Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

We've got plenty of rumors circulating around about a possible new edition of WHFB around summer time. And whilst there are plenty of threads discussing what rules are rumored to be changing, I haven't yet seen a thread dedicated to discussing what WE want to see in 8th edition. So, thats the question I pose to you, lads!

I personally hope that they don't alter the rules that much-I think fantasy is a very streamlined game once you know the basics, and is a lot of fun at that. However, I do agree with sentiments that have been passed around that cavalry should cause some impact hits when they charge-and I think psychology and magic needs toning down, if only to stop all these Daemon and Vampire counts armies dominating the tourny circuit. Maybe ward saves need to be altered too-perhaps the forest spirit mechanic is a good one, you lose your save against magical attacks?

Aaaannddd...Discuss!

It would be nice to see Halberds get Armor Piercing. After all, they are basically oversized can openers...

On a more serious note: Impact hits from cavalry charges makes perfect sense. The horse is every bit as much a weapon as the lance. For the more exotic mounts... I wouldn't give it to the wolves or cold ones. They are generally too slightly built to have the heavy impact of a horse. Boars? Sure. They are built just as heavily - if not even more heavily! - than a horse.

Monsterhammer and Elitehammer, on the other hand, needs to be toned down. Right now, regular infantry blocks are pretty much irrelevant much of the time. In historical warfare (and fantasy depitcions of warfare) hordes of cheap troops are always a threat, even to elites. It should take good generalship to beat a horde with a small elite force, the structure of the game should not support (for example) 7 Swordmasters always beating a SCR infantry block.

Im not disagreeing with calvary not getting impact hits, however they "kind of" get impact hits in that they normally have lances so they get the +2 strength when charging.


I think it would be neat for calvary to be able to charge through units however. In movies and what not you dont see them stop in the middle to fight. They charge through the rank and file lines trampling and cutting units down as they go.

So maybe have them go their full charge and mark where it "should" end. You can choose to run right through the models, or stop and fight. If you go through they still attack back, which is symbolic of them slashing at the mounts/rides as they run by! Think it would just be a neat strategical element.

I honestly dont like the way CR is handled. If a unit of 3 W3 units is attacked by 25 little rats i honestly dont think they are going to be to afraid of them. Outnumbering is fine, but the bonuses for addition rank is basically another form of outnumbering... This might be better handled in specific codexes tho.

I think stupidity on mounts is kinda dumb. If its well trained and your poking it to prod it forward or what not, i DOUBT its gunna go stupid on you... Other than that i think psych is well done. If your getting ready to fight and see the unit next to you get obliterated by a spell, i think your going to be more than a little agraid.

Vulcan wrote:It should take good generalship to beat a horde with a small elite force

I agree with what your saying here, but in this case don't you think this could put new players who play, lets say, High elves, when fighting against armies such as, say, Skaven at a disadvantage? Don't get me wrong, I think that small armies should need to bring their A game to beat larger one's too, but how could it be balanced so as not to penalize high cost armies unfairly?

Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:

Vulcan wrote:It should take good generalship to beat a horde with a small elite force

I agree with what your saying here, but in this case don't you think this could put new players who play, lets say, High elves, when fighting against armies such as, say, Skaven at a disadvantage? Don't get me wrong, I think that small armies should need to bring their A game to beat larger one's too, but how could it be balanced so as not to penalize high cost armies unfairly?

You have to look at it tho.

Most RaF soldiers are the grunts, they have some military training but not much. They basically know Hit guy with sword or poke him with sharp stick...

Where an Elite unit or Lord choice, these guys have been fighting for, quite possible in the warhammer world, thousands of years. Its not unlikely that they could cut a path through RaF soldiers while suffering minimal if any wounds. They are experts in martial combat, skills perfected over centuries or Melinia!

Look at point value also, if a 100 point squad of RaF could easily overwhelm the 400 point lord... think you get what im saying.

What I'd like?

Rank Bonus - based on model base:
6-wide 20mm (120mm)
5-wide 25mm (125mm)
3-wide 40+mm (120mm)

+1 CR/rank if up to 25mm long (+3 max)
+2 CR/rank if up to 40+mm long (+2 max)

Easier for Ogres to get some Rank bonus, but keeps the Cav from looking ridiculous.


Combat - Wider units, and less Herohammer:
+1 CR per unengaged File (+3 max);
-1 CR if single model engaged.

Replaces "lapping around" with a simple static CR bonus; makes blitzing a single model into a RnF unit properly suicidal.


Psychology - no auto-Break:
+1 CR for Fear, +2 CR for Terror

Mass ItP makes adjustment necessary.


Magic - Miscast - reroll *all* 1s and consult the following table:

1. Opponent gets +1 to Dispel
2. Opponent gets +d3 to Dispel
3. Opponent gets +d6 to Dispel
4. Spell is Dispelled
5. Spell is Dispelled, Caster takes a wound (Ward save applies)
6. Spell is Dispelled, Caster takes d3 wounds (Ward saves apply)
6. ...
13+ Spell is Dispelled, Caster Removed from Play, Magic Phase Ends.

If you throw a lot of PD, not only do the Miscasts go up, each 1 rolled increases the penalty dramatically.


[fixed Rank bonuses error for 25mm]

JohnHwangDD wrote:What I'd like?

Rank Bonus - based on model base:
6-wide 20mm (120mm)
5-wide 25mm (125mm)
3-wide 40+mm (120mm)

+1 CR/rank if up to 20mm long (+3 max)
+2 CR/rank if up to 40+mm long (+2 max)

Easier for Ogres to get some Rank bonus, but keeps the Cav from looking ridiculous.


Combat - Wider units, and less Herohammer:
+1 CR per unengaged File (+3 max);
-1 CR if single model engaged.

Replaces "lapping around" with a simple static CR bonus; makes blitzing a single model into a RnF unit properly suicidal.


Psychology - no auto-Break:
+1 CR for Fear, +2 CR for Terror

Mass ItP makes adjustment necessary.


Magic - Miscast - reroll *all* 1s and consult the following table:

1. Opponent gets +1 to Dispel
2. Opponent gets +d3 to Dispel
3. Opponent gets +d6 to Dispel
4. Spell is Dispelled
5. Spell is Dispelled, Caster takes a wound (Ward save applies)
6. Spell is Dispelled, Caster takes d3 wounds (Ward saves apply)
6. ...
13+ Spell is Dispelled, Caster Removed from Play, Magic Phase Ends.

If you throw a lot of PD, not only do the Miscasts go up, each 1 rolled increases the penalty dramatically.

Liked everything up to the magic. It might be a little powerful at the moment, but damn you are making it so its almost not worth fielding anymore....

Re-rolling all 1s is a very simple mechanic, and the Miscast table can be tweaked.

The big issue with Magic is DoC Tzeentch rewriting the rules completely by being able to have 20+ PD on the board. The old Miscast system simply doesn't handle this.

If you roll a single 1, your spell still goes off half the time, and maybe you take a wound. Not a big deal.

If you roll a couple 1s, now you're in the normal Miscast situation, and I could probably fudge the old table to cover 7 to 12. Nothing really changes too much.

Roll 3 (or more) 1s, and the hammer starts coming down. This happens very rarely, so big risk = big reward or big penalty.


From a math stand point, Magichammer will still be strong, but will encourage players to cast more small spells on 1 or 2 PD, maybe 3 PD rather than throwing large numbers of dice for big effects.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Re-rolling all 1s is a very simple mechanic, and the Miscast table can be tweaked.

The big issue with Magic is DoC Tzeentch rewriting the rules completely by being able to have 20+ PD on the board. The old Miscast system simply doesn't handle this.

If you roll a single 1, your spell still goes off half the time, and maybe you take a wound. Not a big deal.

If you roll a couple 1s, now you're in the normal Miscast situation, and I could probably fudge the old table to cover 7 to 12. Nothing really changes too much.

Roll 3 (or more) 1s, and the hammer starts coming down. This happens very rarely, so big risk = big reward or big penalty.


From a math stand point, Magichammer will still be strong, but will encourage players to cast more small spells on 1 or 2 PD, maybe 3 PD rather than throwing large numbers of dice for big effects.

Theres the issue tho. You would like to re-do all the magic rules because of one particular unit.

How about keeping the old miscast rules, but adding a twist. Roll you miscast, then for each additional one beyond the first two roll another D6 and subtract/add (opponents choice) that from your miscast score.

This would keep lower PD armies safer, but increase the chance for the all dreaded "2" miscast roll. Have the 2 miscast roll be changed to <2. Also imo the lower number miscasts are far more devastating.

Magic was unbalanced before, when TK and HE would take 12+ PD / bound items. DoC made it obvious.

Your version is less elegant, compared to simply picking up the 1s and rolling them.

And in my version, low PD armies would see very little change. The big difference is they have to deal with the annoyance of minor miscasts when a 1 comes up. But it's good to reinforce the risk and danger of Magic, whereas right now, there's very little risk because of the need for 2 (or more 1s).

I agree with Vulcan. In the games i've seen ( I am pretty new to fanatsy) it is quite easy for an elite unit to beat 5 or 6 times their number. All they have to do is kill a couple of models and the units is gone. Their needs to either be Ld boosts for outnumbering (like skaven have) or after a certain point say if you outnumber them 4 to 1 then your unit won't run. This means the elite unit needs to kill a reasonable amount of models before the other unit runs. At the moment an elite or hard hitting unit can beat a block of 80 normal guys in one turn just because they kill a few of them in combat.

@4M2A: that is why I suggest CR bonuses for unengaged files. To get max rank & file bonuses against a 5-wide elite unit, you'd need to be 10-wide, 4 deep.

A boost to large infantry, something for ranked infantry (even though I don't field them!), and a nerf to magic

JohnHwangDD wrote:+1 CR/rank if up to 20mm long (+3 max)
+2 CR/rank if up to 40+mm long (+2 max)

My only gripe with this is that 25mm infantry only ever gets one rank benefit, and nothing else matters. Not too good to me, mostly because it means Saurus, Orcs, and Marauders have pretty much no reason to take more than two ranks (one for the CR, the other to soak up wounds).

JohnHwangDD wrote:Combat - Wider units, and less Herohammer:
+1 CR per unengaged File (+3 max);
-1 CR if single model engaged.

Personally, I'd prefer this over the rumor of a 10-wide front. The flaw is in someone taking a ten wide front instead of taking additional ranks, but it could work beyond that (a simple reform could negate most of that advantage for the enemy).

JohnHwangDD wrote:Psychology - no auto-Break:
+1 CR for Fear, +2 CR for Terror

While I'm not too much a fan of auto-break, I think this in turn gives too little a bonus for fear / hatred. Perhaps it's something like +1 CR / +2 CR for every amount of outnumbering: Outnumber in general is x1, outnumber two-to-one is x2, three to one is x3, and so on. If it's five men outnumbered by thirty Skeletons, they're probably going to be more afraid than twenty men beat by fifteen skeletons (assume bad rolling on the player's part).

JohnHwangDD wrote:Magic - Miscast - reroll *all* 1s and consult the following table:

1. Opponent gets +1 to Dispel
2. Opponent gets +d3 to Dispel
3. Opponent gets +d6 to Dispel
4. Spell is Dispelled
5. Spell is Dispelled, Caster takes a wound (Ward save applies)
6. Spell is Dispelled, Caster takes d3 wounds (Ward saves apply)
6. ...
13+ Spell is Dispelled, Caster Removed from Play, Magic Phase Ends.

I'm not exactly fond of this, if only because it means almost a 9% chance from each die that you've instantly dispelled yourself. It wouldn't exactly bother me for a few months (Orcs having their own Miscast table until their new release), but it still seems too much a nerfing of magic. It'd be pure brutality against Ogres.

For the most part, I like a lot of your change suggestions though. As for the people saying "Cavalry get Impact Hits", if it does happen it's going to work similar to Ogres (You must charge over half your distance, you get one hit per model in front and add additional ranks to strength, and so on). The "D3 impact hits each" that some people proposed in another thread is just absurd (Up to 15 hits from a five wide front!), and would render Tomb King Chariots almost worthless compared to their cavalry (Who do the same thing, aren't cripplingly weak against cannons, and so on).

Minsc wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:+1 CR/rank if up to 20mm long (+3 max)
+2 CR/rank if up to 40+mm long (+2 max)

My only gripe with this is that 25mm infantry only ever gets one rank benefit, and nothing else matters. Not too good to me, mostly because it means Saurus, Orcs, and Marauders have pretty much no reason to take more than two ranks (one for the CR, the other to soak up wounds).

Crap, that should have been +1 CR/rank up to 25mm long... Saurus, Orks, Chaos should get up to +3 CR for going deep.

Minsc wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Combat - Wider units, and less Herohammer:
+1 CR per unengaged File (+3 max);
-1 CR if single model engaged.

Personally, I'd prefer this over the rumor of a 10-wide front. The flaw is in someone taking a ten wide front instead of taking additional ranks,

Going wide has it's own disadvantages, as you'll run out of board frontage in a hurry. Things like Light Cav and Skirmishers can cover the entire front, while narrow units only give up the +3 cap even if 3/10 models are engaged. The key here is that there's some tactical question about finding a balance between ranks, files, and outnumbering, whereas right now, you simply want more Ranks in a degenerate sort of way.

Minsc wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Psychology - no auto-Break:
+1 CR for Fear, +2 CR for Terror

While I'm not too much a fan of auto-break, I think this in turn gives too little a bonus for fear / hatred. Perhaps it's something like +1 CR / +2 CR for every amount of outnumbering: Outnumber in general is x1, outnumber two-to-one is x2, three to one is x3, and so on. If it's five men outnumbered by thirty Skeletons, they're probably going to be more afraid than twenty men beat by fifteen skeletons (assume bad rolling on the player's part).

It depends on how powerful you want Psych to be, given that ItP is given out like candy. 5 MAA v 30 Skels are at -2 (-1 ON, -1 Fear); 20 MAA v 15 Skels are at 0 (+1 ON, -1 Fear).

Minsc wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Magic - Miscast - reroll *all* 1s and consult the following table:

1. Opponent gets +1 to Dispel
2. Opponent gets +d3 to Dispel
3. Opponent gets +d6 to Dispel
4. Spell is Dispelled
5. Spell is Dispelled, Caster takes a wound (Ward save applies)
6. Spell is Dispelled, Caster takes d3 wounds (Ward saves apply)
6. ...
13+ Spell is Dispelled, Caster Removed from Play, Magic Phase Ends.

I'm not exactly fond of this, if only because it means almost a 9% chance from each die that you've instantly dispelled yourself. It wouldn't exactly bother me for a few months (Orcs having their own Miscast table until their new release), but it still seems too much a nerfing of magic. It'd be pure brutality against Ogres.

Again, it depends on where we want the balance to be. Right now, double 1s are a 3% risk on 2d6. That's negligible.

Minsc wrote:For the most part, I like a lot of your change suggestions though.

As for the people saying "Cavalry get Impact Hits", if it does happen it's going to work similar to Ogres (You must charge over half your distance, you get one hit per model in front and add additional ranks to strength, and so on).

Thanks. Tho I'd guess GW's version will be nothing like what I want.

*All* impact hits should probably follow the Ogre model. It's a good mechanic.

Hmmm...lots of good replies in here.

while im no einstein of the rules....here's my opinion.

I think personally calvary is fine as it is. Most games i've seen, if calvary charges a flank, most average units = death. (not including IB's, Chosen, etc). I think if impact hits were added, it would basicly rule out the idea of even bothering with a chariot. Get hit by a strength 7 attack and die instantly, OR take 5-10 calvary and have one model die potentially.

I think the fear and terror rules are a little bit steep. I agree they should be ammended. Somehow i find it hard to beleive, for example, a unit of 20 chaos warriors (without MoK) wet their pants and dont charge /flee when charged because a unit of 20 zombies are staring them down real hard, unless they outnumber you 2 to 1 or something. That could represent that at first, a unit would seem hesitant to charge such a huge number of fear causing troops, but once they get into combat with them and start killing a bunch of them, they arn't half as scared cause they are actually winning CR. The rest of fear it ok i think..such as auto break if you lose CR and what not.

Magic is unbalanced though. I've read through some of the spells in the WoC book and some of them are insane. Granted it takes alot of good roles to get that high, but like some have said, if you have 20+ PD, who cares...may suffer a wound but meh, worse things can happen, right? Maybe they should give every wizard the WAAAGH miscast table....at least give them a higher chance to be out of commission for a miscast. Perhaps have a rule where if someone rolls double 6's on a dispel it can make the enemy wizard roll on the miscast table even, unless it's a irresistable force cast, in which case whoever has the highest roll with their Irresistable cast or dispel wins? Just some thoughts.

In terms of rules id like to see changed...
Do something to make spears a more viable option. I mean the rules for them are pretty much crap. At least have them strike first against calvary, or +1 STR attacks if calvary charges you, perhaps even armor piercing if calvary charges. I mean it's been proven by world history that Calvary charge spears= dead calvary. I mean really, i can't see a bunch of guys with 2 foot long swords being half as effective against calvary then guys with up to 10 feet (actually 10 feet being the Minimum average of most spears, some went up to as long as 20 feet) setting for the charge and skewering the horses / riders before they even touched them.

I think fear and terror should be split into 2 kinds of terror and fear. Normal terror and fear for monsters and other large creatures like Ogres, then something else for stuff like zombies. Small fear causing stuff like zombies really shouldn't work in some circumstrances.

As Gorgarak said earlier a unit of zombies is scary if they outnumber you but pathetic if you have more guys. Change it that unit strength 1 creatures don't cause fear if you outnumber them.

This encourages players with fear causing units to damage the enemy first then charge them. For players without fear causing units it means you might actually get a be able to get into combat as at the moment it can be difficult.

I'm a strong advocate for cavalry impact hits, but they should probably only apply to Heavy Cavalry only.

@Flashman - How would you define Heavy Cavalry? If you mean barded warhorses, I might disagree with you. Horses cause a lot of damage, but so would a boar charging into you. I can agree with horse and boar and excluded the more exotic mounts for the impact hits.

I'd like to see some form of changes to steer away from monster hammer. Not sure how you'd do it, but right now it seems like it's all about the big models...

RZ

Looking at the most recent army books I would say Gw wants it to be monster hammer. Unfortunately they seem to be giving every army big monsters.

Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:

Vulcan wrote:It should take good generalship to beat a horde with a small elite force

I agree with what your saying here, but in this case don't you think this could put new players who play, lets say, High elves, when fighting against armies such as, say, Skaven at a disadvantage? Don't get me wrong, I think that small armies should need to bring their A game to beat larger one's too, but how could it be balanced so as not to penalize high cost armies unfairly?

There is that.

Of course, it's no fun for the new Skaven player when the High Elf player's 7 Swordmasters spank 30 Stormvemin... Every. Single. Time.

What I want?

1.) Introduction of scenarios as it instantly gives more variance to games.
2.) New terrain rules, because terrain is currently mostly treated as impassable (except by Wood Elves ). Having special city fight rules (buildings!) would be fine.
3.) A new Daemon army book (plus OK and O&G) to get balance back. And more playtesting to avoid imbalance in the future (esp. if Matt Ward continues to write army books ).

I like Shiv's idea of rolling three dice for a miscast, but giving the opposing player that much control over your miscasts seems a bit unfair to me. However, rolling 3d6 and discarding the highest would be a bit more fair I think.

As a new player to WFB what bothers me most is all the damage tables and modifiers you have to remember compared to 40k. In 40k there's only really the vehicle damage table to remember. To hit is 7-BS, to wound is 4+ (+- the difference between the enemies toughness and your attack). In Fantasy you've got hitting modifiers, terrain, combining armour saves, armour modifiers, CR. It's really complex compared.

So, as someone who's played only two Fantasy battles but extensively plays 40k, I'd like to see CR simplified, armour changed to be like 40k ap, only one save per character, hitting modifiers to be simpler, none of this combining armour craziness; just an armour save per unit entry which can be upgraded as normal.

It just doesn't make sense to me that 40k is such a vastly simpler game and yet still provides compelling play. GW needs to do the same thing with Fantasy; strip it down!

No, no no no!

Why would you want to simplify the game? That's what makes it better than 40k: its more complicated.

If you can't handle the few extra rules which make it a more tactical involving game, than play 40k instead, and sell your 3700 of WOC ^.^

Better != more complicated.

More complicated == More complicated.

There is a difference.

I don't want WHFB to be 40k, but fantasy

As long as WFB is on square bases, I don't think you'll have anything to worry about.

This new edition says otherwise, and looks like Lunar's going to get his wish.

Of course, he might be biased in that if combat breaks down to only wounds and armor save modifiers are removed, Chaos Warriors just because beasts. You have any idea how many weapons would be AP4, let alone AP3? Or who'd be able to match the I5 WS5 A2 S4 Chaos Warriors in hand-to-hand if it boiled down to "Wounds + banner against wounds + banner"?