PDA

View Full Version : What changes would you have liked in 9th ed?



Tiberius Frost
11-07-2015, 13:41
I think most of us are surprised that there's not going to be a 9th edition of Warhammer, for whatever reason.

That aside, if there _had_ been, what changes would you have liked to see? Either rules-wise, fluff-wise, or models-wise.

Personally I don't like that forests don't block line of sight, although that's easily resolved if your opponent agrees. I also think that some models were essentially unkillable due to the proliferation of high ward saves, which I found frustrating.

I know that the roll-a-dice-or-die type spells (eg pit of shades) were unpopular with some people although I never found them too bad. Probably because I was never on the receiving end too badly, although I confess to using them to take out daemon princes etc on the first turn several times.

Fluff-wise, I personally feel that the warhammer background was a bit to rigid. For example, I didn't like that the armies seemed to be inherently good or evil. I prefer 'grey' style factions, where nobody is perfect and everyone can be against anyone else. Eg, an army of evil humans (Empire allied with chaos) trying to conquer their neighbours, or an alliance of necessity Eg High Elves allied with Orcs to fight a Dark Elf army. If you go back to early versions of Warhammer, then these situations seem more common, whereas the more recent versions (roughly 4th ed onwards) separated the factions out into their own 'countries' and forced you to collect the army as dictated to you, rather than just getting whatever models you wanted. Just personal preference though.

Interested to hear what everyone else thinks!

Shandor
11-07-2015, 14:17
I think most of us are surprised that there's not going to be a 9th edition of Warhammer, for whatever reason.

That aside, if there _had_ been, what changes would you have liked to see? Either rules-wise, fluff-wise, or models-wise.

Personally I don't like that forests don't block line of sight, although that's easily resolved if your opponent agrees. I also think that some models were essentially unkillable due to the proliferation of high ward saves, which I found frustrating.

I know that the roll-a-dice-or-die type spells (eg pit of shades) were unpopular with some people although I never found them too bad. Probably because I was never on the receiving end too badly, although I confess to using them to take out daemon princes etc on the first turn several times.

Fluff-wise, I personally feel that the warhammer background was a bit to rigid. For example, I didn't like that the armies seemed to be inherently good or evil. I prefer 'grey' style factions, where nobody is perfect and everyone can be against anyone else. Eg, an army of evil humans (Empire allied with chaos) trying to conquer their neighbours, or an alliance of necessity Eg High Elves allied with Orcs to fight a Dark Elf army. If you go back to early versions of Warhammer, then these situations seem more common, whereas the more recent versions (roughly 4th ed onwards) separated the factions out into their own 'countries' and forced you to collect the army as dictated to you, rather than just getting whatever models you wanted. Just personal preference though.

Interested to hear what everyone else thinks!

Rule wise i would have liked it if the Mounts and Riders have a combined Profile.
I was always sad that Riding a Big Monster is a downgrade. Lets take a Darkelf General for examble: Riding a Pegasus the model has Flying with Armor 1+ and a safe of 4++ or 3++ against shooting and magic. On a Dragon the rider has the same but the Dragon was vunable. One good cannon shot and your General wasted 500 points and is walking. Even in Close combat the smart enemy always attacked the "soft" dragon over the Rider because it has only some armor to protect it.

Thats something the End times really did right.

Besides that the Magic should really be toned down. Slaanesh has 2 Spells making a expensive big unit compleat useless. Skaven had the Storm Banner and a couple of Warpstorms in his Hands could easy having the storm all game Long. Purple sun and spells like this could wipe out an half Ogre army with one spell. thats boring.

Well and it should be impossible to have a Modell with a Armor 1+ and save 3++ where 1 is rerollable. Its almost Invulable and that should not be possible.

As a last Rule Problem for me.. remove the new End times "I kill a unit of 40+ models with 3 Terminator Rats shooting on them." rules/models.

As for the fluff. I liked the Change the End times did to some point. Malekith the new King? Thats a cool twist. Skaven conquer some minor Kingdoms? Cool.
Chaos ending the world? Not cool.

HereComesTomorrow
11-07-2015, 14:39
I only really wanted 8.5 Ed.

Change the big spells like Pit and Sun to say "cause one wound, no armor saves" and increase their value.

I actually think thats about it for general rules. Anything else I'd change would be army specific.

Harsher miscast table.

Tweak Steadfast somehow. Maybe make it so that a single rank disrupts, but Fast Cavalry and War Beasts can't disrupt (due to being too light to force their way through a unit).

Kakapo42
11-07-2015, 15:26
Fluff-wise, I personally feel that the warhammer background was a bit to rigid. For example, I didn't like that the armies seemed to be inherently good or evil. I prefer 'grey' style factions, where nobody is perfect and everyone can be against anyone else. Eg, an army of evil humans (Empire allied with chaos) trying to conquer their neighbours, or an alliance of necessity Eg High Elves allied with Orcs to fight a Dark Elf army. If you go back to early versions of Warhammer, then these situations seem more common, whereas the more recent versions (roughly 4th ed onwards) separated the factions out into their own 'countries' and forced you to collect the army as dictated to you, rather than just getting whatever models you wanted. Just personal preference though.

I've said it before in a couple of other places, but I honestly never had any problems whatsoever with restrictive background, up until the ET series at least, in fact I actually found the Pre-ET setting to be wonderfully free and open-ended. The trick was to essentially put yourself in the position of background writer and remember that literally every single part of the setting was malleable. If, for example, you wanted an evil Empire army, or a desperate alliance of High Elves and Orcs... then there was literally absolutely nothing stopping you from doing that. It was trivially simple to come up with some corner of, say the Old World (which incidentally is NOT the entire setting - that's the Warhammer World, of which the Old World is simply one part), and create a cool story about why such a thing happened. As long as it was done well and made at least some sense, I don't think anyone would mind. To my knowledge there was no core official word preventing such things (actually a major reason why I disliked the ET series so much was because it started putting down concrete guidelines and made the setting more rigid).

Anyway, down to business.


I think most of us are surprised that there's not going to be a 9th edition of Warhammer, for whatever reason.

That aside, if there _had_ been, what changes would you have liked to see? Either rules-wise, fluff-wise, or models-wise.

First off, right off the bat: the ET series is given the Storm of Chaos treatment, and the entire series, ALL of it, is made an un-product and is never spoken of again (or just consigned to some alternate universe).

The background is returned to a setting that builds up to a present point of the timeline, and stops. What happens afterwards is entirely up to hobbyists and gaming groups to decide. The 'Chaos Always Wins' element is retconed out, and more emphasis is placed on how any outcome is possible and that the future is uncertain. Add in some various hooks, like say the Dark Elves and High Elves gearing up for the bloodbath to end all Asur/Druchii bloodbaths or an Elven princess or wealthy Imperial heiress being captured, but stress that these are starting points for hobbyists to build on as they see fit (something like a call to arms for great heroes or something).

On the model front, a return to the early 2000s aesthetics and looks. More recent models are redone to fit in with the early 2000s style (or replaced with renewed versions of the older models if possible *COUGH*gyrocopter*COUGH*). Material is something I'm flexible on, I like metal but I would be ok in seeing the older models in plastic, just as long as that's the ONLY change to them.

Rules mechanics wise, magic items. Lots of magic items. Specifically army-specific ones, bring back all the ones that were left out of the 8th edition army books too. And army-specific magic lores (I'm looking at you Lore of Athel Loren!). And little characterful addons for armies like Sacred Spawnings or Virtues or Kindreds. For core rules I'd say some sort of blend between 6th and 8th edition would be ideal. And encourage units of 20-25 infantry again!

And finally, it wasn't mentioned in the OP, but there is one other area that I consider very important - artwork. I'd like to see a return of the old evocative black-and-white artwork, that stuff was incredible.

Fle
11-07-2015, 15:46
I like most things about 8th, but if I'd probably tweak magic a bit. I've always thought that there should be risk associated with it, for example for each dice past 2 that you use to cast, modify the roll on the miscast table by -1 or something like that. Too many times I've been blown players 6 dicing 'those' spells....it's tough being a Dwarf in the magic phase :D

Pacman
11-07-2015, 16:06
Proper terrain rules. The ones in 8th are mental.

theunwantedbeing
11-07-2015, 16:13
Test or die spells either removed or only cause a single wound
Miscast results ignore saves, maybe deduct the number of dice used to cast the spell from the score
Units that are steadfast cannot benefit from Inspiring Presence or the Hold your Ground special rules while disrupted
Cannons and Stone throwers roll to hit the declared target point, if the miss the shot doesn't happen
Cannon hits randomise what they hit (1-4 the mount, 5-6 the rider)
War machines get bases and facings, but retain the 5 models attacking them at a time limitation
Magic resistance is the number of dispel dice added to dispel attempts on spells that affect them
Monster riders can ignore challenges

Banner of the world dragon changes back to immunity to spells (friend and foe)
Skullcanon changed to bs3

Probably other stuff.

golem
11-07-2015, 17:39
Changes to make?

I've said some of these before elsewhere, but here goes.

Strategem Schools: Units have formations like skirmishers, regular block as part of standard tactics. Your non-magical champions, heroes, lords and general(even if magical, sole exception) can take extra strategies from their available schools.
Empire might have: Standard, Disciplined & Technical
Brettonians might have: Standard, Martial, Faith
Lizardmen might get: Standard, Wild, Disciplined
Elves: Standard, Martial, Disciplined, Faith
Dwarves: Disciplined, Martial, Technical
Orcs: Wild, Savage
Chaos Warriors: Martial, Savage
etc

Standard: Skirmish, Block, Fast Cavalry,
Disciplined: Turtle, Phalanx, Retreating Line
Technical: Three Line Firing, Assisted Shielding
Martial: Lance formation, Arrowhead,
Savage: Horde, Mob,
Faith: Heroic, Protective,

Just as an example, Dwarves and Empire I can see using something like this:
Retreating Line. Initiative Check, difficulty 7+ (So roll d6 + leaders ini, get 7+ to do)
While in formation: +1 armour save, -1 strength.
Retreating line requires your unit to be either already in this formation, or engaged in combat and not flanked or rear attacked in any formation with ranks and has at least 6 models. The unit rearranges into ranks 6 wide and is now in formation.
Charge move is now 2".
At the end of any combat phase it can retreat up to d6" inches and drag engaged units with it. If a unit retreats off the board, it counts as destroyed. Any enemy unit dragged off the board returns from that point on a successful leadership check at the start of it's next movement phase.

Ideally, i wanted the units to play more of a part. Not less.

Movement: Now more dependant on formation.

Terrain: Do it properly thanks.

As suggested by someone else, go back to the fluff allowing less conventional alliances.

Advance the fluff, even post end times it. Just don't make it fantasy 40k. (facepalm) n/m...

Sent from my K00C using Tapatalk

Tiberius Frost
12-07-2015, 10:50
I've said it before in a couple of other places, but I honestly never had any problems whatsoever with restrictive background, up until the ET series at least, in fact I actually found the Pre-ET setting to be wonderfully free and open-ended. The trick was to essentially put yourself in the position of background writer and remember that literally every single part of the setting was malleable. If, for example, you wanted an evil Empire army, or a desperate alliance of High Elves and Orcs... then there was literally absolutely nothing stopping you from doing that. It was trivially simple to come up with some corner of, say the Old World (which incidentally is NOT the entire setting - that's the Warhammer World, of which the Old World is simply one part), and create a cool story about why such a thing happened. As long as it was done well and made at least some sense, I don't think anyone would mind. To my knowledge there was no core official word preventing such things (actually a major reason why I disliked the ET series so much was because it started putting down concrete guidelines and made the setting more rigid).


Yep fair points, I guess I agree with you about the End times making the factions more static. Maybe before that it was still pretty fluid, which I prefer. I'd like to see more rules allowing use of allies in game. But you're right, we can always just play that.

itcamefromthedeep
12-07-2015, 16:09
Remove the extra rank of attacks. Remove the horde bonus.

Steadfast only kicks in if your rank bonus to combat res is higher than your opponent's (so when one unit 4 deep and another 10 deep are fighting neither is Steadfast, and getting flanked removes it).

Remove stomps (they won't be needed any more).

Prevent redirecting by having the defender for up to the attacker where possible. Tighten the screws a bit on the movement mechanics so that units can't be prevented from wheeling by nearby enemies.

Tighten the war machine mechanics, as theunwantedbeing suggests.

Change magic to something where the dice represent a wizard's concentration, and "failing to cast" is always a miscast, with the margin of failure affecting how badly the model miscasts (spells that you fail to cast by way of dispelling don't cause miscasts. Dice generated by the wizard, only usable by that wizard, 7e-style (no winds of magic dice rolls). The super-spells should ideally be removed, but if not, have them cause wounds that can be saved against. Wizards should buy their spells a la carte rather than generating them randomly. Magic resistance helps for dispelling rather than adding to ward saves.

Chain
13-07-2015, 00:06
It has been to long since i last had a game of warhammer to recall all of my isseues with 8'th ed, but some issues i got:
the 2d6 charge range is redicilous, 1d6+M i'd be ok with but having something like dwarfs with m3 charging between 2 and 12 inches is just dumb.

True line of sight rule should go to, it's rather silly, Bouncing canonballs should lose power depending on how many inches they move, Magic should get back to the old times where each mage contribute to the total mana though there should be a curve where you'd get less and less out of each additional mage not make them useless.
Spells should be less powerful and have less risk just like in the old days to.
Everything in the armybooks should be reasonably balanced, there should not be any unit best at everything, a solid main groups but several niche units experticing in one form of combat or another. MAgic item lists should be more exciting the once in the 8'th ed rulebook are fine in addition to 3 of each type unique to each race 1 at 25 or less one at 50 and 1 at 75+ points
Always strike first should be change to, to lose the reroll to hit and possibly just be strike first which would be the first round of combat with the exception on if the unit is rear charged, spear and other range weapons should get a bonus to initiative or asf on the first round of combat.


THose are just the ideas from the top of my head and i haven't played a warhammer battle in like 2 years.

SuperHappyTime
13-07-2015, 01:31
Less complaining.

One can only dream though...