Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

JSG wrote:

 Overread wrote:
AoS had had Old World themes in it since day 1.

Also in general the concept of an army or faction can be quite broad or quite niche. Look at Skaven, one side use high tech machines and are essentially an elite army, another side uses huge monsters, another relies on swarms of pox ridden rats and numbers and almost super primitive tech.

They are all skaven, but different aspects of them.


Gloomspite Gitz could easily be going the same way of having different niches within the whole, one of which are the wolfriders. It might well be a sane way for Gw to expand the concept without having to invest in an entirely new army from scratch.



Also nothing says you can't have sun and moon worshippers operate in the same army, someone has to do scouting during the day when the moon worshippers are all abed after a long night of screaming at the moon.

Purest copium. For your Skaven analogy to work the Battletome would have to be Battletome: Clan Eshin but include everything anyway because they're all rats. There are more Dark Elf factions than Greenskin ones. AoS is just a dogs breakfast of half baked ideas and U-turns.

"Copium". God i despise these made up words that try and seep into conversation, grow up. And what's the problem with having different goblin types mingling together? It's called growth and development, which is what the game needs and should have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 D6Damager wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

Goose LeChance wrote:

Carlovonsexron wrote:

 Equinox wrote:
The Snarlfang Riders are outstanding models, but feel like a WFB retread that is out of place in GSG.

I'd say theres' gonna be good money on a bet they show up prominently in the old world....

Yeesh I hope not

They're all the worst parts of the old wolf riders dialed up to 11

They're literally goblins riding wolves. What exactly do you want them to be?

I would have liked them to match the aesthetic of the army they are in. They should be night goblins riding wolves instead of wannabe Mongol goblins.

You mean "goblins"? Like the Spiderfang that can quite happily mix in with Gloomspite and now some more development with a different type?

As long as AoS and ToW are separate model lines it's cool

AoS can keep the mongol goblins, maybe ToW can get some new wolf riders eventually, if it doesn't flop.

Goose LeChance wrote:
As long as AoS and ToW are separate model lines it's cool

AoS can keep the mongol goblins, maybe ToW can get some new wolf riders eventually, if it doesn't flop.

Old world war riders had mogol vibes too though. The named wolf rider was named Gitilla the hunter

 GaroRobe wrote:

Goose LeChance wrote:
As long as AoS and ToW are separate model lines it's cool

AoS can keep the mongol goblins, maybe ToW can get some new wolf riders eventually, if it doesn't flop.

Old world war riders had mogol vibes too though. The named wolf rider was named Gitilla the hunter

Yes but now AoS owns them so ToW will need new, better looking wolf riders.

 GaroRobe wrote:

Goose LeChance wrote:
As long as AoS and ToW are separate model lines it's cool

AoS can keep the mongol goblins, maybe ToW can get some new wolf riders eventually, if it doesn't flop.

Old world war riders had mogol vibes too though. The named wolf rider was named Gitilla the hunter

The models were just generic goblins on wolves.

JSG wrote:

 GaroRobe wrote:

Goose LeChance wrote:
As long as AoS and ToW are separate model lines it's cool

AoS can keep the mongol goblins, maybe ToW can get some new wolf riders eventually, if it doesn't flop.

Old world war riders had mogol vibes too though. The named wolf rider was named Gitilla the hunter

The models were just generic goblins on wolves.

You sure about that?





The additional Wolf Rider sprues had a bunch of "Mongol style" parts to make them look like the older metal wolf riders.

He's not wrong though, they were generic goblins that came with a bunch of heads and some were vaguely mongolian.

Also if ToW keeps all the comedy characters and stuff like that they're out of their minds

Yeah, that's literally the generic goblin kit with bowed legs and the ancient wolf models.

JSG wrote:
Yeah, that's literally the generic goblin kit with bowed legs and the ancient wolf models.

And additional Mongol parts.

I've built like 40 of the things.

So if these new wolf riders had the option for unhelmeted heads, would they no longer be mongol like? Is it just the heads? Did the old ones have non Mongolian style helmets or were their only “normal” goblin options bare heads? If so how is that kit any different than the new one? I’m really not seeing the issue with why these couldn’t work in TOW

How even should a sensible, generic goblin wolf rider for Warhammer Fantasy look, if not like these? Different helmet, or none at all so as to avoid a look inspired by any real world designs? They're light cavalry, so the armour should be light and sparse. The exaggerated weapons are an unfortunate hallmark of Citadel Miniatures, but if they weren't Wonky Goblin Shaped then they'd probably just be sabres, either directly inspired by or a convergent design to that of the Mongols. The proportions are fine and necessary, they look the same as all the goblin kits in recent years.

You can just not like them, but if there's not actually a generic alternative then it's all a bit apropos of nothing. If the problem with goblin wolf riders made for Age of Sigmar is simply that they look like they were designed by Games Workshop, then I've got some unfortunate news about Warhammer: The Old World.

These new wolf riders were designed for AoS not ToW.

ToW doesn't have any models yet.

If you think tow will be radically different to how fb looked i have got bad news for you. Gw won't change their style for it. And these are very much fb style. Gw could easily put these to tow and they wouldn't look out of place.

tneva82 wrote:
If you think tow will be radically different to how fb looked i have got bad news for you. Gw won't change their style for it. And these are very much fb style. Gw could easily put these to tow and they wouldn't look out of place.

What style would that be, AoS style? Blood Bowl style? LoTR style? Old WHFB models look nothing like current AoS models.

There's no point in meshing AoS and WHFB together, they already make money off the people who like AoS. Worst case scenario is I stick with my old models and continuing spending nothing on GW.

...MAYBE I get a couple new empire units if they don't screw it up too badly.

Whether or not the models will be usable in WFB mk 2 is beyond my ability to debate.

My "issue" with the new models is that the theme of cave-dwelling, moon-worshipping, goblins and trolls seems like one that offers a pretty large canvas for creative opportunities. Instead of coming up with something new that fits into that concept, we are getting models that share only superficial similarities and play on nostalgia. It would have been a much more exciting release to see something that visual fits more directly with the current GSG range.

Because, again, Gloomspite are not the only faction in the book. Spiderfang are their own thing and there is no issue if they want to expand and look at other goblin types.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
Because, again, Gloomspite are not the only faction in the book. Spiderfang are their own thing and there is no issue if they want to expand and look at other goblin types.

Which is an indication of GW's laziness and lack of creative depth when it comes to the range. Would you have the same opinion of the release if it was a winged/avian themed elf that was added to the Idoneth battletome? You know seagulls eat crabs, so bird-elves fit with fish-elves if I use that logic. Why expand the resources to create a new product that only shares superficial similarities to the existing range when something with closer ties would garner a better reception (potentially).

It could also be argued that a single kit does not constitute or justify a faction. Unless there are additional kits to be revealed, you cannot field a Snarlfang only army, which I would consider a basic requirement of being a faction. At least with Spiderfang, it is possible to field a complete army composed of just that faction regardless of tabletop viability.

See thing is even Old World and 40K armies have had units that stand out. Heck Tau have almost two armies in one with Tau and Kroot/xenos allies taking very different design pathways.


Bigger armies are going t oget things that don't look 100% identical to everything else.

Witch Aelves are a great example in the Dark Elves army of old. An army full of rank and file orderly, neat and heavily armoured elves then BOOM a bunch of circus style dancing elves with almost no armour, nor formal rank and file appearance and dancing around with blades.



Armies visually diversify. Would I welcome seagull Idoneth - sure why not? After all there are vast numbers of birds that migrate and fly over the seas to say nothing of the famous seagull (which isn't even an actual species of bird). So yeah a squad of specialist winged warriors would be fine.



There are limits, but goblins riding wolves and riding spiders as opposed to riding squigs - yeah I'm ok with that level of diversity.




As you say 1 model does not an army make. GW might put those wolf riders in for years and never expand the idea; or they might one day make a whole wolf and goblin themed army. Or perhaps an animal and goblin themed army with wolves, cats, bears, owls and spiders. Who knows.

I think it would all be fixed with a rename like the Ogres got, Beastclaw became Mawtribes right.
Gloomspite as the book name but with non Gloomspite units is the problem.
If it were just called Gitmobs would people still have an issue?

Probably yes cause they'd want more shroom gobbos.

A good way to expand the Destruction range.

Gloomspite Gitz

Gitmobs or whatever you can call a second Goblin tome.

I find it understandable that people would at least want to have a subfaction leader option so even if the wolf riders can't make a full army, their detachment within the gits army at least looks like it has its own organization instead of being a lone, random addition.

In the Kroot example people liked to have Shapers and Angkhor Prok just for this reason, and it's not just Kroot that were in all codices, but also hounds and oxen. That offers a bit more variety, even if they started out as a single unit entry. There's more to build a theme and fluff around, even if you need a larger Tau force to make it work.

Edited for rule 1.

 Overread wrote:
See thing is even Old World and 40K armies have had units that stand out. Heck Tau have almost two armies in one with Tau and Kroot/xenos allies taking very different design pathways.

Bigger armies are going t oget things that don't look 100% identical to everything else.

Witch Aelves are a great example in the Dark Elves army of old. An army full of rank and file orderly, neat and heavily armored elves then BOOM a bunch of circus style dancing elves with almost no armour, nor formal rank and file appearance and dancing around with blades.

Armies visually diversify. Would I welcome seagull Idoneth - sure why not? After all there are vast numbers of birds that migrate and fly over the seas to say nothing of the famous seagull (which isn't even an actual species of bird). (What is your point with the comment?) So yeah a squad of specialist winged warriors would be fine.

There are limits, but goblins riding wolves and riding spiders as opposed to riding squigs - yeah I'm ok with that level of diversity.

As you say 1 model does not an army make. GW might put those wolf riders in for years and never expand the idea; or they might one day make a whole wolf and goblin themed army. Or perhaps an animal and goblin themed army with wolves, cats, bears, owls and spiders. Who knows.

Tau are a bad example since the army since it conception has been about how they incorporate various races into their empire. Kroot and Vespid models also share design elements with Tau models (armour, icons, weapons, etc.). The same could also be said about any army in WFB as that was a different game. Dogs of War (my favorite army from WFB) were the poster child of armies in WFB that lacked visual cohesion because the range was so varied in its design. You could compensate for that variation to some degree via a shared color palette, but individual units still stood out as odd when compared to others in the army (chaos bearmen with heavily armored crossbowmen). Given the failure of DoW as an army, I would suspect that a lack of visual cohesion across the army contributed to its lack of adoption in later editions and early demise.

Diversity in the overall AOS range is not the same discussion as diversity within a single battletome. A model may fit within the overall style of AOS, but not be appropriate to a particular faction or battletome.

I don't have any issue with the models being added to AOS, it is them being shoehorned into GSG that disappoints me. You clearly are of the opinion that anything new is a good thing regardless of how it is implemented, but that is not a view I share. I like GSG and want to purchase more for the army, but I want those purchases to share common elements with my existing collection.

 Overread wrote:
See thing is even Old World and 40K armies have had units that stand out. Heck Tau have almost two armies in one with Tau and Kroot/xenos allies taking very different design pathways.


Bigger armies are going t oget things that don't look 100% identical to everything else.

Witch Aelves are a great example in the Dark Elves army of old. An army full of rank and file orderly, neat and heavily armoured elves then BOOM a bunch of circus style dancing elves with almost no armour, nor formal rank and file appearance and dancing around with blades.



Armies visually diversify. Would I welcome seagull Idoneth - sure why not? After all there are vast numbers of birds that migrate and fly over the seas to say nothing of the famous seagull (which isn't even an actual species of bird). So yeah a squad of specialist winged warriors would be fine.



There are limits, but goblins riding wolves and riding spiders as opposed to riding squigs - yeah I'm ok with that level of diversity.




As you say 1 model does not an army make. GW might put those wolf riders in for years and never expand the idea; or they might one day make a whole wolf and goblin themed army. Or perhaps an animal and goblin themed army with wolves, cats, bears, owls and spiders. Who knows.

Aren't the Idoneth at the bottom of the ocean to deprive themselves of sensation? How would Gull Aelves do this?

Danny76 wrote:
A good way to expand the Destruction range.

Gloomspite Gitz

Gitmobs or whatever you can call a second Goblin tome.

It does make me wonder what GW's internal opinion of the destruction ranges are since they seem hesitant to expand them. We can have 3+ elf books, but all orruks or goblins are lumped into a single book. With this edition being themed around destruction, it is disappointing that we haven't gotten anything major since 3rd edition launched.

Goose LeChance wrote:

Also if ToW keeps all the comedy characters and stuff like that they're out of their minds

Why? That stuff is a part of the setting this new game is relying upon to get our $.

JSG wrote:

Aren't the Idoneth at the bottom of the ocean to deprive themselves of sensation? How would Gull Aelves do this?

By not hiding at the bottom of the Ocean.

It easily fits into the lore for them, with the Idoneth forced into alliance with the Daughters of Khaine and forced into more and more land based combat (because that's where 99.9% of the other factions in the world are) it would make sense that at some point some of them might grow a greater tolerance or need to be surface side. Why not avail yourself of winged air units who can take to the skies and scout far above and ahead of your sea forces, without the need for the aether sea to be present. Especially if you're being forced to conduct major campaigns of war and not just raiding parties and raids on the coastlines.

 Overread wrote:

JSG wrote:

Aren't the Idoneth at the bottom of the ocean to deprive themselves of sensation? How would Gull Aelves do this?

By not hiding at the bottom of the Ocean.

It easily fits into the lore for them, with the Idoneth forced into alliance with the Daughters of Khaine and forced into more and more land based combat (because that's where 99.9% of the other factions in the world are) it would make sense that at some point some of them might grow a greater tolerance or need to be surface side. Why not avail yourself of winged air units who can take to the skies and scout far above and ahead of your sea forces, without the need for the aether sea to be present. Especially if you're being forced to conduct major campaigns of war and not just raiding parties and raids on the coastlines.

Genius! You've created elves.

ccs wrote:

Goose LeChance wrote:

Also if ToW keeps all the comedy characters and stuff like that they're out of their minds

Why? That stuff is a part of the setting this new game is relying upon to get our $.

Because making a farce of your own setting seems like a recipe for disaster, not everything from WHFB was good.