes in France.

So I boycott GW however I love the Old world and WFB.

[Drachenklinge]

Another thing you don't have in english is the crappy translation into [...]: All the name in english and the sentence in [...]

same here ... make that German ^^