|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Aug 12, 2021 14:47:01 GMT
Hello once again fellow EEFLers, particularly my fellow Beastlords! As part of my work on an 8th Edition Beastman army book, I have reached a particular sticking point - would you like to see the Lore of the Wild remain in the army's Magic Lore selection? I've already returned the Lores of Tzeentch, Nurgle and Slaanesh from the Warriors and Daemons books (with suitably Beastly Lore Attributes) to allow Marked Shamans to be able to use their deity's Lore, but if you're running an unmarked Shaman it could be a useful fourth option alongside Beasts, Shadow and Death - I mean Chaos Sorcerers have the latter two Lores plus Fire and Metal, so why can't we have four Lores too? One of the least-liked Lores in Warhammer Fantasy, the Lore as it is certainly has its downsides, from spells that result in your casters and characters getting wounded, to spells that just feel so strangely 'off' you wonder what the writers were thinking. However, particularly given it has a place in Storm of Magic's spin-dial of magicness and its own Cataclysm spells, I'm wondering if I could keep it and just tweak it a bit to make it a bit better and make more sense, plus give it an attribute of its own. Therefore I've included options so that if you want to see it return, you can either vote for it returning as it is (you brave/foolish soul!) or vote for it to return but with some alterations. I'd love to know what you all think knoffles markdienekes chaosreigns pinge KevinC mrbaldrick mottdon beastyboy mithras grandmasterwang boda317 (Any other Beastmen players I've missed?). |
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Aug 12, 2021 16:36:45 GMT
I voted no. My reasons are that it was not needed. Chaos wizards use chaos magic and in addition, you have the Lore of Beasts, extremely appropriate for Beastmen.
|
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Aug 12, 2021 16:49:51 GMT
Personally, I love the idea of all armies having their own, unique (or two) that other armies DON'T have access to. It gives them more reason to be taken.
That being said, it totally needs tweaking. By and far, one of the most useless lores. A rewrite (or tweak as KevinC did with Tomb Kings) would be most welcome!
|
|
pinge
New Member
Posts: 47 
|
Post by pinge on Aug 12, 2021 19:38:20 GMT
I think it sounds like a great idea to have it in - I would probably tweak some of it but without weeding out all the “bad” stuff and overpowering it. I agree with Kevin that Beasts is great for Beastmen (and the name more appropiate  ) but Lore of the Wild has stuff like Traitor-kin which to me is awesome to imagine along with Savage Dominion. Am I correct in saying that there is no lore attribute to Lore of the Wild? In that case a lore attribute could also be fine - perhaps something silly like whenever a spell is succesfully cast an Ungor/Gor/Bestigor appears in the appropiate block (if none such units are present nothing happens). I would also work fluff-wise as Gors would be attracted to the sound of battle. |
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Aug 12, 2021 21:14:50 GMT
I’m ambivalent about it. Being the most useless lore in existence (😉) I’ve never taken it. Although I’ve run death and shadow a fair few times, I always find myself returning back to lore of beasts. I find it complements the Beastmen army so well and my play style with them. That said I’d be curious to see what you come up with but my gaming group is quite adherent to the released rules so would probably never get to try a custom/updated lore (am trying to get them to agree a few club house rules, such as Devastating chg for Bretonnians and that is hard enough!)
|
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Aug 13, 2021 17:12:03 GMT
I would like to see it stay, albeit tweaked.
Traitorkin is great and thematic. Empire has access to Lore of Beasts. I like the idea of Beastmen having their own evil forest lore.
|
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Aug 13, 2021 18:07:29 GMT
I would like to see it stay, albeit tweaked. Traitorkin is great and thematic. Empire has access to Lore of Beasts. I like the idea of Beastmen having their own evil forest lore. Then please by all means vote in the poll above - currently I have two votes in the poll for ‘Yes - but reworked’ and three people explaining their reasons for this choice. Thanks Similarly there have so far been three people that have voted for ‘No’, but only two have explained their reasons for it - I’d be most interested to know who it was who placed that third vote and why they thought the lore wasn’t needed (even if it’s for reasons similar to those KevinC and knoffles have already mentioned). So far, interestingly, it looks even-stevens. We’ll see what all the other Beastlords around the forum have to say first, though, before I make my decision. |
|
|
|
Post by chaosreigns on Aug 14, 2021 5:38:38 GMT
I vote yes. There are (at least in theory) some really cool spells in the lore that would actually be pretty awesome with relatively minor tweaking - both from a narrative perspective and a rules perspective.
|
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Sept 2, 2021 10:55:21 GMT
Haven't had anymore votes or replies explaining them recently, but it now looks a clear win for 'Yes, but reworked' for Lore of the Wild! Unless things rapidly change with five more votes in favour of 'No', I'll be adding this lore into my 8th Beastman book and giving it a good old shake-up. Stay tuned and I'll tag you all when I complete it and post it on the forum. Thanks again to everyone who has voted thus far.
|
|
Yvain
Full Member
Posts: 112
|
Post by Yvain on Sept 2, 2021 13:18:21 GMT
I voted no. My reasons are that it was not needed. Chaos wizards use chaos magic and in addition, you have the Lore of Beasts, extremely appropriate for Beastmen. I am with Kevin here.
There are honestly too many magic lores and we already struggle with spell usefulness. If anything you should just be changing the lore attribute. Beast men are just chaos folk so having access to beasts and the four chaos lores would suffice.
The lore shouldn't be fixing your book if that makes sense. You should be able to function without it, but the lore access should help with certain play styles.
|
|
beastyboy
Full Member
5th eddition lizardmen !
Posts: 227
|
Post by beastyboy on Sept 2, 2021 14:17:18 GMT
Lore of beasts isn't bad but very, very situational. a nice attribute and a rewording of the spells!
And it would could be a rival for lore of beasts, shadow !
|
|
beastyboy
Full Member
5th eddition lizardmen !
Posts: 227
|
Post by beastyboy on Sept 2, 2021 14:30:06 GMT
An attribute that gave anourpirecing to a unit within a certain amount of inches would be really nice thinking about it !
|
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Sept 3, 2021 1:42:18 GMT
I voted no. My reasons are that it was not needed. Chaos wizards use chaos magic and in addition, you have the Lore of Beasts, extremely appropriate for Beastmen. I am with Kevin here.
There are honestly too many magic lores and we already struggle with spell usefulness. If anything you should just be changing the lore attribute. Beast men are just chaos folk so having access to beasts and the four chaos lores would suffice.
The lore shouldn't be fixing your book if that makes sense. You should be able to function without it, but the lore access should help with certain play styles.
--------------I like this idea...have a Beastmen army special rule that gives them a new lore attribute for the Lore of Beats and/or a new signature spell for the Lore of Beasts would be cool! |
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Sept 12, 2021 21:04:29 GMT
I voted to include Lore of the Wild, with a rework/bump in competitiveness.
Fluffwise I've always thought the way a Beastmen Shaman practices magic is completely antithetical to the way a scholarly/Faustian Chaos sorcerer practices magic. And also completely different to how Chaos Daemons can inherently cast spells.
Beastmen Shamans having access to their own lore would go a long way towards representing the uniqueness of the Shamans' magic on the table top.
|
|
|
|
Post by DemolitionMan on Nov 17, 2021 11:42:02 GMT
I've voted to keep it in, I'd quite like to see viletide as the signature spell though and with boosted versions of the spells available too, as in most 8th edition lores, and maybe just able to switch out signature spells from the god-specific lores instead of having to take viletide for marked shamans. I personally don't see a beastman shaman studying magic in the same way a chaos warrior or daemon would, or being rewarded in the same manner either so the full lores should stay with the other chaos armies and allow everyone to keep some flavour. Beasts should be beastly for me, but it's your book so do what you feel should suit and I'll happily give it a try regardless mate :-)
|
|
) but Lore of the Wild has stuff like Traitor-kin which to me is awesome to imagine along with Savage Dominion. 
