PDA

View Full Version : Why not continue with a community-modified 8th if AoS kills of Fantasy Battles?



Noodle!
18-06-2015, 22:33
This is just a thought... and I by no means have the skills or knowledge to even participate.

If Age of Sigmar does away completely with fantasy as we know it and purely becomes a skirmish game I think there could be great value to find in the community here (and perhaps preferably cross-community with other major wargaming forums). I know there are plenty of rules people are not happy with (such as cannons in general, exactly how ranks work or the magic phase) that would certainly be tweakable while still retaining the base of the current rules.

I know I wouldn't toss out my army anyway and I would even want to continue collecting.

Just Tony
18-06-2015, 22:48
And finding a popular consensus on what rules to keep and which to nerf and which to buff will be a nightmare. I say if you're sticking with 8th, leave it where it is barring a house rule or two.


I'm already a 6th-Hammer guy, so I'm out the door before AoS even hits the floor.

Vulgarsty
18-06-2015, 22:55
This is just a thought... and I by no means have the skills or knowledge to even participate.

If Age of Sigmar does away completely with fantasy as we know it and purely becomes a skirmish game I think there could be great value to find in the community here (and perhaps preferably cross-community with other major wargaming forums). I know there are plenty of rules people are not happy with (such as cannons in general, exactly how ranks work or the magic phase) that would certainly be tweakable while still retaining the base of the current rules.

I know I wouldn't toss out my army anyway and I would even want to continue collecting.

I think lots of people will. 8th is a pretty good edition, wood elves were the last army that absolutely had to be updated as skaven, bretts and beasts (now with marks) are all competitive - even kislev are useable (if uncompetitive) I think end times magic is overpowered but you neednt play that. Overall ill see what aos is like (without much hope) but i think oldhammer will settle around 8th which is good as whilst there might be a lot of nostalgia about 3rd it is a cumbersome game to play with terrible magic.

Ahnarras
18-06-2015, 22:55
That's why i'm planning to do if i fail my exam and have a whole year of nothing to waste.
But as Tony said, the "rulebook" i would create would only serve to my gaming group. You can't really create a balance when you are not official in some way : people playing TK or beastmen will love the buff, and the one playing chaos or dark elves will just snort at your nerf and refuse to play. Very rare to find people that could accept a nerf...

Still, it's not totally impossible. In france we have "blackhammer", a fanmade 6/7th that's gaining more and more support. There is already multiple tournament each year with this ruleset.
It's just a lot of work for a not so great chance of success, so most people don't bother to beging writing...

Vulgarsty
18-06-2015, 22:59
That's why i'm planning to do if i fail my exam and have a whole year of nothing to waste.
But as Tony said, the "rulebook" i would create would only serve to my gaming group. You can't really create a balance when you are not official in some way : people playing TK or beastmen will love the buff, and the one playing chaos or dark elves will just snort at your nerf and refuse to play. Very rare to find people that could accept a nerf...

Still, it's not totally impossible. In france we have "blackhammer", a fanmade 6/7th that's gaining more and more support. There is already multiple tournament each year with this ruleset.
It's just a lot of work for a not so great chance of success, so most people don't bother to beging writing...

Agree even if you are house ruling it, it is easier to get buy in by buffing the weak than nerfing the overpowered. Im certainly working on a set but it is comping 8th not re-writing from scratch

http://www.north-herts-wargamers.webspace.virginmedia.com/8th%20Improved%20Rules.html

Montegue
18-06-2015, 23:05
I've been seriously considering a general Fantasy wargame rules set and a kickstarter. Nothing fancy, just a solid, deep fantasy game for folks who like ranked up models and units, good fluff, and a fun game to play.

Not sure if it's something you could monetize - maybe with expansions, campaigns, and the like - without miniature production. But, honestly, I'm tired of waiting for Warthone, I want something more in-depth than Kings of War, and I want to keep on keeping on with the models I've painted and created.

Ahnarras
18-06-2015, 23:11
It was my idea too, but i encountered a problem : creating a ruleset means creating armies lists, units, fluff... If you want to use your army, you are going to copy/paste warhammer's units.
If you are trying to sell it, it's gonna be a huge problem for you, specially with the lawsuit prowness of GW. I'm not sure about the legal statut of a kickstarter, but you will be making money on the warhammer's world fluff. I can't see that ending well.

Montegue
18-06-2015, 23:32
GW already knows it can't win lawsuits about general fantasy tropes. If they could, Avatars of War would be dead in the water.

DeathGlam
18-06-2015, 23:33
Well i have no interest in being involved in the process, too many other games taking my focus but i agree with the sentiment, if AoS does not offer any ranked battle play, then no reason the community cannot take control of the ruleset in the same way they have the Specialist Games which still have a strong following, especially BB.

Like the specialist games, they only have to die off when us players say so, not GW, unless you only ever play in a GW store, then your screwed but im not sure why anyone would play in a GW store anymore.

logan054
18-06-2015, 23:43
This is just a thought... and I by no means have the skills or knowledge to even participate.

If Age of Sigmar does away completely with fantasy as we know it and purely becomes a skirmish game I think there could be great value to find in the community here (and perhaps preferably cross-community with other major wargaming forums). I know there are plenty of rules people are not happy with (such as cannons in general, exactly how ranks work or the magic phase) that would certainly be tweakable while still retaining the base of the current rules.

I know I wouldn't toss out my army anyway and I would even want to continue collecting.

I think it's a good idea, I see no reason why people couldn't come together and come up with tweaks to the rules.

ChargeAndDie
18-06-2015, 23:50
There's already etc which has a huge following in like 40 to 50 countries.. Its not warhammer per se but its close enough for me.. Alternative there is Swedish but its complicated as hell..

Sent from my HUAWEI MT7-L09 using Tapatalk

logan054
18-06-2015, 23:59
Problem with the etc is that's only aimed at people who play competitively. You're not going to see new units added, rules for fun fluffy armies added

Just Tony
19-06-2015, 00:59
I think it's a good idea, I see no reason why people couldn't come together and come up with tweaks to the rules.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!

Wait, you were serious. I tried this with attempting to fix 6th Ed. units with five of my friends. We used the GT comp scoring as a basis, and two of us agreed on half of what we discussed. Past that, everyone either thought something wasn't broken or that there were other things to nerf that weren't an issue. And if 5 people can't come to an accord (Hell, 2 could barely do so) then I have no confidence in dozens of people on the net pulling it off.

logan054
19-06-2015, 01:10
Law of attractions mate, look it up and come back.

E-Dog
19-06-2015, 01:53
My group plans on doing just that. We're all pretty happy with 8th edition, and I'm hoping we can come together and tweak a few things. Personally I was looking forward to combined profiles for ridden monsters as I think it would balance out cannons. Hopefully we'll play test it.

ChargeAndDie
19-06-2015, 02:14
Problem with the etc is that's only aimed at people who play competitively. You're not going to see new units added, rules for fun fluffy armies added
They do add new units like the end times ones. But it all depends on how different the new aos units are in terms of Stats etc. Unfortunately people where I'm from are mostly WAAC so etc helps to rein in the cheese a bit. We use campaigns for fun fluffy builds.. Tons of current material out there for that Btw. And u can always do your own campaigns.. We had one based on nagash and it was a blast..

Sent from my HUAWEI MT7-L09 using Tapatalk

Geep
19-06-2015, 02:54
If AoS is enough of a departure from Fantasy, or flops completely, there definitely will be community groups making their own Fantasy rules. The issue is- everyone has different ways of doing things, and everyone has a different preferred version to start from. This isn't a bad thing, but it gets confusing.

Take a look at Epic as a living example- GW cut it, so communities took over. Some players think 2nd ed was the best, so we have NetEpic- I don't really know how the command structure of that works. Other groups liked the latest edition, and from those some wanted quick, strict, tournament lists with a high turn-over to keep things fresh (EpicUK), others like more fluffy options, even if it slows down when things get the 'official' branding (NetEA).
NetEA works by having an elected council who dish out the 'official' stamp (a conservative group by nature), while each army has a 'champion' who plays with that force, attempts to break it, tweaks it, receives feedback from other gamers, and- when satisfied- attempts to raise it through the levels of officialdom by presenting it to the council (I am an outsider to any official stuff- I may have details a little wrong).
The only issue I've encountered is that it can be damn confusing for a new player to work out what's going on with the three game versions.

I have no doubt there'll be strong community support for Fantasy- but it won't be one Fantasy. There'll probably be at least 5, probably many more, supported versions based on what people want out of the game (my minimal prediction: 8th ed based with End Times, 8th ed based without End Times, 6th ed based and a tournament focussed 6th and 8th).

Marauder Carl
19-06-2015, 03:35
Why not continue with a community-modified 8th if AoS kills of Fantasy Battles?

Because it's 8th & my favorite armies owned are Brettonia, Beastmen, & Dogs of War. I have DE and LM, but didn't even bother to buy the army books for 8th for those.

I'd consider joining a group if using the fan DoW book was cleared, but I'd rather play 6th/7th.

GrandmasterWang
19-06-2015, 04:39
I will continue playing 8th no question.

Chillhammer ftw!

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Urgat
19-06-2015, 10:21
And finding a popular consensus on what rules to keep and which to nerf and which to buff will be impossible.

Fixed that for you. Anybody reading topics on steadfast would come to that conclusion.

Spiney Norman
19-06-2015, 10:33
And finding a popular consensus on what rules to keep and which to nerf and which to buff will be a nightmare. I say if you're sticking with 8th, leave it where it is barring a house rule or two.


I'm already a 6th-Hammer guy, so I'm out the door before AoS even hits the floor.

I agree with most of this, community rule sets are a nightmare, agreement is impossible and every time something gets changed no-one knows which version of the rules to use. Fortunately WFB is in the most balanced place it has been for over a decade, so ironically enough (unless you are a Bretonnian or Beastmen player) this was probably the best time for GW to drop it.

Micalovits
19-06-2015, 10:54
Honestly, the only way I see something like that being successfully implemented would be if someone like ETC made it. Mostly because they all ready have a large following, it is used in tournaments and they might actually be able to get something right.

That said, I think most will just stick to 8'th, or maybe go back to 6/7'th. Well, unless Age of Sigmar is actually good

Tokamak
19-06-2015, 11:11
7th edition was mostly a polished 6th edition. 7th and 8th are profoundly different games that each have their merit.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?40084-Warhammer-Fantasy-7th-edition

Spiney Norman
19-06-2015, 11:18
Honestly, the only way I see something like that being successfully implemented would be if someone like ETC made it. Mostly because they all ready have a large following, it is used in tournaments and they might actually be able to get something right.

That said, I think most will just stick to 8'th, or maybe go back to 6/7'th. Well, unless Age of Sigmar is actually good

We've discussed the possibility of a 'Tournement FAQ' authored by a group like ETC in the past on these boards and the response was not favourable, the general sense from a lot of people was 'who are these people to dictate how I play the game', which unfortunately is always the response to any unofficially sourced FAQ, a full unofficial rules set would be even worse.

Maccwar
19-06-2015, 11:23
... I want something more in-depth than Kings of War, and I want to keep on keeping on with the models I've painted and created.

This is not the first time I've seen this criticism levelled at KoW - I think some people are thrown at how easy it is to pick up the rules and fail to spot that it has tactical game play by the bucket load. There are no 'killer combinations' so defeating your enemy often comes down to out thinking and out playing your opponent.

I have been an active playtester for KoW v2 which will be released shortly. The new version removes some of the rough edges (tones down artillery and heavy cavalry etc) and adds a load more choice to the army lists. I can't wait to get the new hardback book in my hands.

Back on topic - The NetEpic group managed to keep Space Marine/Epic alive for years when GW put out Epic 40,000. IIRC as time rolled on various balance issues crept in but the game was still playable amongst friends when common sense was applied. These days online discussion and collaboration are much easier so it would be possible to try and keep things in kilter a bit better. The big issue with unsupported games is recruitment and player numbers tend to dip over time.

logan054
19-06-2015, 12:02
Fixed that for you. Anybody reading topics on steadfast would come to that conclusion.

As said many times before, you would a player committee with an elected team. It's is no different to now really, not everyone plays 8th, some play older editions.

It will never be achieved while people are so negative, and accept like most of us, we don't have the right answers.

All we really need is a better faq, few rules tweaks and a couple of books being updated to 8th. I'm pretty sure the community could manage that if they really wanted the game to continue.

HelloKitty
19-06-2015, 13:12
This is not the first time I've seen this criticism levelled at KoW - I think some people are thrown at how easy it is to pick up the rules and fail to spot that it has tactical game play by the bucket load. There are no 'killer combinations' so defeating your enemy often comes down to out thinking and out playing your opponent.

I have been an active playtester for KoW v2 which will be released shortly. The new version removes some of the rough edges (tones down artillery and heavy cavalry etc) and adds a load more choice to the army lists. I can't wait to get the new hardback book in my hands.

Back on topic - The NetEpic group managed to keep Space Marine/Epic alive for years when GW put out Epic 40,000. IIRC as time rolled on various balance issues crept in but the game was still playable amongst friends when common sense was applied. These days online discussion and collaboration are much easier so it would be possible to try and keep things in kilter a bit better. The big issue with unsupported games is recruitment and player numbers tend to dip over time.

It was too vanilla for me to enjoy. I tried twice. I also detest games that center around combinations, which is why I am not a warmahordes player, but Kings of War goes entirely the other end. There needs to be some middle ground. Every unit felt to me so similar as to make the models themselves seem to just be aesthetic but they functioned many times to me so close to each other.

As to community driven rulesets, this has been proposed many many times and many many times it doesn't go anywhere so I don't put any stock in it. You'll never get the community to agree on anything because everyone seems to want something different. I've been a part of several efforts and it always devolved into gamers shouting at each other because we all think our voice is the most reasonable and carries the most weight. Gamer-Politics poison it.

I think tournaments could possibly do this but a reality that I saw long ago is that gamers for the most part want to stay current, and if its not an official ruleset they will not latch on to it. Thats the biggest driver to a game's success, not the quality of its rules but if the community uses it. Thats why inferior gaming systems like WHFB and 40k are still so popular... (speaking strictly as a game both are pretty poorly done in this day and age) because the players feed the machine by playing it, and others see people playing it so are more apt to play it, despite the rules themselves being poor when there are games that are considered very good rules-wise that you can't grow a community around because no one wants to play a game that no one else is playing (catch-22).

logan054
19-06-2015, 14:05
As to community driven rulesets, this has been proposed many many times and many many times it doesn't go anywhere so I don't put any stock in it. You'll never get the community to agree on anything because everyone seems to want something different. I've been a part of several efforts and it always devolved into gamers shouting at each other because we all think our voice is the most reasonable and carries the most weight. Gamer-Politics poison it.

I think tournaments could possibly do this but a reality that I saw long ago is that gamers for the most part want to stay current, and if its not an official ruleset they will not latch on to it. Thats the biggest driver to a game's success, not the quality of its rules but if the community uses it. Thats why inferior gaming systems like WHFB and 40k are still so popular... (speaking strictly as a game both are pretty poorly done in this day and age) because the players feed the machine by playing it, and others see people playing it so are more apt to play it, despite the rules themselves being poor when there are games that are considered very good rules-wise that you can't grow a community around because no one wants to play a game that no one else is playing (catch-22).

http://www.starwarsccg.org

I think they would disagree with you. It can be done as long as it has some kind of leadership. Simple stating it won't work really achieves nothing. Seriously, what are people achieving by being so negative other than putting people off from even trying.

If you ended up with 4 different rule sets (the amount doesn't matter) then people would have more options to play in way that is enjoyable.

HelloKitty
19-06-2015, 14:14
Thats great that people have succeeded. I know that there have been some community driven initiatives that succeeded (blood bowl, net epic etc)

People also win the powerball too!

Its a forum. Nothing is being achieved, I am voicing my opinion by answering the question "why not continue with a community-modified 8th if AoS kills off Fantasy battles".

I'm certainly not stopping people from trying.

Urgat
19-06-2015, 14:26
As said many times before, you would a player committee with an elected team

And? If I'm not pleased with what they come up with, why would I care about a committee of players I don't know, that have been elected by people I don't know and who probably don't know the people they've elected? I'm sure most people feel the same, and I don't feel it's being negative. We're not talking about a small niche game that has a small community where everybody knows each other and all gather on the one forum, we're talking about what's probably the most played fanatsy miniature game, with dozens of different forums and countless conflicting opinions.

logan054
19-06-2015, 15:08
Thats great that people have succeeded. I know that there have been some community driven initiatives that succeeded (blood bowl, net epic etc)

People also win the powerball too!

Its a forum. Nothing is being achieved, I am voicing my opinion by answering the question "why not continue with a community-modified 8th if AoS kills off Fantasy battles".

I'm certainly not stopping people from trying.

Of course nothing is being achieved, why would anything be achieved when half the people seem to be content to whinge about the problems rather than actually suggest solutions.

As my example suggests, it can be done, it won't be perfect, neither is the current edition.

Then again we could just sit here moaning about how it can't be done and watch the game die.

You achieved just as much by telling people it can't be done.

@urgat - Then go have a rant about some goes are trying to keep you like alive for free.

Urgat
19-06-2015, 15:53
Sorry, you need to rephrase that, I don't understand.

HelloKitty
19-06-2015, 16:07
Of course nothing is being achieved, why would anything be achieved when half the people seem to be content to whinge about the problems rather than actually suggest solutions.

As my example suggests, it can be done, it won't be perfect, neither is the current edition.

Then again we could just sit here moaning about how it can't be done and watch the game die.

You achieved just as much by telling people it can't be done.

@urgat - Then go have a rant about some goes are trying to keep you like alive for free.

Good luck to you on your crusade. Perhaps you will defy the overwhelming odds and be the leader that the warhammer community needs to rally behind. However, you may need to look at your criteria of "whining and moaning" because if you wish to apply it to anyone that has an opinion differing from yours you will have a more difficult time than the odds already make it be.

Montegue
19-06-2015, 17:13
The only way to make it work is to simply write it, do a good job of it, and then promote it to a group and see if it works. Honestly, very little has to be done to 8th to make it a fantastic game on the table. Very little.

HelloKitty
19-06-2015, 18:29
Then I suggest that this forum lock down any threads asking for the opinion of "why" or "why not" as if answering a question posed will lead to posters aggressively attacking those people that don't agree with them by using such phrases as whining and moaning, that will lead to some busy moderation of nasty responses I figure. :)

logan054
19-06-2015, 21:26
I hate to break it to you, you have actually attacked and insulted the community. Apparently we are so up our own arses that we wouldn't be able to agree on anything to keep a game alive. Because we are all, apparently that arrogant.

Great, you have an opinion. You stayed it on page one multiple times. If you really have so little faith in the community why are you even posting in this topic? Is it that important that the world hears your negative thoughts? Maybe if people like you put as much effort into suggesting ideas how something like this could work then something could be achieved.

But no, it's more important that your opinion is stated time and time again. What are you even achieving? Aside putting people off by dragging me into a stupid debate.

Just Tony
19-06-2015, 22:46
I hate to break it to you, you have actually attacked and insulted the community. Apparently we are so up our own arses that we wouldn't be able to agree on anything to keep a game alive. Because we are all, apparently that arrogant.

Great, you have an opinion. You stayed it on page one multiple times. If you really have so little faith in the community why are you even posting in this topic? Is it that important that the world hears your negative thoughts? Maybe if people like you put as much effort into suggesting ideas how something like this could work then something could be achieved.

But no, it's more important that your opinion is stated time and time again. What are you even achieving? Aside putting people off by dragging me into a stupid debate.

Jesus...

Okay, lets conduct an experiment. Everyone who still gives any sort of flip in this thread: How would you fix the 6th Edition High Elves book? Or do you think it works perfectly? Watch popular consensus in action now...

Geep
20-06-2015, 02:43
Just curious with all this talk- how many people look in the rules development part of this forum? How many even know there is a rules development forum? How many have looked at something like the 'Warhammer CE' rules being worked on there?

This is how this kind of thing happens- someone stops with the whining (positive or negative) about whether it's possible to do this, and actually has a go. They put their work out to the community for feedback, and can adjust accordingly. They (in this case Seelenhaendler) don't need to change things according to suggestions, because they are the self-established leader (a right earned by being the one to actually do the work) and they have a vision of how they want the game to be- but they still seek feedback. Maybe they'll even split the work among a group who seem to have the same vision.
Disagree with their ideas in an irreconcilable way? Fine. But your moaning is meaningless unless you get off your backside and put in the work to make your own rules. That's not a bad thing- it's good to have the choice, as long as the choice is easily available to all to choose from.

In partial answer then to the 6th ed High Elves book issue- there are many ways people may try and solve it. None are wrong (or at least those that are terrible will receive no support). The more people who have a shot at it, the more options there are and the better things will be (likely two or three versions will become 'mainstream'- and players can pick the one that suits their vision of the army).

Noodle!
20-06-2015, 13:27
That's interesting Geep, I actually didn't know there was a rules development forum... I must've overlooked it so many times over the years. Time to have a look at those.

mdauben
20-06-2015, 13:59
I'd consider joining a group if using the fan DoW book was cleared, but I'd rather play 6th/7th.
This. If I'm going to play old, OOP rules I'd pick either of these over 8th, and that's part of the problem. Those wanting to stick with "classic" Warhammer Fantasy are going to further splinter into smaller subgroups by edition, house rules, etc.

To me, the biggest draw of GW games, whether it was Warhammer Fantasy or 40K, wasn't the rules or the fluff or even the minis, it was that I could go down to my FLGS and almost always find someone to play. The last few years, Warmahords, FOW, and a couple other games are already cutting into thus advantage. Add in a splintered fan base for Warhammer Fantasy and that advantage is gone. [emoji20]



From a Galaxy far, far away...

Tupinamba
20-06-2015, 15:29
This. If I'm going to play old, OOP rules I'd pick either of these over 8th, and that's part of the problem. Those wanting to stick with "classic" Warhammer Fantasy are going to further splinter into smaller subgroups by edition, house rules, etc.

To me, the biggest draw of GW games, whether it was Warhammer Fantasy or 40K, wasn't the rules or the fluff or even the minis, it was that I could go down to my FLGS and almost always find someone to play. The last few years, Warmahords, FOW, and a couple other games are already cutting into thus advantage. Add in a splintered fan base for Warhammer Fantasy and that advantage is gone. [emoji20]



From a Galaxy far, far away...

I agree. Thatīs also why Iīd rather have the community going to another, supported, alternative game system. There would still be the problem of splitting up, but if at least one of the bigger alternatives, like KOW or Warthrone, really takes off, there should be enough of a network effect to consolidate one specific game as WHFB substitute. In my dreams, I even envision a cooperation of the smaller companies to achieve that by polling their resources and cutting the waste of paralel product development.

DeathGlam
20-06-2015, 17:34
If you just keep the ranked battle rules available online in some form for free(assuming GW do drop their own version) it could work, as it has for Blood Bowl, which currently has multiple small companies making nothing but "Fantasy Football" miniatures.

Lordcypress
20-06-2015, 21:52
Over here in North British Columbia Canada we are sticking with 8th edition if 9th turns out to be a completely different game. We all love have our own races and backgrounds. Each army gets its own book. Pretty simple. All we are going to do is make a few house rules for friendly gaming and our local tournaments.

1. Flanking units negate Steadfast if they have at least two ranks themselves.
2. Artillery will return to guessed ranges.
3. Spears will receive plus 1 strength when charged by anything larger then regular infantry.
4. Challenges will be axed.
5. Fear will be tested at -1 leadership
6. Terror will be tested at -2 leadership
7. All Cavalry will get the Lance Formation option on the charge. Brettonians will get it all the time.
8. Characters will receive a "Look Out Sir" roll from any spell that auto kills.
9. Units that complete a charge strike first. Further rounds is determined through initiative order.

Those are just some of the ideas our group has been discussing recently. And thanks to Warseer for a lot of those ideas too!!!

Just Tony
20-06-2015, 22:39
Just curious with all this talk- how many people look in the rules development part of this forum? How many even know there is a rules development forum? How many have looked at something like the 'Warhammer CE' rules being worked on there?

This is how this kind of thing happens- someone stops with the whining (positive or negative) about whether it's possible to do this, and actually has a go. They put their work out to the community for feedback, and can adjust accordingly. They (in this case Seelenhaendler) don't need to change things according to suggestions, because they are the self-established leader (a right earned by being the one to actually do the work) and they have a vision of how they want the game to be- but they still seek feedback. Maybe they'll even split the work among a group who seem to have the same vision.
Disagree with their ideas in an irreconcilable way? Fine. But your moaning is meaningless unless you get off your backside and put in the work to make your own rules. That's not a bad thing- it's good to have the choice, as long as the choice is easily available to all to choose from.

In partial answer then to the 6th ed High Elves book issue- there are many ways people may try and solve it. None are wrong (or at least those that are terrible will receive no support). The more people who have a shot at it, the more options there are and the better things will be (likely two or three versions will become 'mainstream'- and players can pick the one that suits their vision of the army).

I don't go for fan created rulesets. If there's a house rule that makes sense and is damn near universal, I'll run with it.

As far as the High Elves comment, yeah having 3 or more solutions would be absurd. Say my opponent doesn't like the version I like? Yep, back to square one. That's why I figure it's better to stick with an older edition that's complete and can easily be house ruled (Insane Courage and 7th power dice rules added to 6th for instance).


This. If I'm going to play old, OOP rules I'd pick either of these over 8th, and that's part of the problem. Those wanting to stick with "classic" Warhammer Fantasy are going to further splinter into smaller subgroups by edition, house rules, etc.

To me, the biggest draw of GW games, whether it was Warhammer Fantasy or 40K, wasn't the rules or the fluff or even the minis, it was that I could go down to my FLGS and almost always find someone to play. The last few years, Warmahords, FOW, and a couple other games are already cutting into thus advantage. Add in a splintered fan base for Warhammer Fantasy and that advantage is gone. [emoji20]



From a Galaxy far, far away...

And we are establishing just how fractured the fanbase is on things.

theunwantedbeing
20-06-2015, 23:08
Over here in North British Columbia Canada we are sticking with 8th edition if 9th turns out to be a completely different game. We all love have our own races and backgrounds. Each army gets its own book. Pretty simple. All we are going to do is make a few house rules for friendly gaming and our local tournaments.

1. Flanking units negate Steadfast if they have at least two ranks themselves.
2. Artillery will return to guessed ranges.
3. Spears will receive plus 1 strength when charged by anything larger then regular infantry.
4. Challenges will be axed.
5. Fear will be tested at -1 leadership
6. Terror will be tested at -2 leadership
7. All Cavalry will get the Lance Formation option on the charge. Brettonians will get it all the time.
8. Characters will receive a "Look Out Sir" roll from any spell that auto kills.
9. Units that complete a charge strike first. Further rounds is determined through initiative order.

Those are just some of the ideas our group has been discussing recently. And thanks to Warseer for a lot of those ideas too!!!

1. Fair.
2. Makes basically no difference and allows over guessing nonsense, if anything this is worse.
3. Mounted as well or just spears on foot? Either way, it's fair.
4. Good riddance.
5. Basically meaningless but okay.
6. Terror is panic now remember, this is potentially brutal.
7. I like it, it's almost meaningless unless the unit is actually in lance formation anyway, this doesn't include rank bonuses does it as that opens up abuse and combines with the first change to basically make cavalry able to auto-break giant steadfast blocks with ease.
8. Makes more sense to have them get a look out sir roll on anything that strike the unit they are in.
9. Is this to stop the elf nonsense? I'm not sure I agree with this one, ideally ASF will simply not give re-rolls to hit.

Interesting changes, it does make monsters and cavalry a LOT more powerful though.
Potentially not for the better.

StygianBeach
21-06-2015, 00:19
I don't go for fan created rulesets. If there's a house rule that makes sense and is damn near universal, I'll run with it.

As far as the High Elves comment, yeah having 3 or more solutions would be absurd. Say my opponent doesn't like the version I like? Yep, back to square one. That's why I figure it's better to stick with an older edition that's complete and can easily be house ruled (Insane Courage and 7th power dice rules added to 6th for instance).

And we are establishing just how fractured the fanbase is on things.

Agree, it is just too hard to please everyone.

I think it would just be better if a small group make their own changes and run tournaments with them and try and create a following.
Give it a fancy name and only tolerate suggestions at the end of tournament season.

The best form of government in this situation is a competent dictator. Everything else is just too fractured and divisive.

Geep
21-06-2015, 02:59
I don't go for fan created rulesets. If there's a house rule that makes sense and is damn near universal, I'll run with it.
This is exactly where 99% of fan made rules come from. You seem to have missed my main point though- you clearly have opinions on how the game should be. Whining here does nothing. If you want to see your ideas reach the community, go and write the rules you want! Put it to the community!


As far as the High Elves comment, yeah having 3 or more solutions would be absurd. Say my opponent doesn't like the version I like? Yep, back to square one. That's why I figure it's better to stick with an older edition that's complete and can easily be house ruled (Insane Courage and 7th power dice rules added to 6th for instance).

It's not back to square one- you have an idea of what each of you wants, and something to base a compromise on*.
Most rules people make will be simply tweaks of what they consider the best version of the game. The work these people do in tweaking the game should then get exposed to the community, say... maybe on a rules development part of the forum?
Once enough options are out there people will polarise- certain rule sets will become 'universal' (or as universal as possible- even right now no ruleset is universal, houserules are everywhere), others will wither and die. Those that survive will be the best, as judged by the community, of which you and all your opponents are members- therefore there should be a version or two that satisfies both you and your opponents. From there you can houserule to a common ground, or just alternate which system you're using. It's the same as you may be doing now with End Times vs non-End Times, or similar.
If you think 6th/7th/8th is near perfect and you want to stick with that, no worries- I'm sure one of the most fan-supported versions will be these pre-existing editions, but there are still going to be fan adjustments- whether it's adding Dogs of War to 8th or more fundamental changes to rules we all know are terrible (each edition has something...).

*Just as a side note, 40k is popular and is already this fractured- pre-game discussions on whether you use Lords of War, limit D weapons, allow formations- there's heaps of different things that change the game and split the community as some people like them and others hate them- all rolled into the core rules.


Agree, it is just too hard to please everyone.

I think it would just be better if a small group make their own changes and run tournaments with them and try and create a following.
Give it a fancy name and only tolerate suggestions at the end of tournament season.

The best form of government in this situation is a competent dictator. Everything else is just too fractured and divisive.
You don't try to please everyone. You be that dictator, you make your rules with your vision and make them available. If people dislike them enough they can go to the effort of making their own rules, or be quiet. It's a natural process then that some successful versions will merge, unsuccessful versions will die, and we'll be left with a handful of the most popular versions- of which each gaming group will probably follow one or two as they please.

The important thing is: If you have a vision, put it out there. If you aren't willing to go to that effort, you have no right to comment against the work of someone who has (other than politely and respectfully giving ideas, and accepting that they may be ignored).

HelloKitty
21-06-2015, 03:24
I hate to break it to you, you have actually attacked and insulted the community. Apparently we are so up our own arses that we wouldn't be able to agree on anything to keep a game alive. Because we are all, apparently that arrogant.

Great, you have an opinion. You stayed it on page one multiple times. If you really have so little faith in the community why are you even posting in this topic? Is it that important that the world hears your negative thoughts? Maybe if people like you put as much effort into suggesting ideas how something like this could work then something could be achieved.

But no, it's more important that your opinion is stated time and time again. What are you even achieving? Aside putting people off by dragging me into a stupid debate.

No - I stated my opinion and then you attacked me so I defended my stance, which you are now twisting into how I am somehow jumping up and down shouting my opinion over and over again and insinuating I've insulted an entire community of people.

It was stated on page 2 the one time. Then after your comment about whining and moaning it was referenced. That is it. It takes a giant leap of logic to take those comments and turn them into someone needing to post their opinion time and time again.

You have a long and storied posting history of attacking people and jumping into exaggeration. Just like now. I know from your posting history that you are an intelligent person so I know its not a simple matter of misunderstanding or mistaking what I wrote with someone else, but it falls in line with other things you have posted about others in what seems to be a deliberate attack to try and force the timeless "I win" button to an argument by discrediting the person rather than what they are trying to say. I believe they call those ad hominem attacks? I'm not an expert but it sounds right.

I know from your posting history that you are very well aware of exactly what youre doing when you use the phrase 'whining and moaning' that it wont lead to a constructive conversation and more likely is used to pick a fight.

That's the last I'll address the point on regarding you and what you have to say.

Ultimate point being for those that care about trying to make some community edition of warhammer - go into the rules development forum and make it happen. There have been a couple of people that have done so (the one from here that sticks in my mind is Commissar Von Tousiant). If you think you can get something that the community will embrace - have at it.

Gorthaur
21-06-2015, 04:19
I don't know, I guess that would work for fans of the current system. But i'd prefer a restart from the ground up, if you ask me WHF had become really complicated and mind numbing over the years. Going back to the basics and stuff with Age of Sigmar is what i'm hoping for. A game that's easy to pick up and play and learn, and is still fun. WHF as it is in 8th edition just isn't fun to me, I used to have fun playing with the contents of the old battle for skull pass box though. I'm the type of person who hates numbers though, so maybe its just me.

StygianBeach
21-06-2015, 07:29
You don't try to please everyone. You be that dictator, you make your rules with your vision and make them available. If people dislike them enough they can go to the effort of making their own rules, or be quiet. It's a natural process then that some successful versions will merge, unsuccessful versions will die, and we'll be left with a handful of the most popular versions- of which each gaming group will probably follow one or two as they please.

The important thing is: If you have a vision, put it out there. If you aren't willing to go to that effort, you have no right to comment against the work of someone who has (other than politely and respectfully giving ideas, and accepting that they may be ignored).

I thought that is what I was getting at?
The idea that if someone wants a modified 8th, they should simply do it and see what happens.

Are we simply in agreement then?

Geep
21-06-2015, 10:43
I guess we are :)

I was just getting annoyed at the people whose mindset seems to be 'consensus won't be easy! Don't bother trying!'

Ben
21-06-2015, 13:04
You could just play 3rd.

Noodle!
21-06-2015, 13:51
Over here in North British Columbia Canada we are sticking with 8th edition if 9th turns out to be a completely different game. We all love have our own races and backgrounds. Each army gets its own book. Pretty simple. All we are going to do is make a few house rules for friendly gaming and our local tournaments.

1. Flanking units negate Steadfast if they have at least two ranks themselves.
2. Artillery will return to guessed ranges.
3. Spears will receive plus 1 strength when charged by anything larger then regular infantry.
4. Challenges will be axed.
5. Fear will be tested at -1 leadership
6. Terror will be tested at -2 leadership
7. All Cavalry will get the Lance Formation option on the charge. Brettonians will get it all the time.
8. Characters will receive a "Look Out Sir" roll from any spell that auto kills.
9. Units that complete a charge strike first. Further rounds is determined through initiative order.

Those are just some of the ideas our group has been discussing recently. And thanks to Warseer for a lot of those ideas too!!!

Sounds pretty good!

I started a little thread in the (newly found for me) rules development forum if you'd be interested to discuss what you said. Not saying your group should change to what I say, but I'd like to hear your reasonings behind the changes, especially those I disagree with or don't understand and perhaps from that I'll be able to develop something that I can use with my group here at home.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?410254-Warhammer-8th-Discombobulated-house-ruling&p=7471219

SuperHappyTime
21-06-2015, 13:57
You could just play 3rd.

This illuminates the entire problem with a community-modified ruleset. We can't even agree on what edition to start from.

Noodle!
21-06-2015, 14:07
This illuminates the entire problem with a community-modified ruleset. We can't even agree on what edition to start from.

But as was previously stated, we don't have to.
It's not an all or nothing situation. Not every part of the community has to be interested or participating, it's enough with a small amount of players who feel the need for it. Same goes for players how play other editions.

Players who didn't like 8th obviously wouldn't play or modify 8th, but that's irrelevant since they wouldn't have to.

Konrad von Carstein
21-06-2015, 15:52
I don't know, I guess that would work for fans of the current system. But i'd prefer a restart from the ground up, if you ask me WHF had become really complicated and mind numbing over the years. Going back to the basics and stuff with Age of Sigmar is what i'm hoping for. A game that's easy to pick up and play and learn, and is still fun. WHF as it is in 8th edition just isn't fun to me, I used to have fun playing with the contents of the old battle for skull pass box though. I'm the type of person who hates numbers though, so maybe its just me.

As long as I don't have to buy a whole new army, or buy additional troops that weren't originally part of it, I'm cool.

swordofglass
21-06-2015, 16:11
This is all that's necessary in order to keep 8th healthy for a long time:

Army-specific:
Tomb Kings: use crumbling rules from VC book instead of their own
Beastmen: can take marks as per the Glottkin book
Bretonnians: BSB can take normal mundane equipment as if he wasn't a BSB

Rulebook changes:
Test-or-die spells allow a ward save, including a ward granted my MR, to be taken.


That's it. Predatory Fighter? Skaven spell-types? Point adjustments? People get by without official rulings on these now. The above changes are all that are necessary, anything else such as nerfing armies or changing rules around will never be accepted by enough people.

DeathGlam
21-06-2015, 17:01
No need to adapt the rules, leave that to individual clubs, if you want to keep mass ranked battle warhammer alive, just make the rules easily available online similar to the specialist games community.

Galushi
21-06-2015, 20:25
This is all that's necessary in order to keep 8th healthy for a long time:

Army-specific:
Tomb Kings: use crumbling rules from VC book instead of their own
Beastmen: can take marks as per the Glottkin book
Bretonnians: BSB can take normal mundane equipment as if he wasn't a BSB

Rulebook changes:
Test-or-die spells allow a ward save, including a ward granted my MR, to be taken.


That's it. Predatory Fighter? Skaven spell-types? Point adjustments? People get by without official rulings on these now. The above changes are all that are necessary, anything else such as nerfing armies or changing rules around will never be accepted by enough people.

I would use those, and possibly adjust power/dispel dice generation. To me that's the largest thing interfering with the scalability of the game.

GrandmasterWang
22-06-2015, 07:46
This is all that's necessary in order to keep 8th healthy for a long time:

Army-specific:
Tomb Kings: use crumbling rules from VC book instead of their own
Beastmen: can take marks as per the Glottkin book
Bretonnians: BSB can take normal mundane equipment as if he wasn't a BSB

Rulebook changes:
Test-or-die spells allow a ward save, including a ward granted my MR, to be taken.


That's it. Predatory Fighter? Skaven spell-types? Point adjustments? People get by without official rulings on these now. The above changes are all that are necessary, anything else such as nerfing armies or changing rules around will never be accepted by enough people.

We will continue playing "Chillhammer" in our area.

I love my beastmen and tomb kings.

We use your suggestion re: marks from Glottkin. Additionally a Jabberslythe has a 5+ regen save and heals d3 wounds if successful with the tongue attack. Ghorgon has a 6+ regen save.

Regarding Tomb Kings with the End Times in our Chillhammer games TK can march within 12 inches of the general. Regarding Crumble if there is a Tomb King then no crumble. Crumble only starts when upper leadership echelon eliminated.

Your suggestion for test/die spells we have been using for years now with no drama.

Challenge mechanic - Any challeges are done between players. If both players accept the characters move next to each other to fight up to max +5 overkill. Declining challenge no penalty.

Probably the biggest change we use is to drastically speed up the magic phase/our games every magic ability is cast like a bound spell.

We use many oop unit such as Dogs of War pikemen so given people who houserule will read this I thought I'd share my Pike rules.

When charging fight in 2 ranks, otherwise 4 ranks fight. Asf and +1 strength in first round of combat. Mounts lose 1 attack by charging the front of pikes. Pikemen units ALWAYS receive rerolls to hit against opponents to the front.

With these changes pikemen are an incredibly fun and fluffy defensive unit to use who add an additional element to Warhammer.

Feel free to give them a whirl

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

employed
22-06-2015, 10:01
I have allways wondered how this will play out. Im hoping for a unified community with balanced ruleaking without tha insane powercrep with specialrules and insane stats just to sell models.

Eyrenthaal
22-06-2015, 14:49
We just had a meeting where everyone in the group was to find one nerf and one boost for their own book. It went very well. Trying to make unofficial changes across the board might be tough, but as gaming groups we should be able to house rule. The problem then starts when you're playing outside your normal group.

taurus-marstein
22-06-2015, 15:48
I bet a lot of people will keep playing 8th, many will use ETC, many will use swedish, many will say "this rule is stupid, can't it be X?" and their opponent will say "sure".

One buff and one nerf? Hmm. What if you get to do up to 3 of each? Butt keeping 1:1 ratio.

So HE for instance, if I make BOTWD a 4++ instead of a 2++, that's 1 nerf. If I make spearmen get heavy armor for free, that's 1 buff.

Seems fair, right? I think what you could accomplish is to make playing with the sub optimal stuff more enjoyable.

swordofglass
22-06-2015, 16:02
Dwarfs:
3 buffs:
Ironbreakers have a 1+ save
Organ Guns hit automatically
Dwarfs always get Hatred

3 nerfs:
Slayers are ld8
Miners are WS3
Runelords are T4

Who could possibly argue with that...

taurus-marstein
22-06-2015, 17:06
The buffs need to be on units you are actually gonna take. You saying you're gonna take slayers? Also you shouldn't buff units that are already good (please insert common sense here).

Montegue
22-06-2015, 17:11
I think he was joking.

I think if I had to nerf/buff anything from dwarfs, it would be -

Buff - +1 As to Gromril/Forge Proven Gromril armor (so, gromril a 3+ base), Hammerers, and Longbeards (separate the heavy armor from Dwarf Scale, so that Gromril armor really is the finest armor in the world, and the elite warriors have armor at least as good as they sell to the empire swordsmen)

Nerf - Misfire on an Organ gun halves the total shots instead of a -1 to hit on all shots. The weapons are already crazy accurate with a ME and Accuracy, and giving an additional -1 isn't always a big deal.

HelloKitty
22-06-2015, 17:47
He was highlighting another issue that comes up regularly using satire - buffing things one would use while nerfing things that are meaningless (making slayers leadership 8 for example is meaningless because they are unbreakable and I believe immune to psychology (haven't seen them on the table in years so I forget)) so their leadership score could be 2 and they'd function the same.

swordofglass
22-06-2015, 18:13
The serious point behind my list was that the intention is presumably to avoid negotiation and hassle by allowing players to 'self-comp' - my examples were extreme, but there will be less extreme buffs which people still disagree over - hence negotiation will still be required ('hey, I made my BotWD a 3++ against magic instead, so you should be totally fine with my white lions having 2 attacks'... erm, how about no?) hence it would be just as messy as anything else, except even more now that everyone's making up their own custom ganky rules.

taurus-marstein
22-06-2015, 18:16
Except versus screams, death magic, etc.

Yes of course you can't just buff the good stuff to be better wwhile nerfing useless stuff even more into the dirt.

Your opponent needs to agree on your buff/nerf trade.

I actually love the idea of gromril being a 3+, and giving hammerers a 4+.

Halving organ gun shots is a reasonable nerf, considering the helblaster has that.

theunwantedbeing
22-06-2015, 18:40
I actually love the idea of gromril being a 3+, and giving hammerers a 4+.

Halving organ gun shots is a reasonable nerf, considering the helblaster has that.

Yeah, love the idea of a free extra +1 save for almost everything.
Especially when it's at the expense of an almost negligible change in an artillery piece you might not even be taking.

Instead of doing 1-5 hits when you misfire (long range, +1 to hit rune)
You'll be doing 0.66-3.33 hits instead.

taurus-marstein
22-06-2015, 22:32
If you're playing dwarves without an organ gun that's a major disadvantage. That extra armor isn't always huge.

There are tons of things that negate armor entirely, also there's always metal magic...

The point is that each army has 1-2 netlists. If you gimp a piece of that netlist but buff one of the components that would otherwise never get used, it's most likely gonna be no big deal.

For instance: I don't take any steam tanks or demigryphs in my empire army, so can I please let my Altdorf spearmen have heavy armor?

It's fluffy, itt doesn't create a new netlist, just a moderately better way to play a sub-optimal choice.

Just Tony
22-06-2015, 22:46
I don't think I've taken a netlist in my life. I've fought plenty, and wasn't impressed.

Galushi
22-06-2015, 23:10
I think the point of that buff/nerf idea is to buff underutilized units, and tone down major offenders. Gromril armor definitely deserves a buff for its fluffiness as the most elite armor in the world. Giving it a point or two cost increase would be fine with me for that, as well.

Obviously you cant compare some random buff and some random nerf and pretend they balance eachother out, but the overall goal of houseruling should be to make things more balanced, logical, and fairly costed for its abilities. Some unit that no one ever takes because it's overcosted or brings nothign unique? come up with some fluffy rules for it or reduce the cost a bit. Then playtest it.

I'd assume certain armies are marginally balanced around their best possible lists, so I'd be concerned with bringing up the power level a tad on the underperforming units so they have a better chance at being brought. If they're a bit more efficient to use, but still not as good as the cheese you're replacing with them, then you're not damaging the balance too much. Though I bet there are a few armies out there that could stand to have their army power brought up a bit too.

taurus-marstein
23-06-2015, 01:02
Like bretonnia.

The only infantry with WS2 is skavenslaves and peasants (that I know of). That's pathetic.

Peasants should be buffed to make bretonnia more of a combined arms army (but where infantry is a solid anvil and cav is a hammer, not just the only unit that can do anything)

That would balance the books a bit more, and invoke more tactically rewarding play

Geep
23-06-2015, 09:54
The only infantry with WS2 is skavenslaves and peasants (that I know of). That's pathetic.

Peasants should be buffed to make bretonnia more of a combined arms army (but where infantry is a solid anvil and cav is a hammer, not just the only unit that can do anything)

Why not use Men at Arms over Peasants? Peasants are supposed to be awful- they've never carried an honest weapon, have no training, etc. Giving them equal skill to skaven slaves and goblins seems right to me. If you want someone who actually has at least a slight modicum of training look to the Men at Arms. If Men at Arms are no good I'd look into fixing them- not making Peasants a replacement.

Edit: I take it that I'm probably confused- Peasants and Men at Arms are the same in Warhammer? I haven't played against them in ages. In Warmaster though, they are definitely separate units.

Malagor
23-06-2015, 12:24
The only infantry with WS2 is skavenslaves and peasants (that I know of). That's pathetic.
Also Goblins and makes sense for the men at arms to be pathetic.
They are pathetic. They are literally peasants that are given a pole-arm, shield and light armor and then thrown into fight. It's fluffy that they are WS2 since they have no training compared to say Knights Errants who have WS3 that does have training and no lord would ever give peasants a chance to be on equal footing along his son or other younger knights.
And they are a solid anvil as it is since they are dirty cheap and can be made to be extremely durable thanks to magic items.
I have had my 45 men at arms hold superior forces at bay thanks to the prayer icon from round 2 until the end of the game and they were still standing when it was over.

Spiney Norman
23-06-2015, 13:02
Dwarfs:
3 buffs:
Ironbreakers have a 1+ save
Organ Guns hit automatically
Dwarfs always get Hatred

3 nerfs:
Slayers are ld8
Miners are WS3
Runelords are T4

Who could possibly argue with that...

This post and its replies demonstrate precisely why community-driven rule sets are a terrible idea, the 'community' is fundamentally fragmented and everyone jumps on the idea with the agenda of buffing their favourite armies to unreasonable levels while simultaneously trying to stamp on every other army, esp those that give them trouble.

In my view the only viable way to play 'old hammer' is to use the rules as published by GW exactly as they were for a 'closed' edition. For me the best candidate at the moment is pre-end times 8th Edition, which allows most of the contemporary model range to be used (obvious exceptions for ET models), but cuts out the game-ruining crap that the end times mixed army list brought in. Thinking about it, it might work to allow ET models but just not ET army lists, so allow Nagash to be fielded by VC and TK, but don't allow use of the undead legion etc.

Kyriakin
23-06-2015, 14:07
This post and its replies demonstrate precisely why community-driven rule sets are a terrible idea, the 'community' is fundamentally fragmented and everyone jumps on the idea with the agenda of buffing their favourite armies to unreasonable levels while simultaneously trying to stamp on every other army, esp those that give them trouble.

In my view the only viable way to play 'old hammer' is to use the rules as published by GW exactly as they were for a 'closed' edition. For me the best candidate at the moment is pre-end times 8th Edition, which allows most of the contemporary model range to be used (obvious exceptions for ET models), but cuts out the game-ruining crap that the end times mixed army list brought in. Thinking about it, it might work to allow ET models but just not ET army lists, so allow Nagash to be fielded by VC and TK, but don't allow use of the undead legion etc.
ET beastmen rules as they didnt get an 8th?

Just Tony
23-06-2015, 14:40
Also Goblins and makes sense for the men at arms to be pathetic.
They are pathetic. They are literally peasants that are given a pole-arm, shield and light armor and then thrown into fight. It's fluffy that they are WS2 since they have no training compared to say Knights Errants who have WS3 that does have training and no lord would ever give peasants a chance to be on equal footing along his son or other younger knights.
And they are a solid anvil as it is since they are dirty cheap and can be made to be extremely durable thanks to magic items.
I have had my 45 men at arms hold superior forces at bay thanks to the prayer icon from round 2 until the end of the game and they were still standing when it was over.

I started with WS3 M@A and I can say that the switch from 3 to 2 made me stop taking them. Also, the change was after they decided to take any altruism in the Bretonnian book and destroy it, costing us the Arthurian army that honestly brought quite a few people in to the game. Looking at it from an in-world explanation: if you were going to throw everything you value into a big ass building, would you just tell farmer Dell to grab a polearm and hop to? No, you'd have a dedicated body of men who drill every day to know their job and protect all that stuff you own. In world there is no reason to have an untrained defense force except that they needed the book to be grimdark with tons of moral ambiguity. It wouldn't break my heart to see that go at all.

Spiney Norman
23-06-2015, 17:17
ET beastmen rules as they didnt get an 8th?

And neither did Bretonnians, in fact Brets haven't had an army book since 6th, but there has always been books that are hard-done-by in every edition. In terms of the available options I didn't like the way 5th edition played at all, 6 was ok, but the inter-army balance was inferior to 8th, and 7th was comprehensively ruined by the worst power creep WFB has ever seen.

The other down side of playing a pre-8th rule set is that many of my favourite models were released in 8th and do not have rules for earlier editions (warsphinx, Bastilodon, ripperdactyls, Arachnarok etc). I realise it's not a perfect solution, but I think it's the best option available now the eternal cycle has ended.

Katastrophe
23-06-2015, 17:28
The other down side of playing a pre-8th rule set is that many of my favourite models were released in 8th and do not have rules for earlier editions (warsphinx, Bastilodon, ripperdactyls, Arachnarok etc). I realise it's not a perfect solution, but I think it's the best option available now the eternal cycle has ended.

Since most pre-8th rules allowed all the armies to have access to monsters, one can always counts as. I believe it wasn't until 6th that they began limiting which armies could take which monsters and prior to that, nearly all monsters were available to nearly all armies.

Giankllr
24-06-2015, 15:39
The other down side of playing a pre-8th rule set is that many of my favourite models were released in 8th and do not have rules for earlier editions (warsphinx, Bastilodon, ripperdactyls, Arachnarok etc). I realise it's not a perfect solution, but I think it's the best option available now the eternal cycle has ended.

Well with 8th rules l can't play with my Tilean army,SoC list, Zombie pirates.....

HelloKitty
24-06-2015, 15:47
Sure you can. Our last 8th campaign before the one we are currently had a zombie pirate army and we've also had the storm of chaos lists in every campaign. You just need to clarify any rules that don't exist in 8th that were in 7th.

GrandmasterWang
25-06-2015, 05:46
Sure you can. Our last 8th campaign before the one we are currently had a zombie pirate army and we've also had the storm of chaos lists in every campaign. You just need to clarify any rules that don't exist in 8th that were in 7th.

Indeed.

If I can play my Dogs of War in 8th then you can too!

Imo 8th is by far the best Fantasy ruleset that GW have ever done so I don't mind sticking with it. The massed battles actually feel like massed battles!

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Rake
25-06-2015, 14:28
If only it weren't for a childish magic system I would argue 8th was the best edition. Just tone down magic (hard!) and play.

taurus-marstein
26-06-2015, 01:52
All you need to fix magic is make miscasts worse when you roll more dice.

My concept for this is you have to subtract a number based off of how many dice you rolled for the spell from the miscast roll...

so 6 dicing a spell and miscasting would mean you have to roll 2d6 - 4 on the miscast table, where any result thats lower than a 2 is also a dimensional cascasde. That essentially means you have a much higher chance of dimensional cascading yourself if you 6 dice and miscast compared to a 2 or 3 dice miscast.

That would make a lot of the lame aspects about magic extremely risky.

Ayin
26-06-2015, 02:15
Indeed.

If I can play my Dogs of War in 8th then you can too!

Imo 8th is by far the best Fantasy ruleset that GW have ever done so I don't mind sticking with it. The massed battles actually feel like massed battles!




Going to agree here. My Dogs of War (straight outta the 2004 Annual!) play much, much better in 8th than they ever did in 7th. It was actually pretty neat to see so many idea from 6th (which the DoW were based in) and 5th (when they were given their book) re-appear in 8th, like 10/10/10 for command (meaning DoW command were in line with everyone else's) and a vastly expanded magic items list (allowing the army and characters tons of new options).

Gork or Possibly Mork
27-06-2015, 13:47
Because for the most part it would be almost impossible to get anyone to agree on hardly anything and almost nobody is a pro level rule writer/statistician and almost nobody seems to understand the concept of being more abstract, elegant and sophisticated by keeping it simple stupid for balance sake and not going full fanboi fanatic getting bogged down in overly detailed options and game mechanics.

Have you even seen the fan rules section of WHFB forums? They're a mess and most people just generally really suck at it because often their biased passion blinds them overiding common sense & reason. :p

Geep
27-06-2015, 17:27
Because for the most part it would be almost impossible to get anyone to agree on hardly anything and almost nobody is a pro level rule writer/statistician and almost nobody seems to understand the concept of being more abstract, elegant and sophisticated by keeping it simple stupid for balance sake and not going full fanboi fanatic getting bogged down in overly detailed options and game mechanics.
You've played GW games recently, right? Maybe 40k? Even if the forum were as incompetent as you seem to believe, we've got a very low bar to jump over.

Fortunately, as has been pointed out multiple times already, when some people take the initiative others follow, and a community can build good things. You're right that some 'fanbois' make terrible books- but those books crash and burn when exposed to the community, and are quickly forgotten. Good stuff can last.

logan054
27-06-2015, 17:39
You've played GW games recently, right? Maybe 40k? Even if the forum were as incompetent as you seem to believe, we've got a very low bar to jump over.

Fortunately, as has been pointed out multiple times already, when some people take the initiative others follow, and a community can build good things. You're right that some 'fanbois' make terrible books- but those books crash and burn when exposed to the community, and are quickly forgotten. Good stuff can last.

The way I see it, people that actually care about the game and the hobby will agree on some kind of committee to keep the game going, some will vanish because only know how to fix warhammer, others will grumble like they do now. I think if anyone actually believes that AoS is going to end up in a better position than 8th is very delusional. As soon as AoS doesn't pull in the sale figures GW want they will pull the plug. First thing that needs doing is spells from older editions being updated for 8th (hi skaven).

Gork or Possibly Mork
29-06-2015, 05:04
You've played GW games recently, right? Maybe 40k? Even if the forum were as incompetent as you seem to believe, we've got a very low bar to jump over.

Fortunately, as has been pointed out multiple times already, when some people take the initiative others follow, and a community can build good things. You're right that some 'fanbois' make terrible books- but those books crash and burn when exposed to the community, and are quickly forgotten. Good stuff can last.

I don't play 40K. Never have, never will. The genre just doesn't appeal to me at all. I have played WHFB since 6th ed. and like a lot. 8th is my favorite incarnation thus far ( minus ET which was a little more OTT for me gameplay wise ) and sure it has it's faults but it's a pretty solid ruleset as is imo. My only gripes with 8th is the magic system's uberspells could be tweaked and or adding some mechanic to make 6 dicing riskier, a few tweaks to make giant tarpits slightly less effective, making movement/flanking a little more important, something to make deathstars less desirable and warmachine sniping less reliable.

WHFB biggest problems imo is not so much the rules/internal balance bar is low. From my perspective it's the great cost, time, complexity which turns away the entry level players and for vets the game needs a constantly evolving cycle of redoing armies/units/scenarios to shake things up and keep the meta fresh or things get stale after a while. In a lot of ways those two sides are in opposition to each other so it needs to be something in the middle.

I kind of agree with you but my point was it's hard enough just getting just 4 people in a room to agree on something completely. Everyone brings their on bias, favoritism etc..
and if you want to move the game along and keep things fresh and interesting by expanding/adjusting rules, making new units & army rules it gets hairy real fast so good luck with that.

I'm not really saying the community is incompetent per se i just have little faith the few that could do an excellent job and get a massive enough following for the majority of the community to adopt fan driven projects not matter how well thought out. Maybe as a one off thing to try out but i doubt it would be uniting or lasting. Most people are much more likely to just move on to something official.

ehlijen
29-06-2015, 05:28
I don't play 40K. Never have, never will. The genre just doesn't appeal to me at all. I have played WHFB since 6th ed. and like a lot. 8th is my favorite incarnation thus far ( minus ET which was a little more OTT for me gameplay wise ) and sure it has it's faults but it's a pretty solid ruleset as is imo. My only gripes with 8th is the magic system's uberspells could be tweaked and or adding some mechanic to make 6 dicing riskier, a few tweaks to make giant tarpits slightly less effective, making movement/flanking a little more important, something to make deathstars less desirable and warmachine sniping less reliable.

WHFB biggest problems imo is not so much the rules/internal balance bar is low. From my perspective it's the great cost, time, complexity which turns away the entry level players and for vets the game needs a constantly evolving cycle of redoing armies/units/scenarios to shake things up and keep the meta fresh or things get stale after a while. In a lot of ways those two sides are in opposition to each other so it needs to be something in the middle.

I kind of agree with you but my point was it's hard enough just getting just 4 people in a room to agree on something completely. Everyone brings their on bias, favoritism etc..
and if you want to move the game along and keep things fresh and interesting by expanding/adjusting rules, making new units & army rules it gets hairy real fast so good luck with that.

I'm not really saying the community is incompetent per se i just have little faith the few that could do an excellent job and get a massive enough following for the majority of the community to adopt fan driven projects not matter how well thought out. Maybe as a one off thing to try out but i doubt it would be uniting or lasting. Most people are much more likely to just move on to something official.

It happened with Bloodbowl. If no one steps up and tries, sure, nothing will happen. If too many people step up and each try their own direction, then yes there is a danger the fanbase will split too much, but a far more likely outcome is that the most popular direction will become the de facto new warhammer.

The only alternatives to trying to keep your warhammer alive yourself are giving up or sticking with GW and hoping they won't bungle it too badly.

StygianBeach
29-06-2015, 09:07
WHFB biggest problems imo is not so much the rules/internal balance bar is low. From my perspective it's the great cost, time, complexity which turns away the entry level players and for vets the game needs a constantly evolving cycle of redoing armies/units/scenarios to shake things up and keep the meta fresh or things get stale after a while. In a lot of ways those two sides are in opposition to each other so it needs to be something in the middle.


Agree, that is why I have nothing against GW updating army books and core rules every 4-6 years.

hobojebus
29-06-2015, 11:03
It's not just disagreement over rules that is an issue it's also no longer being able to get the kits, it's a big stumbling block that you have to overcome.

I've tried to get people into gothic but they won't because they can't get the models.

Odin
29-06-2015, 12:52
There will no doubt be a hundred different attempts to create a community modded version of 8th. The huge challenge is getting any kind of consensus. I don't think it will happen, though there may be a few reasonably popular variants.

I will continue using the house riles I wrote with my regular opponent. .. may even put them online somewhere in case anyone wants to use them.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

Eyrenthaal
29-06-2015, 13:22
This is What our group came up with as house rules for 8. Strange enough we agreed on almost Every Point.

Movement

A charging unit gains the rule always strike first in their subsequent turn of close combat.

Magic

All spells which inflict wounds or kills will also allow ward saves.

Winds of magic is no longer static. From 3000p and every 1000p above one extra dice will be added. Ie. 3000-3999p = 2d6+1d6, 4000-4999p = 2d6+2d6 etc.. This will be done in the following manor; roll 2d6 as normal and then deduce any buffs or suchlike (HE, Deamons, etc) and then roll any additional die, this roll will be given to both players.

Shooting

Cannons shooting at a monster or a chariot ridden by a character will be using the following table;

1- only the character has been hit.
2-3 only the monster/chariot has been hit (if this hit kills the target the character will also be hit, falling from the back of a monster hurts)
4-6 the entire unit has been hit.

Crew is affected as normal.

Close combat

A charging unit gains the rule always strike first in their subsequent turn of close combat.

If two or more units fighting each other has either always strike first or always strike last rule fighting will be done in initiative order.

Cavalry other than fast cavalry that charges will have one of the beasts attacks changed into one impact hit in their subsequent turn of close combat.

A non fear causing unit that has to take a fear test from a terror causing unit in close combat do so at -2 ld.

Calculating close combat results

To disrupt a unit it will be sufficient to have a full rank in the flank or rear.

Outnumbering your foe gives +1 combat result. (Thus unit strength is back)

Infantry = 1
Cavalry = 2
Larger pieces = their current amount of wounds

Combat reform

A unit fighting another unit inside of a house that wins their combat will be allowed to do a combat reform.

If you are fighting in your front and only in your front you will be allowed to sidestep in order to maximise the number of models in combat. This is done instead of a combat reform and may change where the centre of your unit lies. This cannot be combined with a normal combat reform, one or the other.

Victory points

Half wp for any fleeing enemy unit at the end of the game.
Half wp for any enemy unit below half their starting unit strength

These two combines.

Yowzo
29-06-2015, 13:50
I'm not really saying the community is incompetent per se i just have little faith the few that could do an excellent job and get a massive enough following for the majority of the community to adopt fan driven projects not matter how well thought out. Maybe as a one off thing to try out but i doubt it would be uniting or lasting. Most people are much more likely to just move on to something official.

ETC and Swedish have thousands of players worldwide. Both being maintained by a core of players receiving feedback on an online forum and they form the backbone of dozens if not hundreds of tournaments worldwide.

You may or may not like their rulings and FAQs but they have stepped in to fill a void and succeeded.

Our group hardly plays non-ETC warhammer anymore.

Just Tony
29-06-2015, 14:41
Okay, time to show how much I've been paying attention...



What is this ETC you speak of?

HelloKitty
29-06-2015, 15:17
European Team Championship.

www.warhammer.org.uk

They have their own comp rules, which I happen to quite like a lot, but could never get it to stick here in our events.

Gork or Possibly Mork
30-06-2015, 01:47
ETC and Swedish have thousands of players worldwide. Both being maintained by a core of players receiving feedback on an online forum and they form the backbone of dozens if not hundreds of tournaments worldwide.

You may or may not like their rulings and FAQs but they have stepped in to fill a void and succeeded.

Our group hardly plays non-ETC warhammer anymore.

Not a big fan of comp. When you impose handicap restrictions it's a balancing act that works fine in some cases but in others it can be a real mess or rather unwarranted. I find it way too limiting in that it narrows your scope of choices too much. It paints you into a corner sort of taking away some of the freedom of expression in choice and playstyle. I find scenarios a much better and simpler way to curb imbalanced power gaming.

That being said i'm not a big fan of uber optimal competitive beardy power gamer free for all either.

I'm pretty lucky though my group while competitive don't go out of their way to be hard ass un-enjoyable win at all cost types of players.

Just Tony
30-06-2015, 02:34
I'm fine with comp as a standard, the awkwardly one sided fluffy lists should be an agreed thing, not something that you spring on the casual gamer. One of the great things our tourney scene in Ft. Wayne did was match comparable comp score armies against eachother. So you had your uber-cheese comp score 0 armies facing eachother while your perfect score comp armies went toe to toe.

Yowzo
30-06-2015, 07:57
Not a big fan of comp. When you impose handicap restrictions it's a balancing act that works fine in some cases but in others it can be a real mess or rather unwarranted. I find it way too limiting in that it narrows your scope of choices too much. It paints you into a corner sort of taking away some of the freedom of expression in choice and playstyle. I find scenarios a much better and simpler way to curb imbalanced power gaming.

It's fine that you don't like them, but it seems to work for a lot of people.

This year's ETC has 38 teams representing 37 nations +1 international team to even the numbers. So this is a case where the community has self-organised and made for the shortcomings of GW's lack of support.

Important rulings are decided on a committee vote from the captains of each country, and it seems to work just fine.

Greyshadow
30-06-2015, 08:38
I think I will be playing on with standard 8th. I am very sad about where we are at with this new game.

Lemenhead
08-07-2015, 17:01
It happened with Bloodbowl. If no one steps up and tries, sure, nothing will happen. If too many people step up and each try their own direction, then yes there is a danger the fanbase will split too much, but a far more likely outcome is that the most popular direction will become the de facto new warhammer.

The only alternatives to trying to keep your warhammer alive yourself are giving up or sticking with GW and hoping they won't bungle it too badly.
Here here!!

Sent from my XT1031 using Tapatalk