T9A: More Than Just Renaming

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.

**Karak Norn Clansman**

Prince of Spires over on Ulthuan has cut to the core issue:

Prince of Spires wrote:Nice. I think it's a good direction to be heading in. If T9A wants to stick around for 30 more years then it needs to start doing its own thing and not just rehash the same WH stuff over and over. It needs to for its own stories and background. And it slowly needs to start being its own rules instead of just 8th edition+.

So all in all I think its making the right moves. No guarantee of course that it will succeed in the long run. But this gives it a good chance to do so.

Also, many units dropped by GW through the years have been brought back: Chaos Dwarf gunnery teams (petard/swivel gun), for instance. Not everything is as it should be, (where's the Dogs of War army book for instance?), but it is crucial to raise one's eyes and view T9A as a creative project, and a chance to go much further than Warhammer Fantasy did in its own stomping grounds. This isn't all about rules and initial promises, this is also a lot about creativity and developing the fantasy genre as a whole with new concepts in the spirit of Warhammer.

Gargolock over on CDO may explain why:

Gargolock wrote:
History has always been my favourite subject; before my dad even showed me lord of the rings or Star Wars. There is multiple reasons that once I encountered the warhammer fantasy world that I fell in love. Whether it be that instead of playing with action figures as a tiny child I played with my dads GW plastic talisman third edition miniatures —including the fabled chaos dwarf and many other Warhammer staples such as skaven, beastmen, chaos sorcerer etc etc— or that I have always liked thinking philosophy and morals and a dark world gave me the chance to review actions of the extreme. However these reasons fall before the greatest of the reasons: my love for history and the ability for me to try to spot which factions are inspired from where.
I love how you can clearly see the fantastical version of historic power within warhammer fantasy. The empire is clearly a twisted version of pike and shot Germany. I like this however it could have had factions from all over. It took them 30 years to scratch the surface of what can be done with a world inspired through history. Games workshop failed. They seemed to stop expanding it until it was too late and would never be expanded again. It’s a shame as they had hinted at areas that would have really helped that world: Nippon, Cathay and Hobgobla Kahn’s kingdom to name a couple.
The Ninth Age is putting in the areas games workshop failed to include. It seems to be picking up the torch. Everything I like about WHFB is recreated in T9A with more added. I don’t see it as a copy. I see it as a 2.0. The perfect sequel of a world; it grabs everything that the old one had and improves them as well as adding new stuff to improve the overall world. It is a wonderful creation that is coming a long nicely. Personally I think it needs more cartography work done as detailed maps are they easiest way to see a world. I enjoy the T9A’s world as it is as I said a better version of WHFB. It still needs more in my opinion.

**jouso**

Karak Norn Clansman wrote:
Not everything is as it should be, (where's the Dogs of War army book for instance?),

It's currently being polished by 10+ people on the homebrew section.

I've seen many tournaments accepting the Asklanders barbarian book, and this looks like it's going the same way.

kodos wrote:

But as the game later changed there was no reason at all to stick with 8th edtion as a baseline instead of doing a "best of all editions" versions and use it as a baseline for their new game.

Such as? Fixed charge range, casualties not striking back, etc. are out of the question, but many things from 6-7th are already in the game. Unit caps, fear brought up a notch (not 7th-ed broken, but better than 8th), chargers getting an Ini boost (rather than outright swinging first), etc.

Most people who have stayed this long on the not-Warhammer boat presumably liked 8th edition best. I definitely enjoyed 8th the most from a gaming PoV, despite starting in 4th so it's only natural that the underlying skeleton is more similar to 8th than other editions.

If I'd liked a more 6-7th feel I'd have gone over to KoW or one of the many classichammers around, as many people indeed have. We can't complain about choice, that's for sure.

**Platuan4th**

kodos wrote:
for now if you want to play tournaments/events (for whatever reason, as for some people it is easier to get a weekend once per year playing 5 games than going to the store/club once per month for one game) Kings of War and T9A are the games you can choose from.

There's still plenty of 8th Ed tournaments and events throughout the US and Britain, so they're not the only choices.

**Just Tony**

Platuan4th wrote:
kodos wrote:
for now if you want to play tournaments/events (for whatever reason, as for some people it is easier to get a weekend once per year playing 5 games than going to the store/club once per month for one game) Kings of War and T9A are the games you can choose from.

There's still plenty of 8th Ed tournaments and events throughout the US and Britain, so they're not the only choices.

There was also a 6th Ed. tourney about a year or two ago in Spain as well.

**jouso**

Just Tony wrote:
Platuan4th wrote:
kodos wrote:
for now if you want to play tournaments/events (for whatever reason, as for some people it is easier to get a weekend once per year playing 5 games than going to the store/club once per month for one game) Kings of War and T9A are the games you can choose from.

There's still plenty of 8th Ed tournaments and events throughout the US and Britain, so they're not the only choices.

There was also a 6th Ed. tourney about a year or two ago in Spain as well.

It's a yearly event (usually October) in Barcelona. Using MdNR re-written books (which bring all the stuff from later editions to 6th ed rules). Usually 30-ish people attend (this year they even had international visitors) the core of which are the team behind MdNR, and who also organise 2-3 smaller tourneys a year in a Barcelona mini shop.

Never been there myself, but a mate of mine who mostly plays T9A goes every year (this October was the 4th year) and swears for the event.

**brr-icy**

Interesting, they just added the missing units into 6th?

**jouso**

brr-icy wrote:
Interesting, they just added the missing units into 6th?

Exactly, core rules remain but the armybooks are reworked to include new (and in some cases older) units, special rules tweaked whenever needed and so on.

If I ever got the bug for a 6th-ed style game that would be my choice.

**auticus**

If only 6th edition could come back somehow.

**Just Tony**

auticus wrote:
If only 6th edition could come back somehow.

I'm telling you, if GW were going to do a WFB Legacy set for Specialist Games or whatnot, I sincerely hope they'd roll out 6th with the army books more in line with each other. THAT would get my money in a heartbeat. But they'd need a nice sexy tome for all the extra material.

**brr-icy**

auticus wrote:
If only 6th edition could come back somehow.

It does, every week at my house and friend's houses. lol

**JohnHwangDD**

Just Tony wrote:
auticus wrote:
If only 6th edition could come back somehow.

I'm telling you, if GW were going to do a WFB Legacy set for Specialist Games or whatnot, I sincerely hope they'd roll out 6th with the army books more in line with each other. THAT would get my money in a heartbeat. But they'd need a nice sexy tome for all the extra material.

Based on what I've seen, I'll probably be writing a Classichammer Armies "Dogs of War" Army Book soon enough, structured like the 5E Army Book (the last actual DoW Army Book), but costed like other 6E armies.

**LiveWaaaaagh**

Yea, I echo what many have said. T9A started super strong with 1.1. Small, but welcomed changes to the existing game and small changes in the IP. It was "just renaming" and I think that's what most people around me wanted. Then it evolved into its own game, and sure, that's great for them, but that's not what I signed up for. So I stopped playing and went back to 8th edition with my group - having a great time playing that. Some try 7th every now and then, or even 6th. But nobody I know, unless they're tournament players, has gone back to T9A.

Plus, I've seen 4 tournament in US for 8th edition pop up in the last 2 months, so that shows people are coming back to 8th.

**Just Tony**

If a car company stopped making pick up trucks, and your company hammered out trucks similar to theirs in order to get the cast off customers, it'd be completely ludicrous to suddenly start selling motorcycles advertised as trucks.

We can agree on that, I hope.

Thusly, it was absolute folly for T9A to try to change up their formula. This is on the same level as someone publishing something they wrote on a website under the guise of it being a leaked product so they could get your foot in the door you would have otherwise ignored.

**jouso**

Just Tony wrote:

Thusly, it was absolute folly for T9A to try to change up their formula. This is on the same level as someone publishing something they wrote on a website under the guise of it being a leaked product so they could get your foot in the door you would have otherwise ignored.

The reasons behind the change are well documented, and explained time and again.

2.0 to me is a better ruleset than 1.1, and the background is always a personal issue.

The Herford masters is already at 350 players signed up for April, and still has room to grow. No other fanmade project has gone this far.

**Just Tony**

The reasoning is what we commonly refer to as a "bait and switch". It's a rather old tactic. Their intent was to get their own game system from the get go, but they didn't think they could toss the frog in the boiling water (Kings of War) so they decided to toss the frog in some tepid water and slowly increase the heat. The frog is not aware it's cooking and happily floats as it boils alive. THAT is why T9A changed their model.

You CANNOT copyright a game mechanic, so GW has no leg to stand on if T9A apes 8th in that respect. They also can't go after common Fantasy tropes, so the only reason T9A has to swap out for 2.0 is to purposefully be their own thing. It won't surprise me in the slightest if they start charging for the rules soon.

**JohnHwangDD**

jouso wrote:
The reasons behind the change are well documented, and explained time and again.

2.0 to me is a better ruleset than 1.1, and the background is always a personal issue.

The reasons can be explained, but it's still a switch that defeats the entire point of why Ninth Age ever got people to try it in the first place.

Better is subjective, and the biggest issue with GW Warhammer Fantasy wasn't the rules as much as it was the balance of the Army Books. But let's not pretend that the background and rules continuity isn't the reason why Ninth got anyone to try it.

**jouso**

Just Tony wrote:
The reasoning is what we commonly refer to as a "bait and switch". It's a rather old tactic. Their intent was to get their own game system from the get go, but they didn't think they could toss the frog in the boiling water (Kings of War) so they decided to toss the frog in some tepid water and slowly increase the heat. The frog is not aware it's cooking and happily floats as it boils alive. THAT is why T9A changed their model.

You CANNOT copyright a game mechanic, so GW has no leg to stand on if T9A apes 8th in that respect. They also can't go after common Fantasy tropes, so the only reason T9A has to swap out for 2.0 is to purposefully be their own thing. It won't surprise me in the slightest if they start charging for the rules soon.

I can't blame for not following the whole 9th age story, but if you want to speak about intent it would be better to go to the primary sources first.

Read a bit (the good thing about this being a community, international project is that most of it is just a few clicks away), what you don't find, ask around, staff members are for the most part approachable and attend events just like every other player who wants to spend a day out with the minis. They will tell you about intent and the whole story of how 9th age came to be and then evolved.

The legal explanations are here.

https://www.the-ninth-age.com/index.php?thread/28401-the-grand-summary-of-the-legal-explanations-for-t9a/

I'll take a real IP lawyer opinion over any random thought over the internet.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
jouso wrote:
The reasons behind the change are well documented, and explained time and again.

2.0 to me is a better ruleset than 1.1, and the background is always a personal issue.

The reasons can be explained, but it's still a switch that defeats the entire point of why Ninth Age ever got people to try it in the first place.

Better is subjective, and the biggest issue with GW Warhammer Fantasy wasn't the rules as much as it was the balance of the Army Books. But let's not pretend that the background and rules continuity isn't the reason why Ninth got anyone to try it.

Most people flocked to KoW because it ticked a certain itch as well.

People have different interests when taking a game up. To me 9th age fills the same game space 8th did. Some things better, some things worse but overall the balance better.

Curiously enough AoS fits on a different box. Different enough that I can play both. Though I still prefer rank and flank it provides a nice contrast.

I'd still play 8th over AoS if there was no such thing as 9th though.

**kodos**

jouso wrote:

The legal explanations are here.
https://www.the-ninth-age.com/index.php?thread/28401-the-grand-summary-of-the-legal-explanations-for-t9a/
I'll take a real IP lawyer opinion over any random thought over the internet.

And it say that there was no need to change rules, and it that changes in background/naming were just done to be on the save side

But still, if the T9A Team would not have promised a more balanced 8th edition and nothing more, they wouldn't have got the spot for the ETC in the first place and it would have been dead from the start.

**JohnHwangDD**

kodos wrote:
But still, if the T9A Team would not have promised a more balanced 8th edition and nothing more, they wouldn't have got the spot for the ETC in the first place and it would have been dead from the start.

Exactly right.

**jouso**

kodos wrote:
jouso wrote:

The legal explanations are here.
https://www.the-ninth-age.com/index.php?thread/28401-the-grand-summary-of-the-legal-explanations-for-t9a/
I'll take a real IP lawyer opinion over any random thought over the internet.

And it say that there was no need to change rules, and it that changes in background/naming were just done to be on the save side

But still, if the T9A Team would not have promised a more balanced 8th edition and nothing more, they wouldn't have got the spot for the ETC in the first place and it would have been dead from the start.

Exactly. The scope on the project changed along the way once it got a certain critical mass and lawyers happened.

It's all there for everyone to read. You can even ask lawgnome or Mr. owl (who weren't project members at the start) or read their posting history at the 9th age forum who were the minds behind the necessary legal changes.

And again, law is a complex issue and they're professionals working pro bono for a game they love. I'd always take their advice (even if that means losing some players) if that ensures the project lives on.

**Platuan4th**

Sorry, but if every change is losing you players, then the project isn't living on, it's slowly dying and those in charge just haven't realized it yet.

That's literally how we lost WHFB.

**jouso**

Platuan4th wrote:
Sorry, but if every change is losing you players, then the project isn't living on, it's slowly dying and those in charge just haven't realized it yet.

That's literally how we lost WHFB.

You win some, you lose some.

There were many people who wouldn't touch T9A until the core rules were stable and now it's that time.

Can't make everyone happy and we're spoiled for choice anyway.