Does the army percentage rules mean that big characters like Malekith wont see the light of day outside of 8000pt games?

So...$75 for the rulebook? $75 for just the plain rulebook, no collector's edition BS or any of that? Is that right?

Well it is pretty huge. Really. MASSIVE. But still, thats loads for just a book!!

Okay got one more thing to say about the book. It is waaaay to heavy. My God, it hurt my wrists just holding it open. The seriously need a mini copy.

I know there will be a lot of haters out there but the new rules seem very interesting and fun...im looking forward to playing.

Minsc wrote:Just a response to a comment last page: Fast Cav can march and shoot now. It's not a rule change.

One of those things I never noticed, I guess...

ZF-

um.... someone mentioned javelins and a range boost. Can someone confirm if they are still 8" or not. or for that matter the changes to blowpipes and skinks in general.

Pip wrote:
I didn't find the random charge range as bad as I thought I would. The game was so much fun to play, the random charges added just enough risk/reward to movement in my oppinion. Especially seeing as terrain no longer slows people down. Failed charges are hilarious. big 10 man kinght unit with a lord about 15" from my loner Alter lord declares a charge. He rolls triple 2s, which gives him a charge distance of 11" so he failed his charge and only moves 2" instead. I would love to say that was a game winning fail but there was plenty of back and forth between the luck of the dice.

I would say the randomness of the charge distance is balanced a bit by being able to pre-measure the distance. You should be able to make an informed decision on attempting the charge.

ZF-

Therion wrote:

On the musicians, yes. Free reform other than they count as moving (So no move or fire weapons).

Thank you! I can't stress how incredible this is for infantry blocks with missile weapons. A unit of 20 Crossbowmen can be in a fighting formation of 5x4 and when not threatened by combat reform to 10x2 and shoot with every model.

You're saying they can do this? Re-form and then fire? That sounds... really scary for my army walking up to them. Ugh!

Therion wrote:Does the flaming rule still exist? What does it do? Does it negate regeneration like before? Are High Elves with Dragon Armour still totally immune to flaming cannonballs?

I checked this one, it's the same as before as far as turning 1 wound into 2, or if you're rolling a dice for wounds, multiplying the result by 2. Which obviously hurts my trees as much as usual . I didn't see anything about regeneration (I don't have models with that ability, and didn't realize that it currently negates it, either!). I will check that next time.

I'm not sure about the other two questions (what regeneration and ethereal are).

Airmaniac wrote:If a unit of Saurus Warriors has Spears, how many attacks does each rank get? Spears will allow them to attack in three ranks, but do the second and third rank only get 1 attack per model? For example if I have a unit of 6x3 Saurus Warriors with Spears, do I get to make 30 attacks (first and second rank, normal attack profile, third rank, single attack regardless) or 24 attacks (first rank, normal attack profile, second and third rank, single attack regardless)?

You get 24 attacks- full attacks with the first rank, 1 "supporting attack" with the second and third ranks. Monstrous infantry (I believe that's what they call them now, referring to ranked ogre-sized units) get full "supporting attacks". So a monstrous infantry unit such as treekin, would get 3 attacks each from the second row. If they have the "horde" rule (6-wide for monstrous infantry, 10-wide for infantry) they get attacks from one additional row- and these are also full attacks for the monstrous infantry. Saurus with spears would simply get 1 attack from an additional row for having horde.

Hopefully that makes sense!

So basically, the Predatory Fighters rule the Saurus Warriors had in the previous Lizardmen Armybook is back, but is now a Core rule? Hand weapon and shield it is then!

Can the spear rank be used on the charge this time around?

ZF-

Therion wrote:

What does regeneration do now? Is it a 4+ ward save like before?


Has the ethereal special rule changed?

Cheers.

Regeneration is a 4+, but can't be used in addition to ward save. It is one or the other. Furthermore, they've specifically said you can get different regenerations. So in the future you might see "Regeneration (2+)" which would be a 2+ save.

Ethereal was listed in the special rules, but I didn't read it carefully. All it does now is you have to have magic weapons/attacks to damage?

On the flaming note. Units with flaming attacks cause fear for some units. I believe chariots is one of them but do not quite remember.

Zad Fnark wrote:Can the spear rank be used on the charge this time around?

No, it can only be used when receiving a charge (I did check this, it's under the weapons entry for spears for models on foot)

Airmaniac wrote:So basically, the Predatory Fighters rule the Saurus Warriors had in the previous Lizardmen Armybook is back, but is now a Core rule? Hand weapon and shield it is then!

Well, there will be an errata for every army book, so perhaps Predatory Fighter will give them another benefit (perhaps an additional rank, like high elves?). I'd wait for the errata before converting anything

zioN wrote:Does the army percentage rules mean that big characters like Malekith wont see the light of day outside of 8000pt games?

Lowest game point value:
Foot = ~2500
Coldone = 2520
Dragon = ~3700
Chariot- 2850

Thing to note about spears as well: If you're equipped with them on a charge, you must use them now. Even if you have Hand Weapons too and it'd be better to Parry.

Did anyone else notice how the composition reads, as far as minimum units? You have to have 3 units in addition to a hero/lord choice, but 25% of your army must be core. So in reality you could have 1 core unit that costs 25% of your army and be totally legal. Imagine horde size block of Chaos Warriors - brrrrrr scary.

I wonder how TK magic will work - how will dispel dice and power dice be generated for them, as well as since their casters don't have "levels", will they get a bonus on their casting? I'm just glad that the screaming skulls catapults will get toned down a bit (although that Str 9 under the hole will be pretty nasty if dropped on a character on a big mount).

Here's a question though for the group, as now I'll have to change up my Skaven list to accomodate the special choice restrictions. How viable are skirmishers now with the new rules of "checkerboard" formations, as well as the viability of bigger creatures in units (using Rat Ogres as an example). I'm worried my PCB units are going to be less mobile, and with an I3, will probably be going simultaneously as other folks. Compare that to a unit of 5-6 rat ogres, which can have the second rank attack (3 attacks each), at Str 5 I4. Plus stomp attack from the front rank. Mmmmm decisions decisions.

Therion wrote:

On the musicians, yes. Free reform other than they count as moving (So no move or fire weapons).

Thank you! I can't stress how incredible this is for infantry blocks with missile weapons. A unit of 20 Crossbowmen can be in a fighting formation of 5x4 and when not threatened by combat reform to 10x2 and shoot with every model.

Does the flaming rule still exist? What does it do? Does it negate regeneration like before? Are High Elves with Dragon Armour still totally immune to flaming cannonballs?

He did say they count as moving. So unless you're talking about repeater crossbows, then no, you wouldn't be able to fire on the turn you reformed.

As a side note, flaming attacks allow re-rolls (possibly on both to hit and to wound) when attacking models in buildings. A small bonus, but it's there.

On the subject of buildings, I noticed cav can assault buildings now, but can't enter them in the event they drive off the enemy. It also means riders will attack on foot- as in, without armor save benefits, or mounts attacks and the like.

RZ

Mattbranb wrote:Here's a question though for the group, as now I'll have to change up my Skaven list to accomodate the special choice restrictions. How viable are skirmishers now with the new rules of "checkerboard" formations, as well as the viability of bigger creatures in units (using Rat Ogres as an example). I'm worried my PCB units are going to be less mobile, and with an I3, will probably be going simultaneously as other folks. Compare that to a unit of 5-6 rat ogres, which can have the second rank attack (3 attacks each), at Str 5 I4. Plus stomp attack from the front rank. Mmmmm decisions decisions.

From my 2 game experience it means you have to pay a bit more attention to how they move because they have a facing and can't just charge 360 but since the charge ranges are potentially larger it is actually easier to get them to the enemy. I'm not sure on the cost per PCB but having slightly larger skirmishing units isn't a bad idea now. I did find myself constantly changing how wide I wanted them to sit. The whole having to stick with as many wide as you are when you charge was strange to deal with, allthough ultimatly I was just second guessing myself because it was so different.

TK magic, from what we could tell, is literally broken right now. As in, by the rules, it simply doesn't work at all (because the TK army book references bound spells per BRB).

Strong evidence in our minds that TK army book is coming out before year-end.

Mattbranb wrote:
I wonder how TK magic will work - how will dispel dice and power dice be generated for them, as well as since their casters don't have "levels", will they get a bonus on their casting? I'm just glad that the screaming skulls catapults will get toned down a bit (although that Str 9 under the hole will be pretty nasty if dropped on a character on a big mount).

This is something I dont understand. They say bound spells are cast like normal spells with power level=caster level... But what about bound spells like the TK ones (I think they count as bound spells anyways) which dont have a casting cost? It doesnt work...

Lowest game point value:
Foot = ~2500
Coldone = 2520
Dragon = ~3700
Chariot- 2850

So wait, is the 25% thing, EITHER Lords AND/OR Heros? (ie. in 3000pts you could have 750pts of lords) Must have misread that! >.<

Tomb King spells can't fail to cast so wouldn't they just work like they do now?

Ixquic wrote:Tomb King spells can't fail to cast so wouldn't they just work like they do now?

Unless they roll double 6's or they get a sum of 1 or 2, to my understanding (which the former is always an Irresist followed by Spell Loss, while the later is Inc. fails for that turn).

Since the TK's roll for the Power Level, however, and not to go off, it might also very well be that it's the number they buff their spell casting by. That is how bound works now, yes? You add the Bound Level to the casting? So if you rolled a 6,6 in this case, you wouldn't lose the Spell, you'd get to add your PD to it and - barring a 1, 2, or double-six result - you'd get +12 to the cast value you rolled. Would seemingly mean that rolling 1,1 for PD can only get you two incantations a turn (at best), but you could still possibly get two off at something like 18 (which would piss off a lot of defenders).

Or it could be neither of these. I don't have either book on hand, and am working off what I recall from reading in the TK book as well as people have said about the Rule Book.

As I said, from what we can tell, TK magic literally doesn't work. Since they don't have a value, they cannot be cast. That is current RaW.

I'm sure they will be errata'ed and I'm pretty sure they are the next army book.

Therion wrote:

On the musicians, yes. Free reform other than they count as moving (So no move or fire weapons).

Thank you! I can't stress how incredible this is for infantry blocks with missile weapons. A unit of 20 Crossbowmen can be in a fighting formation of 5x4 and when not threatened by combat reform to 10x2 and shoot with every model.

Crossbows are move or fire, so they won't be able to shoot the turn they reform even with a free reform.

Allright, some more stuff:

What does regeneration do now? Is it a 4+ ward save like before?

Defaults to a 4+ save, though can have other values if specified. Cannot be taken with a ward save. Flaming attacks remove regen for the rest of the (Either phase or turn...Not sure on that).

Does the flaming rule still exist? What does it do? Does it negate regeneration like before? Are High Elves with Dragon Armour still totally immune to flaming cannonballs?

Still around, better against regen. Now causes fear in certain units. I didn't see anything that would make Dragon armor vulnerable to flaming cannonballs, but I didn't look at it too far.

Has the ethereal special rule changed?

No changes from what I saw.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Airmaniac wrote:
If a unit of Saurus Warriors has Spears, how many attacks does each rank get? Spears will allow them to attack in three ranks, but do the second and third rank only get 1 attack per model? For example if I have a unit of 6x3 Saurus Warriors with Spears, do I get to make 30 attacks (first and second rank, normal attack profile, third rank, single attack regardless) or 24 attacks (first rank, normal attack profile, second and third rank, single attack regardless)?

Fight in additional rank adds to supporting attacks, so 3 ranks of spear saurus is 24 attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

gendoikari87 wrote:um.... someone mentioned javelins and a range boost. Can someone confirm if they are still 8" or not. or for that matter the changes to blowpipes and skinks in general.

12" Range for Javs now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Zad Fnark wrote:Can the spear rank be used on the charge this time around?

ZF-

Nope. You don't get the fight in additional rank bonus when you charge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Minsc wrote:

Ixquic wrote:Tomb King spells can't fail to cast so wouldn't they just work like they do now?

Unless they roll double 6's or they get a sum of 1 or 2, to my understanding (which the former is always an Irresist followed by Spell Loss, while the later is Inc. fails for that turn).

Since the TK's roll for the Power Level, however, and not to go off, it might also very well be that it's the number they buff their spell casting by. That is how bound works now, yes? You add the Bound Level to the casting? So if you rolled a 6,6 in this case, you wouldn't lose the Spell, you'd get to add your PD to it and - barring a 1, 2, or double-six result - you'd get +12 to the cast value you rolled. Would seemingly mean that rolling 1,1 for PD can only get you two incantations a turn (at best), but you could still possibly get two off at something like 18 (which would piss off a lot of defenders).

Tomb kings are screwed. You roll for the power level of the bound spell. However, to get a bound spell off, you now have to meet the power level with dice (Your priest rolls well and gets a power level 10, you need to roll 10+ with however many power dice you want to use.) Counterintuitively, princes are the best casters in the Tomb Kings army right now. At least I do believe that Tomb Kings specify that they don't get Irresistable or Miscast...

So with saves, let me see if i have this right.

Get armor and either ward or regen?

I play HE. I'm wondering if Teclis can still ignore first miscast each turn, if so he will devastate.

However with save changes I think that his brother won't be as good, however being able to use his breath weapon in CC will be a bit more offensive.

With the extra rank rules and the dual weapons of the sea guard, I think I will roll with a block of 50 of these bad boys.

Acardia wrote:Get armor and either ward or regen?.

Yep.

Minsc wrote: That is how bound works now, yes? You add the Bound Level to the casting?

no, the bound level is the required casting value.

Pip wrote:

Minsc wrote: That is how bound works now, yes? You add the Bound Level to the casting?

no, the bound level is the required casting value.

Ah, in that case Skyth's Tomb Prince comment makes sense: You'd never want a Liche Priest beyond the minimal Hierophant requirement as it's most likely to force a 6-8 casting value whereas a Prince will only force a 3-4. Don't have the book, but I think naked Princes are cheaper to boot. Still, Prince will be better for incantations now.

Acardia wrote:With the extra rank rules and the dual weapons of the sea guard, I think I will roll with a block of 50 of these bad boys.

that doesn't make sense to me seeing as you only get 1 attack from people not in the front rank.

Sea Guard only get a single attack anyways. However, with 50 Sea Guard (in a 10 wide x 5 rank unit) get everyone to attack with ASF.

About bound spells. What about the tactic of giving a bound spell item to non-wizards? I can't remember, but I think it said something about only wizards being able to utilize PD. I suppose you COULD give a non-caster a bound spell (kinda a pretty bauble), but it'd be useless.
I do like the plethora of 5pt magic items in the book. I've lost track of the number of times I've been just a few points short on an army list.
I do think it's gonna take a while to adjust to 1 dispel scroll per army. There's a note in the magic item section that says if the item description allows, multiples of a magic item are allowed/ However none of the items in the book have that attribute.
Oh, and War Banner now 35 pts. No more skellies with it, or any other units that can have 25pt banners.

Skellies can still take a War Banner, at least until they get a new army book.

Minsc wrote:Ah, in that case Skyth's Tomb Prince comment makes sense: You'd never want a Liche Priest beyond the minimal Hierophant requirement as it's most likely to force a 6-8 casting value whereas a Prince will only force a 3-4. Don't have the book, but I think naked Princes are cheaper to boot. Still, Prince will be better for incantations now.

No, that's not how it works. As of right now, the TK don't work at all. Their book says "they are automatically cast like a bound spell" - but bound spells are no longer automatically cast.

RaW they don't work, at all.

skyth wrote:Sea Guard only get a single attack anyways. However, with 50 Sea Guard (in a 10 wide x 5 rank unit) get everyone to attack with ASF.

the comment about dual weapons is what I was confused about. You don't get the +1a for 2 weapons after the first rank. So spears add the same number of attacks as the front rank having 2 weapons, but mean your models can also have shields.

Durzod wrote:About bound spells. What about the tactic of giving a bound spell item to non-wizards? I can't remember, but I think it said something about only wizards being able to utilize PD. I suppose you COULD give a non-caster a bound spell (kinda a pretty bauble), but it'd be useless.
I do like the plethora of 5pt magic items in the book. I've lost track of the number of times I've been just a few points short on an army list.
I do think it's gonna take a while to adjust to 1 dispel scroll per army. There's a note in the magic item section that says if the item description allows, multiples of a magic item are allowed/ However none of the items in the book have that attribute.
Oh, and War Banner now 35 pts. No more skellies with it, or any other units that can have 25pt banners.

War banner is still 25 if your army book says 25.

Also, there's nothing stopping non-wizards from having bounds. You would just use dice from the pool.

Durzod wrote:About bound spells. What about the tactic of giving a bound spell item to non-wizards? I can't remember, but I think it said something about only wizards being able to utilize PD. I suppose you COULD give a non-caster a bound spell (kinda a pretty bauble), but it'd be useless.

Bound spell items I believe are considered the ones using the power dice. I know for a fact that you do not get your wizard's lvl added to your roll when using a bound spell. So I am pretty sure you can cast a bound spell carried by a non-wizard caster.

Pip wrote:

skyth wrote:Sea Guard only get a single attack anyways. However, with 50 Sea Guard (in a 10 wide x 5 rank unit) get everyone to attack with ASF.

the comment about dual weapons is what I was confused about. You don't get the +1a for 2 weapons after the first rank. So spears add the same number of attacks as the front rank having 2 weapons, but mean your models can also have shields.

I was referring to having bows as well for volley fire. This creates a core choice with a lot of tatical flexibility. Could be a very hard anchor for HE armies, depending on hero/mage support.

If it was just my two cents on Tomb Kings (which you know will be cleared up come the erratas), here's how I would see it working:

1. Assign casting values to Tomb King Spells. Assign a lvl to the caster, i.e. Princes Lvl 1, Kings Lvl 2, etc.
2. Roll your 2d6 for power dice, which would determine the number of dispel dice your opponent gets.
3. Go in your order of casting for the magic phase.
4. Successful spells get modified by the Lvl of the caster.
5. Irresistable spells go off, but are forgotten (no roll on the miscast table as per bound items).

This would bring them in-line with say Warrior Priests or folks who have bound spells. It would also allow for the caster to throw more dice at a spell they really want to go off, as well as answer the question about dispel dice.

That's probably roughly what the errata will say, but again, as of now they don't work at all. And they most likely have a new book coming!!

Knowing GW, I wouldn't count on them being cleared up in the erattas...

Durzod wrote:About bound spells. What about the tactic of giving a bound spell item to non-wizards? I can't remember, but I think it said something about only wizards being able to utilize PD. I suppose you COULD give a non-caster a bound spell (kinda a pretty bauble), but it'd be useless.

Non-wizard can use bound spells. It has a specific note about miscasts with bound spells on units that have them as an "innate ability" or something (like treemen). If I remember correctly, it just fails to go off that turn, and that character can't use any more bound spells that turn. They don't have to roll on the miscast table, and it can be used again next turn. If it's an added item to a character (not an innate ability) then it crumbles to dust and can't be used again, but I also don't think they have to roll on the miscast table.

About the dispel scrolls- I'm glad they're limited to one, I always thought it was rather silly to have so many- basically an item that says the other play just can't do anything if you took 5 of them or so. It's going to be a challenge without them, though! Since some of those big spells are downright scary, and not that difficult to cast imho.

So non-wizards can use PD now? Not what I remember reading, but then that's not so unusual. Maybe it was in the oh-so-cutsie rules fluff they insisted on including (to pad the page count and justify the high price? NOT GW! Hah!)

Thinking about it, having loads of wizards if not very effective now that you only get a fixed amount of pd. Especially if you can only choose from 1 or 2 lores. The only advantages I can see are that you can have more wizards to cast with if you end up failing a spell, and more variety, if you can choose from many lores. And staying power. But you can rule the magic phase with a massive pile of pd/dd from your wizard spam...

Mattbranb wrote:Did anyone else notice how the composition reads, as far as minimum units? You have to have 3 units in addition to a hero/lord choice, but 25% of your army must be core. So in reality you could have 1 core unit that costs 25% of your army and be totally legal. Imagine horde size block of Chaos Warriors - brrrrrr scary.

Naw, that'd cost far too much. Marauders with hand weapons, shield and MoT. 6+ armor save, 5+ ward vs. front attacks (apparenlty shields give a 6+ ward instead of +1 armor save for parry and MoT stacks with ward saves) and a 6+ ward. If I remember correctly they're 5pts each which would make a block of 40 260pts with these upgrades.

Pretty sure Marauders are 5pt vanilla, as I recall doing a point-by-point comparison of them v clanrats shortly after Skaven came out this edition.

One thing I predict is that a lot of the fast cav units without shooty-goodness (See: things other than Pistoliers & Dark Riders) or some nifty special rules (See: Spider Riders and their ignoring of Dangerous Terrain) are going to start getting phased out. Mostly because they can't run flanks as well any more, nor negate them either. Instead, the extra points will probably be spent buffing up pre-existing heavy cavalry, infantry units, or buying small 10 or 15-big units of infantry to run the flanks instead.

zioN wrote:

Lowest game point value:
Foot = ~2500
Coldone = 2520
Dragon = ~3700
Chariot- 2850

So wait, is the 25% thing, EITHER Lords AND/OR Heros? (ie. in 3000pts you could have 750pts of lords) Must have misread that! >.<

From what I gathered with the rumors without having seen the book (I can't afford to drive the 64 miles to go see the book) it goes something like this:
Lords - MAX 25%
Heroes - MAX 25%
Core - MIN 25%
Special - MAX 25%
Rare - MAX 25%

Obviously, you can't go over 100% but I believe that is the current set up. By all means if you've read the book correct me if I'm wrong.

I meant what I read from other posts. What you say seems right.

special is Max 50% I believe.

Ordered book and counters,not bothered about the ruler set- metal would have been better, ill stick with tape for now!

It is indeed...

Up to 25% Lords
Up to 25% Heros.
AT LEAST 25% Core
Up to 50% Special
Up to 25% Rare.

However, remember you must have at least 3 units (not including Characters) and up to 3 repeats of Specials, and up to 2 repeats of Rare.

As for orders? Copy of Collectors and Gamers editions, soon to be mine. Mwahahahahahahaha!

P.S. Selling like hotcakes those two. You want, you order asap.

Why both, MDG...?

I can understand the collectors, if I had the extra $50, I'd get it in a heartbeat, but the gamers edition is just the regular rulebook with all the extra gak they released.

Killjoy00 wrote:That's probably roughly what the errata will say, but again, as of now they don't work at all. And they most likely have a new book coming!!

Really, a new book for TK? That would be fantastic! Maybe some Ogres, Wood Elves and Brets after that. Man, that would complete me.

From what I understand, that's roughly the plan, with maybe High Elves or O&G thrown in. I think it was Harry on warseer that said those are basically the books being worked on right now.

Man, High Elves just got a book. I consider them one of the new armies. I won't clamour too much about this, but I will have some loud coughs that sound like "Chaos Dwarfs". They got robbed.

Chaos Dwarves are on the docket for the Forge World treatment. Full campaign book, model range, etc.

I wouldn't call that "robbed".

Kanluwen wrote:Chaos Dwarves are on the docket for the Forge World treatment. Full campaign book, model range, etc.

I wouldn't call that "robbed".

Except that it's not an actual army they're doing. It's various units spread through out the campaign books that may eventually be compiled into an army.

At least according to the latest from them/

Still--I'd take that over a crummy GW update most of the time.

oh one thing about lizardmen is that diadem of power is now useless.

Anyone taken a gander at the random movement section? It looks like if you have random movement, you move like a spawn (i.e. pick a direction, roll and go). Furthermore, the enemy doesn't get a charge reaction because it's too unpredictable.

My question? How does this impact the Doomwheel? Probably gotta wait for the new FAQ...

Hmm, I only skimmed that section, I'll have to look it over again.

Can anyone confirm if you can take th same spell (such as "Purple Sun" from the Lore of Death) twice in the same list? I'd heard you could only take a spell once, but forgot to look to see if that is the case in the book.

Addressing the above- you generate the "Winds of Magic" no matter what, and to use a bound spell you have to use PD. So yes, a non-wizard can use PD to cast a bound spell (it's not really them casting it- you're casting the bound spell. even if a wizard has it, you won't add their level to the cast like a usual spell- just the PD roll).

Also, the diadem of power for lizzies will probably be errata'ed.

I didn't notice the "no duplicate spell" ruling, but I just listened to the Baddice podcast, and Ben C's saying that's absolutely in. The only possible duplicates are the "signature spells" (i.e. the ones you can default to).

Big question I just realized: How does Scout work now? You - this edition - can't Scout in LoS. Next edition, only way to avoid LoS is pretty much nil. If Scout is unchanged... did it just become practically impossible to scout?

Yes, spells cannot be duplicated in a list. However, if you roll a spell that you already rolled or that someone else in the army rolled already...You can choose your spell.

One little tidbit that I hadnt seen mentioned: units may not move within 1" of any unit, friend or foe, unless charging.

No mroe butting troops right up next to each other anymore...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
One tidbit I havent seen mentioned: Units may not move within 1" of ANY unit, friend or foe, unless charging.

There is also a Start of Turn phase, to clarify "when" all those different effects happen, finaly!

Yes I will be curious to see how the doomwheel is errata'd - I mean, it moves kind of like a spawn, but the FAQ has it moving like a chariot so it gets 1 free pivot while moving. Have to see.

I'm more stoked about the 25% for rare for Skaven though - whew - 2 warp lightning cannons and 2 doomwheels in a 2250 list? Nasty, nasty nasty.

Can I just ask... About this whole wizards and bound spells malarkey, what about the Bluescribes? They count as casting a random bound spell every turn, but as the power level counts as the casting roll of the spell in question, does this mean it is cast automatically? Or do you need to roll, and a 1/2 still counts as a fail? Or am I interpreting this all completley wrong?

If it counts as a Bound Spell with the same casting level as the original spell... it would be a regular spell now, to my understanding. Only difference being it's impossible for them to miscast.

zioN wrote:Can I just ask... About this whole wizards and bound spells malarkey, what about the Bluescribes? They count as casting a random bound spell every turn, but as the power level counts as the casting roll of the spell in question, does this mean it is cast automatically? Or do you need to roll, and a 1/2 still counts as a fail? Or am I interpreting this all completley wrong?

I think it's you roll for which spell you get which then becomes a bound level at the cost of the spell which you then need to meet with rolled power dice; so basically you are casting a spell like normal without any bonus modifiers and it's random. The Fey Enchantress has a similar ability and both aren't very good under the current rules.

Of course getting extra power dice is pretty great under in 8th so I'm not exactly crying big tears for a Demon special character.

Ixquic wrote:

zioN wrote:Can I just ask... About this whole wizards and bound spells malarkey, what about the Bluescribes? They count as casting a random bound spell every turn, but as the power level counts as the casting roll of the spell in question, does this mean it is cast automatically? Or do you need to roll, and a 1/2 still counts as a fail? Or am I interpreting this all completley wrong?

I think it's you roll for which spell you get which then becomes a bound level at the cost of the spell which you then need to meet with rolled power dice; so basically you are casting a spell like normal without any bonus modifiers and it's random. The Fey Enchantress has a similar ability and both aren't very good under the current rules.

Of course getting extra power dice is pretty great under in 8th so I'm not exactly crying big tears for a Demon special character.

I way told that the power level of a bound spell was like the lvl of the wizard, in that you add it to your casting roll. Or is that only with magic items power levels?

zioN wrote:

Ixquic wrote:

zioN wrote:Can I just ask... About this whole wizards and bound spells malarkey, what about the Bluescribes? They count as casting a random bound spell every turn, but as the power level counts as the casting roll of the spell in question, does this mean it is cast automatically? Or do you need to roll, and a 1/2 still counts as a fail? Or am I interpreting this all completley wrong?

I think it's you roll for which spell you get which then becomes a bound level at the cost of the spell which you then need to meet with rolled power dice; so basically you are casting a spell like normal without any bonus modifiers and it's random. The Fey Enchantress has a similar ability and both aren't very good under the current rules.

Of course getting extra power dice is pretty great under in 8th so I'm not exactly crying big tears for a Demon special character.

I way told that the power level of a bound spell was like the lvl of the wizard, in that you add it to your casting roll. Or is that only with magic items power levels?

I'm pretty sure neither get that unless it was under magic items and I missed it. The benefits of bound items seem that you know the spell by default and that it can't miscast (although you can lose the spell on double 6s.)

I just checked a few sites, and I think you're right. The info I was going off has changed recently... >.< Problem solved!

Seems like the Bluescribes are just power dice collectors now...

Looking at the book again and just noticed that everything now has a chance of causing a wound no matter how low the strength is or how high the toughness is! For example in the Watchtower scenario it gives the tower stats of toughness 8 and 6 wounds so in theory this could be destroyed quite easily by a 20 strong unit of Goblin archers (4+ to hit then any hits wound on 6+ so should take average of two turns to destroy...).
welcome to he wotrld of shooty armies that become hero/monster killrs...

Mick

Average would actually be roughly four player turns, not two, for 20 Goblins. Assuming they were within short range, and 20 was the number of shots and not the number of total Goblins (unless it was a ten wide front). You aren't going to take it down with small fire in a reasonable time. It doesn't mean that it's not silly, though: Could you imagine if I tried to have my home taken down by letting a few dozen people with bows fire at it for a couple minutes?

Mattbranb wrote:Yes I will be curious to see how the doomwheel is errata'd - I mean, it moves kind of like a spawn, but the FAQ has it moving like a chariot so it gets 1 free pivot while moving. Have to see.

FAQ nothin'. The book itself has it moving like a chariot.

Pg. 67: "The Doomwheel moves and manoeuvres like a chariot with a few exceptions."

Minsc wrote:Average would actually be roughly four player turns, not two, for 20 Goblins. Assuming they were within short range, and 20 was the number of shots and not the number of total Goblins (unless it was a ten wide front). You aren't going to take it down with small fire in a reasonable time. It doesn't mean that it's not silly, though: Could you imagine if I tried to have my home taken down by letting a few dozen people with bows fire at it for a couple minutes?

ya my wood elf army however now loves to shoot down big things.

Also thunderous stomp is so awesome. My treeman has gone from a meh attacker to a badass. I played a couple more games yesterday and the treeman had got to be my most consistant unit/model now.

Something else I noiced - The Hand weapon/shield bonus is no longer limited to infantry. Even Cav/monsters can use it. However, you no longer get it if you are using a magical shield.

Just double checked, and there is a paragraph at the bottom of the 'Parry Save' bit with exclusions. Frenzy prevents it, as does being mounted.

Easily missed though fella. Had to actually double double check!

skyth wrote:Something else I noiced - The Hand weapon/shield bonus is no longer limited to infantry. Even Cav/monsters can use it. However, you no longer get it if you are using a magical shield.

I remember while I was reading the new awesome 5 point enchanted shield that you still get the parry save as well as it being a 5+ armour save shield. I admit I can't recall where exactly I was reading that (the shield itself or magic armour section rules) but I think atleast the enchanted shield still gets it.

I know the magic armor section says that magical shields don't get the parry bonus.

You are indeed correct here Skyth. Magic Shield grants the armour bonus, but no Parry.

skyth wrote:I know the magic armor section says that magical shields don't get the parry bonus.

Does that not kind of nerf Magic Shields for anyone who does not already have a Ward Save?
It is like saying you can have a +1 Armour Save but loose your 6+ Ward Save against penetrating attacks...

There's a reason Enchanted shields are going down to 5 points...

Furthermore, Ward Save items have increased by at least three-fold for quantity - two of which are better than the old item and one of which gives you the Parry bonus non-stop anyways.

I just can't get over that price, I'm sorry. What are we expected to pay $75 for? Because it's printed in full color finally? They should have been in full color anyway when they were being sold at $50 (are codices and army books going to jump to $50 when they finally start printing them in color, too?). 1,000 extra pages of useless fluff padding? That's all well and good, but if you're going to pull that crap then you should offer me a book with just the rules, the stuff I'm actually going to use, at a reasonable price.

This kind of crap is going to hurt the hobby. Do you really think anyone's going to get into the game when they see that just the main rulebook alone costs almost $80?

But I'm sorry, I forget where I'm posting. Now time to be bombarded with "GW is a business blah blah blah".

For $75 and 500 pages, I'd almost rather GW split the thing into 2 volumes - an A4 softback for the Rules, and an A4 hardback for the Fluff and Hobby. It'd save space in the backpack, along with a pound of weight.

Well those that want the softback rules, they will be included in the forthcoming starter set.

Sidstyler wrote:I just can't get over that price, I'm sorry. What are we expected to pay $75 for? Because it's printed in full color finally? They should have been in full color anyway when they were being sold at $50 (are codices and army books going to jump to $50 when they finally start printing them in color, too?). 1,000 extra pages of useless fluff padding? That's all well and good, but if you're going to pull that crap then you should offer me a book with just the rules, the stuff I'm actually going to use, at a reasonable price.

This kind of crap is going to hurt the hobby. Do you really think anyone's going to get into the game when they see that just the main rulebook alone costs almost $80?

But I'm sorry, I forget where I'm posting. Now time to be bombarded with "GW is a business blah blah blah".

Do what me and my buddies do with rulebooks: buy 1 for the group. Our rulebooks (the clubs) stay behind the counter at my FLGS and only we can get them from behind it. If anyone wants tehir own set of rules by all means but this saves us all money. Plus, the rulebook is at a central location so we don't have to worry about them being at someone's house who is sick or getting kicked out into the doghouse for the night and can't make it to play a couple of games. There are 5 of us so for this book it would be ~$16 or $17 a person (after tax) for the book. Not too bad huh?

Has anyone said or noticed how sturdy and well built this behemoth of a rulebook is? I don't mind the price tag or the extra million pages of fluff, as long as it doesn't fall apart easily. Will I have to gut and bind the parts I need to have a nice, secure and tidy rulebook for my gaming?

Also, any reports of tables flipping over after someone placed the rulebook on their side of the table, with nothing of relative weight on the opposite side?

I just can't get over that price, I'm sorry. What are we expected to pay $75 for? Because it's printed in full color finally? They should have been in full color anyway when they were being sold at $50 (are codices and army books going to jump to $50 when they finally start printing them in color, too?). 1,000 extra pages of useless fluff padding? That's all well and good, but if you're going to pull that crap then you should offer me a book with just the rules, the stuff I'm actually going to use, at a reasonable price.

This kind of crap is going to hurt the hobby. Do you really think anyone's going to get into the game when they see that just the main rulebook alone costs almost $80?

But I'm sorry, I forget where I'm posting. Now time to be bombarded with "GW is a business blah blah blah".

When I preordered the rulebook, the perspective I had was that for $75 plus 6% sales tax (thanks Maryland), I'm getting a product that will last me 5-6+ years. Aside from a few noticeable exceptions, none of my $50+ each video games in my collection have anywhere near that long of a play life. I remember a 40k podcast(can't recall the name) that had a segment called "noobs corner" where they broke down the price and relative shelf life of a starter set and how the initial sticker shock isn't so bad when you put in how every aspect of the hobby will probably hold your attention longer then a decent video game.

Not trying to convince you that its a great value or anything, you're obviously an adult that can decide that for himself, just giving you my thought process for when I made the purchase.

Plus I'm a WHFB addict, which probably says more about why I made the purchase then my explanatory paragraph above.

Oh, and how dare you!? GW is a business blah blah blah. Insert obligatory overzealous and aggressive fanboy rant here

AAARGHHHH! Not fair, it's not fair I say!

I brought out my old orc army, and played a very good GT player with a tooled up Dark Elf list. We did 2500pts. He had most of the usual bells and whistles, I took arrer boyz, big blocks of orcs and black orcs, and some random stuff like squig herds and pump wagons. Maybe a little artillery, but not more than a half dozen bolt throwers and rock lobbers. Well, maybe a little more than a half dozen.)

I was kicking his butt up until turn 4. My shamag got off waaagh! and we charged everything. Then his head exploded rolling for the miscast. Dark Elfs running everywhere, and then his level 1 hiding out in a wizards tower tosses Purple sun with total power, and kills 26 orcs, my general, and his hydra. We fought valiantly one but slowly ran out of steam after that, and he got the win at the end.

Insanely awesome game, but I was so robbed! Still, orcs and gobbos are definitely not at the back of the bus in 8th edition. Tomorrow I'll test out blocks of 60 nightgoblins.

Being stubburn and having a battle banner is insanely useful for a horde grinding down elite units.

A lot of fun. I like rolling up the random mission, the random terrain, placing it, and rolling for sides. Made the game very enjoyable to have a full table, and terrain that didn't slow stuff down. Well thought out I think.

For tournaments, I'd go with judge placed terrain, or a system to limit the time it takes to set up the board. But for friendly games, I'll always use the terrain generator.

Arrer boyz charging out of a river of blood and routing dark riders. Fun fun fun.

mikhaila wrote:Insanely awesome game, but I was so robbed! Still, orcs and gobbos are definitely not at the back of the bus in 8th edition. Tomorrow I'll test out blocks of 60 nightgoblins.

Being stubburn and having a battle banner is insanely useful for a horde grinding down elite units.

and a lord for every unit right? lol I've been trying to get one of my friends to pull out his gobbos to see what it is like, and would love to hear how well/fun it is.

mikhaila wrote:Dark Elfs running everywhere, and then his level 1 hiding out in a wizards tower tosses Purple sun with total power...

Heh, if a level 1 managed to get the spell, someone was a very lucky boi! And the amount of lords you can take with these new rules is pretty gud!

Sounds excellent, mikhaila! I'm itching to try it out... I'll probably be playing again today, but unfortunately with 7th ed rules :-/.

*envy*

Has anyone said or noticed how sturdy and well built this behemoth of a rulebook is? I don't mind the price tag or the extra million pages of fluff, as long as it doesn't fall apart easily.

The sample book in my local GW shop is still in good shape after several days of much handling by many different people, but I also have the same concern. I find the occasional lack of quality to be more annoying than GW's pricing. I can live with their pricing when the quality is high, but on the few occasions it has been not it is most annoying. As we all know, the issue with the new printer of their army books spanning from the last Dark Elves release all the way up to the last Warriors Of Chaos release was most irritating and I still see books from that period falling apart out there with customers who don't realize Customer Service would replace those for them. The army/figure cases are my other complaint. The high price tag would be fine if they lasted forever, but the sturdy cases suffer from weak latches and hinges and I see broken ones all the time, often rendering expensive cases completely usesless.

If I buy this new $74+ WFB rule book I will be most careful with it. It's annoying enough that it will be obsolete in 4 or 5 years, but I'd really hate to have it fall apart before then. The fact that it is so thick, 528 pages and weighing 5 pounds, means that it could easily be damaged by its own mass if not handled carefully.

Those would be my concerns too Brass.

I don't mind paying that sort of dosh on a quality book that will last me for a lifetime. I baulk at something that has built in obsolescence.
Mostly on the grounds that is hard for me to justify the outlay.

Not having a dig at you chaps that will btw good luck to you lucky ers

zioN wrote:

mikhaila wrote:Dark Elfs running everywhere, and then his level 1 hiding out in a wizards tower tosses Purple sun with total power...

Heh, if a level 1 managed to get the spell, someone was a very lucky boi! And the amount of lords you can take with these new rules is pretty gud!

Welcome to Random Terrain! The wizards tower grants a mage who is inside/near it the chance to have all spells from his lore. That level 1 tossed a handful of dice at 1 spell a turn and made my life hell. Lore of death is not a nice thing. My other favorite was "All your units withing 24" are -1 str and toughness. "

For what it's worth, I've spent a couple of hours with it now and found it to be extremely sturdy.

Unbeknownst to most people, the 8th Edition Rule Book can double as a home-defense tool.

I'm waiting for the last Heavens Magic spell - Utter Destruction - drop rulebook on the table. Anything damaged is automatically destroyed with no saves allowed.

BrassScorpion wrote:

Has anyone said or noticed how sturdy and well built this behemoth of a rulebook is? I don't mind the price tag or the extra million pages of fluff, as long as it doesn't fall apart easily.

The sample book in my local GW shop is still in good shape after several days of much handling by many different people, but I also have the same concern. I find the occasional lack of quality to be more annoying than GW's pricing. I can live with their pricing when the quality is high, but on the few occasions it has been not it is most annoying. As we all know, the issue with the new printer of their army books spanning from the last Dark Elves release all the way up to the last Warriors Of Chaos release was most irritating and I still see books from that period falling apart out there with customers who don't realize Customer Service would replace those for them. The army/figure cases are my other complaint. The high price tag would be fine if they lasted forever, but the sturdy cases suffer from weak latches and hinges and I see broken ones all the time, often rendering expensive cases completely usesless.

If I buy this new $74+ WFB rule book I will be most careful with it. It's annoying enough that it will be obsolete in 4 or 5 years, but I'd really hate to have it fall apart before then. The fact that it is so thick, 528 pages and weighing 5 pounds, means that it could easily be damaged by its own mass if not handled carefully.

Seriously, my W.o.C book is a piece of gak quality wise, but my Beastmen Book probably didn't even need me binding it.

I don't mind paying that sort of dosh on a quality book that will last me for a lifetime. I baulk at something that has built in obsolescence.

Exactly. $75 or more for a book that I will never have to replace...maybe. $75 or more for a book with a pitifully short lifespan by design? Well you saw what I had to say about that earlier.

I still think this is going to hurt them. When 5th edition 40k came out I eventually caved and bought it when it was available at midnight, back when it cost $50. I felt dirty enough doing that, if it was $75 I NEVER would have bought it. I'd have either waited until the softback showed up on eBay or forgone getting it altogether. It's too much to spend for a rulebook that won't last.

So I saw the rulebook today.

O. M. G.

The thing is massive. If you like the content, it's worth every penny. It's beautiful.

Do I want to bring that to every game along with an army? No way. If I get back into WFB, I'll wait to grab a small starter set rulebook off of eBay.

Sidstyler wrote:

I don't mind paying that sort of dosh on a quality book that will last me for a lifetime. I baulk at something that has built in obsolescence.

Exactly. $75 or more for a book that I will never have to replace...maybe. $75 or more for a book with a pitifully short lifespan by design? Well you saw what I had to say about that earlier.

I still think this is going to hurt them. When 5th edition 40k came out I eventually caved and bought it when it was available at midnight, back when it cost $50. I felt dirty enough doing that, if it was $75 I NEVER would have bought it. I'd have either waited until the softback showed up on eBay or forgone getting it altogether. It's too much to spend for a rulebook that won't last.

Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook, 320-page, hardback, cost £35 ...approximately 11p per page
Warhammer Rulebook, 528-page, hardback, cost £45 approximately 9p per page

If You want better value get the Battle for Skull Pass and grab the mini book (and sell on the models if you don't play those armies)

BrassScorpion wrote:If I buy this new $74+ WFB rule book I will be most careful with it. It's annoying enough that it will be obsolete in 4 or 5 years, but I'd really hate to have it fall apart before then. The fact that it is so thick, 528 pages and weighing 5 pounds, means that it could easily be damaged by its own mass if not handled carefully.

while the rules may be obsolete in 5 years or so, the majority of the book (at least from what has been reported here) won't as the fluff and painting/hobby sections don't stop working with a new edition. if 40k is any indication (my experience as i'm not currently a fantasy player), very few people use the big book during games. in my local group, only one person out of the 20 or so i've met playing there has ever brought the tome to a game; everyone else uses the aobr booklet. i suspect that those buying the big book instead of waiting for the little one/starter are significantly interested in those nonrules sections.

Won't there just be the same fluff in the 9th Ed too?

No point getting the Skull Pass coz it has the 8th Ed booklet

Seriously I will do as advised and try and pick up a small rules book from the Isle of Blood set that will be released shortly. Again I wasn't intending to be dismissive of others getting the Might Tome . TBH if I had the disposable income I might be tempted.

Have £25 in unused book tokens, wonder if GW would accept them towards the cost

The other consideration is that I don't get to play that much unfortunately and have no one to split the cost with. That is brilliant if you have a gaming group to do that with at the LFGS

Sidstyler wrote:Exactly. $75 or more for a book that I will never have to replace...maybe. $75 or more for a book with a pitifully short lifespan by design?

if it was $75 I NEVER would have bought it. I'd have either waited until the softback showed up on eBay or forgone getting it altogether. It's too much to spend for a rulebook that won't last.

$75 for a 4-year lifespan is $19/year. From the Warstore, it's $15/year.

Or course, if you just want the rules, you get a FREE rulebook if you buy the IoB starter in a few months.

Out of curiosity, have you looked at college textbook prices lately???

College textbooks are stupid expensive, too. I'm not sure I see your point though, what do college textbooks have to do with anything? How does it even compare to GW rulebooks, other than the fact that they're both, in fact, books?

Well no, I guess I see the relevance. Before long you won't be able to participate in the Warhammer hobby without government grants.

For those not in the know, college textbooks are very expensive, and have an even shorter lifetime than GW rulebooks.

JohnHwangDD wrote:For those not in the know, college textbooks are very expensive, and have an even shorter lifetime than GW rulebooks.

Don't even speak of Medical Textbooks....

Got some more time with the book today. A couple additional things.

The +1 for combat res based on height is only for charging units. And it is only for charging downhill. Basically, it reads that you get +1 if you charged and you started from a higher elevation.

Monstrous cavalry that are ridden use a combined profile now, but NOT monsters. Basically, from the bestiary, it looked like it included Dark Pegasus, Eagles, Royal Pegasus, etc. The smaller mounts. So for example, a sorceress on a dark pegasus now has a combined profile with 3 wounds (the higher total is used) and 3 toughness (rider's toughness is used). Rather than 2 wounds for sorceress at toughness 3 and 3 wounds for pegasus at toughness 4. On the other hand, monsters like dragons and manticores act basically the same as in 7th. You have to check the bestiary for what is considered a monstrous cavalry and what is a monster.

Fast cav do not shoot 360.

If you fail your leadership test to attempt to march when the enemy is within 8 inches, you still count as marching.

I think this has been mentioned, but it wasn't clear to me. Warmachines now have use the toughness of the machine and have wounds = the number of crew. Everytime the machine takes a wound, a crew dies. It has a save equal to the crew's save. In hand to hand, only 6 "points" worth of guys can attack it (6 infantry or 3 cavalry, or 2 monstrous infantry).

I think this also has been mentioned but wasn't clear to me. Monsters and handlers, for all purposes, hits and wounds are to the monster on its toughness. After you take a wound, you roll a die and on a 5-6 a handler dies. The handlers can attack in hand to hand anything the creature can attack. Otherwise they are completely ignored.

Hatred does not affect mounts anymore. The book is very explicit about what psychology affects mounts.

Stupidity always makes you immune to psychology.

As Jin pointed out I think in other threads, it is very clear that items that give you an irresistible or a miscast do not cause the opposite. So ring of hotek does not create a IF and the high elf item that gives you IF does not also give you a miscast.

Only one scenario really cares about banners. It's the one where if you fall below a certain number of points, then you lose. Banners are worth 1 point each (general 2). All the rest don't really care about core units or banners. 4 of the scenarios just use victory points. VPs are units (only full, no half), general, banners (less vp now) and having a unit champion kill a character. Nothing else.


I think there were a few other things but I can't think of them now


Also, can we skip the ramblings about the quality (which is very nice) and value (it is very high) of the rulebook and stick to the rules??

And again I ask, what's your point? Are you seriously comparing college textbooks to Warhammer rulebooks in an attempt to justify the price?

Why do you even care?

Buy it? Great.

Don't? Nobody cares.

I'm just trying to understand what the hell you're on about. You brought up textbooks and I'm not sure why.

The point is that textbooks are good for 3 months 6 if you are lucky I went to college more than 14 years ago some of my books ran $75-80 then and the store did not buy them back so a nice large book with colorful pictures and nice background fluff that will last some years is a good buy for me you don't think so well to each his/her own I am getting the collectors ed and that one runs $125

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:No point getting the Skull Pass coz it has the 8th Ed booklet

I know that but it'll be resold soon enough with the new book in.

Sidstyler wrote:I'm just trying to understand what the hell you're on about. You brought up textbooks and I'm not sure why.

As has been said. For the size and quality of the new rulebook, the price is very reasonable. But of course, you just drop into threads to whinge and make sweeping statements, so by all means carry on.

Sidstyler- there are more pages related to gaming (inc scenarios, bestiary etc) in the new book than there are total pages in the 7th hardback. I think that makes it worth the money on its own...

Mick

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
As has been said. For the size and quality of the new rulebook, the price is very reasonable.

As one of DakkaDakka's resident haters, I can still only agree with the good Mad Doc. The book is beautiful. One of the highest quality books I've ever seen.

Do I think it's a good value as a rulebook? Not really. Very little of the book is actual rules and the fact that it's a big beautiful monster of a book makes it less than ideal for hauling to and from games.

While GW is too dumb to sell it's soft cover rulebooks for cheap, eBay sellers will fill the deman and everyone who wants a smaller, more portable version of the rules will be able to grab one off of eBay or your favorite bitz store.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:I'm just trying to understand what the hell you're on about. You brought up textbooks and I'm not sure why.

As has been said. For the size and quality of the new rulebook, the price is very reasonable. But of course, you just drop into threads to whinge and make sweeping statements, so by all means carry on.

I've actually tried to sound as least "whiny" as possible when approaching this topic, and personally I thought I managed to express myself rather reasonably compared to how I've done so in the past (at least up until this point, but that's entirely YOUR fault Grotsnik). Instead of trying to fan the flames maybe you could just accept the fact that I don't think it's that reasonable and leave it at that? All I asked for was an explanation as to why the comparison to college textbooks was at all relevant when they're not at all the same thing.

Give me some time and I could probably find books even more expensive than college textbooks, would that mean you college guys wouldn't have a right to complain anymore or would you still be pissed that you have to fork out that much cash?

A more reasonable comparison that I would accept would be comparing the main rulebook for Warhammer with the main rules for any other miniatures game. At least then we're talking about the same thing, games, and not comparing it to something with far more "value" in the real world with completely different content that you're purchasing for an entirely different reason.

Stupidity always makes you immune to psychology.

This explains why my shrink is not making any progress with me!

I know that but it'll be resold soon enough with the new book in.

I thought that once the new starter set was released the Skull Pass set would be discontinued Tri ?
Already have a Skull Pass but it could be a way to boost my Dwarves and Gobbos.

How would I know if the box has the new rules, will there be a different box?

Am reading the book. Quite impressive. Inspiring even for veterans.
And if you don't care about background and modelling but only about winning, wait until the starter box comes out. Many Skaven players will sell lots of mini rulebooks.

@Chibi Bodge-Battle: Ever seen an old starte box sold by GW with new rules? No? Then don't expect that to change.

Kroot, I didn't think that would be the case and was surprised that this was suggested.

Killjoy00 wrote:I think this has been mentioned, but it wasn't clear to me. Warmachines now have use the toughness of the machine and have wounds = the number of crew. Everytime the machine takes a wound, a crew dies. It has a save equal to the crew's save.

What about machines (like the casket of souls) that say all hits on the machine are ignored? Machines that dont have a toughness value?

Kroothawk wrote:Am reading the book. Quite impressive. Inspiring even for veterans.
And if you don't care about background and modelling but only about winning, wait until the starter box comes out. Many Skaven players will sell lots of mini rulebooks.

But I'm the one who does nothing but make sweeping generalizations...

I care more about the game than fluff, doesn't mean all I care about is winning. How about you then, does that mean you want to lose?

Been going through it again, and Terror has changed a fair bit. Gone now is the radial effect (so no more Terror Bombing!). Instead, each and every time a Terror causer charges, the target unit must take a Ld test or flee. This is no longer 'once per game'.

Really liking this whole thing! Also, further into the book is a nice history of not only Citadel and GW, but also Wargaming as a whole.

[quote=Sidstyler
A more reasonable comparison that I would accept would be comparing the main rulebook for Warhammer with the main rules for any other miniatures game. At least then we're talking about the same thing, games, and not comparing it to something with far more "value" in the real world with completely different content that you're purchasing for an entirely different reason.

You know i just assumed they'd keep the box as is but change the cover and the rule book ... Well guess i was wrong rumor has it the might be Greenskins vs. Empire, Chaos vs. Empire, or High Elves vs. Skaven

but any way, Point was .. get the box set what ever they call it and sell on the models if you don't collect them.

No one wants to actually believe GW would dare put out a good product.

No, I can believe that they can put out a good product. It just seems like they can't make something both good and reasonably priced. Apparently if they actually start putting effort into their products it means they start charging twice as much for them.

::pinch of salt::

I haven't finished reading the rules for myself, but I've gotten a fair ways through, and gleaned a lot more from this thread, and I think have a new nickname for this edition:

Warhammer Little League.

These changes seem to balance everything out to such an extreme amount that only the randomness of the dice determines the winner. It seems unlikely that skill is going to play anywhere near as much part as it used to, and the list of popular builds is just going to get even more polarized (O&G armies will all be Orc heroes leading giant piles of Night Goblins, Empire and Dwarves will forget they have hand weapons, etc...).

Hopefully, I'll get a chance to play a game or two today or in the near future, and my mind will change. But right now, I'm not particularly impressed. The game is less like Chess and more like War.

Sidstyler wrote:

No one wants to actually believe GW would dare put out a good product.

No, I can believe that they can put out a good product. It just seems like they can't make something both good and reasonably priced. Apparently if they actually start putting effort into their products it means they start charging twice as much for them.

Well, I should have added the " " .
But as you asked: I am primarily interested in modelling and having a fluffy battle, where both sides have fun. I don't care whose army wins then, as both players win.

Manfred von Drakken wrote:But right now, I'm not particularly impressed. The game is less like Chess and more like War.

That's a really devastating critique for a war game

Manfred, I really disagree. I think dice will play a role, but I can't see it playing that much more of a role than before. Try a game with the new rules before dismissing it.

I thought charging random inches would add a lot more randomness, but when taken in conjunction with pre-measuring, I actually find it to be a bit more tactical. Since I wasn't good at determining the difference between 9 and 11 inches, I found it slightly random sometimes in 7th. But now, I can know exactly the difference and determine my odds on making the charge for every charge.

Someone who makes strong tactical decisions with appropriate risk-making and an understanding of the odds is going to win over someone who doesn't. That hasn't changed.

Killjoy00 wrote:Since I wasn't good at determining the difference between 9 and 11 inches, I found it slightly random sometimes in 7th.

There's less tactical trying to determine if you or your enemy have charge range, but it's much more tactical pre-measuring then rolling and having to risk if you're in charge range anyways? Doesn't that seem a bit... double-standardish? It's not tactical having to eye whether you or your opponent might have charge, but it is tactical seeing if your opponent might have the charge if they roll average?

Killjoy00 wrote:But now, I can know exactly the difference and determine my odds on making the charge for every charge.

And before I could know the exact distance and determine my odds for being within that range. It's not more tactical, it's the same thing but with rolling 2D6 instead of eyeballing.

Sidstyler wrote:

No one wants to actually believe GW would dare put out a good product.

No, I can believe that they can put out a good product. It just seems like they can't make something both good and reasonably priced. Apparently if they actually start putting effort into their products it means they start charging twice as much for them.

What you choose to believe, or not believe, is pretty irrelevant to what the product actually is. To find your 'reasonably priced' product, we need a time machine. The price of this book is very much in line with the prices of similar products, and the quality is very good. And as I'm sure you'll point out immediately, it's just my opinion. Then again, my job for 25 years is evaluating products bases on quality vs. price, and their sales potential in my stores. I've also been able to spend several hours reading the book over the last week, and get in a lot of games with the new rules.

Good product. Better set of rules than they had for the last couple of editions. Having a lot of fun playing the game. Artwork is good, content is good. Price is appropriate based on similar products, and quality is a lot better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manfred von Drakken wrote:::pinch of salt::

I haven't finished reading the rules for myself, but I've gotten a fair ways through, and gleaned a lot more from this thread, and I think have a new nickname for this edition:

Warhammer Little League.

These changes seem to balance everything out to such an extreme amount that only the randomness of the dice determines the winner. It seems unlikely that skill is going to play anywhere near as much part as it used to, and the list of popular builds is just going to get even more polarized (O&G armies will all be Orc heroes leading giant piles of Night Goblins, Empire and Dwarves will forget they have hand weapons, etc...).

Hopefully, I'll get a chance to play a game or two today or in the near future, and my mind will change. But right now, I'm not particularly impressed. The game is less like Chess and more like War.

Played a great game last night. Orc great shaman, Black orc warboss, Black orc ASB. 8 big blocks of 25-30 infantry, several warmachines. 3000pts vs Chaos. Had a great time and won by a whole 4 pts.) The game is fun, and I actually like the idea of huge blocks of stubborn gobbos and orcs, but won't be wasting heroes on the weedy stuff. Rather put them in the Black Orc units and take on the tough guys. Friggin Khorne warriors with 30 attacks! But we beats them up, yes we did.

Minsc wrote:

Killjoy00 wrote:Since I wasn't good at determining the difference between 9 and 11 inches, I found it slightly random sometimes in 7th.

There's less tactical trying to determine if you or your enemy have charge range, but it's much more tactical pre-measuring then rolling and having to risk if you're in charge range anyways? Doesn't that seem a bit... double-standardish? It's not tactical having to eye whether you or your opponent might have charge, but it is tactical seeing if your opponent might have the charge if they roll average?

Not at all. I had basically no idea whether something was 9 inches or 11 inches. Now I know I have an X% chance of making the charge and can weigh that appropriately. Also, just as importantly, I can determine my distance to an opponent exactly and make my movements based on that. That's a lot more tactical than... well, I should back up a little bit because I think this puts me out of his charge range (or oops it didn't).

Thing is, with the change in army restriction and selection, a large part of your strategy is going to be the choice of going with megaunits to blag Horde, lots of smaller units looking to disrupt ranks, or somewhere in between. Thus chosen (as well as Magic Lores, which are now set when your write your list, NOT when you've seen your opponent!) your tactics work around how to make best use of this.

Right now, there is no metagame whatsover, and although hardly an afficiando of such things, I expect it to be some time before anything reliable enough emerges. The S3/R2 restriction makes it slightly more predictable, but then with 50% of your points available for Special, whether we will see lots of Artillery favoured, or chunky blocks of Heavy Infantry is something time alone will tell. For instance, currently (pre it's release!) my Dark Elves can have either 1 Hydra and 2 Bolt Throwers, 4 Bolt Throwers, or 2 Hydras. But as soon as the rules are released, and points allowing, in 2,000 points I could field either 3 Bolt Throwers and a Hydra, 4 Bolt Throwers, 2 Hydras and a Bolt Thrower, and so on. Much, much harder to predict exactly what I'm taking. Indeed, now I no longer strictly need Hellebron to take lots of Witch Elves, we might see more Cauldron Armies, but still backed up with a couple of Highborns...

With the advantages that huge units have, I wonder if we're going to see more of a return to hammer and anvil type tactics. Large unwieldly and wide blocks of cheaper troops making up the anvil and then fast moving and heavy hitting choices waiting to hit once the lines start engaging.

I noticed something similar in previous editions, but the centre/anvil units tended to be multiple smaller units (and by smaller I mean less huge) rather than truly large ones.

I'm glad I've gotten my collector's edition ordered. They've sold out now.

ZF-

frozenwastes wrote:With the advantages that huge units have, I wonder if we're going to see more of a return to hammer and anvil type tactics. Large unwieldly and wide blocks of cheaper troops making up the anvil and then fast moving and heavy hitting choices waiting to hit once the lines start engaging.

I noticed something similar in previous editions, but the centre/anvil units tended to be multiple smaller units (and by smaller I mean less huge) rather than truly large ones.

You will, but trust me, the bigger units are not nearly as unwieldy and difficult to maneuver as they were in previous additions. My goblins are going in blocks of 50, my orcs in 30. 6 wide on orcs, and gobbos can go either 10 wide for horder, or 10 deep for tarpit.)

The changes to the movement rules is what allows the larger units to work better, right? I've only paged through the book and spectated a game so far.

I'm just curious as to how people are judging the "quality" of this book, especially in comparison to what else is on the market right now. I looked at Warmachine and the Prime MKII book comes in a paperback for only $30 brand new, and IIRC it's also in full color AND has all the rules for all the armies in it, so you don't really need to buy the army books in order to play the game. I think every model comes with a stat card, too, so you don't really need the decks, either.

Why does everyone think the 8th edition WHF book is such a good value in comparison? Because it's big? So being huge and impossible to use means it's "better", and worth more money? Even if most of those extra pages are worthless padding, the same regurgitated fluff that they reprint word for word in every rulebook? I know everyone's been trying very hard to insinuate as much (or just outright accusing me of caring about nothing but winning, as if you people know me at all), but I don't hate fluff, I just hate being forced to pay an extra $60 for a retelling of the same old fluff.

I'm waiting for the Starter set to come out, so i'll at least have some minis for the bloated price of the rulebook with it. (unless its more than 60$, in which case I may... just not buy into it really.)

There needs to be a softcover version of the rulebook without so much needless crap the veteran gamer out there doesn't need.

After careful consideration and repeated viewing of the new 528 page book I've decided to get a copy at the midnight release at my local GW store. Being mainly a hobbyist I'm mightily impressed with the attention paid to the kind of hobby and story elements that have kept me modeling GW miniatures all these years. I've even started finally painting the newer plastic models for my ancient Chaos Warriors army.

Sidstyler wrote:I'm just curious as to how people are judging the "quality" of this book, especially in comparison to what else is on the market right now. I looked at Warmachine and the Prime MKII book comes in a paperback for only $30 brand new, and IIRC it's also in full color AND has all the rules for all the armies in it, so you don't really need to buy the army books in order to play the game. I think every model comes with a stat card, too, so you don't really need the decks, either.

Why does everyone think the 8th edition WHF book is such a good value in comparison? Because it's big? So being huge and impossible to use means it's "better", and worth more money? Even if most of those extra pages are worthless padding, the same regurgitated fluff that they reprint word for word in every rulebook? I know everyone's been trying very hard to insinuate as much (or just outright accusing me of caring about nothing but winning, as if you people know me at all), but I don't hate fluff, I just hate being forced to pay an extra $60 for a retelling of the same old fluff.

Im buying it because you've spent so much time typing up dozens of long posts trying to explain why its not a good value at all.. With that kind of attention I need to see what Im missing!!

frozenwastes wrote:The changes to the movement rules is what allows the larger units to work better, right? I've only paged through the book and spectated a game so far.

Yes, quite a bit of small changes adding up to a smoother flowing game.
-A unit may reform immediately after a combat if it does not overrun or pursue.
-It is possible to do a 'quick reform' with a leadership test.
-It is not possible to be totally march blocked. A leadership test lets you ignore nearby enemy.
-Charges are simpler, checking for line of site, and distance between the unit. (Closest to closest, far as I can tell.) The unit is then assumed to have made the charge, and the unit is then moved in, allowed to wheel, etc, and the actually distance the far corner of the wheel moves doesn't matter. You have made the charge, now move the unit.
-Rivers, woods, etc do not prevent you from moving, or slow you up, although they may negate rank bonuses, steadfast, or other abilities while in them. So big units don't get bogged down.
-Units can just 'sidestep' or 'moveback' a portion of their move. No need to "I turn around, move half my distance, and then turn back around" explanations to an opponent.

Taken as a whole, it is making for some easier movement for larger units.

Sidstyler wrote:I'm just curious as to how people are judging the "quality" of this book, especially in comparison to what else is on the market right now. I looked at Warmachine and the Prime MKII book comes in a paperback for only $30 brand new, and IIRC it's also in full color AND has all the rules for all the armies in it, so you don't really need to buy the army books in order to play the game. I think every model comes with a stat card, too, so you don't really need the decks, either.

Why does everyone think the 8th edition WHF book is such a good value in comparison? Because it's big? So being huge and impossible to use means it's "better", and worth more money? Even if most of those extra pages are worthless padding, the same regurgitated fluff that they reprint word for word in every rulebook? I know everyone's been trying very hard to insinuate as much (or just outright accusing me of caring about nothing but winning, as if you people know me at all), but I don't hate fluff, I just hate being forced to pay an extra $60 for a retelling of the same old fluff.

Can you give it a rest already? I mean come on, either buy it, or wait for the starter set to come out to get a paperback rulebook. Guess what whining will do: Oh yeah, nothing.

Its got so much fluff and awesomeness in it compared to other editions, we're just trying to convince ourselves to splurge more money on this terribly overpriced hobby, and trying to justify it to others just makes it seem more real in our own minds.

Complaining about the price of a GW product is like going into jail to murder someone on death row: Its pointless.

trying to explain why its not a good value at all..

To me. That's the difference between me and you guys, I'm not openly insulting anyone who does buy it and think it's a good value.

Me on the other hand, I've been accused of being a WAAC donkey-cave who does nothing but whine and make sweeping generalizations because I personally think GW is out of their gourd.

GW's already scored big with some of their limited edition merchandise this time. The Skull Dice, Collector's Edition and the Gamer's Edition set were all sold out in about 3 days. The only limited edition item still available is the Engineer's Ranging Set.

I'm just curious as to how people are judging the "quality" of this book, especially in comparison to what else is on the market right now.
Well, for me, I can walk around the store, pull out rulebooks from a dozen miniature companies, and compare.

I looked at Warmachine and the Prime MKII book comes in a paperback for only $30 brand new, and IIRC it's also in full color AND has all the rules for all the armies in it, so you don't really need to buy the army books in order to play the game. I think every model comes with a stat card, too, so you don't really need the decks, either.
It's softcover, (they make a HC for 40.00), and one hell of a lot smaller than the book we are comparing it to. It's also quite useless for playing Warhammer, so even if you liked the book, you'd need a new army to use it. The 8th edition book is twice as big as the MarkII book, and in HC. I think they have a comparable cost.

Why does everyone think the 8th edition WHF book is such a good value in comparison? Because it's big?
Big, high page count, lots of pretty pictures, good stories, nicely done rule set, good diagrams, lots of basic missions, lots of advanced missions, rules for a dwarf airship, nice production quality, good artwork. And its BIG!


I just hate being forced to pay an extra $60 for a retelling of the same old fluff.
Don't buy it then. No one cares if you pick it up or not. No one is Forcing you to buy it. Wait for the el cheapo paperback version in September, people will be breaking open boxes and chucking them on Ebay. Or don't buy it at all. Go play warmachine or checkers. Keep playing 7th.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

strange_eric wrote:I'm waiting for the Starter set to come out, so i'll at least have some minis for the bloated price of the rulebook with it. (unless its more than 60$, in which case I may... just not buy into it really.)

There needs to be a softcover version of the rulebook without so much needless crap the veteran gamer out there doesn't need.

And lots of veteran gamers might just disagree with you.)

Starter set will be at least 90.00, and from what I've heard has some very nice miniatures coming with it. Hoping for 60.00 is a bit unrealistic, since they aren't that low now.

Sidstyler wrote:I'm just curious as to how people are judging the "quality" of this book, especially in comparison to what else is on the market right now. I looked at Warmachine and the Prime MKII book comes in a paperback for only $30 brand new, and IIRC it's also in full color AND has all the rules for all the armies in it, so you don't really need to buy the army books in order to play the game. I think every model comes with a stat card, too, so you don't really need the decks, either.

Its worth pointing out the hardcover version of the Warmachine Prime MKII is $39.99 regular retail. Its 256 pages compared to GW's 528 for $75.

Not trying to argue or assist in a derail of this good and informative thread, just pointing out that GW isn't the only one who bumped their head when it comes to pricing.

If you absolutely must have a paperback version, GW's starter sets are historically a great deal, so nab that when it gets out, sell/trade the mini's you don't want from the box set and the overall price is an absolute bargain.

Well, for me, I can walk around the store, pull out rulebooks from a dozen miniature companies, and compare.

Except that comparison would apparently be pointless, because those rulebooks from the other companies are "quite useless for playing Warhammer".

I assumed when you said "similar products", you weren't just talking about Warhammer Fantasy rulebooks (of which there are conveniently only two now, the regular $75 one and the collector's edition which costs over $100...and when those are your only options then hell yeah, the regular one sure looks like a good deal, doesn't it) and meant game rulebooks in general. I offered up what I found to be a pretty fair comparison, and it gets shot down because "lolz you nub WARMACHINE isn't Warhammer!"...so I have to admit I'm confused by this statement. I already knew you owned a shop, and apparently having other product didn't really matter since GW and Warhammer Fantasy is all we care about, you CAN'T compare it to anything else. Except uh...college textbooks, for some reason.

Second, I know it's softcover. I brought up the softcover because it was smaller and much easier to game with, and to emphasize that PP actually provided you with more realistic options, instead of "Buy the expensive gigantic hardcover, or the REALLY expensive gigantic hardcover! NAO!". I know they make a hardcover, but even then the hardcover is only $40. Sure, it's smaller, but the only people who are seriously going to support their arguments with that are the ones who actually believe that, since it's bigger and heavier, that makes it worth more money. Which is absurd, and just leads credence to my theory that GW purposely padded out the page count JUST SO they could charge $80 for it. Not only that but being smaller has it's advantages, for one thing it's noticeably cheaper (half the price for about half the page count...but this makes PP the price gougers somehow), and the softcover version is much easier to game with as I said. Easier to carry around, easier to reference rules with. Also, despite having fewer pages, they manage to fit in rules for most of the units for all armies in the game. What does the WHF book offer? A reference in the back, and I guess new rules for ONE race-specific unit. No updates for anyone, no army rules in the main book, just the main rules, missions, and then reams of reprinted fluff and a dwarf blimp. I'd much rather spend $30 for a softcover WHF book with just the 130 some-odd pages of rules that I need to play the game, than $75 for a huge tome full of bs.

The "bigger=better" mindset, it's the same kind of mindset that people make fun of PP fans for (that I myself have kinda picked on PP fans for), who try to justify the ridiculous prices of their metal models because "They're heavy, they feel like they're worth $60+." Just looks like hypocrisy to me, GW fans don't shy away from picking on PP for their prices, but stubbornly defend GW for theirs when neither side really has a leg to stand on.

Despite the amount of time I've supposedly spent on this topic, I don't really care. The only reason I've kept it up this long is because I find the responses I've gotten interesting. People are making weird statements and comparisons and I thought it would be fun to get people to explain themselves better. Turns out people don't like having to defend their claims and would prefer I just STFU and drink the Kool-Aid already.

"It's a good product! Definitely worth $80!"
"Why?"
"STFU GW HATER!"

Like I said though I really don't have anything against anyone who buys the book. It's your money and I don't give a damn what you do with it, and obviously if you want to keep playing Warhammer you kinda have to buy it, so I'm not going to pick on people for that. From the beginning I was pointing the finger at GW here and calling bs on them, because I personally think it's obvious what they've done, that is bloating the book up on purpose to make it seem like it's "worth" more. Seriously, has anyone read through the fluff of the new rulebook yet? How much of it is actually new and not just the same old crap reprinted on full color pages this time? Is any of it new? Or is it just like the 5th edition book, where everything is the same except for a couple of dates on a timeline and the Emperor's golden throne crapping out a little (and some new red and brown John Blanche scribbles)?


...all that said, I'll fully admit that the new WHF rulebook is a better product than before. They've FINALLY printed a rulebook in full color, it's got an enormous page count, and supposedly the quality of the book itself is pretty good (though I've heard from elsewhere that some store copies are falling apart). But in my opinion, they should have been up to this quality in the first place. They're finally doing work that seems worthy of a $50 price tag, and then sell it for $75. That's what bothers me so much.

I don't see anyone calling you a GW hater. What I see is people that know that GW is retailing an over-priced hobby, but we don't need you telling us that every other post..

Personally I'm getting it, the price is very high, but it's a weekends worth of wages for me, and being only 16 and living at home, this is ok. I can perfectly understand why some people may be angered by the price with other priorities, but the starter book will be up on ebay in september anyway for a much cheaper price, so till then you just have to sit out and wait.

Hopefully the game as a whole will be enough to convince you Sidstyler!

Sidstyler wrote:I'm just curious as to how people are judging the "quality" of this book, especially in comparison to what else is on the market right now. I looked at Warmachine and the Prime MKII book comes in a paperback ...

Hard back = More expensive then paperback ... also its only 256 pages So really what the hell is your point? A smaller paperback is cheaper then a larger hardback?

Well speaking as a veteran hobby person I think the extra pages on the rulebook, will not only be very inspiring for more than just gamming, but also its a deal maker for me.
So you have both gamers and hobbyists covered with this book.

If you just want rules you can always wait for the starter deals.

PP and GW are ridiculous expensive we all know that and as such we really have to select what we get these days, for me this rulebook is a good value because it inspires my modelling projects and rules wise is very detailed with lots of graphics etc... So I can pick up a game fast and easy if I choose to... My last miniature shopping was the new trolls and yes far from cheap but wicked nice kits.

Speaking in general lots of miniatures companies are pushing the prices up... PP, GW, Infinity, ALkemy, Artefactory, Mercs, Sodapop are some of the best outhere wich I have the pleasure to collect but you cannot really say they are that cheap... The more they rise prices the less I buy to the point of dropping my PP collections all together.
Its a expensive hobby if ride all waves of cool stuff.

I will get the rulebook and that will mean that I will not get Figone's taurus, one mini 40 euros, both overpriced yet the kind of things really worth getting IMO.
ALso its not only the size that makes the Book cost more... but it has a great influence on the final price.

Going by Sids defence of PP on other threads and bringing it up here I think its all starting to become clear...

Mick

I don't own any PP merchandise. So I'm curious, what's so fething clear there?

Mick A wrote:Going by Sids defence of PP on other threads and bringing it up here I think its all starting to become clear...

Yes, because making sly insinuations about other posters' motives is so conductive to a pleasant discussion... Who not state your accusation openly and be a man?

Sid : With regard to erratas and updates for the various armies, no need to buy them in the book, as they are being released seperately online. For free download.

FAQ and Errata for the main rulebook is planned for 2 weeks after release, so that response from Gamers can be collected, collated and appraised.

Tri wrote:Hard back = More expensive then paperback ... also its only 256 pages So really what the hell is your point? A smaller paperback is cheaper then a larger hardback?

No gak, really? Hardback is more expensive? I had no idea!

I know that, clearly you missed the point. PP gives you OPTIONS, less expensive options. GW charges you a crap-ton and tells you to feth off, you either take what they give you or leave it. And the PP hardback option is still much cheaper than what GW offers, and even at only 256 pages it still gives you more than what any GW rulebook does.

And I'm really getting sick of people bringing up page count, as if that really mattered. Apparently it doesn't even matter what's on the damn pages, only that they have the page count. If they were all blank would it still be worth $75? Apparently because it'd still be a hug brick of a book and weighing a ton = worth a lot.

As for this, this is my last post about it. I said what I think and that's that, lol. If I get the book at all I will, in fact, hit eBay. That's a big if, though.

Sidstyler wrote:I don't own any PP merchandise. So I'm curious, what's so fething clear there?

Why choose to defend PP's prices but have a go at GW's pricing? Both companies are now seeing what they can get away with these days (going by PP's plastic starter set prices). And as for Prime II, yes it is a good book but again, as the new 8th book, a lot is not needed by a lot of players (fluff, stories and in my case any army list that isn't Khador). Having said that I have Prime II as I enjoy playing it and I will be getting 8th as I like this version better than 7th...

Mick

Option is coming in September with the new boxed set.

Sid, seriously duder, if you really don't like it that much, then just leave the thread. You're like a dog with a bone. If you don't agree the price is a fair reflection of the product then fairly dos. Most people do, so we can leave that one there.

Come on Sid mate, The pages are not blank they are full color and for printing prices alone it makes a HUGE diference on final price of any book outhere.

Also you can get super prices on starter books wich is in my opinion a valid alternative.

THe content per say its down to personal opinions wich I obviously respect.

I look in the present times at PP and GW ( whats with so many comparisons with both lately?) and they are so similar both quality/ prices wise that only minor things differ from them.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Option is coming in September with the new boxed set.

A pretty awful option since it's a) coming several months later and b) bundled with a bunch of ugly figures for two armies I certainly don't want, so in order to get an affordable rulebook without extraneous rubbish in it (or the tedium of having to try to hawk it off to other rubes/gamers in your social circle), one has to buy it from an secondhand ebay vendor. So yeah, GW's business model is clearly perfect and in no way could it possibly be improved...

Faced with the prospect of either buying a bad book for 60€ or waiting until September to buy a stripped-down book from ebay (easier said than done because demand will outnumber supply, just like with all the other starter set rulebooks), I really don't have any incentive from GW to finish painting my Empire army. If they'd released a cheap, softcover rulebook this summer, I could have had time to learn the rules, paint new units, try out different ways to put my army together, etc, but no way am I going to pay 60€ for that pleasure, especially for a book that's ludicrously unwieldly at a table (I dare anyone try to hold one aloft at reading height with one hand for five minutes and tell me otherwise) and a pain to carry. Wait until September, you say? By then my enthusiasm will have waned, my holidays over and my spare time notably cut short.

So yes, GW missed a sale.

And we care how? Getting seriously tired of these pathetic posts in attempts to derail the thread. You don't like the options you have? Don't play fantasy. Seems that you won't be anyway, so leave the thread and let the conversation of new rules and changes continue.

To be fair, we don't know for sure if the models are "ugly" yet...and probably won't until a week before release.

So how are the figures in the new set ugly? I've not seen them yet.

So same to you Agamemmnom. If you don't like it, or the price then hey, don't buy it.

To me the idea of fielding one big ass block of 100 gobbos is so damn tempting now

Price wise you can get way cheaper than 60 euros at Maelstrom, and the warstore sometimes has the starters splitted from books in the battlewagon bitz... sure you missed most of the summer Aga but just saying theres alternatives outhere.

As for "you dont like so go away "comments... I disagree with them... If users post is because they care enough about these things... and I bet both aga and sid will get some books at cheap in the future, they know they want to, they are just trying to convince themselves to save some damn money... Resistance is futile

So the new edition means buying lots more models for my existing armies?

Oh now thats surprising...

I agree with your final comment, the more fantasy players the better in my personal opinion. But learly 3 pages of telling us why they don't want it seems over the top. Yes the book is expensive, I personally have ordered the collector's edition in hope that in few years i can make my money back, but you have bought into an expensive hobby, I don't see the point in backing out over a book?

Sidstyler wrote:To be fair, we don't know for sure if the models are "ugly" yet...and probably won't until a week before release.

If then.

Admittedly, I'm projecting current trends into the future, but since they will be starter-set quality and since GW has never made an attractive High Elf plastic infantryman, I do believe I'm on sure footing.

Big P wrote:So the new edition means buying lots more models for my existing armies?

Oh now thats surprising...

Yes and no. The rules now enable larger units, giving them distinct benefits (more attackers, or stubborn) and this is certainly encouraged, but still far from compulsory.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Big P wrote:So the new edition means buying lots more models for my existing armies?

Oh now thats surprising...

Yes and no. The rules now enable larger units, giving them distinct benefits (more attackers, or stubborn) and this is certainly encouraged, but still far from compulsory.

I do believe you're being optimistic there. The metagame will almost certainly favor players who will buy more in order to get those benefits, so if you want to be competitive, you'll need them.

I will probably skip the starter, one rulebook and the big gobbo army I managed to get mostly at ebays' Maestrom, aftermarkets etc ( thats one good thing about GW popularity) saved me a ton of money... So I really have no use for the starter... only if it gives you really cool terrain.

Speaking of terrain GW should really make a huge box with 3 or 4 citadel woods bundle... specially now that theres more terrain in fantasy.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Big P wrote:So the new edition means buying lots more models for my existing armies?

Oh now thats surprising...

Yes and no. The rules now enable larger units, giving them distinct benefits (more attackers, or stubborn) and this is certainly encouraged, but still far from compulsory.

I do believe you're being optimistic there. The metagame will almost certainly favor players who will buy more in order to get those benefits, so if you want to be competitive, you'll need them.

I do believe you're being optimistic there. Some armies will not favour large units for the amount of points basic troops will cost such as WoC. This is where Elite armies come in, and will be using multiple charges.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NAVARRO wrote:Speaking of terrain GW should really make a huge box with 3 or 4 citadel woods bundle... specially now that theres more terrain in fantasy.

This is true, GW need to bring out some sort of box set like there Cities of Death or Planetstrike bundle. Fantasy is really lacking in this department, and I know if I could get multiple empire buildings in a box, I would definitely pick a few up for an Empire town.

I agree the book is bloody expensive and how are you supposed to carry it around for gaming. oh you are not you are expected to pay the same again for the mini rule book and miniatures that you might not even use! Sure there is ebay to buy the mini rule book by itself but I doubt that would be a suggestion given by GW.

120 AUD is crazy, maybe they thought its a once buy only item so they had to make it as high as possible and talk about the value of it being an item you only need to buy every 5 years or something. Right now GW is coming to the point where everything they release seems to have less extra bits but more expensive at the same time. Also there will be less and less content looking at some older rule books they actually showed you how to make scenery but now it will be look at the cool scenery you can buy we will make awesome rules so you buy more! There is no more hobby in their books.

You can see the difference between the 4th ed 40k and the 5th ed 40k rule book. The 5th ed came with more pages but way less content and the extra pages was just was some 2 page spread for each race! But the 4th ed book has different ways to play and tonnes of extra rules. I feel that the extra pages in the new fantasy are just an excuse to charge us more.

But (c)learly 3 pages of telling us why they don't want it seems over the top. Yes the book is expensive, I personally have ordered the collector's edition in hope that in few years i can make my money back, but you have bought into an expensive hobby, I don't see the point in backing out over a book?

That is all fine and dandy First Born but we all don't have the huge wadge of readies that you have mate.

For some of us we have to think in other terms. That is all. I agree the book for what you get is probably worth the money in terms of quality from what has been said. The problem is in 4 or 5 years time it will be redundant and I will be expected to fork out another heap of rhino on a book that will only last another 4 or 5 years.
Now that is only a tenner or so a year but a 50 quid up front still represents a considerable outlay to me.

Please try to be more careful with your comments of the, "I can afford, it so if you can't, then " type please because it comes across as patronising, even if it isn't intented

but you have bought into an expensive hobby

It wasn't this damn expensive when I started!

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Big P wrote:So the new edition means buying lots more models for my existing armies?

Oh now thats surprising...

Yes and no. The rules now enable larger units, giving them distinct benefits (more attackers, or stubborn) and this is certainly encouraged, but still far from compulsory.

I do believe you're being optimistic there. The metagame will almost certainly favor players who will buy more in order to get those benefits, so if you want to be competitive, you'll need them.

You can also just field your existing models in larger units- i.e. combining two smaller units into one. Certainly, I bought some extra models to get ready for 8th edition, but I'm also just going to combine a few units to make them viable.

As to the book price- is it expensive? Yes! Is it (seemingly, up to this point) awesome and worth the price? Imho, yes . I'm quite pleased with it, although I do wish the small one was being released sooner so we didn't have to lug that huge tome around...

Sidstyler wrote:

but you have bought into an expensive hobby

It wasn't this damn expensive when I started!

Still not... Just some people seem to like the 'elite' status of it being so.



The thing is, the cost has no bearing for me. I self fund my hobby by selling painted figures. This works well for me and I have a monthly hobby budget of a quite considerable amount that doesnt impact of my 'real-life' money pit of daughter, car and living costs!

My point is, have the rules been altered purely to make people buy more stuff?

It sure seems that way.

I have been playing WFB since 1984 and have no anti-GW bias (indeed I spent a few years working for them) but Im trying to see what reason there is for these changes other than the real bottom line being that it will sell them more models. Great business strategy, just not sure its what I want from a 'hobby'.

I cant help but distrust a game system that seems to have been rewritten in order to sell more product... Especially to those who already have armies. Make the people who dont buy, be forced to or find themselves outclassed.

What I dislike is the constant dumbing down and simplification of the rules systems so they become short affairs in seeing who can roll the highest on a die. I stopped 40K after the last few re-writes as I found it an awful game. Luckliy I still have 2nd Ed to play!

I hope WFB dont go the same way for me. But I suspect it will... I may give it a go, but suspect I will be sticking to my 5th/7th edition hybrid. I may well still get the book if it has useful stuff in it, and I like the 'fluff'. One beauty of the Warhammer system is the ability to pull parts from all editions and cobble them together in a fashion of your choosing.

Of course its only the rules, one good thing is hopefully there will be some nice new figures...

Woot just ordered my stuff.

Love the magic cards (really hope individual army books are in there). The tokens are also really nice.

The rest of the stuff just seems bulky. That folding ruler just looks like it would be death on the gaming board. One careless player could take out a whole block of minis (it looks heavy). And the engineers compass thing just looks way to bulky.

As for the rules, i dont think they are as horrible as some people make them out to be. I was really against variable charges but after messing around with some blocks on my gaming table it really isnt that bad. Sometimes it will let you pull off a nuts charge.

Magic looks like its going to be really really strong. Lizard magic just looks devastating now. Slanns can add one dice to all their casting rolls (which if im reading it right wont contribute to the 12 PD max). They can make their power dice go a very very long way...

My skaven look like they are getting a lot stronger, weapon teams and warp lightning cannons are going to be incredibly devastating with no more guessing.

Well us in the historical world are well used to variable charges... Lost of rules have them.

Makes it alot more fun.

Good point about the Warp Lightning Cannon. Wasn't overly sold on it when the book came out, mainly because I'm a bit stuck in my ways for guess range, so trying to leave enough room for a favourable bounce then explosion twisted my melon. So now I just need to worry about more favourable positioning, which is nice.

As to needing to buy more models, I really don't see it happening to the degree people seem to fear. Fast, heavy armies like my my Dark Elf Monsters can still operate exactly as they do, but the resulting close combats will probably be more about wiping out the enemy in a single swoop rather than flanking with a single Hydra.

Now this particular list does need some tinkering. I need to strip down, or possibly drop altogether, the Black Dragon Lord, as he's a tad over the 25% for 2250 (the usual size my gaming group plays), and the 4th Chariot needs to be clipped out, in favour of more Core (not far off the Core, as I have 396 points in Core just now). HOWEVER, I do have a more extensive collection of Dark Elf models than I need for my favoured list, so I probably won't really need to buy anything (can always drop in a couple of units of Dark Riders to eat those final points, and bring core to over 25%).

Now to be absolutely fair, I don't really play in Tournaments, so I suppose having to worry about the Metagame is less of an issue for me than it might be for some. But like I said, I'm of the mind that the Metagame for 8th Edition will be a lot wider than 7th, and is going to take a while to really filter through. Not particularly up on Metagame and it's formation, so feel free to disagree if you have a better grasp than I do.

I would hope that GW would release the mini book as a stand alone.

Expecting players to purchase a starter to get the smaller version of the rules is not acceptable.

There should be the third option for those who are not entering the game, but who need a rulebook.

I would be willing to spend $20 on the little book. But expecting a $90 purchase to NOT have a 526pg monster book is dumb.

I'm still demanding blood!
The general consensus is that this is a very good edition, and having see a few demo games myself, I'm impressed by the rules and by the quality of the new hardback edition.

I'm not associated with GW (thank God) but when I see a lot of the positive messages for the new game, I think back to the hysteria of a couple of months ago when people were ready to write this off without actually giving it a chance - "my army is screwed," "I'm putting my minis up on ebay asap," etc

Some people are blameless, but others need to eat humble pie until they choke!!!

Rant over

anf yes the little rulebook should be sold as a stand alone.

skrulnik wrote:

I would be willing to spend $20 on the little book. But expecting a $90 purchase to NOT have a 526pg monster book is dumb.

They will be all over Ebay for 10 dollars after a month....

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Big P wrote:So the new edition means buying lots more models for my existing armies?

Oh now thats surprising...

Yes and no. The rules now enable larger units, giving them distinct benefits (more attackers, or stubborn) and this is certainly encouraged, but still far from compulsory.

I do believe you're being optimistic there. The metagame will almost certainly favor players who will buy more in order to get those benefits, so if you want to be competitive, you'll need them.

And those that already own the big units. How many people that play orcs buy up the old starter sets, or skull pass, build big units of 20-25 models, and then get their butts kicked. Or dwarves with big units of elite infantry, only to find out you couldn't maneuver enough to bring someone to combat? Small, hardhitting units nailed the front rank of those big blocks of infantry, giving no attacks back, and breaking them on the charge. And they all went back on the shelf.

I've got dwarf and orc units getting played for the first time in 20 year!

ShivanAngel wrote:

skrulnik wrote:

I would be willing to spend $20 on the little book. But expecting a $90 purchase to NOT have a 526pg monster book is dumb.

They will be all over Ebay for 10 dollars after a month....

BS. $10 starting with $6-10 shipping, maybe. They don't stay that low if you follow the auctions til the end.

I was trying to grab a 40k book for a friend. gave up after a week because the total price kept creeping into the mid $20s.

Look don't like it don't buy it ... I hate to break it to you, you're play a game where 16 little plastic dwalf cost £18 ... that over £1 per model.

You also have to factor in how much do you really spend on warhammer.

I bought my skaven army about 2 months ago, spent around 350 dollars on it. Havent spent any money on them since. So the number of hours of enjoyment relative to cost ratio is getting better.

In a month i have to spend 80 bucks on a rulebook. I honestly dont have a problem with that. Lots of people say GW gouges and charges to much etc. However you have to look at the big picture. Once a lot of people get their armies built they stop buying models. At least i do.. So once that 400-500 dollars is spent for your army they dont really make any more money off you.

Big P wrote:Well us in the historical world are well used to variable charges... Lost of rules have them.

Makes it alot more fun.

Actually, along with the "you can measure anything you wan't now", what it makes is remove the last bit of skill that was required to play the game and replace it with yet another layer of luck.

The dumbing down of Fantasy in the last 2 editions is notorious, looks like my DE (wich I've played faithfully from 4th edition until 7th), will spend the next 5 years gathering dust...

Er, Shivan, GW does cost too much. When I started, I could get a good 2.25K army for cheaper than a new console (of course, barring the new Nintendo stuff).

Now, I did the math: Same army, same models, none of it changed, could buy something a 360 Elite with 2-3 games for the same price. Again, no model change. This is also excluding the lack of a rulebook & army book, which is now +$104 USD for a grand total of three to six games.

To be fair, it was overpriced when I started on a lot of things (See: Much more metal boxes). However, there's a difference between being able to buy an army for the cost of a vanilla console and being able to buy several months / years' worth of entertainment (depending on the games bought: You can easily get several weeks / months out of some games without wearing out their "short term" welcome, let alone their long-term welcome).

Sorry for the derail, but:
1) We're already derailed.
2) I just dislike seeing people claim it's a reasonably priced hobby.

BTW, the Rulebooks really are getting out of hand: Army and Rulebook together. Say you want two GW WHFB armies, as well as the rulebook. Let's say that no new Army Book comes out until the next edition, and the next edition's book costs the same as this one's. $75 + $75 for those, now another $58 for both the army books. $208 USD for no models. Just the books so you can play the next four-to-six years. Let alone if you have to shell out another $58 for the new army books, for a grand total of $266.

While the Rulebooks may be full of content, they really need to see a price decrease soon. At $266 before models for four-to-six years, I could buy enough paperback books to sustain me for at least half that time.

PhantomViper wrote:

Big P wrote:Well us in the historical world are well used to variable charges... Lost of rules have them.

Makes it alot more fun.

Actually, along with the "you can measure anything you wan't now", what it makes is remove the last bit of skill that was required to play the game and replace it with yet another layer of luck.

The dumbing down of Fantasy in the last 2 editions is notorious, looks like my DE (wich I've played faithfully from 4th edition until 7th), will spend the next 5 years gathering dust...

Being able to judge a distance is hardly skill imo.

You could teach a monkey to do that. Proper deployment, flank protection, moving units correctly. Thats skill.

I think the variable charges adds more skill to the game. Forcing your opponent to either attempt to charge and fail, or risk being charged. Theres a lot more variables to determine the pros and cons of a situation.

I can live with the random charges. Once you get close it's a non-factor. What bugs me is terrain nit slowing down a unit. What possible justification could they have for flying in the face of logic, precedence and real-world experience. How many times have YOU waded across a swimming pool with five of your friends AT NORMAL WALKING SPEED only to have one of them drown on the way? And yet GW is claiming this happens all the time!?
I can see open order troops (the new "skirmishers") moving thru woods at no speed reduction, but a block of rank and file infantry? Trying to maintain formation? Yeah, right.
And please don't tell me "it's FANTASY, dude". Fantasy, yes. Ludicrous, no.

Open order skirmishers might even struggle in woods. There is such a thing as undergrowth to contend with.

Does it not negate one of the advantages of WE's?

Ease of play. As is right now, Fantasy boards are extremely light on terrain, and in my experience, rather than something to plow through it's merely something to avoid going through. Now, the current situation clearly benefits certain armies, which is why the mind numbing boredom of a Gunline is so popular. You're opponent dare not use cover in his approach, as it slows him down immeasurably, and you just concentrate your firepower on the more mobile units.

Now, make Terrain something usable by all armies, albeit at a risk, and you benefit all armies equally.

But gunlines are much, much better now with actual line of sight (-1 to hit is better than not being able to target at all), firing in two ranks without needing a hill, no guess ranges, no partials on templates and less restrictions on cheap special and rare slot warmachines.

I feel bad for the guy that excitedly gets his old infantry army that was shelved in 7th edition together to play 8th and then doesn't make it halfway across the board.

PhantomViper wrote:

Big P wrote:Well us in the historical world are well used to variable charges... Lost of rules have them.
Makes it alot more fun.

Actually, along with the "you can measure anything you wan't now", what it makes is remove the last bit of skill that was required to play the game and replace it with yet another layer of luck.
The dumbing down of Fantasy in the last 2 editions is notorious, looks like my DE (wich I've played faithfully from 4th edition until 7th), will spend the next 5 years gathering dust...

ah yes, the idea that if you don't like a rule, it's somehow "dumbing down" the game.

Where to place your units now has an element of risk to it. You don't know if the other player can get a charge off or not. You and he both have to plan for it to go both ways. It actually takes a lot more skill to play the game. How much skill is there in putting cavalry 7" to 12" away from a unit of dwarfs? You absolutely know you can charge, and that he can't.

Adapting to changing situations in a game is also skill, as in adapting to a new ruleset.

Sadly not. With generally extended charge reaches, and overall more cover on the board, they days of Gunline Boredom dominating are gone. Are they pointless now? Nope, of course not, but instead of seeing your opponent run pell mell across open terrain, hoping to have enough troops to smash your head in, they will now be pouring through all kind of terrain, and without decent fighting blocks of your own, too many eggs are in that one basket to rely upon it like you used to.

skrulnik wrote:I would hope that GW would release the mini book as a stand alone.
...
I would be willing to spend $20 on the little book. But expecting a $90 purchase to NOT have a 526pg monster book is dumb.

I agree. I'd buy the little book for $20 as an impulse the next time I was in a shop.

I would hope that GW would release the mini book as a stand alone.

That would be nice, but to date they have never done that. The closest thing to that was when they included it in the "Gamer's Edition" on the WFB 7th Edition release, but it was still part of a bundle of products that cost $75 at the time.

Durzod wrote:I can live with the random charges. Once you get close it's a non-factor. What bugs me is terrain nit slowing down a unit. What possible justification could they have for flying in the face of logic, precedence and real-world experience. How many times have YOU waded across a swimming pool with five of your friends AT NORMAL WALKING SPEED only to have one of them drown on the way? And yet GW is claiming this happens all the time!?
I can see open order troops (the new "skirmishers") moving thru woods at no speed reduction, but a block of rank and file infantry? Trying to maintain formation? Yeah, right.
And please don't tell me "it's FANTASY, dude". Fantasy, yes. Ludicrous, no.

And you'll be happy to know that most scenery in 8th edition does not slow down movement

They affect units in other ways. A ranked unit has trouble forming up in woods, and can't get steadfast, whereas skirmishers are stubborn in woods. Woods and Obstacles are dangerous for cavalry to charge through. etc.

Game moves quite fast, even with added scenery bits.

Allowing everyone to run through cover no penalty IMO is dumbing down the game. At the very least it could be something like "The Turn / Player Turn that you exit the terrain from, your unit still lacks ranks as it attempts get get itself back into proper marching order." In the very least prevent me from taking my Black Orcs separated from your troops by 18" of field including 10" of woods, and charging with absolutely no penalty unless it's a Mysterious Wood.

It does less to encourage tactical thinking (Baiting units into woods / using Skirmishers / Cavalry to quickly move around the woods is much less impressive now), and it's not like it's making you more durable (If anyone in 40K could move through woods without penalty, you think people would suddenly start using them more whilst they can still get 4+ saves from their squads?).

Just... I don't like how you're only at a penalty as RnF if you're parking in the woods at the very moment. Don't let me march through, charges starting or ending in woods are only D6, if you pass 25% or more of your unit through a wood on any given player turn (50% if you're under Horde Formation) you cannot gain a Rank Bonus that player turn / game turn, something.

Impulse spending is not a sustainable business model.

One book, £45, lasts you several years. Value = Good, surely? If GW were this bigg bad money grabbing machine some imagine, surely double the thickness = double the price, and not just a bit more? Rememer folks, there is my hobby, there is your hobby, and then there is THE hobby. The rulebook has the task of satisfying all that, hence all the extra stuff in it. Great for me, I love reading background and coming up with my own stuff. Great for a newcomer as it sets the scene. You however, might prefer JUST the rules, and no bumph. Valid opinion, but sadly one at the more extreme ends of the opinion scale, and thus one not really appeased by the new book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Minsc, I seriously suggest reading through the whole book before writing it off as dumbed down. I can and will continue to bait you into woods with Skirmishers, just in a different way. Why? ALL Skirmishers are Steadfast in woods, meaning with the right number in there, I can potentially tie up your massive unit for a couple of turns. All it takes is for just one Skirmisher to be in the woods when combat begins.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just thinking about it a little further, woods etc are DEADLY to big ranked units. All the time you are in there, you lose Steadfast for having more Ranks, meaning combat comes to down to whomever gets the most kills. A well positioned Skirmish or Cavalry unit can literally run roughshod over the unit, inflict heavy casualties, and quite possibly wipe you out. So although the old tactical decision is gone, it's replaced with an entirely new one. I think my Hydras will be lurking in woods from now on...Chariots too!

N.B. Not trying to belittle your opinion, just trying to engage in a little conversation and constructive criticism!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:One book, £45, lasts you several years. Value = Good, surely? If GW were this bigg bad money grabbing machine some imagine, surely double the thickness = double the price, and not just a bit more? Rememer folks, there is my hobby, there is your hobby, and then there is THE hobby. The rulebook has the task of satisfying all that, hence all the extra stuff in it. Great for me, I love reading background and coming up with my own stuff. Great for a newcomer as it sets the scene. You however, might prefer JUST the rules, and no bumph. Valid opinion, but sadly one at the more extreme ends of the opinion scale, and thus one not really appeased by the new book.

I love the background too, and would buy the big book if I could. Depending on how the Island of Blood set is priced, I may buy it anyways due to cost saving and - possibly - it being more accurate (again: It looks like the Big Book clarifies things much more readily than the little one, the Irresistible Force / Miscast being the most obvious example). I just don't like the prospect of slapping down some $180 USD in the next four-to-six years for three books (8th Ed, O&G 8th Ed, 9th Ed). I'm not a gamer, but considering my limited schedule of going to a GW / working on my stuff I can make more use of that $180 elsewhere for leisure.

Key word on the end there being leisure: Like you said, it's a hobby. While $600-$700 being shelled out over five years for the stuff and an army is a lot (Again, 360 Elite w/ five to ten games, Wii w/ potentially fifteen-ish), in the long term it's not going to drive you broke unless you're on a very low income: $600 in five years is $120 a year, $10 USD a month. Almost everyone can afford to save up at least $10 USD a month for leisure, just changing your groceries to store brand or using some coupons can get you that if really pinched for money.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Minsc, I seriously suggest reading through the whole book before writing it off as dumbed down. I can and will continue to bait you into woods with Skirmishers, just in a different way. Why? ALL Skirmishers are Steadfast in woods, meaning with the right number in there, I can potentially tie up your massive unit for a couple of turns. All it takes is for just one Skirmisher to be in the woods when combat begins.

The Skirmishers better be Dryads or a unit of 20-some Huntsmen, as they're not going to last more than two player turns otherwise (simply by being horrendously chewed out by enemy infantry). And a big difference here is that the reward is much smaller for the same effort: Last edition, you bait some Chaos Knights into charging into the woods they're stuck there for the next two to four turns unless you present them a charge. This edition, they're stuck there for however long you keep throwing units into them to tie them up: Otherwise, they're out their very next turn.

I did look at the book BTW, I was at the GW for some nine hours this Saturday and even errata'd a thread I made on 8th Edition from some errors I drew before looking at it. I'm of the opinion now that I can and probably will play 8th, but I'm also still of the opinion that things are simplified.

EDIT:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Just thinking about it a little further, woods etc are DEADLY to big ranked units. All the time you are in there, you lose Steadfast for having more Ranks, meaning combat comes to down to whomever gets the most kills. A well positioned Skirmish or Cavalry unit can literally run roughshod over the unit, inflict heavy casualties, and quite possibly wipe you out. So although the old tactical decision is gone, it's replaced with an entirely new one. I think my Hydras will be lurking in woods from now on...Chariots too!

N.B. Not trying to belittle your opinion, just trying to engage in a little conversation and constructive criticism!

The problem is that it's going to be very hard to catch a unit in the woods: If you don't start the turn inside the wood, but parked right outside, most of the infantry unit (if M4, if M5 or M6 practically all of it) can clear the wood in a single bound. If they start the turn only partially in the wood, it's very likely they can clear it in one round.

I know that "most" is not "all" and thus keeps the lack of ranks, but GW seemed to have forgotten that practically every army has at least one mean to clear the wood in an assault without a single model touching. While I realize they shouldn't have to adjust for everything, it again doesn't seem right watching some thirty Blood Letters bum-rush a unit 16" away through a set of woods and suffer absolutely no penalty. Well, for them it does, but for Orcs / Skaven / Lizardmen?

mikhaila wrote:
ah yes, the idea that if you don't like a rule, it's somehow "dumbing down" the game.

Where to place your units now has an element of risk to it. You don't know if the other player can get a charge off or not. You and he both have to plan for it to go both ways. It actually takes a lot more skill to play the game.

And that added "risk" is nothing but a gamble on the roll of the dice.

A poor player can now get out of a bad positioning by just rolling high enough for a charge... how is that NOT dumbing down the game?

mikhaila wrote:
How much skill is there in putting cavalry 7" to 12" away from a unit of dwarfs? You absolutely know you can charge, and that he can't.

You are using an extreme to try and justify your position. There is skill in puting your unit outside other units charge range so that you can bait your opponent into a failed charge, just because you mention one of the easier and more extreme cases doesn't make less true in other situations.

mikhaila wrote:
Adapting to changing situations in a game is also skill, as in adapting to a new ruleset.

Too bad that new ruleset has very little resembling the old one, its not a case of adapting to a new ruleset, its a case of the game turning into something that I don't wan't to play anymore. I would go as far as to compare it to the change from 4th to 5th edition! And just like that change got me to pick up the game again, so will this one cause me to drop it again. (and by this one I'm refering to the amalgamated mess of IMO bad rules that GW is calling 8th edition, not just the movement rules in particular)

Thing is, the terrain rules have changed how you approach it, when you combine it with the less predictable charge range. This is my thinking (feel free to disagree. We are only dealing in opinion after all!)....

So, currently, I tend to avoid woods etc because I am slowed to a literal crawl, as not only am I prevented from Marching, but my movement is then halved, so the majority of units will shuffle 2" through it a turn.

But, in 8th Edition, I can march straight through it, risking the legs of 1 in 6 of my troops (or more if I'm Cavalry!). However, what if I cannot emerge from the other side of the woods fully, and my opponent has units nearby? The exact type of unit isn't terribly critical here, I hasten to point out. Now, if they are a good charge distance away (say, 12" or more for Infantry) I might just push through, knowing that the odds of the charge failing are in my favour, meaning I can be out and free next turn, possibly turning to face my would be aggressor. But that's still a massive risk. Even if his unit is 16" away, the charge can still connect, and them I am thoroughly bollocksed, especially if he has the good sense to jump me in the flank, where I cannot parry, nor bring additional attacks to bare. So considering this, it's very much a case of thinking just because I can, doesn't mean I should. I can make things a bit more solid in my favour by having a unit tailing my own, in a position to counterattack my opponents units, ideally should they fail their charge. This is a pretty significant tactical undertaking, as even a small unit of light troops can do horrendous damage in a flank charge these days, as not only do I get more attacks, but my opponent is extremely unlikely to be steadfast, unless Stubborn regardless.

Let me just say thank god forests are no longer the tar pits of death they used to be anymore. If you ever went into a wood in 7th, chances were you were never getting out. Good riddance!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:But, in 8th Edition, I can march straight through it, risking the legs of 1 in 6 of my troops (or more if I'm Cavalry!).

Actually, to my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) you're only at risk for the cavalry anyways, at only 1-in-6 for them. Standard infantry just loses ranks, Cavalry and the like are now Dangerous Terrain (albeit woods being more nasty to Heavy than Light cavalry now as it's no-save for Dangerous).

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Now, if they are a good charge distance away (say, 12" or more for Infantry) I might just push through, knowing that the odds of the charge failing are in my favour, meaning I can be out and free next turn, possibly turning to face my would be aggressor.

Personally, I wouldn't declare the charge. You're much more likely to get your March Distance on your own than with the single, lowest D6. Actually, to my understanding Dwarves are the only ones who can even match that.

Everyone takes Dangerous Terrain when *marching* through area terrain. Cavalry get it worse when going through woods.

As for baiting Frenzied stuff into woods, I'd say it's now more tactical, as they can take a Ld to restrain, or have to charge the closest. When someone has paid for Frenzied Knights O'Doom, to simple bog them down in a wood for most of the game wasn't especially tactical. But remember, still dealing purely in opinion. Apologies if I come across as lecturing.

Sidstyler wrote:

Tri wrote:Hard back = More expensive then paperback ... also its only 256 pages So really what the hell is your point? A smaller paperback is cheaper then a larger hardback?

No gak, really? Hardback is more expensive? I had no idea!

I know that, clearly you missed the point. PP gives you OPTIONS, less expensive options. GW charges you a crap-ton and tells you to feth off, you either take what they give you or leave it. And the PP hardback option is still much cheaper than what GW offers, and even at only 256 pages it still gives you more than what any GW rulebook does.

And I'm really getting sick of people bringing up page count, as if that really mattered. Apparently it doesn't even matter what's on the damn pages, only that they have the page count. If they were all blank would it still be worth $75? Apparently because it'd still be a hug brick of a book and weighing a ton = worth a lot.

As for this, this is my last post about it. I said what I think and that's that, lol. If I get the book at all I will, in fact, hit eBay. That's a big if, though.

Then leave, nobody really cares if you buy it or not. At all.

Wait for the starter set, you can buy that for basically the same price as the book and get a bunch of miniatures along with your rulebook as well.

Skipped 3 pages of QQ.

The small rulebook will be good. Probably, I'll find a HE player and trade Skavens for High Elfs.

ShivenAngel- the magic cards are just the lores of magic from the main rule book. Each army will get a limited edition card set released when they get a new army book.

Mick

Sorry, I still find the new "run thru me at no penalty" terrain rules an idiotic departure from physics and reality. Will it stop me from playing? No. But it won't stop me from praying that GW sees the light in 9th ed., assuming I'm still around then. Gettin' old, y'know.

Durzod wrote:Sorry, I still find the new "run thru me at no penalty" terrain rules an idiotic departure from physics and reality. Will it stop me from playing? No. But it won't stop me from praying that GW sees the light in 9th ed., assuming I'm still around then. Gettin' old, y'know.

Trust me, there's penalties.)

Watching a chaos knight roll a 1 and die as leap across a defended barricade to charge my gobbbos is quite hillarious. You know how hard it is for for a gobbo to kill a chaos knight. They got one from the wall, and one in the ensueing combat because 10 of them got to attack. My opponent later stared at the board fo 5 minutes, wondering if he should take a shortcut through the woods with a block of chaos warriors, and risk a charge from a unit of orcs that would about 11 inches away.

If you make terrain to restrictive on movement, the game bogs down, units don't move, and we get to play a skirmish and monster game. If you want both terrain AND blocks of troops, you have to have some way for troops to move and engage. I was horrified when we set up the first game, and used the random terrain generator to fill the board up. Figured it would just suck. And then had a hell of a game.

Im glad terrain wont completely bog down some armies now.

Played a game a week or so ago where i got the side with 2 big forests just outside my deployment zone. It took 3 turns just to get half my army through the damn woods.

mikhaila wrote:If you make terrain to restrictive on movement, the game bogs down, units don't move, and we get to play a skirmish and monster game. If you want both terrain AND blocks of troops, you have to have some way for troops to move and engage.

GW have chosen their own way on this because they feel, perhaps quite rightly, that tables with lots of terrain look more impressive, given the scale of the game (and it can't hurt that they're now deeply in the plastic terrain business). The traditional approach has been to make terrain bog troops down, and simply have very little of it per game, assuming generals would choose open battlefields precisely because they need the space to maneuver. This is the way most historical wargames do it, that and by having massive, ungainly battlefields.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Impulse spending is not a sustainable business model.

Umm. You better not tell the supermarkets or they'll remove the magazine, book and candy stands from around their checkouts. Oh no, wait. They're probably know better than to listen to you on this one.

$20/£13.5 little rulebook for both 40k and WFB right at the cash register. Every employee has to ask every customer if they need a mini-rulebook each time they buy something.

Impulse buy + suggestive upsell = lots of sales.

It's a sales tactic but not a sales model. Consider the exact item. If you wish to play Warhammer, Warmachine, 40k or whatever, you need the rulebook it's an about essential. What you're on about is additional stuff, like a Chocolate Bar. I go to a Supermarket to buy my weeks shopping, that is what I am after. The choccie bars etc right by the till are not where the Supermarket makes it's profit, but it doesn't hurt. Totally different intent behind the two styles.

Hey Frozenwastes,
is that a Buy One Get One Free?

Yea I kinda agree. Rulers, paintbrushes, maybe some terrain = impulse buys. Core ruleset? Not so much.

Mini rulebooks could definitley be impulse buys to get some cross system buying going on. Say you play 40k and someone suggests grabbing a WFB minirulebook just to check it out. I think even people who already own the big rulebook might grab one just because it's easier to carry.

People want the mini rulebook outside of the starter box set. Right now, eBay sellers are the only ones filling that demand. GW could do it directly.

Also, it'd be a good cross-promotional give away. Spend over $150/£100 pounds on 40k or WFB and the staff just slips a mini rulebook for the other game into your bag.

They could also do a "build your own starter" promotion where you buy a battalion (or equivilent) and a hero/lord and get the mini rulebook thrown in.

It can be so much more than something that you can only get from buying the starter or from some eBay guy.

Needs more than that though. Not selling you rules, selling you a setting, the background, the whole shebang. No way could an impulse provide anywhere near what is really required.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Big P wrote:So the new edition means buying lots more models for my existing armies?

Oh now thats surprising...

Yes and no. The rules now enable larger units, giving them distinct benefits (more attackers, or stubborn) and this is certainly encouraged, but still far from compulsory.

I do believe you're being optimistic there. The metagame will almost certainly favor players who will buy more in order to get those benefits, so if you want to be competitive, you'll need them.

I see this comment or variations of it in alot of threads and don't understand it. All the new rules do is favor players that have large collections and want to field them in larger battles. A 1500pt(or any size for that matter) game is still a 1500pt game, with the same amount of models. If a player wanted to adjust(metagame) their army to max out a units benefits, they will have to sacrifice something else in the army, maybe a warmachine, a character or some such.

Indeedy. Barring the possibility of list rejigging, existing armies are just as valid now as they ever were.

Just played a game in the GW store using 8th edition rules, very interesting, and good, the rumours got pretty much everything right, and the biggest change is in how much terrian affects a game, 10 gutter runners and an assiassin with poison, close to a tower of khorne got hatred and frenzy, with some lucky rolls, tore right through a slann and 20 temple guard

doubled wrote:Just played a game in the GW store using 8th edition rules, very interesting, and good, the rumours got pretty much everything right, and the biggest change is in how much terrian affects a game, 10 gutter runners and an assiassin with poison, close to a tower of khorne got hatred and frenzy, with some lucky rolls, tore right through a slann and 20 temple guard

I can see the tactical decisions that went into this. Dicehammer here we come!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Agamemnon2 wrote:

mikhaila wrote:If you make terrain to restrictive on movement, the game bogs down, units don't move, and we get to play a skirmish and monster game. If you want both terrain AND blocks of troops, you have to have some way for troops to move and engage.

GW have chosen their own way on this because they feel, perhaps quite rightly, that tables with lots of terrain look more impressive, given the scale of the game (and it can't hurt that they're now deeply in the plastic terrain business). The traditional approach has been to make terrain bog troops down, and simply have very little of it per game, assuming generals would choose open battlefields precisely because they need the space to maneuver. This is the way most historical wargames do it, that and by having massive, ungainly battlefields.

And yet 40k manages to have OODLES of terrain that slows down troops that AREN'T marching in serried ranks.
The reason historical games have terrain that slows down troops is because that's how is was. If you look at maps of historical battlefields, you don't see lots of cool looking terrain where the troops were moving, because generals knew what they were doing. The concept of avenues of approach is lost when terrain is just Eye Candy.
What I used to love about the game was the way that historical tactics translated well to the tabletop. Guess I'll have to play Napoleonics to get that rush (By the way, not all historical games require massive ungainly battlefields. Just the large showpiece games...kind like the 6000 points on a side Warhammer showpiece games.), hopefully only until 9th ed.

Durzod wrote:

doubled wrote:Just played a game in the GW store using 8th edition rules, very interesting, and good, the rumours got pretty much everything right, and the biggest change is in how much terrian affects a game, 10 gutter runners and an assiassin with poison, close to a tower of khorne got hatred and frenzy, with some lucky rolls, tore right through a slann and 20 temple guard

I can see the tactical decisions that went into this. Dicehammer here we come!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Agamemnon2 wrote:

mikhaila wrote:If you make terrain to restrictive on movement, the game bogs down, units don't move, and we get to play a skirmish and monster game. If you want both terrain AND blocks of troops, you have to have some way for troops to move and engage.

GW have chosen their own way on this because they feel, perhaps quite rightly, that tables with lots of terrain look more impressive, given the scale of the game (and it can't hurt that they're now deeply in the plastic terrain business). The traditional approach has been to make terrain bog troops down, and simply have very little of it per game, assuming generals would choose open battlefields precisely because they need the space to maneuver. This is the way most historical wargames do it, that and by having massive, ungainly battlefields.

And yet 40k manages to have OODLES of terrain that slows down troops that AREN'T marching in serried ranks.
The reason historical games have terrain that slows down troops is because that's how is was. If you look at maps of historical battlefields, you don't see lots of cool looking terrain where the troops were moving, because generals knew what they were doing. The concept of avenues of approach is lost when terrain is just Eye Candy.
What I used to love about the game was the way that historical tactics translated well to the tabletop. Guess I'll have to play Napoleonics to get that rush (By the way, not all historical games require massive ungainly battlefields. Just the large showpiece games...kind like the 6000 points on a side Warhammer showpiece games.), hopefully only until 9th ed.

Really? What historical tactics are you talking about? The ones that left the game long ago? There is a game called warhammer ancients btw that may be better suited to "realistic combat" instead of say a game that is based in high fantasy! Thats one thing I'll never understand. Ive been playing fantasy for a very long time and I havent seen much evidence of this "historical tactics" thing people keep talking about

7th was all about huge monsters, war machines and psychology destroying all your enemies.. I see absolutely ZERO evidence of such historical tactics in ANY of the top armies of fantasy. Kairos + horror spam != historical combat.. Nor doom wheel + abom with two bells in a huge block of skaven... Hmm dont remember war hydras either backed up by a ring of hotek and insane unit of blackguard!

5th was all about hero hammer and 7th all about "big stuff".. Rank and file troops were pathetic for most armies because they were slow (IE got charged and destroyed) or were just weak in general. The only good ones were ones with insane combinations due to magic banners (generally).. Maybe if everyone only played Empire, Orks, bretonnians and tomb kings youd get some awesome historical combat going.. Or the empire player will just bring 2 steam tanks and a war altar

Personally, I think the changes to dealing with terrain are good and will make the game more fun. My wood elves can go treesinging-heavy and basically shut down standard blocks by moving forests into their way under 7th ed rules.

They can't march in the forest, and can only go half-speed, meaning most blocks are only moving 2" or 2.5" straight ahead. Once they enter, I can use the same spells to cause damage to them. Even without that, they move at half speed until the last rank has cleared the forest, which can honestly take the whole game.

It's not fun, and pretty much just plain silly, imho. And that's coming from someone who it benefits . I'll be glad to see the new terrain rules come into affect so we can actually put some terrain on the table without compromising the game.

You mean all these years you never made a flank attack? Or protected your own flanks? Or managed to engage a portion of the enemy's force with a greater proportion of yours? I could go on, but why bother? In your mind Cheese will out.
Just because a unit has a fantasy look doesn't mean it can't be used according to the principles of war. Or don't you believe a good player can overcone a cheesy list?

My opinion (and I think that of many nay-sayers) is, and likely always will be, that the game has substituted randomness for skill.

Luck determines who can charge; skill has been removed (sure, you can do the odds, but that's not a skill - it's basic math).

Luck determines the effectiveness of magic. I played a game over the weekend, and had 6 levels of Tzeentch. On one turn, I had six spells and four dice; the next, two spells (one useless) and nine dice. The magic pahse has been reduced to one steaming pile of luck to 'balance' things out.

Step up removes the tactical advantage of charging, ie killing the enemy before they can attack. Sure, my Swordsmen can swing before Dwarves, but where they could maybe kill one or two to minimize casualties, now they're going to stare down the full weight of their ire - where's the advantage to charging now?

And so many drawbacks can be 'tested out' of: Frenzy, march blocking... The game now offers no incentive to be a crafty general. It's been reduced to two armies running at each other full tilt, two players rolling buckets of dice, and the dice gods are the only authority in who wins (reminds me of little league, in the way that they play and not care who wins*).

My objection is that GW threw in more random and called it 'balance'. The game has really become too random for my taste.

I may play 8E to satisfy my urges (and maybe even grow to be okay with it), but I seriously think I'm going to write my own system while I count the days until 9E.

..

*I know that this might tag me as a WAAC player, but think about: Why do we play the game? We PLAY TO WIN THE GAME! I am fully capable of enjoying a good game of Warhammer when played by two skillful opponents, and congrats if I get outplayed. The rare game that I get truly frustrated is when the dice go WAY beyond 'statistical anomaly'. The random factor is going to have much more impact on the outcome of games, and I prefer to lose by being outplayed rather than crappy luck.

Manfred von Drakken wrote

Luck determines who can charge; skill has been removed (sure, you can do the odds, but that's not a skill - it's basic math).

What is so skillful about earlier editions with fixed charge ranges? You can charge 8", I can charge 10" so if I sit 9" away from you I get the charge and you don't - that's basic math too! Yes you needed to judge that distance by eye, but that's hardly a terrific feat of skill to anyone who has played wargames for more than a few weeks.

Do you think that generals in the past said to their troops 'they're in plate armour so they can only charge 80 yards up the field, you're not so stand about 85 yards from them and we'll win this one lads!'? Of course not.

If you want to charge an enemy you need to be close enough to them so that you aren't too out of breath to fight when you get there but that's hardly a specific distance, sometimes you'll charge further due to really minor effects (a cooling breeze, have you just gulped down some water, the ground is smoother than you thought, etc).

The skill comes in assessing the risk and that's what this ruleset simulates. You can dismiss it as 'basic math' but isn't that the whole basis behind statistically driven combat resolution and therefore the choices that you make in army design?

so, I've read most of this thread...

I have a question: as someone who has never seen nor played a game of WHFB, would this be a good ruleset to start playing in?

I've been curious about Fantasy for quite some time now, actually, and having realized that a new rule book was due I've kind of been biding my time waiting to see what transpired...so far all I have to go on is one person, who also didn't play Fantasy, describing to me the different phases during a player turn...regardless, it sounds interesting & I've been thinking, based on what I've heard, that it may be fun to get into & that now may as well be as good a time as any, since I'd be learning from scratch like a lot of folks.

oh, one other thing, how likely is it that Mat Ward &/or Robin Cruddace will write Fantasy army books? that may affect my decision, ha!

If you're interested in WHFB this is as good an edition as any. Since it's the current edition, you'll be learning as much as the rest of us.
If your wallet can stand it, I'd say go ahead and get the big new book. There's a lot of non-rules material in there that'll increase your enjoyment of the hobby (as well as building upper body strength) and can help you decide which army you like the look/feel of.
A few of us have our issues with some aspects of this edition, but that's due to our history with past editions and/or other systems (anything that lets me throw lead and push dice...). It's really a good game, otherwise would we be so passionate about it?
As for MW, rumor has him having a big hand in the 8th ed rules. Maybe that's why GW doesn't list an author.

Chimera_Calvin wrote:
What is so skillful about earlier editions with fixed charge ranges? You can charge 8", I can charge 10" so if I sit 9" away from you I get the charge and you don't - that's basic math too! Yes you needed to judge that distance by eye, but that's hardly a terrific feat of skill to anyone who has played wargames for more than a few weeks.

Of course it takes skill to judge that 1" interval, no one said it took a huge amount of it, we are talking about pushing toy soldiers around a table after all...

Chimera_Calvin wrote:
Do you think that generals in the past said to their troops 'they're in plate armour so they can only charge 80 yards up the field, you're not so stand about 85 yards from them and we'll win this one lads!'? Of course not.

If you want to charge an enemy you need to be close enough to them so that you aren't too out of breath to fight when you get there but that's hardly a specific distance, sometimes you'll charge further due to really minor effects (a cooling breeze, have you just gulped down some water, the ground is smoother than you thought, etc).

Actually, that is mostly a fixed distance and generals did say that (or something to that effect), go read some accounts about the napoleonic wars and the way that cavalry charges where made at the time. Humans don't run 100 yards at full speed one moment and 200 the next just because of a gust of wind...

Chimera_Calvin wrote:
The skill comes in assessing the risk and that's what this ruleset simulates. You can dismiss it as 'basic math' but isn't that the whole basis behind statistically driven combat resolution and therefore the choices that you make in army design?

You can assess the risk all you like, fact is that luck will be a much bigger factor in a Fantasy battle in 8th edition than it ever was in previous ones and alot of us are understandably (IMO), upset about it.

Manfred von Drakken wrote:My opinion (and I think that of many nay-sayers) is, and likely always will be, that the game has substituted randomness for skill.
Luck determines the effectiveness of magic. I played a game over the weekend, and had 6 levels of Tzeentch. On one turn, I had six spells and four dice; the next, two spells (one useless) and nine dice. The magic pahse has been reduced to one steaming pile of luck to 'balance' things out.

How can you have a different amount of spells each turn? And if this is Tzeentch daemons, you can do loads to maximise your power dice to 10-12 with bluescribes and several power vortexes.

RiTides wrote:Personally, I think the changes to dealing with terrain are good and will make the game more fun. My wood elves can go treesinging-heavy and basically shut down standard blocks by moving forests into their way under 7th ed rules.

They can't march in the forest, and can only go half-speed, meaning most blocks are only moving 2" or 2.5" straight ahead. Once they enter, I can use the same spells to cause damage to them. Even without that, they move at half speed until the last rank has cleared the forest, which can honestly take the whole game.

It's not fun, and pretty much just plain silly, imho. And that's coming from someone who it benefits . I'll be glad to see the new terrain rules come into affect so we can actually put some terrain on the table without compromising the game.

Feels like I am going at half speed in the woods on this thread and can't keep up.

Difference is RiTides is that the internal logic that WE's can make the forests move is fine, it is within the bounds of possibilty within the Old World if not ours.
Now, if I have misunderstood I apologize, but the effect on terrain has no effect on movement, which doesn't make sense, even within the fantasy world. I don't fully understand the point of adding all the terrain if it has no effect on movement and cover. Other than to look pretty and boost GW sales
Having sid that, I do like the addition of lots of terrain because it does look good, and I can understand why they want to streamline the game.

Like I said I have probably got the terrain rules completely wrong anyway!

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=11200010a

Gotta admire the enthusiasm at least.

Mr. Vetock returned to the USA a while back, I hope he contineus to contribute stuff to both the game and setting for a long time.

reds8n wrote:http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=11200010a

Gotta admire the enthusiasm at least.

Mr. Vetock returned to the USA a while back, I hope he contineus to contribute stuff to both the game and setting for a long time.

Yup the fella seems extremelly exited Not much info in there though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Funny thing, he reminded of me something with his style of comments and after thinking a bit I discovered what...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH7qq7OjJO8&feature=related

Durzod wrote:As for MW, rumor has him having a big hand in the 8th ed rules. Maybe that's why GW doesn't list an author.

Actually, each chapter of the book lists a separate author/authors by name. And the rule section lists Mat Ward as the sole author.
And the book shows him playing a game with Jervis, ending with both drinking beer in Bugman's.

@radical bob: I think it is a very good moment to start. The book is really inspiring, the new templates (preorder the ranging set and/or dice, almost sold out!) are very imaginative. Whatever the rules in detail, the terrain interaction is very much better and the scenarios make the game much more flexible and fun, instead of just both armies running into the middle of an empty board and brawling. The rules will certainly change the power balance of the armies. Experience will tell, if Chaos Daemons are now playable in friendly games

They told me at the GW store that the new "special" terrain rules are optional, and you have to agree with your opponent before the game whether or not you'll play them.

So is this true or not?

I am not going to play those terrain rules either way, but I guess it would make a difference if it is an optional thing only.

I am curious about one thing, which has probably been addressed already but I guess I was too busy "QQing" about the ridiculous price of the rulebook. For my Dark Elves I was planning on taking a lord on a dragon and a sorceress, and maybe a couple of hydras (been thinking about either two hydras or a hydra and some bolt throwers). I saw someone post something about percentages earlier and I was wondering if a big expensive lord on dragon and a sorceress would even be possible in an army of 3k points or less.

I'm not all that "serious" about Fantasy, not like 40k anyway. If I do play Fantasy I'm more or less going to be pretty casual about it and just taking crap that looks cool, which is big stuff like dragons and monsters, obviously. But if they've toned that down and I can't realistically play that stuff anymore and have to field a bunch of boring spearmen blocks and little else (unless I play with a $1000+ army), then that'll definitely finish off whatever little interest I had. From what I've seen though it doesn't look good, IIRC someone posted earlier that in order to play with just one dragon you'd have to play a nearly 4000 point game and I just don't have the inclination to build a WHF army that damn big.

I saw someone post something about percentages earlier and I was wondering if a big expensive lord on dragon and a sorceress would even be possible in an army of 3k points or less.

In 2.25K you get to spend 562,5 points on lords, so you can get the Black Dragon. He costs about 535-545 points normally. You also get to spend 562,5 points on heroes, so you get the Sorceress and other heroes too. You're also allowed to spend 562,5 points on rare, so you can buy two Hydras and two RBTs.

IIRC in 3K the amount of how many identical choices you can bring doubles, so with the 750 points rare allotment you can get 4 Hydras.

But if they've toned that down

Far from it. A Hydra now attacks 7 times, handlers 6 times, breaths into combat 2D6 hits, and stomps into combat D6 hits. Yes, theoretically you can kill 31 of those 'boring spearmen' in one phase with one Hydra.

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:Feels like I am going at half speed in the woods on this thread and can't keep up.

Lol

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:I don't fully understand the point of adding all the terrain if it has no effect on movement and cover. Other than to look pretty and boost GW sales

Unless I read it wrong when I got to check the rulebook, terrain definitely adds to cover. You can get a -1 or -2 to hit. That's huge! Sure, it's a little silly that it doesn't slow down units at all- I think perhaps a good compromise would have been to say that they cannot march. That's what's silly right now- they cannot march, and move half of their normal movement speed. I'm not sure how many people actually play this correctly, because it slows you down a lot. On the other hand, I can't recall if it slows down a charge or not. It just is a little too much, imho.

TBD- I have also heard (mikhaila mentioned it earlier in the thread I believe) that the "special" terrain effects/rules are optional. He didn't think they would be used in tournaments.

As to the skill- I never get why this comes up. Imho, it takes very little skill to make a "power gaming" list that is monster and calvary-heavy, and takes no blocks. Now, that's not as powerful... it doesn't mean the game will take less skill, it will take different skill. You can't take out the entire enemy army with a single monster. Imho, that will mean a little more skill will be involved overall.

I lost a game to skaven where basically my entire army was taken out by the HPA. The other player was good, but he didn't get to show his skill, because his monster just ate my army.

I'm very happy that a single monster can't break a block of troops now. Also, I like the pre-measuring- it takes away a lot of the gamesmanship from charge distances and the like. You get to premeasure, then roll for it. I think the whole talk of skill being toned down is rather silly- it's realistic for you to attempt a charge, and perhaps fall short. Now can you adapt to that? Just because everything doesn't always go "according to plan" doesn't mean that a game takes less skill... it actually makes it more realistic, imho.

Now terrain probably should slow units down, but I believe it does have the chance of injuring calvary / monsters, so that's something. And it makes sense- infantry can fluidly move around obstacles, while calvary riding over a fence or the like might get injured.

Anyway, I like the new rules, even with treesinging being less effective. With the move to more blocks, it would be unreal how deadly it would be if it stayed under the old rules. The reason it's not as effective now is simple- most people don't take a lot of blocks or at least, most of their points are in elite calvary/monster/etc units.

Last thought- I can't believe people are reminiscing about how things are now in 7th edition!?? Especially about it requiring "skill". I've played daemons and only killed 4 models in an entire game while being tabled. This past weekend I played O&G and only lost a handful of models myself, not even an entire unit. There's too much unbalance in the rules as they are now, they definitely needed an overhaul, and GW did it pretty darn well, imho. I don't like their company policies a lot of the time, but you've got to give credit where credit is due- I think they hit the nail on the head with this one.

reds8n wrote:http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=11200010a

Gotta admire the enthusiasm at least.

Mr. Vetock returned to the USA a while back, I hope he contineus to contribute stuff to both the game and setting for a long time.

Wow, Jeremy still works for GW? I remember working with him back in '97 during my stint at GW HQ, real nice guy.

I wish I had the disposable income I had in my younger days, I'd be all over the new rulebook. This really sounds like a fun new edition of the game and I hope to get the chance to play! I do agree that it would be nice if they could just sell the little rulebook directly, but I'll suffer with the wait and dealing with the joy that is EBay.

Indeed, he's been a member of the Design Studio for a few years now, wrote the Skaven army book amongst a few other bits and bobs.

I think some people confuse tactics and skill. 7th ed was like chess in some ways - you *knew* that, if you sat >8" from a M4 unit, they could not charge you. That kind of perfect tactical certainly is *hardly* realistic - for example look at Total War, regarded as fairly accurate: that has variable ranges your troops can charge in.

What they try to represent, imperfectly (D6 system, IGO UGO, etc) is that chargnig into combat is *not* a fixed event with 100% probabilities associated with it - there is some variability. THis is the variable charge distance - 2D6 means you have slightly reduced the randomness (more results in the middle ranges of 7-11" from a base M4) but you have some representation of "real world" appearing.

Fantasy battlefields were open fields? Not in the various books I've read...they certainly used terrain.

As for units not being slowed down - well, they are. If you want to not take casualties, dont march. If you march, you have a chance that some of your unit will die / get lost / give up and go home which reduces your units effectiveness. Again, you have to use less than perfect information (variable casualties) to determine if the risk / reward is worth it.

Same as charging.

I *love* the new version, it stops fantasy being what it was in 7th - no point in static blocks as they were mainly liabilities (with rare exceptions), just take skirmishers / cav / monsters and returns it to a game where Infantry, even the ranked stuff, can play a part. Which is a *very* good thing.

Agamemnon2 wrote:This is the way most historical wargames do it, that and by having massive, ungainly battlefields.

So you aint played any historical games then...

Kroothawk wrote: Whatever the rules in detail, the terrain interaction is very much better and the scenarios make the game much more flexible and fun, instead of just both armies running into the middle of an empty board and brawling.

So instead we have armies rushing across a cluttered battlefield and brawling with bucketloads of dice.

Did anyone else notice that chariots can now march, and have the swifstride special rule (M+3D6" charge and discard lowest dice) like flyers? Not only that, but they also get one stomp attack after each combat at always strike last initiative on the chariot's own strength?

Very, very nice.

reds8n wrote:Indeed, he's been a member of the Design Studio for a few years now, wrote the Skaven army book amongst a few other bits and bobs.

Man, step away from the hobby for a decade and look what happens! Glad to see he's done well.

zioN wrote:

Manfred von Drakken wrote:My opinion (and I think that of many nay-sayers) is, and likely always will be, that the game has substituted randomness for skill.
Luck determines the effectiveness of magic. I played a game over the weekend, and had 6 levels of Tzeentch. On one turn, I had six spells and four dice; the next, two spells (one useless) and nine dice. The magic pahse has been reduced to one steaming pile of luck to 'balance' things out.

How can you have a different amount of spells each turn? And if this is Tzeentch daemons, you can do loads to maximise your power dice to 10-12 with bluescribes and several power vortexes.

My Deamon Prince died. That should drastically reduce the amount of dice I can generate; instead, random interfered and gave me even more that I couldn't even use.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Therion wrote:

But if they've toned that down

Far from it. A Hydra now attacks 7 times, handlers 6 times, breaths into combat 2D6 hits, and stomps into combat D6 hits. Yes, theoretically you can kill 31 of those 'boring spearmen' in one phase with one Hydra.

And still not break anybody because of steadfast...

And still not break anybody because of steadfast...

Yeah because you can really take 60+ casualties all over your battle line every phase. Wow, you're stubborn. Wow, you're out of models.

RiTides wrote:Last thought- I can't believe people are reminiscing about how things are now in 7th edition!?? Especially about it requiring "skill". I've played daemons and only killed 4 models in an entire game while being tabled. This past weekend I played O&G and only lost a handful of models myself, not even an entire unit. There's too much unbalance in the rules as they are now, they definitely needed an overhaul, and GW did it pretty darn well, imho. I don't like their company policies a lot of the time, but you've got to give credit where credit is due- I think they hit the nail on the head with this one.

The biggest imbalances in the rules - at least, the ones people gripe about - are all army book specific problems, such as the enite Daemons of Chaos army book. Instead of fixing one book to solve a problem ("How do we fix that damn Staff of Nurgle spam problem?") they rewrote the core rules to 'solve' it, instead ("Ooh! Let's make bound spells regular spells and screw everyone!").


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Therion wrote:

And still not break anybody because of steadfast...

Yeah because you can really take 60+ casualties all over your battle line every phase. Wow, you're stubborn. Wow, you're out of models.

The breath weapon is only once per game. And how often are you going to kill all 31 potential models? I'm no soldier, but if some giant mosnter is squishing all my buddies and we ain't hurting it, I'm not sticking around to get squished just because there's a bunch of us.

Therion- I didn't notice that about the chariots! That's good, as they definitely needed a boost to offest the fact that they can't break ranks anymore (at least for armies like tomb kings that are dependent on them).

Manfred von Drakken wrote:

RiTides wrote:Last thought- I can't believe people are reminiscing about how things are now in 7th edition!?? Especially about it requiring "skill". I've played daemons and only killed 4 models in an entire game while being tabled. This past weekend I played O&G and only lost a handful of models myself, not even an entire unit. There's too much unbalance in the rules as they are now, they definitely needed an overhaul, and GW did it pretty darn well, imho. I don't like their company policies a lot of the time, but you've got to give credit where credit is due- I think they hit the nail on the head with this one.

The biggest imbalances in the rules - at least, the ones people gripe about - are all army book specific problems, such as the enite Daemons of Chaos army book. Instead of fixing one book to solve a problem ("How do we fix that damn Staff of Nurgle spam problem?") they rewrote the core rules to 'solve' it, instead ("Ooh! Let's make bound spells regular spells and screw everyone!").

I don't know. Deamons was overpowered, but O&G, Ogres, and the like were underpowered, and nobody could really get away with using ranked infantry very much (OK, not nobody, but most armies. And if ranked infantry were used, they were usually of the elite variety... mass goblin armies excepted). I think the problem was inherent with the basic rules, and the later books just made that very, very painfully obvious.

Also, I'm probably only going to be using bound spells, as they come on my treemen. I don't mind using PD for them. They have a better chance of not being dispelled that way and keeps people from getting around the lower number of PD by just adding in a bunch of bound spells.

I know that change hurts some armies/units/wargear options, but overall I think it makes sense with the changes to magic. They had to change the whole magic phase, imho- it was getting out of hand, and if you weren't going magic heavy it just seemed pointless to have to take a "scroll caddy" in every list. Those days are gone now, and I'm not going to miss them one bit

RiTides, not sure if you noticed this, but: Apparently, unless it's another big-book / little-book error, Bound Spells not granted by a magic item aren't forgotten on a Miscast - they just cannot be casted again that player phase by the Wizard.

Im really likeing the one dispell scroll per army thing.

I always though it was dumb that you could take 4 scrolls for like 200 points.

Now you are actually going to have to tactically think before you just say "scroll".

ShivanAngel wrote:Im really likeing the one dispell scroll per army thing.

I always though it was dumb that you could take 4 scrolls for like 200 points.

Now you are actually going to have to tactically think before you just say "scroll".

I'm not as fond of the change, but if you asked me about four years back I probably would be.

What has changed? Spell casting. Before, many of the "dangerous" spells went off on something like a 12 to 15 (at the highest!) and could - conceivably - be dispelled on roughly three to four dice. This was balanced out by the fact that casters had more dice than the defender had dispel (more often), and that it wasn't likely a spell would go off anyways (When you need a 7+ and you roll 2D6, it is only a 50% odd you'll get it).

Now? We're looking at spells that are going to be going off on values like 18, 20, 22, let alone the horror of stuff like specially tailored Tzeentch Lords who cast at something like +6 to all spells (Making a 3D6 average 15 to 18, with a range of 9 to 22 w/o irresistible force). The removal of automatic dispel failure on Double 1's is pretty much the only thing that balances this out, as you can now throw dice like crazy and not be screwed from your 6 5 and 4 because two 1's joined in with the roll.

I just feel that if they wanted to limit Scrolls, it might have been better if they saved it for a time when every army couldn't get at least one caster with +5 to their Casting Rolls.

Minsc wrote:

ShivanAngel wrote:Im really likeing the one dispell scroll per army thing.

I always though it was dumb that you could take 4 scrolls for like 200 points.

Now you are actually going to have to tactically think before you just say "scroll".

I'm not as fond of the change, but if you asked me about four years back I probably would be.

What has changed? Spell casting. Before, many of the "dangerous" spells went off on something like a 12 to 15 (at the highest!) and could - conceivably - be dispelled on roughly three to four dice. This was balanced out by the fact that casters had more dice than the defender had dispel (more often), and that it wasn't likely a spell would go off anyways (When you need a 7+ and you roll 2D6, it is only a 50% odd you'll get it).

Now? We're looking at spells that are going to be going off on values like 18, 20, 22, let alone the horror of stuff like specially tailored Tzeentch Lords who cast at something like +6 to all spells (Making a 3D6 average 15 to 18, with a range of 9 to 22 w/o irresistible force). The removal of automatic dispel failure on Double 1's is pretty much the only thing that balances this out, as you can now throw dice like crazy and not be screwed from your 6 5 and 4 because two 1's joined in with the roll.

I just feel that if they wanted to limit Scrolls, it might have been better if they saved it for a time when every army couldn't get at least one caster with +5 to their Casting Rolls.

Im pretty sure the miscast table balances this out. Throwing 4 dice at a spell you have a huge chance of miscasting, and the table is harsh. sure the spell goes off, but the risk to the caster is massive.

The thing is, for a modest roll you don't have to throw 4 dice at a spell. With even a +4 to your roll you only have to throw 2 or 3 dice at a spell. The chances of a miscast haven't changed, just the penalties. And the rewards for successfully casting spells are so much more than before. I don't know as magic has been de-emphasized so much as changed. The eight lores are now so potentially devastating that the risk is maybe not bad enough. We'll just have to see how it plays out, though I admit I am not sorry to see the 15-20PD armies go the way of the dodo.

Durzod wrote:The thing is, for a modest roll you don't have to throw 4 dice at a spell. With even a +4 to your roll you only have to throw 2 or 3 dice at a spell. The chances of a miscast haven't changed, just the penalties. And the rewards for successfully casting spells are so much more than before. I don't know as magic has been de-emphasized so much as changed. The eight lores are now so potentially devastating that the risk is maybe not bad enough. We'll just have to see how it plays out, though I admit I am not sorry to see the 15-20PD armies go the way of the dodo.

For the upgrades spells that cast on a 20 plus you wont get them off unless you throw 4-5 dice at them

If you'd read carefully I said modest roll. I wasn't talking about boosted high end spells.

I just know pandemonium just got alot more fun, miscasting on any double should be funny

ShivanAngel wrote:For the upgrades spells that cast on a 20 plus you wont get them off unless you throw 4-5 dice at them

I may not have the book on hand, but I'm pretty positive most spells don't have an average cast requirement greater than 16+. Many of the spells going off on 20+ are the super-uber spells: You don't need them when you have something like the #6 Lore of Metal spell that's killing a third of a unit it targets right off the bat (or 1/6th if it's composed of multi-wound models) with no saves of any sort allowed.

Pointing at higher costing values isn't anywhere near as effective a "See? It's limited!" now as it was last edition. Last edition, if you didn't have any buff items a 12+ casting value meant it was pretty much restricted to Lord-level wizards alone (as a Level 2 could only manage it on the highest of average possibilities, and normally required above average). This edition, still without any buff items, that has changed to at least 15+ casting value for the same limitation (Lord only). And, actually, it has gone better for Hero levels as - while it's -1 to -3 compared to a Lord wizard - the miscast is being risked on a cheaper model, as well as the fact that you can throw enough dice with that level a Wizard to reach it on average (Exactly 50% of all castings by a Level 2 wizard on four dice will accomplish a casting of a 16+ casting, last edition the most you could get with a 50% success rate on a Level 2 was an eleven: A five casting value difference for the same wizard).

Recall once more: Last Edition, 12+ casting was risky for a Level 2 to go for even with all three dice and a +1 to cast (+1 bumping it to just possibly a 50% success rate). This edition, 16+ casting with no buff items = exact same odds, at one more die but in turn with an average of same-to-plus-two power dice for two Level Two spell casters (6-8 rolled for aveage) as opposed to last edition (2 pool, +2 for each Wizard), with no pool limitation for current casters and the chance for an even further +2 bonus in dice.

That example uses your four dice, but considering most spells that one can want without going into the uber are still casting on less than a 13+: the average a Level Two Wizard can roll with three dice. If one assumes their opponent had a Lord Wizard (more common now in less-than-3K point games now as it's not competing with a Combat Lord for slots), the average on 3D6 changes between a fourteen (level 3) and a fifteen (level 4). Heck, someone with just +1 to casting rolls (Magic Item in their list, special rules, etcetera) with a Lord-level wizard can manage Casting Values of eleven to thirteen on average with just two dice.

Miscasting is no more frequent this edition than last, and - while it is deadlier - it has the problem now of not only letting the spell still go off but being Irresistible Force to boot.

I feel that if there were any time to limit Dispel Scrolls, an edition with this many buffs to casting rolls would not be it.

Minsc wrote:RiTides, not sure if you noticed this, but: Apparently, unless it's another big-book / little-book error, Bound Spells not granted by a magic item aren't forgotten on a Miscast - they just cannot be casted again that player phase by the Wizard.

I didn't see this myself when I looked at the book, but I read it here, and I'm pretty much ecstatic (sp?) about it . It will basically make my treesinging risk-free (which kind of makes up for the fact that it's not nearly as powerful as before!) since I also think the miscast doesn't harm the user of a bound spell at all (although if it's purchased, they forget it for the whole game). Just not being able to cast again with that wizard in that phase is basically no penalty at all. Whew since that miscast table is nasty, and I'd hate to lose a treeman to it!

youbedead wrote:I just know pandemonium just got alot more fun, miscasting on any double should be funny

Pandemonium is likely to get an errata since miscasts don't exist anymore. Also, don't forget Teclis from the HE. Any double and it goes off with IF. Probably going to be errata'd since he's likely to kill himself every game as is.

youbedead wrote:I just know pandemonium just got alot more fun, miscasting on any double should be funny

I considered that also. However, they changed RIP spells. Now you can dispel them at any time in the phase instead of at the end. So first thing you do is dispel pandemonium, then you start casting.

Infreak wrote:

youbedead wrote:I just know pandemonium just got alot more fun, miscasting on any double should be funny

Pandemonium is likely to get an errata since miscasts don't exist anymore. Also, don't forget Teclis from the HE. Any double and it goes off with IF. Probably going to be errata'd since he's likely to kill himself every game as is.

Miscast table on the bottom of page 34. Miscasts discussed under the heading of 'Miscasts on the top of page 34'.

Pandemonium is a very fun spell now.

or the black tongue, or hell the hell cannon number three result where alll wizards miscast is just going to be hilarious.

youbedead wrote:or the black tongue, or hell the hell cannon number three result where alll wizards miscast is just going to be hilarious.

Especially with an Infernal Puppet to hand. Lost a huge unit of Temple guard to that in 7th. 3 misfires, 3 3's rolled. OUCH!

I'm suddenly very very interested in seeing how the WoC are going to do in the magic phase. I forgot that they have an item, spell and hellcannon which can all potentially cause miscasts. The risk of using magic suddenly got much much more risky.

Big P wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:This is the way most historical wargames do it, that and by having massive, ungainly battlefields.

So you aint played any historical games then...

A putdown that snide, arrogant and uninformative doesn't even deserve a proper response. Get bent. I don't have to prove my credentials to you or anyone here.

Infreak wrote:I'm suddenly very very interested in seeing how the WoC are going to do in the magic phase. I forgot that they have an item, spell and hellcannon which can all potentially cause miscasts. The risk of using magic suddenly got much much more risky.

Not as bad as 6th Edition: Hellshriek doesn't exist any more (for those who don't know what it is: Was a 55pt Mutation from Chronicles '04, allowed a Lord to make every Wizard on the table Miscast on time per / game).

I've played a lot of historical games.

I agree with Agamemnon2 that until modern times generals used to try and choose battlefields with an eye to the terrain, to use defensive features and to ensure clear space for deployment and movement of troops.

At the Battle of the Issus the Persians did both, by deploying behind a river, and preparing the ground in front of them for heavy chariot charges.

The other point about real life battlefields is that they do not have edges unless bounded by the sea, cliffs or some other impassable feature. Thus manoeuvring can take place all around the edges of the field.

Some battles took place over large amounts of space, sometimes with the result that bodies of troops got lost or were unable to arrive at the battle in time to take part.

These features are reflected in many historical rulesets by providing lots of clear space around the edge of the action, and giving terrain penalties to different troop types to encourage players to use their troops realistically.

After playing a few games its become pretty apparent that a huge strategy will be "throw lots of dice at the top level spell and hope for double 6s".. Since the top spells generally can kill entire units

Life magic is AMAZING x10.. My slaan killed something like 70-80 goblins over 2 turns, healed around 12 wounds worth of my models and provided huge toughness boosts.. I suggest taking the scroll that does a wound on a 5+ for every die the enemy wizard used to cast a spell!

Kilkrazy wrote:I've played a lot of historical games.

I agree with Agamemnon2 that until modern times generals used to try and choose battlefields with an eye to the terrain, to use defensive features and to ensure clear space for deployment and movement of troops.

At the Battle of the Issus the Persians did both, by deploying behind a river, and preparing the ground in front of them for heavy chariot charges.

The other point about real life battlefields is that they do not have edges unless bounded by the sea, cliffs or some other impassable feature. Thus manoeuvring can take place all around the edges of the field.

All the best historicals I've played in or seen have been massive multitable affairs that let you try bold encirclement moves without having to worry about hitting a table corner. Very hard to organize and stage, of course.

There are still some misconceptions in this last page

chariots CANNOT march, that is very clear under the chariot rules.. However it is true they cannot be gibbed

also the steadfast rule only applies if you have more RANKS.. So a unit of 50 goblins still only has 5 ranks and thus a unit of 5x6 guys could cause them to lose stubborn..

One big thing is that if you chase down a unit and destroy it you get a free immediate reform.. You also get this if you restrain yourself from pursuing

It is now very clear that units that use compulsory movement (random D6, 2d6 or 3d6) now can ONLY pivot once and move in a straight line.. This makes the doomwheel not as insane

Units that used to pursue 3d6 now drop the lowest.. So cav can no longer flee or pursue 18"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There are still some misconceptions in this last page

chariots CANNOT march, that is very clear under the chariot rules.. However it is true they cannot be gibbed

also the steadfast rule only applies if you have more RANKS.. So a unit of 50 goblins still only has 5 ranks and thus a unit of 5x6 guys could cause them to lose stubborn..

One big thing is that if you chase down a unit and destroy it you get a free immediate reform.. You also get this if you restrain yourself from pursuing

It is now very clear that units that use compulsory movement (random D6, 2d6 or 3d6) now can ONLY pivot once and move in a straight line.. This makes the doomwheel not as insane

Units that used to pursue 3d6 now drop the lowest.. So cav can no longer flee or pursue 18"

I would think that the doomwheel will still be able to wheel and what not.

It specifically says it can do that in the skaven book.

They still pursue/flee 3d6...It's when charging that they drop the lowest.

skyth wrote:They still pursue/flee 3d6...It's when charging that they drop the lowest.

If I recall the rules right, Kirasu's right here. Cavalry / M7 troops only pursue / flee 2D6 of the 3D6.

skyth wrote:They still pursue/flee 3d6...It's when charging that they drop the lowest.

They still drop the lowest when they pursue/flee.

Mick

Just spent about 2 hours with the new book, really likeing what i see.

Anyone else notice flyers now flee and pursue on the ground?!

"I would think that the doomwheel will still be able to wheel and what not.

It specifically says it can do that in the skaven book."

I've already had this come up in a game. My opponent insisted that his doomwheel moved like described in the Skaven book, saying that army books always trump the main rulebook. It's hard playing without those army book updates...

This also makes me wonder if they are going to update the spells in the army books. In our game the other night I noticed that it seemed that it was much easier for the Skaven player to get his spells off. I, using the new lore of heavens, only got one spell off the whole game. I think someone in another thread mentioned that the Beastmen spells on the new deck are the same...

ShivanAngel wrote:Just spent about 2 hours with the new book, really likeing what i see.

Anyone else notice flyers now flee and pursue on the ground?!

that's dumb a dragon should be able to just fly like 8 ft of the ground now how's the swordsman going to get him

FlammingGaunt
Not sure what you are finding dumb, the rule or the dragon?

I was thinking that a flying beastie, when panicked, is likely to fly rather than leg it. But never having scared a dragon witless I cannot be certain!

Have scared many birds in my time but they just fetched the police

FlammingGaunt wrote:

ShivanAngel wrote:Just spent about 2 hours with the new book, really likeing what i see.

Anyone else notice flyers now flee and pursue on the ground?!

that's dumb a dragon should be able to just fly like 8 ft of the ground now how's the swordsman going to get him

In the real world most large, flying, birds tend to need to run to build up speed to fly, this may be what the rule is trying to simulate?

Mick

Mick A wrote:

FlammingGaunt wrote:

ShivanAngel wrote:Just spent about 2 hours with the new book, really likeing what i see.

Anyone else notice flyers now flee and pursue on the ground?!

that's dumb a dragon should be able to just fly like 8 ft of the ground now how's the swordsman going to get him

In the real world most large, flying, birds tend to need to run to build up speed to fly, this may be what the rule is trying to simulate?

Mick

Or it could just be for alleged 'balance'...

Apparently swans need 30 yards to get airbourne. Dragons presumably would need a longer distance. Then again their physiology doesn't look particularly suited for aerial locomotion

Luckily mythical beasties have VSTOL capabilities and magic to keep them airborne.

Oh yes, from this months WD

'Despite stringent safeguards a Snotling managed to slip through our defences with the result that the rules for victory points on page 143 of the Warhammer rulebook say you need to score twice as many victory points as your opponant in order to win a game. This is a mistake, and should read that you need to score 100 more victory points than your opponant to win the game, and at least twice as many victory points to achieve a crushing victory'.

parcival42 wrote:"I would think that the doomwheel will still be able to wheel and what not.

It specifically says it can do that in the skaven book."

I've already had this come up in a game. My opponent insisted that his doomwheel moved like described in the Skaven book, saying that army books always trump the main rulebook. It's hard playing without those army book updates...

This also makes me wonder if they are going to update the spells in the army books. In our game the other night I noticed that it seemed that it was much easier for the Skaven player to get his spells off. I, using the new lore of heavens, only got one spell off the whole game. I think someone in another thread mentioned that the Beastmen spells on the new deck are the same...

I think so only because it specifically states it moves like a chariot, where the HPA is a point and go.

Also anyone else notice my lovely HPA is going to get thunderstomp now!!!!