PDA

View Full Version : My honest opinions on warhammer.



KrisPicman
19-06-2010, 20:55
I hate magic. I truly believe that if GW was to do away with the magic phase and revamp the game into a more combat (close and ranged obviously not magical), troop and war orientated game it would be better.
I just in all honesty do not like magic at all. Now I know magic is an integral part of the game but I think warhammer could be better off if it minimized its effect on the game and actually forced you into a more "warrior" perspective.

Dont flame me because your OPINION is different than mine. If you disagree please act like an adult.

tezdal
19-06-2010, 21:07
Well... there's always WAB if you like that sort of thing, not really a magic fan either, but it dosn't bother me all that much.

snowywlf
19-06-2010, 21:11
I actually wouldnt be playing WFB if there wasnt magic. A good part of my original army choice (Lizardmen) was based on the Slann and their ability with magic (fluff wise anyway).

I want to play in a *fantasy* universe, not a historic universe. Now, do I like how insane it appears to be for 8th? No, not really. I think it should be a fun, useful phase... exactly like shooting, close combat and movement.

Lord Malorne
19-06-2010, 21:14
Likewise, I love magic in WFB.

minionboy
19-06-2010, 21:15
I hate magic. I truly believe that if GW was to do away with the magic phase and revamp the game into a more combat (close and ranged obviously not magical), troop and war orientated game it would be better.
I just in all honesty do not like magic at all. Now I know magic is an integral part of the game but I think warhammer could be better off if it minimized its effect on the game and actually forced you into a more "warrior" perspective.

Dont flame me because your OPINION is different than mine. If you disagree please act like an adult.

Definitely not meant to be a flaming post, but...

Why play Warhammer?

There are tons of historic gaming systems out there, none of which have magic. Alternatively, if you like GW products, LOTR seems to have much less influential magic.

Ultimate Life Form
19-06-2010, 21:18
A, sure, a Fantasy game without Magic would be such an excellent idea...

While we're at it, why not take the Xenos races out of 40K?

Looks a bit like you missed the point to me, but you can still play games with only Dwarves involved of course, so all hope is not lost.

Korraz
19-06-2010, 21:24
But don't forget using no runes whatsoever, since Runes are also created by magic.

Wendersnaven
19-06-2010, 21:30
I'm on board with you, as I do not like the arcane or relying on it. My objective is to nullify the enemy magic phase so that the game is determined by strategy of troops.

I would play historical or something but all my friends play fantasy and I have soo many darn models it would break my heart to play anything else.

Commodus Leitdorf
19-06-2010, 21:31
While we're at it, why not take the Xenos races out of 40K?


Wait wait....there are Xenos races in 40k?

When did the Space marines allow that to happen!!?!??


In seriousness though....it's a fantasy game. I'm not a super fan of magic either but I wouldn't want to play this game if it wasn't there since, you know, it wouldn't be a fantasy game.

EmperorNorton
19-06-2010, 21:31
I hate magic. I truly believe that if GW was to do away with the magic phase and revamp the game into a more combat (close and ranged obviously not magical), troop and war orientated game it would be better.
I just in all honesty do not like magic at all. Now I know magic is an integral part of the game but I think warhammer could be better off if it minimized its effect on the game and actually forced you into a more "warrior" perspective.

Dont flame me because your OPINION is different than mine. If you disagree please act like an adult.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, but are there any reasons in particular that made you form this opinion?
The way you have presented your point there really isn't anything to discuss, aside from the "maybe you should play a historical game" retort.

Nuada
19-06-2010, 21:37
I truly believe that if GW was to do away with the magic phase and revamp the game into a more combat, troop and war orientated game it would be better.

You could try warmaster. It still has magic and characters, but they aren't as powerful as the WH equivalent. It's a better game, but harder to find any opponents.

Or you could put a limit/cap on magic and magic items within your games.

I've had quite a few games of 7th ed without any magic items or magic. They've been my favourite games. Wouldn't work with every army (VC's & TK's)

Volker the Mad Fiddler
19-06-2010, 21:45
I hate magic. I truly believe that if GW was to do away with the magic phase and revamp the game into a more combat (close and ranged obviously not magical), troop and war orientated game it would be better.
I just in all honesty do not like magic at all. Now I know magic is an integral part of the game but I think warhammer could be better off if it minimized its effect on the game and actually forced you into a more "warrior" perspective.

Dont flame me because your OPINION is different than mine. If you disagree please act like an adult.

I somewhat share your opinion and would just like to be able to compete without having to use magic. Chaos and Bretts basically do fine without shooting. Gunlines can compete without movement or combat [for the most part]. Why can't there be an army for the traditional sword and sorcery fan where magic was associated with the dark and unknowable but the brave hero could overcome it by steel, strength and guile. So, I don't want to see magic done away with, but would like some more 'mundane' choices with an army [similar to say Brett virtues] rather than always casters and magic items.

Gimp
19-06-2010, 21:49
Magic is just as much a part and appeal of WFB as is infantry blocks and cavalry charges

AFnord
19-06-2010, 22:04
It might also have a lot to do with your local meta. If you would encourage people to make lists with far less magic and with a greater focus on troops & powerful mle heroes, then you would probably get a game more similar to what you are looking for.

I take it that you are quite fond of Robert E. Howard and his Conan stories, where magic is often portrayed as quite a bit darker than most post LoTR fantasy.

Slyphor
19-06-2010, 22:13
I like the magic for the fantastical aspect it adds to the game, which is key for "fantasy," but within the game, at least with 7th, I thought it provided a decent amount of unpredictability to a game otherwise based on averages and accurate guessing. In 8th, this aspect may be less important due to other aspects of the game, which have increased in unpredictability. Of course, that would never make me trade a fireball for a cannonball.

Maoriboy007
19-06-2010, 22:16
I hate magic. I truly believe that if GW was to do away with the magic phase and revamp the game into a more combat (close and ranged obviously not magical), troop and war orientated game it would be better.


There are tons of historic gaming systems out there, none of which have magic. Alternatively, if you like GW products, LOTR seems to have much less influential magic.

Minionboy seems to have answered your question, you are perfectly entitled to not like the magic phase but really, your probably looking at the game system then. There are a lot of good alternatives.
Fortunatly for you, GW seems to have worked pretty hard at eliminating a lot of the actual fantasy element in 8th. Its look more limited to massive elite blocks of in moving robotically in formation for the most part. Basically Fantastic Monsters and Wizards are heavily penalised, Gunlines and War Machines have stepped up to become the powerhouses.

Vandelan
19-06-2010, 22:21
I hate magic. I truly believe that if GW was to do away with the magic phase and revamp the game into a more combat (close and ranged obviously not magical), troop and war orientated game it would be better.
I just in all honesty do not like magic at all. Now I know magic is an integral part of the game but I think warhammer could be better off if it minimized its effect on the game and actually forced you into a more "warrior" perspective.

Dont flame me because your OPINION is different than mine. If you disagree please act like an adult.

If you want to play a game without magic, play 40k.

After playing 40k for a couple of years the magic in Fantasy is one of the hands down most exciting and fun things about Fantasy for me.

Volker the Mad Fiddler
19-06-2010, 23:02
It might also have a lot to do with your local meta. If you would encourage people to make lists with far less magic and with a greater focus on troops & powerful mle heroes, then you would probably get a game more similar to what you are looking for.

I take it that you are quite fond of Robert E. Howard and his Conan stories, where magic is often portrayed as quite a bit darker than most post LoTR fantasy.

That is exactly where my love of fantasy comes from, though the aversion to magic has been continued by many authors [such as David Gemmell]. The closest I have come to my perfect army was 6th edition Empire which had only a single warrior priest, but still contained 5 or 6 magic items. I just think it is odd that you can remove any other aspect of the game by choosing the right army, but magic has to remain to be competitive especially when Warhammer is generally darker in tone [all magic is from Chaos] than most 'high' fantasy worlds.

Heimagoblin
20-06-2010, 00:07
Protecting wizards, getting them into los of the targets and using them to battle with opponents wizards whilst those all around them are fighting hhand to hand knowing if they let there own wizard die they will be burned to a crisp. Classic tactical gaming, I love it. I suggest you read the "ERAGON" series, it may change your idea's about magic.

Seth the Dark
20-06-2010, 00:23
I like the randomness and sheer destructive potential that magic has, but I prefer to stay on the defensive because I prefer much more reliable parts of the game (ie shooting and combat).

Noserenda
20-06-2010, 00:25
You do realise you can play Warhammer without Wizards? We've done it before and it works fine... Talk to your opponents..

Lord Malorne
20-06-2010, 00:30
Yeah, and hope they don't play undead or like magic ;).

Darsc Zacal
20-06-2010, 01:27
I guess I'm going to have to go against the tide here and stand beside the OP on this.

Magic is only one aspect of Fantasy. But without magic we wouldn't have flying horses or dragons. I like having those things in my armies. What I suspect the OP doesn't like are spellcasters in his wargames. I'm much the same in that respect, although as I've stated, I love my fantastical creatures, outlandish background and scenarios, and over the top weaponry. All of these are just different aspects of Fantasy.

I'd find it very hard to engage myself in a historical wargame, it wouldn't capture my imagination. I know of many people who don't like firearms and gunpowder in their fantasy wargames, yet those make up a large part of Warhammer too. I think the trouble is finding like minded individuals to play against, as I believe that the Warhammer rulesystem is certainly robust enough to handle games excluding these things if the two players are so inclined.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised, yet I am, that so many people believe that their version of fantasy is the only one. :(

Ultimate Life Form
20-06-2010, 01:38
I guess I shouldn't be surprised, yet I am, that so many people believe that their version of fantasy is the only one. :(

Yes, my idea of fantasy is the only valid one and everyone who has a different view is wrong. :angel:

And yes, I'm not too keen on firearms and gunpowder in my fantasy but I can accept it because no one forces me to use it. I don't play armies that use cannons and such for that very reason. Well if the opponent uses them it's fine, it's within the rules and I gotta accept it. I frankly don't care if the holes the enemy shoots into me are caused by bullets or arrows; it's simply a game mechanic and the result is the same.

The same is true for Magic; it's simply a game mechanic the opponent has a right to use. If you don't like it fine, no one forces you to use it, but don't complain if the enemy does. It's in the game and you can either accept it or find a different game that suits your tastes more. If GW would remove everything from the game someone has a problem with there wouldn't be anything left.

Darsc Zacal
20-06-2010, 01:57
Yes, my idea of fantasy is the only valid one and everyone who has a different view is wrong. :angel:


My comment was directed at those whose first reaction was to post that the OP should play historical or non-fantasy games. There were very few who respected the OP's concern and suggested alternative Fantasy game systems for the OP to try out.

Belittling that concern isn't very helpful. Is it?:rolleyes:

Kevlar
20-06-2010, 02:52
My comment was directed at those whose first reaction was to post that the OP should play historical or non-fantasy games. There were very few who respected the OP's concern and suggested alternative Fantasy game systems for the OP to try out.

Belittling that concern isn't very helpful. Is it?:rolleyes:

It is a silly concern. Why play a game based on magic and monsters if you don't enjoy that aspect of it? There are literally tons of alternatives out there, fantasy and historical. I don't think you will find too many warhammer tournaments that disallow 25 percent of the game.

Idle Scholar
20-06-2010, 03:13
I suggest you read the "ERAGON" series, it may change your idea's about magic.

Is that the dark magic they used to get that steaming pile of refuse published? (We are talking about the poorly written Star Wars knock of involving Dragons right?)

As far as the OP's discussion. I've no problem with magic in my fantesy wargaming but every issue with it's implementation in 6th and 7th. 8th is looking to improve it somewhat by limiting the number of spells you can get off but they've made up for that by making them far more powerful so once again the entire game can revolve around the rolls of a few dice.

(and yes I know there is some gameplay to be had from the mechanic, and I don't have a better idea of how to do spells but still it's often a point in the game where the least number of dice have the most impact)

Darsc Zacal
20-06-2010, 03:37
It is a silly concern. Why play a game based on magic and monsters if you don't enjoy that aspect of it? There are literally tons of alternatives out there, fantasy and historical. I don't think you will find too many warhammer tournaments that disallow 25 percent of the game.

First, while you've quoted me, I'm not sure if your comments are directed at myself, or at the original poster. Since I've already stated I don't like the spellcasting aspect, but I do like magic in that magic allows for fantastical creatures, scenarios, and contraptions, maybe your comments aren't directed at me. In which case just ignore the rest of my post and my reply.:)

Secondly, I don't go to tournaments, so that's irrelevant to me.

Thirdly, I was playing other Fantasy wargames long before there was Warhammer, and even after Warhammer came on the scene, I continued to play other systems.

However.

After being out of the hobby for many years, I found those other systems and their players simply were no longer around. For all intents there was only one game in town, and if I wanted to find anyone to game with, I had to sign up. Yes there are a few other systems out there for fantasy now, but it's still very hard, at least around here to find players for them. There's a lot about Warhammer I like, as I said it's a fairly robust system. I believe it allows for the game to be played in many different ways. I hope 8th Ed opens that idea up to more people.

VonUber
20-06-2010, 03:40
its warhammer FANTASY battle, thee is allot of magic in fantasy worlds, why shouldnt a FANTASY WARGAME have magic?

Daredevil
20-06-2010, 03:58
But don't forget using no runes whatsoever, since Runes are also created by magic.
They most certainly are not.

slayerofmen
20-06-2010, 04:54
he could still play against undead, they could just be limited too defensive raising spells and such, nothing offensive (including the danse) so just raise dead and invocation, i've done it before and the game was a hoot.....i did run out of zombie models though....

as for not liking the magic phase there is a point with all people when that slann you had a flank charge on proceeds to IF spirit of the forge onto said flanking unit which happens to be a unit of blood knights..... that makes you want to tear the magic phase section out of the BRB

Urgat
20-06-2010, 05:05
Started a long post, then remembered my sig. Just going to say that post was not directed at Krispicman's opinion though.

Don Zeko
20-06-2010, 05:12
Protecting wizards, getting them into los of the targets and using them to battle with opponents wizards whilst those all around them are fighting hhand to hand knowing if they let there own wizard die they will be burned to a crisp. Classic tactical gaming, I love it. I suggest you read the "ERAGON" series, it may change your idea's about magic.

No, no no. I will not stand for this. Based on the above paragraph, you ought to be reading the Malazan Book of the Fallen if you want a magic-heavy world, and you should be reading A Song of ice and Fire if you don't. Unlike Eragon, these are good books, with well-written characters and dialogue, gripping stories, and expansive, original worlds. Eragon was written by a high schooler, and while it's certainly better than anything I could have written in high school, it shows.

ChaosVC
20-06-2010, 06:16
It actually took me 10 years to like magic, only reason I started WFB was because the rules sounds so much like the historical battles I read in all those famous historical battles "AT THAT TIME" and found out only that its pretty much not as I was expected as it is still fantasy with fantastic creatures, magic and super heros...

Well magic can still be fun if both side don't over do it.

dragonet111
20-06-2010, 10:10
I respect your opinion but I have to disagree. Magic is my favorite part of the game. I began to play with Realms of Chaos 10 years ago and Tzeentch instantly became my favorite god. My main army is chaos army and a magic heavy list. Before GW split the list in 3 different armies I played a 100% tzeentch army with warriors of chaos and daemons, now I play an almost 100% Tzeentch daemons army with a lot (I mean A LOT:D) of Horrors.

I'm also a RPG player and all my characters can cast spells I play RPG before playing warhammer and I can't recall a character that is unable to cast magic.

Well long story short, I absolutely love magic. :D

WarmbloodedLizard
20-06-2010, 10:20
I love magic.

I really dislike powerful spells and devastating miscasts, though. I'd prefer a system with small useful supportspells with the occasional magic missile. (portent of far, uranon's thunderbolt, unseen lurker, beast cowers, commandment of brass were all really great.

but, well, some people prefer boring random stupid monsterspells and ridiculous miscast tables... (including GW sadly)

chilledenuff
20-06-2010, 10:30
I play WFB for the reason that it is fantasy (magic, monsters'orcs et al (shame about the elves though (JOKE!))
WAB is very similar, but without the gribbly things and WECW (Warhammer English Civil war) is Empire vs Empire with no wizards/monsters and lots of pikes (ok it's 5th ed(ish, i lose track) Warhammer but so what, that had such crazy movement rules it was uber tactical movement, remember snaking?)
Not sure where i'm going with this... oh yeah, play a different version of warhammer, no magic... or agree with your opponent to not use magic users/items, sorted!

Kerill
20-06-2010, 10:37
No magic= not warhammer. Simple really.

Whether 8th edition magic is reasonable we will have to see but at least it prevents the arms race of more and more mages for power dice and VC and Tzeentch daemons (the two worst magic phases) have been severely nerfed.

Zaonite
20-06-2010, 10:44
Magic is an integral part of the game. I don't like the new magic rules but then again it's all part and parcel of a new edition; things change.
I think people are hugely put off by it because we've been using (roughly) the same magic rules for two editions of the BRB. The rest of the rules have been (again... roughly) the same since fifth. We've gotten too used to playing a certain way. I welcome the changes, it's going to make us think in different ways. A wizard will now be a choice, instead of a no-brainer scroll caddy.
Don't be afraid to mix it up, otherwise it all becomes very stale.

yabbadabba
20-06-2010, 10:44
Playing wargames was never easy. Just trying to find an opponent in the old days was trialing enough. To the OP I would say your opnion is of course totally valid, but I would seriously look for another game to play. All wargames have grown through word of mouth, so be patient if you can't find an opponent at first. As all wargames are also just rules mechanisms, I would take the time to work out and encourage "counts as" lists so no one has to by brand new armies.
Have fun.

rtunian
20-06-2010, 17:16
you can play warhammer and not use magic. you can field an army that has 0 wizards and still be playable, and you will be able to do that in 8th ed as well.

there is no good reason that your dislike for magic should remove your opponent's ability to use magic. the beauty of warhammer is that you can play it so many different ways. saying that "my way is the right way and your way is bad" is just plain wrong. all ways (that are also legal) are right.

i suggest to the op that you make yourself a non-magic army, and challenge yourself to survive in a world of magic.

gormaster
20-06-2010, 19:29
I think magic has a place in fantasy. I also, like you think it`s just too much in WH. Think of the foundation of fantasy. The Lord of the Rings. Not the stupid movies, the novels. There was magic to be sure. Both good and evil. And the magic items, which is my real complaint, were not so powerfull they were rediculous. They (both magic and items) didn`t win the war of the rings for either side. Magic didn`t win the battle of five armies in the Hobbit either. They gave benifits to the bearers that helped them.

I try to get my group to try low fantasy but they won`t. They depend on thier obsurd magic/weapons whatever to win for them where thier tactics don`t.

I have considered, after many years, dropping out of WH in favor of historical games because of my distaste of OTT magic stuff and still may. First I have to give 8th ed. a chance. If the changes lower magics effect of the game I`ll stick with it.

Justicar_Freezer
20-06-2010, 21:29
I'm at the other end of the spectrum from the OP. I really enjoy the magic phase of the game. Right now I have 3 armies. One of which is a high elf army based on the forces of Hoeth which means lots of magic. Another is a Khaine themed dark elf force which shifts between two level 2s or one level 4 Being able to cast those mighty spells is fun to me. Though at the other end of the spectrum I play dwarves for those days when i just want to shut the magic phase down.

To me Warhammer is a game of fantasy. There should be powerful magics being blasted over the battlefield. There should be powerful heroes capable of wading through units of lesser beings without fear. There should be gribbly monsters that can rip units apart because they're monsters. However if I played someone that truely didn't enjoy magic or some of the other fantasy elements of the game I would tone it back some so they could enjoy the game a bit more. I may not play against them again depending on how the game went but I would wait till after the game was over to see.

just my 2cents

Don Zeko
20-06-2010, 22:06
I think magic has a place in fantasy. I also, like you think it`s just too much in WH. Think of the foundation of fantasy. The Lord of the Rings. Not the stupid movies, the novels.

Name me one superior film adaptation of a fantasy novel. There may have been elves at Helm's Deep, but the LotR movies were great, and anyone that really loves the books ought to be happy to see that the film adaptation was done by people willing to put in the time and resources to do the books justice. The fact that they were commercially successful and doubtlessly turned many people on to the series is nice too.


I try to get my group to try low fantasy but they won`t. They depend on thier obsurd magic/weapons whatever to win for them where thier tactics don`t.

Let's see how this sounds if I play Mad Libs with it.


I try to get my group to try medieval fantasy but they won`t. They depend on thier obsurd guns/cannons whatever to win for them where thier tactics don`t.


I try to get my group to try steampunk but they won`t. They depend on thier obsurd knights/infantry drill whatever to win for them where thier tactics don`t.


I try to get my group to try infantry armies but they won`t. They depend on thier obsurd cavalry/monsters whatever to win for them where thier tactics don`t.

It's a game, and magic is part of the game. There are tactics to it, and it is integrated with the fluff. if you don't like it that's fine, but insisting that you are a better player than your opponents because you have a different playstyle or fluff sensibility to them is obnoxious.

Botjer
20-06-2010, 22:50
I agree with the original poster.

what i would like to see is magic as it is portrayed for eldar in 40k, you can pick your spells, you know what you get and you pay for each spell.

also you dont HAVE TO have magic users, to counter your adversaries magic user.

KrisPicman
21-06-2010, 00:08
Definitely not meant to be a flaming post, but...

Why play Warhammer?

There are tons of historic gaming systems out there, none of which have magic. Alternatively, if you like GW products, LOTR seems to have much less influential magic.

Because I love the history and popularity of the game. I like the races. And I also like the diversity of the game as well.


A, sure, a Fantasy game without Magic would be such an excellent idea...

While we're at it, why not take the Xenos races out of 40K?

Looks a bit like you missed the point to me, but you can still play games with only Dwarves involved of course, so all hope is not lost.

If magic was kept more or less in the fluff to the fullest possible extent it would be a great idea.

How about we stay on topic?

Doesnt look like I missed my point to about 44 other people. It always seems like you miss the point ULF.


I'm on board with you, as I do not like the arcane or relying on it. My objective is to nullify the enemy magic phase so that the game is determined by strategy of troops.

I would play historical or something but all my friends play fantasy and I have soo many darn models it would break my heart to play anything else.

Totally understand, magic should not define victory or defeat. Troops should.
It is "WAR"hammer. Not "MAGIC"hammer.

Stronginthearm
21-06-2010, 00:20
I somewhat share your opinion and would just like to be able to compete without having to use magic. Chaos and Bretts basically do fine without shooting. Gunlines can compete without movement or combat [for the most part]. Why can't there be an army for the traditional sword and sorcery fan where magic was associated with the dark and unknowable but the brave hero could overcome it by steel, strength and guile. So, I don't want to see magic done away with, but would like some more 'mundane' choices with an army [similar to say Brett virtues] rather than always casters and magic items.

Dwarves without warmachines, take Bretonnians with no damsels, empire with no wizzards, magic is not nessesary, no you're not going to get an army that gets super anti magic because they are "Pure of Heart and Noble in Cause" but you dont have to take magic especially now in 8th

Coldblood666
21-06-2010, 00:32
I have the perfect solution for you. If you love combat and hate magic then maybe you should try playing a full on Khorne Daemons army. Problem solved!

Volker the Mad Fiddler
21-06-2010, 00:41
Dwarves without warmachines, take Bretonnians with no damsels, empire with no wizzards, magic is not nessesary, no you're not going to get an army that gets super anti magic because they are "Pure of Heart and Noble in Cause" but you dont have to take magic especially now in 8th

The problem isn't the wizards [as I said I played an Empire army without warmachines and only a single priest for magic defense for 6th and part of 7th edition] it is the magic items. Just too hard to keep that general alive without them, but maybe in 8th, we will see something different.



PS. Haven't posted this much in months- Amazing what procrastinating about writing report cards will do eh?

Commissar Vaughn
21-06-2010, 00:46
I kinda agree with the OP...I dont mind magic on the battlefield but I prefer it to be the magic of the harpells (from DnD) or the Discworld, where it bumbles around the place, trying to remember how to tie its shoelaces, and occasionally making peoples heads explode.

theunwantedbeing
21-06-2010, 00:47
Totally understand, magic should not define victory or defeat. Troops should.
It is "WAR"hammer. Not "MAGIC"hammer.

Sounds a lot like your a magic hater in a world of magic lovers.
You just not going to be happy in that gaming environment.

Magic is not something you need in warhammer at all, no more than you need shooting troops or to move towards the enemy or to have anything good in combat.
Magic does not definite victory or defeat, although it can snatch one from the other with a single lucky spell.
(note that shooting can do a similar thing, as can combat or clever positioning of troops)

You seem to be rather misguided in wishing for magic to be removed from warhammer, I sugguest you take a step back and actually have a look at the reasons why you feel the way you do about magic, it may well change your outlook on it.

Lord Inquisitor
21-06-2010, 00:47
I think there's something to be said for this. Magic is something of a wild card and can dig a player out of a poor tactical position (e.g. vampire magic used for tarpitting) without too much thought but in.

Similarly, I don't like the over-reliance on magic items. I mean, every character typically comes dripping with magic items, indeed, as many as can be taken.

I feel that the game could benefit from less focus on such things - and, it seemed that certainly magic was getting toned down as the rumours of 8th progressed - but then the awesome power of the spell lores became apparent, that went out the window as the spells have such a game-changing effect.

CrystalSphere
21-06-2010, 00:58
If you ask me the only thing that i see toned down in 8th is the number of power dices available (now with a cap) and the need of including many mages for a strong magic phase is now gone. But the magic phase remains a very powerful aspect of the game, and it have been so for several editions of the game. If you dont like magic in the sense of wizards shooting lightnings and fireballs, then you are out of luck because that is the kind of magic in warhammer. It is not the subtle magic of the lord of the rings but more like harry potter on steroids.

SPSchnepp2
21-06-2010, 03:20
Now, I've found that Brets can get along just fine without any spellcasters. The trick is to hunt down their spellcasters (hippo-mounted Lord, pegasi, well-placed and lucky Trebs) before they end your world. Similarly, my WE lists never included a spellcaster. My Empire army was focused around fancy techno-stuff, but I did bring along a wizard just so I could actually do something in a magic phase for once. My Dwarf army... 'nuff said. That worked in 7E, but I don't think it'll work so hot in 8E, what with the uberspells and all. It used to be that a magic phase ended out being around as powerful as a shooting phase, and I generally balanced by devoting the points into something with the ability to reach out and touch someone, be it artillery, a unit of shooters, or a flying unit. I found it fun being able to beat an army of casters with an army that had no spellcasters at all. I prefer low-magic like the LotR setting, but with plenty of monsters and other fantastic critters. Heck, I like magic items. What I don't like are folks completely dominating play because of magic-users. One phase should not overwhelm all of the others. From the looks of things, that's how it's going to be in 8E.


I somewhat share your opinion and would just like to be able to compete without having to use magic. Chaos and Bretts basically do fine without shooting. Gunlines can compete without movement or combat [for the most part]. Why can't there be an army for the traditional sword and sorcery fan where magic was associated with the dark and unknowable but the brave hero could overcome it by steel, strength and guile. So, I don't want to see magic done away with, but would like some more 'mundane' choices with an army [similar to say Brett virtues] rather than always casters and magic items.

I think you meant to say Vampire Counts. About a quarter of my points in any given game of using the Brettonnians is devoted to shooting, usually two Trebs and a passel o' Bowmen.


Protecting wizards, getting them into los of the targets and using them to battle with opponents wizards whilst those all around them are fighting hhand to hand knowing if they let there own wizard die they will be burned to a crisp. Classic tactical gaming, I love it. I suggest you read the "ERAGON" series, it may change your idea's about magic.

Don't mind him, he's simply lost his mind. I won't be nice like some people and say "It was good for a high schooler". It was crap. Garbage. I wrote better in high school, and I didn't keep it because I realized it was crap. I couldn't slog through more than half of the first book, and what I've read of the rest of the series made me glad I quit while I was ahead. Heck, Dragonlance beats it in every way imaginable, and even Dragonlance fans (such as myself) admit it ain't exactly high literature.

stuntyKing
21-06-2010, 04:27
I play dwarves but I have to say , magic is a very fun part of the game! And all I ever do is dispel! It's fun to see others miscast And there super spell get dispeld because of my ol runesmiths, so then I can grumble" that's what yur gets for meddlin with that unreliable magic". But what I'm tryin to say is , is that u got to make with what yea got. If u hate magic entirly then maybe find Another game. But to me it's to much fun and is half the fluff in it's own right

Stronginthearm
21-06-2010, 04:53
I kinda agree with the OP...I dont mind magic on the battlefield but I prefer it to be the magic of the harpells (from DnD) or the Discworld, where it bumbles around the place, trying to remember how to tie its shoelaces, and occasionally making peoples heads explode.

It is like discworld, it makes heads explode, except occasionally they do too much and the dungeon dimensions come in and eat people

skelezom
21-06-2010, 05:53
This might sound strange at first, but Play Tomb kings. They have one magic missile that isn't that strong, and the rest really just augments the other phases of the game. I mean. you like Combat? Get them there faster. You like Shooting? Shoot twice as many times. Tomb kings magic is not about the destructiveness and pure power of the spell, but about the power and destructiveness of the units that they get cast on. Beware though, the learning curve is quite drastic for the Kings of Khemri, and there power is probably going down in 8th.

Tokugawa100
21-06-2010, 06:55
I guess I'm going to have to go against the tide here and stand beside the OP on this.

Magic is only one aspect of Fantasy. But without magic we wouldn't have flying horses or dragons. I like having those things in my armies. What I suspect the OP doesn't like are spellcasters in his wargames. I'm much the same in that respect, although as I've stated, I love my fantastical creatures, outlandish background and scenarios, and over the top weaponry. All of these are just different aspects of Fantasy.

I'd find it very hard to engage myself in a historical wargame, it wouldn't capture my imagination. I know of many people who don't like firearms and gunpowder in their fantasy wargames, yet those make up a large part of Warhammer too. I think the trouble is finding like minded individuals to play against, as I believe that the Warhammer rulesystem is certainly robust enough to handle games excluding these things if the two players are so inclined.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised, yet I am, that so many people believe that their version of fantasy is the only one. :(

Its not that people believe their version of fantasy is the only way, its that warhammer's version of fantasy is the only way when playing WHFB.

The issue isnt that the OP wants to play fantasy without magic, thats not ludicrous and can be done very well. The problem is the OP is complaining about an integral part of a game which has probably been around longer then them.

It would be like me saying I dont want Heroes in LOTR Battles or I dont want Space Marines in WH40K.

The complaint is also silly because its very easy to play Warhammer without magic. Just about every army except for the Undead can have an army without magic.
Scratch that, everyone except Tomb Kings.

A VC army can be easily made if not a little boring by making a full Crypt Ghoul Army, Varghulfs and a combat oriented Vampire.


My comment was directed at those whose first reaction was to post that the OP should play historical or non-fantasy games. There were very few who respected the OP's concern and suggested alternative Fantasy game systems for the OP to try out.

Belittling that concern isn't very helpful. Is it?:rolleyes:

As I said before, the reason people didnt respect the OP's concern is simple, you can easily play Warhammer without magic. Claiming it would be a better game is a little silly though as the majority would disagree.

There is a reason there arent many "non historical" fantasy games out there, people like magic and fantasy is a perfect excuse to use it.
That is certainly not the OP's fault but he cant expect everyone to admit the game would be better without magic.

He could of course always make his own game system or even just prearrange with people that he would not like either side to use magic.

For some armies this is a major inconvenience and hardly fair to the player who enjoys magic and has the right to use it.


It is a silly concern.

Exactly.


Name me one superior film adaptation of a fantasy novel. There may have been elves at Helm's Deep, but the LotR movies were great, and anyone that really loves the books ought to be happy to see that the film adaptation was done by people willing to put in the time and resources to do the books justice. The fact that they were commercially successful and doubtlessly turned many people on to the series is nice too.



I must agree, I trully believe there are people out there who find fault in everything for the sake of complaining.

The LOTR movies were great. I actually enjoy them far more then the books.

There was great acting, excellent action and some trully dramatic moments.

People are of course entitled to their opinion, as I am but sometimes I trully cannot see how people find these movies to be abominations. Trully they were some of the better movies of the time.


Because I love the history and popularity of the game. I like the races. And I also like the diversity of the game as well.

As do I but I respect that there is magic involved. As I said before, close to every race can do an army without magic very easily.

My personal recomendations are:

Empire, Orcs and Goblins, Dwarfs, Elves of all kinds, Ogres, Lizard Men, Vampire Counts, Brettonians, Chaos "Khorne Oriented", "Warlord Skaven", Clan Skyre Skaven, Khorne Daemons.

There is plenty of choice.:)




If magic was kept more or less in the fluff to the fullest possible extent it would be a great idea.

I disagree, all it would do is tick me off that there is this ability that I dont have the option of using because a minority of people decided they didnt like Warhammer because it had magic in it:rolleyes:.




How about we stay on topic?

Doesnt look like I missed my point to about 44 other people. It always seems like you miss the point ULF.

ULF does often come out a little, well "blunt" shall we say but he is often right.
From what Ive read he hasnt missed the point, his simply giving his opinion and you dont seem to be able to take it.



Totally understand, magic should not define victory or defeat. Troops should.
It is "WAR"hammer. Not "MAGIC"hammer.

Magic is often, in my experience anyway not what wins battles.
Magic is a fun aspect of a battle which can sometimes make a situation better ot horribly worse.
Its the randomness of it that I like.

While we're at it we should remove monsters, artillery and magical beasts because these also "by your understanding" do not define victory.

Yes this does sound fun, I will have nothing but State Troopers and my friend will have nothing but Orc Boys, yes this will be fun.

Im being sarcastic, sorry about that.

My point is though, Warhammer magic is a part of the game, it adds fun and alot of people enjoy it.
Its fine that you dont like magic and as I have said it is very easy not to use magic, it may restrict you slightly but thats not the games problm thats your problem.