@@nigeltownley7472 I don’t know what to answer to that 😅. Opportunity cost means you have a choice to make. When I need to charge it’s always better to cast a charge bonus than a gravetide or something
in my opinion the best way to balance manifestation would be that for each manifestation a wizard cast his wizard level is reduced by one for as long as the manifestation is on the table. doing so will make it easier to balance manifestation around the value point of a wizard 1 and make it so that you technicly replace your wizard with the manifestation. i think it would make lot of sens also in a lore perspective since maintaining the manifestation would be a toll on the caster.
Not such a bad idea. They could be required to make a manifestation check to keep it where it is.. or it automatically vanishes (but allows them for resummoning)
Thematically, I think it would be wicked if the wizard who casts the manifestation is linked to it by magic so if it gets destroyed then the caster takes X mortal wounds, or while a manifestation is active, the caster effectively goes down 1 wizard level, as they're using concentration to maintain the manifestation instead of being free to yeet other spells/unbinds around.
I completely agree with everything you said Rob, with two additions: 1) From a list building perspective, the necessity to have multiple cast attempts is painful; we should not be heavily incentivised to bring wizards/priests just to gain access to this insane power advantage. 2) It is absolutely BONKERS that we are bringing wizards for the specific cast attempt at summoning endless spells, instead of using our own spell lore and warscroll spells. The longer I think about this, the more it proves just how overpowered they are. SHEESH.
I just hope they think about this, I know, and not just slap on points and be done with it. That's only going to stop people from playing them again. I love them personally as they are a very different way to show how damn dangerous magic is, heh. I do like the once per battle once summoned idea and I think that simple rule would set things right. The "Endless" spell for me is that they stay on the table until banished or destroyed, not how many times you can cast it after all. Thanks again, Rob!
Perhaps having wizards need to maintain channeling to keep the manifestations on the board, as in a lvl 1 wizard cannot cast any other spells while they maintain the manifestation they have on the board .Of course multilevel casters can maintain multiple manifestations or still cast additional spells while maintaining one(or more).If I remember correctly this is similar to the way they worked when originally released.
Right, like if a wizard summons a manifestation their power level is reduced by 1 until that manifestation is removed. They can only have one summoned at a time per wizard.
I would say one way to help balance the power of a manifestation is that each one can only be summoned once per battle. That way if the Purple Sun gets killed by the plucky steelhelms it won’t be back half a turn later. I’d also add a simple spell to all manifestation lores so in the event all the big spells have been used you don’t just have a wizard sitting against a rock drinking Gatorade because they are spent.
Probably the most reasonable change until we have better stats, but I would think that another spell isn't needed, surely armies with wizards have access to their regular lores anyway right?
We took away free summoning for a lot of good reasons , but then we made new summoning for a selected group of armies, with all the old problems, but also a lot of new one. ❤ GW
They took away summoning because people wouldn't know what models they would need to bring to a game, that doesn't apply to manifestations. You pick the lore and then you know exactly what options you have to summon. They clearly didn't do it to reduce units coming back because they increased recursion a lot.
I'm absolutely certain we'll see a nerf to manifestations but I kind of hope they don't just make them cost points again. There are lots of other ways to balance them. They could play with casting and vanish values. I get that the 6+ ward is meant to represent their magical nature but I think it should be removed. I like to see some compensation for armies that don't choose a manifestation lore. Being able to choose an extra artefact on heroic trait would be nice. I then throw in the change that you can't summon them more than once or with a counter spell. That would reign them in quite a bit. I'd also increase the casting value of all the morbid conjurations and the incarnate by one.
Armies with no access to it should just be cheaper. KO has no access to any of it and their damage is already lacking. Limiting it to one per phase also means they don't get spammed in a single hero phase for armies that bring a lot of wizards
Points are required to balance them because of the garbage balance between all the lores, especially when considering faction lores. It's the only way.
One solution is to increase summoning difficulty for each recursion, but I also quite like the idea of pointing up manifestation (first summon free/2 summons=X points/Up to 3 summons=XX points) and/or limiting the number of recursions. Maybe make it so that a manifestation can only achieve recursion if it was banished, thereby increasing interaction decisions for opposing players to balance risk/reward and put it in the hands of the players. Would also be super cool to have some Grand Alliance themed manifestations; Fist of Gork smashing units, Foot of Behemet kicking objectives, Hammer of Sigmar comet striking, etc.
I'm a big fan of limiting manifestation either by X per 1000 points, or by making a manifestation cost command points to summon. Both will ensure both players have a similar amount of manifestation power, actively lower the spam, yet still allow for the summoning of multiple manifestations (albeit with a drawback)
Ooo I like this, especially the command point cost! I'd also suggest a "One shot" for every spell, I don't think it's very fun when my opponent kicks my shyish reaper off the board then all of a sudden, I just resummon it next heros phase. There does need to be some sort of soft limit.
@@Kazerole I disagree, some of them are very powerful. To spend 1cp to in effect get another unit on the board, that has a reasonable save, a 6+ ward and can last multiple turns seems like a better use of a cp than an all out attack giving you +1 to hit for a phase
Suggested this last night in my game with my mate. They're too strong. CP cost, and once they're banished, that's it for that manifestation for the game to bring them in line. I don't think points are the answer because they would be prohibitively expensive for what they do
@@Shadowknightneo do you mean instead of the cast ? Just a CP ? AoA and AoD aren’t automatic like they used to. But they are more impactful. That said, movement commands are just so efficient in this edition I can’t see a manifestation being more useful.
Imho give every army their own manifestations, axe the generics ones. This gives you more of the army you already love and balancing is easier. As is, its hard to balance them because they are stronger in some armies then others. Also dead is dead seems like a good change to make.
Could make it so for each manifestation you have on the board, a casting roll for an additional manifestation is at -1 to cast. So it gets more difficult but not impossible to flood the board.
Played against DoT for my first game (as CoS) & it felt like I was playing down points, as the later turns he had 2-4 ES's fighting me as magical proxies. & not being able to take Wizards or Priests as regimental bonus heroes/without increasing my drops... left me at a tactical disadvantage. I'd like to see them not be re-summonable, & only ones that need to be set-up in advance (like Lauchon) should be summonable during the opponent's turn. It would be nice if there was an opportunity cost to taking them, like you get a free Cmd. Pt. every round if you go without. Also all the tournament gamers are taking the same manifestation lore: Morbid Conjurations. Or maybe the Krondspine Inc. if they can only get a single cast/power level in their list
Before watching, if GW wants to keep manifestations lore free the following changes should help fix it imo: - Magical intervention won't allow you to summon a manifestation. - Manifestations that can move shouldn't be allowed into combat ranges (except charging ). - If you dont take a manifestation lore you get 1 extra CP per battle round. ( So non wizard lists won't be punished but actually has benefit ) - Limit 1 summon per wizard, if they don't succeed a summon they can attempt another.
I wouldn't bet on hero traits getting points costs. GW seems to move in the opposite direction. Compare to 40k which did have points upgrades like that but removed all of them with the latest edition launch.
What if they cost CP to summon, so you're spending in game recourses and giving you more tactical decisions? Like you have to succeed the casting roll and spend a cp, then they'd also cost two cp to cast in your opponents turn.
CP is a renewable resource. I still dont think thats enough. Plus, the balance between them all is really bad. You'll still only see the same like 2 lores every game. The only option is to give them points.
I’m leaning towards having them be a once per game summon but I’m curious what GW ends up deciding and how the community responds. Thanks for the video!
- 1 controlled Manifestation per Wizard - Can not Summon Manifestation with Counter Spell command ability - Move Shackles out of Morbid to weaker lore Fixed
Doesn't resolve the infinite wounds problem, which if you have 3 wizards is a huge issue. Manifestations should not be resummonable if destroyed by shooting/combat/spell ability (other than banish) but can be if banished, which also would not require a major overhaul to rules as they stand currently. 100% agree on the 1 active manifestation per wizard.
Can't really shuffle the spells because they come out in boxed sets. The lores will always match the sprues. Maybe making people get 3 manifestation points from their lore, and having spells cost different amount of points (like Graveytide would be 3, Shackles 2, etc) would create an incentive to pick based on variety or power within their lore. This could also help weaker lores by making them cost only 1 pt thus giving you access to all of them.
@@julianmhuactually most of the core manifestations come in one big box. they have been divided into these lores just by design in this edition. there is no morbid conjuration box set i. e.. 12 of the manifestations come in the malign sorcery box. so easy to shuffle into new more balanced groups.
I like the manifestations, they are fun and flavorful. I would be sad to see them gone. A way to not make wizards mandatory is to give the option during list building to forego manifestation lore and receive 1 CP each battle round. Then both options would be powerful.
I do very much like the idea of only allowing manifestations to be summoning once. I could also see an argument for increasing the cast value on each attempt.
First I’d like to say great video! I really like the conversation piece of actually talking about it and seeing how people feel about the spells. I’m new to AOS and am coming from 40K. Over all I feel like armies that are good at magic do have an advantage with endless spells which really blows for my poor maggotkin 😅. At the same time I’m really happy for players that quite enjoy the magic phase and get a lot out of it. I think manifestations happening once is a good solution, but I also think if we made them +1 harder to cast every time they come back would be pretty cool as well! Thanks for the great content I really enjoyed the video!
- split the stronger lores up so you can have 1 incarnate, 2 good manifestations (say purple sun & maelstrom?) or 3 ordinary or faction ones, but no 4s - if you kill it it stays dead (you put an axe through it, you earned it), if you banish it then sure they can summon it again - maybe let wizards heal damaged manifestations, give them something to do with their spare casts, either that or maintaining a manifestation costs a cast slot - make it so manifestations can’t approach within 6” of a place of power controlled by your opponent or similar, or maybe even an objective, representing you warding it off your vital points with magic nexus stuff idk
A manifestation points pool for each army would be cool, say an army starts with 20 of these points. Then use the casting value of manifestation as its points value too, so if an 8 is required to summon the purple sun, you deduct 8 off of your 20 points.
Removing them would suck, I love the idea of cool strong magic going off, and having a model to show it. Possible other solution: Get rid of generic spells have each army have their own spells that are balanced around the army, make them easier/harder to cast depending on the army, give an option to summon manifestations when you have no wizards like the option in 3rd to unbind a spell if you didn't have a wizard.
This doesn't matter much to vetereans, but telling a new player they have to shell out for a huge box of endless spells as well as faction terrain before they even bother with the actual toy soldiers, is a pretty stupid idea.
New to AoS with 4th edition, coming in from 40k. Also the channel has been my gateway in so thanks for that 😅. Listening to faction reviews straight away it just sounded like all these things are like easy mode. They sound like a ton of fun and I look forward to fielding them so I Def don't want them to go away. 1. Keep them free, primarily I want to field as many units as possible, if there's less on the table because I'm bringing spells and enhancements I'm having less fun. 2. They sound far too easy to get on the board. Make them high risk high reward. Difficult to cast either through higher rolls required or high chance of backlash to caster or a failed cast shuts down your magic for rest of turn. 3. Make them each a 1 cast per battle, only summonable in your turn, but to give you a chance to actually get use them maybe make them a bit more survivable??
If they make is so manifestations can't be resummoned they'd have to take away the ability to banish. Otherwise manifestations would be near worthless since the opponent can just take them off the field without any counter play to that. You'd be wasting a spell cast for something more reliable. IMO they are just likely to try giving them a points cost. Or an opportunity cost if you don't take the manifestations you can have an anti-manifestation lore or other neutral spell lore in addition.
I play gitz and I feel their faction manifestations should be the benchmark. Fun, flavorful, ok melee profiles, easy to kill. From what I've seen in my few games it's the generic ones that have issues. Gravetide is just straight up a better unit than any of my actual units lol (I don't play trolls)
I guess almost all manifestations represent death, as they got released (barring Krondspine) during AoS2, which had a very death heavy emphasis. That being said, I think manifestations can bring more pro's to the table than cons. The problem is that a lot of these cons are pretty harsh (mandatory is a great point) and cause some feelbads when summoned in the opponent's turn. I would start by removing that option. I would also reward players who do not select a manifestation lore (perhaps with a new command ability that makes banish an auto-pass and performable by your general) to make the manifestations (and wizards) feel less mandatory?
They should have really only existed for 2nd edition in my honest opinion. We have factions out now (just under half) that still don't have their own endless spells (or even terrain) so it just feels poorly introduced as we go further on into new editions. Throughout the editions I've only ever really used the same endless spells too I've never felt the need to 70% of them. Purple sun, cogs, shackles, geminids. They've all been relevant since they were first around, where as the others don't really have that going for them.
One of the most OP things about them currently is there is no negative to recasting. You can just get them all down turn 1 with no punishment. But if they added +1 to the value needed to cast each time, you would hesitate.
One solution for continuous recasting is the casting roll costs 1 more for each subsequent cast. It dies once, +1 to the cast requirement. Second time, +2,.etc. I also like the -1 for each manifestation you control on the table.
I think just having a cost for each group of lore will bring a bit more list building, like maybe 150 pts for morbid conjurations, and other lores cheaper /more expensive accordingly. Also maybe add +1 to the difficulty of casting it each time u resummon?
Great video Rob! Really good, thank you for opening up the conversation. Personally I do think that making them as a lore is a pro. Having choice of 3-4 different tools (that should be cheap, not free) is fun And they're better than the last edition. I would also say that Gravetide looks nice, I don't find it ugly, shards are good looking models despite being plain, horrorghast and Pendulum are very nice, top 5 for looks, cogs is nice if not a bit boring, same with Geminids, not ugly but mid at best. My personal opinion on the fix is 3 parts. 1. Having the ability to pick a manifestation lore should be baked into the underspend mechanic. This does alot. It effectively means they cost 50 points. It's also a choice point. When you underspend (in my new example) you'd have the choice of either an additional command point round 1, or bringing an additional casting lore. This also means that magic heavy armies that want them, can't also gain the command point. So the choice is on the player in list building. It also means that armies that function without magic/prayers have the choice to underspend and gain a command point. It also means that the inclusion rate will go down. So lots of positives. 2. They should be once per game use. That I 100% agree. You can attempt to cast them multiple times, but once it's been put out, that's it. 1 use. 3. This means though that they need to not be as easy to kill. They should probably all have a 5+ ward. And some of them should go up in health.
Great video Rob, sincerity is your jam. IMO having them summoned once per game would be the way to go. To me that feels like other things already put in the game like "once per battle" abilities which add a tactical depth to the game. 'When should I summon this manifestation?" becomes another mini game with less feel bad IMO. The other reason I vote for this is we have to be honest with ourselves and remember it's GW and they will most likely not be taking the models away and I don't think they want to add point values to them. To me this is giving a bit of what we want to see out of the game and still giving GW our money. I don't like giving them money but I do like giving them money, know what I mean? :)
Couple of ways to fix them I think might work, each wizard can only be bound to 1 manifestation so if you want 4 on the table you need 4 wizards, maybe when a manifestation id killed or banished the bound wizard takes d3 mortals. Maybe roll a d6 each turn for each manifestation and in a 4+ its banished
I think there definitely needs to be clarifications on how they work/interact with the rules, points, etc. I think making them cost points could absolutely work as it has in the past, but I also really like the idea of them only being able to be summoned once per game. I think that creates a skill set for the players so that way they are strategically planning out when they are going to actually manifest these spells and have them interact with the game more deeply. It adds another layer of tactical decision making if you're deciding to summon X on this turn to try and do Y etc.
Im on the side of liking meta WITH free Endless Spells. My biggest disagree with most cons is -is not a Unit, but just glorified Spell Token. There is many spells that leave effect on unit, or terrain. Is it much different "your unit will take 2 mortal damage every turn", from "there is a manifestation attacking you every turn, but you can either fight it back or banish". Instead of "teleporting 3 units, away", I cast magical bridge that my units can use, but you can just attack it to destroy or banish. What I do agree that wizzards became more powerful and it's not reflected in THEIR points. That's why my suggestion are (pick one or many at once): - Increase point's for wizzards - spells should be free - Make Endless spell Reduce Wizzard power level for the duration - wizzard can not go below 0, more powerful Endless Spells take more power and require more powerful wizzards (like make Sun require Wizzard(2) and it takes away his entire power for the duration) - Make wizard "focus" their power on Endless Spells. When Wizzard summon Endless Spell and for duration can not summon more Endless Spells and can not run, charge, attack or shoot. If spell is destroyed by shooting or melee attacks make wizzard Stunned (whatever that would mean).
As someone who is getting into AoS 4.0 from being a highly competitive 40K player - endless spells being so accessible is the thing that really sold me on playing AoS 4.0 for the first game and now I’m hooked. It’s just so freaking sweet to have a model that represents the cool magic in this world. I really hated (from a flavor standpoint) that 40K got rid of the psychic phase. AoS went the exact opposite direction. I hope they don’t get rid of manifestations.
Great video Rob. I agree with all your Solution options and felt compelled to throw another few options into the mix. One manifestation per caster. Having Manifestations causing D3 mortal damage to their caster if removed by an ability with the "Banish" keyword; or D3+3 mortal damage to the caster if killed/removed by some other non-banish manifestation means. Noting that I'd also seek to clarify that rules like Archaon's 3 Headed Titan Spell-Eater thingy has the "Banish" keyword. So that would do D3 mortal damage via whatever this made up rule is being called and then another D3 on a 2+ via the Spell-Eater thingy. Manifestations are removed from play if their caster is removed from play. But in truth, I feel like the best option/solution is to just remove them for now or just make them cost points like they did in 3rd.
while we defo gotte wait for some more data before we start to balance things. especially current points of none magi armies or very limited casting vs heavy cast armies. perhaps command points can be used for manifestations instead. like if you want to cast a manifestation beyond the first time it's summoned you got to spend 1 cp for it. this at least makes it less of an auto choice if you have plenty of casting.
As a Sons of Behemat player I'm possibly a little weensy bit biased but I'm inclined to agree with your take. Ultimately they made a big show out of how modular the 4e ruleset is and if this one module is messing stuff up then change the official competitive rules to not include the Manifestation module. Magic would just go back to screaming "lightning bolt" at your opponent as loud as you can, idk ive never competed, I assume that what you do.
I think the correct way to do this, if it at all, is ensure that every army has their own manifestations, and restrict that army to just being able to take them. It makes balance considerably easier and also helps with some of the clashing aesthetics that currently occur.
Here are the ideas I've had (and seen) since I've noticed all the buzz around Manifestations: Each wizard can only bind to 1 manifestation, so in order to cast 4 you need 4 different wizard units. More regiments/higher drops. Points tax on wizards based on power level and bonus to casting. Cannot cast summon spells on enemy hero phase using the command (mentioned in Rob's list as well) Follows the "Replacement Unit" rules, aka can only be resummoned once after being destroyed or banished. Also Rob, what are your thoughts on Hexwraiths, Spider Riders and Evocators having control 2 with only 2-3 health each. Do you think it was a deliberate design choice or a typo when making their warscrolls?
I saw a guy convert his Cogs by cutting them apart and gluing them back together into a three dimensional configuration, rather than the stock flat two dimensional style. I liked using Lifeswarm on my sacrificial ungors for my herdstone...called that unit "the eternally tormented" because they get sacrificed then brought back (course that was what 2nd edition?)
I agree, summoned once per game or just get rid. Perhaps a points cost may work, but would you pay per Manifestation or for the lore and then they would have to be subject to points changes. Points just seem too complicated; they would have to point them to account for the armies they work for best - the Sloggoth factor. I only have Purple Sun left to build and paint ( left to last for a reason ) from Malign Sorcery, but I wouldn't complain if they went away. They can become terrain pieces or embellish existing terrain pieces. They shouldn't take the role of units or act as blocking pieces.
A quick fix to level the board between lists with manifestations vs lists without spellcasters vs lists without manifestation but with spellcasters is to add a points tax: Let's assume summoning a manifestation is worth 100 pts, then if the list includes a manifestation lore, then all your spellcasters cost 100 pts more per power level (which is roughly equivalent to the potential to summon manifestations). This tax could be adjusted per lore to balance them against each other. Regarding the look of the models, I agree that most of them are meeeh, but there are some exceptions. DoK faction manifestations are, imo, very good looking (plus the aesthetic obviously fit). The gnawing jaws is nice (and fit a destruction army). The purple sun looks exactly like my cat's toy which looks like a coronavirus, so at least it brings someone (my cat) to the table. BTW, I think GW didn't anticipate the current issue because they wanted to introduce the "choose a magic lore per army instead of choose a spell per wizard" concept. Which is, for me, a very welcome change. And then they just introduce the same concept with manifestations, were probably too busy playing Spearhead and didn't have the time to play test the manifestations. The current manifestation mess is so obvious and as we have see, even GW staff doesn't understand their rules... I can't help but have to assume it wasn't field tested.
I think increasing the summon cost on turn 1 by 2-3 would be a good solution. The primary balancing cost for them is that you are using up a spell or chant. But in turn 1, many if not most spells and prayers are either out of range or not particularly effective. On turn one you can summon what you want effectively without paying the cost for it.
My vote is for the single summon per manifestation per game, would be an easy bolt on fix and potentially allow for them to reduce some of the rules baggage surrounding them (even if it makes them a little stronger on the table for that single instance).
I’ve liked the idea of a tax for resummons, perhaps increasing the summoning requirement by 1, maybe 2 each time it’s summoned. Or perhaps you can’t summon the same one twice in a row? I’m not sure how much that will address the issue or just make more rules. Maybe a degrading stat line that makes the manifestation weak with each summon.
My swampboggler shaman with the staff and +1 attack felt very spicy for the points, banging out the burning head. Gnashing jaws or one of the spells from quite a good spell lore.
They need a point cost and once per game, also no bs opponents turn summoning either. I do like the idea of manifestations. I have such a cool Cities of Sigmar wizard list idea that I would love to do, but will have to see if it's possible after the adjustments hit.
In terms of solutions, I think they baked a pretty good solution right into the design as is. They didn’t print the manifestation lores in the core rules. I think that was an intentional and wise choice. It allows them to reorganize the lores for balance. For example, you might divide morbid conjuration into 2 separate lores. Pair purple sun with maelstrom and gravetide with shackles or something. Or trade spells within the lores. Substitute gravetide for lauchon the soulseeker. Alternatively, maybe we do away with lores and you get to bring one endless spell or invocation for each wizard/priest up to a maximum of four. You could even place limits in the profiles section that say X spell cannot be included with Y spell. Maybe you pick a manifestation lore and have to select from spells within that lore. As for the incarnate… just toss it into legends and pretend it never existed. I don’t think we need to throw the baby out with the bath water. The system needs work… but I think it’s salvageable.
I would have loved it if manifestations had kept their points costs from previous editions. The way that the lores are set up now however, it will be really awkward to bring back points for them in the current edition. Therefore, I would prefer the following changes: A) Summoning spells and prayers can't be used with Magical Intervention. B) Wizards and priests suffer -1 to summoning for each friendly manifestation that is already on the battlefield.
I agree with your cons Rob and I think it is a big challenge for less magical armies like Ironjawz to keep up playing a game against Soulblight Gravelords.
I like the idea that they can only be summoned once per game. Something else I think could work is if manifestations are tied to a specific caster. Like, you declare a wizard as the manifestation guy and when it dies, boom, no more manifestations.
Two more solutions: Only one manifestation per army allowed on the table top at any one time… the lore behind it is “maintaining a manifestations presence requires an ongoing focus from the casting wizards/army, and therefore only one can be maintained at any one time. OR Just raise their casting value so that they are a real risk to attempt… minimum casting value an 7, max 11.
I really like the added fantasy Manifestations add to the setting, and I think they all look OK or better. I get what you are going for with more things costing points, but GW is trying to sell their main titles to the widest market, which often means lowest common denominator, so I'm not sure they will move away from their current direction of simplified army building. Unfortunately, not all games appeal to all people, and maybe people who want a deeper skill expression in their list building should play a game other than AoS. Luckily we live in golden age of miniature gaming, so there are a ton of other options.
Interesting convo, Rob. Im definitely not a competative player so perhaps offer a different perapective to where youre getting your data on Manifestations from tournaments: the new edition and manies have given me a new way to play an army ive collected for decades, therefore theyre automatically good. I can afford a screen and chaff unit now whilst playing the army the way I want to without worrying too much about expensive unit fragility
i think a lot of these concerns are very well founded. I really like the idea of having models representing magic on the battlefield. It would be kind of neat to integrate them into the spell lores rather than have them as a separate entity. ALSO really like the idea that they are better tied to the realms. at bare minimum that would be better
I haven't tried 4th yet, so I can't comment on how good or bad they are. But , If they are really a problem, I think the best solution I can think of is the non recursion one mixed with an independent system of points and no "Lores". Instead of being free, you could have like 200 extra points to pick manifestations with a maximum of 4. Incarnate 200pts. Big impact ones like Gnashing Jaws or the Sun may be in the 125-175 range, medium impact ones maybe 50-100 and the little ones 25 or so. This would promote more choice, more flavour and, also, alleviate the repetition problem. It would also fix another issue that hasn't been mentioned. Faction manifestations. They are the most flavourful ones but, right now, most of them are, supposedly, not worth it. So you end up picking the Morbid Lore and losing all those flavourful ones. You'd fix that too. Also, as other comments said, there needs to be a compensation for armies not taking manifestations at all so you can fix the mandatory and wizard-heavy-list trend. For the other solutions mentioned on the video, just assigning them points brings two problems two my mind: either you balance all 25 armie's points with manifestations in mind(which I think GW would not be on board and, even if they did, would bring more rippling problems to the table), or we'll get back to 3rd, when you'd only see one or two in all the edition. Which, clearly, is not what GW wants. Removing them is more about GW already having the models and wanting to sell them than the viability of the solution. Even if it's good, it's not gonna happen. And summoning in enemy turn may be an enhancement, but I don't see it as a solution for many of the cons mentioned. Great video as always Rob
I agree with you.. they are a bit much at this point. I run Mega G's usually with out magic ( my own issues here). I have run them but and the ability to kill them, they come back, kill them again ( rinse and repeat) is a bit much, especially for FREE !!! like the Idea of a combo of what you said, give them a cost, no casting in your opponents turn and 1 time per spell per game...
Each time an enemy endless spell is destroyed, you gain Manifestation Points equal to the casting value of the endless spell. In the movement phase, you can spend X Manifestation Points to return 1/2 a destroyed unit or Y Manifestation Points to return an entire destroyed unit Lets people play with endless spells if they like them, while also making use of wizards less mandatory. Just need to get the X and Y numbers in the right ballpark
Right. So. My thoughts so far - casting in the enemy turn seems like a major No-No here. Fluffwise, Manifestations seem like they should take more effort to bring forth, not be the equivalent of a quick counterspell, so player turn only for them makes sense tbh. Also, the idea of Level Locking them - it'd take maybe some balancing to work each Manifestation out to a rough Power Level of 1, 2 or 3 and....here's the catcher, they can only be cast by a Wizard/Priest(X) who matches their power level. So yeah, the big casters throw out the BIG spells. They pay the points to do just that. But it also stops Level 1 wizard spam to mass yeet the suckers out.
It went t from Endless spells costing points and optional extras in 1.5e. too endless spells, I also remember something about your opponent could potentially hijack your spell and control it against you to then being mandatory in 4.0. I get they want to lean into the "high fantasy" and nothing screams high fantasy like spells smashing into each other but there's no trade off of taking them at the moment. Every army has a massive advantage if they have more wizards. (Nagash can summon a whole manifestation lore, A WHOLE LORE in one round for example)
A WHOLE LORE is three spells dude, one frog or two goblins can pull that off in a turn. And then until a manifestation is killed to be resummoned they're just sitting on their thumbs trying to not get roped into a melee and maybe casting one of the seven dozen variations of D3 mortals.
So I think "only cast once a game" could be a bit much for something you have to spend a cast on to get out and that is easier to remove than a typical unit (non squishy unit anyways), but I think a cool idea that could also be lore friendly would be a Mechanic similar to commanders in mtg: every time you re-summon one that was removed from play, you add one to the casting value you need in order to get a successful cast. Because I imagine pulling a permanent manifestation of magic into the world could be a bit draining for a wizard, and they're stuck in battle so obviously not taking time to rest and recuperate.
I understand why lorewise they can be summoned multiple times. My suggestion is to make the casting target past the first time higher by 1 or 2. In addition idk if this is already a thing if the hero that summoned them dies the manifestation just goes away. 1000% they should not be able to be cast in the opponents turn. A big thing is that well they are just so much better then most spells in the game period maybe the normal spells need a little bit of a buff if these endless spells dont get point costs. Idk if casters are pointed properly for being so powerful as idk all the point values of them.
I know this isnt the best place but my dad booked a ticket for bootcamp 4 but we are not going to be able to make it so we have been trying to contact TSN arena to either refund us or change our ticket to bootcamp 5 but they have not responded. I know you have been organising these tournaments with them so wanted to ask if you would be able to do anything about our situation.
I think not summoning in the enemy phases and some points would be great, saying that I didn't use them before that much, and now have to buy endless spells for 3 armies plus the main ones....doesn't feel great from my wallets POV lol. Great video as always Rob!!! Keep up the excellent work!!. ...btw are you going to do a stormcast faction focus? Or is it already out I didn't see it. Love all those faction focuses you have done so far.
Well said. I wish I could offer a solution. I play Seraphon, and it feels just as oppressive in the games I've played, most of which my opponent took only 1 wizard to. It quickly started snowballing out of their control of they didn't get their Krondspine out early or I've killed their wizard already. I just wish they'd balanced the power of the lores better. I like the idea, but the execution needs a lot of tweaking.
If new players had easy access to them it would be more fair. Right now I can't find a box for less than twice retail. Creates a system of haves and have nots.
I agree with all the issues and they need to be toned down. The one thing I do like about them though, is that as someone who loves wizards in video games etc, this makes magic feel strrong. Usually a wizard is just a buff piece unless it's a god tier (nagash etc) kind of wizard. I admit that this is entierly a narative benefit and is only cool for my own theatre of the mind though, so I understand from a competitive standpoint they gotta be changed. :)
100% agree that replacing the current Generic Endless Spells with Realm-specific lores would be ace - and we could go back to the time where you chose which realm your army is from and have bonuses (like artefacts) and drawbacks to go toward balancing the manifestation lores. That said, I love that they're free - they are harder to balance, but harder doesn't mean impossible - and I love it because I think they add a very fun and cinematic element to the game. I am a bit irked by their grouping into lores, but that's only because I bought the few generic Endless Spells that appealed to me in 2nd edition, which means I now have bits of a multiple generic lores but no complete ones.
If something goes from expensive, optional choices to free, it needs to reflect that in the new edition. A 120pts model that can stand back and summon the near-exact manifestation from last edition at the cost of 60pts, should reflect that in a points hike. I don't say it has to be exactly 60 points like it did before.. But say, the wizard now costs 150, 160 maybe. If the Gravetide can be cast over and over again to prevent a whole flank an entire game, it should reflect that.
@@91CEO - you get no disagreement from me on any of those points. I realize they're not balanced, but it's also possible to balance them even without charging points. It's tricky, sure, but it certainly can be done (using what you described, reducing the effectiveness of the most egregiously good ones, etc.).
Agree on pretty much everything except having artifacts and traits cost points. 40K went to points for those and it strips so much flavor from the game. I really think the game should go to an equipment system like kill team, you get some amount of fun bucks separate from points that you spend pregame on a handful of different upgrades. It adds so much flavor to armies
Mild ideas: Limit one active manifestation at a time (reduces need for multiple wizards in your army) Every time you manifest creates a stacking penalty to your cast roll for future manifestations (reduce recursion) Must take your faction manifestation lore if you have one (keeps your manifestations in line with your army instead of everyone using the best universal option) Only get a manifestation lore OR a spell lore, not both (adds a "cost" without getting points involved) WILD idea: Universal manifestation lores are removed from being a player option entirely. Instead, if both players agree to it, randomly determine a universal manifestation lore when setting up the battlefield terrain. Players alternate placing all manifestations from that lore on the battlefield before placing any units from their armies (insert additional placement guidelines here as needed). The manifestations are controlled by the underdog - if there is no underdog then they are controlled by whoever is going second in the round (this probably needs some adjusting as well, but the general idea is that the manifestations are "neutral" and interact with the underdog mechanic to help the losing player get back in the fight). The manifestations can be banished/attacked by either player as normal, and once destroyed they are gone for the rest of the game (or maybe the controlling player can roll to see if they come back as per the normal manifestation rules, but they don't need any wizards to do it. The rolls represent the battlefield itself attempting to re-manifest the effects, and the non-controlling player can attempt to counter with an unbind attempt as normal)
Imagine making me pay 60 points for a chaos spawn of Tzeentch but giving me gravetide for free.
You can just bring lore of fate
They are not free. They have a big opportunity cost
@@Kazerole they're still factually free and very strong for being free. If it's always a good option, cost opportunity doesn't mean anything.
@@nigeltownley7472 I don’t know what to answer to that 😅. Opportunity cost means you have a choice to make. When I need to charge it’s always better to cast a charge bonus than a gravetide or something
@@Kazerolekind of? But really they are free, functionally
in my opinion the best way to balance manifestation would be that for each manifestation a wizard cast his wizard level is reduced by one for as long as the manifestation is on the table. doing so will make it easier to balance manifestation around the value point of a wizard 1 and make it so that you technicly replace your wizard with the manifestation. i think it would make lot of sens also in a lore perspective since maintaining the manifestation would be a toll on the caster.
Not such a bad idea. They could be required to make a manifestation check to keep it where it is.. or it automatically vanishes (but allows them for resummoning)
Thematically, I think it would be wicked if the wizard who casts the manifestation is linked to it by magic so if it gets destroyed then the caster takes X mortal wounds, or while a manifestation is active, the caster effectively goes down 1 wizard level, as they're using concentration to maintain the manifestation instead of being free to yeet other spells/unbinds around.
Actual consequences to spamming gravetide nice.
This doesn't address the issue of balance between the lores. You'll still only see the same 2 lores. They HAVE to cost points
@@Sothas Oh yeah, of course that too. It should have cost and risk both
I completely agree with everything you said Rob, with two additions:
1) From a list building perspective, the necessity to have multiple cast attempts is painful; we should not be heavily incentivised to bring wizards/priests just to gain access to this insane power advantage.
2) It is absolutely BONKERS that we are bringing wizards for the specific cast attempt at summoning endless spells, instead of using our own spell lore and warscroll spells. The longer I think about this, the more it proves just how overpowered they are. SHEESH.
I just hope they think about this, I know, and not just slap on points and be done with it. That's only going to stop people from playing them again. I love them personally as they are a very different way to show how damn dangerous magic is, heh. I do like the once per battle once summoned idea and I think that simple rule would set things right. The "Endless" spell for me is that they stay on the table until banished or destroyed, not how many times you can cast it after all. Thanks again, Rob!
Perhaps having wizards need to maintain channeling to keep the manifestations on the board, as in a lvl 1 wizard cannot cast any other spells while they maintain the manifestation they have on the board .Of course multilevel casters can maintain multiple manifestations or still cast additional spells while maintaining one(or more).If I remember correctly this is similar to the way they worked when originally released.
Right, like if a wizard summons a manifestation their power level is reduced by 1 until that manifestation is removed. They can only have one summoned at a time per wizard.
this one is my favorite idea
This would work the best for balancing.
Have to change arachnacauldron.
Cool idea
I would say one way to help balance the power of a manifestation is that each one can only be summoned once per battle. That way if the Purple Sun gets killed by the plucky steelhelms it won’t be back half a turn later. I’d also add a simple spell to all manifestation lores so in the event all the big spells have been used you don’t just have a wizard sitting against a rock drinking Gatorade because they are spent.
Probably the most reasonable change until we have better stats, but I would think that another spell isn't needed, surely armies with wizards have access to their regular lores anyway right?
We took away free summoning for a lot of good reasons , but then we made new summoning for a selected group of armies, with all the old problems, but also a lot of new one. ❤ GW
They took away summoning because people wouldn't know what models they would need to bring to a game, that doesn't apply to manifestations. You pick the lore and then you know exactly what options you have to summon.
They clearly didn't do it to reduce units coming back because they increased recursion a lot.
I'm absolutely certain we'll see a nerf to manifestations but I kind of hope they don't just make them cost points again. There are lots of other ways to balance them. They could play with casting and vanish values. I get that the 6+ ward is meant to represent their magical nature but I think it should be removed. I like to see some compensation for armies that don't choose a manifestation lore. Being able to choose an extra artefact on heroic trait would be nice. I then throw in the change that you can't summon them more than once or with a counter spell. That would reign them in quite a bit. I'd also increase the casting value of all the morbid conjurations and the incarnate by one.
Armies with no access to it should just be cheaper. KO has no access to any of it and their damage is already lacking. Limiting it to one per phase also means they don't get spammed in a single hero phase for armies that bring a lot of wizards
Points are required to balance them because of the garbage balance between all the lores, especially when considering faction lores. It's the only way.
With only having limited spells in your spell lore I think manifestations are needed for 3 and 4 cast wizards.
One solution is to increase summoning difficulty for each recursion, but I also quite like the idea of pointing up manifestation (first summon free/2 summons=X points/Up to 3 summons=XX points) and/or limiting the number of recursions. Maybe make it so that a manifestation can only achieve recursion if it was banished, thereby increasing interaction decisions for opposing players to balance risk/reward and put it in the hands of the players.
Would also be super cool to have some Grand Alliance themed manifestations; Fist of Gork smashing units, Foot of Behemet kicking objectives, Hammer of Sigmar comet striking, etc.
I'm a big fan of limiting manifestation either by X per 1000 points, or by making a manifestation cost command points to summon. Both will ensure both players have a similar amount of manifestation power, actively lower the spam, yet still allow for the summoning of multiple manifestations (albeit with a drawback)
Ooo I like this, especially the command point cost! I'd also suggest a "One shot" for every spell, I don't think it's very fun when my opponent kicks my shyish reaper off the board then all of a sudden, I just resummon it next heros phase.
There does need to be some sort of soft limit.
CP cost would outright kill them
@@Kazerole I disagree, some of them are very powerful. To spend 1cp to in effect get another unit on the board, that has a reasonable save, a 6+ ward and can last multiple turns seems like a better use of a cp than an all out attack giving you +1 to hit for a phase
Suggested this last night in my game with my mate. They're too strong. CP cost, and once they're banished, that's it for that manifestation for the game to bring them in line. I don't think points are the answer because they would be prohibitively expensive for what they do
@@Shadowknightneo do you mean instead of the cast ? Just a CP ?
AoA and AoD aren’t automatic like they used to. But they are more impactful. That said, movement commands are just so efficient in this edition I can’t see a manifestation being more useful.
As a LRL player: Endless Spells are soooo powerful, and GW decided to create Scinari Calligrave. It's bonkers.
Biggest con… assembling the Purple Sun. I still have PTSD.
I’m happy it’s not just me
@@daswookie79 I’ve never used so much Green Stuff in my life…
@@thewellandvalley2103 The green stuff cost more than the model at some point 😂
Lol I'm putting it on its base right now, just done with it. I've assembled Spirit Hosts, but the Purple Sun comes second
I just cut the internal lattice out and it was easier to assemble.
It's almost like GW had a ton of these in their warehouse and needed to shift them somehow...
Some sort of benefit if you don't take a Manifestation lore, like 1CP per round.
"That's how other units work in Age of Sigmar: You kill them and they die."
Imho give every army their own manifestations, axe the generics ones. This gives you more of the army you already love and balancing is easier.
As is, its hard to balance them because they are stronger in some armies then others.
Also dead is dead seems like a good change to make.
Could make it so for each manifestation you have on the board, a casting roll for an additional manifestation is at -1 to cast. So it gets more difficult but not impossible to flood the board.
That's actually a really good idea
Played against DoT for my first game (as CoS) & it felt like I was playing down points, as the later turns he had 2-4 ES's fighting me as magical proxies.
& not being able to take Wizards or Priests as regimental bonus heroes/without increasing my drops... left me at a tactical disadvantage.
I'd like to see them not be re-summonable, & only ones that need to be set-up in advance (like Lauchon) should be summonable during the opponent's turn.
It would be nice if there was an opportunity cost to taking them, like you get a free Cmd. Pt. every round if you go without.
Also all the tournament gamers are taking the same manifestation lore: Morbid Conjurations. Or maybe the Krondspine Inc. if they can only get a single cast/power level in their list
They should treat manifestations as they do prayer points. The higher the summoning points you save up the better the manifestation you can summon.
Before watching, if GW wants to keep manifestations lore free the following changes should help fix it imo:
- Magical intervention won't allow you to summon a manifestation.
- Manifestations that can move shouldn't be allowed into combat ranges (except charging ).
- If you dont take a manifestation lore you get 1 extra CP per battle round. ( So non wizard lists won't be punished but actually has benefit )
- Limit 1 summon per wizard, if they don't succeed a summon they can attempt another.
You can during Magical intervention ? wow
I quite like the 1 extra CP per round for armies that don't use them. Or something similar.
Brilliant suggestion
I wouldn't bet on hero traits getting points costs. GW seems to move in the opposite direction. Compare to 40k which did have points upgrades like that but removed all of them with the latest edition launch.
What if they cost CP to summon, so you're spending in game recourses and giving you more tactical decisions?
Like you have to succeed the casting roll and spend a cp, then they'd also cost two cp to cast in your opponents turn.
CP is a renewable resource. I still dont think thats enough. Plus, the balance between them all is really bad. You'll still only see the same like 2 lores every game. The only option is to give them points.
I’m leaning towards having them be a once per game summon but I’m curious what GW ends up deciding and how the community responds. Thanks for the video!
- 1 controlled Manifestation per Wizard
- Can not Summon Manifestation with Counter Spell command ability
- Move Shackles out of Morbid to weaker lore
Fixed
Doesn't resolve the infinite wounds problem, which if you have 3 wizards is a huge issue. Manifestations should not be resummonable if destroyed by shooting/combat/spell ability (other than banish) but can be if banished, which also would not require a major overhaul to rules as they stand currently. 100% agree on the 1 active manifestation per wizard.
Gravetide would still be stronger than the jaws, which is not okay.
1 Manifestation per wizard would absolutely ruin multi cast wizards. Would hate to see that happen personally.
Can't really shuffle the spells because they come out in boxed sets. The lores will always match the sprues. Maybe making people get 3 manifestation points from their lore, and having spells cost different amount of points (like Graveytide would be 3, Shackles 2, etc) would create an incentive to pick based on variety or power within their lore. This could also help weaker lores by making them cost only 1 pt thus giving you access to all of them.
@@julianmhuactually most of the core manifestations come in one big box. they have been divided into these lores just by design in this edition. there is no morbid conjuration box set i. e.. 12 of the manifestations come in the malign sorcery box. so easy to shuffle into new more balanced groups.
I like the manifestations, they are fun and flavorful. I would be sad to see them gone.
A way to not make wizards mandatory is to give the option during list building to forego manifestation lore and receive 1 CP each battle round. Then both options would be powerful.
I do very much like the idea of only allowing manifestations to be summoning once. I could also see an argument for increasing the cast value on each attempt.
First I’d like to say great video! I really like the conversation piece of actually talking about it and seeing how people feel about the spells. I’m new to AOS and am coming from 40K. Over all I feel like armies that are good at magic do have an advantage with endless spells which really blows for my poor maggotkin 😅. At the same time I’m really happy for players that quite enjoy the magic phase and get a lot out of it. I think manifestations happening once is a good solution, but I also think if we made them +1 harder to cast every time they come back would be pretty cool as well! Thanks for the great content I really enjoyed the video!
Bring back wizards can only control/summon 1, would bring a compromise to trying low drop lists + stop/limit spam.
- split the stronger lores up so you can have 1 incarnate, 2 good manifestations (say purple sun & maelstrom?) or 3 ordinary or faction ones, but no 4s
- if you kill it it stays dead (you put an axe through it, you earned it), if you banish it then sure they can summon it again
- maybe let wizards heal damaged manifestations, give them something to do with their spare casts, either that or maintaining a manifestation costs a cast slot
- make it so manifestations can’t approach within 6” of a place of power controlled by your opponent or similar, or maybe even an objective, representing you warding it off your vital points with magic nexus stuff idk
A manifestation points pool for each army would be cool, say an army starts with 20 of these points. Then use the casting value of manifestation as its points value too, so if an 8 is required to summon the purple sun, you deduct 8 off of your 20 points.
Removing them would suck, I love the idea of cool strong magic going off, and having a model to show it. Possible other solution: Get rid of generic spells have each army have their own spells that are balanced around the army, make them easier/harder to cast depending on the army, give an option to summon manifestations when you have no wizards like the option in 3rd to unbind a spell if you didn't have a wizard.
This doesn't matter much to vetereans, but telling a new player they have to shell out for a huge box of endless spells as well as faction terrain before they even bother with the actual toy soldiers, is a pretty stupid idea.
That Stormcast hero with anti-manifestation tech is Stonks right now then
Single summon for manifestations (free things) makes sense given how impactful they can be
New to AoS with 4th edition, coming in from 40k. Also the channel has been my gateway in so thanks for that 😅.
Listening to faction reviews straight away it just sounded like all these things are like easy mode. They sound like a ton of fun and I look forward to fielding them so I Def don't want them to go away.
1. Keep them free, primarily I want to field as many units as possible, if there's less on the table because I'm bringing spells and enhancements I'm having less fun.
2. They sound far too easy to get on the board. Make them high risk high reward. Difficult to cast either through higher rolls required or high chance of backlash to caster or a failed cast shuts down your magic for rest of turn.
3. Make them each a 1 cast per battle, only summonable in your turn, but to give you a chance to actually get use them maybe make them a bit more survivable??
If they make is so manifestations can't be resummoned they'd have to take away the ability to banish. Otherwise manifestations would be near worthless since the opponent can just take them off the field without any counter play to that. You'd be wasting a spell cast for something more reliable. IMO they are just likely to try giving them a points cost. Or an opportunity cost if you don't take the manifestations you can have an anti-manifestation lore or other neutral spell lore in addition.
I didn't know army lists have to include a mandatory Wizard slot
I play gitz and I feel their faction manifestations should be the benchmark. Fun, flavorful, ok melee profiles, easy to kill. From what I've seen in my few games it's the generic ones that have issues. Gravetide is just straight up a better unit than any of my actual units lol (I don't play trolls)
I guess almost all manifestations represent death, as they got released (barring Krondspine) during AoS2, which had a very death heavy emphasis.
That being said, I think manifestations can bring more pro's to the table than cons. The problem is that a lot of these cons are pretty harsh (mandatory is a great point) and cause some feelbads when summoned in the opponent's turn. I would start by removing that option.
I would also reward players who do not select a manifestation lore (perhaps with a new command ability that makes banish an auto-pass and performable by your general) to make the manifestations (and wizards) feel less mandatory?
Agreed, they're mostly death themed because they were brought about by the necroquake 💀
They should have really only existed for 2nd edition in my honest opinion. We have factions out now (just under half) that still don't have their own endless spells (or even terrain) so it just feels poorly introduced as we go further on into new editions.
Throughout the editions I've only ever really used the same endless spells too I've never felt the need to 70% of them. Purple sun, cogs, shackles, geminids. They've all been relevant since they were first around, where as the others don't really have that going for them.
One of the most OP things about them currently is there is no negative to recasting. You can just get them all down turn 1 with no punishment. But if they added +1 to the value needed to cast each time, you would hesitate.
One solution for continuous recasting is the casting roll costs 1 more for each subsequent cast.
It dies once, +1 to the cast requirement.
Second time, +2,.etc.
I also like the -1 for each manifestation you control on the table.
I think just having a cost for each group of lore will bring a bit more list building, like maybe 150 pts for morbid conjurations, and other lores cheaper /more expensive accordingly.
Also maybe add +1 to the difficulty of casting it each time u resummon?
My playgroup have just added a house rule that each manifestation can only be summoned (successfully) once. Once it’s gone, it’s gone.
In my house they are banned altogether lol
Great video Rob! Really good, thank you for opening up the conversation.
Personally I do think that making them as a lore is a pro.
Having choice of 3-4 different tools (that should be cheap, not free) is fun
And they're better than the last edition.
I would also say that Gravetide looks nice, I don't find it ugly, shards are good looking models despite being plain, horrorghast and Pendulum are very nice, top 5 for looks, cogs is nice if not a bit boring, same with Geminids, not ugly but mid at best.
My personal opinion on the fix is 3 parts.
1. Having the ability to pick a manifestation lore should be baked into the underspend mechanic.
This does alot. It effectively means they cost 50 points. It's also a choice point. When you underspend (in my new example) you'd have the choice of either an additional command point round 1, or bringing an additional casting lore. This also means that magic heavy armies that want them, can't also gain the command point. So the choice is on the player in list building. It also means that armies that function without magic/prayers have the choice to underspend and gain a command point. It also means that the inclusion rate will go down. So lots of positives.
2. They should be once per game use. That I 100% agree. You can attempt to cast them multiple times, but once it's been put out, that's it. 1 use.
3. This means though that they need to not be as easy to kill. They should probably all have a 5+ ward. And some of them should go up in health.
Great video Rob, sincerity is your jam. IMO having them summoned once per game would be the way to go. To me that feels like other things already put in the game like "once per battle" abilities which add a tactical depth to the game. 'When should I summon this manifestation?" becomes another mini game with less feel bad IMO. The other reason I vote for this is we have to be honest with ourselves and remember it's GW and they will most likely not be taking the models away and I don't think they want to add point values to them. To me this is giving a bit of what we want to see out of the game and still giving GW our money. I don't like giving them money but I do like giving them money, know what I mean? :)
Couple of ways to fix them I think might work, each wizard can only be bound to 1 manifestation so if you want 4 on the table you need 4 wizards, maybe when a manifestation id killed or banished the bound wizard takes d3 mortals. Maybe roll a d6 each turn for each manifestation and in a 4+ its banished
I really like manifestations, having physical representation of spells is fun
Yep but spells SHOULDN'T be units lol
I think there definitely needs to be clarifications on how they work/interact with the rules, points, etc. I think making them cost points could absolutely work as it has in the past, but I also really like the idea of them only being able to be summoned once per game. I think that creates a skill set for the players so that way they are strategically planning out when they are going to actually manifest these spells and have them interact with the game more deeply. It adds another layer of tactical decision making if you're deciding to summon X on this turn to try and do Y etc.
Im on the side of liking meta WITH free Endless Spells.
My biggest disagree with most cons is -is not a Unit, but just glorified Spell Token.
There is many spells that leave effect on unit, or terrain. Is it much different "your unit will take 2 mortal damage every turn", from "there is a manifestation attacking you every turn, but you can either fight it back or banish". Instead of "teleporting 3 units, away", I cast magical bridge that my units can use, but you can just attack it to destroy or banish.
What I do agree that wizzards became more powerful and it's not reflected in THEIR points. That's why my suggestion are (pick one or many at once):
- Increase point's for wizzards - spells should be free
- Make Endless spell Reduce Wizzard power level for the duration - wizzard can not go below 0, more powerful Endless Spells take more power and require more powerful wizzards (like make Sun require Wizzard(2) and it takes away his entire power for the duration)
- Make wizard "focus" their power on Endless Spells. When Wizzard summon Endless Spell and for duration can not summon more Endless Spells and can not run, charge, attack or shoot. If spell is destroyed by shooting or melee attacks make wizzard Stunned (whatever that would mean).
As someone who is getting into AoS 4.0 from being a highly competitive 40K player - endless spells being so accessible is the thing that really sold me on playing AoS 4.0 for the first game and now I’m hooked.
It’s just so freaking sweet to have a model that represents the cool magic in this world. I really hated (from a flavor standpoint) that 40K got rid of the psychic phase. AoS went the exact opposite direction. I hope they don’t get rid of manifestations.
Great video Rob.
I agree with all your Solution options and felt compelled to throw another few options into the mix.
One manifestation per caster.
Having Manifestations causing D3 mortal damage to their caster if removed by an ability with the "Banish" keyword; or D3+3 mortal damage to the caster if killed/removed by some other non-banish manifestation means. Noting that I'd also seek to clarify that rules like Archaon's 3 Headed Titan Spell-Eater thingy has the "Banish" keyword. So that would do D3 mortal damage via whatever this made up rule is being called and then another D3 on a 2+ via the Spell-Eater thingy.
Manifestations are removed from play if their caster is removed from play.
But in truth, I feel like the best option/solution is to just remove them for now or just make them cost points like they did in 3rd.
while we defo gotte wait for some more data before we start to balance things. especially current points of none magi armies or very limited casting vs heavy cast armies. perhaps command points can be used for manifestations instead. like if you want to cast a manifestation beyond the first time it's summoned you got to spend 1 cp for it. this at least makes it less of an auto choice if you have plenty of casting.
is this rob's first BIG comment?? lets find out
BIG? Hey...Woah... let's calm down... and get some cream
As a Sons of Behemat player I'm possibly a little weensy bit biased but I'm inclined to agree with your take. Ultimately they made a big show out of how modular the 4e ruleset is and if this one module is messing stuff up then change the official competitive rules to not include the Manifestation module. Magic would just go back to screaming "lightning bolt" at your opponent as loud as you can, idk ive never competed, I assume that what you do.
I think the correct way to do this, if it at all, is ensure that every army has their own manifestations, and restrict that army to just being able to take them. It makes balance considerably easier and also helps with some of the clashing aesthetics that currently occur.
Here are the ideas I've had (and seen) since I've noticed all the buzz around Manifestations:
Each wizard can only bind to 1 manifestation, so in order to cast 4 you need 4 different wizard units. More regiments/higher drops.
Points tax on wizards based on power level and bonus to casting.
Cannot cast summon spells on enemy hero phase using the command (mentioned in Rob's list as well)
Follows the "Replacement Unit" rules, aka can only be resummoned once after being destroyed or banished.
Also Rob, what are your thoughts on Hexwraiths, Spider Riders and Evocators having control 2 with only 2-3 health each. Do you think it was a deliberate design choice or a typo when making their warscrolls?
They need to dial then down a bit, but not too much. Like no more summon with Magical Intervantion.
I love the models. Super fun to build. Upsetting I'm having a hard time painting them but it'll be fun to get better.
I saw a guy convert his Cogs by cutting them apart and gluing them back together into a three dimensional configuration, rather than the stock flat two dimensional style.
I liked using Lifeswarm on my sacrificial ungors for my herdstone...called that unit "the eternally tormented" because they get sacrificed then brought back (course that was what 2nd edition?)
I agree, summoned once per game or just get rid. Perhaps a points cost may work, but would you pay per Manifestation or for the lore and then they would have to be subject to points changes. Points just seem too complicated; they would have to point them to account for the armies they work for best - the Sloggoth factor.
I only have Purple Sun left to build and paint ( left to last for a reason ) from Malign Sorcery, but I wouldn't complain if they went away. They can become terrain pieces or embellish existing terrain pieces. They shouldn't take the role of units or act as blocking pieces.
A quick fix to level the board between lists with manifestations vs lists without spellcasters vs lists without manifestation but with spellcasters is to add a points tax:
Let's assume summoning a manifestation is worth 100 pts, then if the list includes a manifestation lore, then all your spellcasters cost 100 pts more per power level (which is roughly equivalent to the potential to summon manifestations). This tax could be adjusted per lore to balance them against each other.
Regarding the look of the models, I agree that most of them are meeeh, but there are some exceptions. DoK faction manifestations are, imo, very good looking (plus the aesthetic obviously fit). The gnawing jaws is nice (and fit a destruction army). The purple sun looks exactly like my cat's toy which looks like a coronavirus, so at least it brings someone (my cat) to the table.
BTW, I think GW didn't anticipate the current issue because they wanted to introduce the "choose a magic lore per army instead of choose a spell per wizard" concept. Which is, for me, a very welcome change. And then they just introduce the same concept with manifestations, were probably too busy playing Spearhead and didn't have the time to play test the manifestations. The current manifestation mess is so obvious and as we have see, even GW staff doesn't understand their rules... I can't help but have to assume it wasn't field tested.
Manifestations are wayyyyy too much right now.
I think increasing the summon cost on turn 1 by 2-3 would be a good solution. The primary balancing cost for them is that you are using up a spell or chant. But in turn 1, many if not most spells and prayers are either out of range or not particularly effective. On turn one you can summon what you want effectively without paying the cost for it.
My vote is for the single summon per manifestation per game, would be an easy bolt on fix and potentially allow for them to reduce some of the rules baggage surrounding them (even if it makes them a little stronger on the table for that single instance).
I’ve liked the idea of a tax for resummons, perhaps increasing the summoning requirement by 1, maybe 2 each time it’s summoned.
Or perhaps you can’t summon the same one twice in a row? I’m not sure how much that will address the issue or just make more rules.
Maybe a degrading stat line that makes the manifestation weak with each summon.
Well presented arguments for both.
Maybe if they just let each army control one at a time I feel like it would be a step in the right direction
My swampboggler shaman with the staff and +1 attack felt very spicy for the points, banging out the burning head. Gnashing jaws or one of the spells from quite a good spell lore.
They need a point cost and once per game, also no bs opponents turn summoning either.
I do like the idea of manifestations.
I have such a cool Cities of Sigmar wizard list idea that I would love to do, but will have to see if it's possible after the adjustments hit.
In terms of solutions, I think they baked a pretty good solution right into the design as is.
They didn’t print the manifestation lores in the core rules. I think that was an intentional and wise choice. It allows them to reorganize the lores for balance. For example, you might divide morbid conjuration into 2 separate lores. Pair purple sun with maelstrom and gravetide with shackles or something. Or trade spells within the lores. Substitute gravetide for lauchon the soulseeker.
Alternatively, maybe we do away with lores and you get to bring one endless spell or invocation for each wizard/priest up to a maximum of four. You could even place limits in the profiles section that say X spell cannot be included with Y spell. Maybe you pick a manifestation lore and have to select from spells within that lore.
As for the incarnate… just toss it into legends and pretend it never existed.
I don’t think we need to throw the baby out with the bath water. The system needs work… but I think it’s salvageable.
some of them could serve as randomly moving hazards determined by rolls in the same way the SOBs timber mechanic works.
Solutions
1- Use the old OBR Soulbound rules
or
2- Each wizard can only attempt to summon 1 per round
I would have loved it if manifestations had kept their points costs from previous editions. The way that the lores are set up now however, it will be really awkward to bring back points for them in the current edition.
Therefore, I would prefer the following changes:
A) Summoning spells and prayers can't be used with Magical Intervention.
B) Wizards and priests suffer -1 to summoning for each friendly manifestation that is already on the battlefield.
I agree with your cons Rob and I think it is a big challenge for less magical armies like Ironjawz to keep up playing a game against Soulblight Gravelords.
I like the idea that they can only be summoned once per game. Something else I think could work is if manifestations are tied to a specific caster. Like, you declare a wizard as the manifestation guy and when it dies, boom, no more manifestations.
Two more solutions:
Only one manifestation per army allowed on the table top at any one time… the lore behind it is “maintaining a manifestations presence requires an ongoing focus from the casting wizards/army, and therefore only one can be maintained at any one time.
OR
Just raise their casting value so that they are a real risk to attempt… minimum casting value an 7, max 11.
I think once per a game but remove banishment. so teclis doesnt invalid lesser magic armies even bothering to summon them.
I really like the added fantasy Manifestations add to the setting, and I think they all look OK or better. I get what you are going for with more things costing points, but GW is trying to sell their main titles to the widest market, which often means lowest common denominator, so I'm not sure they will move away from their current direction of simplified army building. Unfortunately, not all games appeal to all people, and maybe people who want a deeper skill expression in their list building should play a game other than AoS. Luckily we live in golden age of miniature gaming, so there are a ton of other options.
Interesting convo, Rob. Im definitely not a competative player so perhaps offer a different perapective to where youre getting your data on Manifestations from tournaments: the new edition and manies have given me a new way to play an army ive collected for decades, therefore theyre automatically good. I can afford a screen and chaff unit now whilst playing the army the way I want to without worrying too much about expensive unit fragility
i think a lot of these concerns are very well founded. I really like the idea of having models representing magic on the battlefield. It would be kind of neat to integrate them into the spell lores rather than have them as a separate entity. ALSO really like the idea that they are better tied to the realms. at bare minimum that would be better
I haven't tried 4th yet, so I can't comment on how good or bad they are. But , If they are really a problem, I think the best solution I can think of is the non recursion one mixed with an independent system of points and no "Lores". Instead of being free, you could have like 200 extra points to pick manifestations with a maximum of 4. Incarnate 200pts. Big impact ones like Gnashing Jaws or the Sun may be in the 125-175 range, medium impact ones maybe 50-100 and the little ones 25 or so. This would promote more choice, more flavour and, also, alleviate the repetition problem. It would also fix another issue that hasn't been mentioned. Faction manifestations. They are the most flavourful ones but, right now, most of them are, supposedly, not worth it. So you end up picking the Morbid Lore and losing all those flavourful ones. You'd fix that too. Also, as other comments said, there needs to be a compensation for armies not taking manifestations at all so you can fix the mandatory and wizard-heavy-list trend.
For the other solutions mentioned on the video, just assigning them points brings two problems two my mind: either you balance all 25 armie's points with manifestations in mind(which I think GW would not be on board and, even if they did, would bring more rippling problems to the table), or we'll get back to 3rd, when you'd only see one or two in all the edition. Which, clearly, is not what GW wants.
Removing them is more about GW already having the models and wanting to sell them than the viability of the solution. Even if it's good, it's not gonna happen.
And summoning in enemy turn may be an enhancement, but I don't see it as a solution for many of the cons mentioned.
Great video as always Rob
I agree with you.. they are a bit much at this point. I run Mega G's usually with out magic ( my own issues here). I have run them but and the ability to kill them, they come back, kill them again ( rinse and repeat) is a bit much, especially for FREE !!! like the Idea of a combo of what you said, give them a cost, no casting in your opponents turn and 1 time per spell per game...
Each time an enemy endless spell is destroyed, you gain Manifestation Points equal to the casting value of the endless spell. In the movement phase, you can spend X Manifestation Points to return 1/2 a destroyed unit or Y Manifestation Points to return an entire destroyed unit
Lets people play with endless spells if they like them, while also making use of wizards less mandatory. Just need to get the X and Y numbers in the right ballpark
Right. So. My thoughts so far - casting in the enemy turn seems like a major No-No here. Fluffwise, Manifestations seem like they should take more effort to bring forth, not be the equivalent of a quick counterspell, so player turn only for them makes sense tbh.
Also, the idea of Level Locking them - it'd take maybe some balancing to work each Manifestation out to a rough Power Level of 1, 2 or 3 and....here's the catcher, they can only be cast by a Wizard/Priest(X) who matches their power level. So yeah, the big casters throw out the BIG spells. They pay the points to do just that. But it also stops Level 1 wizard spam to mass yeet the suckers out.
The Aethervoid Pendulum is from the Realm of Shadow. Its old name (Penumbral Pendulum) made this more obvious.
It went t from Endless spells costing points and optional extras in 1.5e. too endless spells, I also remember something about your opponent could potentially hijack your spell and control it against you to then being mandatory in 4.0. I get they want to lean into the "high fantasy" and nothing screams high fantasy like spells smashing into each other but there's no trade off of taking them at the moment. Every army has a massive advantage if they have more wizards. (Nagash can summon a whole manifestation lore, A WHOLE LORE in one round for example)
A WHOLE LORE is three spells dude, one frog or two goblins can pull that off in a turn. And then until a manifestation is killed to be resummoned they're just sitting on their thumbs trying to not get roped into a melee and maybe casting one of the seven dozen variations of D3 mortals.
So I think "only cast once a game" could be a bit much for something you have to spend a cast on to get out and that is easier to remove than a typical unit (non squishy unit anyways), but I think a cool idea that could also be lore friendly would be a Mechanic similar to commanders in mtg: every time you re-summon one that was removed from play, you add one to the casting value you need in order to get a successful cast. Because I imagine pulling a permanent manifestation of magic into the world could be a bit draining for a wizard, and they're stuck in battle so obviously not taking time to rest and recuperate.
I understand why lorewise they can be summoned multiple times. My suggestion is to make the casting target past the first time higher by 1 or 2. In addition idk if this is already a thing if the hero that summoned them dies the manifestation just goes away. 1000% they should not be able to be cast in the opponents turn. A big thing is that well they are just so much better then most spells in the game period maybe the normal spells need a little bit of a buff if these endless spells dont get point costs. Idk if casters are pointed properly for being so powerful as idk all the point values of them.
I know this isnt the best place but my dad booked a ticket for bootcamp 4 but we are not going to be able to make it so we have been trying to contact TSN arena to either refund us or change our ticket to bootcamp 5 but they have not responded. I know you have been organising these tournaments with them so wanted to ask if you would be able to do anything about our situation.
I think not summoning in the enemy phases and some points would be great, saying that I didn't use them before that much, and now have to buy endless spells for 3 armies plus the main ones....doesn't feel great from my wallets POV lol. Great video as always Rob!!! Keep up the excellent work!!. ...btw are you going to do a stormcast faction focus? Or is it already out I didn't see it. Love all those faction focuses you have done so far.
I love the shameless objective marker plug on all the videos 🤣 I'm sold, I'm gonna pick some up
Well said.
I wish I could offer a solution. I play Seraphon, and it feels just as oppressive in the games I've played, most of which my opponent took only 1 wizard to. It quickly started snowballing out of their control of they didn't get their Krondspine out early or I've killed their wizard already.
I just wish they'd balanced the power of the lores better. I like the idea, but the execution needs a lot of tweaking.
If new players had easy access to them it would be more fair. Right now I can't find a box for less than twice retail. Creates a system of haves and have nots.
The manifestation are medium detail but can look great with the right skill expression. I am very proud of my Nurgle corrupted purple sun.
I agree with all the issues and they need to be toned down. The one thing I do like about them though, is that as someone who loves wizards in video games etc, this makes magic feel strrong. Usually a wizard is just a buff piece unless it's a god tier (nagash etc) kind of wizard. I admit that this is entierly a narative benefit and is only cool for my own theatre of the mind though, so I understand from a competitive standpoint they gotta be changed. :)
100% agree that replacing the current Generic Endless Spells with Realm-specific lores would be ace - and we could go back to the time where you chose which realm your army is from and have bonuses (like artefacts) and drawbacks to go toward balancing the manifestation lores.
That said, I love that they're free - they are harder to balance, but harder doesn't mean impossible - and I love it because I think they add a very fun and cinematic element to the game.
I am a bit irked by their grouping into lores, but that's only because I bought the few generic Endless Spells that appealed to me in 2nd edition, which means I now have bits of a multiple generic lores but no complete ones.
If something goes from expensive, optional choices to free, it needs to reflect that in the new edition. A 120pts model that can stand back and summon the near-exact manifestation from last edition at the cost of 60pts, should reflect that in a points hike. I don't say it has to be exactly 60 points like it did before.. But say, the wizard now costs 150, 160 maybe.
If the Gravetide can be cast over and over again to prevent a whole flank an entire game, it should reflect that.
@@91CEO - you get no disagreement from me on any of those points. I realize they're not balanced, but it's also possible to balance them even without charging points. It's tricky, sure, but it certainly can be done (using what you described, reducing the effectiveness of the most egregiously good ones, etc.).
Top content as always, thanks Rob.
Agree on pretty much everything except having artifacts and traits cost points. 40K went to points for those and it strips so much flavor from the game. I really think the game should go to an equipment system like kill team, you get some amount of fun bucks separate from points that you spend pregame on a handful of different upgrades. It adds so much flavor to armies
Mild ideas:
Limit one active manifestation at a time (reduces need for multiple wizards in your army)
Every time you manifest creates a stacking penalty to your cast roll for future manifestations (reduce recursion)
Must take your faction manifestation lore if you have one (keeps your manifestations in line with your army instead of everyone using the best universal option)
Only get a manifestation lore OR a spell lore, not both (adds a "cost" without getting points involved)
WILD idea:
Universal manifestation lores are removed from being a player option entirely. Instead, if both players agree to it, randomly determine a universal manifestation lore when setting up the battlefield terrain. Players alternate placing all manifestations from that lore on the battlefield before placing any units from their armies (insert additional placement guidelines here as needed). The manifestations are controlled by the underdog - if there is no underdog then they are controlled by whoever is going second in the round (this probably needs some adjusting as well, but the general idea is that the manifestations are "neutral" and interact with the underdog mechanic to help the losing player get back in the fight). The manifestations can be banished/attacked by either player as normal, and once destroyed they are gone for the rest of the game (or maybe the controlling player can roll to see if they come back as per the normal manifestation rules, but they don't need any wizards to do it. The rolls represent the battlefield itself attempting to re-manifest the effects, and the non-controlling player can attempt to counter with an unbind attempt as normal)