• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

AoS Age of Sigmar - Laws of War

L
Jungle Swarm

Lug

New Member
Messages
3
Likes Received
4
Trophy Points
3
Rules for Laws of War have seemingly just gone up on Warseer, they look legitimate to me, and aim to add a penalty for taking large amounts of monsters, heroes, war machines etc.
 

Attachments

hmm.. that last one might be problem for our army.... :meh:
 
Interesting approach to balance, not sold on just how balancing it is though…

Many of these conditions also seem unfair to utilize.

"+1 power for using more models carrying weapons with an attack characteristic greater than 1"

What if I only have one model more than my opponent, or if I have more with 2 attacks, but his models have 3 (less models, more total attacks).

I'd rather see these power levels come from the units themselves (i.e +1 power for having more than 15 models in a unit that have 2 attacks, or 10 models with 3, etc.), +1 power per war machine, monster, hero, or special character, etc.

Then you compare power levels with your opponent, then consult the chart.
 
Last edited:
Sleboda said:
Ahhh... Another misguided attempt to turn a potato into orange juice.
Click to expand...

Close to my home town there is a small brewery that make whisky out of potatoes. Yeah, I have nothing to say about the ruleset, not interested.
 
Last edited:
These are certainly interesting. Our local group uses our own army comp rules (already posted about that method in more than one thread, so I'll avoid explaining them again. Pm me if anybody actually cares to know), but I can definitely see these being used in some of our games. Perhaps this could be used in map based campaigns with fixed army list rules (the ancient General's Compendium campaign rules spring to mind) as a balancing/handicap mechanic? Sacrifice a certain fraction of your income this campaign turn to curry favor with the gods and gain access to this rules?

I don't know, just spitballing here.
 
"Age of Sigmar is easy to pick up and play ....now call your accountant"

Seriously!? what is this?
Its more like a scenario / variation of the game than it is a balancing factor...

Funny enough, the guy on Warseer who posted it was ALSO named "Laws Of War"
..hmmm
 
I applaud the effort, but I don't care for this. It looks like it combines the worst aspects of Oldhammer and Age of Sigmar. You don't have points for a universal balance system, but you do have a giant checklist of things you have look over and tally a score of at the start of every game. It seems both complex AND unbalanced.
 
Not to highjack the thread or anything, but I just made a comp-system I am trying to develop further.
If anyone is not satisfied with "the laws of war" please have a look at what I made.
Please leave me some feedback so we can make this S _ _ T work.
http://www.lustria-online.com/threads/phat-comp-beta-testers-wanted.16702/

On topic: I like the idea of the underdog having extra powers to counter the stronger army, but a problem is that it can only go to 8 scrolls....so........if I bring big enough an army to max that, why not just continue from there?
 
Sleboda said:
Ahhh... Another misguided attempt to turn a potato into orange juice.
Click to expand...

If at first you don't succeed...:shifty:
we may not get orange juice, but at this rate at least Vodka looks likely.:woot:
 
I don't mean to be critical here but I'm seeing a lot of complaining about failed attempt at balance and not a whole lot of comments on the actual content of the Laws of War scrolls.

That said, I agree that it is not a good method of balance. I kind of like the whole "difference in army power" thing, but it is a bit clunky and wouldn't be good in pickup games. I think folded in with a decent comp system "Army Power" could be used as a valid indicator of the difference of strength between two forces, but as it stands in the Warscroll I don't think it works particularly well.

The Laws of War themselves seem inconsistent at best. Some are clearly more useful in my eyes than others, and some will bring the game to a grinding halt to work out its effects (which is a pretty bad thing given this game is supposed to be smooth and streamlined). My initial thoughts are below.

Azyr - Celestial Judgement: Possibly the least powerful unless there's a huge discrepancy in power levels but it could be useful if your opponent fields huge units, or units of models with multiple wounds. Ultimately though it's a one-use nuke that only causes wounds on a 5+.

Aqshy - Flames of Agony: This is one of the better abilities I think. Used against the right enemy it could really boost your ability to hurt them with battleshock tests, and you have the potential to deal mortal wounds to injured multi-wound enemies and finish them off in the Battleshock phase before a test is even rolled. Best part is your entire army gets this and it lasts all game. Really good against multi-wound armies like Stormcast, Chaos and anything cavalry heavy.

Shyish - Vengeful Dead: With a low difference in power levels this is pretty terrible, you could easily be looking at only bringing back 3-5 or so models. You can still make it work though if you use small, multi-wound, heavy hitting units. For us a good unit to combo with this would be Terradons, Ripperdactyls, Kroxigor, Salamanders and Razordons. Any army that's consisted of a lot of heavy Cavalry, Monstrous Infantry, and Monstrous Cavalry will benefit from this quite a lot, but unless there's a big power difference then "balanced" armies probably won't get much out of it. It's a pretty good power if there's a big power difference between armies though - this way you can regularly return destroyed units to the field at a decent strength. At the end of the day though you only have a 50% chance to bring models back, so I wouldn't build a strategy that relies on this.

Ghyran - Breath of Life: I hate this one. The effect has the potential to reduce incoming damage from multi-damage attacks, but the mechanic is awkward and requires a bit of record keeping - which you and your opponent are probably sick of after working out the power difference. It's also utterly useless against multiple Dmg1 attacks, so overall not too great really.

Hysh - Blinding Light: A bit of an old school to-hit modifier for ranged attacks. Pretty straightforwards and could help against range-spam armies (which I'm sure will be a thing). Situational, but you get to see what your opponent plops on the table before you choose a warscroll so it still could be useful.

Ghur - Savage Assault: Another one that can slow down the game. If your enemy makes a 3+ save you can mortal wound them on a 5+. Okay? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me and not a lot of models have a 3+ save so its possible you'll never use it. Arguably the better part of this scroll is that your opponent can only successfully cast Mystic Shield once per turn, and enemy models don't get a cover save bonus if you attack them in melee. Not game breaking but it can definitely help you out against heavy armoured opponents.

Chamon - Magic Ward: Really useful against caster-heavy opponents. -1 to cast for enemy wizards, and your unbinding range increases to 24". This is pretty snazzy because it lets you get in unbinding range of enemy wizards without being at risk of getting Arcane Bolted off (in theory). Not super-powerful, but I think this combined with Ulgu would cause a real headache for Seraphon, Death and Chaos summoning opponents.

Ulgu - Entangling Mist: Not really useful against most opponents I think. When your enemy summons a unit it can only have a maximum 10 wounds in total, and you can "dispel" it on a 4+. Really good against Slann-based Seraphon, who can summon basically anything other than more Slann, and decent against Death armies and Chaos wizards that summon Daemons.

And that is my 2c.
 
Kind of agree with the majority here - not a great comp system (and also not hugely interested)

On a cynical note, is this GW's long term plan? "to produce a system that everyone has to comp in order to properly play so that when people cry about something being overpowered they can say - its not our fault you made your own comp"

On a frustrated note - how long until we get a universally accepted comp system? I'm not a fan often constantly having to learn a new set of rules everytime I meet someone from another club...
 
On a realistic note - why want a comp system to build your army around? Why not a comp system focussed on sportsmanship, effort in balancing a game, painting etc. earning points for playing games fair and fun.
 
hahahaha - i think unfortunately, a large proportion of the player base has forgotten about this

For me - fun and sportsmanship died when i noticed players taking ten minutes at the start of every turn to mark out with dice the maximum charge/shoot ranges of all the opposing units. That and canon sniping...
 
well that would be then subject for some negative points in the campaign / tournament. good luck ending high up :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top