Twilight Kin have also lost a lot of units but can take Nightstalkers.
Ratkin suffered a similar fate.
So it’s not just Brotherhood, lots of factions had significant overhauls in 3rd and lost access to some key units. I completely sympathize - I’m facing some big changes, too, and to make the transition involves a wad of money and a lot of hobby time that I don’t know when I’ll be able to get to.
I don’t have any inside information as to why this was done, but as I understand it, Kings of War has evolved in every possible way: From a narrative and world-building perspective, Mantic is creating their own stories and spins. Mechanically, they are refining how the game and all the constituent armies work, rebalancing, and reevaluating. Financially, Mantic is trying to perform a very difficult balancing act in supporting peoples’ existing miniature collections and 3rd party products, while also, you know, not going out of business or even better, actually thriving. And as frustrating as all of this can be when managing one’s own personal collection, it’s all in the service of ensuring that KoW remains a vibrant, fun, challenging game with an active community. “Gotta break some eggs to make an omelet”, and all that.
The good news is Mantic seems to have striven to ensure that 75% of anyone’s armies can find a home in KoW, and that’s really amazing for a very refined game. There are lots of games that let you play with any models you want, but the trade-off is those games are not very tightly balanced, well-supported, or popular. And I think as we the community adapt to 3rd ed, and deal with some of the fallout that come with evolution, it’s important to step back and recognize how amazing it is that a company even 3/4s supports an ancient 3rd-party miniatures line that’s been neglected for decade.
Here’s an example of how I’m thinking about it: I love KoW and have a couple armies, but each new army has been a monumental effort and expense. That’s not great for me, the community, the meta, and Mantic.
One of the significant shifts in 3rd ed is to design the army lists with more crossover in mind. With the addition of just a few new units, players can now morph their existing collection from one army into another and experience the game in a dramatically different fashion, at just a fraction of the cost and effort.
So in one sense, you just lost access to part of your army, and that sucks. But the good news is you just gained access to two new armies, and those lead into many more. I, for one, love that my Salamander army has led to a Nature list and, with just a little effort, I can merge that with my Bretonnians and now I have three fantastically different armies to explore. More army diversity leads to longer engagement (aka I don’t get bored), healthier metas, and more fun for everyone. And if that helps Mantic sell more models, well, that’s actually a pretty cool way to go about it.
I was much luckier as I find I can randomly now do a Green Lady Army with my Fireforge figures. I bought the Pegasus Knights to be Elohi and already some Naiads (v old metal GW figs) and Earth Elementals. So I accidently have a new army!
Mantic are trying to define all the armies as part of Mantica. People bitched and whined that KoW was generic and then Mantic try to make it their own IP and people bitch and whine again. Yes we all have things we can’t use but that’s the way of things. With 3rd Mantic are trying to balance things from the start, UE in 2nd was a knee jerk reaction to events, the armies weren’t thought out or balanced, this is giving KoW a more solid basis.
With the use of theme lists the RC and Mantic can more tightly define what armies are and add things without unbalancing the whole list. In the fluff for the Brotherhood they specifically name check the “Roamers” who refused to join either of the new Orders, so my best guess is a third list that follows the original Brotherhood army will come down the line, more in keeping with the narrative for Mantica and KoW as a whole.
This was an extract from a Mantic blog prior to the release of UE.
Q: Have some units been dropped from the previous edition?
A: Just like with the lists in the main rulebook, we’ve taken the opportunity to look at how we wanted each army to behave, as well as how the game played overall. Some of this involved consolidating similar units into one, some units were removed, but others have also been added. Not all units removed will have gone forever – they may come back in a future Clash of Kings book, on their own, or as part of a formation, for example. Some units were moved out of what is now a Master list and into a Theme – and so some units currently not available may do likewise in some of the Themes we introduce in the future.
Q: Where have all the halflings gone!?
A: There are still some halflings in the League of Rhordia list! However, the halflings are pulling back from the League of Rhordia, and while they continue to fulfil their basic and mandatory military obligations, there is a growing migration back to the shires. Have no fear though, the armies of the shires are swelling as a consequence so you can probably read between the lines (and refer to a previous answer above!) if you are a fan of the little people.
As Gerrcinn states above, v3 was about both sorting rules out and moving armies towards how they want things to be based on their progressing lore and background. Therefore a number of armies did move away from the more or less direct proxy of the gw equivalent.
What happened to the Brotherhood follows on from the edge of the abyss book/campaign and to take things away from a direct port across of a Breton list.
A historical style army with knights and peasants plus a fantasy twist can be done via KoM, but Mantic decided that they wanted to switch thing up with these lists, merging them into their own back story.
works for me
The people moaning about it being generic and moaning now are not necessarily the same people. Quite likely not to be.
I think that it’s fine for people to vent for a bit, healthy even.
Emphasis on ‘for a bit’.
Thanks for all the great comments and feedback, guys.
I think what makes me a bit more jumpy about this than I might otherwise be is that I seem to have a tendency to pick factions in games that wind up getting pushed to the side. For example, in 40K I picked Black Templars, which eventually got absorbed into the regular Space Marine codex. I picked Bretonnia in WHFB which languished for years and years without an update before the got the whole finger (Spoiler alert, your faction’s deity was just an Elf thing all along! Fooled you!) when the world was destroyed.
Miniature wargame companies really encourage you to get into the fluff. That, to me is a good thing, which is why it rankled me a LOT when GW didn’t just stop supporting their game, but they destroyed the world… So you’re supposed to get invested in the story, then punished for doing so.
But this ain’t about GW.
I’m going through my army, unit by unit, and comparing my options. I do appreciate that Mantic created a safe refuge for those of us who weren’t on board with AoS, and of course I’m not looking to drop KoW. Just gonna have to make some decisions about how to structure my army going forward.
Maybe once I’ve finished my analysis I’ll come back and post my findings with suggestions for others who are facing the same challenge.
No issue with that MarkG, provided it isn’t taken to far.
The changes have invalidated various units I’d built, albeit when looking to ally stuff in to KoM list. The split has actually made me want to built a mantic brotherhood list now - Fireforge stuff is great for this, whichever order you go for
My brotherhood army has been using a placeholder for the order of redemption for the past year.
I painted up a single model for a regiment during the last summer, completing the unit has been postponed due to goblin expansion, however.
As I don’t think I’ll be doing order of the green lady (due to not playing forces of nature) and my army may do a crossover to Basilea my army will be Order of the Brothermark.
This means, sadly, that the above dude will probably not be getting company. Alas, the ravages of a new edition.
That said, my human army will probably be Basilea first and KoM or League of Rhordia alternatively depending on my whims and/or battlefield performance. when (and if) I the army will represent Brotherhood depends on the feel and playstyle of the army.
There seems to be alot of discussion about E3armies. As i game in 15mm and therefore do not ‘compete’ I am happy to look at these new lists whilst continuing to utalise E2.
I do like the addition of Titans as I have some very BIG models in my 15mm collection.
Check my blog https://warrenswargamerantings.blogspot.com
this is only natural in the early days of an edition.
Generally, I’m happy with my V3 armies; especially undead and basilea. As I don’t have my uncharted empires book, I don’t have a complete overview of these armies.
The former Warhammer armies that are now merged into panithor will have some time adjusting.
Overall I am happy with the changes as the Brotherhood is now something I really consider playing over a more generic KoM army.
My question for those who struggle with the split, are allied units are artefacts to not an option or is it more of a background problem?
Glad to read that you are happy with the changes!
I’m not sure where I stand as my UE book hasn’t been delivered yet, so my information is all 2nd-hand.
That said, mybrotherhood army (yes, I know, this army has been linked before. Here’s it again). was pretty feasible in 2nd edition and maybe not so much in 3rd edition due to an over-reliance on cavalry and monsters.
The main reaon why Brotherhood apealed to former Bretty players was due to the variety of cavalry that could be fielded. The 2nd ed. Brotherhood army had light cavalry, flying cavalry and 4 kinds of knights, ranging from the mediocre initiates to the superb order of redemption.
In the new edition it’s either light cavalry OR flying cavalry (depending on green lady or brothermark) and 2 kinds of knights. (paladin knights/abyssal hunt or order of the brotherhood/redemption). This consolidation, (or lack of variety as it’s also called) takes some time to getting used to. The real question is: what’s Brothermark’s unique playstyle compared to -say- Basilea, Rhordia or Kingdoms of Men.
As I don’t have the book I cannot answer this question at this moment. I doubt that I could answer the question without playing a few games anyhow. As I am trying my army as basilea for the time being, Brotherhood will have to wait a few months.
Maybe other Brotherhood players can answer this?
I am struggling to convert some my old armies as well, just in terms of the figures matching up with the list. I think the new lists are just a little less generic, but overall I think the new lists are a great improvement from 2e, especially in terms of play balance. I was unsure if I should even bother trying to convert my Twilight Kin army as my three units of cold one knights and black dragon (the bulk of my army) were no longer in the list! However, I think it is just an adjustment, and we will have to be creative or bring allies until we get our armies sorted out and new stuff painted. That other game (WH) had the same problem, with each new edition many old figures lost their place in the list, but KoW still waaaay more flexible in terms of model choice and usage.
It seems to me that the main thrust of the split is that the elements of The Brotherhood that were more “mundane” like peasants, regular knights, etc went the way of Basilea with the Brothermark list, and the more mythical, more magical type stuff like Order of the Forsaken, Order of Redemption or Villein Martyrs went to the Green Lady.
The Order of the Brotherhood units, which are more like “mundane” knights went Green Lady but I suspect that was more to give a “regular” knight option to the Green Lady lists since the Brothermark list gives access to Basilean Paladin Knights.
You can work prettymuch any model from your old army into an Order of the Green Lady list except your artillery (though you can do that will allies), but there’s no simple analog to bring over the Order of the Forsaken into the Brothermark. Either way there’s no 100% solution.
That said, the only real “harm” here is that you can’t field 100% of your existing collection in a game anymore if you’re trying to field everything you’ve got. Since most of us own a lot more points than we play in any one game, it’s not a terrible hardship to switch back and forth depending on the opponent or what tactics you want to try. True, you won’t be fielding Forsaken supported by artillery without creative use of allies, but overall it’s an annoyance that isn’t army breaking.
It’s a bit of Thread-o-mancy, but since I had to wait for my Uncharted Empires book (it got lost in the mail) I couldn;t reply informed earlier.
I do like the Uncharted Empires theme lists for the armies that I play: League of Rhordia and Kingdoms of Men. I also do like the UE lists for several armies that I don’t play, such as free dwarves and Tkin. That said, I do not like the Order of the Brothermark theme list. I’ll try to explain here why.
The order of the Brothermark list seems not meaningful different from its main list - Basilea. I could literealy port over my Basliean army with only very minor changes (Lancers -> Skirmishers, Arbalest ->Siege artillery) without it playing differently.
My gut feeling (as I haven’t played Brothermark yet) is that it plays exactly the same as the Basilean list. The new additions (Slightly cheaper and more versatile bowmen, slightly better and more expensive knights, other light cavalry) fill the same roles as their Basilean counterparts. Indeed, the army loses one major tactical option - Elohi.
If you compare this to the League of Rhordia theme lists, the differences become apparent. The league list adds several very powerful tools to the parent list (war altar, honour guard) in exchange for other units. League plays differently that it’s parrent list, while Brothermark seems not to.
Furthermore, the inclusion of some very Basilean items such as the Phoenix and the Palace guard to the Brothermark list feel wrong. These models are one of the defining features of the parrent list, adding them to theme lists makes them more similar.
The order of the green lady does not suffer from this. The list (inclusion of heavy cavalry and heavy infantry to Forces of Nature) plays and feels different than the original.
How would I adress this?
Of course generating ideas for your own armies is usually easier and very dangerous for the internal balance of the system as a whole. Please read the below as a set of ideas, for the RC to use (or ignore) as they see fit.
a) lose the Phoenix and the ogre palace guard from the Brothermark army list. Maybe swtich the high paladin on elder dragon for a more brotherhood-themed guy with more or less the same stats.
b) Add the order of the forsaken (irregular) to the Brothermark as well as a light and medium flying hero to the army list. Exemplar on pegasus -comparable to KoM captain on pegasus and Exemplar on flying beast (comparable to kom general on flying beast). This would emphasis the Brotherhood army as an army of heroic individuals instead of ogres and firebirds.
c) return the villein initiate cavalry unit (Me 4+; 7/14 att; TC 2; def 5+; nerve 13/15 and 20/22) at a serious discount. This kind of unit (iniate knights aka kights errant) made the Brotherhood army special to me in V2; I’d like that returned for V3.