Topic: 8th Edition Revisions. 3 Suggestions per man.

[mr chumley warner]

OK 8th , let's do this, keep it alive with some revisions. Minor revisions. 3 Suggestions per man.

Mine :

1. MR covers big spells like Dwellers.
2. Missile Troops can fire in 3 ranks.
3. Chargers get ASF

Edit: Once we have 100 posts, I could pool them all onto a spreadsheet and we could stage a vote, then implement the top 10 voted for. In a PDF.

[Padre]

I like those. How about:

1. No silly TLoS looking through ac model's legs etc, but a sensible LoS rule
2. Sensible and balanced points values (tho' 3 rank shooting might help massively here)
3. No steadfast if disrupted.

[Cal1989]

1. Remove move or fire from hand held weapons and replace with slow to fire. Long range penalty should only apply when shooting upto an additional 50% of the weapon's stated range (A longbow say Has a range of 30" but can shoot up to 45" only suffering -1 to hit beyond 30").

2. Cavalry to gain impact hits on the charge (this is negated if the unit is armed with spears/pikes etc.) A cavalry unit that makes a successful charge negates steadfast on the turn it charges.

3. No test or die spells - MR counts, ward save counts, perhaps regular troops can flee from vortexes to avoid being hit by them.

[Padre]

I like your No. 1 Cal1989. I reenact and we can load our matchlock muskets whilst marching and maneouvring. When we 'cast about our muskets' we are not supposed to rest the the butt on the ground because of the fact we could be moving. If we get charged whilst unloaded, however, there's little we can do (other than enter melee or run). So yeah, spot on. Interestingly we used to have a house rule that Move or Fire could always fire in their first turn of the game, even if they moved, as they began the battle already loaded.

[Shadespyre]

We use the ready loaded house rule as well, partly cos it makes sense, partly cos a lot of our regulars have dwarves! 

3 suggestions? I'd have to think hard about that, as there are so many little tweaks that would help.

[Warlord]

Everyone is going to mention steadfast disruption, so I would suggest everyone doesn't list it here otherwise you are wasting your 3 wishes.

To Chumley - just include it.



1 - Cavalry have 4 models to a rank. Cavalry and monstrous infantry only require 1 rank to disrupt. Require 2 ranks to disrupt a horde same as infantry.

2 - No limit on rank bonuses. Monstrous infantry can only contribute 1 attack in the 3rd rank of a horde unit.

3 - Charge distance is Double Movement +D6. Failed charge is Movement +D6.

Bonus - As Monsters lose wounds, they also lose attacks.

[shavixmir]

The first three posts say it all:
- MR can be used against all forms of magical death / pain spells
- ranked units flank charging disrupt steadfast
- charging units have ASF except against spear / pike / halberd units (on foot) if they're charging them head on

[mr chumley warner]

Keep em coming, we have some goodies here

[Oxycutor]

1 - Cavalry have 2 wounds
2 - a unit with 10 or more wounds flank or rear disrupts  (and as already pointed out disrupt shuold break steadfast)
3 - ASF adds 2 Inititaive, ASL subtracts 2 initiative, charge adds 1 Initative

[Rein]

I can not believe this:

Everyone is going to mention steadfast disruption, so I would suggest everyone doesn't list it here otherwise you are wasting your 3 wishes.

Why does everybody think this is relevant ? I have never encountered this to be relevant. I played in a campaign where they houseruled this in. It happened exactly: 0 times. Who of you is playing this 1 massive block of infantry without stubborn (maybe deathstar?) ? Most stars use stubborn, which is supreme to steadfast anyway. Could as well just make the rule: Don't play skaven slaves, or state troops.

MC have all the rules of C (Cavalry). Giving them this:  A cavalry unit that makes a successful charge negates steadfast on the turn it charges. makes MC far to strong.

mine are:
1. Let all ridden mounts have the highest T and W of the combined model and give horses 2 wounds.
2. Bring back unit strength (=number of wounds)
3. Give weapons more and less support attacks (great weapons no support attacks for instance)

[Battlekruse]

1) Only front rank can attack, (No supporting attack!), only spears allow fight in two ranks. High/Dark/Wood Elfs can fight with 2x ranks ekstra if armed with spear
2) Ogre Kingdoms get removed and replaced with Chaos Dwarfs.
3) Dogs of War returned as a army and as troops for other armies.

[knightofthelance]

1. Return to the terrain/movement rules of earlier editions. Terrain should slow you down not kill a random number of models of inconsistent importance.

[Jomppexx]

2) Ogre Kingdoms get removed and replaced with Chaos Dwarfs.

Wow... Just wow...
Chaos Dwarfs are a mistake.

[mr chumley warner]

SOme very solid suggestions, and some random ones lol

[emcdunna]

1) alternating activations (like in bolt action) where you issue an order to a unit, then I issue an order to one of my units, and so on.

2) a new characteristic value called "discipline" that is basically like leadership except it is only used for things like swift reform, staying organized in combat, shooting in extra ranks, or restraining frenzy and things of that nature.
Mainly, there should be a difference between courage and discipline.

3) simpler combat, shooting and magic. Just lessen the total number of modifiers for everything, less special rules that could be replaced with simpler rules that basically do the same thing.


I am currently 30% done writing a ruleset from the ground up that incorporates all of these changes. It should be a complete standalone game where you can play warhammer in a new way, but still have the fantasy battle aspect of previous editions.

[Deuce]

1. Remove pre-measuring.

2. Scrap the lot and replace it with a scaled-up version of the Warmaster rules. 

[Battlekruse]

Wow... Just wow...
Chaos Dwarfs are a mistake.

Ogre Kingdoms are a bigger mistake then Chaos Dwarfs.

Beside mercenary ogres from Dogs of War would be nice option for most armies.

[emcdunna]

I don't see why you can't just field dwarves, give them chaos marks, let runesmiths use lore of metal/ashay/whateever, throw in some goblins + monsters, and just roll with it.

Also, I think a lot of factions should be allowed to field ogre mercenaries as long as there's a tiny chance they betray you and become enemy units during the game (think End times Thanqual style)

[Shadespyre]

Personally, I think deciding what armies should or shouldn't be in the game is irrelevant to a rules discussion.

Sensible rules for allied forces and mixed force composition in general would be worth a look, but again, I'm not sure it's a core rules issue.

Does anyone think that acknowledging that D&D happened and that there are dice with more or less than 6 sides would be useful to the game? Or is the d6 one of the things that makes WHFB what it is?

[emcdunna]

D6 are very very available. Are there other dice? Yes! There are. But the other dice are not that fun to roll 40 of IMO. Do you own 40 d8's? Or d12's? I feel like you can't base the whole system off of one of those AND have units that get more than 10 attacks a turn.

[Deuce]

While I retain a fondness for d100s, I think retaining the d6 is a good idea for availability, as emcdunna says, and also for accessibility. D6s are familiar to anyone who's played board games, while other dice are weird and scary and just another thing that might put newcomers off. Admittedly without GW support whether newcomers are going to be plentiful is a good question, but if the system is good enough, who knows.

The other issue of course is whether in a mass battle tabletop wargame (which I think the majority of us are probably agreed WFB should be, if not necessarily on such a titanic scale as 8th was at times) the degree of granularity from a d>6 is actually desirable or whether it would clog up the system and slow everything down.

Perhaps also worth noting that 2nd edition 40K did use dice of a greater variety and that didn't seem to be a resounding success - although whether 3rd edition actually improved upon 2nd edition or whether it was 40K's Age of Sigmar moment is debatable and not worth getting into here 

[Warlord]

Wow... Just wow...
Chaos Dwarfs are a mistake.

Ogre Kingdoms are a bigger mistake then Chaos Dwarfs.

Agree.
First iteration in 6th edition were flavoursome and thoughtful.
Second iteration in 8th edition were obscene.

Chaos Dwarves deserve a return. But its not a core rulebook choice.

[Ambrose]

If I had to create/choose only three, I like a combination of the first two responses and impact hits.

1 - MR covers all spells
2 - No steadfast if disrupted.
3 - All cavalry, monster cavalry, etc. have impact hits at the strength of their mount.

Ambrose

[CarolineWellwater]

(( Warlord,

I'm assuming that you want this initial batch of suggestions for the Main Rule Book... and will address Army Books in future iterations.

Here are my three suggestions.

1) Irresistible Force can be countered... by either a Dispel Scroll, or a Dispel "cast" with Irresistible Force.

2) If a Lord / Hero character causes Terror, any unit they are in also causes Terror.  Right now, only Fear is defined as transferring to the unit as well.  Terror is... unanswered.

3) Counter-Charge as a Charge Reaction.  If the charged unit passes a Leadership test, that unit can Counter-Charge the unit charging it. ))

[emcdunna]

I don't think you even need to counter IF as long as you take a worst miscast based on how many dice were rolled.

My suggestion:
2 dice, +2 to miscast result.
3 dice, +1 to miscast result
4 dice, the usual roll on the table
5 dice, -1 to the miscast result
6 or more dice, -2 to the miscast result.

What does this do? Well you are more likely to get dimensional cascade or other nasty miscast attempts if there's a negative modifier on the miscast table roll.

Also, miscasting on 2 or 3 dice has less of a chance for bad things to happen (who here has miscasted fireball on 2 dice and dimensional cascaded their wizard into the warp??)