Aelves in the Grand Alliance - Order book

[Aicanor]

For those interested, here are the like links:

https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com/bloggings/598
https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com/bloggings/599
https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com/bloggings/600

I would rather not comment, but feel free to do so.

[Shannar, Sealord]

Well that's "interesting"

[SpellArcher]

I see we're all friends with the Dark Elves again!

[Prince of Spires]

Of course, the most interesting thing here is that it shows how irrelevant GW has become to the hobby for a lot of people. In the past, a leak of this kind / magnitude would have resulted in a multi-page topic overnight, instead of 2 whole posts...

As for the leak, it seems like White Lions have now become monks. And Phoenix Guard are pretty much elves who died and were brought back by Phoenixes. It's not the most original of fluff perhaps. But it's moving forward and it seems to be building something again. I'm missing the complete picture of the fluff at this point. It's too spread out to follow from the sideline. I don't like the strong focus on sigmar, which somehow places the rest of the races in a secondary / support role. But we'll see. There is at least room for the fluff to grow from here.

Rod

[Shannar, Sealord]

Do those even qualify as "whole" posts?

But you are right. I suppose this should be roughly equivalent to the release of a HE army book, and yet it's only crickets.

[Prince of Spires]

Do those even qualify as "whole" posts?

What can I say, I'm an optimist...

But that was indeed my point. The HE have gotten a new army book. In the past we would have been discussing whether the shadows in the back in the army shot are new models/units or just existing models looking different. Now?...

[SpellArcher]

To be fair I suspect AoS's internet presence doesn't focus on race-specific forums. The fact that it has a somewhat altered line-up of races and armies means those forums may be less relevant to it. While 9th Age for example is closer to the traditional divisions so fits in more easily.

[Doctor]

TBH I'm not very interested in AoS fluff. Though I kinda like the Phoenix Temple one. Turning WLs into monks is kinda silly.

[Prince of Spires]

At least they're moving the fluff forward and giving it a bit more body. The little I've read seems a bit stuck in clichés, but at least they're putting some effort in it. And it's slowly moving away from the traditional, old WH fluff. The more it moves away from that the more it will end up a separate thing and be judged on its own merits. That can only be a good thing.

You're probably right on the race specific thing SA. I'm curious if that's a good thing for GW or not. WH being tied to races gave players something to identify with, something to talk about and a reason to buy certain models (though also to not buy other models). Also, it might have a similar trend to 9th age, where it initially starts with a (few) central forum(s). But as the community grows and the game matures people will start to drift away to various sub divisions. The 9th age then is perhaps a bit more mature then AoS. It's of course closer to 8th ed, making the transition easier. But AoS is also only now getting books for elves. And some races are still missing 'real' AoS rules. So they're a bit behind the 9th age in that regard.

Time will tell...

Rod

[Doctor]

Can AoS really be compared to 9th edition? It seems these are two completely different games.

[Shannar, Sealord]

Can AoS really be compared to 9th edition? It seems these are two completely different games.

I think the only comparison was internet talk. And that's not unreasonable.

[SpellArcher]

And it's slowly moving away from the traditional, old WH fluff.

The impression I have is that they are moving away from the popular roots of many fantasy games (Moorcock, Tolkien etc) and trying to make something more cleanly 'theirs'. Though I believe this owes a debt to Paradise Lost. The risk is, that the 'old' background might resonate stronger.

[Prince of Spires]

Can AoS really be compared to 9th edition? It seems these are two completely different games.

I think the only comparison was internet talk. And that's not unreasonable.

Indeed, that's what I meant. The games themselves are very different and can't really be compared in such a way. But the internet talk and the maturity of the game, so how fleshed out and set the rules are can be compared.

And at this point, the 9th age rules are more mature then the AoS ones. AoS is still busy moving away from its WH heritage and finding its way as a game I feel. The 9th age, with the 0.99 release is starting to be much more fleshed out (probably easier since it's closer to original WH). And I feel this is reflected in the internet community. If things are in motion and new, with a smaller community people group together in general forums. As the community grows and things become more set people separate out in smaller groups and end up on more race specific forums.

And it's slowly moving away from the traditional, old WH fluff.

The impression I have is that they are moving away from the popular roots of many fantasy games (Moorcock, Tolkien etc) and trying to make something more cleanly 'theirs'. Though I believe this owes a debt to Paradise Lost. The risk is, that the 'old' background might resonate stronger.

I wondering though if that is the case for everyone or mainly for the older players. I think many of the younger players won't have read Tolkien (they might have seen the movies) and certainly not Moorcock. And their influence on the idea of what fantasy is perhaps is smaller for younger generations then for older people. There is a lot more fantasy around and it's hard to tell what came first and is original and what is only derivative.

For example I remember seeing a discussion somewhere a few years ago after one of the Harry Potter books had come out (one of the later ones). Some younger kids were calling Terry Pratchett and his books copies of Harry Potter since for them that was their first venture into fantasy. Even though the Terry Pratchett books had been around for 10 years before the first Harry Potter one was even thought of.

So perhaps the fluff needed a bit of an update to resonate more with younger people. After all, that seems to be the main target group for the game. It still looks filled with clichés to me. But then, perhaps I read too much fantasy.

Rod

[SpellArcher]

There is a lot more fantasy around and it's hard to tell what came first and is original and what is only derivative.

IMHO Rod, all fantasy is derivative. Harry Potter steals a Golden Cup from a Dragon. Oho, says I, that's from The Hobbit. But it's also from Beowulf.

Fantasy works, I suggest because themes and archetypes emerge and re-emerge down the centuries. The Wood Elves in Warhammer don't resonate because GW invented some clever ideas, they resonate because GW took ancient myths and legends and re-invented them to push certain buttons inside our heads. The Hobbit is a wonderful story but the reason we care about it is that Dwarfs, Dragons, Wizards etc are embedded in our psyches, these elements can't just be made up.

As said, I believe GW's new fluff owes a debt to Paradise Lost, as I also believe, does His Dark Materials for example. This is a solid start because Milton deploys powerful characters and themes that reach back and back. But whether this will work for a game setting quite so well as the Old World, grounded in the rich and earthy mythos of northern europe is debateable. We could compare the Horus Heresy I guess but how much of 40K's success is down to the backstory and how much down to the fun of supermen shooting rayguns?

[Prince of Spires]

All fantasy work is definitely derivative. Tolkien borrowed heavily from all sorts of European legends and stories.

My argument was a bit that if you grew up 20-40 years ago, your view of fantasy was dominated by Tolkien, Moorcock and related works. And the fluff of any fantasy war game you played would be tied into that. For 15 year olds now that is no longer the case. I don't think Tolkien is as well read by the current teenagers (if at all). So a fantasy game is less dependent on that fluff and can pick something more 'modern' which resonates better perhaps with younger players.

Rod

[Doctor]

Funny thing. My idea of fantasy was shaped by Tolkien, D&D (including computer games like Baldurs Gate and Planescape: Torment) but perhaps most importantly by WFRP (since the 90s). So Warhammer - the world they've decided to ditch.

Of course since then I read a lot of various books, played various other games and my view on the topic was severely broadened.

You have a point though. But on other hand, we had the Hobbit in cinemas recently, haven't we?

[SpellArcher]

TBH I was exposed to a lot of variety in Fantasy growing up. Tolkien clearly influenced games like D&D. But Moorcock's work is somewhat different and he was a critic of Tolkien. We had RPG's like Runequest, yes with elves and dragons but in a very different kind of world. One of my favourite authors, Robert Holdstock, wrote a very different kind of Fantasy. I've just finished a fascinating non-fiction book by Terry Pratchett. In it, he places JK Rowling in a British & Irish tradition of authors like E Nesbit and CS Lewis (Lewis had Classical and Biblical elements that Tolkien didn't), where the fantasy world is kind of 'just around the corner'. He contrasts this with Middle Earth, presented as 'all that there is'.

Having witnessed the development of the Old World setting from way back, I didn't think much to it, for a long time. Seemed like such a mish-mash of different elements. But somehow it coalesced into something better than that. Having artwork over many years has helped a lot I think and the models of course. But GW have been quite good at taking powerful archetypes and adapting them, in the end.

What kind of recent fantasy did you have in mind Rod?

[Doctor]

I forgot about Sapkowski, of course (how could I). His view on fantasy was also quite different than the classic Tolkien one.

As for Warhammer, remember that the WFB fluff was a different thing than the darker and much less "heroic" RPG setting. It has been enchanced by some articles from White Dwarf, but also a very influential, rather grimseries here in Poland. I don't know about the books (I've read only one, Jack Yeovil's / Kim Newman's Genevieve Undead from 1993)

[Prince of Spires]

The hobbit movies didn't have a lot of Tolkien in them other then some names and the general idea of the script. I still am not sure how they managed to turn a tiny childrensbook into 3 long movies (or why actually, they would have been better if they had condensed them into 2 movies...).

@SA: Which Terry Pratchett book did you read? Sounds like fun... It's indeed one of the splits in fantasy between people who create whole worlds and those who mainly adapt existing ones.

As for specific fantasy, I think it's harder to pinpoint a single dominant work of fantasy that influences peoples view on fantasy. I think Harry Potter is a major one in peoples view on magic and adaptive fantasy. More so 10 years ago then now though. Another major one at the moment is game of thrones. Somehow people don't really think of it as fantasy anymore in the traditional sense. It's more mainstream somehow. A lot of people who wouldn't touch anything fantasy related watch game of thrones.

As for AoS, it seems to have a lot of ties with the 40k fluff. But there is also a bit of StarCraft in there. They indeed dropped a lot of the Tolkien related ideas and seem to focus on a human first universe, whereas in a lot of high fantasy humans are more often a less powerful and less idealist race who came later, compared to elves or dwarves. The corruption and battle vs corruption, as well as the portals to different worlds has a bit of Warcraft 3 in it.

Thinking about it a bit further, corruption in fantasy has changed over the years. In Tolkien it's a high and mighty kind of corruption. An evil deity people chose to follow or not. In later fantasy, like Warcraft 3 or the 'The witcher' computer games or the Shadows of the Apt series by Arian Tchaikovsky it's more personal and a battle inside each individual. This perhaps matches more with the Chaos idea in AoS, where an individual is converted by chaos and turns into some kind of evil version of himself, even when trying to do good.

Rod

[Doctor]

The Hobbit movies sucked (at least as far as being in line with the actual book is taken into account), but still the world presented in them is more or less based on the Tolkien one.

I was never into Harry Potter. Too childish imo.

If you liked the Witcher computer games, I strongly recommend reading the books.

As for AoS, I didn't study the fluff, but I see a bit of Planescape there (not the great Planescape: Torment, but the D&D Planescape world idea and some other elements, including the war).

[Galharen]

If you liked the Witcher computer games, I strongly recommend reading the books.

I agree, the books are really awesome!

[Prince of Spires]

I'll add them to my to-read list. Always on the lookout for new books/writers

[SpellArcher]

@SA: Which Terry Pratchett book did you read? Sounds like fun... It's indeed one of the splits in fantasy between people who create whole worlds and those who mainly adapt existing ones.

'A Slip of the Keyboard' Rod. It's a collection of his non-fiction.

I was never into Harry Potter. Too childish imo.

That's what I thought at first. But a lot of children's fiction is excellent. The Hobbit, The Owl Service, Pratchett's 'Tiffany' books for example. Once I got stuck into HP I was hooked. The later books get darker and there are definite echoes of The Magician's Nephew or The Phoenix and the Carpet say.

Another major one at the moment is game of thrones. Somehow people don't really think of it as fantasy anymore in the traditional sense. It's more mainstream somehow. A lot of people who wouldn't touch anything fantasy related watch game of thrones.

Very good point.

I'd also underestimated the influence of computer games. I'm PacMan generation so not au fait.

[Shannar, Sealord]

What's funny is that this has started to be an active topic, but it's not really a discussion about the AoS stuff.

[Aicanor]

That's because it is physically painful to read AoS fiction (in my experience at least). It is 'fluff' in its worst form.

As others, I also actually enjoy Harry Potter series. It is best in audio version (great storytelling), and parallels to our realities are just hilarious. Well done to JKR.
Sapkowski as far as I know was trying to kill the Witcher on many occasions but he still keeps coming back. And no one is sorry.


Edit: You can have a taste of AoS fiction for free here: http://www.blacklibrary.com/aos/whaos-q ... ebook.html
I started to read it in January. Still didn't finish it. But it may just be me... ... ...

[Prince of Spires]

What's funny is that this has started to be an active topic, but it's not really a discussion about the AoS stuff.

I guess we just like discussing fantasy more then we like AoS....

[Shannar, Sealord]

What's funny is that this has started to be an active topic, but it's not really a discussion about the AoS stuff.

I guess we just like discussing fantasy more then we like AoS....

haha, I'm with you there.

[SpellArcher]

I've nothing against AoS personally it just doesn't...grab me. Lots of systems to choose from.

[Shannar, Sealord]

I've nothing against AoS personally it just doesn't...grab me. Lots of systems to choose from.

That's one of the things I find so interesting about this decision to restart. They've left the fans of the old behind, and hope they also move on to the new thing. 20 years ago that would have been almost automatic. But now there is a glut of things to choose from. Even really good games are failing to pick up large followings simply because they get lost in the pile of other really good games that exist.

[Prince of Spires]

I've nothing against AoS personally it just doesn't...grab me. Lots of systems to choose from.

That's one of the things I find so interesting about this decision to restart.

That makes two of us. The one unfair advantage Warhammer had over all the other games was that it had by far the largest player base. It was the household name for fantasy wargames. And someone starting in fantasy wargames would probably start with WH.

The threw all that out of the window with the restart and how they handled it. And now they have to fight for their place like all the other fantasy games out there. With the exception that they managed to alienate much of the potential player base by doing the restart.

From a business point of view, it seems like a pretty dumb decision to me. Some solution where they would take the majority of the player base from the old to the new would have been a lot better. Already just some Mordheim like event, where all that's left of the WH world is rubble and starting from there would have been better. Even more so if they simply left (most of) the old races in place.

Rod