Sell me on either 40k or Age of Sigmar

So I think I’ve hit another one of those major shifts in my gaming tastes, and I’m looking at one of these two games for my thematic, more narrative driven gaming.

I’m looking at the $68 starter boxes (Know No Fear and Thunder and Blood). I don’t want the all-in box because I know myself well enough to know I’ll be overwhelmed with how much I have to paint all at once. I also definitely want stuff for two players. It’s been years since I’ve played 40k, and I’ve never played AoS. I know the latter is getting a new edition, but I don’t think that’s quite enough to deter me.

Give me some pros and cons of each, which one do you prefer?

Isn't 40k getting a new skirmish set soon? GW release schedules are relatively unknown to me.

While both games are fun and pretty similar, I'd say it just comes down to the fantasy vs sci fi choice. If you like lasers and explosions or clash of steel and big monsters, if you like both which one do you like more?

For me the real key is if you are playing with a closed group (family or friends getting into the game with you) or planning on playing with other GW inclined folks at the local meeting spot. If its the former, you really can't go wrong and can dive in. If its the latter be prepared for a grind of new rules, releases, etc. It just comes with the territory and the game can seem to be more tactical driven then narratively driven if that is the case. I played in a slow grow league for 40k earlier this year from Dec-Mar and I loved being back in the gam, but since that ended I haven't really felt the desire to play again. I met some great people and had a blast, the league was run amazingly well. But I want my limited game playing time spent playing less of a treadmill type game system. Gaslands, Fist Full of Kung Fu, etc. I still get the thematic pop of a minis game and don't feel the rules are constantly being changed (codex releases).

Also when you do get into it make sure you have some good terrain to play on and if you don't plan on making it or buying it yourself. It makes all the difference in the world especially if you are looking at "thematic narrative driven gaming".

Personal Preference - AoS

40k has an abundance of fluff, which also locks it into certain things and limits development. AoS starting new has no limits or is bound in those ways, and it's kind of fun to watch this stuff unfold and grow from early on. AoS feels more varied and diverse at this point, 40k will always be half Space Marines of some flavor and half Xenos races that get no love.

The rules for both games kind of develop in parallel with 40k and AoS borrowing and adapting from each other.

Broad strokes - I feel like the AoS community is lighter, less serious. 40k feels more competitive and tourney focused. 40k, to me from a distance, seems like the end results of the game are very important. Where with AoS I feel like there are so many options, modes of play and so many ways to take ownership over your game that I feel lets you take ownership and create a fun and memorable battle.

The new edition is giving artifacts and rules for fighting in each of the eight mortal realms so each realm feels different to fight on. Open play games that only take place up in the air/sky with flyers. There's the Path to Glory campaign book where you start with a hero and a small band of followers and progress growing your forces as the hero's exploits gain notoriety. Rules for Skirmish games that take it from the unit to the individual. There's just so many ways you and your opponent can tailor your game to make it unique each and every time where even playing the same armies will feel different due to the environment.

Don't fall into the "gotta paint them all" trap. Grey models are fine. Play the game, enjoy the game. Then find a race that you want to collect AND enjoy painting. Nothing feels more chore-like than feeling like you HAVE to paint models you don't enjoy painting.

I prefer AoS to 40k because I am not a big fan of the CP system in 40k and the relatively clunky point system they devised (if you use just the power levels, you'd be okay). I also think AoS is significantly ahead of 40k in the quality of the new kits being released because they are not as tied to any kind of established setting or realism. I was lukewarm on 7th edition 40k and was initially excited for 8th edition, but it just did not click with me. The 40k scene in Missoula is very strong whereas AoS is barely a blip and I still have more fun with the minuscule selection of opponents/armies.

AoS is getting updated to 2nd edition in a week, so you might want to hold off for a bit if that is the path you choose.

The other folks have hit all the main points here and I agree with all of the above, including the edge given to AOS.

I think it also bears mention that army building in general with AoS is easier in general- you don’t have any units with a page full of gear options.

In 40k, it kind of feels like Primaris Marines, which you get in in that starter, are kind of lacking- they had a big release last year, but they are missing a lot of key elements (like a flyer) so you have to go into the older, out of scale kits. Which kind of sucks. Death Guard is awesome though- lots of great new models and kits.

Stormcast on the other hand keep getting better and better. The first kits and rules for them were sort of dull. Now they are coming into their own with much more diversity and specialization.

I would strongly advise AGAINST Thunder and Blood. Soul War comes out in two weeks, and it will give you starter armies for the new Stormcast Sacrosanct Chamber and Nighthaunts, which are quick and easy to paint to a great result. You want to be up with the 2.0 rules, especially if the new Malign Sorcery expansion catches your fancy- it adds Final Fantasy like spells. It looks awesome and innovative.

I know you are only looking at two armies, but another option is to do a Daemon army. You can play most Daemon units in both games. I have Tzeentch and Nurgle armies for both.

Soul Wars is awesome. The new unit cards inside it are fantastic. Every wargame should have unit cards.

I really don’t get why 40k doesn’t have the unit cards- they are a TREMENDOUS help. I guess it goes back to the broader options in 40k. I have the unit cards for all of my AoS armies.

Thanks everyone, I’m pretty sure I’m going with AoS. And hey, lucky me, there’s a $15 off coupon on $75+ on eBay today. Plenty of Soul Wars preorders on there.

barrowdown wrote: I prefer AoS to 40k because I am not a big fan of the CP system in 40k and the relatively clunky point system they devised (if you use just the power levels, you'd be okay). I also think AoS is significantly ahead of 40k in the quality of the new kits being released because they are not as tied to any kind of established setting or realism. I was lukewarm on 7th edition 40k and was initially excited for 8th edition, but it just did not click with me. The 40k scene in Missoula is very strong whereas AoS is barely a blip and I still have more fun with the minuscule selection of opponents/armies.

AoS is getting updated to 2nd edition in a week, so you might want to hold off for a bit if that is the path you choose.

Barrowdown, you'll be unhappy to learn that CPs are coming to AoS in the new rule set. As with everything AoS, however, the rules are being implemented in a slightly more intuitive way.

What it really comes down to is that everything bad having to do with GW's game rules has to do with making legacy players happy by letting them exploit little edge cases and rules ambiguities (until they get replaced in an FAQ or a rules overhaul by new ambiguities). Thus, the house style for all of these rules always includes a little puzzle for high church insiders, and irritating question marks for newcomers; my friends and I call them Torture Devices for Incels. The tragedy is, GW has been trying to get out from under this legacy for a few years now, especially with AoS, and only partially succeeding. Very few randos in my area play AoS (because it's too simple), and few of my friends are very patient with the rules as they stand (because they're too complex). I don't think the new AoS rules, which are more flavorful and more complicated, are going to turn either them around on the subject.

That said, AoS is much looser and open to house ruling and weird list building, and the models (to my mind) are more interesting. If you like building and modeling like I do, there's simply nothing better. I'm not sure I would ever want to play any of these games competitively. Path to Glory and Skirmish are great fun, and they're still played in my household.

In our last couple of sessions, we've used Gaetano Ferrara's One Page Rules for both "Age of Fantasy" and "Grimdark Future." They are fast, flavorful, free, and better than the official rules in every conceivable way for casual play. onepagerules.com/ So much so, that GW has knicked a few of Ferrara's rules for this new iteration, particularly for "transport" terrain.

I think I might have just talked myself out of pre-ordering Soul Wars.

GorillaGrody wrote: AoS is getting updated to 2nd edition in a week, so you might want to hold off for a bit if that is the path you choose.

Barrowdown, you'll be unhappy to learn that CPs are coming to AoS in the new rule set. As with everything AoS, however, the rules are being implemented in a slightly more intuitive way.
[/quote]

I am aware of the CP stuff in AoS, but I have much less of a problem there than with the detachment manipulation stuff that is encouraged in 40k. The command abilities in AoS feel completely different than the weird army-specific abilities that have been shunted into the system in 40k. It's character-linked and less likely lead to building armies the "one true way" to maximize your CP. You still can use a command ability without building to it in AoS unlike 40k where a suboptimal build could lead to being locked out of an entire subsystem.