PDA

View Full Version : Improvments



big squig
04-11-2005, 04:21
Ok, now I love LotR SBG as out of the three core GW games it hands down the best written one, but there are a few little things that I would like to see improved in the game.

In no particular order:
-Shields. The +1D just doesnít seem to be enough and 'shielding' kinda sucks. My idea, drop those bonuses and make it so models with shields always count as being behind a low wall. This means, archers will have to roll to get past the shield (kinda like wargods) and in combat they will be defending, though models out numbered will lose this bonus.
-Cover. Guess I'm being picky here, but I'd like the obscured target test not to be a 4+ roll, but a re-roll to hit.
-Lances. Lances just donít feel right. I think they should work like throwing weapons. A S5 impact hit would work just fine.
-Ties. If two models with the same fight tie in combat, who has priority should be used to determine winner...just means less dice rolling really.
-Knocking models down. I feel itís a bit unjust that cavalry knocks infantry down but a troll or balrog can't. All that should matter is if the winner is bigger than the loser, not just if they are cav.
-Monsters. The mumak rules are pretty flawed and over-wordy. (grr Matt Ward) At the same time, the monstrous mount rules are not enough. Id like to se them simplified and streamlined into one set of universal monster rules...I'll try and write an example later.
-Volley fire. Not sure how to fix this, but it feels a bit off.

Well, those are some of the idea Iíve been having lately. Recently I have been playing ALOT of LotR and these issues just stuck out.

What do you all think? Are these ideas nut? Are there other things you like to see improved in the game?

rkunisch
04-11-2005, 12:03
-Shields. The +1D just doesnít seem to be enough and 'shielding' kinda sucks. My idea, drop those bonuses and make it so models with shields always count as being behind a low wall. This means, archers will have to roll to get past the shield (kinda like wargods) and in combat they will be defending, though models out numbered will lose this bonus.I never experienced a bad feeling about it. In fact for me the actual rule is quite fine.


-Cover. Guess I'm being picky here, but I'd like the obscured target test not to be a 4+ roll, but a re-roll to hit.You mean you have to roll the to-hit twice?


-Lances. Lances just donít feel right. I think they should work like throwing weapons. A S5 impact hit would work just fine.Sounds not too unreasonable.


-Ties. If two models with the same fight tie in combat, who has priority should be used to determine winner...just means less dice rolling really.Seldom happend in my games, but this would be acceptable as well. No really need to change this rule, though. Yours would not be that much better.


-Knocking models down. I feel itís a bit unjust that cavalry knocks infantry down but a troll or balrog can't. All that should matter is if the winner is bigger than the loser, not just if they are cav.I think the main idea behind this is not size but impact. Riders are more in motion than other warriors and their impact will be represented by this. I wouldn't mind if the rules are broaded a bit (to include large monsters), though.


-Monsters. The mumak rules are pretty flawed and over-wordy. (grr Matt Ward) At the same time, the monstrous mount rules are not enough. Id like to se them simplified and streamlined into one set of universal monster rules...I'll try and write an example later.Never had the chance to play with or against a MŻmak yet (my opponent has one painted but the crew is still missing). So, no idea here.


-Volley fire. Not sure how to fix this, but it feels a bit off.Works fine for me. :)

All in all your amendments would not be that big and the question is, if the benefits outweight the problems that you get with every change. First there is a (small) chance that an amended rule breaks the ballance of another rule. Then you have different knowledge in the player community.

Have fun,

Rolf.

Baggers
04-11-2005, 12:07
-Monsters. The mumak rules are pretty flawed and over-wordy. (grr Matt Ward)


You do realise that it was Allessio Cavatore who worte the rules don't you?

methoderik
04-11-2005, 13:11
I think the shield rule is tough enough. Though your suggestion of using it like a barricade is kinda cool.


-Cover. Guess I'm being picky here, but I'd like the obscured target test not to be a 4+ roll, but a re-roll to hit.

This idea on the other hand is excellent. A skilled shooter would have a better chance of hitting an obscured target than one not so skilled.

I am not a big fan of the volley rules either, especially since they jacked it up to 10.

ejazzyjeff
04-11-2005, 16:00
Shields- I like that idea, but it also means more die rolls.
Knocking down models - I think that has to do with speed of the horse more than size. But how about if the troll/balrog wins the fight but does not kill, the figure is move back 1 inch and automatically knocked down.
Cover - I like the 4+. It equals everyone out. If I play my Moria Orc or Mordor, having to roll 5+ to hit, this is a little to my advantage and takes aways the elves advantage also. I think that this presents that even though you are a skilled shooter, you still always have a chance to miss (that orc just ducks his head behind the wall from the elf's arrow), and a poor shooter always has that chance to get that lucky shot (the elf just happens to look around the wall when an orc arrows was flying by and gets him between the eyes.
Volley - I like when they made it 10 figures to volley. Improved on who can be hit. Got tired of the captain/hero being designated as the prime target of a volley..

UnRiggable
06-11-2005, 13:51
shields: actually makes sense (your rule, not GW). Because a shield is either there or its not, and when it is, it blocks the blow/arrow. HOWEVER: this means we would have to establish a defence value for shields so that they would break.
Cover: It depends on the size or whatever is obscured. It should be this way: If over 1/3 of it is obscured, then the cover rule kicks. Right now its like if even a troll's toe is hidden, the 4+ cover rule kicks in.


The volleying rule is really stupid, i agree. It should work like this: The model you aim for is this hard to hit: 12+ with one dice, add 1 for every model near him. Because its easier to hit something when theres a bunch of them, hmm?

Dr Death
06-11-2005, 15:23
I cant say im truly impressed by any of your suggestions Big Squig for the reasons im about to give.-

Sheilds- More realistic, granted but the sheild is a very standard peice of equipment and the added rolling just complicates the matter particularly when on average two thirds of your army will have them.

Cover- I dont mind this one too much but as you say it is a bit picky.

Lances- Why dont they feel right? The lance rules represent a long pole being held under arm, why make it like a throwing weapon?

Ties- The problem with priority is that really does make it a far too vital roll and aside from that, using it to resolve ties takes the skill of a warrior compleately out the equasion meaning there is no point in having the fight value statistic.

Cavalry- As others have said, its a speed thing, with a cavalry charge, you are literally getting run over by the horse (or warg) whereas with a troll or balrog, they're simply legging it towards you untill you're in arms reach.

Monsters- The Mumak rules were always going to be wordy, its the only way they can be made water tight, also because of its sheer uniqueness as a creature (what other monster is akin to a giant elephant with a wicker tower on its back?) it was always going to need special governing- its a bit like the Steam Tank of Warhammer, there arnt many things like it.

Volly fire- Cant really help you there.

As you can see, there are a few fairly obvious flaws with your suggestions, no offense meant to you of course but they just dont seem practical additions/replacements.

Dr Death

big squig
06-11-2005, 20:01
OK, cool, thanks for all the responses guys.;)

I guess I should explain some stuff a bit more.
Shields: I guess I'm one of the few that is really bother by how shields act nothing like shields in LotR. i mean half the time the +1D doesnt help against bows.:eek: Shields don't act like armor. They're not passive like a breast plate, they're active; a controlled wall between you and your enemy. One extra die to hit with shooting prolly wont bog down the game at all, and in combat, your not rolling any extra dice with my idea, it just changes who gets pushed back, like when defending a low wall. Of course, models who are outnumbered lose this bonus.

Lances: I say make them throwing weapon like not because I invision knights 'throwing' their lances:p but because it would make them kinda like an 'impact hit'. I find it a pain in the but to keep track of which models charged and which models didn't. Its almost as bad as when TTT came out and we had to keep track of which Rohan guys had used their throwing weapons, and which hadn't. If lances got a free S5 hit in the move phase while charging, I think that would streamline things nicley.

Everyhting else is just me being picky:D I still don't like the volley rules (I'm glad we have them, just not very well implemeted), but i have no idea how to fix them in an elegant manner. The 12+ to hit thing was kinda neat.

Festus
06-11-2005, 21:01
Hi

Shields: I guess I'm one of the few that is really bother by how shields act nothing like shields in LotR. i mean half the time the +1D doesnt help against bows.:eek:
Well, face it, shields don't help against bows more than half of the time in RL as well :rolleyes:


Shields don't act like armor.
Well, they do...:wtf:

They're not passive like a breast plate, they're active; a controlled wall between you and your enemy.
I take it you have never used a shield yourself? Only up close and personal are you able to predict the angle and direction of attack halfway accurately. Against missile fire, you just hold them in the general direction of the attack, like an added bit of armour.

Guess what, that's exactly what the shield rules in LotR do: They let you try and parry the enemies blows in close combat...

...while I am at it:

I hated your proposal of deciding drawn fights by priority, as this makes priority much to strong and lets one side win most fights turn n and the other side win most fights turn n+1 (if you want to say that it is not most fights: Yeah, right, but why make a fuss about it then?)

OTOH I love your idea of adapting the cover in regards to the skill of the shooter. This makes elves better with bows anf gobbos will be even more abysmal than they are now. Great from the fluff point.
Unfortunately this will kill a big part of the game froma balance point of view: Nobody is bothering with Gobbo Archers anymore, then...

Greetings
Festus

big squig
07-11-2005, 02:32
I take it you have never used a shield yourself? Only up close and personal are you able to predict the angle and direction of attack halfway accurately. Against missile fire, you just hold them in the general direction of the attack, like an added bit of armour.

Guess what, that's exactly what the shield rules in LotR do: They let you try and parry the enemies blows in close combat...

Well, no, I've never taken a shield out to combat and been shot at by a hail of arrows...who woulda guessed.:rolleyes:

Well, I was looking for a rule that would allow shields to be shields in combat. As for shooting, I can imgine them acting as cover like Romans linking thier shields together to make a 'shell'. I guess it would make sense if shields were only considered 'obscuring' if all the shield models were in base contact with eachother...it is kinda silly for a loose skirmish of troops to make a wall of shields when noones standing next to each other.

big squig
07-11-2005, 02:36
Well, face it, shields don't help against bows more than half of the time in RL as well

Hence a 4+ roll for obscured target...? The thing is the cover the shield would be providing would be a benefit in all situations, unlike the +1 D we have now...which is thanks to the wound chart escalating by twos making the +1D only work on a rare occasion.