Pinned ID General Chat

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • darkknight109 wrote:

      We do, however, get our own form of that with visitors to our country. The tourism industry here has a bit of a saying: "A North American thinks that a 100 year old building is old; a European thinks 100 km is far away." While visiting with some friends on that same German trip, I wound up talking about back home and mentioned that I went to university in a nearby city. As I described it, "It was only about 350 km away from my hometown - it was nice being close to home so I could still drive down and visit on holiday weekends." This caused them to laugh and, noticing my confusion, they explained that 350 km would get you about halfway across all of Germany and was not what any of them would consider "close". On a separate occasion, I also had some British friends who wound up visiting Winnipeg for a business trip and told me, "Yes, we plan on driving to Toronto for the weekend to see the sights, then come back to Winnipeg for Monday." I had to politely explain to them that just because Toronto was only a province away did not mean it was in "weekend road trip" range (for those who are not up to speed on their North American geography, Winnipeg and Toronto are about 2000 km apart and it takes roughly 24 hours of driving to go between them).
      When I was in London, I walked from Heathrow Airport to Harrow on the Hill. About 10.6 miles. Took 4 hours cause I was hauling my heavy dufflebag and not going to fast. Everyone was like "wow!" they couldn't believe someone would/could walk that far.
      ....I did travel for about 5min on the bus, then vomited everywhere and had to walk. The air pollution in that city made me carsick very fast.

      I didn't have a map either and this was before phones were good. Had my cowboy hat too so got lots of looks.

      lawgnome wrote:

      I use saurians for my slave units, personally.
      I will be using Saurians as my Vassals.
      Some will be slaves as well but I also plan to get a miniature from each faction/species and make a slave unit of that.

      And when I face an opponent I will hide the miniaturs that are the same as his army and then when I win I will bring out the miniature and say "now I can an extra slave to my roster". :)
    • Just to be cheeky for a second (see Disclaimer*)...

      I've finally got around to reading the LAB fluff and it's really well-written and entertaining. Personally, I'm taking it slightly with a pinch of salt as I haven't yet found a clear enough thread to the Chaos Dwarves that I read about in early 90s White Dwarfs when I was a teenager but that's by-the-by. (Anyone feel free to suggest such a connection, however tenuous! Any way I can make a link in my mind would be greatly appreciated :) )

      Anyhow, what's really amused me is that the section on Immortals focuses on three things:
      1. Making them sound amazing via exciting descriptions of their training and testing and the ritual that results in their dead predecessors (whose souls are locked in the mask) speaking to them constantly and guiding their actions
      2. Some Empire force had heard of them and were afraid of them
      3. They got their butts kicked by the Empire force but were amazing against unarmed, untrained farm residents
      And I just thought: yup, that captures them perfectly! :D :D :D


      *Disclaimer: apart from Immortals, I really am a big fan of the new book and think it's great!!! I was previously weighing up a unit of Incarnates vs a unit of Immortals and now it's a clear choice that I'm mega-happy with: yay Incarnates! :thumbsup:

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Kriegschmidt ().

    • The Changing Constant wrote:

      I find the min/max of the design for the hereditary to allow HBE drain magic and DH rune of revocation to not work on it while making it extra wordy, not to be a good design. Also, it counter intuitive interactions with DE blade of what ever.
      (replying here to prevent discussion in the other thread).

      Just to be clear, because I think you are intuiting things that aren't the case, there was no design goal/intent (that I am aware of) to circumvent those things or cause the counter-intuitive interactions. It just happens that way because it was the nicest/clearest way to write the sort of effect that was looked for (incendiary token and combat affecting spell tied to incendiary).
      I personally would happily give up those interactions if it made the spell clearer/simpler (without affecting the intended goals of the spell).

      Can I ask what you have in mind for a "not extra wordy" version please?
      Maybe it is useful to us.
      List repository and links HERE
      Basic beginners tactics HERE
      Empire of Dannstahl HERE
    • Kriegschmidt wrote:

      I've finally got around to reading the LAB fluff and it's really well-written and entertaining. Personally, I'm taking it slightly with a pinch of salt as I haven't yet found a clear enough thread to the Chaos Dwarves that I read about in early 90s White Dwarfs when I was a teenager but that's by-the-by. (Anyone feel free to suggest such a connection, however tenuous! Any way I can make a link in my mind would be greatly appreciated )

      Anyhow, what's really amused me is that the section on Immortals focuses on three things:

      Making them sound amazing via exciting descriptions of their training and testing and the ritual that results in their dead predecessors (whose souls are locked in the mask) speaking to them constantly and guiding their actions

      Some Empire force had heard of them and were afraid of them

      They got their butts kicked by the Empire force but were amazing against unarmed, untrained farm residents
      And I just thought: yup, that captures them perfectly!
      I've read about two-thirds of the LAB fluff now and the Immortals definitely jumped out at me. I get that fluff and crunch won't always perfectly overlap (else every top-end character in every army would be an unstoppable killing machine), but there seems to be a serious disconnect on the Immortals specifically.

      If I could sum it up:

      What their name suggests they are: Very difficult to kill. Dwarves are already pretty hardy by nature, so when I hear the word "immortal" tossed around by a race known for being tough and sturdy, I'm immediately thinking that these must be a pretty dang hard unit. This is one of the reasons why I loved the Beta 1 version - they absolutely lived up to that name.

      What the fluff suggests they are: Really fast death machines. One of them kills three farmers before the narrator can react; one of them is pitted against six other fully armed warriors while armed with nothing but a baton and proceeds to kill two and badly injure the rest, commenting that his reaction speeds are much higher than they once were and that he killed before he could mentally stop the process.

      What the crunch says they are: Citadel Guard with melee weapons/rules and +1 Off/Def. Seriously, they have a 100% identical statline to CG other than that Off/Def buff; the only other differences are their equipment and their special rules.

      I just don't feel like any of those line up properly. OK, the name "Immortal" comes from their mask rather than their unkillability, which feels like false advertising but that might just be my own personal bias on the matter. But they're not any faster than any other dwarves (they actually get outsped by their Lugar compatriots), nor are they a huge step up in eliteness from the other dwarven infantry.

      The fluff suggests these guys should be used as murder machines, yet they have bodyguard and a statline that's more defensive than offensive. The fluff suggests that the body's previous owner isn't really in command of his actions anymore and is in thrall to the mask, which implies he would have difficulty controlling his actions and following orders the way a bodyguard would need to. The fluff suggests that all of the minds of the mask act in concert as a gestalt whole, yet the crunch has them switch special rules from turn to turn as though one personality of the mask is dominant at a time.

      Honestly, if you handed me the fluff and didn't tell me what unit it was for, I'd probably think it was for the Lugars. If I had to stat that fluff, I'd probably give it Frenzy, Fearless, maybe Unbreakable, Dis 7, and probably two attacks at Agi 3 or 4. In other words, I'd basically wind up with an armoured version of the slimbook Lugars, back when they were Infernal Dwarf berserkers.

      While I'm on the subject, I find the background for the Lugars and the new direction they took odd. As I understand it, Disciples of Lugar were first put into the game because some model companies had put out lines of "Chaos Dwarf Slayers" that the T9A team wanted to account for, which is all well and good. Yet now they're basically battlefield lawyers, whose lore suggests their "hat" is trickery and wrangling of technicalities (i.e. an actual rules lawyer in miniature form), which seems somewhat at odds with both the recommended models (Lugar models, regardless of company, are all basically naked dwarven berserkers on fire - you'd think they'd be more interested in personal protection if they weren't mindless rage-machines) and their stats and equipment, which still seems more suited to a group of shock troops than commandos and tricksters.

      My head-canon for these, back in the WFB days, was that they were dwarves that had committed some crime or disgrace and been punished by basically being made into dwarven daemonhosts, their bodies used as vessels for fire-daemons not unlike the K'daai and used as suicidal linebreakers in battle. That actually lined up really well with the slimbook stats, but not so much these days and I can't help but feel a disconnect when I look at their lore, their stats (and it is mostly stats - their special rules seem to line up with their current lore fine) and the models that get used for them.
    • darkknight109 wrote:

      What their name suggests they are: Very difficult to kill. Dwarves are already pretty hardy by nature, so when I hear the word "immortal" tossed around by a race known for being tough and sturdy, I'm immediately thinking that these must be a pretty dang hard unit. This is one of the reasons why I loved the Beta 1 version - they absolutely lived up to that name.
      I think it's been mentioned that the name comes from a group of Persian warriors who all wore a mask, meaning that it seemed like you were fighting the same person over and over, and that they weren't actually dying.

      So from the namesake, it should be something where they can come back. My favorite idea for the unit was to let you sacrifice dwarfs from a nearby unit to raise the same number of Immortals. Sadly, it never came to fruition.



      darkknight109 wrote:

      What the fluff suggests they are: Really fast death machines. One of them kills three farmers before the narrator can react; one of them is pitted against six other fully armed warriors while armed with nothing but a baton and proceeds to kill two and badly injure the rest, commenting that his reaction speeds are much higher than they once were and that he killed before he could mentally stop the process.
      I totally agree.


      darkknight109 wrote:

      The fluff suggests these guys should be used as murder machines, yet they have bodyguard and a statline that's more defensive than offensive. The fluff suggests that the body's previous owner isn't really in command of his actions anymore and is in thrall to the mask, which implies he would have difficulty controlling his actions and following orders the way a bodyguard would need to. The fluff suggests that all of the minds of the mask act in concert as a gestalt whole, yet the crunch has them switch special rules from turn to turn as though one personality of the mask is dominant at a time.
      Yeah, there does seem to be a disconnect between the offensive based fluff and the defensive based unit. On the other hand, having one unit be the defensive special infantry and one being the offensive special infantry (immortals and disciples, respectively) makes sense for avoiding redundant units.


      I'm not sure what the best answer is, honestly.
    • darkknight109 wrote:

      Kriegschmidt wrote:

      I've finally got around to reading the LAB fluff and it's really well-written and entertaining. Personally, I'm taking it slightly with a pinch of salt as I haven't yet found a clear enough thread to the Chaos Dwarves that I read about in early 90s White Dwarfs when I was a teenager but that's by-the-by. (Anyone feel free to suggest such a connection, however tenuous! Any way I can make a link in my mind would be greatly appreciated )

      Anyhow, what's really amused me is that the section on Immortals focuses on three things:

      Making them sound amazing via exciting descriptions of their training and testing and the ritual that results in their dead predecessors (whose souls are locked in the mask) speaking to them constantly and guiding their actions

      Some Empire force had heard of them and were afraid of them

      They got their butts kicked by the Empire force but were amazing against unarmed, untrained farm residents
      And I just thought: yup, that captures them perfectly!
      I've read about two-thirds of the LAB fluff now and the Immortals definitely jumped out at me. I get that fluff and crunch won't always perfectly overlap (else every top-end character in every army would be an unstoppable killing machine), but there seems to be a serious disconnect on the Immortals specifically.
      If I could sum it up:

      What their name suggests they are: Very difficult to kill. Dwarves are already pretty hardy by nature, so when I hear the word "immortal" tossed around by a race known for being tough and sturdy, I'm immediately thinking that these must be a pretty dang hard unit. This is one of the reasons why I loved the Beta 1 version - they absolutely lived up to that name.

      What the fluff suggests they are: Really fast death machines. One of them kills three farmers before the narrator can react; one of them is pitted against six other fully armed warriors while armed with nothing but a baton and proceeds to kill two and badly injure the rest, commenting that his reaction speeds are much higher than they once were and that he killed before he could mentally stop the process.

      What the crunch says they are: Citadel Guard with melee weapons/rules and +1 Off/Def. Seriously, they have a 100% identical statline to CG other than that Off/Def buff; the only other differences are their equipment and their special rules.

      I just don't feel like any of those line up properly. OK, the name "Immortal" comes from their mask rather than their unkillability, which feels like false advertising but that might just be my own personal bias on the matter. But they're not any faster than any other dwarves (they actually get outsped by their Lugar compatriots), nor are they a huge step up in eliteness from the other dwarven infantry.

      The fluff suggests these guys should be used as murder machines, yet they have bodyguard and a statline that's more defensive than offensive. The fluff suggests that the body's previous owner isn't really in command of his actions anymore and is in thrall to the mask, which implies he would have difficulty controlling his actions and following orders the way a bodyguard would need to. The fluff suggests that all of the minds of the mask act in concert as a gestalt whole, yet the crunch has them switch special rules from turn to turn as though one personality of the mask is dominant at a time.

      Honestly, if you handed me the fluff and didn't tell me what unit it was for, I'd probably think it was for the Lugars. If I had to stat that fluff, I'd probably give it Frenzy, Fearless, maybe Unbreakable, Dis 7, and probably two attacks at Agi 3 or 4. In other words, I'd basically wind up with an armoured version of the slimbook Lugars, back when they were Infernal Dwarf berserkers.



      The slim-book story (with the berserk fury) depicts a newly-transformed Immortal. We also briefly see them deployed in a battlefield role in the Bull of Shamut story:



      On the right were the Overlord’s personal guards. Zhabi stood surrounded by the Immortals, masked and armoured dwarves who stood so still, so perfectly in formation that I half wondered if they were statues.


      Part of the disconnect, I think, is that Citadel Guard don't seem impressive to you. Even the basic Infernal Warrior is pretty dang badass by setting-wide standards; Citadel Guard might not have lifetimes of experience but they do have thirty years plus of their own very personal experience.





      While I'm on the subject, I find the background for the Lugars and the new direction they took odd. As I understand it, Disciples of Lugar were first put into the game because some model companies had put out lines of "Chaos Dwarf Slayers" that the T9A team wanted to account for, which is all well and good. Yet now they're basically battlefield lawyers, whose lore suggests their "hat" is trickery and wrangling of technicalities (i.e. an actual rules lawyer in miniature form), which seems somewhat at odds with both the recommended models (Lugar models, regardless of company, are all basically naked dwarven berserkers on fire - you'd think they'd be more interested in personal protection if they weren't mindless rage-machines) and their stats and equipment, which still seems more suited to a group of shock troops than commandos and tricksters.

      My head-canon for these, back in the WFB days, was that they were dwarves that had committed some crime or disgrace and been punished by basically being made into dwarven daemonhosts, their bodies used as vessels for fire-daemons not unlike the K'daai and used as suicidal linebreakers in battle. That actually lined up really well with the slimbook stats, but not so much these days and I can't help but feel a disconnect when I look at their lore, their stats (and it is mostly stats - their special rules seem to line up with their current lore fine) and the models that get used for them.

      Disciples of Lugar were already battle lawyers when I first joined the BGT three years ago (more? Pretty sure at least three).

      Given they can't wear armour (cloth burns, red-hot armour on bare skin is going to kill ya when ya flame off) and their stats are based on being a fusion of Kadim Incarnate and Basic Dwarf (usually the better of the two, sometimes midway between the two), what would you suggest be changed?

      lawgnome wrote:

      darkknight109 wrote:

      What their name suggests they are: Very difficult to kill. Dwarves are already pretty hardy by nature, so when I hear the word "immortal" tossed around by a race known for being tough and sturdy, I'm immediately thinking that these must be a pretty dang hard unit. This is one of the reasons why I loved the Beta 1 version - they absolutely lived up to that name.
      I think it's been mentioned that the name comes from a group of Persian warriors who all wore a mask, meaning that it seemed like you were fighting the same person over and over, and that they weren't actually dying.
      So from the namesake, it should be something where they can come back. My favorite idea for the unit was to let you sacrifice dwarfs from a nearby unit to raise the same number of Immortals. Sadly, it never came to fruition.

      That idea has been floated repeatedly.



      darkknight109 wrote:

      What the fluff suggests they are: Really fast death machines. One of them kills three farmers before the narrator can react; one of them is pitted against six other fully armed warriors while armed with nothing but a baton and proceeds to kill two and badly injure the rest, commenting that his reaction speeds are much higher than they once were and that he killed before he could mentally stop the process.
      I totally agree.

      darkknight109 wrote:

      The fluff suggests these guys should be used as murder machines, yet they have bodyguard and a statline that's more defensive than offensive. The fluff suggests that the body's previous owner isn't really in command of his actions anymore and is in thrall to the mask, which implies he would have difficulty controlling his actions and following orders the way a bodyguard would need to. The fluff suggests that all of the minds of the mask act in concert as a gestalt whole, yet the crunch has them switch special rules from turn to turn as though one personality of the mask is dominant at a time.
      Yeah, there does seem to be a disconnect between the offensive based fluff and the defensive based unit. On the other hand, having one unit be the defensive special infantry and one being the offensive special infantry (immortals and disciples, respectively) makes sense for avoiding redundant units.

      I'm not sure what the best answer is, honestly.

      It's worth noting that a character with the Mask of Ages is also, fluffwise, "an Immortal". So any OTT feats can be attributed to that.

      Background Team

    • Forgive me if what I am saying is dumb here, but is the answer that they just aren't elite enough? Should they be like WDG Chosen? Just really damn expensive and really small units with appropriately nonsense "blessings"? Because we don't need defensive powerhouses, ID are tough enough, and Disciples are meant to be the fast choppy murder unit. I'm not as immersed and well discussed in the lore justifications as some though, so could just be saying dumb things :)
    • lawgnome wrote:

      Yeah, there does seem to be a disconnect between the offensive based fluff and the defensive based unit. On the other hand, having one unit be the defensive special infantry and one being the offensive special infantry (immortals and disciples, respectively) makes sense for avoiding redundant units.
      I'm not sure there is an easy answer for this. It seems silly to demand a fluff rewrite and, as you've observed, the Lugars have our "offensive elite infantry" base covered (and if the Immortals were more offensively talented, the Lugars - who already aren't showing up in a lot of lists - would probably disappear altogether).


      WhammeWhamme wrote:

      Part of the disconnect, I think, is that Citadel Guard don't seem impressive to you. Even the basic Infernal Warrior is pretty dang badass by setting-wide standards; Citadel Guard might not have lifetimes of experience but they do have thirty years plus of their own very personal experience.
      To be fair, that isn't what I said.

      Observed in a vacuum, I do think Citadel Guard have a pretty burly statline and I really enjoy using them as a result. But the implication - in both fluff and crunch - is that the Immortals are supposed to be a tier above them in terms of eliteness. Maybe not multiple tiers, but it seems like there should be a notable jump in power when moving from CG to Immortals. Right now, it feels like there's a power jump from Warriors to CG (as there should be), but almost none from CG to Immortals. Really, it almost feels like Immortals could be a special option for CG the same way that Ziggurat Regulars are a special option for Warriors.


      WhammeWhamme wrote:

      Disciples of Lugar were already battle lawyers when I first joined the BGT three years ago (more? Pretty sure at least three).

      Given they can't wear armour (cloth burns, red-hot armour on bare skin is going to kill ya when ya flame off) and their stats are based on being a fusion of Kadim Incarnate and Basic Dwarf (usually the better of the two, sometimes midway between the two), what would you suggest be changed?
      The ID seem to have mastered the "armour that can handle intense heat and not kill the wearer" thing, in crunch (Aegis vs. flaming) and fluff (the Bull of Shamut fluff mentions the human ambassador being given a modified suit of Infernal Armour so that the heat from the bull wouldn't kill him), so if it can survive a divine burning bull's heat, I feel like a Kadim's heat would probably also be manageable.

      But ignoring that quibble, if it were up to me and no one else, I probably wouldn't have made them battle-lawyers in the first place, given that it didn't really fit the models being used nor the slimbook profile. I understand that ship has long-since sailed and I'm not suggesting it's realistic to change it now.

      Really, I'm not sure there are any changes to be made now with regards to this observation of mine. I think that the last beta's rules were probably truer to the Lugars' fluff, but I also think the current rules are closer to the mark in terms of a unit that I'd actually want to put on the table as part of an ID force. The slimbook rules were, in my opinion, the most enjoyable from a crunch perspective (though still too fragile for my tastes, unless you had the Mechanism and a list that was magic-heavy enough to reliably cast it) and the truest to the battle-mad berserker models, but those rules don't line up at all with the fluff.

      If we acknowledge that the models are what they are and that the Lugar's fluff is set and not going to change, I think the answer is there is no way to square that circle; something in the fluff, the crunch, and the models isn't quite going to line up with everything else. It's not ideal, but I also don't think it's a priority one problem either.


      devolutionary wrote:

      Forgive me if what I am saying is dumb here, but is the answer that they just aren't elite enough? Should they be like WDG Chosen? Just really damn expensive and really small units with appropriately nonsense "blessings"? Because we don't need defensive powerhouses, ID are tough enough, and Disciples are meant to be the fast choppy murder unit.
      I don't think I'd be in favour of that myself. Much as the idea of "Dwarven Chosen" tickles my loins, this army isn't really about small units of really-killy things. Our models already tend to be fairly high on the eliteness scale, which means they're also pretty expensive. I already have trouble with units like a Taurukh Commissioner and his attendant Anointed bodyguard eating up a quarter of my points allowance, so I don't think there would be room for a unit with that eliteness level and associated points cost.

      Also, as I alluded to above, if the Immortals become the offensive powerhouses that the Lugars - already an endangered species at the moment - are trying to be, we probably won't see the former on the table anymore.

      Not to mention, from a fluff perspective it just doesn't feel right to me. That part is obviously subjective, but I've never felt like we should have the strongest - or one of the strongest - infantry units in the setting. We are not about a bunch of individual barbarians, mutated beyond recognition into otherworldly champions; we are a soulless, relentless advance of faceless iron. While not a horde of individually-weaker models like VS or OnG, it is that "legion of iron" that forms our identity, not godly individuals committing feats of daring-do (that's more for KoE and WotDG).
    • Kriegschmidt wrote:

      @Crazydwarf Your powers are astounding. You must explain to me how to read all those words people don't write.
      Sorry Krieg, it was not my intend to steal your words and modifie them.

      I cannot forsee the immortal and Lugar patch tho, but i do hope something happens with them. Right now i dont feel they have a room in the army, but thats just my opinion.

      That being said.. I do wish to ask.

      Do the team think the current cost for Lugar's and Immortals is good?
      Both weapon prices and models.

      I know the pricing can be ajusted, but it would be nice to know if we will see an increase in cost vs more eliteness, or if they currently are priced to high (or low)
    • Crazydwarf wrote:

      Do the team think the current cost for Lugar's and Immortals is good?
      Both weapon prices and models.

      I know the pricing can be ajusted, but it would be nice to know if we will see an increase in cost vs more eliteness, or if they currently are priced to high (or low)
      My personal opinion is (and was the same when I wasn't staff), that I don't expect the prices to be close to correct until after the designs are gold.
      It is simply too difficult a problem, with insufficient data.

      Individual prices might be close to correct of course, and nothing should be stupidly wrong (like a unit cost being out by a factor of 2), but I would not expect that the fine grained balance that is the hallmark of t9a will be manifest consistently across the whole book until after gold.

      Now, that is a statement about correct prices, which are an average over contexts/metas/preferences.
      Will I personally use them at the current prices?
      Yes, for sure. With a current preference towards GW lugars and spear immortals, as those seem the most price efficient options to me given my preferences and what I want out of the units.


      However, I think you are kinda asking "will their design or price be adjusted?'
      The answer to this question in general is it depends what the LAB team/RT evaluate the problems to be for the unit/item/entry in question.
      If problems can be fixed by points, that is generally the better route.
      Some problems can't be fixed by points (playstyle, feel etc); those things will typically be fixed by design.

      (Any answer to your question beyond this general point would be pure speculation by me at this point, so I think this general answer is the best/fairest/most honest I can give).
      List repository and links HERE
      Basic beginners tactics HERE
      Empire of Dannstahl HERE
    • Kriegschmidt wrote:

      Crazydwarf wrote:

      Sorry Krieg, it was not my intend to steal your words and modifie them.
      No, I should apologise: it seems I misunderstood the tone of your comments. My mistake, sorry :)
      Okay, okay. You are both awful people apparently

      ferny wrote:

      Yeah, lately as I've explored books like this I never encountered much in either legacy or recent, I find different base sizes for infantry to be a shame from a model agnostic perspective. It's pure legacy, and not a thing for cav, MC etc.

      The models I've found to be most fitting for my vision of slaves is GW empire flagellants, but I'd need to base them up specifically for slaves. In this example I wish they could just be 20mm. But then I go to WDG with this mind set, and model choice says " hard nope". I can see why it's needed for model reasons, but I wish it didn't have a rules impact and it could be interchangeable.
      I imagine the 25mm was just standard due to legacy models, and only the more burly species being able to survive the industrial hellhole of ID slavery.

      I've often wondered if it could be handled like Cultists in their auxiliary, so you could have 20mm Slaves with Res3 (same price)
    • Dear all !
      (I wish I could wake you up all at once, like on discord - but that may be my assertive-self speaking...)

      The sub-forum is pretty busy, but @WhammeWhamme needs you, beloved nerds.

      ==> Give WhammeWhamme some feedback on ID background <==

      To avoid any confusion, I take the liberty to quote WW:


      WhammeWhamme wrote:

      In the Ninth Age Project, we do care a lot about trying to improve our products.

      I, personally, care about improving as a writer.


      So if you've read the LAB and been underwhelmed by the background stories as stories, let us have it.



      This is not a thread for asking for changes to the background; the LAB is released and the stories are final. It is a thread for trying to do better next time - craft more engaging narratives, cut down on overuse of commas, whatever. Make contributions to the DE, KoE, VS, SA and so forth books better. :)

      Please be specific in your comments - name the story you didn't like, and give as much detail as you can be bothered to on why.

      And this may yet benefit ID in terms of getting better stories, to be clear - we need antagonists in other books, and the Infernal Dwarves make excellent foes and foils.
      ETC Belgium ID Player Novi Sad 2019

      My journey with ID ==> Tales of an infernal general :ID: