View Full Version : Alternate rule to crumbling

01-03-2009, 16:30
I'm not sure if this should go here, but it was an idea that hit me. As of now, when the undead lose combat they lose a number of models depending on how much they lost combat by. After reading the fluff thread on this, this is due to the magic holding them together dissipating. Now, here is where my idea comes in.

Instead of crumbling, a leadership test is taken using the leadership of the closest necromatic character within 12'' (aka: a vampire or necromancer). The usual modifiers apply, except that the vampire player gets +1 for every level that the spell caster is. If there is no necromatic character within 12'', then the unit's leadership is used instead. So, for example:

A unit of zombies loses combat by 7. A vampire with a leadership of 8 and a magic level of 2 is within 12''. The vampire player rolls a 7. Because he is a level 2 spell caster, only 5 zombies collapse.

Anyways, this was just an idea to better show how the undead army is being kept together. And while some may not like how it puts even more emphasis on characters, it does better represent the will of the vampire in question holding his army together.

Just my two cents, feel free to rip it apart. ;)

01-03-2009, 16:41
first off, let me just say this is a horrible idea. But barring that.

I'm not even sure how you got the 5 zombies.

Ld 8, +2 levels is 10 - the 7 he lost combat by is 3. He rolls a 7 so misses by 4. Why would 5 crumble instead of 4.

I think it is as bad as the new Daemon crumbling except even more ridiculous. Let me use my example.
Vamp Lord level 4 near of Varghulf. The Varghulf loses combat by 5, but the Ld 10 + 4 for Ld 14 Lord is nearby. so minus the 5 and we have 9. Or an 84% chance he won't take a wound at all. This is insane. Oh and lets throw a BSB nearby to make it basically +1 Ld, so now there is only a 1/12 chance they will take a wound, and 2 wounds at the very max if I roll a 12. And even then the Vaghulf has a chance to regenerate them. And if I fail one, no biggie, I'll just heal it next round.

Yea, lets make up rules that make a VC army stronger, we all know how pathetically weak they are.

01-03-2009, 17:17
I have to agree with the last post. Not a great idea. It makes units too difficult to break.

01-03-2009, 18:13
Yes, please make it harder to get rid of those 10d6+40 zombies per turn. :-\

I see what you're getting at, but I've personally always thought as Undead crumbling as more representing the fact that Undead mainly win through numbers and as they lose combat the people they fight just kind of run rampant slaughtering undead. Kind of representing the fact that animated corpses don't make terribly good soldiers and so when they go down, they go down quick.

Vampires? I dunno, lol.

01-03-2009, 19:58
I would go for a vampire power or magic item that makes all units within Xinches lose one casualty less by ´crumble (not cumulative but may be combined with a BSB) instead not as fluffy but gives some feel to it and could make the master powers more unique (they are curently the same but with differernt units)

01-03-2009, 23:32
I think I see what grumbaki is trying to achieve, which would be to have elements of a Necromantic army hold together better if they are near powerful Necromancers [and conversely worse if they are not]. This makes sense.

What his idea would need is a little tweaking so that it doesn't make them more powerful. You could use his mechanic, and apply some sort of modifier to centre the results.

It's also worth bearing in mind that a unit not within 12" of a Necromancer is going to crumble a horrible death using his suggestion. A Skeleton unit would take an Ld check on its own leadership, which is pretty pathetic, meaning it is likely to fail by a wider margin than it lost combat by. Unsupported units would evaporate pretty much instantaneously.

02-03-2009, 04:54
Good try, but like the others said, it will only make VC much much harder. It is not very difficult to get 4 characters near every single VC unit and this would make ethearal units almost unkillable.

02-03-2009, 05:07
This is a way I've been thinking of for a little while, but it would make it a little more complicated (just because it makes something more that people may want to memorise.)

Instead of having it that they must test and lose models depending on the amount failed by, have a table that shows, if they fail the test, depending on the opponent's modifier, they take a certain amount of damage.

Say you have them split into catagories under what slot they take up. Say that core take 3x as many wounds as they lost by, special 2x as many and rare as many as they lost by. eg, you have a squad of Skeletons that lost a combat by 3 and fail the crumble test. They would take 9 wounds.

This more focuses on the fact that Skeleton Warriors have less magic concentrated on them than Grave Guard, who have less than Wraiths. Not sure if this would work, but I think that it shows more the crumblyness of the army in weaker units. Maybe even have certain units ignore it. ie, they are unbreakable.

02-03-2009, 08:29
Its always bad when a rule gets complicated, especially in a game as complex as warhammer.

Simplicity is still the best.

02-03-2009, 09:27
ChaosVC is correct

02-03-2009, 16:16
A unit of zombies loses combat by 7. A vampire with a leadership of 8 and a magic level of 2 is within 12''. The vampire player rolls a 7. Because he is a level 2 spell caster, only 5 zombies collapse.

As most people have already noted:

- This idea doesn't even work in your own example. Where does 5 zombies come from? 8+2 is 10, and you've lost by 7 and then passed your LD test. No possible maths can explain how you've arrived at 5 zombies crumbling. 10-7 is 3. 3-7 is 4. The numbers required to make 5 just aren't there, however you play it. :p

- VC are powerful enough as it is, without REDUCING the number of zombies that you can kill per round.

- Making things needlessly complicated, especially rules that you'll have to use in pretty much every turn of every game you ever play, and multiple times per turn too, isn't a great idea.

I can see what you're trying to get at, but it's really not working and to be honest, where you're trying to get at isn't really worth getting at anyway. Crumbling works fine as it is.

02-03-2009, 21:03
I'm sorry if I did that example wrong. Here was my thought process:

VC lose combat. A basic leadership test is taken, where combat modifers modify that.

So, if you lose combat by one, then you take a LD test at -1. The amount you fail by is how many models are lost. So, for example (gah...),

* You lose combat by 1. You have a LD of 7, and you roll an 8. Because you failed by 1 and lost combat by 1, you lose 2 models. In this case, the new system works against the VC player.

* A second example. The VC has a Ld of 8 and loses combat by 6. The VC player rolls a 6. He passed his LD test by 2, but lost combat by 6. He loses 4 models. In this case, the new system does work for the VC player.

* One final example. During the course of the game a unit of skeleton warriors moves too far ahead of the main host. In the ensuing combat, they lose combat by 10! With a Ld of 2, the player rolls an 8. He failed his test by 6, and with the loss of combat by 10 he loses a further 16 models. The unit is far, far more likely to vanish.


This system would, admittedly, make blocks of undead led by a vampire tougher. I see that. However, what about dire wolves, bats, or units of ghouls that are meant to harass the enemy? They'd be completely screwed with this new system. And if an enemy manages to kill a vampire leading a unit, that unit would be in major trouble. This would force the VC player to really think about how they use their vampires. Do they really go even heavier on protection, as they know that they need to keep them close to their units, or do they go for sheer summoning power? It adds something new to the game. Also, it gives room for new abilities to increase the staying power of a unit they are with, but which do nothing for spell casting or close combat power.

The idea could also be changed a bit, where only the army general gets a 12'' range, or perhaps also a BSB, but every other hero only gives a benefit to their own unit. Anyways, I understand where many of you are comming from when you say the idea is horrible, but I think that there is some merit in it. Anyways, I hope that this post did a better job of getting my idea across.

02-03-2009, 22:58
You want a rule somehow making the crumble test more dependent on the magic level of a nearby character, on the theory that the greater magic level is what keeps the undead up. But you haven't taken into account that a) the vampires' Ld is already sufficiently high and is already used by the undead in range and b) the combined magic level of the characters in the army will be at least in proportion with the size of the army to begin with. The general's mere still being ... not dead ... is what's keeping the army up to begin with, and whatever damage is caused against the undead will likely be reversed by the nearest mage anyway.

Or, simply put... while your idea may have some merit, the system's already put it into effect.

02-03-2009, 23:03
why take a fine rule and compliate it whilst making it more random.

Crumbling is fine. Instability is the ridiculous one.

02-03-2009, 23:04
Yes because vampires need strengthening even more don' they. Silly idea

03-03-2009, 02:41
1) I know this won't go into effect, the book is out

2) Instead of just saying "it can't be perfectly put into the army book", how about give some ideas on how it would work better? Some here have said the idea has merit, well, what would it need to be balanced?

Maybe: Lower leadership for undead characters, as in this way, LD would be a better reflection of how well they can keep together their undead minions, than say, their bravery. An example system:

* Only the general and bsb give a 6'' range for other units to use their leadership, a bloodline power makes it 12''.
* Base Hero Leadership: 6
* +1 Leadership for each magic level
* Crumbling tests are taken from shooting in the same way as panic checks

Sure, this makes things a bit more complicated, but that is not always a bad thing. In my eyes the crumbling of the undead, without taking into account the strength of the necromancers/vampires keeping them there is as lazy as giving ASF to high elf archers instead of firing in two ranks. Sure, it works and is easy to use, but with a bit more effort a system can be put into effect that makes more sense and is usable. I hope that I can get constructive help on this.

03-03-2009, 04:19
If it aint broke, dont try to fix that by breaking it! :angel:

Lord Dan
03-03-2009, 04:25
Wait, rolling under your leadership is bad here? All of your examples seem to have a correlation between rolling low and losing models, which I don't understand. Not only is that the opposite of the current system, but it would penalize models with higher Ld.