PDA

View Full Version : Sell me on War of the Ring?



Brother Ranz
26-11-2009, 03:16
Before the Mods admonish me for redundant posting, I checked and got this response:

The following errors occurred with your search:

1. Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.

I am thinking hard about possibly getting into War of the Ring at the expense of playing WFB. Any of you suggest one over the other?

Baggers
26-11-2009, 10:15
Before I can sell you WOTR what is that is making you think of moving away from WFB.

Tarax
26-11-2009, 10:50
There are some other threads that compare both games, though you would not guess from the title. Try: "LoTR Warhammer - more popular?"

Shrapnelsmile
27-11-2009, 10:37
~better rules than fantasy
~gorgeous miniatures
~lots of "fluff" and flavor to the abilities of characters and magic spells
~easier to paint that a lot of Fantasy and 40K models
~movement trays for round bases -- these work very well
~once you have a core force, bumping up to higher points is pretty easy
~slightly less expensive than other GW games

Just placed my Black Friday sale order ... we are very excited about this game

Dai-Mongar
27-11-2009, 12:08
~lots of "fluff" and flavor to the abilities of characters and magic spells


Except Aragorn's "Epic Teleport", which makes little to no sense. :p

HsojVvad
27-11-2009, 16:38
Well for one thing, do you have anyone to play with? If you don't then you would want to start because you would want to collect the mini's for painting, modelling and fluff.

lorelorn
27-11-2009, 23:24
It's called Epic Journey, genius. It represents Aragorn doing things like journeying through 'impassable' mountains and appearing where least expected with a fighting force behind him. Remember that from the book/film?


To the OP - I can't tell you what to like and won't even try.

I will say I had given up Warhammer as the confused, broken mess that it is before WotR was ever released. Once I read through it I jumped on board. It offers:

A fast, fluid game system with no 'huh?' moments
A game system that is flexible and offers many different types of game (scenario) without breaking down
A turn system that keeps both players engaged at each stage
Game rules that present both players with a constant stream of tactical options and ploys
A single starting product that gives you everything you need to get started (except the figures). No other rules expansions to buy, use every other dollar on miniatures!
Out of the book game scenarios that will keep you going for years.
Army lists that offer massive variety while retaining decent balance - no 'rock/paper/scissors moments where you realise your army simply can't compete.
Wonderful miniature quality, sold in quantities you will actually use in your games (some exceptions but nothing's perfect)


I will only say that I have observed none of the above in Warhammer. Some people like it, and good for them. Really, other games don't have to be bad for WotR to be good. It's great all by itself.

Brother Ranz
28-11-2009, 18:22
Thanks for the replies. I've been playing WFB off and on for 20ish years. I think the biggest problem with the game is codex creep and the fact that some army books span multiple core rule designs. The same is true of 40K. I've moved to Warmachine over the last 6 years for my competitive game. Not perfect, but each faction has builds that are legitimate winners and the better player usually wins due to auto hit possibilities and bell-curve die results. For rank and file combat, I;ve been playing Wargods. Great game, but small player base.

Pavic
28-11-2009, 19:29
A fast, fluid game system with no 'huh?' moments


~better rules than fantasy

Before you jump out of WHF, I want to point out two things regarding the above statements.

First, there are many "huh" moments in WOTR as in WHF. The book does not even make clear exactly how movement is handled, most noticable in regards to facing manuvers. Now, most people have worked out some system, but I can promise that you will actually have difficulties with this if you leave your play group. There are numerous other items I could throw out there, but I will leave it at this and just say that WOTR has it problems like any other game.

The second statement is simply an opinion, nothing more. I prefer WHF rules. Do I enjoy a game of WOTR? Sure, but I still prefer the WHF rule system, which is much more varied than WOTR.

I would also point out that there are a number of undercosted models in the current edition. Gandalf the Grey, Khamul, Grey Company, and the Dragon are a few I will throw out here.

Lastly, there is still no FAQ for the WOTR rules. Now we are talking about GW here, but no FAQ at this point is really unacceptable. I really think that WOTR/LOTR will be receiving less and less FAQ support in the future, mostly because the product is again not moving well and not supported in most areas. We can all hope for a big push when the Hobbit movies hit, but support will likely fall off after this just like it did once the original trilogy wrapped up.

Just remember, the game is not perfect and it is being made by GW, which means there are going to be some serious flaws. If you prefer the rules system, great, but don't expect to see WOTR receive the type of support (little enough as it is) that WHF or 40K receive.

Oh, and I still play WOTR, LOTR, and WHF by the way.

Shrapnelsmile
29-11-2009, 08:01
@ Brother,

While I definitely think Pavic hit a nail on the head and made some great points, I would add the fact that it is easier in a gaming group to come to terms with and agree upon a point adjustment for a unit, a hero, etc in WoTR, with one book, vs. attempting to remedy out-of-date Army Books, especially when comparing them to flawed new ones.

No game is perfect, and I don't play WHF (but I have tried it and read the rules), but fantasy seems to be quite a mess right now.

Pavic
29-11-2009, 18:43
I would add the fact that it is easier in a gaming group to come to terms with and agree upon a point adjustment for a unit, a hero, etc in WoTR, with one book, vs. attempting to remedy out-of-date Army Books, especially when comparing them to flawed new ones.

I completely agree on this point. Trying to come up with a creative, effective, and fair fix for the Daemons in WHF is much more difficult than it is to come up with fixes for the current issues in WOTR. I still prefer to slug through the problems in fantasy though :D

bork da basher
29-11-2009, 23:19
having myself recently started WOTR i took it up as an alternative to fantasy which to me has gotten a touch boring lately. i still like it i just need a break but as a huge lotr fan it was kind of a step ive been putting off since the game was released and im not really sure why. i'm yet to play a game of wotr but i've read the rules and can already see i'll like it and already prefer alot of whats in the book over whfb. its just a case of assembling the 200 or so orcs/uruks/trolls etc on my desk now.

Xelee
30-11-2009, 00:56
@ Brother,

While I definitely think Pavic hit a nail on the head and made some great points, I would add the fact that it is easier in a gaming group to come to terms with and agree upon a point adjustment for a unit, a hero, etc in WoTR, with one book, vs. attempting to remedy out-of-date Army Books, especially when comparing them to flawed new ones.

No game is perfect, and I don't play WHF (but I have tried it and read the rules), but fantasy seems to be quite a mess right now.
I'm just getting into this game myself (plug: comment on my armylist ) but I was immensely heartened when, having seen all the online debates, I had a chat to one of the local players about the rules and it turned out that he interpreted all the contested points pretty much exactly as I did.

I think there is a constituency for this game amongst gamers who like a larger scale fantasy game but, for whatever reason, aren't that enthused about WFB.

Personally, I like that it's a mass battle fantasy game, which is cheap to get into.

Avatar of the Eldar
30-11-2009, 03:08
I'd echo all Lorelorn's points and second Shrapnelsmile's rejoinder to Pavic. And to that I would encourage you to find 2 or 3 gaming buddies who are committed to jumping in with you. That or you'll need to be prepared to be the promoter for this game. It's new and new endeavors need some extra push to get going. GW certainly isn't doing much.

It's certainly a matter of taste. I've played WFB almost 10 years and I'm just tired, tired tired of it. I'm especially tired of playing against VC, Daemon and Dark Elves Shadestars, Empire Stank + Walter, 3 Steg Lizardmen lists and on and on. Too many WFB armies are outclassed for all but the most exceptional players.

Hellfury
01-12-2009, 00:41
I wont get into which system is better.

This is why I enjoy WotR:

The rules are elegant in their simplicity.

That statement isnt given lightly. The military has an old adage of "K.I.S.S, which is an acronym for "Keep it simple, stupid." meaning that the simplest choice is often the best choice. No need to go from point A (the player) to point B (fun) by adding 100's of turns and stops in between them if you can just get there in a straight line.

If you enjoy tolkeins background, and want a game where there isnt a whole lot of ambiguities (though there are some to be sure) which doesnt require many hours of reading in ordr to understand the rules, WotR may be for you.

Hero adamite
01-12-2009, 03:27
~better rules than fantasy
~gorgeous miniatures
~lots of "fluff" and flavor to the abilities of characters and magic spells
~easier to paint that a lot of Fantasy and 40K models
~movement trays for round bases -- these work very well
~once you have a core force, bumping up to higher points is pretty easy
~slightly less expensive than other GW games

Just placed my Black Friday sale order ... we are very excited about this game


Pretty much this, ^ I love how you can get boxes of 24 warriors of Gondor/Rohan or Urak-hai etc for $32 CDN. Not 100% on the prices in fantasy but in 40k a squad of 10 can be from $26-50.

Also LotR has great fluff and a well thought out story created by Tolkien and it has epic movies to go along with it :P

Enfid
01-12-2009, 05:33
I found the unit interactions to be very subtle and elegant. I feel like the system plays out like a wargame should, and the mainly macro managing leaves plenty of room for strategy and tactics rather than fiddly things and too much micromanagement.

The only thing we need is either an official FAQ, or a second edition of the rules (if only a minor tweak of the first edition, to clarify most of the rules). Alas, I don't know how to really start convincing GW to at least make an FAQ to give an official stance on some of the rules, so at least everyone can play in a similar way.

Shrapnelsmile
18-02-2010, 02:10
can someone post an non-official FAQ?

Reinholt
18-02-2010, 05:56
Ironically, I started up a blog to keep track of some of my tabletop gaming thoughts recently, and had posted some FAQ stuff to keep track of it for the group I usually game with.

So here it is, with the caveat that this is just the way we do it, based on what makes intuitive sense to us, seems to fit the rules, and works well in our games:

http://fearandloathingonthetabletop.blogspot.com/2010/02/our-informal-faq.html

http://fearandloathingonthetabletop.blogspot.com/2010/02/our-informal-faq-part-2.html

If anyone has other questions, just ask, and I'll put interesting questions to the group that plays WotR around here, we'll comb over our rulebooks and imbibe too much coffee, play a few test rounds, and see what we can come up with.

arobe
18-02-2010, 06:08
Why did I get into LotR stategy game (the movie and minatures)
why did I start WotR and now enjoy it more than any other game system
the simplistic nature of the rules
flowing movement of formations - 2 parts to this
never really felt right to move in my furn and then stand there in my opponets turn to be charged.
WotR has mestill thinking about if it's better to have the priority or not after so many games Im still unsure.

The scenarios make every game more interesting and like LorRs the minatures are still brilliant IMO

cheers. Arobe

Pioneer
18-02-2010, 18:47
There's nothing much to add on the points listed above. I have found that having two, around 800-1000p armys after few beginning steps of the hobby do help, mainly one good and one evil army. Most players that i know have multiple armies in WotR, including my self. You will have much more variety in painting, selecting style and th general feel of your army.

Sedge
18-02-2010, 21:24
Thats how I got WotR started at my club. I got a cheap Elven army of ebay, painted it quickly (lotr models are quick to knock out) got another army Mordor, again of ebay and encoraged as many games as I could. Buying big job lots has allowed me a third army, Rohan, and I've given loads of models to mates to get them started. It has really been worth the effort I think.

captain krak
01-03-2010, 23:30
Nice. Thanks for the links to your informal faqs, and I also enjoyed your article, On Elves.


Ironically, I started up a blog to keep track of some of my tabletop gaming thoughts recently, and had posted some FAQ stuff to keep track of it for the group I usually game with.

So here it is, with the caveat that this is just the way we do it, based on what makes intuitive sense to us, seems to fit the rules, and works well in our games:

http://fearandloathingonthetabletop.blogspot.com/2010/02/our-informal-faq.html

http://fearandloathingonthetabletop.blogspot.com/2010/02/our-informal-faq-part-2.html

If anyone has other questions, just ask, and I'll put interesting questions to the group that plays WotR around here, we'll comb over our rulebooks and imbibe too much coffee, play a few test rounds, and see what we can come up with.

Wil Grand
09-03-2010, 10:10
Not wanting to pop up another thread for a short question. On the back of what I asked previously, I'm guessing there's room for Moria Goblins in WotR? Full list or allied? Sorry, not got the book yet.

Xelee
09-03-2010, 18:54
There is a full 'Misty Mountains' list. It has Goblins as well as a wide range of the monsters from that area, from Spiders and Wargs all the way up to Balrogs and Dragons.

In fact, it is a very effective list and hordes work well in this system.

Wil Grand
09-03-2010, 23:37
Ah, excellent! thank you, Xelee. I got worrie about them since I've never seen any talk of them being used, didn't know if they either didn't have a list, were a underpowered part of a bigger list so not worth using or just plain old pap.
I've got loads of them and they're pretty easy to pick up on ebay for next to nothing so maybe I'll put together about four or five boxes worth in the meantime.
They're excellent fun to paint!

Xelee
09-03-2010, 23:52
If you want a horde, you will like them a lot. Their two Goblin heroes are pretty cheap for what they do and the WOTR rules really support the horde aspect, with no penalties for terrain (aside from impassable) extra attacks from rear ranks, good movement and flanking bonuses.

One of the longer term local players started with these and has always done well with them. In a recent game I still couldn't force a win vs him despite the best possible deployment conditions for me. He just goes with lots of cave trolls, goblins and Durburz. You should have a lot of fun with them.

Reinholt
10-03-2010, 00:01
Let me also throw my hat into the ring to say that Goblins are rather strong. I've seen a goblin army or two played locally, and they have been very strong contenders overall. The only time I've seen one suffer a crushing defeat was against an Angmar army, as the player failed charge after charge due to some poor luck on courage rolls to charge terror causing units...

They are a very playable army, with some very interesting units (multiple monsters, including Dragons and Balrogs; very cheap cavalry; huge hordes of cheap goblins; good magic users). If you like them, go for it.

Wil Grand
10-03-2010, 09:50
Excellent chaps, cheers! I'm most certainly in!

IllidanStormrage
13-03-2010, 04:53
I tried to get into fantasy but the models never really appealed to me... to clunky and chunky i guess, and the dwarves in MY opinion look to fake.

Shrapnelsmile
14-03-2010, 06:19
I tried to get into fantasy but the models never really appealed to me... to clunky and chunky i guess, and the dwarves in MY opinion look to fake.

exactly my problem with the game, one of many.

It has been some years since I've enjoyed painting an army as much as I've enjoyed painting my WoTR Dwarves. These models are a lot less cluttered, clunky and busy than the other two systems. I love their depth of character yet simplicity in painting (for the most part).