Recognition to Rick Priestley

The place for all game discussions on Age of Sigmar.

Moderator: The Dread Knights

Post Reply
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Barking Agatha »

I introduced my brother to Age of Sigmar today. He hasn't played Warhamer in 15 years, but he had a few Lizardmen lying around that could not have been an army in 8th edition, but perfect for a quick game of AoS. I played with only Dreadspears and Darkshards and, not too surprisingly, he won, but it was fun. He quite enjoyed it, and while he was playing he commented on the similarities to Warlord Games's Hail Caesar and Black Powder, both games designed by Rick Priestley (et. al.), so after the game we chatted a bit about Mr. Priestley.

In case you don't know who Rick Priestley is, he designed Warhammer, with Bryan Ansell and Richard Halliwell. He also designed the original WH40K, Rogue Trader. Keep that in mind: without Rick, there would be no Warhammer and no 40K, and therefore no Games Workshop. Now, what we have heard is that for about ten years after 2000, Rick had been working on ideas to make a new Warhammer and a new WH40K. In his opinion they were outdated and could be made better, not by tweaking them here and there as they had always done, but by designing entirely new systems. Games Workshop, however, had no intention of messing around with the golden goose even if the creator of that golden goose thought it was a good idea. Instead of letting him design new games, they assigned him to the Department of Crazy Old Coots, in charge of Ideas We Never Intend to Use.

In 2010, Rick left Games Workshop. I've heard that he quit because life is too short and he was tired of being irrelevant. My brother believes that he was sacked when someone realised he was still there and drawing a salary. In any case, he took his ideas with him and co-founded Warlord Games, co-designing in quick succession Hail Caesar, Black Powder, and Bolt Action. These are absolutely brilliant games whose design blows WHFB and WH40K out of the water -- but they're historical games. Unless you're the kind of person who enjoys taking on the Roman army even though your Celts are hopelessly outmatched, they won't attract you very much. Bolt Action in particular is a game in which you can sort of see the ideas that might have been used for Warhammer 40K, and it's terrific, and yet I've barely played it because the Second World War isn't really my thing. Recently they've come out with Gates of Antares, their Sci-Fi game, and I'm eager to play it, but unless they could come up with something as iconic as Space Marines, flying cathedrals, space elves, and so on, I doubt it will ever have the same commercial potential as 40K.

So five years later GW decides to completely overhaul and re-design Warhammer, and I just realised that after all of that, they are actually using his ideas. Maybe someone found them in a dusty old folder and finally got around to reading them and went, 'Hey, these are pretty good! This could actually lift Warhammer out of its slow decline! Did Rick write these? Where is Rick, anyway? Rick? Rick! Oh, yeah, I forgot.' It's kind of difficult to know how to feel about that. On the one hand, it's a terrific game, much better than Warhammer has ever been (although I know many will disagree), and full of brilliant ideas... that they should have used in the first place. And on the other hand, sheesh.

So, if Age of Sigmar were to fail, it would prove that they were right not to listen to Rick before. 'See? Gamers don't want anything new and different, regardless of whether it's better or not! They want more of the same that they've always had before, forever and ever and ever!' But if it turns out to be a brilliant move, as I believe it will, they will claim credit. 'Warhammer is popular again, we're geniuses!' No you are not, you're just standing on the shoulders of the same creative person on whose shoulders you have always stood. And you let him go.

I'm enjoying AoS immensely, and I intend to keep playing it, but let's give props to Rick Priestley for anything that is good about it, and while we're at it, why not try some of Warlord's games? It isn't either-or, you can play Warhammer and still enjoy other games. Their design is, again, absolutely genius. My only problem with them is that I need to care about my little men. I have trouble with Black Powder because I honestly couldn't care less about who wins the War of Spanish Succession, and Bolt Action is for people who love to know about the difference between a Panzer II and a Panzer IV or whatever, but give me a disorganised crowd of half-naked Celts and I'll happily lose again and again to the Roman scum! None of the models for Gates of Antares really scream, 'These are my guys!' to me yet, but I'm going to give it a chance anyway. I'm sure the game is great!

EDIT: http://www.warlordgames.com/beyond-the- ... troduction
User avatar
Mr_piechee
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1217
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 3:07 pm
Location: Sussex + Dorset (UK)

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Mr_piechee »

Interesting post - I'll have a look into GoA.

However, the success or failure of AoS doesn't mean anything to Warhammer - they're two different types of game. AoS is a skirmish game, and Warhammer is a large ranked game. Warhammer has had its problems for a long time, and there are lots of great skirmish games about. Doesn't mean they're suitable to compare.

I think GW's problem is that those creators which gave them their dominant market position never had enough power - a board room of people detached from reality do. There are a lot of great games and companies out there run by ex GW employees, and the sad truth is that most of what they do trumps GW, but they just don't have the traction to make noise over the roar of the powerhouse that is Games Workshop.

The drastic move to change up the rules might mean more people look at other systems, which can only be a good thing (more competition, and hopefully people becoming more aware that there are other games out there).

And finally, its nice to see a post about the man behind the the game, instead of the corporate face. I hear names all the time, but I'm terrible at remembering them to give them the credit they deserve, so I'm glad you and your brother have!
[hope you don't mind my random babel] ~ Take a look to the sky just before you die, its the last time you will ~ my pics
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Barking Agatha »

Mr_piechee wrote:I think GW's problem is that those creators which gave them their dominant market position never had enough power...


Oh, there was a time when they did exactly as they liked, and what they liked was to be very, very silly. They had orks in nazi helmets peering out of dustbins driven by tricycles and throwing jars full of bees, and an Inquisitor in a pimp hat named Obiwan Sherlock Clousseau. As for 'balance'... have you ever tried playing Blood Bowl against High Elves with a Halfling team? They cared less than nothing for balance, they just liked to chuck dice and push models around and make funny faces, and they believed everyone else would too, because they were having such a grand time!

Mr_piechee wrote:And finally, its nice to see a post about the man behind the the game, instead of the corporate face. I hear names all the time, but I'm terrible at remembering them to give them the credit they deserve, so I'm glad you and your brother have!


Well in those days the designers were all over White Dwarf magazine every month, writing in their own words rather than ad-copy, and they were each fairly... idiosyncratic, so you came to feel that you knew them a little, even if you'd never been to Nottingham. They were characters with personalities. There was Rick, and Jervis, and Andy Chambers, and Paul 'Fat Bloke' Sawyer, and Mike McVey, and the Perry Brothers, then Gav Thorpe, Alessio Cavatore, Tuomas Pirinen, and so on. They were almost like celebrities for Warhammer fans. and also without exception very friendly people who liked to hang out with gamers and talk shop. It's a bit sad that there are so many Warhammer players now who don't even know the names of the people who make their games.
User avatar
Calisson
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 8820
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Location: Hag Graef

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Calisson »

I remember that time.
Thank you for raising once more memories long gone.
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Barking Agatha »

For the sake of those memories then, here they are:

Image

Top Left to Right there's Rick, Jervis, Andy, Paul Sawyer 'the Fat bloke', who hasn't changed a bit, Nick Davis (totally forgot about him, for shame!), Steve Jackson and Ian Livingstone, who weren't really in the public view that much but they started the whole thing, and goodness, just look at them! Steve (left of Ian) now owns Eidos, who only make (among other things) Tomb Raider. Not bad for a guy who looked like that! :)

Bottom Left to Right there's Gavin Thorpe, Mike McVey painting (what else?), the absolutely amazing Perry Twins, Alan and Michael (and look at Michael with his missing right hand, he sculpts miniatures like that. The first one that he did after his accident was only the Bretonnian Green Knight!), Alessio, and Tuomas Pirinen, just arrived in England from his native tribe of Finnish cannibals. ;)

I'm sure I've forgotten someone, sorry. Memory fades.

EDIT: Obviously I'm not suggesting that Tuomas eats people, only that he looks as though he might. I'm just making fun of his unfortunate 80s teenage picture as is my right, because all of us who were there have a few of our own lying around (although I always looked great in mine, naturally). Tuomas was just a huge Warhammer Fantasy fan and an early presence on the Internet. He wrote cleverly about tactics including how to win with the Empire, which was incredible as it was impossible at the time to win with the Empire, and a few made-up rules of his own for non-existing armies. Games Workshop liked it so much that they just called him up and offered him a job, because that's a thing that could happen at the time. Arguably he was the first to bring over a lot of the 'competitive' way of thinking. Before him, they cared mostly that elves be elfy and orcs be orc-y, and so on, but for Tuomas it was important that they were armies that you could win with. That was probably a good thing, because they needed someone like him who could bring a new perspective to the studio and prevent it from becoming too insular.
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Arquinsiel »

Barking Agatha wrote:the absolutely amazing Perry Twins, Alan and Michael (and look at Michael with his missing right hand, he sculpts miniatures like that. The first one that he did after his accident was only the Bretonnian Green Knight!),
He actually did a random 30 years war mercenary captain type fellow first, while in hospital, that eventually was released when they founded their own company. I think the Green Knight was just the first he did for GW.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Barking Agatha »

Didn't know that. I stand corrected!
User avatar
Icon hack
Druchii Anointed
Druchii Anointed
Posts: 2350
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 5:09 pm
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Icon hack »

Thanks for the history lesson!

Funny, I was just told this evening by another lifelong gamer that Bolt Action may be the best miniature game he's ever played.
.
.
Wishing everyone the very best, to the end of your days.
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Arquinsiel »

It is a testament to the quality of the Bolt Action system that the person I played it with is notably terrible at demonstrating games and yet I could see the elegance of it. It suffers, somewhat, from balance issues when comparing tank armour to infantry AT performance (in my limited experience) but that is easily ignored since the system allows for great flexibility of tactics. I literally pulled of a Brécourt Manor attack without actually knowing the rules. I did notice that the Recce unit withdrawal move needs some work though, that's a bit exploitable.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Barking Agatha »

Yeah, Bolt Action is very nearly a perfect game, except... it's Second World War. It has a marked absence of elves, werewolves, or witches, and a considerable variety of real-life guns and tanks. Also, no girls (they were all back home in factories). It isn't Rick and Alessio's fault, it's the Allies' and the Axis' fault. It was very thoughtless of them to fight such a mundane war.
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Arquinsiel »

Solution: Play Soviets. The Soviets had awesome women fighting in every branch. The Night Witches in particular are amazing.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Gnosis
Hard, but Fair
Posts: 3754
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 4:01 pm
Location: Southern Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Gnosis »

RE: OP

I'd say AoS has taken quite a few more cues from Alessio's work (GoA relies heavily on Bolt Action's mechanics, and Bolt Action is, of course, mainly Alessio's game) and from the likes of Alex Buchel (Saga, Muskets & Tomahawks) insofar as the actual rule mechanics are short and simple, yet it does lean close to Rick Priestley's usual ruleset mentalities of "no point values, be gentlemen and work it out yourself/play a scenario". Not that any of the three would ever have put their name under the four pages of rules GW has released for AoS, of course. The rules are just not good enough.

So, if Age of Sigmar were to fail, it would prove that they were right not to listen to Rick before. 'See? Gamers don't want anything new and different, regardless of whether it's better or not! They want more of the same that they've always had before, forever and ever and ever!' But if it turns out to be a brilliant move, as I believe it will, they will claim credit. 'Warhammer is popular again, we're geniuses!' No you are not, you're just standing on the shoulders of the same creative person on whose shoulders you have always stood. And you let him go.

It looks to me as if here you are preemptively refuting an argument which those old enough in the ways of wargaming could use to argue that AoS isn't what we wanted. I might be reading between the lines too much, though, and if I have, I apologise. In any case, I think Rick had a good run at the Design studio and got out at the right time, just like the many other ex-GW employees who've blown new life into the historical wargaming business.

Bolt Action, finally, is a fantastic ruleset. For a ruleset that is still in its first edition to be this flawlessly written and internally balanced (bar a few minor complaints regarding vehicle flamethrowers and lmg viability) is a rare occurrence in wargaming, and Alessio deserves massive credit for it. Perhaps GW should let his company River Horse take care of the rule writing from now on?
Count them:

Painted in 2013: 500
Painted in 2014: 600
Painted in 2015: 854
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Barking Agatha »

Gnosis wrote:I might be reading between the lines too much, though, and if I have, I apologise.


You are. :)
User avatar
Ramesesis
Slave (off the Altar)
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:10 pm
Location: asrai.org

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Ramesesis »

Gah! Bolt Action! Stop that! I have just started assembling my Flames of War mid war soviet force (Kursk era) and have included the most awesome of tank driver, Mariya Oktabriskaya.
If I could have Night Witches as air support I would.

Now, my fleedling 40K Imperial Guard is also inspired by the Red Army and I am considering on how to implement Night Witches air support.
"A knifeless man is a lifeless man"
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Barking Agatha »

Ramesesis wrote:Gah! Bolt Action! Stop that! I have just started assembling my Flames of War mid war soviet force (Kursk era) and have included the most awesome of tank driver, Mariya Oktabriskaya.


But aren't Flames of War miniatures tiny? How do you model that it's her?
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Arquinsiel »

The turret of her tank says "Fighting Girlfriend" on it, but also the mini has her climbing out the driver's hatch, which is kind of odd:

Image
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Barking Agatha »

Nice! I'm not running out to buy little soldiers yet, but you've intrigued me :) At the scale I like though (where you can really paint faces), I could only find one: Wargames Factory apparently make a box of soviet soldiers that includes women in it (http://www.wargamesfactory.com/webstore ... nfantry-28 in case you're interested). Warlord Games have a nice article about female snipers up on their website, but no miniatures actually they have one medic, one signal lady with flags, and one tank driver who might be a woman, or maybe a lizard... it's hard to see. Between that and the WF ones... maybe. I'll have to have a think :)

I've never played Flames of War, but I've seen others play it. My brother is a WW2-head, and he did not like it very much. Apparently, you end up using armies and tactics that are not really 'representative' of how real WW2 battles were fought. According to him, FoW began as someone's fan rules for 'Warhammer WW2' based on the rules for WH40K, until GW unsurprisingly made them stop and they changed them up to avoid trouble, but deep down they're still based on them. Does anyone know if this is true?
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Arquinsiel »

It's roughly correct. A bunch of guys over in the New Zealand stores started doing a sort of WWII version of 40k and that's what came out of it. The design lineage is clearly visible if you look at the way army lists are structured and the roll to hit, wound, save paradigm exists. They play differently though, as FoW is massively more objective and scenario focussed than 40k ever was in my time. Your brother is also not wrong that you get weird stuff happening with things like my 4th/7th RTR having to fight Japanese infantry at a tournament a while back, and it being a total clusterfuck of bad book interactions. Armies made of pure heavy tanks is not uncommon, and there's very little to represent the fact that half of those Tigers would have broken down before reaching the table etc.

That said, Warhammer Historical eventually, just before the lights went off, came out with Kampfgruppe Normandy which was... problematic. Plastic Soldier Company are now selling a fixed up and improved version known as Battlegroup with "army" books that handle different theatres and periods and it's worth a look. Core rules are a tenner or so, but the period books are kind of BRB in size and price due to the amount of info packed in.

That Wargames Factory box will get you going in Bolt Action or Chain of Command easily enough I think, and it'll give you a good core for Battlegroup but that works better at a smaller scale. Also, don't forget the Scale of Kings - 20mm: http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Periods.aspx

ETA: actually, something that just occurred to me, scale in miniatures that aren't "Heroic" like GW's makes it really hard to tell male and female apart. Here are two miniatures I have, which are my favourite female minis in my collection:
Image
Compared to the rest of the models in the range it's really hard to pick out the female soldier just by looking without holding them together.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Barking Agatha »

Arquinsiel wrote:Also, don't forget the Scale of Kings - 20mm


You and my brother. No! You can't paint them properly. They look like little match heads :)

I've already played Bolt Action and I liked it a lot. I have a bunch of English troops already, but I just couldn't get into the narrative of it. Soviets do sound appealing tho.

And my brother didn't really hate FoW, he just knows a lot about WW2 and it doesn't play out as he thinks it ought to. He mentioned the tank thing. 'Armies full of tanks? Preposterous!' That sort of thing.

And I knew I'd forgotten someone. I probably still have, but here's Nigel Stillman in a funny hat:

Image
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Arquinsiel »

Your brother sounds like a smart chap.

I think you're painting to a far higher standard than I care to anymore these days, I just want to do mad stuff like Irish UN Peacekeepers in the Congo.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Lordmonkey
Corsair
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:47 pm

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Lordmonkey »

Did everyone forget Gav Thorpe?

Image

Certainly enjoyed his articles in the good old days of White Dwarf. He was one of my opponents in the Portent Tourament (the last one before it became Warseer) and I had a great time and a good pint and chinwag after the game :)
User avatar
Darkprincess
Chosen Babe of Slaanesh
Posts: 2625
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:20 pm
Location: Wales

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Darkprincess »

Lordmonkey wrote:Did everyone forget Gav Thorpe?


No, but I'm still trying :twisted:
The Dark Princess
High Priestess of the Cult Of Pleasure


Give yourself over to absolute pleasure
Swim the warm waters of sins of the flesh
Erotic nighmares beyond any measure
And sensual daydreams to treasure forever
User avatar
Giladis
Corsair
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:12 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia

Re: Recognition to Rick Priestley

Post by Giladis »

That is actually quite nicely made replica of a bronze age "Odyssey's" helmet.
Post Reply