Why is no one talking about this massive change?

Welcome to #TheHonestWargamer.
============================================================================
All our Socials in one place:
PLEASE SUPPORT ON PATREON: / thehonestwargamer
CHECK OUT OUR AWESOME WEBSITE: thehonestwarga...
JOIN THE TWITCH GANG: / thehonestwargamer
OUR PODCAST FEED: / the-honest-wargamer

[@Solitayre_sedai]

Dont apologise for being positive, there is too much relentless negativity on line and it is tedious. I much prefer content creators who are willing to give things a chance and be positive. Thanks for the work you do.

[@DukensteinA1]

Completely agree. I go to robs videos to feel good afterwords. Even if it’s an army I don’t play, the positivity is infectious.

[@vagabondbarbarian8961]

100% agree. I love the positive energy. It's great to see videos by people that seem to enjoy the game/hobby. The faction focus stuff is really feeding my hype for AOS 4.0

[@Mike-er5ws]

This is exactly how I feel, couldn't agree more.

[@EPGelion]

This 100%

[@Asskickingfool]

This is the way

[@Vasily_Kotickovitch]

The old Truth is confirmed: build a collection, not a roster!

[@TheMuffinMan42]

I am hate watching, thanks for the shout out. Now I will start love watching

[@jeffreysort7219]

I appreciate how you point to the twitch chat like they’re your cohosts in the studio with you.

[@TheHonestWargamer]

They are!

[@TheDavethepally]

What characters are tied to what heroes is my biggest concern for whether or not a unit is going to be good or not. Because of a unit is tied to a very expensive hero, annihilators being tied to an almost 200 point then annihilators no matter how good they are suddenly become less good. Obviously that’s using third edition points, but I don’t suspect the points would change dramatically.

[@baphometsvomitcomet2350]

THANK YOU, the fact that no one is mentioning this or the changes we've seen so far to how prayers work has been driving me CRAZY

[@RichardLay-sq2bm]

Thank you, Rob. I've been thinking about this quite a lot (genuinely excited for a new edition). It looks like it also opens the door for 'all hero' armies. Or, counter to that, if a warscroll is particularly good, 'no hero' armies, take 14 dragons (for example) all as auxiliaries and let your opponent have his meager 1 extra CP per turn!

[@stephenhumphreys9149]

The article mentions that armies are made up of 'One or more' regiments so you'll probably need at least one hero! So Dude on Dragon accompanied by 13 other dragons...

[@Adclif]

With 10ed the information is on the back of the Data sheet (Warscroll) so we didn't know until the index.

[@TheGeorgehb]

Doing a solid job at pointing to what we know and saying, this could be cool. It's all we can do at this point. Appreciate the evenhandedness.

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Thanks!!

[@Kazerole]

Keep up the positivity :). People are too focused on comparing units between games. And there is too much doom and gloom. Thanks Rob

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

My pleasure

[@DocStab]

Love the videos, nice change of pace from baseless negativity. We all love this game and the IP, but you’d never know it from some circles. As always you’re the first place I come to everyday to see what’s going on. Much love!

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Appreciate you

[@mistformsquirrel]

I actually totally forgot about the 'unlocking' thing. Hrm... It is weird they haven't showed us any of that in the Faction Focuses.

[@paulcable2538]

Having taken a break from the game over 3rd edition due to becoming a dad, I’m diving back in at the start of 4th and all I can say is, everything I’m seeing, I’m loving! - I’ve been following your coverage religiously - great updates and conversations, thank you!

[@matthewthomas5657]

I think it'll come more to light when the Army books are released, It's definitely a great way to introduce and expand subfactions / area's of armies. I've been harping on allot about how it's also a really easy way to introduce allies within the grand alliances, or even 'regiments of renown'. This hero must be included and can bring along X Y and Z units. They can so easily introduce things like the Silent people or the Kurnothi this way. Heck, a Warcry release with alt weapon choices (therefore two possible units) that is followed up by the hero that can bring them can add so much flavour. It could also lead to alliances Across the grand alliances too, Chaos Dwarves released... no problem this Hobgrot hero can bring hobgorts and Goblin wolf riders add's to those units and that 'regiment' doesn't count towards your ally unit. Its so simple it HAS to be the intention.

[@ismasekkate9607]

So, Keep your cool, wait for the full picture instead of judging with haste and be positive because it s a game? Wooo! I wasnt ready for such controversy!

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Hot takes

[@XPoeticRenegadeX]

I've been waiting for this video. I was building a new Gryph centered Stormcast list when the giant cull happened. Now I'm gun shy on buying anything until we get the hero/unit rules.

[@piotrjeske4599]

I understand you so much l ordered two boxes of dracolithes and Aristeia for christmas in Jan. Came in Feb , and l haven't assembled them. And l probably never will unless GW gives back sacrosanct units for 5th ed.

[@redyns99]

Love watching your contact, keep up the good work

[@Kelgrim]

As always, great video and astute observations. Been hyped about the list building aspect since they first revealed it, hoping it'll create more list diversity, and in an ideal world, more thematic lists. At least on paper, I really like this approach.

[@MKDietz]

Honestly I think it's absolutely wonderful that you've been as positive as you've been. It's way better to highlight the things that seem great. I also appreciate the things you've pointed out that seem troublesome, so it's a good mix of review of the rules.

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Thank you so much!!

[@davidfortin6437]

Positity is extremely important in this world of negativity and ''hating on something is cool'' culture on the internet. Your approach is super refreshing and fun. Keep doing you, Rob.

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Thanks bud

[@adamsauve4562]

Hmmmm, your right. Completely forgot about that.🤔

[@beardhammerwargaming]

I hit like and I grew an inch!

[@zramirez5471]

This is what I've wanted to see more than anything else! Glad someone finally made a video on it!!!

[@decokane1019]

So, each army will consist of a hero and their personal troops. Heroes are essential but each one creates a "drop" because it has to have it's own regiment. There's a lot of layered complexity just at army selection level. Centrepiece models sound like they're going to be essential.

[@Mensch777]

Agree on the centrepiece models and I am not sure if I like being "forced" to play faction leaders if I want to stay competetive.

[@decokane1019]

@@Mensch777 like Rob says we will need to wait for the big picture. If the God tier models are 900pts it's going to be a different discussion to if they are 300. Ushoran certainly feels auto-include.

[@SeanHoltzman]

Interestingly, the heroes may be a primary balance point then. "Oh? Are Blood Knights OP in Kastellai but not normally? Vordhrai gets the pts nerf."

[@SeanHoltzman]

Its an interesting design tool to balance detachment rules without literally making detachments cost pts themselves

[@JoeFlamenco]

I find that the best thing to do is withhold judgement until the context is clear. Also, this method of building an army is how Conquest does it, and that game slaps.

[@Leldoranwow]

Great commentary imo. Something else related to list building I'm a bit anxious that we haven't heard about is alliances. I'm getting the feeling that's completely dead and it makes me a bit sad.

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

I think alliances have gone

[@Cindaer]

This will be a good thing for AoS. They've basically copied this from Conquest: Last Argument of Kings and it creates a lot more interactivity with army building.

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Excited to see it in full

[@RrHms2J]

I will take anything they do that makes it so people don't look at me like I'm an alien when I try to explain the rules. I think the regiments helps provide pointers for list building and makes an army easier to plan for. I am also very happy they are de-emphasizing WISIWIG, people seem to bounce off the indecision of multiple build options. I am afraid to even look at 40k when I see how many weapon options they have on everything, my OCD goes through the roof.

[@blindoutlaw]

“You need a hero”…. Holding out for a hero until the end of the night

[@tschriv]

This is very much like 40K. Characters can be assigned as leaders to specific units only. In most cases, there's synergy between leader and unit, so it's not a completely bad thing. But you can also have lone operatives, characters that are off on their own, no unit attached. BUT, this is a bit broader, since in 40K a leader is tied to ONE unit, not up to 4.

[@KateHolden]

I've had a theory the past few weeks about why we haven't seen any examples from Stormcast or Skaven heroes about what units they can bring, and it's that they can't do it without revealing units that are still to be revealed after the box release. For example, if that new Skaven leader says "can take Stormvermin" it'll confirm the new Stormvermin in an anticlimactic way. I think that's why the Stormcast battle formations are so vague too in their faction focus. Just a theory of course, I could prove to be waaay off! 😅

[@Threnodist1]

And then you have armies like nighthaunt where trying to figure out which ghost hero goes with which ghost unit is a mystery.

[@BaneChain236]

I’ve been thinking about this a lot. I play kruleboyz and Nighthaunt and I have no idea how the units will be split up. Fortunately I have pretty much everything so I’ll be covered. I’ve been loving the 4th edition coverage!

[@joelshort2907]

It does make me wonder how factions like Fyreslayers and Kruleboyz that have lots of heroes will work.

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Me too

[@Reesily]

I think this is a more interesting way to gate the heroes and units rather than the way 40K has decided to do it.

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Yeah I agree

[@Bobrob1597]

I wish they would just release all the rules already so we know how to start building the lists already

[@JachymorDota]

Locking units and heroes together is very fluffy. Feels like summoning heroes with their warbands to form your army. A hero-tax might also be good to balance your army. You can't just cherrypick the best things from each subfaction and are enticed to commit harder to a "theme", which also benefits fluff. But knowing a GW Hero costs almost as much as a regiment, it does feel like a money-move a bit.

[@johanderyck6598]

Sounds like my ‘Morathi & the Bow Snakes’ regiment might broaden to a chamber orchestra with 2x 10 fighty snakes next to 2x 10 bow snakes and some soloist heroes.

[@arinkyo]

Killing it man! 💪

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

LOVE YA XXX

[@scottbaker2451]

Great video. I've been asking the same question. Just finished painting a meme list of 18 mighty skullcrushers so am hoping what I'll need is 2 or 3 mighty lord on juggernauts as they are the hero that currently enables them. Frustrating that they chose not to share some of this information during the faction foci.

[@The_Rising_Ape]

Sounds like GW have reworked the rules specifically to sell more of those centerpiece minis.

[@mycatistypingthis5450]

Yeah, heroes are the most expensive pieces of plastic. I wasn't going to play a GW game anyway.

[@CannibalShinobi]

You can say that literally any time they buff a garbage model that wasn't selling well.

[@martyp00s]

GW games have always been hero/monster centric

[@davetrack2950]

Or… they’ve reworked the rules to encourage you to field your favourite centrepiece models.

[@The_Rising_Ape]

@@davetrack2950 possibly but that doesn't track with this edition being streamlined to encourage new players... or maybe I'm just getting cynical in my dotage.

[@trentraber6921]

This reminds me a lot of Conquest: The Last Argument of Kings. Very similar mechanic for army building. And as to your videos, I feel you are the best content creator for AoS so don't change a thing.

[@sirbobulous]

And similar to the warband building in Lord of the Rings too. Heros unlock a different number of troops and you have to bring a hero to lead those troops so can't just have a horde of basic dudes without some heroes to have a warband to fit them into.

[@mordororc6970]

i like the changes so far although the lack of summoning will make a huge difference as a nurgle player, but i hope that chaos factions will be able to play more slaves to darknis units

[@joshuaginn792]

Seems simple. Easy way to add a tax/separation in “Big” faction armies, and in books like Orruks where Iron Jaws heros won’t unlock Kruleboyz and vice versa.

[@salv.6948]

Blightkings don't have a Mortal keyword anymore, but does have Rotbringer so I guess that's the separation we will see in wording for Regiments? We will make it work in the end, super pumped for 4th!!!

[@GoldenRogueMinis]

Imo I think it will be keyword based. So for my army deepkin The king will unlock akhelian units lotann will unlock Isharaan units etc

[@jamesjohnson1290]

I’ve had a couple of thoughts. I think it’ll be extremely rare to see an army with a 1 drop deployment anymore, unless certain characters unlock other heroes as a unit, like Rotigus unlocking GUOs and a whole army of 5 GUOs. I can definitely foresee something like ogors have, maybe something like this: Gluttons are always available Tyrants unlock leadbelchers, ironguts, and maneaters Butchers/slaightermasters unlock gorgers Stonehorn heroes unlock stonehorns and mournfangs Thundertusk heroes unlock thundertusk and yhettes Hunter heroes (ice brow and blood pelt) unlock Frost sabres. Not sure how the rest of the options would break down, but I imagine something like that. Either way, I think it’ll be EXTREMELY interesting to see how armies are built now

[@williamrussell-fu4to]

This is the one thing I that has me most concerned and considering staying with 3rd ed. I will not invalidate the $1000's I have spent on my army because my heros/units don't "match" anymore. I will not be spending more money to make them match. So if my armies don't work under 4th ed rules, then I will just keep playing 3rd.

[@jeffwiese4037]

In general, it feels like they want more types of units on tables. As far as Chaos goes, that Darkoath box that dropped recently is probably a preview of who can take what in that you'll likely need a Darkoath hero to take any of those units. As an aside when I saw they were locking unit availability to specific heroes I mused aloud " Yeah, I too love Conquest"

[@shadeling6717]

i honestly completely forgot about this mechanic coming into 4.0. As i recently started playing Conquest and they do a very similar system this change doesn't bother me too much. We really need to see everything to determine how this will really affect list building.

[@damianelvidge9395]

Great info as always

[@just_gut]

I bought* (won a local tournament so got with my store credit) Tahlia Vedra specifically on the strength of the preview plus what I expected to be able to field with her. Since I already have a fairly full slate of Cities Humans otherwise, and she's no longer sub-faction locked, I made the acquisition when I wasn't planning on it previously. To me it has been pretty easy to see how some of the previews are going to slot into their respective armies in 4th ed. It may not be the same way they did in previous editions, but I tend to look at what is, rather than what was.

[@stevenknight8859]

I just want to know what my cabbage will let me take and will I need a Pig Boss to have Gruntas? James I need to Know!

[@vangrail27]

Been wondering how army building was bc they have been lacking with army building info

[@ndpizzle]

Great video

[@spacepope7867]

I do enjoy the concept, however i am seriously concerned about how certain factions have barely any named character/hero choices. They mention that a bunch of named characters will have greater pools of units they can grab/that can be attached... But what about factions like Seraphon, with just Kroak and NOTHING else? How is that supposed to match up to factions like Stormcast with a ton of named people who can bring a bunch of units? How is this going to affect what builds are viable/ what you can expect an opponent to bring? Is someone with a army with a bunch of named heros going to be able to bring a wider selection of units and playstyles, while factions without will have to struggle with limited options?

[@awesomemusicstudio]

7:46 talking about a hero we would "want to take" .. but I think what this rule is saying is MUST take whether we want to or not, or suffer some penalty. Which makes me not a big fan of this rule at all. Will need to see how it pans out, as you said, but, it really feels like GW is trying to push specific sale bundles that they want at the expense of player enjoyment / creativity / strategic options.

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

I think that's a really fair take

[@awesomemusicstudio]

In my opinion, there doesn't seem to be any player advantage to this kind of rule. It's okay to be diplomatic, but not knowing the point costs and the full scope of things doesn't really change this point, unless we're misunderstanding something, then at best, the 'point cost' revelations will only show the degree of how much this rule sucks. What we can really understand from it at this point is .. Heroes that already have their preexisting buffing abilities (which should be enough), now will be forced to take or suffer an additional disadvantage .. WHY .. in what way can this possibly good for gameplay? And the only real answer that makes sense is to encourage more sales. Because for all those people who already own armies .. what guaranteed way can GW get them to buy new models? Well .. THIS rule seems like a way to do that. Because existing armies likely won't just happen to fit nicely into this new rule system, as it applies to every unit and hero. .. it is understandable that armies will want to be reconsidered based on new rules for new game versions .. but this particular rule is beyond that, it is one that seems to force people to buy new things that they may not even want (unless they already own them) to stay competitive. A basic example, is having war beasts, like the Skaven Hell Pit. Most skaven players would like to add that to their armies regardless of which army style they have . any why shouldn't they? But what this rule is implying .. is in order to do that, we need to have a Clan moulder hero .. or a centerpiece of somesort.. sure we dont know which heroes will be needed at this point, or the point cost of those heroes .. all we really do know, is that we will need to buy it unless we happen to own it.. so sure maybe the hero will only be 10 points, dunno, but for sure it is $50+ . And this goes for every army, all units .. the chances of anybody who owns only what they need to field a 2000 point army to be able to shift into AOS4 without needing to buy something new seems to be low, and that is likely why this rule exists. This rule is only more annoying, less flexible .. and more expensive. I am looking forward to AOS4 and been looking forward to it.. been waiting for new Skaven for so so long ... but I feel kind of 'meh' with the new Skaven .. but this rule, I can't stand it. Ya.. SURE, maybe we dont see the whole picture .. but do we really need to see it? GW is GW ... is it really anything different then a cash grab at the expense of player enjoyment? Time wont tell, time will only pacify. And thank you for bringing up the topic .. it is good of you to stay diplomatic, We know you think about every possible detail of every aspect of this game before any of us do and in more depth. And I guess all these thoughts crossed your mind.. and it is nice to get people discussing it .. But GW should learn that the players and buyers aren't dumb. Sure we really dont have much choice but to take whatever they throw at us, and overtime we will forget this new rule originated just to sell new models to old players .. but yes, you;re right, people do need to discuss it .. because as time goes by, more game choices start existing, and even myself I've started looking at other games recently. And players and buyers should speak up when they think a rule is like this is kind of unethical and hope GW considers things like this for the future. New rules should be a mix of things and reasons, but $$ vs Gameplay shouldn't be so obviously imbalanced when introducing a new system ..for exact major change, give the players something to feel good or excited about it, and not try to sidestep it with other promotions. Let the quality of the models do the work for the sales, and don't add in sneaky stuff like this, or who knows, maybe players will find other things to play. Well. this is the long version of my point of view.

[@lukevassh7740]

It's this way every edition. I think it's due in part to the drip feed nature of these articles. Imo it would be much better if the faction focus articles had a lot more meat to them so folks could really prepare and hit the ground running day one. I'm also not the biggest fan of being nudged into taking centerpiece models. Yes they are cool but It shouldn't be THE way to play. Closer and closer to Kruleboyz. I'm anxious, excited, and nervous to see them as I'm thinking they'll get quite a shake up. Take care, y'all.

[@bas7977]

I am curious to see if the changes to taking the double turn will lead to significantly less double turns (I expect it will, as not being able to get a battle tactic will be too high a price to pay). With that in mind, I am also wondering if deciding who goes first might be (slightly) less impactful, as you wont have to take the impact of an early double turn into consideration. But I am only a very casua player whithvery little experience in actual (match) play, so it's just thoughts...

[@davidratcliffe3039]

On the plus side, it seems like there is no restriction on the number of Heroes you can take. You just take them as auxilaries. There may be builds where giving up a CP per turn is worth it. It might be fun to have 10 Wizards on the board or 5 Wizards and 5 Priests. In some ways this feels less restrictive. with no Battleline and no cap on Heroes.

[@acsblaid]

I'm a little unsure how I feel about this. It sounds like they're taking the idea of units that are currently/previously intended to power pair together and just forcing you to rope them together anyway or risk the disadvantage of auxiliaries. Which is all good and well, but some of those are weaker power pairs than others, and you don't necessarily want the hero meant to go with those units or vice versa. Or in the case of some heroes currently/in their currently available spearhead iteration don't really even offer any real synergy to given units, so being forced to take them to unlock certain units they don't help and don't help them would feel really awkward and annoying. I guess we'll see what we see.

[@philipspringall7068]

The thug lyfe chose me

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Bin dwarfs

[@sirbobulous]

This means we could have a character whose whole power is the 'Power of Friendship!' where they generally suck but unlock loads of the good units in their Regiment.

[@speeddemonpainting7050]

Wow... With this type of army selection AND the spearhead "use your card for VP or for a temporary powerup", it does seem like GW has been paying some attention to how Warcradle studios organises their force building and gameplay mechanics. And that's a good thing, because the forces tend to be very thematic without being too restrictive. Better to take inspiration somewhere else, rather than coming up with a bad original idea! :D

[@babba2565]

maybe the warmasters allow you to take any unit and always to a max of 4? Truth to be told I think that it could be an interesting change but first I have to see which hero unlock which unit

[@stubai78]

It does sound like you may only take one hero with the Warmaster keyword. If the leak is true and they must be your general

[@depalapili-pala4859]

I've been thinking about this a lot recently, I play a lot of different armies and it's very difficult to try to predict what units I can get started on in anticipation for the new edition. Like I want more ogroid theradons but then will I have to have an ogroid myrmidon? Probably but maybe an exalted champion can unlock them idk. Other weird stuff like ogor gorgers or orruk weirdbute wrekkaz I could see being only auxiliary which would suuuuck but it would seem weird for any of their current heroes to unlock them specifically. Any ways that was a bit rambly but thanks for the video it was really insightful, positivity all the way

[@MrGreenpaulo]

Many people actually play 1000pt games, so having to take a 400pt centrepiece model will be dumb at that point level.

[@TheRealThirdME]

We are not talking about it, because we don't know much about it? Makes sense to me 🙂

[@trevorharvey6928]

This is why it's kinda crazy how many people have been screaming about their faction getting nerfed etc. We just don't have anywhere near enough info to know right now........

[@garbagecan755]

The only thing I'm 100% negative on is how many incidental mortals there seem to be. The only army that didn't have at least 1 unit with incidental mortal wounds (Roll a d3, on a 2+ deal that many mortals) was Idoneth. 5 of the armies we've seen (Sons, Nurgle, Tzeentch, Ogors, Fyreslayers) have it as part of their core battle traits meaning they will always be dealing incidental mortals. Every single other army has had at least 1 unit that triggers incidental mortals in some way, either on charge or as a spell etc. It feels like the "reduction of mortal wounds" was the same reduction that 40k got to re-rolls.

[@dalmont8099]

Or you may want to run pure gas and not even care about drops or command points if something is just that good.

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

Yeah definitely

[@Crunch2327]

Cant play X models without buying & playing Y models? Not seeing upsides here.

[@stephenhumphreys9149]

What, like 'Can't take a behemoth without taking at least 3 battleline units and a hero'? It's a different way of restricting, but it's not like it wasn't already in the game. Pretty much every iteration of all GW games have restrictions in one form or another, that's nothing new.

[@marcbenson1969]

Can't wait for Morbidex Twiceborn and nothing but Nurglings. They always should have been Battleline. Now I can live the dream.

[@ihaiaoconnor1209]

Sweet sweet gargants are out for faction focus ❤

[@johncastle2148]

What about allies??

[@markpandelidis2079]

I think it could be even the case that some heroes aren't going to unlock "sub-faction" units and more so their equivalent in "troop" units. What I mean, example: Weirdnob shaman is an *Infantry* hero. So he might allow you to put 3-4 "infantry" non-hero Ironjawz units. Some armies will have heroes that are "sub-faction" locked like lumineth. But other armies that don't have sub-faction keywords will probably just have the new "infantry" "cavalry" etc as their accompanying units. I also doubt that outside of Gargants, any army is going to be 1 drop. It'll be 3-4 on average. 2 rare, 1 almost no one, maybe JUST Gargants because only having 1 hero is super restrictive and having just 4 reinforced units that aren't Gargants lol, is probably pretty hard to play on the table.

[@bennconner1195]

Old world is looking a lot better and it’s only got 3 factions released

[@thehonestwargamerstreams]

I make old world content too

[@Dwilson1282]

i think we’re all just waiting to see what heroes unlock what units and it’s too hard to speculate

[@Thorthon20]

Skaven players know all about heroes unlocking units

[@capt.mannerings8095]

What is the deal! I can't wait to play this faction 😂

[@Vaellas]

I wonder how it will work in terms of Spearhead boxes too that already exist and if some may need to change because the hero provided does not work with the units in the box for their regiment for people juming from spearhead boxes in to 4th. Like Idoneth eels and sharks for example are Akhelian units, so would that mean you need an Akhelian hero to add them to the regiment? Which would mean the Soulscryer, being Isharann, would not be able to have the shark and eels in their regiment as a result or would it be that the Soulscryer, since lorewise are pretty vital to the soul raids, is one of the heroes that can add on to another so you would buy an Akhelian to attach them too etc Be interesting to see when we finally get the rules and if, similar to combat patrol, some boxes will change when battletomes come out to reflect changes.

[@tomasweir2029]

I think its not gonna be that restrictive that we think. Maeby in lumineth there are other heroes that are more cheaper and gonna unlock everything like eltharion or the 2 brothers modelo.

[@estoc5467]

I only Hate Watch. Thanks for the shoutout!

[@randykeeling1916]

I really hope they don't beef it like they did with 40k where certain units are core and others are not for no clear reason. Some stuff in the codex just not being accounted for makes for a really bad time.

[@leesweeney8879]

GW always hids bad news.

[@theDEUBabides]

endless spells are free and everyone has them, but the Incarnate is also now a manifestation lore. What is that going to look like?? insert Oprah screaming "Free incarnates for everyone"

[@Solitayre_sedai]

Cant think of how they will do SBGL. Lock units to dynasty maybe? Vyrkos get access to wolves and bats? Legion of blood heros get access to blood knights and skeleton units?

[@stephenhumphreys9149]

I don't think they've mentioned locking any units to your sub-faction so far. I'd guess most heroes will share a common pool of units (skellies, zombies etc) then they'll also have less-accessible ones (so vampires unlock blood knights, wight kings unlock grave guard, necromancers unlock mortis engines, that sort of thing)

[@minacapella8319]

I actually dont care for the idea of having to take a specific hero to unlock specific units or make them auxiliaries when auxiliaries punish you so much. This feels like a "hero tax" for any types of units you like. That said, im liking enough other aspects of what theyve shown that its not going to turn me off of the game. It will just be an adjustment for me, the way any new edition to a warhammer flagship game is.

[@sheepys551]

If you really do have to bring a specific hero to get a certain unit or get highly punished, this is a game killing rule that will suck any enjoyment out of list building and i likely will not be playing aos.

[@catalingabrielmiron1388]

What do you mean summoning îs gone?

[@Rhuiner]

I think you're always going to have a crowd that freaks out at change. I also think you're dead on that without context you can't really paint a complete picture. As for me, Im hyped as hell for 4e and riding the positive vibes!

[@mrbunning8051]

Do you think that KO will get spell access? I know that's the way we have been lead but what's your thoughts?

[@piotrjeske4599]

Well like most 4th ed changes l don't like it. It feels less like building an army, especialy when focused on a specific part of a faction, and rather a gamey thing that forces you to buy specific models. Try playing the units you want in your LoL , if you didn't buy that super expensive Teclis model .

[@mherrj]

Summoning will return with faction battletomes. I promise, yall need to chill.

[@Mensch777]

I hope not, at least not like it was done so far

[@timmcpharlin773]

Jugz Rob???

[@mastercats]

Warmaster is "this unit must be your general" I think it's like 40k

[@CannibalShinobi]

According to leaks it's not different than how it is in 3rd. It gets treated as a general but you can pick a non-unique to be a second general, that way you can still pick command traits and artifacts.

[@mastercats]

@@CannibalShinobi Yeah haven't seen themself just have heard a few times what they apparently say. If warmaster is another general regiment, i'll be out for the edition unless warmasters are violently over pointed.

[@CannibalShinobi]

@@mastercats I don't see why having 1 extra unit in your second drop is a game breaker for you, but you do you.

[@mastercats]

TLDR: i dont care about breaking the game, I want to play semi-competive with out being mashed by named heros Long: For me i enjoy making my own army with lore. Thats part of the painting and army building i really enjoy, but i also like to play at tournaments or with sweaty folks. If warmaster means "this unit must be your general." thier is some real trade offs for taking a warmaster vs a generic general that can be kitted out with artifacts and such. However, the warmasters (as far as we know), generally can take about every unit in the book in thier regiment, and also let you have a regiment with +1 unit (which matters for priority). That's a huge bonus on a unique character that also has alot of one of the kind abilities. Or just more powerful versions of abilities that the generic versions already have. As such it kind makes spending thousands of dollars and many hours on buying, building, and painting suck when i can't then play with my toys in a fun completive way i enjoy.

[@CannibalShinobi]

​@@mastercats Literally the only difference between Warmaster in 3rd versus 4th is that additional one unit in their regiment. And because heroes have to lead regiments unless you find a 2000pt list that is one unique and 4 units you will never have a one drop list so that one additonal unit has bare minimal effect on priority rolls. You will have multiple regiments, you will have multiple drops. Skipping an edition for 3 years because unqiues allowing 1 additional unit in their regiment is mind-boggling.

[@Elvings92]

Yeah basically AOS is more lore immersive

[@Erebus_the_trustworthy]

Not referring to Robby here. It's fascinating how lazy people are. Instead of just reading the rules themselves they take longer to listen to someone read & talk about it while throwing in their own thoughts & bias which starts the telephone game & people misunderstanding things & rambling online. Just read the Fn rules lol.

[@MoleMantle]

watching the Twitch vod with this on mute and 2x speed at the same time to feed the algorithm! Twitch convert! Also the objective markers are sick (in a good way, like the kids say)