The FAQ is up for WOTR

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.

**reds8n**

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=1000018&pIndex=1&aId=10500005a&start=2

**Hellfury**

reds8n wrote:http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=1000018&pIndex=1&aId=10500005a&start=2

reds8n have I ever told you how much of a ravishing handsome gentleman you are?

I would totally pee in your butt.

**reds8n**

..promises promises....

Let us know what you make of the rulings/ideas contained please.
I liked the first answer at the very least.

and you're more than welcome, please excuse this only being posted here and not on the News/Rumour board.

**Hellfury**

Well, my take is going to be drastically different than what you will find for people who use orange-brown fonts in the LotR section of warseer.

I think the about face rule is sensible and am glad I can stop arguing about that one with different people every game (read: they want to make it more difficult by using WHFB rules and make the about face turn cost movement in some strange way used similarly in WHFB).

The errata is a mixed bag for me. Fixing the obvious disparity in points for the court of the dead king is a good thing, but increasing the S of the black guard is something I would never have guessed they would do since it is not even implied anywhere. Overall the errata is a good thing though as is the FAQ in general.

The reason being is an even playing field for everyone without reinterpreting the rules for each game for each different player, whether your own sense of game design agrees with it or not and thats the whole point of it.

I am still unsure whether epic strike being used in duels is a good thing or not. My own experience tells me its a non issue and not something that needs to be gone over endlessly as we see on the subject discussed on fora, but some people seems to feel compelled to express their opinion regarding this at every turn no matter what is being discussed.

Other issues as to why epic heroes have special rules when they cannot all be transferred to their formation, etc being explained are quite helpful.

I am just glad this has finally been released. I am sad that it took this long though but better now than never.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
If you want a laugh, read this thread and watch how people are agonizing over the rules and then nit pick them to death.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=257366

Oh the gnashing of teeth and wailing. The pulling of hair over epic strike being used in a duel! Lets not forget to point out exactly why you hate it and just pour over the subject over and over again as if its still relevant. Orange-brown fonts are ready to deploy soap boxes at a moments notice.

Then the cult of personality that follows behind utilizing time tested peanut gallery techniques. The originality is dizzying.

I cant wait to play most of those people....

[edit]fixed link[/edit]

**reds8n**

Good grief, you wouldn't think so many people would struggle understanding the meaning of the word "behind". If only there was some sort of visual clue that might help you decide here eh ?

**Hellfury**

reds8n wrote:Good grief, you wouldn't think so many people would struggle understanding the meaning of the word "behind". If only there was some sort of visual clue that might help you decide here eh ?

Oi.... *slaps forehead*

I really hope GW dont take most people on forums seriously.

Because if they do, the people who supposedly have a masterful handling of the rules are missing the point of the game all together. Making any perceived issues with the game far more complicated than it really needs to be.

Not just the definition of 'behind' but on the greater level of the game in its entirety. For GW to follow their lead and pander to those who cry "oh this is detrimental to the game" when the loudest voices have no idea how the game is played in the first place would be folly.

No wonder WotR is having such a difficult time getting off the ground.

Its a shame that Warseer of all places has the most active LotR community. (which is odd considering there are perfectly good alternatives dedicated solely to LotR)

**reds8n**

From a few conversations with the design studio team here and there I think they take some consideration of 'net talk ( ie moaning) when doing their thang but are mindful of not paying too much attention to what is a minority, allbeit a vocal ( and growing one can but assume) one.

I can see their point to an extent.... certain rules arguments have me genuinely worrying at the capacity of some of the participants to function in day to day existence... but I still think there are areas they could improve on.

I had quite a long chat with Matt Ward at the last UK GD with regards to this : the point they kept making referred to an old FAQ they did in WD for the Demonhunters book, basically the query was did they really have no dedicated transport options for a squad. They viewed this as being the nadir of ridiculousness to answer as it was, to them, clear they did not have this option. I could see GW's angle here, but couldn't help but feel it would be easier to ridicule such a query if their initial rules writing and editing were tighter in the first place.

Mind you the Design team are in kind of an odd situation. They are pretty much micro celebrities. I remember some of the design studio giving a seminar at a UK GT a few years back and they were talking about some of the letters they receive. Some were really cool battle reports and pieces of artwork, some were unsolicited codices and the like... and one guy who sent them photos of his dog for them to see.

**Hellfury**

reds8n wrote:I had quite a long chat with Matt Ward at the last UK GD with regards to this : the point they kept making referred to an old FAQ they did in WD for the Demonhunters book, basically the query was did they really have no dedicated transport options for a squad. They viewed this as being the nadir of ridiculousness to answer as it was, to them, clear they did not have this option. I could see GW's angle here, but couldn't help but feel it would be easier to ridicule such a query if their initial rules writing and editing were tighter in the first place.

Agreed. For a company that charges such a premium for their rules ($60 hardbacks) you would assume they would have better proofreading and playtesting.

And because of that I am not too harsh on WotR's detractors because I agree that there is enough ambiguity to suffocate a small european colony. But that doesnt make the game unplayable IMO. Just requires more house rules than anyone is comfortable making when considering the entry price required to play.

**reds8n**

Yeah. I helped draft the last FAQ the Uk GTs had a year or two back. I and most of the other volunteers kept explaining to our "designated contact" with GW that many of the rules queries were perhaps obvious and not in need of FAQing for the "casual" player, but people who have forked out for the rulebook, the army books, the models and then paid X amount extra to enter a tournament expect a bit more and are less happy go lucky/d6 for it than the average guy who only plays against guys he knows once a week.

I've only played a couple of game of WOTR and it seemed quite intuitive to me and it did quite accurately capture the feel of mass combat in Middle Earth. To me anyway. I've heard talk that one or two of the...errr..... fates is it ? Special powers and ability type things... are a bit unbalanced but nothing that shatters the game beyond salvage. Some of the models are really nice too. If I had more time ( and money

) I'd be all over it like a shot.

**reds8n**

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1440049a_FAQ_WaroftheRingv1_1.pdf

updated as well as the WFB ones.

**Mr Mystery**

Huzzah! The Beardy Unit of Temporal Shattering Pain!

Gil Galad, Aragorn, Isildur, and Gimli. +6 to hit, and the option to Epic Rampage.

Don't think I'd ever actuallly field this. Unless my opponent is a complete gimp and deserves it.

**BobOfBobville**

omg, that could take down, like, a whole army. that only real threat is archers. also gilgalad can respawn guys! yay!

**Hellfury**

The news of the V1.2 WotR FAQ is a bit old by now, but considering the recent quality of LotR content in this part of the forum, I thought it was worth a bump.

**Maxstreel**

Thank you Hellfury. I dearly love WOTR but with so little support from GW, there is little news as of late.

I am looking forward to the Hobbit movies. Let's have a Smaug model and some dwarven armies! WOTR would be the perfect system for the Battle of 5 armies instead of the tiny "epic sized" game GW has now. Those tiny figures just don't have enough character, or rather the oomph needed for me to drop the cash on them.

**fellblade**

Heh. I was just commenting on another forum: I like WotR, and it is about the only game I play much anymore. I browse the various fora and the WotR ones are dead, dead, dead. Then I checked back in to the WHFB fora and saw the bile, the confusion, the ranting. "Insert thing here is the BORKEN!" "New edition, chump, learn new trikz!" etc., etc., ad nauseum.

And I thought to myself, maybe quiet on the WotR boards is not such a bad thing, after all.

Then I began to wonder at what point it became "normal" to have a game where most people who enjoy it have to spend so much time on the internet arguing about its rules? Where a game that isn't generating pages of drama is considered a failure, or unpopular.

There was a WHFB player at my FLGS who recently commented that WotR was obviously flawed, because it has only one edition. I can't wait to ask him how well 8th edition WHFB has succeeded at fixing the flaws of 7th. Tell me, sir, when you complained about 7th edition, at what point did you say, "You know, what this game really needs is true line-of-sight."

The Hobbit should refresh the franchise. Bet we get another book along the lines of the Battlehosts?