WFB 9th Edition Rumor Roundup

[Jampire]

I would have to agree with BigRed about War of The Ring's game mechanics making a positive impact on WFB. I would love to see certain elements carry into Fantasy. I was never too into LoTR as a game system, but when WoTR came out I loved the design of it.

The movement system is great and fast for a ranked up fantasy army, magic is handled well in, and MAN combat is bloody. The dynamics of infantry interaction is great. Monsters are great VS cavalry, but weak against infantry. Cavalry can smash through infantry but struggle with monsters. Infantry can bog down monsters and render them semi-obsolete.

Magic in the game scales with each spell. Cast a spell and roll a die 1= nothing, 2-5= x effect, 6= better effect. Spells cost different 'charges' to cast. This is a very simplified explanation, but the War of the Ring system is quite a good rule set. Written by Mat Ward, too. Very surprising.

[Wildeybeast]

Sounds interesting. Not a massive fan of the 'rock paper scissors' unit types, but it is probably better than the current system where ranked up infantry beat everything.

Edit: Out of curiosity, does anyone know if there are any contractual restrictions on them taking game mechanics from WotR into Warhammer? I know once upon they had to be kept so separate that WD got split in two and they used centimetres instead of inches.

[magickbk]

Sounds interesting. Not a massive fan of the 'rock paper scissors' unit types, but it is probably better than the current system where ranked up infantry beat everything.

Edit: Out of curiosity, does anyone know if there are any contractual restrictions on them taking game mechanics from WotR into Warhammer? I know once upon they had to be kept so separate that WD got split in two and they used centimetres instead of inches.

Back when I worked for GW (during the original release of the LotR game), the restrictions were explained as:
1. We can't use LotR to sell the other games, so if someone walks in and asks about LotR, you run them through an Intro Game of LotR, and don't really talk about the other games.
2. The models aren't supposed to be used for the other games, which is why the scale was kept deliberately different.

Now, I've been gone a long time, so there may be other restrictions that were added for the Hobbit release.

[Wildeybeast]

Yeah, it's that sort of stuff I was thinking of. I'm just wondering if a) they are still in force and b) whether it would extend so far as rules mechanics? Are the LotR franchise mechanics so different from a deliberate design choice or because the contracts said they had to be?

[lattd]

The mechanics where terrible because of how they did the blocks of 8 however the move rules would certainly work in fantasy where you are only moving one block instead of 6 combined blocks. I still don't understand the hate for LoTR it was a really balanced system which allowed heroes to be heroes but have the little guy a good chance to win as well, was the closest thing to a tournament ruleset I fear GW will produce.

[Ben_S]

I last played 4th-5th edition and bypassed 6th-7th entirely, before recently returning in 8th (having played just one game so far). I think 8th seems to work pretty well on the whole - I wouldn't see much need for change, but maybe I'm missing some of the broken bits (random charges doesn't bother me though). It would be good if non-Monstrous Cavalry, particularly of a 'medium' type, could be made more useful though.

I think the idea of a mini army book type list in the box game (as in 4th edition and 2nd edition 40k) is a good one. It allows players to try out armies without shelling out £30 for the book. This is useful not only for new players, giving them a more complete game, but also for older players who'd like ot try a new army. Granted GW would rather sell a £30 book, but I think many players will be put off by that entry cost - a basic list lets you spend some money trying out some new models instead.

[Wildeybeast]

There isn't really a lot that is broken in 8th, which is why a few people are doubtful about a major overhaul; it isn't really needed.

[D6Damager]

There isn't really a lot that is broken in 8th, which is why a few people are doubtful about a major overhaul; it isn't really needed.

The biggest complaints that I still hear about Fantasy is that Magic and Warmachines are too powerful while regular Cavalry (not monstrous) and Monsters are too weak.

In the case of monsters especially, every new book sees new monsters for armies and nobody wants to use them for fear of cannon and initiative spells which neutralize them in some cases for a much cheaper cost. Which is a shame since most of them look fantastic.

[Mr Mystery]

The biggest complaints that I still hear about Fantasy is that Magic and Warmachines are too powerful while regular Cavalry (not monstrous) and Monsters are too weak.

In the case of monsters especially, every new book sees new monsters for armies and nobody wants to use them for fear of cannon and initiative spells which neutralize them in some cases for a much cheaper cost. Which is a shame since most of them look fantastic.

Actually, that's just an opinion held by those who seem to think the game is some kind of highly paid competitive sport, and thus place all onus on winning.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

Actually, that's just an opinion held by those who seem to think the game is some kind of highly paid competitive sport, and thus place all onus on winning.

Just ask Mr Stampy my converted, gnoblar crewed, mammoth (who does service as a thundertusk). He went to a tourney and we did ok (top 1/3, better if it hadn't been for a bloody stupid "best game of the weekend" scoring system), he did get sky-cannoned once mind you.