PDA

View Full Version : 50+ magic items. Your thoughts?



Grimstonefire
01-05-2010, 20:44
So, as I have in my sticky, there is rumoured to be a fairly massive increase of the magic items in the rulebook, possibly 50+. For anyone really interested, the person who told me guessed it was more like 80 actually, but I've kept it at 50+ as lists that long can appear to be more than they actually are. At present there are 10 in the rulebook.

So, firstly what do you think of this rumour? A good idea to expand the list?

Which magic items from editions past would you like to see return?

How many people actually use things from the list now (other than scrolls)?

DukeBorric
01-05-2010, 21:04
I think with 25 % on characters (still a rumour I know) people will be using a lot more of those cheap items. I know in the armies I've had a go at designing with the 25% in mind I have.

I'm kind of hoping that it will replace the army book one's mainly because of some of the ridiculous ones in some of them (DE's) but obviously you lose all the interesting less OP ones then.

Zaustus
01-05-2010, 21:08
I think it's an interesting idea, though how useful it would be really depends a lot on what the items are. I wonder if that will pave the way for more homogenization of magic item choices by reducing the number of such items in future army books, but there's been no implication of that from the Skaven or Beastmen books.

What do you mean by "probably another 10 that appear in army books"? Each army book has more like 40-50 unique magic items, so I'm not sure what you mean.

More options is more fun, although the tendency of players is to find which ones are the most cost-effective, and just use those. You see that in every army book, so the list from the BRB won't be any different. You'll just see those common magic items even more frequently, since presumably every army will have access to them. I hope they don't make anything too broken.

I can't really speak to old editions, since I started playing early in 6th and I think the common items are pretty much the same between 6th and 7th. I think they get used a whole lot; besides the ubiquitous dispel scrolls, I know that the Sword of Might, Enchanted Shield, Power Stone and War Banner get used very commonly. I've also seen (or myself used) most of the other common magic weapons and the Staff of Sorcery on some occasion. I've never seen or used the Biting Blade, but 5 points for magic attacks and armor piercing is really a pretty good deal.

The current list of common magic items is full of stuff that's pretty simple, easy to remember, useful and reasonably priced. That combination means they get used. I have no idea if they'll continue that design philosophy with this rumored big list, but if they do I'd expect to see them get used very frequently.

Knifeparty
01-05-2010, 21:09
I find it strange that there would be that many in the rule book. I don't mind an abundance of common magic items, but I think that many of them would start stepping on the toes of the army books.

The magic items in the army books are meant to be in keeping with the theme of the army and therefore are supposed to be fluffy. Having more than 50+ magic items equally available for every army would impact the amount of items available in new army books in a negative way I think.

The only thing that I can think of is that these magic items are useful because they are cheap. Like 5 points cheap. Possibly because they realised the % system that may be implimented on Characters is very strict and we won't be able to afford decent magic items because we can't go over that % cap.

It is also possible that these magic items are race specific in that they will be very good against say undead, but suck against lizardmen.

I personally use items like the warbanner, sword of strength, enchanted shield, and power stones, and dispel scrolls all the time.

Grimstonefire
01-05-2010, 21:10
@Zaustus
There are only about 10 Common magic items that appear in army books that are not in the rulebook afaik.

To be honest I think it's created a lot of work for them, sorting out which armies can take which ones.

Witchblade
01-05-2010, 21:20
If (!) they manage to balance them, more is better.

Zaustus
01-05-2010, 21:20
@Zaustus
There are only about 10 Common magic items that appear in army books that are not in the rulebook afaik.

To be honest I think it's created a lot of work for them, sorting out which armies can take which ones.

:confused: I've never seen a common item that's not in the BRB. I know Tomb Kings can't take Power Stones (since they'd be useless) and Ogre Kingdoms can't take the Enchanted Shield (and obviously Daemons can't take anything).

Can you give me an example?

Nocculum
01-05-2010, 21:23
Are you referring to items with the same effect and points cost, but a different name?

4 + ward for 45 points.

Ignore armour weapon for 50 etc?

Grimstonefire
01-05-2010, 21:27
Hmm... Been so long since I actually looked at the ones in the rulebook I think I may have been wrong. ;) I'll edit it.

Desert Rain
01-05-2010, 21:39
I think that it could be fun with some new items. Unless they are replacing the ones in the army books, that wouldn't be as fun...

VonUber
01-05-2010, 21:46
I like it, iv allways said warhammer needs more magic items to make more customisable characters and units. (But then again iv allways said characters and magic items are way too expencive). Im all for it, if theres 50+ in the rule book hopefully we will see more in the army books... or if gw shoots themselves in the foot again like there doing allot recently we might see magic items go from army books.

-Grimgorironhide-
01-05-2010, 21:52
50+ hmm. I was expecting a few more but that's quite an increase! Hopefully they are basic items that are still fairly cheap in cost.

I.e
-5+ ward item
-+1 to cast or dispel item
-re-roll rally test banner

etc.

cheers.

Spiney Norman
01-05-2010, 23:21
So, as I have in my sticky, there is rumoured to be a fairly massive increase of the magic items in the rulebook, possibly 50+. For anyone really interested, the person who told me guessed it was more like 80 actually, but I've kept it at 50+ as lists that long can appear to be more than they actually are. At present there are 10 in the rulebook.

So, firstly what do you think of this rumour? A good idea to expand the list?

Which magic items from editions past would you like to see return?

How many people actually use things from the list now (other than scrolls)?

I think its absolutely bizarre, I really don't get why they would slap a OTT restriction on the amount of points you can spend on your chars and then make a massive list of new common items. The %cap on chars is going to strongly encourage people to field their characters as minimalist as possible, I certainly don't expect to be maxing out my character's MI limits some builds I've been experimenting with are totally without any magic items.

Leogun_91
01-05-2010, 23:24
So, firstly what do you think of this rumour? A good idea to expand the list? Great idea.


How many people actually use things from the list now (other than scrolls)? I use them all the time and staff of sorcery which seems to be so-so have saved me the game so many times now that I rarely go on a Waaagh! without it.

Ramius4
02-05-2010, 01:35
I use every single one of them. Not every game, and not with every army I play, but it's a rare game that one of my characters isn't carrying an enchanted shield.

As to their relative usefulness between armies, it really depends on the army. There's a reason that common items have different prices in each army book. Some things are more valuable or less valuable in the hands of certain races/characters.

Like I doubt that many Skink Chiefs are going to run around with a Sword of Battle, but for a Saurus, Chaos Lord, or someone else that already has a high Strength, getting an extra attack is more worthwhile.

If I'm playing against VC, the Biting Blade suddenly becomes a far more attractive option just to hit any possible ethereal opponents.

Sword of Striking is pretty damn good most of the time, especially if your characters have a high Strength or lots of Attacks already.

The list goes on... You really can't judge an item's usefulness by what it can do for only one army.

Skywave
02-05-2010, 01:49
Could it be related to the other rumor of finding magic item in a wood? That's the only way I can see for a big list of "all army" magic items. Unless they want all army to have the same gear I can't see it happening, there's not enough variety I think to get 50 to 80 general items that isn't currently in a book or another. Unless they do some race specific items in there, I find it hard to believe.

Ramius4
02-05-2010, 02:33
I don't see it as hard to believe at all Skywave. There's plenty of crossover now between item effects/different army books. I do a lot of army book design and tweaking just for fun and it's really not that hard to come up with new magic item ideas that don't resemble what exists now.

Such a list of common items would also make up for those army books that don't recieve very good lists of their own items. Beastmen ones aren't all that impressive for instance (at least not for 7th, we'll see in 8th).

Another thought about that just occurred to me. It could also be that GW has looked at the commanality between many items and decided to put them into the main rulebook as common magic items. This could reduce the amount of items in future books since you no longer need 5 different versions in 5 different army books of a weapon that causes killing blow for instance...

I don't think that's a great reason to do so, just speculating on a possible thought process.

Orktavius
02-05-2010, 03:22
if you want a book with unimpressive magic items look no further than my poor ogre kingdoms. Can't wait till we eventually get a new book....our most expensive banner protects us from ice magic...........who the hell has ice magic

Erloas
02-05-2010, 03:32
It seems a little weird, because as someone else already said, some of the common magic items have different prices in some of the army books now.

I think overall it is a good thing though, because it will level the playing field a bit with magic items. Especially some of the older books where they didn't have as many or they were set at a higher cost.

When you look at a lot of the current items in the army books there are a few items that pretty exist in every one of them, so I imagine those might become common.

I think there are going to be a lot of bound items with spells from the common lores.

With the magic phase change I think we'll see more items that deal with those changes, but its hard to say what they might be exactly. I wouldn't be too surprised to see MR talisman, and things to add power or dispel dice.

Grand Warlord
02-05-2010, 04:45
Well if they really wanted to they could put a disclaimer where the price listed in the rulebook would be the effective price until new books are published. If they really are going to make a big book of magic items (similar to I think 4th/5th ed?) it could work depending on what items they put in it, like as been mentioned already. This was when I believe all the magic items were in one book (same edition when chaos gifts were on little cardboard cards).

ftayl5
02-05-2010, 04:51
I hope you can take several talismans of protection, stacking ofcourse. More weapons, maybe an enhancement (+1) weapon for each (offensive) stat.
Maybe some armour's other than enchanted shield, enchanted armour springs to mind.

Some more banners would be cool,
Banner of Speed: +D3" to pursuing and charge movements.
Banner of Hope: + 1 LD during break test (so if you lose by 3, you only take a -2 mod. to LD)
stuff like that

ghostline
02-05-2010, 06:11
It's going to be more for the "finding magic items in terrain" bit they have in scenarios. Like a big random table.

sssk
02-05-2010, 07:47
I think it would be a good thing as long as none of them were massive doomsday weapons/armour/talismans etc.

It would make characters very customisable, without making them too powerful. Also it would mean that characters might actually have the item they're wielding from a fluff perspective too. For instance how many bows of loren have been made? because I seem to hear of a lot of wood elf highborns running around with "THE bow of loren".

Maybe that's just a little pet hate (more of a niggling annoyance). As long as they kept the effects of these items minimal (like the current common items) then I don't think they would have too much trouble balancing them out pointswise. Then more powerful items could be in the army specific lists.

In summary, I'd quite like it.

SamVimes
02-05-2010, 14:55
Well, maybe they'll let champions have a magic item like they used to have, and there will be a whole slew of cheap ones that they might take advantage of.

VonUber
02-05-2010, 15:57
I hope theres some more magical weapon subtypes like great weapons, or magical halberds, morning stars... you get the idea. magical armour types. It would make the game more intresting. Would be cool. Would also be nice if they were cheap so I could give my wizards some magical weapons :)

ghostline
02-05-2010, 17:20
I wonder if they would go the Diablo route... certain names mean certain abilitys..

like King's sword of haste, or Great Sword of the Bat!!!

mwahahaha ;)

Gabacho Mk.II
02-05-2010, 18:03
I read that therer would be 11 banners, as well as 4 items that can only be given to unit champions.


Note, this info is from other sites.







And to answer the thread, I am quite psyched to see these new magic items!!! :)

Desert Rain
02-05-2010, 18:12
I'm exited about them, it would be nice to get some more customizability for my characters since the options in the army book are pretty limited if you want to keep the character reasonably effective.

pointyteeth
02-05-2010, 18:34
I like this. Its a great way to put some magic items in the game that utilize the new game mechanics before they bring out new army lists.

logan054
02-05-2010, 18:58
So, as I have in my sticky, there is rumoured to be a fairly massive increase of the magic items in the rulebook, possibly 50+. For anyone really interested, the person who told me guessed it was more like 80 actually, but I've kept it at 50+ as lists that long can appear to be more than they actually are. At present there are 10 in the rulebook.

So, firstly what do you think of this rumour? A good idea to expand the list?

Which magic items from editions past would you like to see return?

How many people actually use things from the list now (other than scrolls)?

I have my fingers crossed for some ward saves so my WoC heroes can actually survive a round of combat, problem we may have now is that with this 3+ save no marching heroes are going to be very weak (i know have several hero models which are totally useles including harry the hammer :( )

Urgat
02-05-2010, 19:06
How many people actually use things from the list now (other than scrolls)?

The staff of sorcery is one of my few mandatory items. I still can't understand how people don't see the awesomeness of it.

I hope there's going to be a flaming sword, that's pretty much all I'm asking for.

Desert Rain
02-05-2010, 19:15
How many people actually use things from the list now (other than scrolls)?
Sword of Might, Scrolls, Power Stones, Enchanted Shield, Warbanner.
That would be about 50% then.

Spiney Norman
02-05-2010, 19:19
I read that therer would be 11 banners, as well as 4 items that can only be given to unit champions.


Note, this info is from other sites.







And to answer the thread, I am quite psyched to see these new magic items!!! :)

But there are relatively few unit champions in the game which can currently take magic items. At this rate they're going to have to so extensively errata each army book that it would probably have saved paper to make another Ravening hordes, no wonder the rule book is going to be 500 pages long...

Alltaken
02-05-2010, 19:51
I use every game warbanner, enchanted shield and dispel scrolls. Now and then power stones and staff of sorcery

Leogun_91
02-05-2010, 19:54
if you want a book with unimpressive magic items look no further than my poor ogre kingdoms. Can't wait till we eventually get a new book....our most expensive banner protects us from ice magic...........who the hell has ice magicTzarina Katrin from the Kislev armylist......people have probobly stopped playing her for that banner:rolleyes:

But there are relatively few unit champions in the game which can currently take magic items. At this rate they're going to have to so extensively errata each army book that it would probably have saved paper to make another Ravening hordes, no wonder the rule book is going to be 500 pages long... Could they not plan for the future and have these 4 (4 of 50) items only be for them at the beginning and give more books access to it when they are released? A short note like "Unless otherwise stated a unit champion is allowed 15pts of magic items" could also do the trick.

inq.serge
02-05-2010, 19:57
I hope there'll be many more unit-boosting non-banner items, especially musical instruments.

(Yes, I play party-buffing bard in RPGs.)

Spiney Norman
02-05-2010, 20:30
I hope there'll be many more unit-boosting non-banner items, especially musical instruments.

(Yes, I play party-buffing bard in RPGs.)

Lets please not have magical musical instruments, I realise that unit musicians might feel a little left out, what with banner bearers carrying magical banners and unit champions getting dedicated magic items, but seriously, there has to be a level of idiocy that the game designers wont sink below.

Or is there?

Besides, my goblins already have a magic musical instrument, behold... the pipes of Doom!

yabbadabba
02-05-2010, 20:34
Lets please not have magical musical instruments, I realise that unit musicians might feel a little left out, what with banner bearers carrying magical banners and unit champions getting dedicated magic items, but seriously, there has to be a level of idiocy that the game designers wont sink below.
Or is there?
Besides, my goblins already have a magic musical instrument, behold... the pipes of Doom!Sorry to see you are so narrow minded. Magical instruments have a long pedigree in fantasy and if they can be adapted to a battlefiled format so much the better.

An increase in the number of common sounds good to me.

Spiney Norman
02-05-2010, 20:47
Sorry to see you are so narrow minded. Magical instruments have a long pedigree in fantasy and if they can be adapted to a battlefiled format so much the better.

An increase in the number of common sounds good to me.

Nice to see that difference of opinion equals narrow minded now.

I just prefer my Warhammer Fantasy more gritty and less whimsical

Odominus
02-05-2010, 21:00
Which magic items from editions past would you like to see return?


Bring back the BANNER OF WRATH!

oh and all armies getting to put magic items on their champions is sweet. Tired of only seeing elves be able to do that.

yabbadabba
02-05-2010, 21:01
Nice to see that difference of opinion equals narrow minded now. Well, try not to make comments like this:

...but seriously, there has to be a level of idiocy that the game designers wont sink below.
Or is there? and your difference of opinion might be taken more seriously.

I just prefer my Warhammer Fantasy more gritty and less whimsical How are magical instruments whimsical? Were you molested by walt disney at a young age? Were you force fed opera? Nothing whimsical about musical instruments - its the rules behind the item which might be whimsical.

Lord Inquisitor
02-05-2010, 21:04
80 core magic items? Seems a bad idea to me. Warhammer has, to my mind, become stagnant with so few troops that don't have some special unique ability. Both 40K and Fantasy have been progressing rapidly towards more and more overcomplicated rules for army books. Skaven are a mess of special rules with several magic item lists. Fantasy has never been exactly simple, but these days it feels like "tactics" involves building the list to take advantage of the best magic items or special abilities in combination.

That said, many items are quite equivalent across armies. The 50-point "power sword" that denies armour saves, for example, is available to so many armies it might as well be a common item.

Now if it were heavily playtested and combined with a massive cutdown in the number of army-specific magic items, then maybe it might be a good idea. However, with the current massive number of magic items available, there is no doubt that it would result in overpowered combos - there's no possible way to playtest 80 items against every list.

yabbadabba
02-05-2010, 21:07
It won't be as bad Lord Inquisitor if many of these magic items are minor stat boosts or one use rerolls items. Thats if the rumour is true :)

Woodsman
02-05-2010, 21:22
I just prefer my Warhammer Fantasy more gritty and less whimsical

Nope, sorry they're not getting rid of Elves .... ... .. . :angel:

Urgat
02-05-2010, 21:56
Well, try not to make comments like this:
and your difference of opinion might be taken more seriously.
How are magical instruments musical?

Well, if they make music... :p

Commissar Vaughn
02-05-2010, 22:03
As a DOw player I can say Im looking forward to being able to hand out some toys at last. In fact,just give me the old warhammer magic supplement :)

Lord Inquisitor
02-05-2010, 22:04
It won't be as bad Lord Inquisitor if many of these magic items are minor stat boosts or one use rerolls items.
Not convinced - often innocuous items are the ones that serve the nastiest combos...


Thats if the rumour is true :)
Indeed, and I remain skeptical ("more common items" is one thing "80 common items" seems most unlikely) but come on ... extrapolating from the barest bones of a rumour is what Warseer is all about!:D

logan054
02-05-2010, 22:05
How are magical instruments musical? Were you molested by walt disney at a young age? Were you force fed opera? Nothing whimsical about musical instruments

I think this is the winner of the thread, im so tempted to sig this


As a DOw player I can say Im looking forward to being able to hand out some toys at last. In fact,just give me the old warhammer magic supplement :)

Im actually with you on a bringing back the magic supplement, i think it was the worst idea trying to fit everything into a single book, the old card system was so much more fun that what we have/had with 6th ed :(

Don Zeko
02-05-2010, 22:08
I remember 5th Edition, and I don't want to go back. The correct choice is to balance the magic items in the various army books better. Adding more, all of which have to be non-OP for every faction in the game, is not how you do that.

yabbadabba
03-05-2010, 06:49
I think this is the winner of the thread, im so tempted to sig thisIhave edited it for the sake of argument consistency, but go ahead :D

Urgat
03-05-2010, 07:10
80 core magic items? Seems a bad idea to me. Warhammer has, to my mind, become stagnant with so few troops that don't have some special unique ability. Both 40K and Fantasy have been progressing rapidly towards more and more overcomplicated rules for army books.

You can't be serious. I don't know about 40k, but fantasy is getting simplified and si!mplified again over each and every edition. Over the course of the editions, we've lost so many rules it's crazy. Heck, I've started at the begining of 5th so I've missed it, but we've lost entire statline entries.
I don't really understand, it is not the first time I read a similar comment to yours, and it strikes me particulalry when I find that every warhammer edition makes the game a bit more... I don't want to say "children-friendly", but...

I mean, on that particular subject, I'll send you back to 5th edition, where all magic was covered in the magic supplement and where, incidentally, among the hundred and something (probably two hundred) items, I've just got through the hassle of counting (stopped at some point so I'm probably off a bit) and found something like... 80ish items everybody can use. Hem :p

edit: counted again, there was 85 common items.
It can also make you wonder if it's really a rumour or just a fake...


I remember 5th Edition, and I don't want to go back. The correct choice is to balance the magic items in the various army books better. Adding more, all of which have to be non-OP for every faction in the game, is not how you do that.

I like the choice, and we won't go back to 5th edition, because 5th edition had nearly no restrictions on magic items :p

inq.serge
03-05-2010, 07:33
Besides, my goblins already have a magic musical instrument, behold... the pipes of Doom!

That's the kind of item I'm talking about. Lizzies have a drum-set, and wood-elves have a harp, not to mention all the horns around everywhere. Musical instruments for all characters, not musician only, I mean.

someone2040
03-05-2010, 08:11
Can't say I think it'll happen.
50+ magic items is more magic items than in one single warhammer book. That's a lot to mess around with AND balance so they're right across all books...

yabbadabba
03-05-2010, 08:22
Can't say I think it'll happen.
50+ magic items is more magic items than in one single warhammer book. That's a lot to mess around with AND balance so they're right across all books... Not really. Back in the old percentage days there were far more generic magic items than race specific ones. You could produce 50 generic magic items by duplicating some from each army book, then as that army book gets revised you just leave those ones out.

Simples :).

Gorbad Ironclaw
03-05-2010, 10:56
I think it sounds interesting. With luck it will add a bit of diversity and fun back into the game. With the way the system is currently you pretty much know what options you are likely to see, I can't see how adding more options will be bad.

On the other hand if we really do see a 25% cap on characters it likely won't matter to much and any improvement in fun and diversity will be minor at best.

Odin
03-05-2010, 11:23
If this rumour is true, I can only assume that there are not just rules for these common magic items, but also prices (as there were in the 6th Ed rulebook I think). But that's not going to help for balance, after all. The current army books have variable prices for these items because they are more beneficial for some armies than for others. Sword of battle for example is worth more for Chaos than for Empire, because it gives you an extra S5 attack instead of a S4 one. Enchanted Shield is far more useful if you've already got a decent armour save than if you're wood elves.

Will be interesting to see how they deal with this. But I still like the idea. The old 4th(?) edition book full of magic items was one of my favourite bits of the hobby - I used to spend ages trawling through that for magic item combos.

Urgat
03-05-2010, 12:28
Sword of battle for example is worth more for Chaos than for Empire, because it gives you an extra S5 attack instead of a S4 one.

This is true but... How does balance work out when you buy it for a black orc warboss or a goblin big boss? Same price, and yet the bonus is obviously different :)

logan054
03-05-2010, 13:05
Ihave edited it for the sake of argument consistency, but go ahead :D

consider it done :D

Kevlar
03-05-2010, 13:16
I miss the crown of command!

Oh and whoever said the army list magic items are "characterful" well a lot of those items are the old generic items that used to be available to everyone. Sword of Heroes, Armor of meteoric iron, book of ashur...

Davo
03-05-2010, 13:40
I miss the crown of command!

Oh and whoever said the army list magic items are "characterful" well a lot of those items are the old generic items that used to be available to everyone. Sword of Heroes, Armor of meteoric iron, book of ashur...

Indeed, you were just encouraged to make your own fluff for the item that fitted in with whichever army you fielded, those with a bad imagination could just say they stole it. ;)

Happy days, loved the Battle Magic supplement.

Drasanil
03-05-2010, 14:39
I want my Amber Amulet back!

I miss the good old days when my General was kitted out with the Sword of Might, Armour of Fortune, and Amber Amulet. Funniest part is he had insane luck, the more tooled up the opposition the better he did, once held up a Frenzied Hydrasword Khorne lord in a challenge while my Cold One Knights beat his escort and ran 'em down, hilarious.

BigbyWolf
03-05-2010, 16:46
Happy days, loved the Battle Magic supplement.

I do sometimes long that my Black Orc Warboss could take his Armour of Brilliance and Silver Seal combo again. In combat he could only be hit on 7's by people with the same WS or less and 6's by anyone higher...the benefits of being able to steal the Bretonnian Kings armour and Karl Franzs talisman...

Davo
03-05-2010, 16:56
I do sometimes long that my Black Orc Warboss could take his Armour of Brilliance and Silver Seal combo again. In combat he could only be hit on 7's by people with the same WS or less and 6's by anyone higher...the benefits of being able to steal the Bretonnian Kings armour and Karl Franzs talisman...

Aye, it wasn't perfect, but I'll never get that feeling back from the hobby of flicking through the Battle Magic Rulebook and reading through all the cards as a young teenager.

Malorian
03-05-2010, 17:41
I'll welcome anything that is done well and gives me more options.

However as it's been said over and over, there comes a point where you risk unforseen loopholes...

Balerion
03-05-2010, 18:13
You can't be serious. I don't know about 40k, but fantasy is getting simplified and si!mplified again over each and every edition. Over the course of the editions, we've lost so many rules it's crazy. Heck, I've started at the begining of 5th so I've missed it, but we've lost entire statline entries.
<snip>
He's wrong about 40K as well. The progression of the Tyranid codex is a perfect example. In 3rd edition the codex essentially invited you to create your own creatures from the ground up. The 4th edition book streamlined that creation system by limiting the types of upgrade each type of creature could take. Now the 5th edition book has installed standardized statlines for all creatures.

That said, I think WFB is in desperate need of some streamlining. The movement system is an atrocity.


Aye, it wasn't perfect, but I'll never get that feeling back from the hobby of flicking through the Battle Magic Rulebook and reading through all the cards as a young teenager.
That likely has more to do with you being a teenager then, and less to do with the functionality and/or ambition of a given edition of rules.

Davo
03-05-2010, 18:24
That likely has more to do with you being a teenager then, and less to do with the functionality and/or ambition of a given edition of rules.

Yeah I realise this, but I am allowed to look through my rose tinted glasses everynow and then aren't I? ;)

willowdark
03-05-2010, 18:27
How is movement in 7th ed an atrocity? You wheel, turn, reform, change formation, march, charge and occasionally pivot. That's not that hard to wrap your head around.

Malorian
03-05-2010, 18:57
That said, I think WFB is in desperate need of some streamlining. The movement system is an atrocity.

I couldn't disagree more.

In my opinion the current movement system is near perfect with only few minor problems.


Warhammer fantasy is what it is because of its comlpex and comprehensive ruleset. If you were to go and streamline it you'd just end up with another 40k.

Balerion
03-05-2010, 19:49
How is movement in 7th ed an atrocity? You wheel, turn, reform, change formation, march, charge and occasionally pivot. That's not that hard to wrap your head around.
Everything is so slow and so restricted. Games are won and lost in the deployment phase as much as they are during gameplay. There's very little exciting, spontaneous action and reaction fostered in a game of WFB. Units are often committed to a particular task/target the second they're placed. The representational movement values in the game are so slow that it ruins the immersion. Terrain is so difficult to negotiate that it functions more as impassable areas of the board than it does as actual, contestable terrain.

Why should turning cost a significant portion of your movement when it literally amounts to a group of individuals turning on their heels? Same thing applies to pulling an about face. These maneuvers should be extremely simple to execute.

It's acceptable for pivots/wheels/formations to cost more movement, since they are more involved procedures.

edit: In the interest of full disclosure I should admit that I've played 40K for a decade, and only picked up WFB last summer. I don't advocate 40K style movement for WFB, but a more flexible system would be more fun, and much more friendly to newcomers. WFB needs to save itself from a slow death/becoming the next Specialist Games, and embracing a more approachable, intuitive movement system would do a lot in that regard.

Glabro
03-05-2010, 19:51
Magic items don't have an intrinsic value in your army as a whole. Individual items can be worth it or not, and while there are no-brainers in many books, taking magic items is not a necessity.

If the new system retains this principle (hopefully doing away with the no-brainer items gradually), then I have no problem with it.

I've usually thought of magic items as a trap for new players. It's much easier to take items that you don't need and weaken your army than to take too few items to hurt your army (as usually the no-brainer items are obvious).

willowdark
03-05-2010, 20:08
Belarion, games between two equally skilled opponents are often decided by who makes the biggest mistake. This is where the element of true skill is. That's why the deployment phase is so critical. It is the moment of pure decision making.

Deploying out of position should mean that a unit fails to have an impact on the game. That is a critical mistake. Conversely, having the foresight to see ahead for several turns, based on your knowledge of your army, your enemy's army and their resources, and going into the game with the superior battle plan _is_ skill. It's what make Fantasy the more tactical game.

And terrain is meant to be encumbering because it carves lanes into the battlefield, lanes that must be controlled either by seizing the initiative with strong fast units, setting traps or covering it with superior firepower. Again, its what gives Fantasy its reputation as the more tactical game. You live and die by the decisions you make before the game begins.

Malorian
03-05-2010, 20:08
WFB needs to save itself from a slow death/becoming the next Specialist Games, and embracing a more approachable, intuitive movement system would do a lot in that regard.

I don't see it getting any less popular in these parts, so I really don't see it as a specialist game.

Fantasy has a huge following but it is mainly made up of vet players who get together on their own rather than the new 40k players that swarm the GW shops.

Lose those vet players but over simplifying the rules and you might as drop the entire system.

Urgat
03-05-2010, 20:18
That being said, you need to inject new blood onece in a while, vets are not the oens who buy tons of stuff regularly, since they're vets. I agree that at times movement can be quite cumbersome, but I blame it for that principaly because of terrain, I wish I could play with more terrain, to have more "cinematic" settings, but it takes so much just to go around a stupid tree that people are kindda forced to take put as little stuff as possible on the table.

Malorian
03-05-2010, 20:26
It doesn't take much to get around a tree if you don't march straight up to it in the first place...


The idea of large formations of warriors being able to move around at whim like shifting sands or kids in a candy store just doesn't make any sense to me..

Balerion
03-05-2010, 20:27
Belarion, games between two equally skilled opponents are often decided by who makes the biggest mistake. This is where the element of true skill is. That's why the deployment phase is so critical. It is the moment of pure decision making.

Deploying out of position should mean that a unit fails to have an impact on the game. That is a critical mistake. Conversely, having the foresight to see ahead for several turns, based on your knowledge of your army, your enemy's army and their resources, and going into the game with the superior battle plan _is_ skill. It's what make Fantasy the more tactical game.

And terrain is meant to be encumbering because it carves lanes into the battlefield, lanes that must be controlled either by seizing the initiative with strong fast units, setting traps or covering it with superior firepower. Again, its what gives Fantasy its reputation as the more tactical game. You live and die by the decisions you make before the game begins.
Coincidentally, I just posted a reply in another thread discussing these very issues. To be brief, I have a very different conception of "skill" than you seem to. To me, a skilled player should have the ability to salvage victory from the jaws of defeat (eg. a poor deployment). The game shouldn't be a dry, deterministic progression of causation, or two players going through the motions to officially declare a winner that was already decided before any models were moved. It should have some dynamism and freeflow, and players should be surprised a couple of times per game.

And I agree with Urgat's comments above. WFB may have lots of loyal veterans... but so did Necromunda, Mordheim, and Blood Bowl. Unless the systems are attractive enough to pull in new people and turn them into veterans themselves, GW won't support the system forever.



The idea of large formations of warriors being able to move around at whim like shifting sands or kids in a candy store just doesn't make any sense to me..
They're not large formations, though. I could fit fifty life-sized Eternal Guard in my backyard. Compare this to the types of huge armies you see in film (the same movies that seem to serve as inspirational fodder for many players)... those consist of hundreds or thousands of individuals.

Malorian
03-05-2010, 20:31
The game shouldn't be a dry, deterministic progression of causation, or two players going through the motions to officially declare a winner that was already decided before any models were moved. It should have some dynamism and freeflow, and players should be surprised a couple of times per game.

And this is exactly how fantasy is now anyway.

As long as you aren't foolish enough to put block infantry in the middle of a forest, your warmachines behind buildings, and your horsemen facing the wrong way behind your line, then it really isn't an issue.

Sure you 'could' screw yourself over in the deployment phase, and how you deploy is very important, but mentally challenged people aside the vast majority of people have a pretty good handle on it and the winner is decided by what you do with the army.

chivalrous
03-05-2010, 20:41
The more I read, the more it sounds like they're backtracking back to 5th edition :)

I don't think having 50+ common items is such a bad idea, I mean how many swords do we have that ignore armour saves (with no further bonuses) or talismans that give a 5+ ward save, etc.?
There are so many items that could be stripped from the race specific books and put into the rulebook.
It might even level the playing field a bit if certain powerful combinations are allowed in other armies. But that's a controversial idea that some might say reduces the differences between each army and homogenises the game.

Points costs? It's possible there could be multiple prices depending on the base cost of the character carrying the item so a character costing up to 100 points pays the base cost (bc) one price, a character costing 100-200 points pays another price, a character costing 200-400 points pays an even higher price and a character costing more than that pays the highest price. What would the increment be, I dunno, Base cost/bc+5/bc+10/bc+15? Where Arcane items are concerned, they could be based on the wizard's level?
All just theorizing though.

As for what I'd like to see back? The standard of shielding was a common fixture on my Corsairs back in the day. One of my Sorcerers usually had the staff that held so many Winds of Magic cards (but had to roll above the amount stored on D6 or loose them).

jamano
03-05-2010, 20:44
I do wish that forests didn't make you half move AND prevent marching(same for turn actions) sure sure there's strategy in forcing your opponent into it, but it's part of what makes stock in ranked units so low.

artisturn
03-05-2010, 20:45
Well if this turns out to be true then I am all for it.

What I am hoping for is more magic weapon choices in the 10 to 15 point range and with the emphasize on bigger units I imagine there will be a good amount of Magic Standards as well.

As for lethal combos it is going to happen no matter how careful GW is in their game design there is always going to be some one trying to exploit some loop hole.

Urgat
03-05-2010, 21:22
It doesn't take much to get around a tree if you don't march straight up to it in the first place...


The idea of large formations of warriors being able to move around at whim like shifting sands or kids in a candy store just doesn't make any sense to me..

Large units that cannot move around a tree w/o slowing down doesn't make much more sense to me. That's just my opinion, which I thought I'd share, I'm fine if you disagree, but you're not going to use the "it makes sense" argument to say that the current way of dealing with units is "near perfect", as you say. Anyway the topic isn't about movement, it's about common items, and since there's already been 85 common items before, I can't se why they couldn't bring back 80 now. Probably most of the same too, toned down (not going to see the hydra sword back as it was for exemple, methinks :p)

Tactical Retreat!
04-05-2010, 00:03
Belarion, games between two equally skilled opponents are often decided by who makes the biggest mistake. This is where the element of true skill is. That's why the deployment phase is so critical. It is the moment of pure decision making.

Deploying out of position should mean that a unit fails to have an impact on the game. That is a critical mistake. Conversely, having the foresight to see ahead for several turns, based on your knowledge of your army, your enemy's army and their resources, and going into the game with the superior battle plan _is_ skill. It's what make Fantasy the more tactical game.

And terrain is meant to be encumbering because it carves lanes into the battlefield, lanes that must be controlled either by seizing the initiative with strong fast units, setting traps or covering it with superior firepower. Again, its what gives Fantasy its reputation as the more tactical game. You live and die by the decisions you make before the game begins.

Get a dictionary. All that you describe is strategy, not tactics. When it comes to making tactical decisions 40k is far superior precisely due to the fact that units always have a plethora of options available to them during the game, instead of deployment.

Spiney Norman
04-05-2010, 10:54
He's wrong about 40K as well. The progression of the Tyranid codex is a perfect example. In 3rd edition the codex essentially invited you to create your own creatures from the ground up. The 4th edition book streamlined that creation system by limiting the types of upgrade each type of creature could take. Now the 5th edition book has installed standardized statlines for all creatures.

That said, I think WFB is in desperate need of some streamlining. The movement system is an atrocity.


That likely has more to do with you being a teenager then, and less to do with the functionality and/or ambition of a given edition of rules.

I agree that some streamlining is needed. The amount of time we waste currently looking up obscure special rules, cross-referencing army books with the BRB and back again, then debating how the two interact is just idiotic.

The easiest way to speed up the game would be to simplify how the rules are presented, not necessarily simplifying the game play. I like what they did with 40K in creating the Universal Special rules, I think that could much better for Fantasy as long as they don't go overboard on exceptions for every unit in the army books, which seems to be a big problem at the moment.


Get a dictionary. All that you describe is strategy, not tactics. When it comes to making tactical decisions 40k is far superior precisely due to the fact that units always have a plethora of options available to them during the game, instead of deployment.

I think the point about 40K is, it rarely matters exactly what you do, whereas in Warhammer there are many crucial points (mainly in the movement phase) where the game constantly hangs in the balance. That said, both games are totally subject to the dice, a lucky pass on a single break-test can literally salvage the game for you in WH (and has done for me on many occasions).

That said, I think the "40K has no tactics" line comes largely from the perception that 40K = Spacemarines (largely the company's fault since they over-support SMs and largely ignore the rest of the armies aside from a new codex every 6-8 yrs), and space marines are the least tactical army in the game (hence great for n00bs, hence over-supported by the company, viva la vicious circle of doom!)

My Eldar and Necrons are pretty hard to play effectively without some serious tactical thought, I know Tau are a challenge too, as my reg opponent plays them.

Lord Inquisitor
04-05-2010, 14:43
I agree that some streamlining is needed. The amount of time we waste currently looking up obscure special rules, cross-referencing army books with the BRB and back again, then debating how the two interact is just idiotic.

The easiest way to speed up the game would be to simplify how the rules are presented, not necessarily simplifying the game play. I like what they did with 40K in creating the Universal Special rules, I think that could much better for Fantasy as long as they don't go overboard on exceptions for every unit in the army books, which seems to be a big problem at the moment.
You know what'd be a good system? Give a list of "universal special rules" and then have no new special rules in armybooks other than army-wide special rules. Really, there's nearly no units that couldn't be replicated by a good core set of special rules with their weapons and profile.


I think the point about 40K is, it rarely matters exactly what you do, whereas in Warhammer there are many crucial points (mainly in the movement phase) where the game constantly hangs in the balance.
Meh, I'm not convinced about that. 40K is more fluid, usually because most units can shoot and assault with devastating weapons, but I'm not even convinced about Fantasy being that critical about deployment anymore... given that most people are playing fastcav/monster/flierhammer these days, redeployment isn't that tough. Conversely most troops, even mechanised, are usually slower in 40K than fast cav in Fantasy.

Both games - and, really, any wargame or indeed even real warfare - comes down to applying a greater proportion of force to a segment of the enemy army while avoiding the remainder, destroying it (by virtue of stacking the odds in your favour) with few losses and then having a numerical advantage against the remainder of the army.

I've always maintained that Fantasy has much greater tactical depth (or strategic, for the pedants), but these days it feels like the flying bloodthirsters, popemobiles and abominations dominate the boards and much of the core mechanics are simply ignored [edit: and here's hoping 8th will bring the focus back!]. Then again, 40K has become mired in deepstrikers, scouters and outflankers that can appear and attack or even assault without any possible reprisal from the enemy, because the game conspiciously lacks an overwatch mechanic. Suffice to say both systems are far from ideal right now, but I think it's unfair to say it doesn't matter what you do in 40K - last game I played, I deployed feigning strength in my centre, refused my right flank, depriving my opponent the utility of several units early on, smashed my opponent's forces on my left flank and rolled up his flank. So "fantasy" style tactics can work in 40K.

Anyway, even with a good set of USRs in 40K, the recent codecies have been absolutely chock-full of special rules, exceptions and unique wargear. 40K hasn't been "streamlined" in a long time.


That said, I think the "40K has no tactics" line comes largely from the perception that 40K = Spacemarines (largely the company's fault since they over-support SMs and largely ignore the rest of the armies aside from a new codex every 6-8 yrs), and space marines are the least tactical army in the game (hence great for n00bs, hence over-supported by the company, viva la vicious circle of doom!)
I disagree with you on virtually every point there. Sure, there are more space marine based armies, but there haven't been more Codex: Space Marines editions than Codex: Imperial Guard since 3rd ed. I don't know about your metagame, but certainly in competetive circles Space Marines are positively under-represented these days - well, they're perhaps still the most-played army, but Imperial Guard typically come in second and at least locally Orks are epidemic. And I'm not convinced that Space Marines are less tactical - they have perhaps the broades range of playstyles in 40K and they require quite a bit of thought to make the most out of them, given their B-list army power status. Now Space Wolves, that's another matter ... with 2 combat weapons, counter-attack and dirt-cheap upgrades, Grey Hunters are a no-brainer unit.

Gabacho Mk.II
04-05-2010, 20:51
I still dont understand why this thread isnt over 10 pages by now.

Easily one of the most important threads concerning 8th ed.


:shifty:

Foxbat
04-05-2010, 21:23
Not sure if already discussed (I did quickly scan the thread), but isn’t it just as likely that the 50 to 80 item list is really just a giant errata to magic items in specific army books aimed at fixing those items that are now redundant or needing to be revised due to changes in 8th edition (e.g. revisions to items to address such things as a single best save rule)?

silashand
05-05-2010, 05:53
So, firstly what do you think of this rumour? A good idea to expand the list?

I always like additional options as long as they are useful. I've never really understood why so few "common" items exist really given the prevalence of chaos/magic in the old world.


Which magic items from editions past would you like to see return?

Hmmm... good question. Most I can think of are race-specific now so I dunno.


How many people actually use things from the list now (other than scrolls)?

Other than scrolls, the war banner and the occasional power stone, I have not seen anything out of the common items list in literally *years*. I am guilty of that as well.

Cheers, Gary

silashand
05-05-2010, 06:03
You know what'd be a good system? Give a list of "universal special rules" and then have no new special rules in armybooks other than army-wide special rules. Really, there's nearly no units that couldn't be replicated by a good core set of special rules with their weapons and profile.

I have to agree with that for the most part. I would allow some one-off special rules for truly unique units though.



Conversely most troops, even mechanised, are usually slower in 40K than fast cav in Fantasy.

The difference though is in 40K units generally have 360 degree LoS. Positioning is much more important in WFB for that reason alone.


I've always maintained that Fantasy has much greater tactical depth (or strategic, for the pedants), but these days it feels like the flying bloodthirsters, popemobiles and abominations dominate the boards and much of the core mechanics are simply ignored [edit: and here's hoping 8th will bring the focus back!].

Agreed. While I like the monsters due to the high fantasy element, the RPS aspect seems to have gotten out of hand.


Then again, 40K has become mired in deepstrikers, scouters and outflankers that can appear and attack or even assault without any possible reprisal from the enemy, because the game conspiciously lacks an overwatch mechanic.

That and 40K can be easily won on the first turn with a good round of shooting. I still think alternating both the movement and shooting phases would do wonders for that game. JMO though.

Cheers, Gary

Balerion
05-05-2010, 06:45
That and 40K can be easily won on the first turn with a good round of shooting. I still think alternating both the movement and shooting phases would do wonders for that game. JMO though.

Only on a poorly-realized board. Proper use of recommended terrain makes this nearly impossible to do.

silashand
05-05-2010, 08:10
Only on a poorly-realized board. Proper use of recommended terrain makes this nearly impossible to do.

This is OT, but I disagree entirely here. The recommended amount of terrain is only 25% which still allows 1st turn "wins" far more often than is desirable. That coupled with that abomination called TLoS makes me really despise that particular aspect of 40K.

Cheers, Gary

lanrak
05-05-2010, 08:28
Hi all.
I would like to chime in with a possible implementation of 'core magic items' that fits with the current development method.

ALL magic items abilities are listed in in the Core Rule Book, along with the standard special rules .

Then each army book simply references whith magic items and special rules appply to that particular army and the relevent cost.

Similar to how Enchanted Sield does exactly the same in all armies but the price varies depending on which army is using it.

So the army books spend more time on background and composition , without having to take up umpteen pages of 'exactly the same magic item -special rule but with a different name '.:D

If this has already been said , Oooops.

TTFN
Lanrak.

Gazak Blacktoof
05-05-2010, 08:45
That seems likely Lanrak, particualrly as people have said that there will be some PDFs available around the release of the new BRB. These documents could easily contain a list of available common items and their associated cost for each army.

As for how I feel about the addition of these items to the game, I'll let the third post in this thread say it for me-


I think it's an interesting idea, though how useful it would be really depends a lot on what the items are.

Oh, and can we take the off topic WHFB vs 40K junk outside please?!

Faitfull
05-05-2010, 09:49
Cant help but thinking what it will do for the old armies, like Dogs of War... perhaps they will be useable once again

hoping here ;)

willowdark
05-05-2010, 12:32
Other than scrolls, the war banner and the occasional power stone, I have not seen anything out of the common items list in literally *years*. I am guilty of that as well.

Cheers, Gary

You forgot Sword of Might. For 15 points that sword makes it into a lot of lists as a good compliment to hero builds.

But you're right. Most of the common magic items are useless, and there should be a better selection.

I think that in a lot of ways the design team just comes up with items that just do _something_, without any regard really to what those items are competing with. Magic weapons that don't give a strength bonus are almost never worth taking over a weapon that does, and why would anyone take the Staff of Sorcery for 50 pts when you can have 2 scrolls.

Gazak Blacktoof
05-05-2010, 12:37
Wit the exception of the sword of striking and the biting blade all of the current items get used off and on by my friends and I.

Urgat
05-05-2010, 15:40
why would anyone take the Staff of Sorcery for 50 pts when you can have 2 scrolls.

Ok, let's say you're facing a VC army who spams one dice spells. Which one do you want, the staff of sorcery, or the two scrolls?
Nothing else to add.

Drasanil
05-05-2010, 20:04
Ok, let's say you're facing a VC army who spams one dice spells. Which one do you want, the staff of sorcery, or the two scrolls?
Nothing else to add.

Oh that staff is awesome, doubly so if you're playing High Elves, +2 dispel against single dice spammers his hilarious, and that's just a back up incase you didn't manage to get drain magic off which pretty much shuts down single dice spamming on it's own.

Avian
05-05-2010, 20:11
Which magic items from editions past would you like to see return?
I'd like some of the oldies and goldies to return. Oh, wait, some of the oldies and goldies are returning. Lucky me! :)


I use the Sword of Might (very often), War Banner (ditto), Enchanted shield (less so), Power Stones (occasionally), Talismans of Protection (only with my Tzeentch guys) and Dispel Scrolls (one per battle, so I'm ahead of the curve).

Drasanil
05-05-2010, 20:15
I'd like some of the oldies and goldies to return. Oh, wait, some of the oldies and goldies are returning. Lucky me! :)

Do share... I still have my 5th edd battle magic supplement to cross-reference any cryptic clues you might want to give out... :D

sorberec
05-05-2010, 20:29
Dispel Scrolls (one per battle, so I'm ahead of the curve).


Hmm.. is that a hint?

Lord Inquisitor
05-05-2010, 20:37
That sounds like a hint that Dispel scrolls may become Dispel scroll...

CrystalSphere
05-05-2010, 23:46
I can imagine them putting common items like 15 poins 6+ ward save, 30 points 5+, etc. and then make the items in each army book less generic but more "fun" with odds combinations of things. This way all armies would get a lot of items to choose from the common list that are useful, perhaps leaving the army specific ones more for race items or fluffy items, or items with drawbacks at cheaper price (think skaven). I personally like the idea of adding a whole lot of common items that everyone can use, one that i hope to see is the Magic resistance talisman (15 points MR1) which is like the gnoblar stone of the ogre kingdoms. You can have up to 3 of them in the same character stacking up to MR3. I would like to see that sort of common items, preferably avoiding too powerful items, perhaps the maximun price could be 50.

Grimstonefire
05-05-2010, 23:52
I did say there was a rumour about all the items in the book being one per army. ;)

Misfratz
06-05-2010, 06:13
I'm a bit lukewarm... I sort of like the potential for customisation that comes with having primarily race-specific magic item lists. Also, where many armies share an item that is very similar [weapon of ignore armour, 4+ ward save] there are two advantages to keeping that in the books rather than in a common list:
1. You are able to prevent one or two armies from having the item.
2. The item has a race-specific description - story-telling is important too!

big squig
06-05-2010, 06:15
My fear is that it's too many. The more magic items you add, the more chance for underpowered/overpowered items there are. And I don't trust GW to balance anything.

Sometimes less is more.