Topic: Dusting off Army...which rules to use?

[Laerniss]

My Empire Army has been neglected; sitting inactive for years.  No more!!!

I intend to clean them up, restore lost limbs, touch up paint and throw them on a gaming table against my brother's greenskins before the end of the year.

Neither of us are interested in a Age of Sigmar ruleset match. So, other options:

a) 9th Age rules which I downloaded at my brother's suggestion. Seems a logical successor old style Warhammer...but I am not sure I want my first match in years to be a ruleset/army book that I've never played under before.

b) Prior Warhammer editions for which we have rules and Army Books : Ravaging Hordes, 6th Edition and 7th Edition (skipped 8th Edition). I've played matches before so it could be a good choice for a solid game. Both of us should be able to dig up old army lists for a good nostalgic battle.

c) Different rulesets entirely.  I've been a collecting and playing with miniatures from Ral Partha (D&D) and Ironwind Metals (Battletech) for years. Ral Partha had a system called "Iron Winds of War" which I still have a copy of....now they are pitching a new system called Chaos Wars which seems to be a more complex version of their Iron Winds system.  Again, would I really want my first battle to be a system I'm not experienced with.

So, active gamers; my question to you is if you have a choice, just for a fun match, what rules do you use?  9th age?  A prior Warhammer edition?  Something else entirely?

[Warlord]

Jist use 8th ed until you get back into the swing of gaming again. Easily accessible.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

I would suggest to use the edition you are most familiar with. The 6th/7th edition rules (7th being an improved 6th) were very balanced - it was the power creep in some 7th edition Army Books that ruined that balance, but that was not the case for the Empire or O&G Army Book.

[jtrowell]

Well, it's hard to suggest something new when you say that you would prefer something that you already know, but myself I strongly recommant Kings of Wars by Mantic, you can use your existing models without problems, the core rules can be freely downloaded, and while the sample army lists only include parts of the units options (still playable, you just get a partial list of the units), you have the complete rules for all units and options in the excellent free army editor at kow2.easyarmy.com

The game is also much easier to learn that Warhammer ever was, and games are faster too, to the point that it might be easier to you to start KoW than (re)learn an older Warhammer edition.

Any warhammer army will have equivalent in Kings of War, and you should also easily be able to use your other models.


I have a huge collection of d&d miniatures and reaper models (thanks to the bones Kickstarters) that give me a lots of options for heroes and monsters, and even some units.

With Kings of War allied rules, your  Ral Partha models might probably be useable to start a small allied detachment to use (and maybe later expand into a full army)

For exemple a KoW player might use a small allied force composed of a necromancer, a zombie horde and some other undeads to represent a local Empire lord allied with a necromancer (or an human army from Sylvania)

I won"t insist more  and let others make their own suggestions, but if you have questions about Kings of War don't hesitate to ask.

[Zygmund]

The most classic Warhammer Fantasy Battles system I'd recommend is the 3rd edition. Maybe not balanced, but has tons of character.

6th/7th ed WFB was about balanced. The books that went over the top were, I think, 7th ed Skaven and DE. Some problematic individual units in other books too.

Then again if you like 6th/7th ed, Mantic's KoW is a very good alternative. I strongly feel it has the same spirit, but is one step simpler and plays considerably faster. I fully concur with what jtrowell wrote above. You have basically three human armies, and while none of them is 100% the WHFB Empire list, they provide very nice uses for an Empire collection. And there's the KoW Historical, which gives even more and extremely fluffy options for a classic Empire army with the Swiss/Landsknecht looks, like the Holy Roman Empire list. You can use those in the fantasy version too, and indeed the Historical lists do contain some fantasy elements, like an Ogre style unit for most armies, HRE included.

8th ed is still around in clubs and played by many with minimal changes. Personally, I found it bland and unbalanced, and especially the Empire suffered from some of the characterful units being weak. Like Handgunners and Mortar. (Then again Empire was quite tough during the 1.5 years after the BRB release but before the new AB, i.e. 7th ed AB with 8th ed rules.)

T9A is more than fine-tuned 8th ed, it's balanced but also a kind of competitive version, where you can fine-tune and buff your units more than in the 8th. Then again you have the 2016 0.9-1.1 versions (available somewhere) which are re-balanced 8th ed. But that system is also evolving into something intentionally different some time later this year, with the advent of the 2.0.

If you hated AoS when it came out, you might want to check where it stand nowadays, with the General's Handbook and points system. Still not everybody's cake (what is?), but I hear many oldtimer WHFB players who absolutely hated the first 4-pager rules have now found the system rewarding. Still sort of beer & pretzels, but not a bring-a-monster-and-beat-the-other-army kind of a kids' game anymore.


In the end, your group of gaming friends will help you to decide where to go. It's a rich era to play Fantasy Battles, only somewhat confused without a single dominant game system.

-Z

[Artobans Ghost]

Quote Zygmund
'If you hated AoS when it came out, you might want to check where it stand nowadays, with the General's Handbook and points system. Still not everybody's cake (what is?), but I hear many oldtimer WHFB players who absolutely hated the first 4-pager rules have now found the system rewarding. Still sort of beer & pretzels, but not a bring-a-monster-and-beat-the-other-army kind of a kids' game anymore.'

This seems to be true. I just finished some work for my friend who was old school fantasy and top tier in the tournement circuit. We went to many tourneys together but he had dropped AoS like a bag of dung but just a week ago went to a tournement with their matched play and thouroughly enjoyed it. Said they now have best general for each faction instead of overall (which is usually his place) so he just took best chaos general. Anyway point is as zygmund said, it's a different game now.

[Laerniss]

Thanks for all the replies....

Jist use 8th ed until you get back into the swing of gaming again. Easily accessible.

Definitely a possibility, since it is a friend game with my brother I don't think he'll complain about me using an out of date 7th edition Army Book.

I would suggest to use the edition you are most familiar with. The 6th/7th edition rules (7th being an improved 6th) were very balanced - it was the power creep in some 7th edition Army Books that ruined that balance, but that was not the case for the Empire or O&G Army Book.

I enjoyed 6th and 7th edition play, which is when I acquired most of my collection. I got turned off by the power creep and wasn't playing much when 8th edition came out.

Well, it's hard to suggest something new when you say that you would prefer something that you already know, but myself I strongly recommant Kings of Wars by Mantic, you can use your existing models without problems, the core rules can be freely downloaded, and while the sample army lists only include parts of the units options (still playable, you just get a partial list of the units), you have the complete rules for all units and options in the excellent free army editor at kow2.easyarmy.com

Then again if you like 6th/7th ed, Mantic's KoW is a very good alternative. I strongly feel it has the same spirit, but is one step simpler and plays considerably faster. I fully concur with what jtrowell wrote above. You have basically three human armies, and while none of them is 100% the WHFB Empire list, they provide very nice uses for an Empire collection. And there's the KoW Historical, which gives even more and extremely fluffy options for a classic Empire army with the Swiss/Landsknecht looks, like the Holy Roman Empire list. You can use those in the fantasy version too, and indeed the Historical lists do contain some fantasy elements, like an Ogre style unit for most armies, HRE included.
-Z

Thanks for the suggestion, I will check it out for future gaming possibilities!

T9A is more than fine-tuned 8th ed, it's balanced but also a kind of competitive version, where you can fine-tune and buff your units more than in the 8th. Then again you have the 2016 0.9-1.1 versions (available somewhere) which are re-balanced 8th ed. But that system is also evolving into something intentionally different some time later this year, with the advent of the 2.0.
-Z

I've never been eager for competitive games, wargaming is suppose to be my relaxing hobby. Still, it also depends on who is on the other side of the table so maybe I'll drop by one of the stores next time they have an event to see if they are hardcore or casual.

If you hated AoS when it came out, you might want to check where it stand nowadays, with the General's Handbook and points system. Still not everybody's cake (what is?), but I hear many oldtimer WHFB players who absolutely hated the first 4-pager rules have now found the system rewarding. Still sort of beer & pretzels, but not a bring-a-monster-and-beat-the-other-army kind of a kids' game anymore.
-Z

No hate for Age of Sigmar, just unfamiliar.  I stopped playing Warhammer at local gaming stores during 8th edition. One of my local stores had a active Battletech group which I found much more enjoyable to play in a store setting or Zombicide at home.

[ZeroTwentythree]

I was initially anti-Kings of War, but after playing a couple of games of KoW 2nd ed. I was sold. Fun game, plays like a battle game should, without getting bogged down in complex/contradictory rules, and it is pretty adaptable in terms of fielding a big variety of armies.

The original Ral Partha Chaos Wars was one of the first miniatures wargames I played. (Before Warhammer.) I still have the old rules. I've been curious about checking out the new version.

As far as WFB, if you're free of any restrictions for choosing which version you play, pick your favorite! I'd love to play 6th again!

[jtrowell]

I skipped 6th edition, but from what I know, playing using the army lists in the ravening hordes booklet is relatively balanced (for Warhammer, other more modern wargames like Kings of War are more balanced than Warhammer ever was).

"Ravening hordes" was a small booklet they released with 6th edition to serve as a stop gap so that all armies had rules under the new system.
The lists in this booklet where maybe slightly "bland" compared to the army books that came later (read "not many special rules"), but with all armies released at the same time they where relatively balanced compared to other Warhammer editions (including later 6th edition and later 7th edition where GW didn't keep to any one design for long resulting in power creep or similar changes in general balance)

[patsy02]

I've thought about what it would be like to try 6th ed. using only Ravening Hordes. I always found the idea of small and consise rule sets like that compelling.

[Von Trinkenessen]

I use a set of rules called "Condotierre" by Wargames Foundry for my current project - The Von Trinkenessen Chronicles - which pitches my various empire, tilian, estalian and border princes  armies against each other against the backdrop of the Italian renaissance and wars 1500 - 1535.
Whilst 'historical' it has enough holes in it to plug with fantasy elements.

[jtrowell]

I've thought about what it would be like to try 6th ed. using only Ravening Hordes. I always found the idea of small and consise rule sets like that compelling.

Sorry if it looks like I am too agressively advising Kings of War, but in a way it's even more of a cleaned Warhammer than any warhammer edition ever was and might match the "small and consise rule set"  part even better *from my point of view*.

It's not surprising, as the core KoW rules have been written by Allesio Calvatore who was in charge of rule dev at GW during the late 6th edition and early 7th.  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alessio_Cavatore)

With KoW he made a wargame that is in several ways a sprirital successor of Warhammer 6th and 7th editions while not falling in the traps of old Warhammer pseudo skirmish system (things like managing each solider individually are an aberration in a mass battle ranked wargame), and while I hated 7th edition, KoW managed for me to implement the same ideas while dodging the problems.

[ZeroTwentythree]

I second everything jtrowell just wrote. 

[Zygmund]

Unsurprisingly, I'm in the jtrowell & 023 train. At least give KoW a try, so you can decide for yourself. 

-Z

[jtrowell]

To be fair, there are reason why some people still prefer 8th edition or the 9th age, for some players the large (excessive ?) amount of detail and extreme number of special rules everywhere are part of the charm of the game.

Someone onve wrote something along the lines of
"if you liked Warhammer *because* of its fiddly bits, then 9th age is for you.
If you liked it *despite* the fiddly bits, then Kings of War is for you."

^_^

[ZeroTwentythree]

To be fair, there are reason why some people still prefer 8th edition or the 9th age, for some players the large (excessive ?) amount of detail and extreme number of special rules everywhere are part of the charm of the game.

Someone onve wrote something along the lines of
"if you liked Warhammer *because* of its fiddly bits, then 9th age is for you.
If you liked it *despite* the fiddly bits, then Kings of War is for you."

^_^

I like all sorts of gaming.

I think my problem with 9th Age is that I didn't like WFB8 at all. I gave it a chance -- played for a few years. But I thought it was a failed attempt at reinventing the WFB mechanics -- while still clinging to too much old baggage.

For the excruciating detail side of things, I've been leaning towards the 3rd ed. "Oldhammer" thing... with all of the pros & cons that involves. 

I like KoW for what it is -- and given the chance, I'd be playing that regularly. (Honestly, I'd love to be playing *anything* regularly. Or semi-regularly. Or at all.)

I would also love to give Shadow Storm a try. It's Warlord's "Hail Caesar" with the addition of fantasy. Hail Caesar is more or less an evolution of Warmaster, which I thought was a brilliant game that just needed a few tweaks (which HC mostly took care off -- and then some!) I really think the 2000+/- time period was the golden age of GW. They had Warmaster -- which was a better battle game than WFB ever was, and Mordheim, which was a better skirmish game than WFB ever was. But that was also the WFB6 era, which, in my opinion, was the best version of that game -- a streamlined compromise between detail, simplicity, special rules -- even if it didn't know if it still didn't know if it wanted to be a skirmish or battle game.

[The Peacemaker]

This is how I view it from seeing what type of players have enjoyed the various games:

6th7th edition - players that absolutely love fixed charge distances, and love deleting units 90% of the time on the charge. And like a bit of hero hammer.
8the edition - players that dislike random charges,
 dislike units getting deleted, and like powerful magic. Hero hammer, but the deathstar variant.

9th age - players who loved 8th edition but didn't like powerful magic. And players that love a fairly balanced game.

Kings of war - for the players that like fixed charge distances, however the tactics and morale system mitigate the "charge = delete" feel. Average hero hammer.
And for hobbyists who love dioramas.

AoS - for players that have never played tabletop before(great starter game for this purpose), and for players who are generally not that strategically minded.   .....if you got a strategic mind then AoS might still be fun but you'll play it out quickly(like 1-2 years or less).



These are generalizations of course. Alot of players who enjoyed 7th also really like 9th age, although they are always complaining about wanting fixed charges and more powerful charges.  Basically they want a game of chess with fantasy miniatures.

[Bugman]

To the original OP, play whatever version of warhammer you want to, all the rules can be found on the internet if you look hard enough and TBH why not, you can change and adapt as you see fit and they are free if you can find them!

I can't stand kow (lack of magic/items) and AoS doesn't really do ranked up infantry

I love T9A, it's a got a great rule set which the community are heavily involved with

[Warlord]

@ ThePeacemaker - did you play 6th edition? I would say it was 50% about deleting units, 50% about static CR. i really liked the static CR component of the game, because stacking as much as you can was the stratgic elements of the game. Combined charges and flanking where so very inportant.

My problem is, i like bits of all 3, but not enough of any 1 to commit.

[Doc J]

I like 7th because its the one Im most familiar with, I started out on 6th, but I havent played a game of either in so long that I can barely remember the rules.

[Doc J]

If you hated AoS when it came out, you might want to check where it stand nowadays, with the General's Handbook and points system. Still not everybody's cake (what is?), but I hear many oldtimer WHFB players who absolutely hated the first 4-pager rules have now found the system rewarding. Still sort of beer & pretzels, but not a bring-a-monster-and-beat-the-other-army kind of a kids' game anymore.


-Z

If thats what AoS has become I might be able to get behind it now.

[Bartolo Miachevelia]

I'd suggest 6th edition, which is the most narrative version of Warhammer, perfect for themed armies, no silly units, you could use mercenaries, Kislev, Cult of Ulric themed armies, lot of material which gives you scenarios, skirmish games, siege,campaigns. It feels like historical with fantasy miniatures.

P.S: Aos cultits are so funny!

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

P.S: Aos cultits are so funny!

Freudian slip, if ever I saw one...

[Laerniss]

To the original OP, play whatever version of warhammer you want to, all the rules can be found on the internet if you look hard enough and TBH why not, you can change and adapt as you see fit and they are free if you can find them!

I can't stand kow (lack of magic/items) and AoS doesn't really do ranked up infantry

I love T9A, it's a got a great rule set which the community are heavily involved with

My Empire army core in 6th and 7th was Empire Infantry lead by Warrior Priests/Arch Lectors and supported by small groups of knights/handgunners. Yes, Empire could do well in 6th and 7th with a gunline supported by wizards but I never bought heavy into Wizards (or Griffins/STank/artillery) my hero and item choices were typically choosen to neutralize enemy wizards and heros. VHS and anything that gave MR to the unit.

Gamers that prefer the hero to be the star of their army were better suited to daemons or vampires. I gathered some minis for greenskins and vampire armies, but was never as into those armies as Empire.

Each playstyles had viable army choices...but not every army could be as competitive with any given playstyle. I loved that about Warhammer but GW lost me with all the powercreep and rulebook changes. 9th age is a system I will get some practice with, but I don't have as much free time for games as 10 years ago.

My problem is, i like bits of all 3, but not enough of any 1 to commit.

I have the same problem with bacon/mushroom/jalapeno burgers.  Each topping is great, don't want to eat just one everytime and all three on one burger is too much.

[Warlord]

Sounds like 7th ed might be your best bet then. Suits the playstyle miniatures and experiences you had previously.

Also, that is hilarious.