PDA

View Full Version : Houserule Poll for Age of Sigmar



Tzar Boris
06-07-2015, 18:08
Just as the title says.
Even if we all disagree, wouldn't it be nice if we all had a "modified" ruleset to try en masse?

Vote on whatever you feel strongly about and we'll soon get a picture of the most poorly received rules in AOS.

EDIT: I'm kinda thinking a points system is a no brainer at this point, but looking for core rules things right now.

Deadhorse
06-07-2015, 18:24
Well, you'd have to do the following to AoS to make it work as a reasonably deep strategy game:

Add points values, unit categories and an organizational chart
Add measuring from/to bases
Add some (preferrably all) of the following mechanics that give advantages to units based on:
- situation bonus (like charging units strike first)
- formation bonus (keep the squares for h-t-h units by encouraging players to use them)
- position bonus (like attacking formations in the flank/rear)
- cover (as in, special cover saves if the enemy does not fully see the target)

Ban summoning (or specify points caps for summoned units), ban the silly rules

Add a victory table
Add scenarios

And icing on the cake:
1) rocks-paper-scissors interactions between units, like spearmen get bonus vs cavalry,
2) upgrades to units/characters (magic items, devices, whatever)

So basically about 50 pages.

taurus-marstein
06-07-2015, 18:27
No don't limit your choices, it'd be a better poll if you simply knew what % of people are for or against each rule.
Limiting them makes it seem like lower importance rules don't need to be changed.

Avian
06-07-2015, 18:30
As I see it, they have to fix:
- Base-to-base measuring
- Army composition
- Scenarios (i.e. there needs to actually be some)
- Terrain (generic types)
- Shooting into and out of combat
- Line of sight
- Cover
- Shields, standard bearers and musicians (need to be standardized, as 20+ types of each is a big barrier to entry)

Philhelm
06-07-2015, 18:33
1. POINTS!
2. Base-to-base measuring.
3. Magic missiles (and command abilities) after movement.
4. Shooting rules should probably be changed too, but only if weapon ranges are restored, especially since units seem to move much more quickly overall. 20 inches for a crossbow? Really?

ScruffMan
06-07-2015, 18:49
Measuring base to base is the only one that I chose, not to say that I won't think others might need houseruling but I am going to see what new stuff they come out with in the next few weeks before considering it. The game wasn't designed for the old armies after all, despite the war scrolls. We only have a few units of new models, so some of the other stuff might start to make more sense with new releases.

Tzar Boris
06-07-2015, 18:49
You're right.
Fixed.

InstantKarma
06-07-2015, 18:52
In descending order of importance (and sticking to the poll options):

1)Base-to-Base measuring (There was no reason to change something that wasn't broken!)
2)No Shooting In/Into CC (again, wasn't broken)
3)Bravery test only if your side lost the fight.
4)Line of Sight (ie, you need to be able to draw true LoS to the model, not just the frills)

some_scrub
06-07-2015, 19:35
My playgroup tried model to model measurement and it was literally unplayable. Either bases can (and must) overlap or you have all kinds of bizarre consequences like units that cannot physically be deployed in coherency, models that actually cannot attack other models in close combat no matter what they do. It seems like it would work fine if you stuck to models on 20mm bases or something, but there are tons of monsters and stuff that just don't fill up a base.

All of the other things in the poll seem like features of the system and we didn't start by house ruling them. Maybe we won't like them and we will change them later, but at least we wanted to start by playing them as is before deciding they didn't work.

I picked other because I think you just have to play with some army composition house rules and ignoring sudden death against horde or elite armies. Otherwise there's just no point.

Nightfall Shimmer
06-07-2015, 20:16
As a Skaven Player I'm used to shooting into melee, now all of you get to have the fun. My only change there would be to distribute the hits 50/50 friend and foe for the full genuine experience!

Kyriakin
06-07-2015, 20:18
As a Skaven Player I'm used to shooting into melee, now all of you get to have the fun. My only change there would be to distribute the hits 50/50 friend and foe for the full genuine experience!
"Yes...but we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves..."

Marauder Carl
06-07-2015, 22:15
The only thing I don't like about base to base needing to 'kiss' is all the instances of extreme overhang with spears, lances, etc. Would like the base to extend at least as far as a models overhead silhouette so true base to base isn't a mess of models banging into each other up and down the line. We just make sure the measurement was far enough to reach, but back them off a little. Works until flanks are involved. Not tried the round base rotating method.

Gork or Possibly Mork
06-07-2015, 22:17
As I see it, they have to fix:
- Base-to-base measuring
- Army composition
- Scenarios (i.e. there needs to actually be some)
- Terrain (generic types)
- Shooting into and out of combat
- Line of sight
- Cover
- Shields, standard bearers and musicians (need to be standardized, as 20+ types of each is a big barrier to entry)

Agreed. Only thing i'd add is a summoning fix so it doesn't break smaller games. It might be ok(ish) in larger games but for smaller games i feel it's kinda broken.


Here's my suggestion to be added to the Wizards section.

Rule #1
"Only models with the keyword 'HERO' may summon models. If the player has models that can summon models roll a D6 at the start of the Hero Phase. On a 1-3 any model with the keyword 'Wizard' may not summon models this phase. On a 4-6 D3 models with the keyword 'Wizard' may summon models once each for this phase."

The first line Prevents non Hero's from summoning as may be the case with Horrors. Second part keeps it random in spirit of AoS but lowers the average for summoning to 1/2 the time now and the latter part of this rule limits spam attempts. Perhaps with Army Comp you can up it to D6, 2D6 etc. depending on the size of the game.

Spiney Norman
06-07-2015, 22:21
Something else I would like to see added is allowing characters to join units, obviously the rules for that would become slightly complicated to prevent abuses (which is I assume why they left the option out), but of the games I have seen/played so far, most characters tend to get taken down at range before they get to use their more interesting special rules or get stuck into combat.

It would also be quite nice if they would tweak Kairos' wording to better show the intent behind the rules so as to make the more extreme rules lawyers pipe down a bit, something like

"once per game you may change the result of a single dice roll to any result of your choosing that is within the possible range of values for that roll."

Reiko321
06-07-2015, 23:02
Other:


Unless characters/single models are protected by the units that are around them... good/targeted shooting will eliminate them prior to them making an impact in the game.

Example: WLC for Skaven or Empire/Dwarf/HE warmachines will target your general without regard to cover etc and snipe with impunity.

Solution: Let characters get a 4+ to avoid being shot at like skaven weapon teams... OR, let them join units like in 40k since the controlling player gets to remove models as they choose in the unit.

exception would be monsters and such. But characters on foot/steed? Cmon now...

Urgat
06-07-2015, 23:20
Or play gopbs and let nearby minis take the wound :p

For now, I haven't tried the game yet, so I'll just choose the one that I cannot see myself not using, the base to base measurement. It might make things more random (might gain/lose a fraction of inch depending on where from the base you measure), but I can't see myself wanting to measure from the base.

Vidd
06-07-2015, 23:38
I'd be wary of rules like "Magic Missiles after Movement." and changes to shooting in regards to combat. Each unit is designed (and presumably balanced to some degree :shifty:) with the original mechanics in mind. Some units may suffer from those changes, others might gain too much.

However, base to base measurement is a bizarre omission and I can only assume it's so many years of square-based baggage that prevented them from being brave enough to move wholesale to round bases. Presumably the game doesn't break down by measuring from the bases GW supply with each model.

I can't see myself collecting unless they change that last rule. Models holding their weapons a bit differently across the unit shouldn't affect gameplay.

Urgat
06-07-2015, 23:45
However, base to base measurement is a bizarre omission and I can only assume it's so many years of square-based baggage that prevented them from being brave enough to move wholesale to round bases. Presumably the game doesn't break down by measuring from the bases GW supply with each model.
I say it's years of refusal to commit a unit to a set base size. If they'd put base sizes in the unit's profile once and for all, they'd have had all maners of whinning for a while, but then it'd be sorted out and we wouldn't have that mess we have now.

Vidd
06-07-2015, 23:57
I say it's years of refusal to commit a unit to a set base size. If they'd put base sizes in the unit's profile once and for all, they'd have had all maners of whinning for a while, but then it'd be sorted out and we wouldn't have that mess we have now.
Yes, it definitely feels like they've sacrificed part of the future of the game for an easier life right now. Considering they've gone to the trouble of implementing all the war scrolls and so on for legacy armies, it's crazy to think they couldn't also implement base sizes while they're at it.

I suppose they may have upset people who collect Orcs+Goblins AoS armies only to find that their Orruk counterparts sometime in the future are on a different base size. Oh well.

Tzar Boris
07-07-2015, 00:04
Went through the base thing several times trying to design my own rules, and really, really does not matter if it's a couple of mm difference. So long as they're sensibly based for the size of the mini/stats - just in the ballpark of what comes with the most recent model, it's all gravy.

Anyone remember when they changed 40k Terminator base sizes to the 40mm ones? Not a problem. Nobody felt the need to change them. Make your base larger than need be, and you just end up with slightly more enemies in combat with you, make it too small and it falls over.

Heck, I still see Original Termies on 25mm hex, and various other "unofficial" bases. So long as it's not a pie plate for an Empire handgunner, it shouldn't really make much to the odds - you can see the base and what size it is. Measuring from a 20mm square base is preferable IMHO to the advantage you'd get for using one of the "upright" smaller spearmen models (Empire, Night Gobbos etc.) Measuring from models is just a solution waiting for a problem, whilst creating a whole set of problems of its own (spear tips, long tails, Heroic poses, guys on top of big ass Dragons)

Avian
07-07-2015, 08:24
I'd be wary of rules like "Magic Missiles after Movement." and changes to shooting in regards to combat. Each unit is designed (and presumably balanced to some degree :shifty:) with the original mechanics in mind. Some units may suffer from those changes, others might gain too much.
When the game has no points then by definition nothing can ever be balanced. Thus you can change the rules however you want without a problem.