PDA

View Full Version : How many army books until we're back to 20+ magic items?



Avian
12-02-2011, 21:21
Experience has shown that new army book design concepts that start with the Orcs & Goblins tend not to last very long. For example the 7th edition concept of making cavalry more expensive which lasted - to be precise - until the next army book (the Empire), when it was the same cost as before, and then in the following books cavalry got better.

So, given that the lack of magic items is the most complained about feature of the army book, how long do you see this trend continuing?

Hrogoff the Destructor
12-02-2011, 21:27
I can't see it lasting more than one book depending on how far Tomb Kings are along the production process.

People like their wargear, plain and simple. The burn shouldn’t be too bad considering how much stuff there is in the main rulebook.

Ronin[XiC]
12-02-2011, 21:28
What if there never was something like "make cav. more expensive"? What if the author of the old o&g was just stupid?
One example is not a structure.
This thread is thus useless.

Avian
12-02-2011, 21:31
Mat Ward said in an interview that there was a feeling in the design team that 6th edition cavalry was too good for the cost and it was time to do something to correct that.

decker_cky
12-02-2011, 21:34
I think less magic items will be the pattern. Whenever High elfs come out, they'll get extra magic items because they're magical beings, etc..

I don't think they'll go back to huge magic item sections this edition though. Likely will be more focused magic sections than the new O&G one though.

Gork or Possibly Mork
12-02-2011, 21:34
I don't think any will get 20+.

I could see TK getting 12ish and HighElves and Dwarfs with thier runes getting 15-18ish but i don't think any will top 20+ anymore.

We'll see though.

Grimstonefire
12-02-2011, 21:36
It will be interesting to see how they justify this, because saying 'we didn't want to give players as many options' sounds like a poor excuse to me.

If they believe they have sound logic behind it then it will not change no matter how much people complain.

I would have been happy if they had around 22 items per book.

Makes me wonder how this will affect Dwarfs.

Gork or Possibly Mork
12-02-2011, 21:43
It will be interesting to see how they justify this, because saying 'we didn't want to give players as many options' sounds like a poor excuse to me.

If they believe they have sound logic behind it then it will not change no matter how much people complain.

I would have been happy if they had around 22 items per book.

Makes me wonder how this will affect Dwarfs.

I would have been happy with about 15. 2-3 per type seems fine to me.

8 most of which aren't that great and expensive is disappointing.

Urgat
12-02-2011, 21:56
It will be interesting to see how they justify this, because saying 'we didn't want to give players as many options' sounds like a poor excuse to me.

"We wanted them to be more flavorful, and felt we needed to focus on fewer of them to get them right". See, that kind of crap probably?

Morkash
12-02-2011, 22:23
In the O&G rumour thread someone said, that the item reduction could be "justified" with the Special Characters wearing special items, while the normal characters use common items... Not that I'm happy with that (not at all...my belovd Iron Gnashas and Screaming Sword :(), but it makes some sense.
Hopefully the items go up again, for Dwarves I cannot imagine that they only get like 8 runes!

Xerkics
12-02-2011, 22:26
As WoC and Dwarf player all the magic items is what differentiates fantasy from 40k for me if they removed them till its barely anything id probably wouldnt be as interested in the game where i couldnt have a character loaded up to his ears in unique magic items others cant have.

Captainbastard
12-02-2011, 22:36
They will never get rid of all the magic (ruinic)items for dwarves.

The armies that will miss magic items the most will be armies such as WOC and vampires that have pretty OTT magic items that are broken in the new rules. For instce WOC can increase a ward save in from the talisman in the rule book from 4 plus to 3 plus ward save by using the mark of tzeentch (wonder how long that will last) on top of that they can then take a magic armour from their own book that makes them immune to magic weapons from other armies.

Xerkics
12-02-2011, 22:40
Runic shield for 50 points? It doesnt make them immune it just makes the weapon from those in base to base a mundane weapon.

chivalrous
12-02-2011, 22:46
A quick question to owners of the current (7th ed?) Orc and Goblin army book:

After you deduct all the magic items in the 7th ed book that have duplicates (i.e. differently named/priced items with the same effects) in the common items section of the 8th ed rule book, how many magic items are you left with?
To give an example, such a deduction in the Dark Elf book would be the Blade of Ruin (ignore armour save) which has a duplicate in the 8th ed book (the Obsidian blade)

Could it be that a certain number of the previous magic items found in the Orc and Goblin army book were duplicates of items now found in the rule book? And that the reduction is simply to address the greater availability of common items.

Off topic:

They will never get rid of all the magic (ruinic)items for dwarves. A ruinic rune would be awesome, thoughts come to mind of a one use only warmachine Master rune that gives a warmachine a large blast template (needs some tweaking, last thing anyone needs is a S10 cannon firing a pie-plate ;) )

Archangelion
12-02-2011, 22:50
I could really care less if there are fewer MIs for each army, so long as those given to each army are more tailored to the army specificly. Like Dark Elves getting/keeping their Arcane items that boost their sorcs. Basicly, just make the army specific magic items more complementary to the armies that they are booked with.

Xerkics
12-02-2011, 22:59
I dont agree , variety is good that way your builds arent predictable cookie cutter builds like 40k where everything is just equipped with the optimal items Fantasy lets you equip your characters in a variety of ways.

dimetri1
12-02-2011, 23:13
I like having army specific magic items. That is one reason I mostly play Dwarfs and Daemons.

Trigger87
12-02-2011, 23:14
A quick question to owners of the current (7th ed?) Orc and Goblin army book:

After you deduct all the magic items in the 7th ed book that have duplicates (i.e. differently named/priced items with the same effects) in the common items section of the 8th ed rule book, how many magic items are you left with?
To give an example, such a deduction in the Dark Elf book would be the Blade of Ruin (ignore armour save) which has a duplicate in the 8th ed book (the Obsidian blade)

Could it be that a certain number of the previous magic items found in the Orc and Goblin army book were duplicates of items now found in the rule book? And that the reduction is simply to address the greater availability of common items.

)

There are 29 items in the currrent O&G army book that do not have similar replacements in the rule book, 10 of which i personally made regular use of.

Shadowsinner
12-02-2011, 23:33
Hmm I wonder if maybe theres a marketing tactic somewhere in place...

Like armies will get about 10-20 items total...

then later down the line an expansion book will come out like the skaven and empire ones, were they discuss more about color theme and principle builds... and oh my gosh I bet there will be at least a dozen new items and theme options in that new book!

So I think they might take a focus on producing the base army book with a followed expansion... If I am wrong however, then I pray GW doesn't read this :P

Chris_
12-02-2011, 23:35
So in 7th O&G had a total of about 50 magic items, this is including the common magic items.

Now when they get the new book they will have a total of about 90 magic items... The reason I thing everyone is complaining is maybe now they are used to having a choice of around 110 items. Actually I don't know, I think this way is rather good.

I mean, you can always rename some of the common magic items if you don't like the feel of 'em. If they keep the 8-ish for the next books I wouldn't mind, just need to tailor it for the armies.

Dwarfs won't have their own magic lore (no magic at all really, except maybe som Altar runic-stuff) and they don't use common magic items so they should definitely get a bigger variety of things to choose from. TK (if they keep an alternative magic system) should get maybe a few more because several Arcane Items are useless. And so on...

ftayl5
12-02-2011, 23:41
I think that since there's more negative discussion (whining) about this than anything else in the new book, it'll probably change pretty quickly but not by the next book, the one after. And then O&G and ____ will have 10 Magic Items while everyone else will have 20 something :(
Just my 2c

Mirbeau
12-02-2011, 23:57
Guessing 4-6 books. I hope I'm wrong mind. Hearing the Orcs got so few items was a :eek:, but I haven't read the book yet so shan't be passing judgement.

overlordofnobodies
12-02-2011, 23:57
I try to make this poll just yesterday but I did not now how.
Any way I vote 1 as I dont see this lasting to long. If it true that TK are next. Then they shpuld have a lot of magic items as they are a very magic have army.

Lord Inquisitor
13-02-2011, 00:04
I'm thinking two. The next book is probably going to be set in stone before the negative feedback reaches high enough to have an effect.

Personally I think it seems eminently sensible to keep the number of magic items relatively low as this improves balance. We shall see how balanced the new book is.

logan054
13-02-2011, 00:59
Well I don't think it will be all that long, people will moan about how every race needs different items to feel different, we will either get loads of magic items or "abilities" for every race much like Magic items.

I think in a years time people will be moaning about how underpowered O&G are


Personally I think it seems eminently sensible to keep the number of magic items relatively low as this improves balance. We shall see how balanced the new book is.

While a agree with this I don't think GW care about balance, they care about what sells the most models and I think GW are going to have to pull out something special to shift new armies as the prices to continue to sky rocket.

Col. Tartleton
13-02-2011, 01:06
Orcs never struck me as having their own magic items. Common works better because they steal stuff. Just use common and translate into orcish.

Lord Inquisitor
13-02-2011, 01:12
While a agree with this I don't think GW care about balance, they care about what sells the most models and I think GW are going to have to pull out something special to shift new armies as the prices to continue to sky rocket.
So why put out a list with only 8 items? Surely they know that people love their magic whatsits?

There was obviously a deliberate shift from the pattern established for the last two whole editions. If not for game balance, then why?

Archangelion
13-02-2011, 01:19
Lack of imagination... shinanigans (they want to mess with our heads because it is fun!)... the hate Orcs and Goblins and think they should die a horrible death... they had a longer list of awsome magic items but lost it just before they took the final copy to the press shop and so some random guy came up with a bunch of crap... :shifty:

Torpedo Vegas
13-02-2011, 01:35
I think it is far, far to early to be making any guesses, maybe after the book is out for a few months.

Tiu
13-02-2011, 01:49
@Chris_: The problem is, every arma would use pretty much the sam eitems, which would lead to kinda samey armaylists. It just isnt as fun, you know? :P

logan054
13-02-2011, 01:56
So why put out a list with only 8 items? Surely they know that people love their magic whatsits?

There was obviously a deliberate shift from the pattern established for the last two whole editions. If not for game balance, then why?

If GW was worried about games balance do you really think the lore of life would have turned out the way it has, personally I think they are trying to recapture 4/5th ed.


@Chris_: The problem is, every arma would use pretty much the sam eitems, which would lead to kinda samey armaylists. It just isnt as fun, you know? :P

I don't think thats at all true, while you have people using some of the same items its hardly like it was rare to see characters with a 4+ wardsave before 8th

bravey
13-02-2011, 02:32
I'll bet GW is planning on releasing a Magic items supplement, if they decrease the amount of magic items in each new army book, sometime soon, full of all sorts of OP goodies. That way, everyone will want to have it, so they can take said magic items.

Just a thought.

Voss
13-02-2011, 02:43
I don't think any will get 20+.

I could see TK getting 12ish and HighElves and Dwarfs with thier runes getting 15-18ish but i don't think any will top 20+ anymore.

We'll see though.

I can see HE getting 20+ as an alternative to the special relationship with magic (or however that was justified) which has been giving them a discount on magic items. They're just so wise, after all.



Personally I think it seems eminently sensible to keep the number of magic items relatively low as this improves balance. We shall see how balanced the new book is.
Unfortunately, its going to be 2 or 3 years before we will see roughly a third of the army books revised for 8th edition, so in the meantime things are going to be balanced against 7th (and 6th) edition army books. So how the book is balanced in the short term is largely irrelevant to its long term balance, and unfortunately, I'm not sure GW understands that distinction.

Of course, two to three years after that, we'll likely only have a little more than half of the armies done for 8th ed, and it will time for IX.

Assuming GW's current trends for fantasy and pressure from competition doesn't kill the game outright.

warplock
13-02-2011, 04:00
A quick question to owners of the current (7th ed?) Orc and Goblin army book:

After you deduct all the magic items in the 7th ed book that have duplicates (i.e. differently named/priced items with the same effects) in the common items section of the 8th ed rule book, how many magic items are you left with?
To give an example, such a deduction in the Dark Elf book would be the Blade of Ruin (ignore armour save) which has a duplicate in the 8th ed book (the Obsidian blade)

The problem I see is that by forcing all armies to use the Common magic items, it unbalances them. Different armies should be able to get the same effect for different costs. For example, High Elves can currently get a 2+ armour save for 25 points, and Dwarfs (and possibly Empire) can get a 1+ for 25. Other armies have to pay 45 points for 2+. And the Enchanted Shield costs more for WoC than it does for Skaven, because +2 to the save is worth more to WoC.

Chris_
13-02-2011, 04:11
@Chris_: The problem is, every arma would use pretty much the sam eitems, which would lead to kinda samey armaylists. It just isnt as fun, you know? :PA lot of the old items in the respective armybooks were very similar/identical with different names and/or different points cost.

Also, 8th is a big step away from herohammer so the armies will be significantly different in other ways.

If you feel that the names and the lack of a short blurb is wrong, then just make your own up!

Personally I don't mind this way at all and I hope they stick to it for all the 8th edition books (of course with some exceptions to armies that need it because of other rules).

Justy
13-02-2011, 04:13
So O&G and TK are going to be the losers of the 8º edition books by the time GW realizes the crap of so few MI in books.
How the hell a magic item reducion is a balance decision, when takes 8 years or more to release all the armybooks....

Voss
13-02-2011, 04:19
The problem I see is that by forcing all armies to use the Common magic items, it unbalances them. Different armies should be able to get the same effect for different costs. For example, High Elves can currently get a 2+ armour save for 25 points, and Dwarfs (and possibly Empire) can get a 1+ for 25. Other armies have to pay 45 points for 2+. And the Enchanted Shield costs more for WoC than it does for Skaven, because +2 to the save is worth more to WoC.

Its actually worth less to warriors of chaos, because they hit the 1+ cap without even trying (or taking any magic armour at all). It isn't unbalanced, it just isn't an item worth taking except is some odd corner cases.

Also, I have no idea why you think the same cost is an imbalance.

exodusofman
13-02-2011, 05:31
Ever consider it could just be a fluff thing? Apat from staeling magic items how many times has thee been something like a famour orc forged weapon? perhaps they ae just doing it to keep in lines with fluff?

Kalandros
13-02-2011, 05:49
exodus, Gorbad Ironclaw has one of the Runefangs - strapped to his shield as a trophy.

They always loot stuff, it makes no sense that they have nothing at all.

Voss
13-02-2011, 06:01
Ever consider it could just be a fluff thing? Apat from staeling magic items how many times has thee been something like a famour orc forged weapon? perhaps they ae just doing it to keep in lines with fluff?

Nope. Quite a few of the magic items from the last few editions of the O&G army books were made by orcs or goblins. Or, in the case of the Axe of the Last Waagh, left by Gork and Mork for Ragnarork.

Orcs & goblins are primitive, but they can make their own stuff. Their shamen are equally primitive, but are quite capable of making things extra stabby with magic.

And even if your premise was correct, there isn't any reason for their swag to disappear.

Storak
13-02-2011, 07:24
I'm thinking two. The next book is probably going to be set in stone before the negative feedback reaches high enough to have an effect.



i agree.

it was the small and cheap items, that gave flavour to armies. (you could include them, even if they were not that strong or always useful)

now we have a small selection of really crappy expensive items. (two goblin banners and an anti-dwarf item? who made such a decision?) i can t see that trend continue beyond the next book, that might be done already.

and so we will face old army books with big and strong magic item collections and newer army books with slightly smaller but very useful magic item collections for the next 5 years.

but hey, at least we can give orcish names to the common magic items. that sounds cool!

Djekar
13-02-2011, 09:53
I'm the most sad about the banners - I like the 7th ed ones. Most of them at least. Oh well, +1 LD banner, here I come for the next 8 years!

warplock
13-02-2011, 12:03
Its actually worth less to warriors of chaos, because they hit the 1+ cap without even trying (or taking any magic armour at all). It isn't unbalanced, it just isn't an item worth taking except is some odd corner cases.

Also, I have no idea why you think the same cost is an imbalance.

Because toughness 5 with +2 to your armour save and chaos armour is much better than toughness 4 with +2 to your armour save and heavy armour. Yes you can easily get a Chaos Lord to 1+ without the Enchanted Shield but it adds flexibility. Another example: High Elves are very fragile and therefore have access to one magic item which gives a 4+ ward and reroll armour save for 55 points, a combination which costs all other races 70 points and takes up two magic item slots. It would be imbalanced to force the T3 Elves to pay 70 points like everyone else, in my opinion.

Shimmergloom
13-02-2011, 14:22
In the O&G rumour thread someone said, that the item reduction could be "justified" with the Special Characters wearing special items, while the normal characters use common items... Not that I'm happy with that (not at all...my belovd Iron Gnashas and Screaming Sword :(), but it makes some sense.
Hopefully the items go up again, for Dwarves I cannot imagine that they only get like 8 runes!

Maybe that is the case. However the ability to make your own unique character that has his own background and flexibility over special characters is the ONE thing that GW can be said to do right vs Warmachine.

I think warmachine is fun, but it is boring to me that I can only take pre-made characters instead of being able to create my own.

Unless GW plans to release further magic item sets like they did in 5th(and I can completely see them doing that, it would be an instant money maker) then characters are going to be pretty bland, since so many will just be armed the same across the table from one another.

edit to add: It is also going to be hilariously horrible, when not only do the further books come out with a full selection of items, but when 9th edition comes out and GW decides to cut common items back to like 10 or 12 and greenskins have almost no choice at all in magic item selection.

And let's face it, at this rate, we'll be in 9th edition before half the armies get 8th edition books. Who knows, an army or two might still be using 6th edition books when 9th comes out.

Ultimate Life Form
13-02-2011, 15:44
Seeing how they went absolutely crazy with Skaven, I don't think this will be a very stable pattern.

Maybe however, just follow me here for a second, this may be a new strategy to set armies apart and define a new flavor for them. O&G, for example, always struck me as a bit odd - basically brainless hooligans but with an exquisite selection of magic items (I hate that dispel banner!!!)
Question: Where did they get them? :confused:
Greenskins aren't exactly expert metalsmiths, and generally better at destroying than creating, but strangely their coffers overflew with tons upon tons of magical tools. I hated it. Now maaaaaybee...

O&G shouldn't have many Magic Items. So better they get a few powerful than the ton of mediocre trinkets (no one used anyway) they used to have. Instead, they get a decent boost in other parts of the book apparently. So you could say O&G are finally the straight-forward force of nature they're supposed to be. Now High Elves, for example, are known for their trickery and relying on magical wards - maybe they'll lack a bit in power but make up for it with a huge array of truly extraordinary magic items. Wouldn't that be cool?! Personally everything that makes armies have a more unique feel is very welcome. We'll see however what GW's long-term strategy is (should they have one for once).

Kalandros
13-02-2011, 16:06
Its sad that Orcs and Goblins are always stuck as the 'Failed Attempt' by Games workshop - lets see how long this lasts. The biggest problem is that they refuse, for some very stupid reason, to do any updates to released books - if they change their design for the next book, they HAVE to release a supplement to the orcs and goblins book, its not hard and it doesn't cost them much. But instead they leave us waiting years for the hopes of perhaps positive changes and although there is some positive, the negatives are immediately obvious.

And our army is still very weak to all the big rulebook spells like Purple Sun - which suddenly the orcs and goblins get a copy of but without the very overpowered Instant Death effect.

Ronin[XiC]
13-02-2011, 16:49
7th Edition O&G book was in no way "failed" or "weak". It was a pretty well balanced book that could stand a fight against almost everything.
No, it probably couldn't compete against the top 4 in an all out tournament, but it's impossible to balance a system with more than a dozend armies.
Our army might be weak against the purple sun but it's stronger against other spells like those who demand a toughness or strength test.
I still haven't come across an opponent who took death or shadow over Life.

And it's a GOOD THING that our two uber spells aren't as stupid as the rulebook spells.

Captainbastard
13-02-2011, 17:06
The little trinkets orcs and goblins had were more usefull for all goblin armies, rather than for mixed armies with lots or orc characters.

The truth is though, that magic items have always been totally broken and unfair since 4th edition. They simply allow some armies to have totally over the top characters compared to other armies. Did they really add much character to the game? I think not, because the way that they were usually used in tournaments as broken combos was completely uncharcterfull. With all of the special rules for armies now, they aren't even really neccessary.

The thing that bothers me more about the book is that it is a bit thin. It will probably end up being a book which is based entirely around the background of the same 5 or 6 special characters, rather than giving a proper background for the troops again.

In 4th and 5th edition everyone shared basically the same magic items. I don't think many people cared that much in 6th edition when books got their own separate items. If anything it only worked out better for elite armies such as vampires and chaos warriors.

Kalandros
13-02-2011, 17:42
To me, this new book completely fails to take advantage of the 8th edition rules. Instead they conflict with the units - Squig Hoppers become really really useless until FAQ'd otherwise, because of how the support attack and the Rider's WS is used (WS4 squigs, WS2 Gobbos, Gobbos do the support attack, not the squig).

We barely get any special rule or unique abilities. Special characters get all the good stuff, again, so I guess I will be using them from now on.

But the rest is all bland. No unit gets Devastating charge or anything that could get them this bonus once per game, we have no access to Heroic Killing Blow, we have nothing against super resilient large units (3+ ward chosens), we have nothing against regen (10 pt flaming banner requires very expensive units with average stats), etc

Its all bland with very few special things. Where's the character in the army now? Even the WAAAGH! was made redundant unless you have Grom the Paunch to also WAAAGh your lil goblins and even then its only a stupid CR bonus. This has a very poor effect for this army.

WAAAGH! Should've been something like: All units charging get +1CR and All Orc units get Devastating Charge.
Much more characterful while not penalizing players who prefer goblins.

Games Workshop, their authors and rules design team, seem to be doing the minimal effort for their rules - Model sales is all that matters to them anyway.

Gekiganger
13-02-2011, 17:52
Maybe that is the case. However the ability to make your own unique character that has his own background and flexibility over special characters is the ONE thing that GW can be said to do right vs Warmachine.


Don't you now have more variety with the core books items? Sure, other people can take the same setup, but you have more options for uniqueness.

I'd put the lack of items down to the massive abundance of them in the core book, I'd be surprised to see this change any time quickly. There were plenty of duplicate '+x attack / strength / ap' weapons that seemed to be in many books, why not just package them into the core and use the saved space for other things?

That said, that's just me trying to see where GW are going with this, I'm a sucker for variety and fun items - I'd happily take any number of magic items that GW throw at me.

Storak
13-02-2011, 18:02
;5311277']7th Edition O&G book was in no way "failed" or "weak". It was a pretty well balanced book that could stand a fight against almost everything.
No, it probably couldn't compete against the top 4 in an all out tournament, but it's impossible to balance a system with more than a dozend armies.
Our army might be weak against the purple sun but it's stronger against other spells like those who demand a toughness or strength test.
I still haven't come across an opponent who took death or shadow over Life.


many tournaments in Germany gave an additional 450 points (in comparison to top armies like daemons) to O&G (and Ogres) army in 2250 points heavy comp (so the worst stuff of other armies was already gone!) environment.

the term "well balanced" does not describe that situation very well.

Lord Dan
13-02-2011, 18:13
Also, I have no idea why you think the same cost is an imbalance.

A chaos exhalted hero can do far more damage with a great weapon than a goblin boss could. As such, the great weapon costs more for an exhalted hero than it does for a goblin boss. Using that same logic a chaos exhalted hero can do far more damage with the Obsidian Blade than a goblin boss could, and therefore it should cost more for him to wield.

As the item costs the same for both characters, the imbalance comes in one of three forms:

-The Obsidian Blade is far too cheap for the exhalted hero
-The Obsidian Blade is far too expensive for the goblin boss
-The Obsidian Blade is both too cheap for the exhalted hero and too expensive for the boss.

scarletsquig
13-02-2011, 18:14
If it's going to change I agree, it'll be after Tomb Kings.

It may not change though... I have a feeling that GW may be trying to limit the amount of magic-item spending that goes on.. so that we spend more points on troops... which require us to buy more models.

Magic items do not cost $$$.

If innovation was going to be used for the magic items in fantasy, it would have been better to have a set of unique, and themed magic items for each type of character to take.

E.g. for Empire

General - may take a runefang for X points, this ward save item for X points, this armour for X points, or this magic weapon for X points.

Wizard - Arcane items and van horstmanns speculum go here.

Warrior priest - new set of themed warrior priest only items, hammer of sigmar, meteoric iron armour.

Captain - less powerful armour/weapons, BSB upgrade unlocks a set of 3 different and actually useful effective magic banners that only the BSB can use.

Engineer - no magic items, lots of techy goodness.

Points values for magic items are a lot easier to get right when they're costed for a specific character and statline.

It's one thing that 40k got right back in 4th edition when the codexes stopped having armouries in them.

Jack Spratt
13-02-2011, 18:30
I get it that we do not need 4 pages of magic stuff anymore, but 8 is just a huge mistake.

theunwantedbeing
13-02-2011, 18:39
So, You went from 50 items, to 91. Almost double!

Or in actual fact.....
you went from 50 items, (7th edition)
to 131 items (8th ed transtion period)
and back down to 91(fully in 8th ed)

So really, the new book means you have 40 items less than before, rather than more.
I expect it to last 1, maybe 2 books before we go back to lots of items.

Voss
13-02-2011, 18:45
Maybe that is the case. However the ability to make your own unique character that has his own background and flexibility over special characters is the ONE thing that GW can be said to do right vs Warmachine.

Odd that GW is more and more moving away from it, and putting greater emphasis on special characters then.

Demon-cookie
13-02-2011, 18:54
I personally hope that this doesn't set a trend as I for one love making my own character with a story behind them. For example my chaos lord with the book of secrets was once a young treasure hunter who slowly corrupted by a 'mysterious whispering book'. Its one thing to make up fluff behind a character but it makes it so much more rewarding to have it actually have an impact on the battlefield.

In short more cheap not overpowered magic items please.

Ronin[XiC]
13-02-2011, 19:16
many tournaments in Germany gave an additional 450 points (in comparison to top armies like daemons) to O&G (and Ogres) army in 2250 points heavy comp (so the worst stuff of other armies was already gone!) environment.

the term "well balanced" does not describe that situation very well.

In 7th. I was talking about O&G in 8th with the older Armybook.
Yes in 7th with the 7th armybook the army wasnt as good as many others. But in 8th with the old armybook is was capable of defeating almost everything.

Aluinn
13-02-2011, 19:21
I can't really vote on any of those options because I don't think it will be going fully back to "normal". I do think, however, that they'll increase the number of items such that they have about 3 in each category (weapons, armor, talismans, etc.). This makes the most sense because, aside from providing some of the variety which people are missing, it allows for at least a cheap (5-20-point) item, a moderately-priced item (25-45 points), and an expensive item (50-100 points) of each type. This would provide the most possible item combinations with a low-ish number of entries, both for item sets taken entirely from the army book and for combinations with the BRB items.

But, yeah, though I haven't commented on it yet, I think the 8 items that O&G are allegedly getting are way too few, and also on the average way too expensive. When GW sees most players flat out avoiding them, I expect some kind of change, but not a complete backpedal.

Storak
13-02-2011, 19:23
;5311631']In 7th. I was talking about O&G in 8th with the older Armybook.
Yes in 7th with the 7th armybook the army wasnt as good as many others. But in 8th with the old armybook is was capable of defeating almost everything.

orcs still stuck at the bottom in european tournaments over the last 6 months (8th edition)

http://www.tabletopturniere.de/eu/t3_armies.php?gid=1&cid=0&latest=1

Ronin[XiC]
13-02-2011, 19:28
Because O&G are probably THE one army that is played by fluffbunnies. I'm sure you are aware of HorusVII?
http://www.tabletopwelt.de/forum/showthread.php?t=136591
He is just one example of how you can be competetive with O&G.

Storak
13-02-2011, 19:42
;5311668']Because O&G are probably THE one army that is played by fluffbunnies. I'm sure you are aware of HorusVII?
http://www.tabletopwelt.de/forum/showthread.php?t=136591
He is just one example of how you can be competetive with O&G.

i have had a lot of discussions about tournament results, and i don t want a boring repetition of it.

the hypothesis "orcs perform badly in tournament because players play orcs for fluff reasons and don t care about results"
falls apart, if you look at the really competitive stuff, like Throne of skulls grant tournament results. even orc players go thereto win, and O&G armies don t perform better there than elsewhere. (though we don t have enough 8th edition data, of course)

dimetri1
13-02-2011, 19:46
;5311277']7th Edition O&G book was in no way "failed" or "weak". It was a pretty well balanced book that could stand a fight against almost everything.
No, it probably couldn't compete against the top 4 in an all out tournament, but it's impossible to balance a system with more than a dozend armies.
Our army might be weak against the purple sun but it's stronger against other spells like those who demand a toughness or strength test.
I still haven't come across an opponent who took death or shadow over Life.

And it's a GOOD THING that our two uber spells aren't as stupid as the rulebook spells.

You have never been purple sunned? I have used it on 2 O&G, 1 Dwarf and 1 TK army. I won all four of those games in tournaments because of a stupid spell.
Just one of many reasons I think 8th is stupid and silly.

As far as the O&G 7th edition never impressed me. As far as 8th, I will have wait until ii have read the book to pass judgment.

Ronin[XiC]
13-02-2011, 19:53
Nope, I've never been purple sunned.
people use life because it's so freaking good.

Sun and other ini-test spells are useless against certain armies (like all elves) while Life is absolutely gamebreaking against everything.


i have had a lot of discussions about tournament results, and i don t want a boring repetition of it.

the hypothesis "orcs perform badly in tournament because players play orcs for fluff reasons and don t care about results"
falls apart, if you look at the really competitive stuff, like Throne of skulls grant tournament results. even orc players go thereto win, and O&G armies don t perform better there than elsewhere. (though we don t have enough 8th edition data, of course)


An O&G army won a GT if I can remember correctly. He used lots of Squigherdes and stonethrowers. WIth the use of the Waaaghspell he owned every single enemy.

dimetri1
13-02-2011, 20:34
;5311727']Nope, I've never been purple sunned.
people use life because it's so freaking good.

Sun and other ini-test spells are useless against certain armies (like all elves) while Life is absolutely gamebreaking against everything.




An O&G army won a GT if I can remember correctly. He used lots of Squigherdes and stonethrowers. WIth the use of the Waaaghspell he owned every single enemy.

I use life also. If we are playing a higher points game I throw in a sorcerer with shadow also.

logan054
13-02-2011, 21:32
i have had a lot of discussions about tournament results, and i don t want a boring repetition of it.

the hypothesis "orcs perform badly in tournament because players play orcs for fluff reasons and don t care about results"

Personally I always thought O&G players just pretended this was the case, last O&G player I played had a black orc deathstar of 36 black orcs with warlord, BSB with +2DD banner. He went on about how no one could kill this unit, blah, blah. After I wiped his army out in about 3 turns he then turn around and said he only took Orc's for fun. If I was to take a similar type of unit with any other army I doubt anyone would call it fun or fluffy.


;5311727']Nope, I've never been purple sunned.
people use life because it's so freaking good.

Sun and other ini-test spells are useless against certain armies (like all elves) while Life is absolutely gamebreaking against everything.

Not surprising, I think death is one of the worst lores in the, I tried it in a tournament not so long ago, payed against a DE army with lore of Death, I think I cast purple sun 3 times, he caste it once, guess how many models we killed between us! 3. lore of Death really suffers from most of its spells being short range. Purple sun could be really good however you would have to use it in conjunction with lore of shadow or I buffs.

Morkash
13-02-2011, 22:03
Hmm, Ronin, I don't think one can impress alot of warseers with German websites... :D

On the sunny issue: To be gamebreaking, the sun is too random imo. Sure, it can eat an ogre army on its own, but the chance that it flies short or outright malfunctions is higher in most cases. The short range limits it further, as only a mounted sorcerer can flankshot the sun effectively and no matter where the sorcerer wants to fire the sun at, he has to be around 12" away from the target to hit it with at least a bit of reliability. And tbh...do you want to be 12" away from a unit of Ogres after you failed at your sunny attempt?
Especially in a tournament, you risk alot by picking the Lore of Death without a Loremaster ability...

Dai-Mongar
13-02-2011, 22:23
Why is there so much talk about Purple Suns in a thread about Magic Items? :rolleyes:
The greater focus on "common" Magic Items reminds me of 4th/5th edition. There were only about a dozen items for each army that were unique, plus Dwarfs had their Runes, of course. That seems to be the direction that Warhammer is going now, trying to capture some of what was lost in the transition from 5th to 6th edition, so I'm not surprised at all that the MI count has gone down.

sulla
13-02-2011, 22:35
So, given that the lack of magic items is the most complained about feature of the army book, how long do you see this trend continuing?It would be nice if GW took the new edition as an opportunity to make the armies more different from each other. They could make brutal, simplistic armies like O&G or Ogres more reliant on troops and less reliant on trinkets by reducing the number in each list, while keeping the numbers in elven or lizard lists high and making chaos and vampires more reliant on mutation/gifts/bloodlines.

Will they do that? Who knows, but what I do know is that; 5 items or 50, there are only ever a few that are actually worthwhile and the rest are taken primarily for fun.

gdsora
13-02-2011, 22:40
I cant imagine army books only havening 8 or so magic items
With Tomb Kings coming next there is no way the army could have only 8. There is so many items simply connected to how different the army plays to other Armies.

So it makes me wonder

UberBeast
13-02-2011, 22:48
Well, what do you guys expect? GWs rule and fluff are being written by complete idiots these days. So are we all going to hang in there waiting for the proverbial monkeys with typewriters to accidentally make a good product or are we just going to admit that it's going to be garbage for some time to come?

Ultimate Life Form
13-02-2011, 22:51
Well, what do you guys expect? GWs rule and fluff are being written by complete idiots these days. So are we all going to hang in there waiting for the proverbial monkeys with typewriters to accidentally make a good product or are we just going to admit that it's going to be garbage for some time to come?

I don't think that's fair; 8th is a very enjoyable game and far better than 7th, and we haven't even seen the first 8th army book in action. It would be wise to reserve judgement until we finally have some reliable gaming data to analyze.

UberBeast
13-02-2011, 23:06
I don't think that's fair; 8th is a very enjoyable game and far better than 7th, and we haven't even seen the first 8th army book in action. It would be wise to reserve judgement until we finally have some reliable gaming data to analyze.


I was speaking generally of GW products, and as someone who thinks 8th edition is a travesty. As for wisdom, GW doesn't write very complex rules. Anyone who has been gaming for a few years can pretty much tell what they think of a tweak to a familiar ruleset just by reading it.

Honestly, does it really take a lot of insight for someone to think that 8 magic items was a bad idea and could make a terrible trend? Wasn't it bad enough in 7th edition to see people using the same three combos for their lists every time without hoping that fewer items in 8th edition won't just leave us with fewer combos?

Here's your wisdom: fewer items= more boring.

rb.uhs
13-02-2011, 23:08
Here's your wisdom: fewer items= more boring.

Hear hear!

Glen_Savet
14-02-2011, 02:12
orcs still stuck at the bottom in european tournaments over the last 6 months (8th edition)

http://www.tabletopturniere.de/eu/t3_armies.php?gid=1&cid=0&latest=1

However, a goblin army also won the Australian Masters this past year.

Maoriboy007
14-02-2011, 03:30
I don't think that's fair; 8th is a very enjoyable game and far better than 7th, and we haven't even seen the first 8th army book in action. It would be wise to reserve judgement until we finally have some reliable gaming data to analyze.

I wouldn't say its far better rather than much different.
Beasts and Skaven were apparantly written with 8th in mind so we have something of an indication of how 8th edition bools are supposed to work, but time will tell how the O&G book will work.

Balerion
14-02-2011, 08:41
Has there actually been some sort of communique or confirmation from GW that this design trend is meant to apply to all armies in the future?

Because without something along those lines we're making a pretty vast assumption that GW is stating, "All armies will have fewer magic items" when they could only be stating "Orcs and Goblins will have fewer magic items".

Of all the races, O&G seem like one of the most suited for an army-wide change in that direction. Sour news if you're an O&G player, but it wouldn't be the first time GW has altered fluff to change the way an army plays.


Its sad that Orcs and Goblins are always stuck as the 'Failed Attempt' by Games workshop - lets see how long this lasts.
And the Dark Angels claim that mantle in the 40K landscape. I guess GW are a bunch of slimy greencists. :shifty:

Djekar
14-02-2011, 12:11
@Balerion:
I believe that there was a statement attibuted (at least) to GW to the effect of "This book will set the stage for all future 8th edition books". Now they could mean just the full color and hardback portions, but us butt-hurt greenskins are hoping that it also means the skimpy magic item selection as well.

Balerion
14-02-2011, 12:45
That's vague enough that it could go either way, but I suppose it's better than total silence from them. Just barely. ;)

logan054
14-02-2011, 15:23
@Balerion:
I believe that there was a statement attibuted (at least) to GW to the effect of "This book will set the stage for all future 8th edition books". Now they could mean just the full color and hardback portions, but us butt-hurt greenskins are hoping that it also means the skimpy magic item selection as well.

I don't think we would have got so many in the BRB if GW didn't intend or all the armies to have less, I'm not saying thats how its going to pan out but its certainly how it seems. For me and my WoC I wouldn't really care if GW dropped half the items just so long as WoC keep chaos gifts (don't care of they change most of them either).

What more do you really need to make a army, the book provides a massive selection of items anyways, you have all your various wardsaves and armours.

tank_santa
14-02-2011, 15:31
Well in may you will find out if this trend continues or not when the Tomb Kings hit the shelf.

Bac5665
14-02-2011, 15:35
I just wanted to say, I like the trend. Magic items are one of the biggest reasons for the balance reasons of 7E. And besides, 75% of the items in the ABS were terrible anyway, and the rest were mostly over the top. So it's no loss to me to see them go.

And with the 50 from the RBRB, it's not like players can't still go nuts with customization.

Harwammer
14-02-2011, 15:40
I just wanted to say, I like the trend. Magic items are one of the biggest reasons for the balance reasons of 7E. And besides, 75% of the items in the ABS were terrible anyway, and the rest were mostly over the top. So it's no loss to me to see them go.

And with the 50 from the RBRB, it's not like players can't still go nuts with customization.

+1

I think OnG in 8th are in a better position for magic items than they were in 7th (with the exception of the really awesome items such as Shaggas, MST and sneaky stealing). The 6th/7th books in 8th are just going through a glory period for items but within a couple of years it will be pretty much be done.

Edit: that said, I'm sure the number of items in each book will slowly creep up :)

Kalandros
14-02-2011, 15:47
Yeah we'll see in about 2 months what exactly is the situation. If they already changed completely, Orcs & Goblins will be in need of a new army book next year.

Ronin[XiC]
14-02-2011, 16:09
Mmh. If all armybooks would lose their magic items... yeah that would probably balance lots of stuff ( no more doomrocket, pendant, cupped hands, helm of commandment etc).

Shimmergloom
14-02-2011, 16:25
Do you really believe they are only going to give lizards for instance around 10 items?

Are you going to tool up your slann with nothing but common book items?

No they are going to ignore this big time.

Greenskins are improved for now. But in a few months it'll be back down to the dung heap with beastmen.

Tzeentch Lover
14-02-2011, 18:02
Tomb kings will show if this is really a trend or an O&G only instance. I think TKs might be to close to release at this point to change if this is going to be an 8th Ed armybook trend. I'll bet the book after TKs goes back to 20+ items though. Less is not better, but GW seems to keep forgetting that; no matter how many times their customers tell them. More magic items will be back.

Remember the Chaos Space Marines! Remember the Chaos Space Marines!

2d6
14-02-2011, 18:15
I'm ok with magic items reducing in number, as long as the 8-12 are well thought out and worthy of consideration.

I think GW are trying to make sure that more players own the core rulebook, as in the past many players woul only own their army book.

In 7th they stopped releasing quick reference sheets as pdf, in 8th they've stuck most of the magic items and special rules into the core rulebook instead of the army books.

minionboy
14-02-2011, 18:41
I would rather have a pile of common magic items, which are easy to balance (since everyone gets them), plus a few characterful items in each book, instead of 20+ magic items which are different (or not) between each book and cause a TON of balance issues.

UberBeast
14-02-2011, 18:57
I would rather have a pile of common magic items, which are easy to balance (since everyone gets them), plus a few characterful items in each book, instead of 20+ magic items which are different (or not) between each book and cause a TON of balance issues.

Here's the thing though, common magic items are the hardest to balance! Simply by putting a universal price on items that are not universally useful you unbalance them. For instance, an item that boosts casting value is worth more to High elves than to dwarves, and an item that boosts a stat is worth more to an army that lacks in that stat than an army that has plentiful access to that stat. A sword that gives +1 attack is more useful to a chaos lord or an ogre tyrant than to a goblin boss or an elf hero, yet both would pay the same cost for it.

No, common magic items are the singly most difficult to balance items in the game. Balancing usefulness and cost on an army to army basis is the surest way to achieve balance.

Now, GWs habbits on internal balance are another issue entirely...

Lord Inquisitor
14-02-2011, 19:23
Yep. Characters with no magic item options (i.e. Special Characters) should be the easiest to balance. Characters with access to only army-specific options should be the next easiest (e.g. daemons) because their options are limited within their book. After that, army-specific items should be easier to balance. Unfortunately it didn't seem to work that way for Daemons!

There are many examples of differential value. The infamous Power Scroll is massively useful for certain armies but nigh-useless for Ogres. Multiple access to 4+ ward saves for Warriors allows their characters to wander around with storm shield-like 3++ wards. Trickster's helm is kinda "meh" until you stick it on a T6 ogre.

Then again, GW traditionally has poor balance with SCs and while a couple of rulebook items are totally borked (crown of command, power scroll) they're generally surprisingly okay. So much for theory.

AlphariusOmegon20
15-02-2011, 16:22
Having read the new O&G book, I can tell you that IMO O&G have 0 magic items in their book.

Let me explain what I mean.

The 8 items in the book are seriously overcosted, mostly useless because they are very situational, or does not fix issues from the previous book.

There still is not a army wide banner for Goblins and the armor is way overcosted for what it does. That is just the tip of the iceberg. The others are almost as bad.

O&G are better off taking items out of the BRB than they are their own book. It's almost a travesty of work on a scale that I thought was not possible to create something worse than Mat Ward did with the previous book. That book looks like a work of art now, compared to the new one.

I will be selling my Goblin Horde very soon.

scarletsquig
15-02-2011, 16:27
I'm fine with new army books lacking in magic items, as long as they ramp up the pace on producing them.

2 new books by May is a great start, I hope there will be at least one more army book this year, and 2 more would be fantastic.

Ideally, GW should look to get most of the army books done towards the start of a new edition, allowing them to balance them against each other well and give the edition time to be played as intended.

Ideally, for each new edition we'd see:

1st, 2nd and 3rd years: 4 new books released each year.
4th year: 3 new books (least popular armies go here)
5th year: all 15 books have been made! No new books in this year, just wave releases.

That would be the best way to do things. 6th edition was great, we got new books for all armies, 7th was a mess with weak books at the start, powerful ones at the end, and lots of armies not getting a 7th edition book at all. Alternatively, even just a standard of 3 book releases per year over 5 years would be better.

I think 5 years is a better timescale for an edition to play out over. I liked the stability of the 6-year long stretch that 6th edition had.

Ender Shadowkin
15-02-2011, 17:16
Ever consider it could just be a fluff thing? Apat from staeling magic items how many times has thee been something like a famour orc forged weapon? perhaps they ae just doing it to keep in lines with fluff?

this

as a non-Orc player without attachments to the old shiny toys. . . makes sense to me. Orcs are more scavengers than crafters. They also have 2 lores and lots of unique units. They don't really need a bunch of unique items for flavor.

Now I do think there will be fewer items in most books, just not down to 8, closer to the number in the beastman book perhaps. I would expect 12 or so as an average, with HE around 20, and dwarves/demons a lot of unique features because they have no access to common items.

Lord Inquisitor
15-02-2011, 17:25
O&G are better off taking items out of the BRB than they are their own book. It's almost a travesty of work on a scale that I thought was not possible to create something worse than Mat Ward did with the previous book. That book looks like a work of art now, compared to the new one.

I will be selling my Goblin Horde very soon.
I've seen a few sentiments like this. Are magic items really that necessary? How many people would sell their army because their army book didn't have enough magic items?

I play Ogres. As far as items are concerned they have about 8 that are at all worth taking (Thundermace, Siegebreaker, Greatskull, Wyrdstone Necklace, Grut's Sickle, Skullmantle, Fistful of Laurels and Rune Maw) and of them the only really good item is the Rune Maw. Now I appreciate a big part is not only do Ocrs have only 8 but they're not very good. But if Ogres really had zero magic items I'd still play them, there's plenty in the rulebook.


I think 5 years is a better timescale for an edition to play out over. I liked the stability of the 6-year long stretch that 6th edition had.
7th was functionally so similar that it really didn't make very much difference. We had over a decade with the same core rules.

Kalandros
15-02-2011, 17:25
You guys with your "it makes sense that they dont have much shiny toys because of the fluff" have just no idea what you're talking about.

Plus its all orcs and goblins had - if there were extra abilities like other races get then it would balance out. Now its just a stupid limited list of few terrible and few useful items with nothing else to make every greenskin army different. Vamps have bloodlines, skavens have their pile of random items and abilities on top of unique abilities to almost everything.

We get the most ordinary list of special rules (except for the pump wagon I guess) - its all very very flavorless.

Sir_Turalyon
15-02-2011, 17:34
Looks like GW is folding items back into form they had in 5th edition, with plenty common ones in universal rulebook and few army specific ones. I like that. One obvious advantage is that you know most of opponent's items as well as your own.

Hope they don't blink and menage to stick to the trend. Otherwise the Orcs and Gobbos are screwed... again.

bazragh elfburna
15-02-2011, 17:46
I havent seen the new O&G book just yet but if more units had options for magical banners then in the prevoious edition it could solve some balance issues and give some needed bonuses to common orc boyz and goblins.

Allthough I admit that some combos in the old army book were kinda crazy, Gobbo warboss on charriot no armor no ward saves was kinda nuts TBH I will miss some magical items from the book badly banner of butchery as primary and maybe spirit totem in its previous form:(.
But if more units can get magical upgrades it could even things up a bit.

However Im gonna wait and reserve my judgement when I see the book and after I played a few games with my greenskins.

Kalandros
15-02-2011, 17:54
Common Goblins, Night Goblins, Savage Orcs, Savage Orc Big'uns and Orc Boyz have no way to access any Magic Banner without a BSB.

Orc Big'unz (one big'unz unit per army, max. except with the special char Gorbad), Boar Boyz and Savage Boar Boyz (and both big'unz version of boar units) as well as Black Orcs may take a magic banner.

The possibility to take a magic banner is still highly restricted. They should have given at least a 10 pts magic banner limit to at least one goblin unit.

Its so annoying.

bazragh elfburna
15-02-2011, 18:18
TBH that is highly dissapointing.:(
I was kinda hoping that at least 1 unit of goblins or night goblins can take a magical banner without the bsb upgrade.
Well maybe some other trinkets (giant spider, mangler squig) make up for lack of magic, fingers crossed.

At least the armor with toughness bonus and impact hits is just awsome, I might put it on a warboss on a wyvern, and see what happens when that and thunderstomp hit something:D

BTW does the wyvern have the same stats ase before ??

Lord Inquisitor
15-02-2011, 18:33
The possibility to take a magic banner is still highly restricted. They should have given at least a 10 pts magic banner limit to at least one goblin unit.

Its so annoying.
Ogres still win in terms of restrictions. Ogres can take a maximum of one unit with a magic banner total. Only four units allowed magic banners? You're spoiled! :p

Kalandros
15-02-2011, 18:48
Ogres still win in terms of restrictions. Ogres can take a maximum of one unit with a magic banner total. Only four units allows magic banners? You're spoiled! :p

We're talking 8th edition book here. Ogre is still 6th ed as you know of course.
Such restrictions nowadays are just annoying.

Just like how High Elves got their 'One core unit with magic banner' and then later one DE come out and any number of Warrior or Corsair unit can take a magic banner.

fluffwise that makes even less sense. High Elves are all rich and have access to a ton of magic stuff, Dark Elves have to go loot them. High Elves should have easier access to them, not Dark Elves.

Tokamak
15-02-2011, 20:12
Hmm I wonder if maybe theres a marketing tactic somewhere in place...

Like armies will get about 10-20 items total...

then later down the line an expansion book will come out like the skaven and empire ones, were they discuss more about color theme and principle builds... and oh my gosh I bet there will be at least a dozen new items and theme options in that new book!

So I think they might take a focus on producing the base army book with a followed expansion... If I am wrong however, then I pray GW doesn't read this :P

I really hope GW considers a longer timespan than indulging in power creep conspiracies. There's no doubt they employed that tactic during the 7th edition and it frustrated a lot of people.

T10
15-02-2011, 22:07
Ach. This poll lacks a "meh." option.

-T10

Lord Inquisitor
15-02-2011, 22:12
Ach. This poll lacks a "meh." option.

-T10

It has a "I have no opinion" option, near enough. What it lacks is an option for "they will never go back to 20+ items".

Dorack
15-02-2011, 22:55
One thing I noticed looking at the new O&G army book today is that their "antimagic banner" now has kind of turned into the Little Wagh special ability, and the Mushrooms come as "standard feature" for Night Goblin Shamans. Perhaps we will see more of this in future books.

Djekar
16-02-2011, 08:39
Hope they don't blink and menage to stick to the trend. Otherwise the Orcs and Gobbos are screwed... again.
and

What it lacks is an option for "they will never go back to 20+ items".

I think the point is that we know that they are going back to 20+ items, it is just a matter of time. Cynicism and all that.

Avian
16-02-2011, 09:20
I think the point is that we know that they are going back to 20+ items, it is just a matter of time. Cynicism and all that.
Yes. It is also deliberate that there is no option for more than 5. :(

Balerion
16-02-2011, 12:12
Again, there is no clear evidence that this was even meant to carry through to armybooks beyond O&G.

I know it sucks, but the only reasonable thing to do is to wait and see how the next 1-2 armybooks shake out.

Spiney Norman
16-02-2011, 12:46
;5311277']7th Edition O&G book was in no way "failed" or "weak". It was a pretty well balanced book that could stand a fight against almost everything.
No, it probably couldn't compete against the top 4 in an all out tournament, but it's impossible to balance a system with more than a dozend armies.
Our army might be weak against the purple sun but it's stronger against other spells like those who demand a toughness or strength test.
I still haven't come across an opponent who took death or shadow over Life.

And it's a GOOD THING that our two uber spells aren't as stupid as the rulebook spells.

The 7th Ed O&G book was balanced, and it was competitive... until High Elves came out when the power creep started in earnest, by the time Daemons hit the shelves O&G was dead in the water as far as competitive play went.

Umm I'm glad you think weak magic is a good thing, and whats your opinion on our lore (goblins) attribute being the most broken thing ever, not to mention every NG shaman being a mini slann?


Again, there is no clear evidence that this was even meant to carry through to armybooks beyond O&G.

I know it sucks, but the only reasonable thing to do is to wait and see how the next 1-2 armybooks shake out.

I've been thinking the same thing actually, I'm absolutely fine with the idea that orcs, being a crude, unintelligent race, don't run forges which constantly churn out magically crafted items. I've long thought that some races should have more items than others, and some races should have more items of certain types than others. For example High/dark elves and Lizardmen have great knowledge of magic and a long history so they should probably have more arcane artifacts or enchanted items than other races, Bretonnians keep going on quests to nick everyone elses stuff and should probably have a wide selection of magic weapons/armours (which would presumably be the most sought after nickable comodities among knights) and I envisage Tomb Kings inscribing incantations on to banners and talismen more while the Empire has a bunch of crazy wizards and engineers who probably keep inventing all sorts of wacky stuff and VC probably specialise in lots of dark arcane bits.

It strikes me as that the chaos armies should probably have access to mutations instead (which could have similar effects) while wood elves have spites, dwarfs have runes, skaven have warpstone machines etc, while armies like O&G, Ogres would have little in the way of magical artifacts.

Shimmergloom
16-02-2011, 13:52
Orcs and goblins LOOTED their items!!!!

Did anyone ever bother to read the fluff for their magic items?

So now you are telling me that Greenskins just forget to loot from dwarfs, empire and elves??

And the items they did forge were crappy little small point items that gave small buffs, like the goblin only items.

But you know, I don't think ogres are master craftsman either. Better give them less items.

And vampires can't craft either, they spend too much time sleeping in coffins to do any crafting. Better give them less items.

What kind of forges are beastmen or wood elves making out in the middle of the woods? No forges there. Better give them less items.

The empire's too busy building endless mortars and steam tanks to forge anything new. Better give them less items.

The economic situation has made all the dwarfs foreclose on their holds. Better give them less items.




6th edition was great, we got new books for all armies,

Tell that to anyone who played Chaos Dwarfs or DoW.

Balerion
16-02-2011, 14:04
Some of those are really flimsy excuses, though, whereas the point about Orcs holds some water.

By their very definition scavenged items are rarer and less accessible than created items. Nobody is saying that Orcs should have 0 magical items. But there is an easy-to-swallow (from a fluff standpoint, if not a fairness/equality one) explanation for them having fewer magical items.

There are absolutely other races that would be suitable candidates for a reduced item list, though. I could see my Wood Elves being on the O&G scale of <10 items, and my VC would probably be middle of the pack.

Avian
16-02-2011, 18:15
Again, there is no clear evidence that this was even meant to carry through to armybooks beyond O&G.
So presumably you voted '1'? ;)

Lord Inquisitor
16-02-2011, 19:16
Yes. It is also deliberate that there is no option for more than 5. :(

Well I don't think this trend will continue. But surely even if it's unlikely to stay, there is a possibility that many rulebook items and few race items was a deliberate design for 8th that they'll stick with?

Captainbastard
16-02-2011, 19:32
The thing is, the majority of Lords would only have a few very generic magic items, such as some quite generic magic armour and a generic magic sword that do similar things to many other items.

Most Lords would not have access to a one off magic item that was stolen from a dark elf a hundred years ago.

In some ways, taking one off magic items is not that different from taking special charcters all of the time. For a single army to have a fifth of the items that orcs ever had seems a bit strange. Thats why I didn't like the introduction of lots of one off magic items in the books so much.

Avian
16-02-2011, 19:37
Well I don't think this trend will continue. But surely even if it's unlikely to stay, there is a possibility that many rulebook items and few race items was a deliberate design for 8th that they'll stick with?
While I agree that it is probably deliberate and they probably plan on sticking to it, I don't think they will. Soon enough someone will decide that Army X really deserves lots of items (or the equivalent to lots of items, like bloodline powers) and not long after that we'll be back just about where we were.

And let's face it, every army book has had a good handful of good items. O&G currently have approximately 2. Even if they don't increase the overall number of items, later books will almost certainly have more useful items than the greenies (after all, it's hard to have less useful ones).

Ultimate Life Form
16-02-2011, 19:58
Even if they don't increase the overall number of items, later books will almost certainly have more useful items than the greenies (after all, it's hard to have less useful ones).

Yes, but that would most likely have been true regardless of their actual number. O&G is the first shot (again), and one could say that 8th Ed is still in an experimental state. It will be a few years till the designers figure out what the game 'needs', or get good ideas to spice things up. If I were to draw a comparison to video games, the first game on a new console is rarely ever the best. Yes, it may be solid and have classic value, but it won't be long before other games follow with better graphics, controls etc that take full advantage of the new platform.

In the current state of the game, the designers couldn't really do much but toss in a number of generic items, and since the BRB is already chock-full of them, they figured they'd just skip the whole thing. The problem with Warhammer however is that it forever is in a state of eternal experimentation, so they may well change tack halfway through. My bet is that we'll see books with more items soon, for whatever reason - O&G isn't the final answer to all problems but merely the first step in the development of a new game, a markstone...

silashand
17-02-2011, 07:29
People like their wargear, plain and simple.

This. Though I have already decided to quit 8th edition I have to confess if they do mangle other armies this way then it will insure I don't pick the game back up as long as this BS continues. Whatever...


Well I don't think this trend will continue. But surely even if it's unlikely to stay, there is a possibility that many rulebook items and few race items was a deliberate design for 8th that they'll stick with?

I hope not. 8th edition is a travesty of a system as it is. IMO this would just make it even less appealing.

Cheers, Gary

herohammer
17-02-2011, 08:08
Who would have thought that they would have stuck with 2-3 special characters per book for all of 6th? Particularly coming after 5th that was loaded with special characters.

I actually think that fewer magic items is going to be the order of the day. I think some books will probably have many more items than O and G but that everyone will have their magic item selections cut down from 7th edition.

Shimmergloom
17-02-2011, 15:02
I believe that any generic warlord will have an item stolen off of a dead dark elf, just as much as I believe that every Chaos Champion was gifted with the same item from Khorne or that every Empire General has a runefang or that every Slann on the battlefield is a 2nd Gen slann who gets extra power dice per roll, or that every Scar Vet is wearing the same pair of nike shoes or that every Skaven army is carring the same Storm Banner.

eron12
18-02-2011, 21:17
Orcs and goblins LOOTED their items!!!!

Did anyone ever bother to read the fluff for their magic items?

So now you are telling me that Greenskins just forget to loot from dwarfs, empire and elves??

It seems to me that this is a perfect fluff reason for O&G to have fewer unique magic items. If most of their items are looted from other races, why wouldn't most of their magic items be from the common list?

Urgat
18-02-2011, 22:15
Because it's not the case. Just skimming through the weapon list, only two weapons are noted as looted, and one is clearly stated to be of goblin craft. And like hell the Effigy of Mork was build by elves with their own dung... Therefore I find Shimmerglooms comment about not reading fluff rather amusing.
edit: upon reading all the magic items, there's a couple more dwarf items, a dark elf item, and it appears that the Spirit Totem is both orc made, and not unique ("Mork's spirit totem is a flag or, more often, a carved effigy"). How about that? :p
Why do I comment to disagree with Shimmergloom on that when I agree with him that it's sad we lost all our most characterful items?

herohammer
19-02-2011, 00:50
every Skaven army is carring the same Storm Banner.
Clan Scyre actually mass produces storm banners in sweatshops in Cathay. They contract with clan Eshin to ship them worldwide via wallrunning ninjas.

Shimmergloom
19-02-2011, 01:30
Because it's not the case. Just skimming through the weapon list, only two weapons are noted as looted, and one is clearly stated to be of goblin craft. And like hell the Effigy of Mork was build by elves with their own dung... Therefore I find Shimmerglooms comment about not reading fluff rather amusing.
edit: upon reading all the magic items, there's a couple more dwarf items, a dark elf item, and it appears that the Spirit Totem is both orc made, and not unique ("Mork's spirit totem is a flag or, more often, a carved effigy"). How about that? :p
Why do I comment to disagree with Shimmergloom on that when I agree with him that it's sad we lost all our most characterful items?

I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Here's a list of looted, pillaged and traded items from the 7th edition book:

1. waaagh! cleva is one of gorbad's looted items. It's a dwarven weapon, 'improved upon' by orc blacksmiths(so yes they do exist in the fluff).

2. skull wand of kaloth was captured from a necromancer.

3. the best basha was a stolen dwarven axe.

4. the best boss 'at is a squashed helmet that once belonged to a dwarf king.

5. staff of sneaky stealing was a dwarven made item, apparently looted from them.

6. Ironback boar was made by chaos dwarfs and traded to greenskins.

7. Brimstone Bauble was taken from a charred dark elf corpse.

So there's 7 clearly looted or traded items. Gorbad also has a sword taken from a dead elector count.

There's several goblin trinkets and poorly made items enchanted by shamans and the like.

The only powerful things are said to have been given by gork or mork or what have you. Which is no different than a myriad of items from other books that are powerful and given to that army by whatever they believe in.

There's nothing to suggest that greenskins are master craftsmen or that they needed to be in order to create things like the itty ring or the backstabber's blade. So there's no reason to suddenly claim that greenskins should not have any magic items. Because they didn't suddenly stop looting, trading or making trinkets.

Geep
19-02-2011, 01:42
I personally hope they don't go back to 10+ magic items this edition. As much as I usually like a lot of items to choose from, we still have a fair selection from the BRB, and any change in this (possible) new design will be a real kick to Orc and Goblin players (who already suffered from being the guinea pigs of 7th ed).
Looking to fluff to try and justify O&G having fewer magic items is pointless- fluff can be used to justify anything. eg. Why shouldn't Orcs and Goblins have the most magic items when they not only create their own but also use your own against you as well?

The only things I'm wondering about are Dwarves with their Rune items and Wood Elves (as there is not a single magic bow in the common items).

Captainbastard
19-02-2011, 02:12
I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Here's a list of looted, pillaged and traded items from the 7th edition book:

1. waaagh! cleva is one of gorbad's looted items. It's a dwarven weapon, 'improved upon' by orc blacksmiths(so yes they do exist in the fluff).

2. skull wand of kaloth was captured from a necromancer.

3. the best basha was a stolen dwarven axe.

4. the best boss 'at is a squashed helmet that once belonged to a dwarf king.

5. staff of sneaky stealing was a dwarven made item, apparently looted from them.

6. Ironback boar was made by chaos dwarfs and traded to greenskins.

7. Brimstone Bauble was taken from a charred dark elf corpse.

So there's 7 clearly looted or traded items. Gorbad also has a sword taken from a dead elector count.

There's several goblin trinkets and poorly made items enchanted by shamans and the like.

The only powerful things are said to have been given by gork or mork or what have you. Which is no different than a myriad of items from other books that are powerful and given to that army by whatever they believe in.

There's nothing to suggest that greenskins are master craftsmen or that they needed to be in order to create things like the itty ring or the backstabber's blade. So there's no reason to suddenly claim that greenskins should not have any magic items. Because they didn't suddenly stop looting, trading or making trinkets.

And for whatever reason every goblin shaman had the staff of sneaky stealing and every goblin warboss had the amulet of protectyness. They were raided and then mass produced it seems.

Balerion
19-02-2011, 02:21
Clan Scyre actually mass produces storm banners in sweatshops in Cathay. They contract with clan Eshin to ship them worldwide via wallrunning ninjas.
yup, the Skaven heraldry book is very clear about the contributions of Clan Clawdidas

Shimmergloom
19-02-2011, 06:45
And for whatever reason every goblin shaman had the staff of sneaky stealing and every goblin warboss had the amulet of protectyness. They were raided and then mass produced it seems.

I've already covered this. They all have the same items for the exact same reason that every skaven army carries the storm banner and every high elf army had teclis running with them and every empire army brings along 1 or 2 of the 8 total steam tanks in the world and why 2nd gen slanns or bloodthirsters show up at every two bit skirmish.

Urgat
19-02-2011, 07:46
I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Here's a list of looted, pillaged and traded items from the 7th edition book:

1. waaagh! cleva is one of gorbad's looted items. It's a dwarven weapon, 'improved upon' by orc blacksmiths(so yes they do exist in the fluff).

2. skull wand of kaloth was captured from a necromancer.

3. the best basha was a stolen dwarven axe.

4. the best boss 'at is a squashed helmet that once belonged to a dwarf king.

5. staff of sneaky stealing was a dwarven made item, apparently looted from them.

6. Ironback boar was made by chaos dwarfs and traded to greenskins.

7. Brimstone Bauble was taken from a charred dark elf corpse.

So there's 7 clearly looted or traded items.

Out of how many? Out of 40! Orcs and goblins items are clearly all looted :rolleyes:


Gorbad also has a sword taken from a dead elector count.
And you count it twice. It's the Waaagh! Cleava, and the Waaagh! Cleava is Solland's Runefang. I thought by that time everybody had realised it was a cameo.


There's several goblin trinkets and poorly made items enchanted by shamans and the like.
So those do not count... why?


The only powerful things are said to have been given by gork or mork or what have you. Which is no different than a myriad of items from other books that are powerful and given to that army by whatever they believe in.
yeah, they are said to. I'm not so sure Gork and Mork routinely craft magic items and drop them in orc camps, though :p Every AB has a dozen of those "some say that" that we know are not true. Some say that if all the orcs united, they'd take over the world, unless all skavens were to stop bickering they would take over the world, but no because in the end chaos can't be beaten anyway, but some say that the world is going to end when the ragnarorc happens, but... Heh?


There's nothing to suggest that greenskins are master craftsmen or that they needed to be in order to create things like the itty ring or the backstabber's blade. So there's no reason to suddenly claim that greenskins should not have any magic items. Because they didn't suddenly stop looting, trading or making trinkets.

And that's the sentence that shows the sillyness of the argument because I happen to agree with you, see?

Balerion
19-02-2011, 08:05
I've already covered this. They all have the same items for the exact same reason that every skaven army carries the storm banner and every high elf army had teclis running with them and every empire army brings along 1 or 2 of the 8 total steam tanks in the world and why 2nd gen slanns or bloodthirsters show up at every two bit skirmish.
Ypu are fundamentally misunderstanding two things. The first is the difference between what it is customary to field and what it is possible to field. The second is that nobody has suggested Orcs be stripped of all access to magic items; they're saying that there's a somewhat valid reason for O&G to be largely confined to the list of common magic items.

Captainbastard
19-02-2011, 15:03
I've already covered this. They all have the same items for the exact same reason that every skaven army carries the storm banner and every high elf army had teclis running with them and every empire army brings along 1 or 2 of the 8 total steam tanks in the world and why 2nd gen slanns or bloodthirsters show up at every two bit skirmish.

I don't see what your point is. Two wrongs don't make a right. If it was up to me, players would only be able to take 1 steam tank in an army, and all armies apart from dwarves would have only common magic items that are easy to produce. The new 8th edition will hopefully go some way to rectify these problems.

Their isn't only one potion of strength in the warhammer world, they could clearly be made by any sorcerer, wizard or shaman. That's why the new magic items are actually more fulffy than the old ones.

Shimmergloom
19-02-2011, 16:01
Well there isn't just one guzzla's backbone brew in the warhammer world.

Or one madcap mushroom.

Or one magic warpainted savage orc.

Captainbastard
19-02-2011, 17:39
Well there isn't just one guzzla's backbone brew in the warhammer world.

Or one madcap mushroom.

Or one magic warpainted savage orc.

That does not really challenge my point. The type of magic items in the new rulebook are the type of items that you are likely to find all over the warhammer world, in many armies.

The type of items in the old lists were 9 times out of 10 items that were totally unique and could only be owned by one hero or wizard.

That's why I don't think they improved the fluff.

Also, when you are in the middle of a game will you really spend a lot of time thinking about the fluff of a magic item? After a while it ceases to be a fluffy item from the book and simply becomes a mathhammer combo that every army uses in every game.

DragonManlol
20-02-2011, 00:01
How many magic items do orcs and goblins have then

Shimmergloom
20-02-2011, 01:43
That does not really challenge my point. The type of magic items in the new rulebook are the type of items that you are likely to find all over the warhammer world, in many armies.

The type of items in the old lists were 9 times out of 10 items that were totally unique and could only be owned by one hero or wizard.

That's why I don't think they improved the fluff.

Also, when you are in the middle of a game will you really spend a lot of time thinking about the fluff of a magic item? After a while it ceases to be a fluffy item from the book and simply becomes a mathhammer combo that every army uses in every game.

You're trying to argue two points.

You're trying to argue that o&g shouldn't have a lot of items because it's not fluffy and you are trying to argue that it's not fluffy for every army to use the same unique combos from their books.

You are trying to have it both ways. If you want every book to only have 8 items, then argue that. But it's unfair for only O&G to get singled out again for an experiment that we all know is not going to last.

At the rate we are going we are going to be lucky if half the 15 books are out in 8th. That means even if for some reason all 7-8 books they manage to put out before 9th only have 8-10 items, then the other 7-8 will still have the full compliment of items when 9th rolls around.

If GW decides in 9th to drop all the common items from the brb, then those armies are going to be SOL for years until they get a new book.

That doesn't provide anymore game balance that you are claiming is going to happen from greenskins only getting 8 items, than it does to let all armies have a full compliment of items.

Captainbastard
20-02-2011, 03:02
You're trying to argue two points.

You're trying to argue that o&g shouldn't have a lot of items because it's not fluffy and you are trying to argue that it's not fluffy for every army to use the same unique combos from their books.

You are trying to have it both ways. If you want every book to only have 8 items, then argue that. But it's unfair for only O&G to get singled out again for an experiment that we all know is not going to last.

At the rate we are going we are going to be lucky if half the 15 books are out in 8th. That means even if for some reason all 7-8 books they manage to put out before 9th only have 8-10 items, then the other 7-8 will still have the full compliment of items when 9th rolls around.

If GW decides in 9th to drop all the common items from the brb, then those armies are going to be SOL for years until they get a new book.

That doesn't provide anymore game balance that you are claiming is going to happen from greenskins only getting 8 items, than it does to let all armies have a full compliment of items.

No.

I said quite clearly that I don't think ANY army should have more than 8 magic items (apart from dwarfs who use ruinic items, and should not use any common items).

I respect that some people think the old items are fluffy and they have a different point of view to me, but I have not argued two different sides of the argument.

Why should dwarfs be an exception to the rule? First of all because ruins are integral to the background fluff to dwarfs. Whether the staff of sneaky stealin was a fluffy item or not, the orc army would not have its background completely turned upsidown without it. Also dwarf characters are supposed to compete with the best characters in the game such as chaos lords and deamons. I'm not a particular dwarf fan so I am not biased in that sense.

Having played many games of 4th and 5th ed I think players will quickly forget about many of these items from the old books and it will certainly not spoil their games. I will also be annoyed if they start making tons of magic items for the new books.

Archangelion
20-02-2011, 03:31
...I love how GW states that the realm of WFB is a very magical one, where there is little in the world that is not somewhat magical in nature (from their words about their new magical terrain feature rules) but would then go and cut down on the number of magical weapons that each race has. I mean, if a forest gives a form of magical effects to those within it, would a stick from a tree not become a magical weapon?

Basically, as I see it, by makeing the terrain more magical, there should be more magical items, with a vaster diversity pool than before because the amount of magical materials has increased, and thus the potential for a greater variance in the magical weapons that the smiths of such a realm would be able to produce.

Perhaps the O&G book's low number of race specific magic items simply reflects that the O&G aren't that imaginitive and tend to take the more basic magic items. Stick of swift beating, and Gem of firebreathing... that sort of thing. They see something shiny, pick it up and ask "Wut dis do?" They turn to their friend beside them, hit them with the object, and if it throws of sparks or cuts their 'friend' in half as if he were butter and the shiny thing were a hot knife, then they wield it in battle, and it has basic magical properties and is thus a common magic item.

Shimmergloom
20-02-2011, 03:37
...I love how GW states that the realm of WFB is a very magical one, where there is little in the world that is not somewhat magical in nature (from their words about their new magical terrain feature rules) but would then go and cut down on the number of magical weapons that each race has. I mean, if a forest gives a form of magical effects to those within it, would a stick from a tree not become a magical weapon?

Basically, as I see it, by makeing the terrain more magical, there should be more magical items, with a vaster diversity pool than before because the amount of magical materials has increased, and thus the potential for a greater variance in the magical weapons that the smiths of such a realm would be able to produce.

Perhaps the O&G book's low number of race specific magic items simply reflects that the O&G aren't that imaginitive and tend to take the more basic magic items. Stick of swift beating, and Gem of firebreathing... that sort of thing. They see something shiny, pick it up and ask "Wut dis do?" They turn to their friend beside them, hit them with the object, and if it throws of sparks or cuts their 'friend' in half as if he were butter and the shiny thing were a hot knife, then they wield it in battle, and it has basic magical properties and is thus a common magic item.

So what kind of imagination does a beastman have? Or a ogre? Or a saurus?

scruffyryan
20-02-2011, 04:05
So what kind of imagination does a beastman have? Or a ogre? Or a saurus?


In order
A. The imagination of the chaos gods
B. Not much of one
C. The imagination of the nigh immortal and all powerful toad mages

Captainbastard
20-02-2011, 12:32
So what kind of imagination does a beastman have? Or a ogre? Or a saurus?

We don't know that they are going to keep magic items for these races. I wish people would stop speculating on future books.

I agree that they should redoo the books as quickly as possible.

Avian
20-02-2011, 14:09
I said quite clearly that I don't think ANY army should have more than 8 magic items (apart from dwarfs who use ruinic items, and should not use any common items).
So, hypothetically, if all armies used to have 8 magic items back in 6th/7th edition, and in 8th edition GW increased this to 30-40 items per army, would you then agree that all armies should have 30-40 items, because that fit the fluff better?
:shifty:

Captainbastard
20-02-2011, 14:59
So, hypothetically, if all armies used to have 8 magic items back in 6th/7th edition, and in 8th edition GW increased this to 30-40 items per army, would you then agree that all armies should have 30-40 items, because that fit the fluff better?
:shifty:

NO. Why would I#?

If 6th and 7th edition had stayed with one list of magic items shared by everyone, I would say don't increase it to 30-40.

I find the way that the question is phrased a bit too hypothetical and abstract. I think perhaps you should go back and look at your sentence structure (using a full stop every now and again does not kill).:p

Avian
20-02-2011, 15:32
NO. Why would I#?
Some people are happy with any change to the rules, regardless. Just checking if you are one of them. :p

Inquisitor Kallus
20-02-2011, 15:43
I heard that the Orc and Goblin book will set a precedent, and that each new army book wil have a smattering of Race specific items, whilst the majority of magic items can be found in the core rules. Makes sense...

SamVimes
20-02-2011, 16:24
Makes sense if they keep to it. People like toys (including designers) and I can't see it lasting long before An army book comes with something around 20 items, and then the previous books are going to be jealous. Really, the only way to prevent it is if GW's lead designer is a hardass (a good thing in my mind) and won't let the othe designers get away with it. I don't see it happening.

shelfunit.
20-02-2011, 16:27
What I don't get, is why all the O&G players are complaining about the magic items - I mean you got many, many more than in 7th ed.
Also as a dwarf player, I began to get really annoyed by all the 7th ed books armies - starting with O&G - getting a bucket full of special characters with which to populate their armies, none of which required their opponents consent, whilst my book contained 3, only 1 of which was ever seen. I haven't complained about it, just re-shuffled the army list with what I do have and got on with avenging grudges.
My point is, don't whine and winge about things that you can't change. Re-build your lists and get on with it. Anyone who "needed" more than the current plethora of magic items to win is clearly not the greatest general in the world, hopefully these changes will sort out the tacticians from the crutch weilders.

Lord Inquisitor
20-02-2011, 17:18
Makes sense if they keep to it. People like toys (including designers) and I can't see it lasting long before An army book comes with something around 20 items, and then the previous books are going to be jealous. Really, the only way to prevent it is if GW's lead designer is a hardass (a good thing in my mind) and won't let the othe designers get away with it. I don't see it happening.

A prime example is Codex Dark Angels. Streamlined, balanced really quite excellent codex. Dark Angel players were generally okay with the book and its comparative lack of toys initially. Then Codex Space Marine set a new benchmark in special rules extravaganza and it's been getting worse with each marine codex after that.

Dark Angels wasn't a bad book, indeed, if all the codices were like that 40k would be a much better game in my opinion. At the time it was accepted that this would be the format for books to come. But the 5e codices were a slap in the face for dangle players.

Yes, 8-10 unique items per book is good for the game. Providing the designers stick to it.

Captainbastard
20-02-2011, 17:59
A prime example is Codex Dark Angels. Streamlined, balanced really quite excellent codex. Dark Angel players were generally okay with the book and its comparative lack of toys initially. Then Codex Space Marine set a new benchmark in special rules extravaganza and it's been getting worse with each marine codex after that.

Dark Angels wasn't a bad book, indeed, if all the codices were like that 40k would be a much better game in my opinion. At the time it was accepted that this would be the format for books to come. But the 5e codices were a slap in the face for dangle players.

Yes, 8-10 unique items per book is good for the game. Providing the designers stick to it.

I think Dark Angels was written by Jervis Johnson. So it was hardly a suprise that it was stramlined, balanced, and kept to the background of the army.

Unfortunately some of the designers are just not as good as others. I don't belive that is a conspiracy by GW to make some armies obsolete quickly, but it does reveal a flaw in GW game testing. Some designers will make an army purely to win tourneys, because it is their favourate army, without really thinking about how it effects other armies. Just look at the cheese superhero fest that was Blood Angels.

Sometimes it also reveals a flaw in the rules. Why is close combat better in 40k than shooting for half of the armies? That is a blatant flaw in the rules, not merely the armies.

I think 8th edition rules will at least make it slightly harder for games designers to spoil the game with armies such as deamons, even if they have totally ruined the background for them.

Captainbastard
20-02-2011, 18:02
Makes sense if they keep to it. People like toys (including designers) and I can't see it lasting long before An army book comes with something around 20 items, and then the previous books are going to be jealous. Really, the only way to prevent it is if GW's lead designer is a hardass (a good thing in my mind) and won't let the othe designers get away with it. I don't see it happening.

The lead deasigners and playtesters need to be more firm with the people who want to make "superhero" armies.

UberBeast
20-02-2011, 18:10
A prime example is Codex Dark Angels. Streamlined, balanced really quite excellent codex. Dark Angel players were generally okay with the book and its comparative lack of toys initially. Then Codex Space Marine set a new benchmark in special rules extravaganza and it's been getting worse with each marine codex after that.

Dark Angels wasn't a bad book, indeed, if all the codices were like that 40k would be a much better game in my opinion. At the time it was accepted that this would be the format for books to come. But the 5e codices were a slap in the face for dangle players.


I hate to move too far from the topic but Dark Angels were anything but a balanced book. Edit (By balanced I mean that it was more restrictive than it's contemporary books and none of the books that followed it were at its level either. It was just a weak book with no follow-through) My first impression as a DA player who has started in 2nd edition and who has suffered for a decade with a garbage 3rd edition book was massive disappointment in the 4th edition book. I could tell the moment I saw it that the release was a 5-minute hack job with a lot of fancy explaining about how this was going to be the precedent set for future books.

The fluff for starters was about 50% of it just copy-pasted from the old book, the model release was down to two "add on" plastic sprues and a few characters, and the rules were simply weak garbage. Their book had nothing that stood out beyond the fact that everything was limited and formulated into boring clumps and the only promise of anything unusual was through taking Deathwing or Ravenwing armies, which were bland and practically unplayable in anything but the most friendly, balanced of environments.

Basically the book was one step closer to chess and three steps further from miniature gaming. Only the most blissfully ignorant people thought that GW would truly continue to neuter their codices in this fashion and every dire prediction I made at the time I got the first pre-release Dark Angel book into my store was proved correct.

I'd say that Army book Orcs & goblins is not nearly as bad as the Dark Angel book, but there are still some worrying indicators for us O&G players that I doubt will be followed through with later books.

My opinion.

Captainbastard
20-02-2011, 18:19
Most books have a tendency to "copy and paste" the old background, and even worse, instead of actually having a background for the army, just have a background for a few "superhero" characters. Warriors of chaos is not the background to the army, it is the background to a few unkillable, superhero, cheese fest characters.

The thing is if they really did give every other army book 40 magic items, that would be a new low even by GW standards. I don't think even GW could get away with that without it hitting their reputation even worse than Dark Elves in 7th edition. That's why I am slightly more optimistic.

Imagine if they did go back to having separate magic items in every army, and left orcs with the same 8 magic items. It would be like openly admiting "our system is totally out of control, our playtesting is totally pointless and our games designers have the mentality of greedy children." I think it would be a really bad move.

Shimmergloom
21-02-2011, 06:45
I think this is our point. That's exactly what they did in 7th edition.

They claimed the new points costs for greenskin infantry and cav. were the new standard. That everyone would have especially their cav. point adjusted to make them less powerful.

2 months later an empire book rolls out with no increases in points and in fact the empire knight remained 23pts and core, just 1 pt more than an orc boar boy.

If you think that GW won't just ignore what they are claiming here with the 8 magic item debacle, then I do not know what to say to you.

Because they will do it and then their will be no shortage of people claiming that we were always at war with Eurasia.

Captainbastard
21-02-2011, 13:35
I think this is our point. That's exactly what they did in 7th edition.

They claimed the new points costs for greenskin infantry and cav. were the new standard. That everyone would have especially their cav. point adjusted to make them less powerful.

2 months later an empire book rolls out with no increases in points and in fact the empire knight remained 23pts and core, just 1 pt more than an orc boar boy.

If you think that GW won't just ignore what they are claiming here with the 8 magic item debacle, then I do not know what to say to you.

Because they will do it and then their will be no shortage of people claiming that we were always at war with Eurasia.

OK, prove it.

Dai-Mongar
21-02-2011, 13:50
Nobody will be proving anything until TK comes out. The unfortunate thing would be if TK has a radically different magic system that requires several new arcane items alone, bumping their number of MIs up, causing forum dwellers to wail and gnash their teeth.

Gromdal
21-02-2011, 15:55
It wont last. Sadly.

Soon the new army books will have many more magic items again.

Urgat
21-02-2011, 16:16
If the TK have more items, it'll be one big WTF moment. If it's to be released in may, certainly it's already written? Why would they change their mind when the OnG book hasn't even been released yet (and there's been no raction from customers besides some nerdrage going on on internet)? Realistically, the TK have to have few items too. If they don't, well, I'm at a loss for words.

UberBeast
21-02-2011, 17:33
Even if the TK are also limited in items, is that really the direction gamers want to see warhammer go in? Is it going to be at the point where we are finding people who don't want to get a new book because the newer ones just don't have the options that make the game fun?

Honestly, I don't think that the common magic items are enough of a substitute, mainly because of how hard it is to balance point costs and usefulness between so many armies.

Captainbastard
21-02-2011, 19:24
Even if the TK are also limited in items, is that really the direction gamers want to see warhammer go in? Is it going to be at the point where we are finding people who don't want to get a new book because the newer ones just don't have the options that make the game fun?

Honestly, I don't think that the common magic items are enough of a substitute, mainly because of how hard it is to balance point costs and usefulness between so many armies.

I think it is using units that makes the game fun, not who can build the best magic item combo to either rule the magic phase or beat the opponents general.

I don't think there is a problem with balancing points and usefullness. If anything cheap champions can simply be given very cheap items. The old army books never had a balanced system for magic items, most of them were completely broken at the end of 7th edition.

Players who remember 5th edition could tell you that having fewer magic items in a book rarely made the game less "fun." If anything I barely cared about the items I found in the book back then because the items that came with the rules were perfectly ample.

I am suspicious when players say that magic items make the game fun. Those same kinds of players will often think that having a small army with the maximum amount of monsters, special rules, wizards, war machines, and the fewest number of troops in "fun."

If anything, warhammer is designed to be a wargame where two armies fight, not a game of magic cards where two players fight it out to see who can pull off the most combos and special rules to break the game.

xxRavenxx
21-02-2011, 19:38
It is nice to have a "big angry sword of chopping +3" on your general. Its exciting and your inner child goes "yay! my general is awesome."

I dont see why you need sixty options in your book to acomplish that though.

I do slightly wish some of the more unique items hadn't gone. (One hit wonder style), but I dont think I'll miss them too much in the end.

As has been said: The core book contains plenty of stuff for you to use.

Shimmergloom
21-02-2011, 20:46
Sigh.

You people defending this decision are the same people who were jumping up and down in happiness, because 8th started to fix the imbalance problems from 7th.

And now you are defending the decision to go down the road of creating 7th all over again.

Leogun_91
21-02-2011, 20:53
Some people are happy with any change to the rules, regardless. Just checking if you are one of them. :pAnd some are displeased with any change to the rules, regardless.

Chaos Undecided
21-02-2011, 20:58
I think they might be able to keep the pattern til they get around to the Dwarves again which could be anyones guess (though I'd like to think it might be next on the list after TK, OK, and WE)

Dai-Mongar
21-02-2011, 20:59
It is nice to have a "big angry sword of chopping +3" on your general. Its exciting and your inner child goes "yay! my general is awesome."

I dont see why you need sixty options in your book to acomplish that though.

I do slightly wish some of the more unique items hadn't gone. (One hit wonder style), but I dont think I'll miss them too much in the end.

As has been said: The core book contains plenty of stuff for you to use.

This is my view exactly. How many armies had access to a 50 pt magic weapon that ignored armour saves before? Seemed like just about every army did, so why not have it as a common item? Quite a few of the army book items do something very similar to (if not exactly the same as) one of the common items.

xxRavenxx
21-02-2011, 21:07
Sigh.

You people defending this decision are the same people who were jumping up and down in happiness, because 8th started to fix the imbalance problems from 7th.

And now you are defending the decision to go down the road of creating 7th all over again.

Why does removing lots of magic items from the army book cause imbalance?... or recreate 7th?

Avian
21-02-2011, 21:16
And some are displeased with any change to the rules, regardless.
Roughly 25% of the player mass, to be exact.

Captainbastard
21-02-2011, 21:55
Sigh.

You people defending this decision are the same people who were jumping up and down in happiness, because 8th started to fix the imbalance problems from 7th.

And now you are defending the decision to go down the road of creating 7th all over again.

The thing is you believe that ANY change in the armybooks is simply a way of going back to the powercreep of 7th. No matter what they had done with the book you would have said that it was bound to lead back to the powercreep of
7th.

We don't know for certain that they will return to 7th. According to you they definetely will - you may be right. However, there is nothing in the new armybook to suggest that they will.

If the book is too overpowered - "they are returning to 7th"
If the book is too underpowered - "they are retrning to 7th."
If the book is balanced - "they are returing to 7th":wtf:

I think you are being a martyr.

Shimmergloom
21-02-2011, 23:31
Why does removing lots of magic items from the army book cause imbalance?... or recreate 7th?

Read the thread title. That's not what will cause imbalance. The argument we are having is that GW will not follow through on this and that they will be back to giving armies full sections of magic items in a book or 2.

Shimmergloom
21-02-2011, 23:32
The thing is you believe that ANY change in the armybooks is simply a way of going back to the powercreep of 7th. No matter what they had done with the book you would have said that it was bound to lead back to the powercreep of
7th.

We don't know for certain that they will return to 7th. According to you they definetely will - you may be right. However, there is nothing in the new armybook to suggest that they will.

If the book is too overpowered - "they are returning to 7th"
If the book is too underpowered - "they are retrning to 7th."
If the book is balanced - "they are returing to 7th":wtf:

I think you are being a martyr.

They do it EVERY single cycle with both game systems.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the pattern. GW is not grown up enough to NOT power creep as soon as they can.

Captainbastard
22-02-2011, 00:09
They do it EVERY single cycle with both game systems.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the pattern. GW is not grown up enough to NOT power creep as soon as they can.

The basis for your argument is about things which have happened in previous editions (particularly 7th). You do not know that 8th edition will have such a severe power creep, and until we are at least a few books in this is mere speculation.

I agree that there is too much power creep in many editions. I think it was much worse in 4th and 5th than it was in 7th. We also do not know what kind of power creep it would be. It might be monsters, it might be cheap infantry, it might be special characters. But there is no proof that it will be magic items.

Captainbastard
22-02-2011, 00:14
Read the thread title. That's not what will cause imbalance. The argument we are having is that GW will not follow through on this and that they will be back to giving armies full sections of magic items in a book or 2.

I expect there will be some power creep, but it will not necessaraly be as bad as 7th edition. The whole thread is based upon speculation.

logan054
22-02-2011, 00:25
The basis for your argument is about things which have happened in previous editions (particularly 7th). You do not know that 8th edition will have such a severe power creep, and until we are at least a few books in this is mere speculation.

I think its a logical assumption based on army books from past edition (and not just 7th ed warhammer), as much as people hate to admit the reason why they buy a lot of things is because of how over powered they are, its why every skaven player ran out and bought a HBA rather than keeping their army the same. Honestly I don't think suddenly after 18 years of playing they are going to change that design model, I think if that was the case I think a lot of errata would have been differently.

Lord Inquisitor
22-02-2011, 00:37
its why every skaven player ran out and bought a HBA rather than keeping their army the same.
Ran out and scratchbuilt one or bought something suitable from a different company you mean? ;) Not releasing the HPA with the first wave seemed very silly if they deliberately made it overpowered.

Captainbastard
22-02-2011, 00:40
I think its a logical assumption based on army books from past edition (and not just 7th ed warhammer), as much as people hate to admit the reason why they buy a lot of things is because of how over powered they are, its why every skaven player ran out and bought a HBA rather than keeping their army the same. Honestly I don't think suddenly after 18 years of playing they are going to change that design model, I think if that was the case I think a lot of errata would have been differently.

I think you confuse the idea that something is likely to happen with proof that it will happen. Based on previous editions can we say that there is likely to be a power creep? Yes, but not neccesaraly as bad as 7th. The power creep between 6th and 7th was much less harsh than between 4th and 5th, so on that basis can we say it will be even less severe in 8th and 9th? - Not really. We can only speculate.

Also power creep happens in different ways. In some editions it was uber-knights, in some editions it was special characters. On the current trend of the kind of models they seem to be making in 8th it seems likely that it will be monster sized models.

However, we cannot say for sure that just because there will be a power creep it will necessaraly be magic items.

The last time they kept magic items mainly out of the list (4th and 5th), they did not give one army 50 magic items. Some armies had a dozen more than others, but apart from dwarfs who only use ruins most of the armies had a similar number of items. So judging by the only previous editions that contained fewer magic items in the books, they will not revert back to 50 magic items.

So when people say that they will suddenly give one army 50 magic items towards the middle of 8th, they are assuming that the power creep will manifest itself in a PARTICULAR way. I think it is more likely to be big monsters rather than magic items.

UberBeast
22-02-2011, 01:00
The real problem here is that we are losing options. Saying that the game is more balanced because there are fewer options for GW to make mistakes on is simply throwing in the towel and lowering our own expectations. I don't think the game will ever be balanced, but so long as I still have options that make it so I'm not stuck playing the exact same game over and over again I can accept that and just have fun experimenting and trying things out.

The fewer options available to players, the faster the internet decides the best list and the less time we have before 8th edition gets boring.

Captainbastard
22-02-2011, 01:05
The real problem here is that we are losing options. Saying that the game is more balanced because there are fewer options for GW to make mistakes on is simply throwing in the towel and lowering our own expectations. I don't think the game will ever be balanced, but so long as I still have options that make it so I'm not stuck playing the exact same game over and over again I can accept that and just have fun experimenting and trying things out.

The fewer options available to players, the faster the internet decides the best list and the less time we have before 8th edition gets boring.

I think people who are so obsessed with magic items should play magic cards instead of warhammer. You will probably find it more interesting.

Captainbastard
22-02-2011, 01:08
The internet does not always "decide the best list." It shows you what powergamers like to have in their army, but it does not always show you what is tactically the best.

For example people who use more core units sometimes do very well in tournements. Certain types of armies are not tried out because the power gamers assume that they won't work and don't know how to use them.

logan054
22-02-2011, 01:16
Ran out and scratchbuilt one or bought something suitable from a different company you mean? ;) Not releasing the HPA with the first wave seemed very silly if they deliberately made it overpowered.

I wonder how many people went a bought a skaven army because of how over powered it was, bought up some of the warlightning cannons, converted some HPA's from other GW models (because thats terrible for sales!) so they could use them in GW or throne of skulls tournament. Not as a silly as you might first think because I bet you those same people went out and bought the official GW one because it looked better than the one they created!


I think you confuse the idea that something is likely to happen with proof that it will happen.

I think your confusing the idea of what a assumption is, I make no such claim its proof, I merely saying its hardly surprising that anyone who has played GW games for a few editions is pessimistic

UberBeast
22-02-2011, 01:18
I think people who are so obsessed with magic items should play magic cards instead of warhammer. You will probably find it more interesting.

Go play checkers then. Magic is always going to be a part of Warhammer.


The internet does not always "decide the best list." It shows you what powergamers like to have in their army, but it does not always show you what is tactically the best.

For example people who use more core units sometimes do very well in tournements. Certain types of armies are not tried out because the power gamers assume that they won't work and don't know how to use them.

What I'm saying is that even in casual gaming, fewer options means a shorter life for the game. I like to try out lots of things, lots of different units and lots of magic weapon combinations. Sometimes I build my list around a theme, sometimes magic weapons make that theme more interesting.

logan054
22-02-2011, 01:23
What I'm saying is that even in casual gaming, fewer options means a shorter life for the game. I like to try out lots of things, lots of different units and lots of magic weapon combinations. Sometimes I build my list around a theme, sometimes magic weapons make that theme more interesting.

In my experience the way people general switch it up is by starting a new army and not just changing a few items about.

UberBeast
22-02-2011, 01:31
In my experience the way people general switch it up is by starting a new army and not just changing a few items about.

Maybe this is the standard GW is trying to achieve by reducing the amount of time people like myself can have fun toying with the available options?

logan054
22-02-2011, 01:36
Its been this way for some time as far as I knew, wasnt the case so much when you had one big chaos army but then again I tend to use more troops than characters!

Captainbastard
22-02-2011, 01:44
Go play checkers then. Magic is always going to be a part of Warhammer.



What I'm saying is that even in casual gaming, fewer options means a shorter life for the game. I like to try out lots of things, lots of different units and lots of magic weapon combinations. Sometimes I build my list around a theme, sometimes magic weapons make that theme more interesting.

Magic is a part of warhammer, as are magic items. They are certainly not the only thing which differentiates warhammer from checkers. I was not saying that magic is not important, but that magic items are relatively unimportant. Most of them do essenstially the same thing- make heros better in combat, improve units, or improve your chance of casting a spell.

I also like to build a list around a theme, but I don't think having different magic itmes will spoil that theme.

Magic items are certainly not the most interesting part of chosing different options for a list. They do give you different options, but they are not the most interesting way of giving players different options.