Random Charge Ranges

[Asp]

Building off other group's ideas:

Charge:
Base Movement + 2D6, keep highest.

Failed Charge:
Base Movement + Lowest D6, stop 2" away from enemy.

Speed skill: Roll 3D6 and keep highest, rather than 2D6, however, if two or more 1s are rolled, the warrior has stumbled and it is a failed charge.

[Zekk05]

if meant to replace the charge rules as they are: poor idea
if meant as an add-on, to be used in special situations: cool idea

too simple of a rule to work, doesnt encompass varying movement ranges for models, cavalary, animals, etc.

[Asp]

lets leave out cavary for cavalary.

I assume that what you mean is that a flat D6" extra is too homogenous for warriors with base movement ranging from 3-6.

yet what you say is:

too simple of a rule to work

and i think that's wrong. moveing fast (and having high I) are huge bonuses i mordheim, much more than warhammer. these races will still move quicker than everyone else, they just won't charge longer. and that's something that's good for the game, imo. ask a dwarf player how many sucessfuly charges they put in in the course of a campaign. some guy say 2 charges in an entire campaign.

[kramplarv]

lets leave out cavary for cavalary.

I assume that what you mean is that a flat D6" extra is too homogenous for warriors with base movement ranging from 3-6.

yet what you say is:

and i think that's wrong. moveing fast (and having high I) are huge bonuses i mordheim, much more than warhammer. these races will still move quicker than everyone else, they just won't charge longer. and that's something that's good for the game, imo. ask a dwarf player how many sucessfuly charges they put in in the course of a campaign. some guy say 2 charges in an entire campaign.

I don't like random charges. especially not in mordheim were we have few miniatures, and very few line of sight restrictions.
If a dwarf player only gets of a few charges during a campaign they are bad players. Since we have 360 LoS and few movement restrictions actual charge reach is not as important as good positioning.

I believe that the rule itself will work withoput any problem in Mordheim. But I think it will diminish the positioning of models. It would be like in WHFB where positioning of units have been less important. That, for me, is a very boring way of playing. I enjoy the fraction of an inch arguments and such.

[Odin]

I definitely like it, and plan to do something similar if I can persuade people to play Mordheim again.

[brokenv]

To offset the random, but still have a bit, set min/max values for each race on 2D6. So vampire is 6/12, dwarves 3/8, humans 4/10, etc

Then roll 2D6 and take the number if it's within the min/max or round to the min/max

[Whitesilk]

If this is to offset slow moving members of ones warband (which ever warband it maybe), then I don't like it.

It does add a bit of randomness to the game, which isn't bad, but it also takes away tactics or positioning of models and more importantly it also runs into the pros/cons of ...playing... certain warbands. 1/2 the fun is learning how to play with the shortcomings of a warband and enjoying what they thrive in.

[Brother Fenix]

This is one part of the game that I don't think needs an additional rule. Although, I was also disappointed when WFB went to random charge.

[Zekk05]

To offset the random, but still have a bit, set min/max values for each race on 2D6. So vampire is 6/12, dwarves 3/8, humans 4/10, etc

Then roll 2D6 and take the number if it's within the min/max or round to the min/max

this is what i was talking about. more rules required to fix this one special rule. then calvalry and animals and such need their own special rule. and all of a sudden 1 new rule becomes 2 paragraphs of charts JUST for a charge; an event that happens very often. meaning it slows down gameplay even more, over complicates things, and for what purpose? to boost the slow and penalize the fast.

a good rules addition is one that wont cause too many ripples throughout the core rule set, wont create any MORE grey areas than needed, and doesnt require lengthy explanations / special circumstance rulings.



ps. to whomever is playing Dwarves and only got in 2 charges in an entire campaign.... thats misplaying the warband. not an issue with the ruleset.

[Odin]

If this is to offset slow moving members of ones warband (which ever warband it maybe), then I don't like it.

It does add a bit of randomness to the game, which isn't bad, but it also takes away tactics or positioning of models and more importantly it also runs into the pros/cons of ...playing... certain warbands. 1/2 the fun is learning how to play with the shortcomings of a warband and enjoying what they thrive in.

The one thing that for me has never been fun is guessing how far 8" is. If you guess well, you'll probably win. If you guess badly, you'll probably lose. That is not my idea of tactics.

[Asp]

i dont think cavalry and animals need extra rules, thay already have base movement 6 where other have base movement 4

okay, maybe cavalry. but we dont play with cavalry anyhow

[Whitesilk]

The one thing that for me has never been fun is guessing how far 8" is. If you guess well, you'll probably win. If you guess badly, you'll probably lose. That is not my idea of tactics.

If you have to guess where your model is when it comes to charge range then your idea of tactics is skewed. The game, all games like this, attempts to simulate "fog of war," to that end the game has to have a randomness to it. One of the facet of that randomness is declaring your intent before measuring.

Its part of the game, you don't have to like every aspect of it... just more than the ones you don't like. Anyway, I've weighed in and I can see myself and the people I play with not wanting this kind of change to the game.

-Silk

[Dribble Joy]

I prefer random charge lengths for the same reason I prefer them in WHFB. I only really got into WH in 8th, but have been around it for 6th and 7th.
Just about all the battle would go in the same order, because the movement values were fixed and people knew where their opponents units were and how far they were away from each other on any given turn. There was no tactics at all.
Random charge distance brings in risk assessment. You have to make choices about baiting, risking long charges, holding back, etc.
The games now are far more tense and frantic with tough choices - and more fun.

[Asp]

dribble joy is correct

its much more fun FOR BOTH PLAYERS when you cant count 100 % on your 5 skaven all getting the charge

[Odin]

If you have to guess where your model is when it comes to charge range then your idea of tactics is skewed. The game, all games like this, attempts to simulate "fog of war," to that end the game has to have a randomness to it. One of the facet of that randomness is declaring your intent before measuring.

Its part of the game, you don't have to like every aspect of it... just more than the ones you don't like. Anyway, I've weighed in and I can see myself and the people I play with not wanting this kind of change to the game.

-Silk

Well, as someone who is rubbish at guessing distances, and whose regular opponent could guess the range of a stone thrower in warhammer precise to the nearest quarter of an inch every time, I can assure you it didn't introduce any randomness in our games.

[kramplarv]

I can assure you it didn't introduce any randomness in our games.

Which is as it should be Randomness due to dice = boring, Randomness due to players = Fun.

[Asp]

Randomness due to players = Fun.

yet 90 % of players do whats efficient, not whats fun/random

furthermoe, a lot of people complain that coreheim is not random enough

[kramplarv]

yet 90 % of players do whats efficient, not whats fun/random

furthermoe, a lot of people complain that coreheim is not random enough

You are assuming that randomness equals fun. Which is wrong in my world.
90% av players do what's efficient, or appealing to them. That is fun for me.

randomness CAN be fun. But dice-randomness is less fun than bad-eye-measure-randomness.


We have a lot of random stuff in the game, there's no need to have more.


on a note on coreheim: I dont like it. My own version of Mordheim is funnier than coreheim. So I don't give a dime for what people think about Coreheim since that has nothing to with me,
or the discussion about randomness, or a general rule discussion.

[Asp]

90% av players do what's efficient, or appealing to them. That is fun for me.

so why do you play mordheim and not chess?

You are assuming ...

randomness CAN be fun. But dice-randomness is less fun than bad-eye-measure-randomness.

yes i am assuming... - and you're assuming the opposite. great.
there should be a ruleset for everyone.

on a note on coreheim: I dont like it. My own version of Mordheim is funnier than coreheim. So I don't give a dime for what people think about Coreheim since that has nothing to with me,
or the discussion about randomness, or a general rule discussion.

that sure is a lot of words about somethings that's "nothing" to you, though.

where can i find your version of mordheim?

i agree with you that people have different opinions but your post seems to flicker back a fourth between positing facts and positing personal opinion as fact.

[tatermitts]

My friend and I both were "for-against" the random charge ranges. After some consideration, however, I decided that having that "risk management" angle can make games more interesting without disrupting the spirit of the game.
Experienced players are able to guess ranges pretty effectively; when most players in my group actually fail a charge it's by the closest of margins, so much so that a third party is needed. Having a chance to fail a charge or make a larger charge really adds an exciting and interesting twist to the game. Also, it adds in taking some of the broken traits away from skaven or other super fast 12 inch chargers.
So, in conclusion, this rule can make the game more interesting, but it definitely favors the slower warbands as the faster guys have to roll well to get what they should and the normal guys have a much higher chance to move further than the original charge range.