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.

Spinning off of the halberd topic, this one is the idea that there should be more variation of weaponry in fantasy.

Light flail: This replaces the current morningstar rules as the morningstar has become a different weapon as described below.

Pike: Requires two hands. Models in the front rank of units that make a successful charge against the front of an unengaged unit armed with pikes must take dangerous terrain checks. Extra rank of attacks. Requires two hands.

Morningstar: Hand weapon. Models wielding morningstars may not make parry saves due to it's unwieldy nature. Wounds from morningstars cannot be parried as they simply crush through blocking.

Mace: Hand weapon. A model wounded by a mace gains always strikes last this round of combat if they haven't attacked yet, or next round if they already have as they are stunned by the blow. (needs to be redone, looking on it now as other people have pointed out it's rather overpowered, any thoughts?)

Scimitar: Hand weapon. Due to it's light nature a model wielding a scimitar gets +1 to it's initiative.

Poleaxe: +1 strength, extra rank of attacks; always strikes last. Requires two hands.

Bastardsword: Armor piercing. If used without a second weapon or shield it is wielded two handed and gives +1 strength in addition to armor piercing.

Nunchaku: A peasant tool that became a weapon of stealth. Hand weapon. When wielded as a pair, units may choose to forgo the +1 attack for two hand weapons and gain a parry save instead. This effect may be chosen at the start of each round of combat.



The following weapons are inspired by darkPrince010's ideas:

Traps: Used for game or man depending on who the poacher is... Once per game these may be thrown as a stand and shoot reaction that causes 1d6 dangerous terrain checks per rank of the unit throwing (minimum 1d6). May only be used by skirmishers or characters.

Torch: Hand weapon. Models using torches attack at S2 with flaming attacks. The strength of the attack cannot be modified.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head. I put these here without point costs because well, it varies from model to model. I tried to balance them around the idea of being infantry weapons (bastard sword excluded, that should be a hero weapon and possibly the mace). Suggestions or thoughts?

Edit (8/5): updated with Traps, torch and nunchaku. Note added to maces about them needing a balance change. Updated bastardswords to be clearer. Made all weapon types clearer. Made light flail to replace the current morningstar.

Edit: Never mind, my reading comprehension fails completely.

I kinda like the way pikes used to work, basically you can attack in 4 ranks and i believe gain ASF vs cavalry. Combined that into now and that would be 5 ranks! Of course cavalry was much better then and you needed something to stop first turn kills, these days most of the time they're just supporters to the main blocks.

Not sure how useful your morning stars are, I think I like them in their current sate even if barely anyone uses them since most of the time they can either take lances, flails, or something else. Actually back in 7th, they were called maces. Not sure why they changed the name.

I like that idea for Pikes, but I would maybe have that be spears.

Spears, extra rank when not charging, dangerous to charge, 1 handed.
Pike: 2x Extra rank when not charging, dangerous to charge, 2 handed.

-Matt

Hmmm. Some interesting ideas here.

Pikes:I'd agree with hawaiiMatt for the pikes (just for simplicity).

Morningstar: Perhaps either make them expensive or just give the wielding unit an I penalty (probably -1)

Mace: See Morningstar. Plus, how would that work for a unit attacking an enemy regiment? would it reduce their number of attacks that strike at their I by the number of wounds the maces cause? This seems somewhat confusing and could complicate a big fight reeeeally quickly. Sounds fine for a "magic" item though (Mundane items that any character can pick, including unit champions? Hmmm... )

Scimitar: This seems like HE could abuse the crap out of this weapon (I5? Thanks!). I'd say balance it by making it insanely expensive or give -1 to S.

Poleaxe: Sounds fine assuming they can still use shields (I'd assume so)

Bastardsword: Lose the Armor Piercing. That way, a unit has the option of swapping from a sword/shield combo (and get the 6+ parry) to the mini-great weapon mode (+1 S at I or -1 I). If you want it to stay a heroic item, I'd say the Armor Piercing is fine, but not for rank and file troopers.

Your ideas sound good so far!

My own (rough) ideas to throw into your pot:

Pickaxe: -1 to I, Armor Piercing.

Torch: Flaming Attacks, can count as an additional hand weapon (Dunno if this is an existing option for some armies or not)

Bear Trap: Dangerous to Charge if the unit has not moved this turn.

Swordbreaker (Heroic Item, looks like a serrated dagger): Once per combat, if this character rolls a 6 for a to-hit, the model hit loses one Attack. This does stack, but cannot reduce an enemy below 1 A.

Duckfoot (Heroic Item, looks like a wierd pistol): Once per game, the model with this weapon can make 3 pistol attacks instead of one this turn. This does not affect the ability to fire pistols normally next turn.

The problem isn't the rules, it's the cost. Various HW usually don't have a tremendous variety of point costs. What their limitation(s) are is which units can use them and what they have to pay for them.

Obviously, most units don't get the option of certain HW no matter what the cost. They're either too good already or would become too good or it would too hard to price them or would be weird (GW Skaven Slaves!).

That said:

But no sword is armor piercing. Maces and Morning stars and hammers kind of are (so what if you got a helmet, BONG!). Some weapons with those long narrow spike, such as modified poleaxes, were armor piercing. Full plate knights would have 2h sword "duels" that generally lasted until they were exhausted. Swords are the epitome of non-armor piercing. They're slashing weapons. Unless the enemy is wearing cardboard armor. Or scale. But I think we generally assume it's some kind of hardish carapice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poleaxe

Poleaxe isn't that big. It's not a line defense weapon like pike/spear, it's for an individual. Basically an advanced axe. So I don't think fight in extra rank applies. You actually need room to use it.

But otherwise, I like your pike, morningstar, scimitar. I would like to see a pike have -1M (min of 1). Since the Cold War of pikes saw them getting longer and longer until they were a gazillion feet tall. Can't see units being all that speedy maneuvering with them. One problem also is representing them on models, as they would make them very fragile and take up a lot of room and shouldn't be confused with spears.

I don't like the mace/bastard sword concepts too much. No one is going to be able to tell a bastard sword from a HW. And the rules make it more confusing. Might even have trouble with scimitars. Be careful of WYSIWYG.

There are already rules for Morning Stars (see bret armybook)

Ralin Givens wrote:There are already rules for Morning Stars (see bret armybook)

Well technically the main BRB but yea the only army I know who has maces/morning stars is Brets. I also already mentioned this somewhat

kenshin620 wrote:Not sure how useful your morning stars are, I think I like them in their current sate even if barely anyone uses them since most of the time they can either take lances, flails, or something else. Actually back in 7th, they were called maces. Not sure why they changed the name.

Ah sorry Ken, it was a big post and that was my only thing to add, so I guess I was ninja'd

Just another thought for pikes.
Spears as is, with dangerous to charge.
Pike is a 2 handed spear, with dangerous to charge for the enemy front 2 ranks.
Failed dangerous tests count toward combat res.

-Matt

I understand the morningstar is in the rules, though as is, it's essentially a light flail, so I made it in mind more of a shaft and mace ball. The current rules would just be light flail rules. That said their new direction is good for frenzied units who already lose parry or more elite units with high armor so they can more easily smash through infantry without worrying about a 6+ slowing them in the least. So imagine if Khorne warriors ran up to light armor shield hand weapon stuff and walked through with them only having 1 6+ save.

Mace can effect only 1 multi wound model so as I said, really more of a character item.

Pole axes were still fairly long (up to 6 ft) and I wanted a way for them to be significant in their own way. So basically they became semi great weapons and semi spears.

Duke: I fully understand knights had one hell of a time killing each other, but infantry wore far worse armor than them. The bastard sword is kind of a mix of D&D's idea of a bastard sword and the cathayan longsword from ogre kingdoms.

Hawaii: I'm not sure I like the idea of carrying over 3 phases to combat for the tests. It just rubs the wrong way against KISS. I like the idea of spears causing DT tests and pikes in 2 ranks I like and that would be part of a grander rewrite or weapons which this may turn into.

I'd love to add and attribute you're suggestions into my main post right now, but I'm a little plastered *looks at the missing 4th of absolute vodka.* I'll have to do it when I can put the thinking cap on without me thinking it's a lampshade.

Surtur wrote:
Hawaii: I'm not sure I like the idea of carrying over 3 phases to combat for the tests. It just rubs the wrong way against KISS. I like the idea of spears causing DT tests and pikes in 2 ranks I like and that would be part of a grander rewrite or weapons which this may turn into.

Good point. But, you'd only test dangerous if you had charged them.
The easy answer is to test at the start of close combat. You have to remember who charged anyone, as you get the +1 combat res and lose fights in extra ranks, depending on who did the charging.
So in theory, a chariot could charge into pikes, do D6+1 impact hits, while at the same time failing it's dangerous terrain test and die; which I like.
It's not like pikes are going to stop something as large as a chariot without possibly taking part of the impact themselves.

-Matt

Alrighty, updated the main post. Thank you all for your input. I am still open to suggestions and debate.

HawaiiMatt: Yes, we do have to remember a lot of rules indeed, but dangerous terrain should come from movement. I'm beginning to think of instead of DT checks it gives ASF to the unit first round of being charged. This would help soften the blow against cavalry, but would grant the possibility of re-rolls (even though I envision pikes on things like peasants).

Surtur wrote:Alrighty, updated the main post. Thank you all for your input. I am still open to suggestions and debate.

HawaiiMatt: Yes, we do have to remember a lot of rules indeed, but dangerous terrain should come from movement. I'm beginning to think of instead of DT checks it gives ASF to the unit first round of being charged. This would help soften the blow against cavalry, but would grant the possibility of re-rolls (even though I envision pikes on things like peasants).

The problem with that is units with ASF gain nothing from spears/pikes.

-Matt

They get an extra rank of attacks. I don't really see high elves complain about it. I am also specifically interested in pikes not spears and making them significantly different, so the suggestion doesn't apply to spears. To top it off, I can't really see elves and the like using something as crude as a pike. I really do envision this as a cheap upgrade to low cost troops like peasants.

Perhaps the best solution is to just have pikes give two extra ranks of attack. I have been focusing mostly on the idea that charging into pikes is a bad idea and maybe it would be best to drop the idea of a penalty for charging.

Surtur wrote: I really do envision this as a cheap upgrade to low cost troops like peasants.

Aww but I like my elite heavy armored pikemen!

Surtur wrote:They get an extra rank of attacks. I don't really see high elves complain about it. I am also specifically interested in pikes not spears and making them significantly different, so the suggestion doesn't apply to spears. To top it off, I can't really see elves and the like using something as crude as a pike. I really do envision this as a cheap upgrade to low cost troops like peasants.

Perhaps the best solution is to just have pikes give two extra ranks of attack. I have been focusing mostly on the idea that charging into pikes is a bad idea and maybe it would be best to drop the idea of a penalty for charging.

Pikes fought in 2 ranks in 7th, and even with other bonuses they typically failed to produce results.
From a play balance standpoint, pikes need more than what they had before.
Fighting in 2 ranks makes pikes worse than a savage orc (3 attacks), because that orc keeps all his attacks on offense as well, and has the same out-put while in a small unit as a very expensive unit of pikes would have.

Extra rank of attacks isn't working for spears, doubling it won't work for pikes.

-Matt

HawaiiMatt wrote:
Pikes fought in 2 ranks in 7th, and even with other bonuses they typically failed to produce results.

I thought they fought in 4 ranks (in total)?

kenshin620 wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:
Pikes fought in 2 ranks in 7th, and even with other bonuses they typically failed to produce results.

I thought they fought in 4 ranks (in total)?

Yeah, I meant to say that 4 in 7th wasn't enough, 2 in 8th wont be enough.

Hell, you could say every man fights with pikes, and it still doesn't work. Pikes are just to expensive for too little damage output.
That's why I like the difficult terrain test.

Take a look at 7th edition; strike 1st, +1 strength vs cav.
What would that do? 4+ to hit, 4+ to wound, 1 in 6 heavy cav fails a save. That means 24 pikemen = 1 dead knight.
As a counter to knights, pikes are horrible.
Adding in difficult ground tests would produce another 1 or 2 kills, which in many cases triples the losses inflicted. But it's more than that; you don't want to charge into pikes; you could roll a bunch of 1's before you even get to swing.
That's what pikes should do; discourage the frontal charge by heavy cav; while not totally hosing everything else.

-Matt

Well in 8th though, any large infantry block is a huge counter to knights thanks to steadfast. Perhaps another solution is to lower the costs of pikes. In the old DoW they are 10 points per pikemen for your average human stats. Maybe 6-8 would be better, obviously more expensive compared to spears but much cheaper to promote larger units. After all pikes are meant to be used in massed (albeit hard to maneuver) formations.