PDA

View Full Version : why use attack in initative order with no initative modifiers



tinytom113
11-10-2010, 21:36
why has GW created the "attack in initative order rule " without weopon mods so using different weapons effects your initative?:confused:

great weapons -2 I

(coz there heavy)

Spears / lances +2 I when the "Hold"
Or +1 when attacking normally

(coz you can angle them when bracing for an attack)

no mods for hand weapons

maybe -1 I for mounts?

and finally

+1 I for charging

to play test this simply add 3 to I on both sides the for each unit so

an orc has a basic Initative of 5
elves 8
dwarves 5

etc


so orcs with spears get I7 when "Holding"

or but elves with great weapons get I7 too when charging with Great wepons so you roll to se who attack first

BUT

if the orcs had choppas (hand weapons for argument sake)

and they charged a unit of elves with spears say DE warriors with spears

the orcs would have I6
the basic I5 + 1 for charging

but the elves would have I10
basic I8 +2 for holding with spears so the elves would strike first

any thoughts please play test this with 8th and let me know how you get on

P.S my 8th rule book is in the post

Kevlar
11-10-2010, 21:39
I guess because they don't want games to last six hours.

Lord Malorne
11-10-2010, 21:40
Because it is a waste of time the way you want it.

tinytom113
11-10-2010, 21:43
o come on its basic maths and most of it is done before the game anyway

if i have a unit of orcs with spears in my army i say they are I6 then add 1 if they use hold for a charge. or charge themselves

its idot proof

Actually GW used a similar rule set for 1st to 3rd edition rules and those games didn't take "6 hours"

Kevlar
11-10-2010, 21:47
o come on its basic maths and most of it is done before the game anyway

if i have a unit of orcs with spears in my army i say they are I6 then add 1 if they use hold for a charge. or charge themselves

its idot proof


You would have to figure it out for every unit, every character, every equipment option, every close combat. While it might be "basic math" Basic math for 200+ models 12 times a game would be cumbersome.

tinytom113
11-10-2010, 21:48
Because it is a waste of time the way you want it.

expand on that please

thats why MOST OF IT IS WORKED OUT BEFORE THE BATTLE, THE ONLY MODS YOU MAKE DURING THE GAME ARE FOR CHARGING AND HOLDING IF YOU HAVE WEAPONS SHAPED LIKE STICKS

my orcs with spears are I6 or seven if they charge / are charged
night gobbos with spears are I7 or I8 if charged/ holding

mental notes writ them down if need be or wait for GW to re release it in 9th after all they have brought back alot of other brill rules from old editions of the rulebook and made out there brand new


also i like the way you ignore the fact its a very good old school rule that in my dads xp and that of alot of old school vets worked very well

Lord Malorne
11-10-2010, 21:56
Are you trolling?

There is no point to it. Considering you don't even have the rulebook yet and have thus not read it, I find it odd you can cast such aspersions on the 8th ed rulebook. Let alone can get so worked up so much over a fictional none useful addition to the rules that would be a waste of time.

I suggest getting the book, playing a few games, then expressing your opinion on how it works.

scarvet
11-10-2010, 22:04
Nice idea, but please take this to Rule development board.....

tinytom113
11-10-2010, 22:11
Are you trolling?

There is no point to it. Considering you don't even have the rulebook yet and have thus not read it, I find it odd you can cast such aspersions on the 8th ed rulebook. Let alone can get so worked up so much over a fictional none useful addition to the rules that would be a waste of time.

I suggest getting the book, playing a few games, then expressing your opinion on how it works.

I have seen a vid on you tube explaing the changes and heard my dad rant about it my final point is that we should not do the mods our selves but GW should include the modded stats to a new army books and explain how it works in the rule book, it is not a fictional rule or a rule i devised it is one GW already know about and have used my question is why have they not brought this rule back along with always atack in Initative order

i simply posted the basic idea based on what i could remember from my dads rant he gave me today as to how weapons used to effect Initative. in the warhammer rule book editions 1, 2 and possibly 3rd (he can't quite remember)

Tarian
11-10-2010, 22:13
I ran a campaign once with the +/- I for weapons/charges etc. It was a bit clunky, and didn't really add much. My 2 gil anyways.

theunwantedbeing
11-10-2010, 22:21
Different troops alreayd have differing initituive vlues, so it's largely irrelevant to have a system to alternate initituive.

Generally speaking, an elf fights before a man and a man fights before an orc or a dwarf.
And with an initituive modifer system that's how it always is except for some things with great weapons (which is no different to now really).

So you end out with a system where average joe runs screaming at all the "math" he has to do for hundreds of models many times a turn when the current system has a largely identical outcome but none of the fear effect on poor average joe.

So this idea isn't really any use unless properly developed.

tinytom113
11-10-2010, 22:31
yes but as it is orcs always attack second generally, would it be nice to have a variation where be a dwarf could attack before an elf members of a unit units all have the same Initative value or at least they should have with exception to units with a character who would attack at seperatly either against the unit generally or against another character or unit champion in a chalenge

THE RULE IS DEVELOPED AND HAS BEEN SINCE 1987

GW DON'T USE IT ANY MORE BECAUSE THEY DEEMED IT TO COMPLEX FOR THE LITTLE KIDDIES THEY WANTED TO SELL PRETTY MODELS TO

hence the death of the cool willpower stats that were combined into the other ld

i find it strang how the replacement for this rule set i more complicated

So now to work out attack order you have

always attack first
always attacks last

sooo

if 2 units that always attack first roll off unless a charge involved then unit 1 that always attacks first that has charged always attacks first over unit 2 that always attack first it but dosen't because it has been charged.

when you charge it dose not matter how low you initative is you always attack first unless the other unit always attacks first so see above

i you always attack last you always attack last unless you attack another unit that always attacks last then you roll of f
But if you always attack last and charge a unit that always attacks last you attack first unless you have zombies that always attack last always and never ever attack first ever even if they charge.

and that old rule set needs development

decker_cky
11-10-2010, 22:40
There was a lot of goofy little modifiers in the old editions. Great fun, made sense, but they did make the game take longer.

About the only one I feel should be done is that spears should give +1 I on top of their other benefits - just because spears are the weapon really left behind this edition.

Kevlar
11-10-2010, 22:41
I'd rather get the monster list back than initiative modifiers.

russellmoo
12-10-2010, 04:21
I think all of the current weapon rules work pretty well, except there should probably be a bonus to Initiative with certain weapons- i.e. lances, or spears when mounted- this is to represent the models longer reach-

Lord Inquisitor
12-10-2010, 04:38
I'm surprised at the rancor directed at the OP. It's a reasonable suggestion. Oh, how much longer would it take! To have to take a model's basic characteristic and modify it for great weapons or lances! That'd slow the game down so much, who'd want to play such a game ... Wait a moment...

Come on people how hard is it to say that lances are +2 strength AND +2 initiative? "Slowing the game down" is hardly a real argument, does adding the strength bonus really tax your brains too much already? Indeed rough riders have exactly that rule in 40k and that game is oversimplified for idiots, right?

An initiative bonus for certain weapons, such as lances and spears and an initiative penalty for great weapons, flails and similar would be a logical addition to the game. Indeed, the game would be a better place without ASF and ASL being so abundant and reserved for magical effects only. All normal attacks could be resolved much better by taking the established initiative system and making that work properly without resorting to special rules.

Skjoldr
12-10-2010, 06:06
I'm actually in favor of Great Weapons having an initiative penalty instead of ASL. That functions way better imho.

And if cavalry don't strike first on the charge, at least give them impact hits or something.

Isabel
12-10-2010, 06:23
I like the idea and dont see it adding much time at all to the game. I've always believed weapons should have some kind of attack order modifier, such as: Lances striking at a higher I on the charge, spears attacking at a higher I when being charged. And I agree, I'd like to see an I penalty on GWs rather than ASL.

Hopefully we see interesting changes like this in 9th. Untill then, I'm still thoroughly enjoying 8th.

skank
12-10-2010, 07:50
Don't sound such a bad idea to me, maybe a bit simpler, just +1 for charging (or charged with spears) that sort of thing.
After a game or two even the more advanced vertions would come very easily.

No biggie though.

eyescrossed
12-10-2010, 08:21
The OP needs to calm down.


And if cavalry don't strike first on the charge, at least give them impact hits or something.
Legs breaking don't count as Impact Hits.

tinytom113
12-10-2010, 11:28
i can breathe now o how i love a good rant, i'm going to try this rule in an 8th game myself, you can tel i'mn my fathers son. He's on here his username's lanrak spends alot of time ripping 40k and games workshop in general.

Maoriboy007
12-10-2010, 18:49
I don't really know why they changed the original system (chargers strike first) in the first place. The main problem with it was that unit lost without getting to fight back having fighting models slaughtered without reproach, the step up rule fixed that problem in itself.

Malorian
12-10-2010, 18:53
Interesting idea, and maybe we'll see a bit of this in 9th, but for now I understand why they would keep it as simple as 'great weapons strike last'.

SgtTaters
12-10-2010, 19:00
You know, WHF has a lot of fat that really just slows down the game

armor save modifiers? We don't need that, adds needless math that bogs down the game. It should just be "get your save, or nothing"

and what's up with causing d3 or some random number of wounds? too complicated, it should just be Instant Death or one wound.

Different movement stats? Needless. We should just take it out and make generic 6" increments of movement.

This flanking and rank bonus nonsense takes too long too, take that out.

and my god, the Magic Phase, an entire PHASE? that power dice junk is clunky. Throw that out. Make magic simply passing a Ld test.


Think about, with these changes how much faster, more streamlined the game has become!

spiderman5z
12-10-2010, 23:29
You know, WHF has a lot of fat that really just slows down the game

armor save modifiers? We don't need that, adds needless math that bogs down the game. It should just be "get your save, or nothing"

and what's up with causing d3 or some random number of wounds? too complicated, it should just be Instant Death or one wound.

Different movement stats? Needless. We should just take it out and make generic 6" increments of movement.

This flanking and rank bonus nonsense takes too long too, take that out.

and my god, the Magic Phase, an entire PHASE? that power dice junk is clunky. Throw that out. Make magic simply passing a Ld test.


Think about, with these changes how much faster, more streamlined the game has become!

that made me chuckle hehehe

Lord Arkhibas
13-10-2010, 18:56
Gw probably wants to sell us more 9th edition rulebooks... i mean, they are always solving TOO MUCH problems, same time creating new ones... they probably think already "Whats the problem of next edition? Woah! let's fix the initiative... So break tests are taken from initiative... hmm. " After that some fluff about initiative making it easier to stop ppl running... "In extreme combat it's easy to see troops with speed to hold their ground, no matter the odds...." And then we buy the book.

... Or they are overheated, overbored and their mental health is unbalanced... which is probably more true... to be honest.

EDIT: Not complaining thought... or i am but... well...

Oglog
13-10-2010, 20:57
I actually like the idea, makes more sense and could be more balanced, but not in this edition.

Chris_
13-10-2010, 23:07
I don't really know why they changed the original system (chargers strike first) in the first place. The main problem with it was that unit lost without getting to fight back having fighting models slaughtered without reproach, the step up rule fixed that problem in itself.Well, maybe because it makes no sense (except maybe for cavalry equiped with spears or lances) and they wanted to make one of the most useless stats more important.

tinytom113
14-10-2010, 12:19
You know, WHF has a lot of fat that really just slows down the game

armor save modifiers? We don't need that, adds needless math that bogs down the game. It should just be "get your save, or nothing"

and what's up with causing d3 or some random number of wounds? too complicated, it should just be Instant Death or one wound.

Different movement stats? Needless. We should just take it out and make generic 6" increments of movement.

This flanking and rank bonus nonsense takes too long too, take that out.

and my god, the Magic Phase, an entire PHASE? that power dice junk is clunky. Throw that out. Make magic simply passing a Ld test.


Think about, with these changes how much faster, more streamlined the game has become!

the issue is all those things take the tactic out of the game completly and make it alot morter like 40k which is the worst rule set ever. if you don't like tactic or method or maths play 40k and get bored like i did, Actually i find the Fantasy rules indepth but they make sence but most importantly they work...ish

like i say GW don't solve issues the make them then just go back on what they have done before %ages for army lists instead of those daft limits were in early editions of the book

One more note my gaming partner is 10 years older than me though has frontal lobe problems meaning that his mental age age and level of understanding is not always that of a 29 year old man. It took ages to explain the 40k rule set maninly because of all those silly special rules on special rules with some more special rules. With fantasy he got it pretty quick. last night i told him about wepon mods he said

"soooo my dwarves are I3 so if i ad 3 thats 6 and i add one when they charge."

then i expalined ASL ASF like i did here earlyer and he looked at me gone out pulled a silly face and said
"errr what"

eyescrossed
14-10-2010, 13:22
the issue is all those things take the tactic out of the game completly and make it alot morter like 40k which is the worst rule set ever. if you don't like tactic or method or maths play 40k and get bored like i did,
He was being sarcastic, and that's your opinion. Personally, I like both. Fantasy for Macro-tactics and 40k for Micro-tactics.

VonManstein
14-10-2010, 13:34
You know, WHF has a lot of fat that really just slows down the game

armor save modifiers? We don't need that, adds needless math that bogs down the game. It should just be "get your save, or nothing"

and what's up with causing d3 or some random number of wounds? too complicated, it should just be Instant Death or one wound.

Different movement stats? Needless. We should just take it out and make generic 6" increments of movement.

This flanking and rank bonus nonsense takes too long too, take that out.

and my god, the Magic Phase, an entire PHASE? that power dice junk is clunky. Throw that out. Make magic simply passing a Ld test.


Think about, with these changes how much faster, more streamlined the game has become!
Hahaha.

The sad thing is, I tried to do something similar, but in reverse. Unfortunately 40k just doesnt seem to have things which are more complicated than Fantasy....


the issue is all those things take the tactic out of the game completly and make it alot morter like 40k which is the worst rule set ever.
Somebody missed the joke. But as you seem proud at the fact that your dad rants at GW/40k then I'm not too surprised. No offense.

Pulstar
14-10-2010, 13:41
We should just get rid of all stat lines. Have the attacking unit roll 3d6, the defended unit roll 2d6, match up the high rolls, with defender winning all ties.

At some point we are all just moving bits of plastic around and rolling dice anyway.

P.S. Turtling in The lost isles of Elites never works.
P.S.S. The guy who holds onto naggaroth is going to win.

ColShaw
14-10-2010, 14:53
We should just get rid of all stat lines. Have the attacking unit roll 3d6, the defended unit roll 2d6, match up the high rolls, with defender winning all ties.

I dunno... sounds like a risky idea to me. :D

Tech Hazard
14-10-2010, 15:52
I think what is being missed here is that generally all types of weapons tend to be availible to all types of armies. (Spears, Great Weapons, Lances... ect) Considering that Init values tend to differ between armies, making some understandably 'quicker' than other armies, the idea of weapon Init modifiers seems somewhat inane.

For instance, Dark Elves can take spears just like Orcs can. Both get the Init bonus and it essentially cancels out. This only gets bulky though when you start looking at negative modifiers to Init and the obvious reasons behind them. Great Weapons are heavy! Right?! But for who, and for what size? A Dark Elf great weapon is a dagger in the hands of an Ogre, a sword in the hands of an Orc... At which point we have to start looking strength values for modifying negative modifiers for initative values regarding weapons, and that's not even taking into account how that would be altered for mounted troops.

Simple answer: It adds little to the game as a whole but opens the door for a lot of new problems.

astornfleshlay
14-10-2010, 16:01
Here's my opinion on this whole thing (and of course, it's just an opinion, so don't get all frothy on me):

What is Initiative?
It's a number that defines how fast a creature can react, or how agile they are

How the hell can someone react faster with their weapon? If they are a sloppy warrior, why should they suddenly become 10% better with their weapon when someone charges?

It doesn't make sense

That being said, I totally agree that some modifier needs to be made in terms of certain unit types. For example:
If cavalry charge a unit on foot, are you seriously telling me that the cavalry has a potential to strike last? A horse will cause some form of impact hit (potentially) and obviously is moving faster than a group of men so should strike first (speaking in terms of "reality").

I know it's just a "game" (and rooted in Fantasy), and of course you can't simulate EVERYTHING with stats, but in my minds eye, a group of knights charging with lances should always hit infantry first.

2 cents :)

Lord Inquisitor
14-10-2010, 16:55
Most of the time a putative initiative bonus (e.g. for spears, lances) would just represent the superior reach of the weapon. No matter how fast you are, if you have to charge into a wall of spears with a knife, you're going to need to get past the pointy bits before you can strike. Obviously these advantages should only apply in the first round.

Which is why we need an end to basic troops with access to ASF.

tinytom113
14-10-2010, 22:16
I think what is being missed here is that generally all types of weapons tend to be availible to all types of armies. (Spears, Great Weapons, Lances... ect) Considering that Init values tend to differ between armies, making some understandably 'quicker' than other armies, the idea of weapon Init modifiers seems somewhat inane.

For instance, Dark Elves can take spears just like Orcs can. Both get the Init bonus and it essentially cancels out. This only gets bulky though when you start looking at negative modifiers to Init and the obvious reasons behind them. Great Weapons are heavy!

It's fair to assume a great weapon is bigger than the unit can swing at normal speed ther is no need to do all that, a snotling would call a choppa a GW

tinytom113
14-10-2010, 22:20
The way combats should work

Who attacks first?

1) Impact hits
2) All other combats in Initative order including modifiers
3) stomps and thunderstomps

Tech Hazard
14-10-2010, 22:29
It's fair to assume a great weapon is bigger than the unit can swing at normal speed ther is no need to do all that, a snotling would call a choppa a GW

Obviously. You're missing the point... though I am not sure there is much to be done about that considering the length of this thread ;)


The way combats should work

Who attacks first?

1) Impact hits
2) All other combats in Initative order including modifiers
3) stomps and thunderstomps

... That IS how it works