Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9
Results 161 to 177 of 177

Thread: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

  1. #161
    Veteran Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    89

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Eltharion was always my favorite High Elf character, I loved every aspect of his background. And personally, I liked the evolution to blind Eltharion, and lament that 7th decided to rip that away from us.

  2. #162

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Retrogamer View Post
    Eltharion was always my favorite High Elf character, I loved every aspect of his background. And personally, I liked the evolution to blind Eltharion, and lament that 7th decided to rip that away from us.
    Fricken elf players - always making the discussion about their army.

    Seriously. It isn't just about you.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try the revised and expanded Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.
    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  3. #163
    Veteran Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    89

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Well, players complained that the story wasn't advancing. 6th advanced the story, and players complained that the story advanced. 7th hit the reset button, and players complained that they weren't advancing the storyline. Then we got End Times and AOS.

    I think EVERY story progression in 6th was good, not just the Elven ones. Yes, even Valten.

  4. #164

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Retrogamer View Post
    Well, players complained that the story wasn't advancing. 6th advanced the story, and players complained that the story advanced. 7th hit the reset button, and players complained that they weren't advancing the storyline. Then we got End Times and AOS.

    I think EVERY story progression in 6th was good, not just the Elven ones. Yes, even Valten.
    The interesting thing about this is that GW knows it doesn't have to advance the timeline to make interesting stories. Isn't there a whole sub-genre about the Horus Heresy?

    GW could have done the exact same thing by revisiting historical wars, challenging players to overturn the verdict of history. I mean, that's what historicals gamers do all the time.

    As a bonus, no one gets annoyed because their "baseline" list is still there waiting for them.

    If I ever create a fantasy setting, that's what I'm doing.

    Don't hold your breath, though.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try the revised and expanded Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.
    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  5. #165
    Veteran Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    89

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    The interesting thing about this is that GW knows it doesn't have to advance the timeline to make interesting stories. Isn't there a whole sub-genre about the Horus Heresy?

    GW could have done the exact same thing by revisiting historical wars, challenging players to overturn the verdict of history. I mean, that's what historicals gamers do all the time.

    As a bonus, no one gets annoyed because their "baseline" list is still there waiting for them.

    If I ever create a fantasy setting, that's what I'm doing.

    Don't hold your breath, though.
    Fricken' historicals players, making everything about their playstyle.



    Yeah, one of the cool things that GW did in 6th was encouraging War of the Beard, including showing the differences between how the armies looked then vs. now, including black powder not existing yet. They didn't hit the reset button to get us there, just gave us the option to play it. Warhammer in general was good about that. Most of the special characters that were given rules on the website weren't current, per se, and you were playing them after their demise. I liked the fact that they had that in-built while at the same time establishing things like the Captain of the Black Guard dying in battle with Tyrion in a story in the High Elf book, and if I took the time to look, I'm pretty sure I'd find other examples in the other army books.

    I don't mind advancing the story in places, but it should be a slow burn. Everything they've done to advance the storyline in AOS and 40K recently has been HUGE steps, too huge in my mind.

  6. #166
    Chapter Master
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Galadrin View Post
    Oh crud, you're right, and he's even right there on the cover art of the 4e box set (probably one of the most iconic images of all of 4e). And to make it worse, I even own that dude in shrink! I think I just never realized it was Eltharion... I need to read the special characters section in the army book again more closely...
    If I am not mistaken, the 4th edition boxed set also came with cardboard stand-up of an elf riding a griffon that might resemble a bit Eltharion...
    Who is Griefbringer? Read his poem.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cenyu
    Since World of Warcraft players manage to get themselves killed due to exhaustion, why should Griefbringer not manage to get himself killed with a regiment of table top miniatures. YouŽd be a pioneer.

  7. #167

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Retrogamer View Post
    Fricken' historicals players, making everything about their playstyle.
    The irony here is that I don't care for historical miniatures. I prefer the open-ended nature of fantasy and sci-fi because of the modeling conversions one can do.

    I do a lot of historical boardgames, though.

    Yeah, one of the cool things that GW did in 6th was encouraging War of the Beard, including showing the differences between how the armies looked then vs. now, including black powder not existing yet. They didn't hit the reset button to get us there, just gave us the option to play it. Warhammer in general was good about that. Most of the special characters that were given rules on the website weren't current, per se, and you were playing them after their demise. I liked the fact that they had that in-built while at the same time establishing things like the Captain of the Black Guard dying in battle with Tyrion in a story in the High Elf book, and if I took the time to look, I'm pretty sure I'd find other examples in the other army books.

    I don't mind advancing the story in places, but it should be a slow burn. Everything they've done to advance the storyline in AOS and 40K recently has been HUGE steps, too huge in my mind.
    They didn't advance the storyline - they brought about the Apocalypse!

    Yes, they had historical lists which I think was the way to go for those who bought into the setting. The well-known weaknesses - codex creep, special rules spam and poor balance combined with frequent revisions - are what makes it hard to settle on a definitive edition.

    I think if you were to look at the cleanest rules set (at least that I played), Ravening Hordes 6th takes the trophy.

    No supplements, minimal rules, crisp game play that emphasizes tactics over gotcha lists and heroes. The armies have plenty of flavor, but don't wander off into the weeds of special rules.

    I recall that as each supplement and army book rolled out, even back in the day people claimed RH was the way to play. I've got a soft spot for 5th, but I think RH was the best version they had.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try the revised and expanded Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.
    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  8. #168
    Chapter Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse
    Posts
    2,056

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    The irony here is that I don't care for historical miniatures. I prefer the open-ended nature of fantasy and sci-fi because of the modeling conversions one can do.

    I do a lot of historical boardgames, though.



    They didn't advance the storyline - they brought about the Apocalypse!

    Yes, they had historical lists which I think was the way to go for those who bought into the setting. The well-known weaknesses - codex creep, special rules spam and poor balance combined with frequent revisions - are what makes it hard to settle on a definitive edition.

    I think if you were to look at the cleanest rules set (at least that I played), Ravening Hordes 6th takes the trophy.

    No supplements, minimal rules, crisp game play that emphasizes tactics over gotcha lists and heroes. The armies have plenty of flavor, but don't wander off into the weeds of special rules.

    I recall that as each supplement and army book rolled out, even back in the day people claimed RH was the way to play. I've got a soft spot for 5th, but I think RH was the best version they had.
    I 100% agree!

    But I must just bring the conversation back round to matters elvish...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSCN1099.JPG 
Views:	74 
Size:	278.9 KB 
ID:	234171
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSCN1096.JPG 
Views:	73 
Size:	280.1 KB 
ID:	234172

  9. #169

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar Vaughn View Post
    I 100% agree!

    But I must just bring the conversation back round to matters elvish...
    Wow! That's a lot of color!

    I freely admit that I'm very minimalist in my painting. My friends consider me the king of the "two-tone paint job," though in truth I now usually use three.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try the revised and expanded Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.
    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  10. #170
    Commander Rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    548

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    The irony here is that I don't care for historical miniatures. I prefer the open-ended nature of fantasy and sci-fi because of the modeling conversions one can do.

    I do a lot of historical boardgames, though.



    They didn't advance the storyline - they brought about the Apocalypse!

    Yes, they had historical lists which I think was the way to go for those who bought into the setting. The well-known weaknesses - codex creep, special rules spam and poor balance combined with frequent revisions - are what makes it hard to settle on a definitive edition.

    I think if you were to look at the cleanest rules set (at least that I played), Ravening Hordes 6th takes the trophy.

    No supplements, minimal rules, crisp game play that emphasizes tactics over gotcha lists and heroes. The armies have plenty of flavor, but don't wander off into the weeds of special rules.

    I recall that as each supplement and army book rolled out, even back in the day people claimed RH was the way to play. I've got a soft spot for 5th, but I think RH was the best version they had.
    Going back to this, I was never fond of having a "Story Line" for the game for a few reasons:

    1: It stifles the imagination: I read a while back a plog on here on a guy who made up his entire world around his High Elves. They were still High Elves as you and I would know them, however they were not on Ulthuan nor were they in the Old World Setting. They were on his own world dealing with their own issues. I really liked how much he put into his story line. He is the exception to most of us. Most of us, to including me at one point in time, all had our "Red Dot" on the Warhammer World where our miniatures lived in our heads, and that is where they stayed.

    2: GW doesn't do a great job at it: Ripping off one part of Michael Moorcock, JRR Tolkien, world history, etc., and placing it on a morphed map of earth looks like they were lazy. While a truly dead game, Armies of Arcana had one thing going for them that I liked. They made a whole new world where there were several different continents, that while challenging to navigate, it looked like someone could sail from one continent to the next without running out of food on the trip. Likewise the world was basically a mish mash of civilizations due to an apocalyptic war that almost destroyed the world. So the following would not be nearly much of an issue.

    3: Playing other armies can be a bit of a challenge in the canonical story line like GW's: Not every army is the Empire with armada's of ships that go around the warhammer world and try to conquer the whole world. How do you justify a Tomb King's army fighting a Chaos Dwarf Army? As both are rather reclusive factions in GW's cannon it is rather hard to see how the two would wind up fighting each other. Likewise, why would a Dwarf army fight their long-time ally, according to GW, The Empire? You either have to make up something absurd, or break the cannon.

    This is one of the few good things about the lack of support from GW. We are not "bound" by their story line, when far too many people were bound to it. Hopefully people will start to use their imagination more and make up their own background to their armies like the guy from the first point. As a very big fan of Campaigns, it is my hope that the next time that I run a map campaign, that everyone participating can get more into making up their own story line, other than just an adjunct army from Thorgrim Grudgebearer, or any other famous character that GW made up.
    Quote Originally Posted by fluffymcfluff View Post
    Warhammer for me is more fun when I can drink, smoke and swear at my dice.
    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar Vaughn View Post
    And dont tell me the rules are "Designed" to work better at certain points values, because the rules are many things but Designed aint one of them...
    My miniature blog. http://tinylegions.blogspot.com/
    www.classichammer.com - New Games with Old Rules

  11. #171
    Stick figure on a beach Arnizipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Hasselt, Belgium
    Posts
    10,963

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Aren't point 1 and 3 in direct conflict of each other?

    In my opinion, if the whole Realm Wars thing had just been accessible through a portal on the Warhammer World (maybe even the polar gates?) it would have been a far more elegant solution.
    That way, people who liked the Warhammer World and its status quo storyline could keep playing with it, and people who wanted something more could play in the whole Realm exploration setting.
    Come join the discussion at the Warseer Anime Fan Group

    Quote Originally Posted by MOMUS View Post
    Nah Arni, it's not your fault you're old and cranky

  12. #172
    Commander Rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    548

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Arnizipal View Post
    Aren't point 1 and 3 in direct conflict of each other?

    In my opinion, if the whole Realm Wars thing had just been accessible through a portal on the Warhammer World (maybe even the polar gates?) it would have been a far more elegant solution.
    That way, people who liked the Warhammer World and its status quo storyline could keep playing with it, and people who wanted something more could play in the whole Realm exploration setting.
    I do see your point in that you can use your imagination to figure out a way to make armies attack each other, but hopefully you are seeing the conundrum of playing strictly by the story line does not allow for one to use the imagination or else go down a rabbit hole into "Wonderland." Its kind of like what came first the chicken or the egg. Ultimately I like for my imagination to actually make sense when I am thinking about how my army is getting into contact with another faction, not feel like I am taking an acid trip just to justify how the game came about. I see it as play either in the bounds of the Warhammer World and be limited by point 3 and 1, or be free of the Warhammer World and make up your own relationship with the factions and let point 1 go nuts, and don't care about point 3. It is the reason why I like Campaign games that used Mighty Empires. There you are on a completely different map than the world of Warhammer, there is no history other than what you make of it. All that you have are the base rules of your faction, and you go from there. But ultimately each to their own.
    Quote Originally Posted by fluffymcfluff View Post
    Warhammer for me is more fun when I can drink, smoke and swear at my dice.
    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar Vaughn View Post
    And dont tell me the rules are "Designed" to work better at certain points values, because the rules are many things but Designed aint one of them...
    My miniature blog. http://tinylegions.blogspot.com/
    www.classichammer.com - New Games with Old Rules

  13. #173
    Stick figure on a beach Arnizipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Hasselt, Belgium
    Posts
    10,963

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    In my opinion, it's easy enough to stick to the story of "Faction X stole the McGuffin from faction Y, so faction Y gathered an army and is out for revenge".
    With that simple story Tomb Kings could be invading Naggaroth and Chaos Dwarfs could end up in Loren Forest.

    Most of the battles I play are pickup games anyway. No background justification needed.
    Campaigns are something else of course, but in that case half the fun is coming up with scenario's and justifications for both factions to face off
    Come join the discussion at the Warseer Anime Fan Group

    Quote Originally Posted by MOMUS View Post
    Nah Arni, it's not your fault you're old and cranky

  14. #174

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Arnizipal View Post
    In my opinion, it's easy enough to stick to the story of "Faction X stole the McGuffin from faction Y, so faction Y gathered an army and is out for revenge".
    With that simple story Tomb Kings could be invading Naggaroth and Chaos Dwarfs could end up in Loren Forest.

    Most of the battles I play are pickup games anyway. No background justification needed.
    Campaigns are something else of course, but in that case half the fun is coming up with scenario's and justifications for both factions to face off
    I think The Old World was pretty much an open arena and most factions could find a way to get to each other.

    Obviously, if you want a consistent world, there are alliances that don't really change (unless civil war), so certain combinations simply don't happen.

    The thing is, GW is about selling miniatures first and foremost, the fluff always came second.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try the revised and expanded Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.
    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  15. #175

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    I'm giving this thread a bump because if the Old World is indeed coming back, that might offer some new scenarios that could be "reto-fitted" to earlier editions.

    Another thought would be to take similar armies from different editions and see how the tactics change edition-to-edition.

    By that I mean, grab 1500 points of high elves and 1500 points of orcs, and build similar armies in the different systems and see how the match-ups differ.

    BTW, when I was working on the Conqueror revision, my 'test armies' were the back-of-the-book samples in the 5th ed. books.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try the revised and expanded Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.
    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  16. #176
    Veteran Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    89

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    I'm giving this thread a bump because if the Old World is indeed coming back, that might offer some new scenarios that could be "reto-fitted" to earlier editions.

    Another thought would be to take similar armies from different editions and see how the tactics change edition-to-edition.

    By that I mean, grab 1500 points of high elves and 1500 points of orcs, and build similar armies in the different systems and see how the match-ups differ.

    BTW, when I was working on the Conqueror revision, my 'test armies' were the back-of-the-book samples in the 5th ed. books.
    I've seriously thought about going back and playing the exact same game with all the rules sets from 5th to 8th, and now with whatever this new set coming out winds up being. I'm not sure it'll drastically change my preferences, but it may make me a little less harsh towards other editions.

    May. No promises...

  17. #177

    Re: Some 4th/5th/6th ed. questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Retrogamer View Post
    I've seriously thought about going back and playing the exact same game with all the rules sets from 5th to 8th, and now with whatever this new set coming out winds up being. I'm not sure it'll drastically change my preferences, but it may make me a little less harsh towards other editions.

    May. No promises...
    One difficulty is that some of the armies (particularly in 5th) were really weak. The Empire comes to mind. The kind of army that can win in 5th is basically illegal in 6th.

    There's also the issue of new or changed lists - Undead being split into Vampire Counts and Tomb Kings, for example.

    As winter settles in, I'm looking to do some gaming (using Conqueror, of course) and while I have "army lists" in the book, there's nothing to stop people from mixing and matching. Even though I've had this system out for a couple of years, it still throws me off a little when it happens.

    To give an example, it's perfectly legal to create an army concept based around knights of evil (chaos knights) with an orc retinue and dragonkin (lizardmen) auxilliaries. Whatever your campaign envisions is fine because the units are modular (a working point system! What a concept!).

    Anyhow, it's just funny how much I've internalized the GW concept of army lists all these years later.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try the revised and expanded Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.
    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •