I am not extremely well-versed in Warhammer lore, and have had several thematic questions on cards over the past two and a half years. Here's two I would like explanations of:

1) Why is the only Kislev card in the game an Empire card?

2) Eatine Harbor and Eataine War Room; are there really two different High Elf areas with such similar names, or is this a typical FFG fail on proof-reading/editing? If an error, which is right? What exactly is this place and its location?

3) Why is Black Knight unique? Is there only one knight in all of Bretonnia that is dubbed "black", and has no formal name? I understand why he is unique in terms of his ability, but not in terms of theme. Is there a thematic reason he is not order (or destruction) only?

I would like this thread not only to be a list of answers, but of other similar lore questions applied to cards that exist (or are announced). I am sure I will remember other lore questions I have had in the past but failed to ask before forgetting them.

Kislev is a country that's closely allied with the Empire, so it's troops would often fight alongside the Empire's armies. For what it's worth, Gustav the Bear is a Kislev unit as well.

Eataine is one of the kingdoms of Ulthuan. Eatine is a misprint.

Bretonnian knights wouldn't wear black, they wear their family's heraldry. The black knight looks to be a renegade knight of some kind who's forsaken his allegiance and responsibilities which is practically unheard of (and which is why he's the only Bretonnian card that isn't "Order Only"). Or at least, that's how I've always interpreted it.

Something that I've wondered: What do the diehard Warhammer fans think of the heroes and legends? Are they good picks? Do their abilities fit the fluff (in so far as that's possible)?

I used to play the Warhammer table top game before the new edition rules came out and ruined it. I mainly played High Elves. Tyrion and Teclis are two of the most bad ass legendary characters in the whole of the game. Tyrion was pure combat and Teclis was pure magic. WH:I Tyrion is ok I guess, but I don't understand the whole concept of wounds being redirected. I guess the intent is that he leads his units in combat to help them become deadlier while being able to sustain more damage themselves. OK...that's cool...but that has no connection to the tabletop Tyrion. The tt Tyrion was powerful in combat with magical perks that helped to keep him alive if he were to take too much damage. I would have loved to see the WH:I Tyrion be more focused on his ability to attack while being able to weather a counter attack himself. He should have had 4 power and 4 hitpoints and 4-6 toughness. Or, same power and hp as well as the ability action: if Tyrion is about to recieve enough wounds to destroy him, instead place him back in your hand. That would have been in keeping with the tabletop game. As far as Teclis goes...well...I loved tabletop Teclis. He was a powerhouse of magic. WH:I Teclis allows you to play any tactic you find at the beginning of your turn for free. That's closer to tabletop Teclis than WH:I Tyrion is to tabletop Tyrion. But, tt Teclis was so powerful with magic that he was able to cast spells anywhere on the board despite range limitations on the spells and was able to cast multiple spells despite the normal limits placed on spell casters. He was also nearly guaranteed to succesfully cast his spells. I think a better WH:I Teclis would have been the same power and hp that he was given but also, Action: search the top 5 cards of your deck. You may play ALL tactic cards revealed this way without paying the cost. Place all SPELL cards on top of your deck. These kinds of tweaks would have made Tyrion and Teclis truely shine and fit in with their original history a bit better. In the tabletop games, they really were legends.

Very interesting, thank you.

That's kinda what I meant though, if some heroes and legends were as powerful as they are supposed to be fluff-wise, they'd be incredibly broken, so it simply might not be possible to have the card match the fluff. I guess Karl Franz is still human at the end of the day (?), but from the little I know, Kairos' power should be off the charts too, for example. Also, I assume Grimgor would have been a Legend if he hadn't already been in the game. At least he seems way more legendary than Grom.

To go a little off topic, since you played High Elves, is their penchant for indirect damage something that's connected to the tabletop rules? I don't know if the tabletop has a similar concept.

The High Elves...like all elves are expert marksmen and therefore was able to field units of archers that were pretty deadly. Also, the High Elves use of magic was nearly unmatched by all except for the Lizardmen. I consider indirect fire as a sort of ranged attack. Ranged attacks by magic and arrows. High Elves rarely wanted to get into direct conflict as they were a bit weak physically. If they did get up close it was usually done with there expert fighters, the Swordmasters.

Well, the mastery of magic certainly is in Invasion, with all the spell effects and synergies. The Lizardmen are supposed to be nearly as good with magic though? I guess that hasn't made it to Invasion yet. I always assumed they had some berserker abilities, and savage was based on that.

Mallumo said:

WH:I Lizardmen make absolutely no sense in the context of the tabletop Lizardmen. I have no idea what 'savage' is supposed to represent. Given, I didn't play the Lizardmen in the tabletop game...but from what I do know...they don't translate well.

I know when this game was released, it was based, or at least appealing to, the MMO that was relatively new at the time. I don't play video games, nor do I know if that MMO ever took off or is still around, but does anyone know in what ways Invasion follows that MMO? Judging by the insert in my original Core from August 09, it appears the six capital factions in Invasion were the six factions you could play as in the MMO at the time. Do things that cards do that don't make sense in the tabletop make sense when compared to the MMO? Is this game still using the MMO as a model?

1) It appears, or sounds like, this game is based in the Old World. In Warhammer lore, Do Lizardmen ever establish themselves in the Old World, or are they just raiders from across the sea or the south?

2) Is there a connection between Wood Elves and "developments" in the tabletop or Warhammer Lore in general? Can the "developments" be understood as trees or other things that grow? Wood Elves don't seem like builders like Dwarves (hence that race's inclination for developments); do they employ some sort of magic to make things grow fast (i.e. in the course of one turn = one development for that turn)?

3) Is Albion a possibility for this game? Is Albion occupied by various tribes, or could they be considered in some way as a cohesive whole like Orcs? Plus, who doesn't want a Famir unit?

Thanks again for any info/theories.

I also heard that Zoats have been re-introduced to Warhammer after at least a decade, if not more, of being removed from the lore. Wonder if this could have any affect whatsoever regarding Invasion in years to come.

Thought of another one, though no one's got the answer to the previous few:

Why are orcs often depicted with armor, weapons, and equipment sporting patches or strips of some checkered pattern. Seen this with 40K orks as well. Any background on this feature?

bitva said:

Nothing extra. Either they like it that way, or they consider it 'enuff Orky' to use it.

On a side note, are you Czech by any chance? Your name has a meaning in Czech language.

Mallumo said:

As is my understanding, the Lizardmen (specifically, the Slann) are the most powerful magic-users in the entire Warhammer world. The magic used by High Elves was given to them by the Old Ones, for whom the Slann were ancient custodians. Similarly, just as High Elves were granted magic by the Old Ones/Slann, so to were human given magic by the High Elves. From a thematic point of view, the strength of Lizardman magic is part of what makes them so appealing to me--in most fantasy settings, lizard people are essentially stupid, and although that might be true of the Saurus, the Slann are almost sophisticated beyond comprehension.

I've always sort of thought of Savagery as being the effects of striking against the Lizardmen in their jungle home. Lustria is an incredibly dangerous place. Super-predators, flesh-eating plants and exotic diseases are a constant threat for anyone that goes there. I don't know if that's an accurate assumption on my part, but it helps me make sense of it.

bitva said:

1) The Lizardmen do, on occasion, venture into the Old World for a very specific purpose, but I don't think they build permanent bases there. It's implied that the Slann have established a network of servants that steer the course of nations in the Old World, however.

2) I'm not sure, but I think the developments just count as the spreading of their forest home of Athel Loren. The forest is magical and is capable of spreading rapidly, engulfing and dismantling buildings and hamlets that stray too close.