Warhammer: Civil War

[quietus1986]

It a good article. hope if they do allot of this that you get the books at the end of the year With all the article like that in it. And lets hope that they do something like that every white dwarf. Pitty I don't really have a other vampire count player that play's in my club.

[Mallo]

I don't mind so much paying for catalogue style white dwarf of now, at least it gives me something to browse through whilst at work and I'm cut off from the internet!

It used to be so much better, but it is to be fair its meant to be a catalogue of new stuff.

What I would like is a return of fanatic magazine (though bigger and more colour!) to complement white dwarf and have them place all these new rules and things in there (the sisters codex, civil war rules...) plus fanatic used a lot of articles from players and used photos and conversions of non 'eavy metal minis!

Trouble with all of this is that there is no need to buy stuff like fanatic as there a tons of webzines and new rule sets on the internet that you can access for free, and people would still gripe over having to pay for fanatic.

I think the civil war rules sound great, I'm thinking of taking a a couple of mini D6's in my pocket just so when I'm at work this week I can have a go on rolling on the new tables! (secretly in the bathroom, mind!)

Its a shame something like the civil war rules couldn't have been squeezed into blood in the badlands book. Its a great campaign book, but it would have been nice to squeeze just a little more in to it. An appendix of trial/non campaign rules like this would have been nice.

[Jossi]

I still use those rules before every game. (modified a bit over time).

You wouldn't happen to remember which WD issue they were published in? I'm intrigued!

[Harry]

It was in White Dwarf 243 written by Nigel Stillman.
Twas later adapted for Warmaster and appeared in the Warmaster annual.

[Jossi]

Ah, I thought I'd seen something like that for Warmaster.

Cheers

[Spiney Norman]

Sigh.

One mans small step is another mans giant Leap.

It is a catalogue with one really fun rules article, some great scenarios, a great battle report, several armies spotlighted, a number of great 'masterclass' painting articles, a nice Necron tactics article, a new Storm of magic 'pact sheet' and a bunch of other stuff.

So I would say that is several steps in the right direction.

But don't let the actual content of a WD sway your opinion in any way at all.
Feel free to hold firm to your belief without ever looking at a WD again.

The thing is, it would be nice if all the hobby articles weren't built around this months (or in some rare cases, last months) releases. Aside from a 40k tactics article centred around the most recent 40k release, a paint guide for the recently released beastmen monsters and the civil war article it's ALL vampire counts. The bat rep was vampire counts, the paint guide was vampire counts there's several pages of sub-par army lists that are... You've guessed it, vampire counts. It's at the point where it's only worth buying an issue if one of your armies has got the release slot this month. A true hobby magazine would not labour under the assumption that every reader starts a new army every month just because GW releases one.

As a Necron player it wouldn't be so bad if their Necron tactic article was actually any good, but it's total hogwash, the insist on telling you how great units like triarch praetorians are (which in reality are total list-poison) and printing army lists with completely useless and illogical combinations that have virtually no in game application and calling it "tactics". Unfortunately a tactic article in WD is rarely anything more than filling pages whilst trying to raise the profile of the unpopular units (which are usually unpopular because they suck) to try and get people to buy more of them.

[stashman]

That. Don't feel like buying the WD again just for one article >>

you don't have to!

[Dargon]

Love the idea, but not much of a fan of the application. The first 2D6 table is great, and might be worth trying out to add a bit of interest.

Many of the race specific 2D6 results though, seem to serve little purpose than to give one army a random edge over the other if they are lucky enough to have focussed their army selection on the units granted a boon by the results (or unlucky if the results are negative) - and if both opponents have more balanced armies to benefit equally, then odds are the armies are nearly identical leading to a rather boring battle.

Despite my disappointment in this particular entry, I'm very happy to see these type of articles returning to White Dwarf. Nigel Stillman's "Night Before Battle" article from WD244 (Aus) was definately a high point in these sort of articles.

Just a thought...

[de Selby]

Sadly, it made every second Skaven player slap runes on a steam tank, and then ask if "the rat-tank rules will be in the next army book?"

I stopped buying WD ages ago (in fact I'm not sure where I can go to buy it now...), I just dropped in to say I am scratch-building a rat tank right now. Out of wood!

[strewart]

I don't mind so much paying for catalogue style white dwarf of now, at least it gives me something to browse through whilst at work and I'm cut off from the internet!

It used to be so much better, but it is to be fair its meant to be a catalogue of new stuff.

What I would like is a return of fanatic magazine (though bigger and more colour!) to complement white dwarf and have them place all these new rules and things in there (the sisters codex, civil war rules...) plus fanatic used a lot of articles from players and used photos and conversions of non 'eavy metal minis!

Trouble with all of this is that there is no need to buy stuff like fanatic as there a tons of webzines and new rule sets on the internet that you can access for free, and people would still gripe over having to pay for fanatic.

No I think people would buy that. The real problem is if Fanatic came out with all the new rules, painted models, hobby stuff.... Who would ever buy WD instead?

[zoggin-eck]

What everyone on about an "annual" or Fanatic/Journal-style magazine for? They've had enough tries at that, and I'm sure if they sold they would still be doing it. I'd rather continue hoping WD will become a sweet magazine again (though it depends on who you ask as to when it was good anyway, as the "golden age" threads show).

Looking forward to the next lot. As said, I wonder if it's in three parts or two?

I just dropped in to say I am scratch-building a rat tank right now. Out of wood!

A timber one (wood is for burning!) sounds neat, and sounds like some effort, which I approve of

[Urgat]

you don't have to!

You missed the "for one article" bit which implies I'm interested in said article, which means I'd like to have it; and which makes you a troll. Next you're going to tell me I'm a GW hater and if I'm not happy I should quit?
Point is: if I want the rules, yes, I have to. I have to buy the whole damn uninteresting thing for two pages. though, to be honest, I'm more insterested in the old rules Harry was talking about It's weird because I should have it, but I don't remember it at all. And the french WD don't have the same issue numbers. What date was WD 243?

[de Selby]

A timber one (wood is for burning!) sounds neat, and sounds like some effort, which I approve of

It's balsa, so not exactly grade A construction material. Intended to be a counts as WLC. Enables me to do the joke about the wooden tank with a wooden hull, wooden turret and wooden tracks in any game in which it wooden work.


Really off topic now...

[Barghest]

This.

So is it ok to like Jervis Johnson again now? Can I admit I have a crush on him and enjoy reading Standard Bearer?

Only if I can admit the same.

Wink.

[mweaver]

Sounds like a lot of fun, actually. Now, if my WD would ever show up... (I hate the new subscription policy, although the increasingly interesting material in recent WDs helps make up for it).

I have a large Empire force in Nuln(ish) colors, and another much smaller in red-and-blue. Sounds like good incentive to work on my Imperials, particularly the smaller force.

Hmmm... and my old-style Dark Elves can take on my new-style dark elves, maybe.

[Kaiserdean]

I remember when the first Brets first came out, there were rules about how nobels wouldn't fight each other and included a joust scenario.

[manickze]

I remember when the first Brets first came out, there were rules about how nobels wouldn't fight each other and included a joust scenario.

The second time the brets came out there was had pop out card terrain for the joust scenario.

[Eddie Chaos]

I don't ask for that: I ask for a yearly compendium with everything rules-related in it, like they used to do. With the binding scrolls, with that, with everything. Or a small 2 pages booklet that they'd sell a couple euros. I don't want to buy the WD, 9/10th of it don't interest me, and throwing that away won't make me feel any better about having bought it, what an odd idea, Zoggin-eck :/ Wasted money is wasted, wether I keep it or throw it away

I suspect we will see those scrolls of binding in a storm of magic expansion.

40k apocalypse got a second book after all

[belgarath97]

Urgat I have to totally disagree. I love WD and have since I got my first subscription. But i guess everyone has their opinion.

[Gwyddyon]

I'm another one of those who is really hoping to see this released separately as a collected set. I'm tempted to buy the three White Dwarf issues just for this, but then I look at the price on the cover and remember that it is laughably overpriced even by GW standards.