SisterSydney wrote:All good ideas. Some wrinkles to work out:
1) If you reduce weapon ranges, I take it you would NOT reduce movement distances? Trying to think of a simple way to do that.... maybe weapons ranges are in centimeters but move distances are still in inches?
(2) Not sure I agree with you about saves... but maybe invulnerable saves ONLY could work as a separate die roll, to make them really distinctive from regular armor?
(3) I don't know how ward saves work in Fantasy -- I'm literally 16 years out of date on WHFB rules. Can you clarify?
(4) Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.
(5) Make sense.
(6) I really like alternating unit-by-unit, but IS definitely tricky when one army has way more units, because that army is going to get a string of actions in a row no matter what. Maybe the guy with the smaller army gets to choose whether the larger army moves its "extra" units at the beginning of the turn (so you can wait and see what they do) or at the end (so you can preempt)?
I would just chop almost every range in half. It is probably less realistic but it would make for far more interesting game play. The biggest problem with
40K is that ~50% of the weapons can cover almost the entire board with their range. You can either increase board size (harder) or decrease range. I would probably do the fantasy movement characterisitic (average 4 for humans 8 for cavalry) or leave it as is so that games feel fast and furious rather than shooting galleries.
Ward saves are a seperate roll after armour saves. If I had my way it would be armour save, ward save, then
FnP to kill something. This would make some units reidiculously hard to kill (termies) but if you are conservative with your designs and don't let it go crazy it really makes them special. In fantasy a really good ward is a 4++.
Rav1rn wrote:Alternating phases would probably be the easiest route to go, but you may have hit on a solution to the outnumbered problem with unit-by-unit system in your original post. You described "reactions" using initiative tests, such as a squad firing at a tank as it moves or counter-charging a unit, so this would be a pretty nifty way of doing things. Something along the lines of:
If one player has activated all of his units, and the second player has more than one inactivated unit remaining, the first player may nominate one unit to make a reaction each time the opponent activates a unit. When a unit attempts a reaction, both units must make an initiative test. If the first players unit wins the initiative test, they are allowed to perform one action at any point in the activated units activation, making a movement, firing their weapons, or counter-charging. Otherwise, the opponents unit activates as usual. All of the first players units must attempt a reaction before any unit is allowed to attempt a second reaction.
Since most armies that would be seriously outnumbered are lower model count, expensive armies that tend to have better initiative, they are more likely to get a reaction against lower initiative, horde armies, so that helps with the uneven activations without it being automatic or overly powerful. Obviously this would need a lot of work, but it's an interesting direction.
It could be really awesome but as proved by many games before extremely time consuming and complicated. I think this may become more possible in the post Augmented Reality age where we all have "google glasses" to keep track of it all for us.
