I will score this issue 2.5 out of 5
TL:DR You will like this issue only if you like reading interviews about people you have no interest in and looking at painted models.
This issue is better than Feb’s, but not as good as January’s. In my opinion this issue is let down by having too many interview/exposition style pieces.
I don’t know what other readers of WD think, but I have little to no interest in the various interviews that appear to be a monthly staple of this iteration of WD.
The Guest Editor interviews I find especially baffling. This run of monthly WD is only three issues old and it has already had three different editors. Surely the magazine should have had time to settle in before guest editors are allowed to take over.
I have always thought that an editor’s efforts should be seen rather than read about. As long as an editor is doing his or her job well I do not see a need to know anything about their personal background.
Additionally there is little point to having guest editors when the content of the magazine does not change. There is less of a point in having guest editors if the only reason for having them is to include an interview with them.
For the third time it is my opinion that Worlds of Warhammer is once again the weakest article in White Dwarf. So far we have read about what it is like to write Warhammer stories, how to name your models and now how to create a map. I am plainly missing something as I struggle to see the point of this article.
A Tale of Four Warlords is back, but after the last efforts I will not be expecting anything other than a painting fest with the odd battle report thrown in. The challenge is over a year this time instead of the normal six months, so hopefully we might get a bit more than just a painting article in disguise.
The challenge is Vigilus based and the armies that have been chosen are Genestealer Cults, Black Legion, Orks and Raven Guard.
I was looking forward to the article about points values (Rules of Engagement) and it was okay, but overall I think it suffers from being too vague. In an article about how points are calculated it is disappointing to read that the method used is too complex to include in the article.
After reading the article I am left with the feeling that they haven’t really got an accurate method of calculating points.
This Month’s Battle Report was the usual mix of narrative and turn information laid out in a non-linear fashion that make it hard to read and difficult to enjoy.
The painting article, Fantastical Realms, is still concentrating on how to build and paint your AoS models to match the Mortal Realm that they live and fight in. This month the Realm is Ghryan.
I can see how this article could be of value to some people, but after three of them I find them to be a bit repetitive.
Realms of Battle made an appearance in this issue and for the most part I enjoyed it even though it was biased towards how to paint stuff rather than how to build stuff.
Glory Points (Warhammer Underworlds: Nightvault) continues to be one of my favourite articles.
This month was all about how warbands are created. The only thing that let this article down was that it is very similar in content to the Rules of Engagement, so it was a bit like reading the same article twice.
Echoes from the Warp is a bit strange this month. Instead of being about the rules and tactics of 40K it described Robin Cruddace’s visit to this year’s NOVA Open. It is a bit lightweight in content and reads like a ‘what I did this summer’ school essay.
The Index Imperialis that provides information and new rules for Assassins was a really good read. As ever with GW fluff some of it leaves me confused.
Part of the history for the Culexus states that a number of the High Lords wanted Pariahs destroyed. Before a decree could be issued the Adeptus Mechanicus ended the Pariah project and claimed they had executed all of the specimens. Instead of executing all of them they set up a secret fortress that became the Culexus Temple.
All well and good, but as Assassins can only be released for a mission following a two-thirds majority vote by the High Lords it is not clear how the same High Lords that ordered Pariahs executed can then sanction them for a mission without blinking an eye.
Blood Bowl also appears again in this issue and once again I find these articles to be a really enjoyable and interesting read.
Unless I have misunderstood the article Goblins sound like a difficult team to coach.
Wrath and Glory and The Buried Dagger are both interview articles. One being about the new 40k roleplaying game and the other a chat with Horus Heresy author James Swallow.
I am really not sure what to say about this type of article. The Wrath & Glory one in particular seems pointless as you learn next to nothing about the game itself.