What do you think of the "mysterious terrain" rules?

[Skarsnik, the Lord]

I prefer not to have mysterious terrain, but I like competitive ETC games as well so it makes sense. It has happened too often to me that a forest causes something that changes the game completely (for instance, destroying/panicking a redirect unit in a crucial situation, moving into a close combat and removing steadfast, etc...), so it's better to go with regular forests IMO.

- Cheers, Skarsnik.

[Urgat]

Could you please quote that part of the rulebook? Iv'e been reading the terrain rules and the only optional thing I find is to decide between taking yourself the terrain you want (using the terrain rules from pages 116-131) or roll at the random terrain table.

Yeah, now that I'm back home (so I can check), I see that I exaggerated a bit, it's not the first sentence at all It's p142 (well at least in the French BRB), says you can either use the table, or pick your own stuff and decide what special rules they will use.

[Vipoid]

I dislike the rules for a few reasons:

1) I hate that you don't roll for what a piece of terrain is until you enter it. If you know what each terrain piece does at the beginning of the game, then it at least gives you a chance to strategise around it. But, when you have no idea what any terrain piece is going to do, then there's really nothing you can do other than avoiding everything.

2) I hate the fluff justification for the above - that you don't know what something is until you step into it. Bull. ****. What? Not a single man noticed that the river was made of blood? Do rivers regularly fill themselves with jam in this universe?

It was even more entertaining when my unit of Skeletons caught stupidity by entering a Fungus Forest. Apparently they inhaled some fungal spores...

3) Several of the effects just seem a little too over the top.

I don't know, maybe I'm just an old fogie, but I just prefer it when terrain is neutral. I think it should be there to block LoS, slow certain units and grant cover - not randomly switch between buffing units that enter it, and eating them.

[Urgat]

It was even more entertaining when my unit of Skeletons caught stupidity by entering a Fungus Forest. Apparently they inhaled some fungal spores...

Ah, I agree with the rest of your post (though I like the rules), but come on, don't force us to bring the matter of how your musicians can blow their horn Undead always don't work with stuff like that, you gotta adapt when it's them. The spores got in their joints, and your skellies were ampered in their movements, rather than just not sure about what they should do next.

[BigbyWolf]

Not a single man noticed that the river was made of blood? Do rivers regularly fill themselves with jam in this universe?

Tends to happen to the Tomb Kings if they don't let people go...

[Lord Dan]

"Okay, so here's what I'm thinking: if someone casts magic of any kind at the forest, it goes berserk!"
"Why?"
"Well, it's a magic forest and it gets upset. I don't know, it's magic."
"Yeah, I know. It's just starting to feel like the end of the last Harry Potter book when his 'mother's love" saved him again. You just can't keep sayi-"
"Bear with me here. Okay, so after the forest goes nuts, it moves."
"Wait, why?"
"They're magical trees."
"Matt..."
"No, I know what you're thinking. Of course there will be some non-magical forests."
"Oh, okay. How often will you roll those?"
"17% of the time."
"So there are more magical trees than not?"
"Yes."
"Matt, how do people survive in this world? I think gamers have a basic expectation of reality th-"
"Okay, now check this: a monument that fires a random spell at the closest unit every turn of the game..."

[Vipoid]

Ah, I agree with the rest of your post (though I like the rules), but come on, don't force us to bring the matter of how your musicians can blow their horn

Oh, we don't blow into them - we just chatter our teeth into the horn.

In any case, the undead aspect wasn't really a complaint - more an amusing example of when terrain fluff completely breaks down.

[Bodysnatcher]

I really like the mysterious terrain rules, makes woods a tad more interesting.
And the unique terrain types are interesting from a converter/modeller's point of view. I likes mekkin' terrain.

[Crovax20]

I personally find that the mysterious terrain serves an important role in the game. It is designed because of the ease you can move through terrain in 8th. Like others have said, its to stop terrain becoming a almost non risk obstacle you can casually stroll over.

That being said I do find the mysterious terrain to be a bit over the top with some results.

[DaemonReign]

While basically residing in the same camp as Bodysnatcher [on this topic at least] I must say Lord Dan's scolding re-enactment of Mat Ward's design process does have a point:
While I have no problem what-so-ever with the occurence of mysterious/magical terrain I would have decreased the general frequency of the occurence.
Mysterious Forests for example - I would probably have designed the table so that instead of being surpriced that the forest is 'normal' you'd be surpriced when it wasn't.

[Montegue]

I know many of my opponents get irritated with random mysterious woods, but we generally play that all woods are mysterious. It can really change the game, which I think is fun on some level but obnoxious on other levels. I am sort of amused that crazy horrible forests outnumber regular ones in the Warhammer world on a 5-1 basis. Why would any army choose to have a battle on a field dominated by haunted woods and blood rivers?

[Waagh Rider]

I fail to see the problem. I always play with full 'mysterious' effects and goofy terrain, and it occurs to me that I have never had a blood forest do anything in my games. We roll it, but then no-one ever casts a spell on a unit in it. Same with a load of other stuff. I'll march my savage orc bigun's through anything, as it is likely to have less of an effect than not proceeding with my battleplan 'cos I'm afraid of taking D6 hits would be.
I hate it when I go for a game and the other player asks to use mundane terrain, because it tells me they are a 7th ed player at heart, who wants control of everything. When a cleverly positioned wood basically won you the game, because your opponent's best unit was effectively stuck inside it until turn 6! The ones who want to win against you in exactly the same way they win against everybody, cookie cutter Warhammer. Well I'm glad they all play Mallifaux now, 'cos they made me never want to turn up for a game in 7th ed.
Whoah, not sure where that came from, think I may have excorcised some demons there...
Peace.

[Maoriboy007]

Jack and Jill went down the Hill to fetch a pail of water,
Jack fell down and broke his crown
because a spiked tentacle snaked out of the nearest river and dragged im screaming into its depths while jill was cursed to death by the hill they just came down...

Nursery rhymes in the warhammer world of mysterious terrain....

[Lord Inquisitor]

I think there might possibly be a happy medium between woods slowing movement to the point of being completely impassable ... and not impeding movement in any way.

[Sh4d0w]

So you present a smirk remark about another person's post, thrown in a completely irrelevant and incorrect comparison which basically states statistics = pocket calculator, ignore the extreme simplicity of estimating ranges based on what is on the table and its irrelevance to simulating wargames, and present no arguments at all supporting your opinion (and proudly claiming so)?

Well played sir.



The old rules practically meant terrain was close to impassable to any unit other than skirmishers. Drastically reducing movement of anything entering terrain makes sure units will never use it whatsoever. The current rules are vastly superior to that imo.

The old rules meant you had to actually be aware that there was a forest on the table. If you were stupid enough to put a slow moving infantry unit straight through one that was your problem. I don't see how forest that go from having an impact to no impact are vastly superior.

[Jezbot]

I think there might possibly be a happy medium between woods slowing movement to the point of being completely impassable ... and not impeding movement in any way.

Yeah, exactly this. A simple reduction in movement through woods and similar terrain would have been enough. And a one or two inch movement cost to move over an obstacle would be nice as well - enough to make open ground desirable, but not enough to block a unit completely from the game.

It'd mean terrain had enough of a mundane impact that magical terrain items could be scaled back to one or two or none per game, according to player preference, and you'd still have terrain playing a predictable, plausible role in every game.

[Lord Solar Plexus]

The old rules meant you had to actually be aware that there was a forest on the table. If you were stupid enough to put a slow moving infantry unit straight through one that was your problem. I don't see how forest that go from having an impact to no impact are vastly superior.

The old rules were crap, period. I'm not sure of your definition of stupidity but it didn't take a lot to raise awareness of those big blocks of binary terrain, and I'm pretty sure you could end up in a stupid wood even if you were a smart player like me or an even smarter one like you.

[Scythe]

I think there might possibly be a happy medium between woods slowing movement to the point of being completely impassable ... and not impeding movement in any way.

I could rally behind a -1M penalty, but not much more than that. On the flipside, you could have roads which give a +1M bonus. Still, in general, the problem with rules for woods is that you don't want to discourage units from entering them, ever, like last edition was (unless you were a skirmisher).

The old rules meant you had to actually be aware that there was a forest on the table. If you were stupid enough to put a slow moving infantry unit straight through one that was your problem. I don't see how forest that go from having an impact to no impact are vastly superior.

Yeah, as an impassible terrain piece. It could just as well have been a lake. Didn't help interesting gameplay in the least. The moment you discourage entering a wood so much people don't even consider it any more, you might as well discard the entire ruleset. And moving at half speed while march moves being prevented just kills any desire to enter a wood, ever.
But please explain me how, even mysterious terrain rules aside (which can do a number on your battle plans, as indicated by some posters), the lack of steadfast from ranked units with even a single model in a wood, or the gaining of steadfast by skirmishers, causes 'no impact' on the game.

[Sh4d0w]

I could rally behind a -1M penalty, but not much more than that. On the flipside, you could have roads which give a +1M bonus. Still, in general, the problem with rules for woods is that you don't want to discourage units from entering them, ever, like last edition was (unless you were a skirmisher).



Yeah, as an impassible terrain piece. It could just as well have been a lake. Didn't help interesting gameplay in the least. The moment you discourage entering a wood so much people don't even consider it any more, you might as well discard the entire ruleset. And moving at half speed while march moves being prevented just kills any desire to enter a wood, ever.
But please explain me how, even mysterious terrain rules aside (which can do a number on your battle plans, as indicated by some posters), the lack of steadfast from ranked units with even a single model in a wood, or the gaining of steadfast by skirmishers, causes 'no impact' on the game.

Challenge accepted. First of all I would just like to say that by "no impact" i mean very little in terms of the average game, this is from my experiences anyway. Yes I do agree that negating steadfast for ranked up units has an impact. But I disagree with the movement penalty by which i mean there is none. I never saw it as impassable terrain, just terrain that highly favored skirmishers.

Fighting in a forest: I agree that it has gotten alot more dangerous

Moving in a forest: I'm sorry but you just don't have any second thoughts when moving into one.

[Urgat]

I know many of my opponents get irritated with random mysterious woods, but we generally play that all woods are mysterious. It can really change the game, which I think is fun on some level but obnoxious on other levels. I am sort of amused that crazy horrible forests outnumber regular ones in the Warhammer world on a 5-1 basis. Why would any army choose to have a battle on a field dominated by haunted woods and blood rivers?

They don't know before they step in

it occurs to me that I have never had a blood forest do anything in my games. We roll it, but then no-one ever casts a spell on a unit in it.

That's the point. Knowing what would happen, you kind of avoid going in there, effectively turning these woods into an impassable obstacle unless you got balls of steel. I said it before, I'll say it again: current terrain is all about balancing risks versus rewards, it challenges your threat assessment.