Full RRP = £280
20% discount on RRP = £224
Box price = £185
So the box is a £39 (17.4%) discount on simply buying everything at the usual discount.
A good deal if you want absolutely everything in the set, not a good deal if you don't (as any single unneeded item wipes out most or all of the saving).
This also assumes you're getting the ruins sets at retail. Each £100 starter box contains £48 worth of terrain, which is frequently sold for less on eBay.
I picked up one set, I'd hoped that it would have been available at my local with the extra 10-20% off then I would have instantly brought 2 (or possibly even three).
I really don't need the ruins, as ruins are easy to make and will appear in almost every starter set/bundle deal/2nd hand bundle anyway.
I've been able to pick a couple of random Gondor buildings up over the last year but they've been very difficult to get hold off, so nabbing a single big set means between that and the handful of sets I have already means I will have enough to at least build a decent sized Arnor ruins table. When it comes to building an actual Osgiliath/Minas Tirith table I'll go for something more affordable to go bigger (much, much bigger than these kits can manage)
Shame, as I have enough Dol Guldor kits to build a full size display piece/table as my FLGS had them on massive discount, and the old bundle deals for lake town houses was always good so I'll have to lake town one day too. The Rohan sets were much better value for getting a good table set up, even if the Gondor sets are just as nice.
I always miss the opportunities when they Release Gamling Mounted and on Foot with Standard. I really should just bite the bullet and get these things separately so I can stop worrying about it lol.
Ah about bloody time. I was starting to fear this would happen after June and the price rise.
One captain, one Eomer and one goddamn defenders of Rohan thank you kindly.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: Finally the defenders of rohan. What a pig of a set that's been to hunt down.
I gave up trying. On the few occasions I came across complete sets they were always ludicrously expensive. GW doing a MTO was the only real chance I had of gettng it.
New captain looks good. Nice to see both foot and mounted versions. I'm keen to see what else they get for their re-release. I hope they get some sort of siege weapon like a ballista or something.
I do enjoy some of these new minis, but I'm too stuck in my old ways to buy things in resin. Rank and file in plastic, heroes in metal, elites can go either. Thankfully I did a big old track down back in 2012 with they were phasing out metal so I've got pretty much all I need, with some additional stuff provided by the wealth of historicals (and the old fantasy) that now exists out there outside GW.
They redo the Last Alliance plastics though and I'm all in.
My bet on an Angmar creature.
Yeah, now character is great and I am loving it. I have no Arnor miniatures at all: planning to buy everything new on launch. And can't wait.
The mounted characters have consistently been $40 for as far back as I can remember ordering from MtOs., they've jumped up to $55 this time around. Still, I'm fortunate I only need Eomer. Defenders and Heroes are cheaper then I expected at $120 and $135 respectively, yet more then I'd have liked. 2 Years ago, the full Easterling Warband was only $110 and that was 12 warriors + captain and bannerman. Still the sculpts from Defenders are rare enough that they still work out at good value over hunting them down 2nd hand in both dollar value and time spent.
$55 for the captain and bannerman is a bit steep, but again, rarity makes it slightly more palatable. Looking back over previous orders most 3 model sets were about $40. So another big jump.
Stupid question as I only really have the funds to pick up one. Which one is 'better' - not gameplay wise, but long term value wise? I'm slowly building my heroes of the LOTR collection, but each one offers a slightly different grouping.
blockade23 wrote: Stupid question as I only really have the funds to pick up one. Which one is 'better' - not gameplay wise, but long term value wise? I'm slowly building my heroes of the LOTR collection, but each one offers a slightly different grouping.
Between Defenders of Rohan and Heroes of Helm's Deep?
The former is significantly rarer. The latter has appeared on MtO multiple times, and I'd wager will continue to appear in future runs, but even before then Defenders of Rohan was still harder to find and went for higher prices when it was
blockade23 wrote: Stupid question as I only really have the funds to pick up one. Which one is 'better' - not gameplay wise, but long term value wise? I'm slowly building my heroes of the LOTR collection, but each one offers a slightly different grouping.
Hero's is by far some of the most common sculpts you can find. The aragorn and theoden you can pick up for a couple of pounds each and the the rest aren't much more expensive.
Wasn't sure about this one- thought about picking it up but it seems quite expensive for a board game which is basically the fellowship sprue and what appears to a slightly more elaborate snakes and ladders board.
The Moria one they did previously felt more like a mini-wargame and whilst I've not got around to painting it felt like it has more playability (at least being able to be pulled out for quick games once a year perhaps at our winters game days or something) and was a lot cheaper in comparison to this one.
It was available previously, so there are probably some reviews out there.
Wasn't sure about this one- thought about picking it up but it seems quite expensive for a board game which is basically the fellowship sprue and what appears to a slightly more elaborate snakes and ladders board.
The Moria one they did previously felt more like a mini-wargame and whilst I've not got around to painting it felt like it has more playability (at least being able to be pulled out for quick games once a year perhaps at our winters game days or something) and was a lot cheaper in comparison to this one.
It was available previously, so there are probably some reviews out there.
Yup, and it doesn't look promising - mediocre to bad is the general vibe. https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/257324/the-lord-of-the-rings-quest-to-mount-doom/ratings Game design feels antiquated, and not befitting its theme either. Probably fine to play with younger children, but then, why not play something actually good that everyone can enjoy? Especially when you can purchase multiple games for the price of this single uninspired specimen.
When I look at the game, just taking it in as a concept, if I were to design it I'd assume you'd do sort of a Runebound/Arkham Horror/Talisman move-around-the-board-and-have-an-adventure type of game. You'd want like a deck of 200 different event cards. And it's GW, they mass produce minis in their own factory for less than a penny each (unless you're a stan, in which case I understand it's times-a-million that much), why not design the game to include some boss orc minis to represent warbands or armies, a few monsters who you have to face if you want through an area, etc.? I paid $60 to get War of the Ring, this game, as it actually is, seems pretty light by comparison.
That's a hilarious rule. I want to see him with Anduril.
What if he steals something like the Royal Standard of Rohan or another item that affects ['X' keyword]? Like in the case of aforementioned standard, does [Rohan Hero] become [Angmar Hero]?
It looks like a fun rule that, while probably not game winning, will certainly open up some wacky situations once in a while when you jag a kill on someone special.
He's definitely a comedy model. The odds of him ever killing Elessar, Elendil and such is probably next to nil. But on the rare occasion it does happen, it's going to be one of the gaming moment.
That is an embarrassing looking game from GW. Especially at that price. Short of some of the miniatures everything else GW produces has really low production values, but this is a step below that.
Looks like a bargain bin game from a garage publisher.
Agreed Gallahad. Take a look at the wonderful boardgames FFG and Ares produce for LotR and then compare it to GW’s. The latter’s low-effort game is bad even compared to GW’s boardgames of the late 80’s.
When it comes to MESBG, I see the 2005 Mines of Moria set and think "Bingo!". Its a shame they don't revise that as a lighter but more adventurous alternative to the Osgiliath set.
When it comes to MESBG, I see the 2005 Mines of Moria set and think "Bingo!". Its a shame they don't revise that as a lighter but more adventurous alternative to the Osgiliath set.
They did release a 'board game version' within the last couple of years. Didn't come with the plastic terrain but had those figures.
When it comes to MESBG, I see the 2005 Mines of Moria set and think "Bingo!". Its a shame they don't revise that as a lighter but more adventurous alternative to the Osgiliath set.
They did release a 'board game version' within the last couple of years. Didn't come with the plastic terrain but had those figures.
Still a modest game under every aspect but at least can be fun to play, more thematic and good as an introduction for this world.
Dawnbringer wrote: I suppose its news someone is actually making content for the game?
Yeah, something like that But seriously, maybe someone will see it here in N&R, where is more traffic, and get some interest in a game otherwise overlooked because their huge neighbours of 40k and AoS.
We're getting another season and RoP and the Rohirrim film soon, not to mention a new book ocming soon....ish. Lots of LOTR traffic coming our way hopefully.
40k and Aos apart GW often "pauses" game in order to push one system at time - it is happened with Necromunda, Horus Heresy and even Tow now.
As you said there is lot of things incoming for the "franchise" (sigh), not olny a new supplement and Rop but a new anime AND a new live film produced by Jackson so hype will rise again and again. Free advertising for the game.
Which unfortunately won't go anywhere so long as they are still pushing the plastics from the original three films.
They aren't in scale with the rest of the range and desperately need redoing. Especially the plastic horses, where half of them rely on a single ankle at the rear to hold it up, I can't count how many I've broken over the years. They also don't even compare to the numerous historical manufacturers out there (Victrix, Perrys, etc) and now they are several better options for orcs / goblins as well.
6 films - there is plastic for the Hobbit range too.
Honestly I don't care as far as we understand what Lotr means for GW and how they support the game. If people remain interested in this universe and GW keep selling somehow miniatures that enough to keep the game going on.
Johanxp wrote: 6 films - there is plastic for the Hobbit range too.
Yes, but it is the original three films where the range suffers the most, especially in scale. By which I mean the ones released as part of those films coming out, not necessarily in that what they represent is in them. So the Last Alliance set, plastic Rohan, and Plastic WoMT. The baddies as well depending how you want them to compare size wise, but I view it as less of an issue, though more that every 10 - 12 guys look the same.
Just compare Victrix Late Roman (under the dark ages tab) range with what's on offer from GW. Unless one is very tied to the movie 'look' (and as a book fan, I am not) they just don't compete one price or quality or options. I'd probably buy around a hundred Warriors of Numenor if they redid them in proper 28mm (not Warhammer scale, just the same as 28mm historics) as I do like the look. But of what they are offering currently, even if I didn't have my collection from 10-20 years ago (glup) there are to many high quality competitors out there now that I wouldn't buy it again, outside of some of the newer sets (Army of the Dead, Rangers, Corsairs, Easterlings). I wouldn't even do the Rivendell forces as the mounted ones are nice but the foot ones don't match in scale and spears still aren't in plastic...
Anyway, I'll stop whingeing as the thread is meant to be for news and rumours, not a complaint box.
back in the days, 25mm was chosen as scale to be different from Warhammer as this was part of the license (same as GW stores did not allow the LotR models to be used in warhammer games)
but now with the other games being 32mm, they could be re-done in 28mm
the other point was that this were cheap and easy to build models aimed at a very different target group that would never touch the expensive and complicated warhammer models for gaming
and one reason why GW is still doing something with the game is simply that no one else can make a game as this would compete with their other games
Dawnbringer wrote: Which unfortunately won't go anywhere so long as they are still pushing the plastics from the original three films.
They aren't in scale with the rest of the range and desperately need redoing. Especially the plastic horses, where half of them rely on a single ankle at the rear to hold it up, I can't count how many I've broken over the years. They also don't even compare to the numerous historical manufacturers out there (Victrix, Perrys, etc) and now they are several better options for orcs / goblins as well.
I was under the impression that the new models were in scale with the classic ones, and the issue was too many copies of the same models? Curious now as to whether there is any size difference between the Fellowship and Three Hunters set, where Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas is concerned...
Dawnbringer wrote: Which unfortunately won't go anywhere so long as they are still pushing the plastics from the original three films.
They aren't in scale with the rest of the range and desperately need redoing. Especially the plastic horses, where half of them rely on a single ankle at the rear to hold it up, I can't count how many I've broken over the years. They also don't even compare to the numerous historical manufacturers out there (Victrix, Perrys, etc) and now they are several better options for orcs / goblins as well.
I was under the impression that the new models were in scale with the classic ones, and the issue was too many copies of the same models? Curious now as to whether there is any size difference between the Fellowship and Three Hunters set, where Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas is concerned...
The size issue is pretty much just with the plastics that came out in the 2001 - 2003 period, the metal from that time are fine. Which is why I always get a bit annoyed when people try and say LotR is / was 25mm. It never had a consistent scale, the metals from that period end up a half head taller than the plastics. It was exceptionally noticeable between the original metal Gondor Rangers and the plastic WoMT. I'd dig out examples but unfortunately my collection is in storage the other side of the Atlantic.
That's an example, though using the Last Alliance set and a metal Arnorian.
Jeez. That just shows I've been working too much lately. I'd completely forgotten they did supplements.
My head is filled with naught but fog at the moment.
Not a fan of the men of Carn Dum. The details are nicely done, but they look far to high-fantasy for LotRIMO with their exposed torsos yet heavily furred trousers. They are supposed to be from a northern, mountainous region, why are they half naked? It isn't AoS of WFB.
Really like the Hill Trolls and I also like how the werewolves take design cues from the wargs. The Carn Dum leader looks too much like a chaos marauder imo, less exaggerated muscles and so on would be better. If I see this in my local shop I will likely pick it up though- Angmar is a fascinating bit of the history of Middle Earth.
Haighus wrote: Not a fan of the men of Carn Dum. The details are nicely done, but they look far to high-fantasy for LotRIMO with their exposed torsos yet heavily furred trousers. They are supposed to be from a northern, mountainous region, why are they half naked? It isn't AoS of WFB.
My test is always "does this look like it would appear in the films?" and the answer for them is a big fat nope.
I do like everything else at least, and the hill trolls are absolutely fantastic sculpts with a studio paintjob to match. I'm so glad there's a new character for the Rangers too.
Haighus wrote: Not a fan of the men of Carn Dum. The details are nicely done, but they look far to high-fantasy for LotRIMO with their exposed torsos yet heavily furred trousers. They are supposed to be from a northern, mountainous region, why are they half naked? It isn't AoS of WFB.
My test is always "does this look like it would appear in the films?" and the answer for them is a big fat nope.
I do like everything else at least, and the hill trolls are absolutely fantastic sculpts with a studio paintjob to match. I'm so glad there's a new character for the Rangers too.
They look like they could appear in the Hobbit though. Such disappointing films.
Wow, this is the biggest wave of new minis in I don't know how many years. Don't love all, but some are rather nice and quite amazing to see this much new stuff all of a sudden. Always liked the Arnor+Angmar setting, so good to see it get some more attention and expansion.
Welp…I have always loved the lore for Arnor and the whole event of the Fall of Arnor. I’m very excited to play MESBG again!
My only gripe, and it is a small one, is that it seems like everything GW makes for any non-core game sells out too quickly and then doesn’t go back in stock for ages. I’m worried that I won’t be able to pick up the book and build armies to purchase and that instead we’ll be expected to impulse buy a bunch of stuff and hope it makes an army. At least it’s easier to do in MESGB than it is in TOW.
Maybe I’ll post a question about things possible army construction in the appropriate sub-forum...
Well damn, wasn't expecting a bombshell today. But i wouldn't say monkeys paw. They've left the core rules basically untouched from day one and i don't see them doing anything else than the usual tidy up job this time. And has it really been six years? Christ.
As a former Beasts of Chaos player, I'm just on edge about the words "new edition".
I am, however, quite keen for the possibility of a new edition having a suitably new starter set, so I'll let the optimism of a Last Alliance theme carry me from here
Lots of new minis is nice, but yet another edition feels unecessary for a game that hasn't had significant changes in 20+ years. More so for a specialist game that is mostly on stand by.
6 years is a good run for impatient edition recyclers like GW though.
VBS wrote: Lots of new minis is nice, but yet another edition feels unecessary for a game that hasn't had significant changes in 20+ years. More so for a specialist game that is mostly on stand by.
6 years is a good run for impatient edition recyclers like GW though.
Not significative changes? Maybe but has had 3 different editions so far. Showing new support and interest in the game is always a good thing for the community.
War of the Rohirrim is exciting and unexpected! Seeing as how the movie has a very different style from the LOTR and Hobbit movies perhaps whatever GW is offering will also be quite different from MESBG?
Is this also an indication that GW has signed a new license deal regarding the LOTR-rights? War of the Rohirrim but surely be it's own thing not covered by the existing license?
All of the trolls are really good. The werewolves are surprisingly understated for GW, but are monstrous enough to work in several settings.
Aranarth could be a young Aragorn, when he rode to the aid of Rohan, or, with some conversion, could be an Aragorn cleaning up remnants of Sauron's forces after the end of the War of the Ring.
The men of Carn Dum are kind of goofy-looking, making me wonder how WGA's Dark-Age Irish or something from Victrix would do, instead.
VBS wrote: Lots of new minis is nice, but yet another edition feels unecessary for a game that hasn't had significant changes in 20+ years. More so for a specialist game that is mostly on stand by.
6 years is a good run for impatient edition recyclers like GW though.
It does seem rather unnecessary. Could see the eventual use of updated "Armies of..." books with ongoing releases, but struggling to see the use of a new core rulebook. Game doesn't need big changes to core mechanics, and not enough new releases have happened to require any small changes either I imagine. Vaguely interested to see if they made any interesting changes or changes for the sake of changes, but haven't played competitively in years so will likely hold off on buying anything until I get back to playing it regularly again in case they ramp up the edition cycling for MESBG now.
I'm a bit impressed how they can tout a new edition despite the lack of support they've given the game over those six years. Thankfully there are plenty of options in the historical realm for human forces and now a days several multipart kits for orcs and such. It is one of my favourite rule sets, but I've not felt the need to keep up with the GW churn since the Hobbit.
I am in the same boat, love the game but charting my own course with it now.
I still pay attention to what GW does though because I am open to trying current versions if I felt the rules were at least as good as what I am using.
Dawnbringer wrote: I'm a bit impressed how they can tout a new edition despite the lack of support they've given the game over those six years. Thankfully there are plenty of options in the historical realm for human forces and now a days several multipart kits for orcs and such. It is one of my favourite rule sets, but I've not felt the need to keep up with the GW churn since the Hobbit.
Over the course of the edition, there will have been 7 supplements including the new one. So i wouldn't say there's been total lack of support over the edition.
Over the course of the edition, there will have been 7 supplements including the new one. So i wouldn't say there's been total lack of support over the edition.
Those books mostly duplicated supplements from over a decade ago. A handful of models.
Redoing any of the pre 2004 plastics I would have counted as support.
War of the Rohirrim is exciting and unexpected! Seeing as how the movie has a very different style from the LOTR and Hobbit movies perhaps whatever GW is offering will also be quite different from MESBG?
Is this also an indication that GW has signed a new license deal regarding the LOTR-rights? War of the Rohirrim but surely be it's own thing not covered by the existing license?
GWs license is primarily with new line cinema and Warner bros, who are producing war of the rohirrim. It may or may not be an extension of the existing license or a separate one, etc. But it's not necessarily indicative of some deep change in licensing.
Interesting. Not a player, yet, and it depends where this is all leading. The new sculpts are interesting...not reaaaalllllyyyy sure if they feel like something from Tolkien but the Werewolves are cool! Hopefully they'll be a more affordable plastic kit.
Can't wait to see War of the Rohirrim as it was delayed from earlier in the year, and probably why GW had to hold their releases back in turn.
Those books mostly duplicated supplements from over a decade ago. A handful of models.
Redoing any of the pre 2004 plastics I would have counted as support.
It would be good if they begin refreshing the models from when they started - Fellowship of the Ring, then move onto Two Towers and Return of the King. At least reducing the number of metal kits.
I'm pretty meh on a lot of the new models. The AoS silliness is very much creeping into the sculpts, especially the hill humans and the were wolves. And honestly that makes me a little concerned for a new edition. So long as they don't mess with the rules too much it will be fine though.
Well the studio allegedly has an active MESBG player so I'm sure a full rewrite will go fine.
Well, player might be a strong word, but at least a person who likes the game. Maybe enough to playtest in their spare time. Certainly not on paid time.
^^^ this, and also the armies of... books with likely borderline trivial stat changes
may likely just stick with the current edition, not as if I play this in any competitive way anyway
not really seeing the need for new models either, beauty of the game is not needing massive armies so having a decent number of them is good. the way some scenarios are written to need an excessive number of some of them isn't subtle either. same with Battle companies, nice idea but silly numbers of models needed to have all the possibilities on the random tables (we just went with "or anything of equal or lower point value")
will see what they do with the rules but to be honest as a small to mid sized skirmish game I think they have it nailed, heros feel heroic, but can be swamped if unaided, the little guys do have an impact sometimes, its about the only set of terrain rules from GW that actually work, magic adds flavour without dominating etc. really captures the feel of the background - the various special weapon attacks that came in last time can be fun without ever being "needed" too
if they go down "heros now have their own phase and have command points" the marketing droid who did it needs shooting until they are really sorry
Really don't know where people are getting this "new edition=total rewrite". That's never happened in the history of the game and Jay an Rob play the game too much to let that happen.
lord_blackfang wrote: Well the studio allegedly has an active MESBG player so I'm sure a full rewrite will go fine.
Well, player might be a strong word, but at least a person who likes the game. Maybe enough to playtest in their spare time. Certainly not on paid time.
I thought it was Jay Clare, one of the top UK tourney players?
The studio guys are certainly part of the main UKFB group and friends with the core tourney people.
Changes-wise the three things that stick out for me are: some of the Heroic actions are never used, difference in quality/approach to some of the Hobbit model rules vs LotR, and the poor writing around differentiating whole model vs elements of a model that impacts cavalry, chariots etc (and disappointingly bled over into some of TOW rules).
I'm inclined to believe it's NOT going to be a total re-write. Why? Well... they did just announce the Angmar supplement, right? Why put that supplement out right before a new edition?
Granted, that didn't matter to GW in the past, but they would first hose you for a purchase before the new edition was announced.
They released the Flesh-Eater Courts book for AoS a mere 4 or so months before 4th edition dropped, and some of the Dawnbringer campaign books had even shorter useful lifespans. It's definitely not unheard of for GW to release books and invalidate them in short order.
I do hope they don't screw around with the rules for MESBG too much for the new edition. The game is easily one of the most balanced games GW offers (probably THE most balanced), and I'd hate to see that get ruined. Removing bloat would be difficult because there isn't a whole lot of bloat, other than maybe the different special strikes for different hand weapons, but honestly that adds some flavor so it should at least stay as optional rules or something.
They simply "should" polish the rules, integrate Faq and balance some models and legendary formation but surely they'll do more. Fortunately, as someone said, Jay Clayre is part of the ME Team and one of the strongest and competent player in the world so my hope is they'll do a good job. They did with the current edition.
ZergSmasher wrote: Removing bloat would be difficult because there isn't a whole lot of bloat, other than maybe the different special strikes for different hand weapons, but honestly that adds some flavor so it should at least stay as optional rules or something.
The Noobs and Men youtube channel said they had info that one thing they'll be removing is wargear options rather than units. One example would be Galahdrim Court Guards with shields. So stuff there's no models for and possibly aren't seen in the films.
With regards to invalidating books, they would have known the next edition release was incoming near the realse of the film, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Angmar book has been written with an eye to be relevent to this and the next edition, like the second WHFB 6th ed dwarf codex, which came out not long before 7th ed and was usable in both editions.
If that's the case it could be we're seeing minor edits to the rules so profiles would still be applicable.
.Mikes. wrote: The AoS silliness is very much creeping into the sculpts, especially the hill humans and the were wolves. And honestly that makes me a little concerned for a new edition. So long as they don't mess with the rules too much it will be fine though.
Aside from the outbreak of Tactical Rocks (TM), where do you see Age of Silliness having an impact on the Werewolves?
.Mikes. wrote: They're cartoonish in their exaggerations. LOTR models to this point have all been more reality based.
Show anyone those werewolf models without context and ask them to guess what game they belong in.
You want reality based werewolves, huh? In my oppinion, these are probably the most realistic werewolves I ever saw. The concept is more or less impossible to execute in a good way without doing an exaggerated cartoon.
New minis are fine, nothing here approaches even the silliness of some of The Hobbit stuff, everything is in line with what we got.
New edition probably means just implementing FAQs and new profiles, maybe the occasional rewrite. Seeing how decisive heroic strikes are could call for a change, for example. It would be a shame to see no models no rules implemented in that game as it would mean to steal shields from all of my orc heroes for no reason, for example.
.Mikes. wrote: Show anyone those werewolf models without context and ask them to guess what game they belong in.
You don't have to like them by any means, but they do very much look like wargs, especially plastic Gothmog's mount. If you showed me those models sans all context, I could quite comfortably say they appear to be were-wargs for Games Workshop's Middle-Earth Strategy Battle Game. We've had this more exaggerated aesthetic since at least the Dragon Cult Acolytes. Even the men of Carn Dum, cartoonish as they are, still fit the MESBG aesthetic more than they do AoS, though they are the closest so far. It's not an invalid concern, it's just a bit late.
Anyway, speculation time, do we think a new starter for a new edition might be enough for GW to finally redo the Last Alliance and make a plastic Sauron for a Siege of Barad-dur set? Or might there be a possible contractual obligation to make it War of the Rohirrim themed?
ZergSmasher wrote: Removing bloat would be difficult because there isn't a whole lot of bloat, other than maybe the different special strikes for different hand weapons, but honestly that adds some flavor so it should at least stay as optional rules or something.
The Noobs and Men youtube channel said they had info that one thing they'll be removing is wargear options rather than units. One example would be Galahdrim Court Guards with shields. So stuff there's no models for and possibly aren't seen in the films.
Unless I'm looking at the wrong book, they only have an option for a banner, no shields. That said...
Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Gert wrote: I mean there's been no evidence of it and NMNR doesn't apply to non-core games as has been proven about a billion times by now.
I'm with you on that, but apparently it doesn't stop rumormongers from naming it as literally the only change for the new edition .
...it has already happened in the past, and could theoretically be further restricted in the future depending on their plans for making certain miniatures and willingness to take let other companies fill any gaps. Plus potential considerations of game balance. Minor example: Watchers of Kârna used to have two swords (kinda but not officially resulting in them having 2 attacks), and the option for a bow. That changed to having either two swords (and two attacks), or a sword and a bow. Which happens to match what the official models have. More impactful example: Moria Goblin Prowlers used to have the choice of two-handed weapons, shields, and/or bows. Now, they have no options anymore at all - they just come with two-handed weapons by default, just like the official models do. If you converted dozens of figures for the other weapon options, or bought the alternative models made by other manufacturers that I definitely recall existing, too bad.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Like quite a few others, I'm not a fan of the Carn Dûm figures, mainly for the antler hats and lazy stereotypical barbarian tropes (bare chest, furry leg-warmers) found in Chaos Marauders and beyond. But what strikes me even more looking at them again is their ridiculous levels of uniformity. Besides their random straps of tattered cloth wrapped around shields and weapons, and antler variants, they have the same helmets, same shoulder guards, same neck cloth, same skirts, same thigh protectors, same belts etcetera etcetera, all worn in the exact same way, aside from the banner guy and left handed warrior who are identical but mirrored. Even the named Warlord leader matches up; only the named shaman looks any different. Seems... very out of place for what they are meant to depict.
Arnor didn't have any models on sale for this entire edition of MESBG but it still had all its rules.
Moria had chunks of its roster missing until about halfway through but still had all the rules.
Kind of puts a hole in the idea that NMNR applies across the board and not just in very rare circumstances.
ZergSmasher wrote: Removing bloat would be difficult because there isn't a whole lot of bloat, other than maybe the different special strikes for different hand weapons, but honestly that adds some flavor so it should at least stay as optional rules or something.
The Noobs and Men youtube channel said they had info that one thing they'll be removing is wargear options rather than units. One example would be Galahdrim Court Guards with shields. So stuff there's no models for and possibly aren't seen in the films.
Unless I'm looking at the wrong book, they only have an option for a banner, no shields. That said...
Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Gert wrote: I mean there's been no evidence of it and NMNR doesn't apply to non-core games as has been proven about a billion times by now.
I'm with you on that, but apparently it doesn't stop rumormongers from naming it as literally the only change for the new edition .
...it has already happened in the past, and could theoretically be further restricted in the future depending on their plans for making certain miniatures and willingness to take let other companies fill any gaps. Plus potential considerations of game balance. Minor example: Watchers of Kârna used to have two swords (kinda but not officially resulting in them having 2 attacks), and the option for a bow. That changed to having either two swords (and two attacks), or a sword and a bow. Which happens to match what the official models have. More impactful example: Moria Goblin Prowlers used to have the choice of two-handed weapons, shields, and/or bows. Now, they have no options anymore at all - they just come with two-handed weapons by default, just like the official models do. If you converted dozens of figures for the other weapon options, or bought the alternative models made by other manufacturers that I definitely recall existing, too bad.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Like quite a few others, I'm not a fan of the Carn Dûm figures, mainly for the antler hats and lazy stereotypical barbarian tropes (bare chest, furry leg-warmers) found in Chaos Marauders and beyond. But what strikes me even more looking at them again is their ridiculous levels of uniformity. Besides their random straps of tattered cloth wrapped around shields and weapons, and antler variants, they have the same helmets, same shoulder guards, same neck cloth, same skirts, same thigh protectors, same belts etcetera etcetera, all worn in the exact same way, aside from the banner guy and left handed warrior who are identical but mirrored. Even the named Warlord leader matches up; only the named shaman looks any different. Seems... very out of place for what they are meant to depict.
As far as i'm aware, there's never been a single description of how the men of Carn Dum actually looked. So barbarian is just as valid as anything else.
Gert wrote: Arnor didn't have any models on sale for this entire edition of MESBG but it still had all its rules.
Moria had chunks of its roster missing until about halfway through but still had all the rules.
Kind of puts a hole in the idea that NMNR applies across the board and not just in very rare circumstances.
Well, I'd say that's a different case than options that never existed as models, like horses for some units or weapons and shields.
Heh. I know the game is based on Weta's designs, but personally I am happy to ignore the ones I don't think fit with Tolkien. Which includes all of the Minas Tirith in plate armour! I think Middle Earth should look like historical figures for the human factions, with some minor differences.
I think the men of Carn Dum particularly grate because they follow the extremely common trope of northen barabarians with frostbite-immune nipples yet a gakton of furs everywhere else. Which is it? Cold or not cold?
For Chaos-tainted Marauders I can accept it, but LotR is a more grounded setting on the whole, at least for humans. Plus that aesthetic is really common, whereas fully clothed northern barbarians are weirdly rare. Pretty much just Frostgrave and historicals.
I doubt that. All that's going to come from that is characters, there's not much else unit wise the movie could add. And Rohan vs Dunland doesn't make for a very exciting launch.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: I doubt that. All that's going to come from that is characters, there's not much else unit wise the movie could add. And Rohan vs Dunland doesn't make for a very exciting launch.
I mean they could actually redo the basic Rohan forces, then do Royal Guard and Dunland in plastic. But we all know that isn't going to happen.
His Master's Voice wrote: Yeah, there's no difference between the Haradrim designs and the Carn Dum stuff.
If you're blind, that is.
The only difference is one (the Warhammer looking one with the ridiculous back banner, I might add) was in the movie so in your mind it's canon and the other one isn't. There's nothing outrageous, stylistically, about Carn Dums. Although I'd agree with the folks saying the sculpts are too uniform.
Da Boss wrote: Heh. I know the game is based on Weta's designs, but personally I am happy to ignore the ones I don't think fit with Tolkien. Which includes all of the Minas Tirith in plate armour! I think Middle Earth should look like historical figures for the human factions, with some minor differences.
I had no idea we had in RL [checks notes] 5673 year old elven craftsmen and dwarves created by literal god of smithing to learn stuff making from. Or, on evil side, literal demigod of smithing even older than said elves who was trying to innovate any advantage for literally millenia. Go figure.
If anything, the 'RL' look is riduculously stupid and 'properly' done Tolkien should approach AoS levels of weird. From different direction, perchaps, but claiming it would have anything in common with medieval times when the culture is drastically different and worst periods of Middle Earth collapse are peanuts to Europe of the time is just silly. For all their faults, Hobbit movies at least tried to give the universe more justice than LotR did, maybe they went in the wrong direction in places but it's still improvement on muh blandrilizm of Gondor and Rohan.
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: Like quite a few others, I'm not a fan of the Carn Dûm figures, mainly for the antler hats
Why?
If these bother people so much, you can (gasp!) try incredibly difficult maneuver of clipping them off. Novel concept, I know
But what strikes me even more looking at them again is their ridiculous levels of uniformity. Besides their random straps of tattered cloth wrapped around shields and weapons, and antler variants, they have the same helmets, same shoulder guards, same neck cloth, same skirts, same thigh protectors, same belts etcetera etcetera, all worn in the exact same way, aside from the banner guy and left handed warrior who are identical but mirrored. Even the named Warlord leader matches up; only the named shaman looks any different. Seems... very out of place for what they are meant to depict.
Why?
No, seriously, for all the muh rilizm complains people seem to have completely wrong ideas on the past. Manufactures mass producing goods date literally to stone age, never mind famous examples of Ancient Egypt, Greece, or Rome. Then there is factor of not just practicality, but fashion, people wore similar stuff just because they thought it looked nice. They are not nobles or some rich dandies trying to look differently on purpose, they are warriors using most efficient gear they have on hand.
Especially seeing they are also an army organized by above demigod of smithing and his chief lackey, people who would organize supply of gear to their soldiers while wasting no time customizing it. If anything, you'd expect even more standarization, stopped only by the fact of their extreme remoteness to the main industry base in Mordor. Do you complain about Roman swords and armor being identical? If not, why, Roman army was organized by far less controlling and micromanaging bosses and yet somehow they did manage it...
Da Boss wrote: Heh. I know the game is based on Weta's designs, but personally I am happy to ignore the ones I don't think fit with Tolkien. Which includes all of the Minas Tirith in plate armour! I think Middle Earth should look like historical figures for the human factions, with some minor differences.
I had no idea we had in RL [checks notes] 5673 year old elven craftsmen and dwarves created by literal god of smithing to learn stuff making from. Or, on evil side, literal demigod of smithing even older than said elves who was trying to innovate any advantage for literally millenia. Go figure.
If anything, the 'RL' look is riduculously stupid and 'properly' done Tolkien should approach AoS levels of weird. From different direction, perchaps, but claiming it would have anything in common with medieval times when the culture is drastically different and worst periods of Middle Earth collapse are peanuts to Europe of the time is just silly. For all their faults, Hobbit movies at least tried to give the universe more justice than LotR did, maybe they went in the wrong direction in places but it's still improvement on muh blandrilizm of Gondor and Rohan.
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: But what strikes me even more looking at them again is their ridiculous levels of uniformity. Besides their random straps of tattered cloth wrapped around shields and weapons, and antler variants, they have the same helmets, same shoulder guards, same neck cloth, same skirts, same thigh protectors, same belts etcetera etcetera, all worn in the exact same way, aside from the banner guy and left handed warrior who are identical but mirrored. Even the named Warlord leader matches up; only the named shaman looks any different. Seems... very out of place for what they are meant to depict.
Why?
No, seriously, for all the muh rilizm complains people seem to have completely wrong ideas on the past. Manufactures mass producing goods date literally to stone age, never mind famous examples of Ancient Egypt, Greece, or Rome. Then there is factor of not just practicality, but fashion, people wore similar stuff just because they thought it looked nice. They are not nobles or some rich dandies trying to look differently on purpose, they are warriors using most efficient gear they have on hand.
Especially seeing they are also an army organized by above demigod of smithing and his chief lackey, people who would organize supply of gear to their soldiers while wasting no time customizing it. If anything, you'd expect even more standarization, stopped only by the fact of their extreme remoteness to the main industry base in Mordor.
Do you complain about Roman swords and armor being identical? If not, why, Roman army was organized by far less controlling and micromanaging bosses and yet somehow they did manage it...
Erm... even based on the rather limited knowledge we have on Romans (and even less for many other tribes and cultures), there was quite a bit of variation at any one time, with e.g. older and newer helmet styles and variants of body armour around at the same time based on archeological finds, not even counting the more ritualistic variation with several command staff wearing quite different gear again.
Every single dude in the Carn Dûm army having the exact same gear to me gives the impression they have no history, no tradition, no culture. They don't have individual characteristics, while for instance showing off personal feats of arms is an extremely common feature in warrior-societies. They have no gear passed down generations, even their leader has nothing setting them apart from any others. In a tribe of 10 people, I would not expect all of them to wear the literal exact same clothing, and presumably the clan is a tad bigger than that. If armed by the Witch-king, I don't see why the helmets (even ignoring the subsequently attached antlers) would be so ornate, or would not resemble the Orcs' gear more (which would actually be an interesting and thematic look: tribal humans with scraps of Orc gear). Extreme uniformity works for Isengard's Uruk-hai, which look brutal, industrial, because the point is that their whole army was created in one place, from scratch, in a short period of time. Perhaps acceptable in other organized nations with central manufacturing and distribution of weaponry, like Gondor. Entirely logically absent elsewhere, like Rohan, Dwarves (Durin's Folk plastics), Harad. Here, it's just a lazy design brief of "barbarian" executed lazily. I'm not even claiming they're AoS sculpts, because at least most of those have some elements that make them feel like Warhammer sculpts (the Carn Dûm figures could have been released by dozens of companies for dozens of miniature lines, they are terribly generic barbarian sculpts), and at least the Darkoath Marauders aren't effectively clones of each other.
Like quite a few others, I'm not a fan of the Carn Dûm figures, mainly for the antler hats
If these bother people so much, you can (gasp!) try incredibly difficult maneuver of clipping them off. Novel concept, I know
Why the f would you even imagine I would buy some overpriced FW miniatures I dislike almost every square millimetre of, to then having to modify them to actually look less awful?
Well, at least one good thing came from this: I'm now quite keen on converting some human figures with Orc bits as a potential alternative to this lot. Oathmark Orcs and Frostgrave Barbarians might be a good starting point, or historicals for the humans if going for a less fantasy look... Hmm...
His Master's Voice wrote: Yeah, there's no difference between the Haradrim designs and the Carn Dum stuff.
If you're blind, that is.
The only difference is one (the Warhammer looking one with the ridiculous back banner, I might add) was in the movie so in your mind it's canon and the other one isn't. There's nothing outrageous, stylistically, about Carn Dums. Although I'd agree with the folks saying the sculpts are too uniform.
The Haradrim designs are obviously based on a stereotype, but they have a design much more consistent with the climate they hail from. If you look at the model range, only the camel riders even have much exposed flesh despite coming from a hot desert region.
The Carn Dum models hace nice, warm clothing appropriate to their northern, mountainous home... except over most of their torsos. Why? How does that make sense? Do their nipples have magical frostbite protection? I'd actually prefer it if they were less clothed and more Conan-esque, because at least being almost entirely naked suggests a complete disregard for the cold of their homeland, rather than mostly dressing up nice and warm except for their core! It isn't about the decoration, they just look inconsistent.
There are details I actually really like, like the mace looking aesthetically like the weapon of the Witch King. But the core models are just a let down.
The Carn Dum guys have obviously been given uniform gear by purpose, they even have the exact same beard.
There are loads of good reasons for this. For example it might just be a way for them to honor and show loyalty to a powerfull warlord they follow and wear his symbols with pride. Or psychological warfar when the opponents instantly recognise them as servants of the witch king (and who knows, it might be easier to point out to the orcs not to kill the guys with antlers).
Da Boss wrote: Tolkien never describes any character as wearing plate armour in the books only ever mail. But go off if you like irbis, it is always funny to read.
Not 100% true. There is a passage (I'd need to remind myself where) where he does use the word plate in relation to Gondor. But it's been a debated subject for years.
They're half naked mountain men with horns on their helmets. They're entirely outrageous by the standards set out by Jackson's depiction of LotR, especially since we already have Wildmen and Dunlendings.
And even if you're willing to gloss over the outlandish design, the technical execution makes them look out of place even next to the Easterlings, who are themselves fairly out there in terms of human design.
I really don't think they're that worth getting worked up over. They're certainly no more outlandish than the wildmen of druadan walking around with grass skirts and blowpipes.
I believe the passage you are referring to is Imrahil using Eowyn's breath misting hia vambrace to show she is still alive. A vambrace is a metal arm guard, but does not imply that Imrahil is wearing full plate armour - it would be fully believable that he has a chain hauberk on and some extra arnour on hie arms.
That sounds like the spot. But again, it's one of those things that because it's there, there's always a possibility that they did actually have it. It's like the Balrog with wings debate. It will always be argued on both sides with no one ever getting a true answer.
Ah, the Balrog. I really hope they resculpt a plastic Dweller in the Dark kit, as that guy deserves some real lackies to hang with. The Goblins just get under his feet...
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: That sounds like the spot. But again, it's one of those things that because it's there, there's always a possibility that they did actually have it. It's like the Balrog with wings debate. It will always be argued on both sides with no one ever getting a true answer.
I will cede that point! But I am happier with an aesthetic that is closer to the Dark Ages, because that is what I imagined when reading the books as a child. Which I suppose is no issue at all - there is a wealth of Dark Ages and Early Medieval kits to choose from these days, and nice and cheap too. And people who prefer the more fantastical or weta-inspired designs have their choices too.
We're lucky to live in such a great time for collecting miniatures!
I had also the impression that Numenorians look like Classic Imperial Romans, while Gondor and Arnor should look like Late (Antiquity) Romans, with Rohan as (Eastern) Germanic People aesthetic, in Goth or Vandal fashion.
His Master's Voice wrote: They're half naked mountain men with horns on their helmets. They're entirely outrageous by the standards set out by Jackson's depiction of LotR,
And you're entirely certain that you've seen Jackson's films?
The Mahud wears armour reminiscent of real life straw or rattan woven armours, or the Greek linothorax. The design is cranked up to underscore its foreign nature, but it isn't absurd.
Wearing iron helmets and pants while skipping on any chest protection is absurd. The only other combatant we see doing this in Jackson's LotR are the Uruk Berserkers, and they're barely sentient lunatics, not an actual culture of people that should know better.
There are definitely fantasy looking guys in the LotR films but the Carn Dum guys really lean on the Warcraft-styled proportioning and nonsense leather armour.
The mahud at least is simply a bannerman dedicated to riding the oliphaunt, so the back banner isn't too much of a hindrance, and the armour looks like a fantasy interpretation of something plausible.
Part of the reason I enjoy the film's aesthetic is that it's got a lot of historical and real world inspirations in the equipment. The fantasy comes from the anachronistic flairs that come together to make the costuming, and there aren't many fantasy settings that do this. Maybe the ASOIAF TV series also.
Contrast this to how easy it is to find pauldron-fetish and muscley barbarian fantasy settings I think it's a nice change of pace to a lot of alternatives. I'm more impressed when someone makes a swish looking plausible set of armaments than another super detailed thing mashed together.
Shout out to Dark Souls/Elden Ring for showing a nice example of doing their own thing, with some allowances such as...gigantic weapons. And a lot of the stuff in the Witcher games is great too.
Carn Dum is basically fantasy celtic aesthetics. bare chests despite living a cool temperate climate? Celts. bare chests yet wears helmets and bits of armor? yep. fur cloaks? not as common IRL but definitely attested to. antlers? not in combat IRL but attested to for some of the ceremonial garb. (bare chests or even outright nudity in battle was something they did to signal their bravery and toughness)
and the celtic aesthetic is a good place as a start given that the native culture of Eriador is heavily Celtic coded in all the bits we see. "carn Dum" seems to be derived from old Gealic words for "mountain fortress", lots of other palce names in Eriador are of celtic origins, their barrow Mounds are basically those of the celtic britons, the description of their history as given by Bombadil is basically that of the bronze age and iron age celtic cultures.
it's also a good choice given that the peter jackson version of Numenorian aesthetics is heavily Roman, making Arnor a thematic analog to Roman Brittania in much the same way that Gondor was the thematic analog to the Byzantine Empire.
just no
yeah celts had some odd ways, like going completely naked painted white with the hair up to scare opponents, but those still used big shields which was the main armour of that time, and this was only one state/tribe located in today Turkey (so much for the climate)
and yes, there are descriptions of bare chests celts fighting the romans but still wearing a wool cloak (and a big shield in battle) because of the climate
and mail was never the primary armour, it was a back up for everything that passes past the shields (usually the pointy stuff, hence mail because this helps there the most) and everyone used a larger shield to fight (they became smaller over time the better the body armour became, and were gone once full plate armour replaced them)
so going without body armour but just the shield was common, fighting naked not so much outside the hot climates
Carn Drum is not fantasy celtic, this is fantasy Stone-Age or what Hollywood think the Stone Age was (which for some reason must have lasted till 1500 in Europe on how movies portray the "Barbarians") or Conan the Barbarian style fantasy but nothing related to history
SamusDrake wrote: Just wondering if War of the Rohirrim might be a separate game, being anime in style. Maybe a board game?
I don't know if this was answered in amongst all the arguing about armour, but GW have said on FB that the style will match the current miniatures. So it'll just be the characters / units from the film added to what we have already
SamusDrake wrote: Just wondering if War of the Rohirrim might be a separate game, being anime in style. Maybe a board game?
I don't know if this was answered in amongst all the arguing about armour, but GW have said on FB that the style will match the current miniatures. So it'll just be the characters / units from the film added to what we have already
Oh, I see. It'll be interesting to see the difference.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Releasing a Hobbit game....
Hmmmm, I'm a bit put out for having the newest version of the rule book outdated already, but I'll accept that as the price to pay for a new edition and hopefully the renewed interest it brings both from GW and the player base.
Plus a new starter box means new plastics! If GW wants this to be a headline release I'd expect them all to be new (Rob has already confirmed on FB that the style will match the current GW models) which is a good excuse for updated Rohan models and new Dunland. Hopefully enough for Dunland to be a full stand alone faction. Worst case we get a box with the old Rohan models and new Dunland stuff, as GW would never do a starter box with resin models.
Jay has also hinted on FB that the new edition is more about "improvement and clarity" so shouldn't include major changes. Both Rob and Jay love the game and as extremely active in the UK scene, so I think its in safe hands. I'd like to see the less used heroic actions reworked, monsters buffed and all the scenarios refreshed. Will be interesting to see what happens LL with the new armies of... books. Maybe time for a clean slate for them all?
As for Angmar, love all the new sculpts except the new darkoath, sorry Carn Dum warriors, who as many have already said, look like they walked in from a different game with a lazy fantasy trope design. As the whole Angmar release cycle was probably meant for 2023, the new supplement is unlikely to be compatible with the new edition. Only buy it if you want the scenarios!
The Men of Carn Dum seem to be done using the game "The Lord of the Rings: War in the North" designs.
I hadn't heard of it, but its from 2011.
But that's irrelevant to my own dislike.
The models look like clones.
The same exact mannequin put into different poses, with pieces of equipment mirrored across bodies.
The only details that actually change are the ragged edge of some, but not all, cloth, and the helmet antlers look to have a couple variations.
They feel like some of the early single or two-part plastics from the 90's.
The Carn Dum Men don't really do it for me the reasons mentioned above, but I am really hoping the new edition will see some more new plastic units released. I imagine characters probably sell better and don't irritate people who already have old minis, but I'd really like to see some old units move into plastic.
Chances are the guy that was tasked to model these miniatures read the exact article for an inspiration
I think it's more likely the design was okayed by the licence holder at the time the game was being made and was subsequently given to GW when they asked about doing Angmar content.
Longstrider wrote: The Carn Dum Men don't really do it for me the reasons mentioned above, but I am really hoping the new edition will see some more new plastic units released. I imagine characters probably sell better and don't irritate people who already have old minis, but I'd really like to see some old units move into plastic.
Which old units do you refer to? Majority of the unders are plastic. And most of then fine plastic.
The only units I can think if that NEED plastics are the Finecast Gundabad Orc and Mirkwood Armoured Elves.
If they do more plastic kits I hope it's replacing the garbage Finecast Commands and Characters.
Last Alliance Numenoreans and Rivendelf spears mainly. But Dunlendings or Wildmen, Laketown or Dale Men, aforementioned Orcs from Gundabad and Mirkwood Elves, Iron Hills Dwarves, Men of Khand, Mahuds... there's others but they get more elite or more scenario-fodder-y.
But I imagine they'd want to stick to movie stuff more than their own concepts, and also I gather that most people are interested in named characters and unique rules rather than nameless warriors and captains, so I get the focus on stuff that'll sell better than my proclivities.
Plastic Dunlendings are quite likely for the new film/starter set, if thats the way GW takes the new edition.
If the game gains popularity again I can see some of the Hobbit film finecast warriors being done in plastic to make them more accessible. But the reason they were done in finecast in the first place was the lacklustre performance of the MESBG following the second and third films.
I'm sorry, I wasn't thinking elite, non-movie units.
Anything is possible but I highly doubt those more elite units will get plastics. I would bet redone FW models before plastics are more likely, like they did with the Dol Amroth Knights.
We have had years of hardly any release so I'm happy to hear what they do with the game and will be haply with whatever they release.
It would be nice to see them redo any and all Finecast models first and foremost.
so just enough changes to invalidate the rulebooks and armies books but not enough to really change the game?
hand weapons back to 1st edition in effect with the special strike stuff gone, could easily have been restricted to heros only but whatever
adding the Intelligence stat makes sense, one wonders if in time a "willpower" stat and maybe something related to "leadership" could go against it..
spreading the range of fight values is a good thing and if they are mucking about with profiles is something long overdue
never saw what was complicated with the "in the way" test, indeed its the most sensible cover mechanic in any GW game, dumbing it down so it can be "improved" again next time with different results?
overall reasonably positive, though its invalidating a hell of a lot of books, and oh look they are bringing the "Legends" concept for stuff they don't currently make models of
OK, mostly good then. So long special strikes, I will not miss you. LL becoming this standard way to build armies is harder to gauge, will need to wait and see how it's implemented.
Glad they are being up front about Angmar not being made for the new edition so people can make an informed purchase.
Not a big fan of all the "non-film" stuff being shunted into their own book. Makes me worried about the Legends removals and how big that's going to be. Is it everything without a model for sale? How does that work with MESBGs rotating range?
Hand weapon change is good. In the Way I don't really care about too much.
Leaning into legendary legions, Fight Value creep and more fiddly special rules for models are all quite unappealling to me.
Does 'modern' design mean cluttered with layers of exception based rules?
Also notable they've increased the number of books needed to play the game - up to 4 books from the Blue Book era when you could happily play with the mini-rulebook.
I also won't be surprised if finecast models end up being the main targets for being 'legended'. It is a failed technology, clearly. Amazing they kept it up for so long, though it has always had it's apologists.
Also ambivalent about new releases being focused on the new animated feature.
I see little to convince me to buy anything here, and will probably continue to use older books.
Edit: kudos to them for being honest about the Angmar supplement, though it is crazy they are announcing it at the same time and it will be valid for so little time!
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: I don't think in the way is complicated, more the fact that virtually no one ever used it. which is perfectly fair to be honest.
pretty much every single game here, heros behind a screen of plebs, or moving up behind walls etc to dilute archery. most of the time it is a 4+ (which it still will be), didn't see what was complicated about seriously solid stuff being a 3+ and softer stuff a 5+. indeed seemed one of the easier bits to remember
the idea that all lists are now legendary legions, all get some "special rule" just for turning up seems to be going the way of what made 40k a few editions ago into a gork awful mess with the daft "formations", will have to see how it works out - if they actually do it properly so the same model can have different costs in different lists specifically because of the "free" rules then it could work nicely. I half suspect it will be a bit more lazy but will wait and see
also to be honest the idea that currently you can decide to run a pretty basic force, no named heroes just a few captains and some basic bods appeals, hopefully this is still easy to do
chaos0xomega wrote: So uhh... what are we thinking ends up on that legends list?
Cynic in me suspects anything they’ve not made a great effort to stock or lines which haven’t received attention in a long time- Khand, Far Harad come to mind immediately.
Legendary legions were cool as more limited versions of the general army lista that were straight out weaker but allowed you more freedom. Them being the default its not good.
Sad to see MESBG follow the aos and 40k trend. This Game Will stop being middle earth strategy Battle Game to become Tm approbed products from the movies fighting each other.
Da Boss wrote: Hand weapon change is good. In the Way I don't really care about too much.
Leaning into legendary legions, Fight Value creep and more fiddly special rules for models are all quite unappealling to me.
Does 'modern' design mean cluttered with layers of exception based rules?
Also notable they've increased the number of books needed to play the game - up to 4 books from the Blue Book era when you could happily play with the mini-rulebook.
I also won't be surprised if finecast models end up being the main targets for being 'legended'. It is a failed technology, clearly. Amazing they kept it up for so long, though it has always had it's apologists.
Also ambivalent about new releases being focused on the new animated feature.
I see little to convince me to buy anything here, and will probably continue to use older books.
Edit: kudos to them for being honest about the Angmar supplement, though it is crazy they are announcing it at the same time and it will be valid for so little time!
The fight value adjustment is severely needed. There is no reason why a character like Azog should be going toe to toe with Aragorn and Boromir.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: Legendary legions were cool as more limited versions of the general army lista that were straight out weaker but allowed you more freedom. Them being the default its not good.
Sad to see MESBG follow the aos and 40k trend. This Game Will stop being middle earth strategy Battle Game to become Tm approbed products from the movies fighting each other.
zombie_sky_diver wrote:I'm sorry, I wasn't thinking elite, non-movie units.
Anything is possible but I highly doubt those more elite units will get plastics. I would bet redone FW models before plastics are more likely, like they did with the Dol Amroth Knights.
We have had years of hardly any release so I'm happy to hear what they do with the game and will be haply with whatever they release.
It would be nice to see them redo any and all Finecast models first and foremost.
Oh for sure. I know it's a pipe dream, but I really am one of the people who'd rather have more plastic troops and don't care about characters that much. Still, there are film things like Iron Hills and the other Last Alliance loadouts that could work, even before we get to the non-movie or rarer stuff. Regardless, I'm pretty keen on this particular update and I'll continue to keep an eye on new releases for it. I've a friend who will be happy to get it back on the table, at least.
Re: the article today, some interesting takeaways. It seems quite clear that whatever logistical challenges they've had clearly affect MESBG as much as anything else; I'm certain the plan wasn't for Angmar to come SO close to the new edition that they'd have to apologise up front for it.
Losing the special strikes seems like a good move to me - I don't really think the game is so granular as to warrant distinguishing between generic hand weapons on many models. In the way I could take or leave; it's just abstracting a thing - particularly vulnerable or beloved characters could have some defensive penalty or bonus instead.
I'm not sure where I'll land about the army list thing - it was already a negative to me that there's such an overwhelming focus on special characters and moments and turning all lists into legendary legions risks exacerbating that, but as long as there's some options to not take major named characters that'll be fine for me - or my friend and I will just decide when we want to play a nameless scrimmage and only take captains and low level characters for those. But it does seem like gamers and pop culture at large in the moment are in a Main Character phase for now, so it's probably the appropriate decision.
The fight adjustment could go well or poorly - if it just creeps upwards then it's a missed opportunity, but if an actual wider spread if accompanied by better accounting for those differentials so armies and models play differently, that could be a good thing.
The legends thing seems like it would be less of a problem here? At least in my experience the folks I see playing MESBG tend to be less invested in meeting tournament standards to begin with, though of course for collectors hoping for this or that model to come back MTO this might mean some models never returning. On the other hand, MAYBE it's an opportunity for more people to creatively interpret their vision of Middle Earth, or follow along with someone else's vision. If GW no longer sells Khand, say, there's any number of ways to interpret Khand from the books, whether you want to go for GW's pseudo-mongol look or read Variag + Wainrider as some sort of Baltic Pagan or Gallic vibes, so there are tons of model options.
Galas wrote: Legendary legions were cool as more limited versions of the general army lista that were straight out weaker but allowed you more freedom. Them being the default its not good.
Sad to see MESBG follow the aos and 40k trend. This Game Will stop being middle earth strategy Battle Game to become Tm approbed products from the movies fighting each other.
Oh my god... you should consider keep playing current version or start another system. It is possible, you can. I stopped playing WHFB, never touched ToW, and now I am playing KoW and I am very happy with it.
Inquisitor Gideon: My preferred solution to the Fight value issue would be to reduce certain characters who got too much rather than bump everyone else. But people prefer increases to reductions even if it all evens out in the end. I mostly ignore the Hobbit stuff in my Middle Earth games anyway. I suppose if they do a good job with it they might improve the game, even with increases. But I don't have a lot of faith in the design team.
I've had too few games with my current books so I'll probably sit this one out, but the design Team of that game has shown repeatedly that they're willing to put much more effort into the game than the 40K or AoS teams so I'm optimistic things will shake out in a good way.
I should take the chance to get some of the current books while I still can, especially the way of the ringbearer was always intriguing, it just lacks a translation.
chaos0xomega wrote: So uhh... what are we thinking ends up on that legends list?
Cynic in me suspects anything they’ve not made a great effort to stock or lines which haven’t received attention in a long time- Khand, Far Harad come to mind immediately.
But that basically describes most of the potential contents of "Armies of Middle Earth" at that point? To the point until they explicitly mentioned the legends/legacy stuff I expected that book to get the legends label.
I suspect not, as there were only two rider sculpts and they've only used two there. And if they are new, then they've been waiting in the wings for a long time as that pic has been used on warcom articles a few times in the past and clearly predates the plastic King of the Dead, as they use the metal version there.
The main thing I'm hoping for is that most of the book stuff (Khand, Warriors of Druadan, Scouring of the Shire, etc.) goes into the third book and not into the "legends" document.
Certainly won't be mourning the loss of special strikes, one of the worst additions to the game during the Hobbit era from both thematic, gameplay, balance and various other perspectives. But things like their removal and overhauling every profile in the game while including a new stat on the profile for the first time since the game's start (probably?) is quite a bit of a bigger change than I had anticipated. Introducing a legends/legacy concept feels the most problematic however. I would be surprised if those will continue receiving updates in the long run, which rarely bodes well.
zombie_sky_diver wrote:I'm sorry, I wasn't thinking elite, non-movie units.
Anything is possible but I highly doubt those more elite units will get plastics. I would bet redone FW models before plastics are more likely, like they did with the Dol Amroth Knights.
We have had years of hardly any release so I'm happy to hear what they do with the game and will be haply with whatever they release.
It would be nice to see them redo any and all Finecast models first and foremost.
Oh for sure. I know it's a pipe dream, but I really am one of the people who'd rather have more plastic troops and don't care about characters that much.
Spoiler:
Still, there are film things like Iron Hills and the other Last Alliance loadouts that could work, even before we get to the non-movie or rarer stuff. Regardless, I'm pretty keen on this particular update and I'll continue to keep an eye on new releases for it. I've a friend who will be happy to get it back on the table, at least.
I'm not sure where I'll land about the army list thing - it was already a negative to me that there's such an overwhelming focus on special characters and moments and turning all lists into legendary legions risks exacerbating that, but as long as there's some options to not take major named characters that'll be fine for me - or my friend and I will just decide when we want to play a nameless scrimmage and only take captains and low level characters for those. But it does seem like gamers and pop culture at large in the moment are in a Main Character phase for now, so it's probably the appropriate decision.
While I'm happy to see Finecast sail off into the West, I would be perfectly fine to just have the minis that had metal variants return in metal, release FW resin for the other characters, and focus on troops for plastics. I only need one Gandalf the White, and actually 99% of the time don't need any Gandalf the White, while I would love to have, say, a few dozen Men-at-Arms of Dol Amroth with pikes that do not bend like the metal or Finecast ones unavoidably did. Plastic troops feel far more useful than plastic characters, and I don't think that's just the feeling because that's how the game used to be.
In terms of game terms, I'm also very much with you, and have long hoped (but also long since given up hope) to for instance see more options for generic characters rather than more named characters. As soon as I expanded from LotR SBG (as it was known) to WHFB (6th ed), I liked how named historical characters were barely used (often cool models converted into generic lords riding dragons or somesuch), but generic ones had all the customization including optional special rules. Given the setting for Middle-earth, I would not want the option for generic Istari, or some rando Elven lord with powers rivalling Galadriel, but always thought it would be fun if instead of relying on named characters for special rules, you could, say, turn a Dwarf Captain into a Dwarf Ranger captain (reducing its armour, but gaining Mountain Dweller and the option for a Dwarf long bow), or give an Orc some poisoned attacks, or a weak Master of Battle rule, or just an extra point of Will (each probably limited to one upgrade/Captain and once per army or so). Anyway, instead every GW game I vaguely follow seems focussed on the reverse indeed, with bloody Primarchs and Lords of Terra wandering around in 40k and Helmawr's daughter in Necromunda. Sure, SBG started as a game to follow the Fellowship on its journey, but the point of playing points-match games instead of book/movie scenarios is to fight the battles we didn't see but could have happened - restrictive Legendary Legions and endless named characters make the world feel smaller, while promoting interesting generic heroes (even more so for factions where the books provide no named characters, like Harad, Moria, Easterlings, instead of making up new ones) feels more interesting to me too.
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: Certainly won't be mourning the loss of special strikes, one of the worst additions to the game during the Hobbit era from both thematic, gameplay, balance and various other perspectives. But things like their removal and overhauling every profile in the game while including a new stat on the profile for the first time since the game's start (probably?) is quite a bit of a bigger change than I had anticipated. Introducing a legends/legacy concept feels the most problematic however. I would be surprised if those will continue receiving updates in the long run, which rarely bodes well.
In terms of game terms, I'm also very much with you, and have long hoped (but also long since given up hope) to for instance see more options for generic characters rather than more named characters. As soon as I expanded from LotR SBG (as it was known) to WHFB (6th ed), I liked how named historical characters were barely used (often cool models converted into generic lords riding dragons or somesuch), but generic ones had all the customization including optional special rules. Given the setting for Middle-earth, I would not want the option for generic Istari, or some rando Elven lord with powers rivalling Galadriel, but always thought it would be fun if instead of relying on named characters for special rules, you could, say, turn a Dwarf Captain into a Dwarf Ranger captain (reducing its armour, but gaining Mountain Dweller and the option for a Dwarf long bow), or give an Orc some poisoned attacks, or a weak Master of Battle rule, or just an extra point of Will (each probably limited to one upgrade/Captain and once per army or so). Anyway, instead every GW game I vaguely follow seems focussed on the reverse indeed, with bloody Primarchs and Lords of Terra wandering around in 40k and Helmawr's daughter in Necromunda. Sure, SBG started as a game to follow the Fellowship on its journey, but the point of playing points-match games instead of book/movie scenarios is to fight the battles we didn't see but could have happened - restrictive Legendary Legions and endless named characters make the world feel smaller, while promoting interesting generic heroes (even more so for factions where the books provide no named characters, like Harad, Moria, Easterlings, instead of making up new ones) feels more interesting to me too.
Yeah, pretty much agreed all around. I'd LOVE the option to have a captain and then do some very low-level alterations to them - customising from a small list of options to just make them more in-line with being a nameless person but MY nameless person is right up my alley. One of the rather surprising things I've found myself enjoying in TOW is the ability to build my characters and unit champions, but it is ALSO a sign of just how much I've fallen into Inane Internet Meta that I can't stop myself from worrying about what "the best" is. Just something I need to retrain myself out of. But it's also clearly true that if there are options the temptation to metagame and optimise will arise.
But yeah, my main concern with the move to turning everything into these Movie (or book) Scene (TM) lists is that it's going to become more like Star Wars Legion or the like. It's one thing with MCP or Shatterpoint where the whole point is to have saturday morning cartoon fights, but when MESBG or SWL pitch themselves as wider in scope, and yet we just have Aragorn and Darth Vader leading around every gang of 30 dudes, it wears thin on me. Making the world smaller is a good way to put it, IMHO. But I also understand that this is very much Old Man Yells at Clouds at the moment, so I don't really expect that GW cater to my desires specifically. The basic ruleset is good though, and over the years there's been enough work put into it that using the rules with our own settings or characters remains pretty attainable, even if my friend and I have to hack together the occasional houseruled unit.
Pikes in plastic in general would be great. Galadhrim Guard (I never even bothered to open the awful finecast blister I got) are unlikely as an elite, but Dol Amroth Pike are just normal warriors, though it'd then be weird to have one of the Gondorian fiefdoms and not the others. But again to me it's a bit of a non-issue. If models like the Lossarnach and Lamedon troops go out of production but have legends profiles, it's much easier for those of us not roped into The Games Workshop Hobby (TM) to treat the Gondorian realms interpretively, whether as early Eastern Roman themes or as medieval western feudal vassals or what have you.
Special strikes could and probably should have been something that only heroes could do, no might points, just something only those the camera is following can do as it were.
personally I seldom used them, largely because I forgot, I was going to make cards but never got around to it
will see how it all ends up, its I think GWs best game, and the fact its changed so little shows its one they got right in the first place really, at a guess the marketing bods left it alone.
trouble is there are so many damned good games out there now, and so little time. I hope this remains perfectly possible to play at a low model count with reasonably generic heroes, the stuff going off just to the side of "that flash git who gets the glory"
I’m a bit disappointed that the Arnor cav are only coming in boxes of two. I’m assuming that means there are no other sculpts, so lots of models repeated if you wanted more than two horsies.
zombie_sky_diver wrote: Well I'm a bit disappointed. The re-release of Gûlavhar is actually resin, not metal. The pre-order preview last week said he would be metal.
They never specified what material he'd be, the section on "All of these products are in metal" was after the consolidated unit sets for rangers and Arnor, not the assorted character packs
Anyway, it really is just the oldest story in the game, but man, those prices for the warbands. Other than Arathorn and Halbarad, they're all Direct Only too, so not even a third party discount can save them. Real shame.
Tim the Biovore wrote: Anyway, it really is just the oldest story in the game, but man, those prices for the warbands. Other than Arathorn and Halbarad, they're all Direct Only too, so not even a third party discount can save them. Real shame.
It's been a while since I've been properly (unpleasantly) surprised by GW pricing, but this release wave managed it. Which is funny in a way, because the prices are perfectly in line with (some) other kits in the range; it just stands out more when seeing a full release wave together (been a while for Middle-earth...), a wave that combines old sets I remember the prices of back in the day (now re-released at prices closer to those of OOP figures on eBay than pure inflation increases), and new Forge World sets of several characters or groups of troops (which while proportionally cheaper than individual characters, still look bad due to the sheer magnitude of the pricetag). I guess some Old World releases have been similar, but some of those seemed to incorporate some pleasant surprises too, with bundled units of figures being almost reasonable in their prices - no luck of that here.
I expect new plastic models for new heroes and that's all.
My bet is, the film will NOT be a such a great success and we'll have to wait until new live action film The hunt for Gollum hits cinemas to see a new wave of mass interest.
chaos0xomega wrote: Do we think GW will make a push towards more plastics if the film takes off and demand returns?
The new film will be a moderate success at best. It's an anime about a fairly obscure part of Middle Earth history, coming after Rings of Power divided the fanbase and barely left a dent on the mainstream.
I doubt it's going to have a massive impact on the size of the game's user base, the main benefit to it is providing new content for the existing fans.
The new film will probably 'at best' be a blip on the games life span. We'll see a single boxset and maybe a year of the game be branded as the 'The War of the Rohirrim' battle game, before its rebranded back to being just MESBG again with a handful of new tWotR heroes & source book.
I doubt we'll even see much in the way of a range refresh for the new film, there isn't much they can do when when the films tone is very firmly anime in style and they can't really base new models on actors. Basing models on the look of the new aesthetic would be wildly different to the current 'realistic' tone of the game and would flop terribly. At most we might see things like a new Rohan rider kit which would still lean towards the look of the live action films.
I think GW are more likely to play it safe with this release and just bring a box set/bundle of old models, with one or two forgeworld models refreshed to coincide the movies release & use the movie logo.
zombie_sky_diver wrote: Well I'm a bit disappointed. The re-release of Gûlavhar is actually resin, not metal. The pre-order preview last week said he would be metal.
Actually he is metal according to the website. "This multipart metal kit contains 8 components and 1x Citadel 60mm Round Base."
Given his size, that model has gotta be pretty heavy in metal. Assembling it might be frustrating too, especially if you're like me and hate pinning (I'm always afraid I won't get it lined up right).
zombie_sky_diver wrote: Well I'm a bit disappointed. The re-release of Gûlavhar is actually resin, not metal. The pre-order preview last week said he would be metal.
Actually he is metal according to the website. "This multipart metal kit contains 8 components and 1x Citadel 60mm Round Base."
Given his size, that model has gotta be pretty heavy in metal. Assembling it might be frustrating too, especially if you're like me and hate pinning (I'm always afraid I won't get it lined up right).
Someone with a listing of being a GW specialist games employee on their facebook said that the resin post was a copy paste error from when the kit was last made in resin and that the store listing should be metal. I wasn't 100% convinced this was fact, as I didn't think GW employees were allowed to make claims on social media any more and I didn't know who he was (I don't actually play MESBG at all or care about their rules. I've just collected the minis for use in other games) so take the info with a pinch of salt.
zombie_sky_diver wrote: Well I'm a bit disappointed. The re-release of Gûlavhar is actually resin, not metal. The pre-order preview last week said he would be metal.
Actually he is metal according to the website. "This multipart metal kit contains 8 components and 1x Citadel 60mm Round Base."
Given his size, that model has gotta be pretty heavy in metal. Assembling it might be frustrating too, especially if you're like me and hate pinning (I'm always afraid I won't get it lined up right).
Yeah, he's not particularly massive but those wings are heavy! I recall some cursing when repositioning them to be more horizontal, making them even less stable...
Someone with a listing of being a GW specialist games employee on their facebook said that the resin post was a copy paste error from when the kit was last made in resin and that the store listing should be metal. I wasn't 100% convinced this was fact, as I didn't think GW employees were allowed to make claims on social media any more and I didn't know who he was (I don't actually play MESBG at all or care about their rules. I've just collected the minis for use in other games) so take the info with a pinch of salt.
many, many GW people post on facebook, it's just that most ignore the worst parts of facebook groups. However, most of the Middle-earth team actively plays MESBG so post pretty regularly. I believe the person confirming Gulavhar is metal that you're talking about Rob Alderman, who is the lead designer/head of specialist games, for MESBG (along with TOW and BB), who actively participates (along with the other MESBG designer Jay Clare and some of the sculptors as well) on Great British Hobbit League, which is basically the semiofficial FB group for SBG content.
Huh, hadn't expected to see models for a movie that won't be out for, what, 3.5 months?
Bit difficult to care at this stage. Model is alright. Not exactly Dunlending aesthetics in my book, but that's not the sculptor's fault. Does have a certain "if Gríma Wormtongue was a warrior" vibe, with the hair, fur, and dark colours.
Not a bad miniature at all. Not too over the top, though I don't love the armour on the horses head.
Better than the Carn Dum guys, I like that he's quite slender.
The design is still slightly busy but he's a faction leader rather than a regular trooper so I think it's fine, and not a million miles away from SBG's general look.
I like him, but there's a couple of bits that seem slightly off. His foot version has a little bit of a moonwalk swing going on with how far he's leaning. And the mouth of the mounted version seems a touch too wide in how far it's open.
His Master's Voice wrote: It just occurred to me that, aside from all the other things that bother me about this miniature, the dude looks like Tommy Wiseau.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: After all these years they actually do a useful composition of an easterling phalanx Got mine solved already, though.
Actually they did a MTO of those models a few years ago and I grabbed 2 sets. Back then they were relatively reasonably costed too (well, for GW anyways). I shudder to think what they're going to charge for them now.
As for the rest of this MTO, I already have the Heroes of the West and the Orc Captains, but I wouldn't mind having the metal Minas Tirith Command guys. I think I'll probably give them a miss though, I've got to keep a somewhat tight rein on my wallet for the near future at least.
Hmm looks like I'll get past this MtO relatively unscathed. I need the mounted Gandalf, and I'll maybe get the troll if it's a decent price. But other then Aragorn and Gandalf from Heroes of the west, I've got everything else already thankfully.
Though i'd not say no to another Phalanx of Easterlings....
Sgt. Cortez wrote:After all these years they actually do a useful composition of an easterling phalanx Got mine solved already, though.
It's absolutely criminal that you only get four pikes in the plastic warriors box. Whole bloody box should be pikes.
It's cool that they keep the range in rotation with these - things like Sam and Frodo in Orc armour are pretty niche but nice for collectors to be able to get them without going to the secondary market.
Nothing here that interests me though - I would go for Galadriel if they had the better sculpt, as the one for general sale is pretty bad imo.
Sgt. Cortez wrote:After all these years they actually do a useful composition of an easterling phalanx Got mine solved already, though.
It's absolutely criminal that you only get four pikes in the plastic warriors box. Whole bloody box should be pikes.
In fairness, the scope of MESBG is small raiding parties, which is an environment where sword and board is very useful. Pikes can be a bit of a liability in small unit skirmishes (although some 16th century writers do actually highly rate pikes in a one-on-one duel).
Not great if expanding up to War of the Ring-sized games though, pikes and spears would predominate there. Although I suppose they could be aiming for something a bit like the pre-Marian Roman legion, with swordsman in the front ranks and spear-armed veterans at the rear.
Edit: the Easterling polearms are halberds in a historical sense, but broadly speaking the above is unchanged in that swords with shields are particularly useful in raiding.
Da Boss wrote: Nothing here that interests me though - I would go for Galadriel if they had the better sculpt, as the one for general sale is pretty bad imo.
Ok, out of genuine interest, what's wrong with this sculpt?
Haighus wrote: In fairness, the scope of MESBG is small raiding parties, which is an environment where sword and board is very useful. Pikes can be a bit of a liability in small unit skirmishes (although some 16th century writers do actually highly rate pikes in a one-on-one duel).
Not great if expanding up to War of the Ring-sized games though, pikes and spears would predominate there. Although I suppose they could be aiming for something a bit like the pre-Marian Roman legion, with swordsman in the front ranks and spear-armed veterans at the rear.
Edit: the Easterling polearms are halberds in a historical sense, but broadly speaking the above is unchanged in that swords with shields are particularly useful in raiding.
Oh shush shush. Stop bringing your Historically accurate hogwash into this.
The Easterling rules in regards to their weapons is a bit inconsistent though. Just enough to annoy me. The captains get an Easterling Glaive which is treated as a Hand-and-a-half Axe. The war priests get a Battle Stave which can be used as a spear or an axe. And the warriors get their Pikes which is just a double length spear (despite being visually identical to the captains weapon and very similar to the war priests weapon.
Could just not have just had them all the same? The battle stave seems to have the rules that suit the look of the weapon best, pokey on the end with a big bladed chunk metal for hacking at people. The Easterling pikes also aren't nearly long enough to be proper pikes (which normally wouldn't bother me so much as it's a 28mm war game so the proportions are generally a bit skew-wiff, but the other factions that have pikes (Uruk-hai and Dol Amroth both have very long pikes, so I'm prepared to make a point of it.) and so it seems odd to me that they'd be given those rules when the battle stave rules just suit it so much better.
Snrub wrote: The Easterling rules in regards to their weapons is a bit inconsistent though. Just enough to annoy me. The captains get an Easterling Glaive which is treated as a Hand-and-a-half Axe. The war priests get a Battle Stave which can be used as a spear or an axe. And the warriors get their Pikes which is just a double length spear (despite being visually identical to the captains weapon and very similar to the war priests weapon.
Could just not have just had them all the same? The battle stave seems to have the rules that suit the look of the weapon best, pokey on the end with a big bladed chunk metal for hacking at people. The Easterling pikes also aren't nearly long enough to be proper pikes (which normally wouldn't bother me so much as it's a 28mm war game so the proportions are generally a bit skew-wiff, but the other factions that have pikes (Uruk-hai and Dol Amroth both have very long pikes, so I'm prepared to make a point of it.) and so it seems odd to me that they'd be given those rules when the battle stave rules just suit it so much better.
The Glaive issue will presumably disappear with the new edition, since it's obviously a fudge to make special strikes relevant for the Captain, and special strikes be dead.
Da Boss wrote: Nothing here that interests me though - I would go for Galadriel if they had the better sculpt, as the one for general sale is pretty bad imo.
Ok, out of genuine interest, what's wrong with this sculpt?
.
Galadriel looks like Noel Fielding and Calaborn looks like he's trying to figure out who farted.
Da Boss wrote: Nothing here that interests me though - I would go for Galadriel if they had the better sculpt, as the one for general sale is pretty bad imo.
Ok, out of genuine interest, what's wrong with this sculpt?
.
Galadriel looks like Noel Fielding and Calaborn looks like he's trying to figure out who farted.
That's the paintjob, not the sculpt. Looks rather a bit better on the model, or painted here, here, here, here, or here .
The Galadriel sculpt is pretty excellent and the only one I feel captures Blanchett's likeness (although I'm not sure if I've seen both Hobbit-era sculpts in the flesh - but I have yet to see painted versions that make them look appealing); however, the pose certainly isn't ideal aside from specific dioramas. The first White Council sculpt with scary-mirror appearance is more fun for battles, but is very coarse compared to the delicate original sculpt.
Da Boss wrote: Nothing here that interests me though - I would go for Galadriel if they had the better sculpt, as the one for general sale is pretty bad imo.
Ok, out of genuine interest, what's wrong with this sculpt?
.
Galadriel looks like Noel Fielding and Calaborn looks like he's trying to figure out who farted.
That's the paintjob, not the sculpt. Looks rather a bit better on the model, or painted here, here, here, here, or here .
The Galadriel sculpt is pretty excellent and the only one I feel captures Blanchett's likeness (although I'm not sure if I've seen both Hobbit-era sculpts in the flesh - but I have yet to see painted versions that make them look appealing); however, the pose certainly isn't ideal aside from specific dioramas. The first White Council sculpt with scary-mirror appearance is more fun for battles, but is very coarse compared to the delicate original sculpt.
That last one actually really looks like Cate Blanchett, it's impressive.
Oh, that's beautiful. Haleth has some interesting barding, but I don't dislike it.
I /hope/ this means some more archaic kits get an update, but even if they're SOL without a standalone film to warrant the investment, it's very good for Rohan and Isengard/Dunland at least
I'm very interested to see how well the new Rohirrim compare size-wise against the old sculpts. If they're the same height, I'm super keen. New wildmen look fething awesome though. They're everything the Carn-dum warriors aren't. Only thing I'm not 100% sold on is their shields.
Most of the Warriors are decent enough, and seem to be roughly the same size as the Perry ones judging by the bases, but I'm not sure how well they're going to blend with the existing range. The sculpting style is noticeably different.
The Wildmen would have been great, if they weren't breakdancing.
The characters are mostly meh, except for Haleth on foot. Mounted Hama might look better from a different angle.
That's a fun little starter set. Now I'm wondering if they'll price it to grow the game, or price it to abuse existing fans like they did Battle of Osgiliath. I don't think new Tolkien-derived movies and TV shows are going to have a cultural renaissance, but I could see a place in the tabletop market for the game to grow into.
frankelee wrote: That's a fun little starter set. Now I'm wondering if they'll price it to grow the game, or price it to abuse existing fans like they did Battle of Osgiliath. I don't think new Tolkien-derived movies and TV shows are going to have a cultural renaissance, but I could see a place in the tabletop market for the game to grow into.
Content looks to be about £260 retail so at £130 (price of Osgiliath) it would be a generous deal by GW standards.
His Master's Voice wrote: It just occurred to me that, aside from all the other things that bother me about this miniature, the dude looks like Tommy Wiseau.
His Master's Voice wrote: Most of the Warriors are decent enough, and seem to be roughly the same size as the Perry ones judging by the bases, but I'm not sure how well they're going to blend with the existing range. The sculpting style is noticeably different.
Actually, judging from the base size and if my math has not failed me, the troops are noticeably larger (30mm vs. 28mm head-to-toe, Haleth seems to be 32-33mm).
Whether that is an issue is up to individual taste, obviously.
Actually, judging from the base size and if my math has not failed me, the troops are noticeably larger (30mm vs. 28mm head-to-toe, Haleth seems to be 32-33mm)
I assumed the new warriors use the same bases, and eyeballing them in Photoshop seems to indicate roughly the same heigh for the models.
If I got it wrong and GW really made them that much bigger, established players won't be able to match those into their collections, and new players will be forced to reinforce them with midgets from a bygone era. The only way it would make sense if GW suddenly decided they want to refresh everything in the range, and that's not happening.
a few locally have muttered about just sticking with the current edition and not bothering with the new one. may change over time but a fair few have a good chunk of the books
new models look decent enough, given how old some of the previous ones were (we have players with models older than themselves) some new was worth it.
I just hope its not just the stuff in the box refreshed and then off they go into made up stuff
leopard wrote: a few locally have muttered about just sticking with the current edition and not bothering with the new one. may change over time but a fair few have a good chunk of the books
new models look decent enough, given how old some of the previous ones were (we have players with models older than themselves) some new was worth it.
I just hope its not just the stuff in the box refreshed and then off they go into made up stuff
Yeah, going from the Hobbit treatment it's well possible we only get plastic for things from that movie and afterwards it's business as usual. (Which could mean new Mumak and Haradhrim going from the trailer, which I'm not opposed to).
However, back in the day when the Hobbit was released the lotr game came out of a phase of being unsupported for years, while nowadays we already have realeases every couple of months. So... there's already a stronger framework they're starting from, maybe they can use that to give us a bit more. (New Goblins anyone?)
I hope so, its to my mind the based actual wargame GW do (as opposed to the very small group stuff let Necromunda), a vastly better system than 40k or AoS
amusing for this that have taken out the special attacks which the previous version put in, a rule that was basically optional and only really made sense in specific situations but has now been memory holed for all
it would be nice to get a gradual update, ideally models that do work well alongside older ones
Honestly I love the old monopose figures. I understand the limitations but I love how easy they are to put together and how easy they are to paint. They're great.
I also love Oathmark multipart plastics - just enough modularity to convert stuff or make characters, but still easy to assemble.
GW modern multipart monopose is really the worst of all worlds, and to my eye, at the tabletop, the difference in model quality is not really that great. These ones do look good, though very busy for the Wild Men.
But I think I'm an outlier here, and I've had a long time to get my hands on all the old monopose plastics I want, so I am genuinely happy for the people who want the range refresh.
While happy to see it (the models look nice; and I have always liked the Rohirrim aesthetic), I now realize this finally sets a precedent that does create more hope (and possibly disappointment) for updated Last Alliance plastics etc., even though I am aware that these are exceptional in being movie tie-ins, and are not directly comparable to other old plastics in that sense.
The Rohirrim look good, though I am surprised by the seemingly entire lack of any customization - not only likely lacking command parts, but building fully duplicate figures if the picture is not misleading. It will be easy enough to cut and exchange parts, but the picture implies even the shields aren't interchangeable, let alone heads and weapons, which feels like a missed opportunity.
The Dunlendings are fine, certainly miles ahead of the other recent barbarians, though I would prefer them slightly less shabby looking - even when poor and evil, you can still have a weapon that looks like it isn't too blunt to cut butter, or a shield that falls apart from a strong breeze. Anyway, that's probably down to the source designs regardless. A pretty cool kit likely further improved with some brighter paintjob and perhaps some different (possibly looted) gear. Always thought Dunlendings should be fairly sympathetic in theory, and a more complete stand-alone army (with plastic core troops) will help get them on the table.
While happy to see it (the models look nice; and I have always liked the Rohirrim aesthetic), I now realize this finally sets a precedent that does create more hope (and possibly disappointment) for updated Last Alliance plastics etc., even though I am aware that these are exceptional in being movie tie-ins, and are not directly comparable to other old plastics in that sense.
The Rohirrim look good, though I am surprised by the seemingly entire lack of any customization - not only likely lacking command parts, but building fully duplicate figures if the picture is not misleading. It will be easy enough to cut and exchange parts, but the picture implies even the shields aren't interchangeable, let alone heads and weapons, which feels like a missed opportunity.
To be fair that's always been the case with lotr minis. Easterling Cataphracts might be the only exception . Back in the day they said it was because of the license.
Yeah look the same height to me, but also that image shows just how well the new sculpts and old sculpts fit side by side. A rarity with modern GW, often the contrast in aesthetic quality between the newer mini vs older makes them unusable in the same army.
The movie version of Helm looks like a martial arts master, which is a pretty weird interpretation of the source material. GW's model looks a bit like an angry Santa.
Santtu wrote: The movie version of Helm looks like a martial arts master, which is a pretty weird interpretation of the source material. GW's model looks a bit like an angry Santa.
Lord Damocles wrote: Even if you can kill a man with a single punch, you'd still have to be a real window licker not to bring an actual weapon into battle.
IIRC Helm from the books did go around killing Easterlings with his bare hands.
I think he's a nod to Beowulf, who fought barehanded, and who Tolkien was well acquainted.
I don't hate the model but it's not quite what I imagined - mostly because I imagined him cloaked and hooded due to the bitter winds of the Fell Winter, and I would have imagined a more taciturn kind of expression on his face. Also not so old.
Love seeing Helm but I don't love seeing only a non-mounted option. I know it's from a specific point in time, but I'm hoping we can see Helm Mounted and Unmounted pre-madness.
I know there's a FW mini already but I'm not a huge resin fan and would love to just get a Plastic kit for him like we've seen with other Leaders in Rohan.