PDA

View Full Version : New Mercenary Rule



Gradek
03-11-2013, 11:14
Is the new mercenary rule only for triumph and treachery or does it apply to all games? (Obviously any group can make their own decisions, but I want the "official" answer).

ArtificerArmour
03-11-2013, 11:21
T&T, as you require gold to buy them

Scammel
03-11-2013, 12:15
I wouldn't be surprised if this is something of a testbed for ally rules in the main book, but for now it's just T&T unless your opponents are cool about it.

mypantsarefree3
03-11-2013, 12:23
I'll put dollars to doughnuts that this a runthrough for 9th edition. Personal results may vary, but get used to the idea now :)

Grok
03-11-2013, 12:36
I'll put dollars to doughnuts that this a runthrough for 9th edition. Personal results may vary, but get used to the idea now :)

This will instantly get me back in the hobby, so much cool conversion ideas and themes pop up in my head.

WLBjork
03-11-2013, 21:10
A new USR? Possible, and as others have said, hope so.

I'm thinking it *could* be a USR for those generic units that appeared in the Dogs of War list. When Ogres first became an army, they had a similar rule, but nothing came of it, so here's hoping...

popisdead
04-11-2013, 02:49
You can house rule it for any game. Warhammer is just a game.

Jimmi Stender
04-11-2013, 05:42
The mercenary rules from T&T are very simple, and I doubt they have anything to do with 9th edition, unless 9th is more or less identical to 8th.

Wesser
04-11-2013, 09:16
This may sound strange, but while I liked mercenaries in the form of regiments of renown I abhor the idea of allies in every other aspect

With a very very few exceptions aka Beastmen allied to chaos warriors, Empire and Dwarves and bret & woodies I find it to be real fluff, army and gamekillers.

The old RoR units were fairly generic and while they had their perks they generally weren't game changers the way an actual ally system is. I remember that how allies worked in in 4th and it was terrible in every conceivable way as people really abused it to cover army weaknesses.

Ofc in a casual environment.

- If you started a new army but only got one regiment painted up, that you wanna see in action
- If you play some narrative game

But for anything remotely competitive it opens too many weird combos that the whole feel of an army may murk up...

I really see no way allies can make a good official addition to the game...

SanDiegoSurrealist
05-11-2013, 14:00
But for anything remotely competitive it opens too many weird combos that the whole feel of an army may murk up...
I really see no way allies can make a good official addition to the game...

Was this comment taken word for word from a 40K 6th Edition rumor post 4 years ago?

GW is the business of selling army books, paints and little plastic dolls.
95% of those who play 40K own 2 books and a close to 2 armies, and that is why 9th Edition will have allies.

duffybear1988
05-11-2013, 14:44
Was this comment taken word for word from a 40K 6th Edition rumor post 4 years ago?

GW is the business of selling army books, paints and little plastic dolls.
95% of those who play 40K own 2 books and a close to 2 armies, and that is why 9th Edition will have allies.

To be fair allies have ruined 40k for a lot of people, myself included. If they restrict allies in fantasy somehow then I will probably end up playing fantasy a lot more.

mypantsarefree3
06-11-2013, 01:45
I think it could be done well, but the ball is in GW's court, of course. I'd hate to see the same units forced in with loose justification.

Maybe if there was a rule that said if someone allied in an Ironblaster or Khorne Cannon you'd either get to hit them closed-fist in the face or sleep with their sister. Then I'd be OK with it .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)