Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

General discussion about Warhammer Fantasy Battles
User avatar
The Prince of Excess
Clan Chief
Clan Chief
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:31 pm
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Contact:

Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby The Prince of Excess » Fri Aug 05, 2011 8:36 pm

Although house ruling 8th is pretty popular, I haven't seen a set that had everything I thought was required. So this is my proposed set to use for friendly play and test, I just wanted the opinions of others. If you have an opinion, please back it up with a logical argument, thanks in advance.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. No more than 3 of a Core Choice and no more than 2 of a Special Choice per Army (doubles for 1 Choice i.e. Bolt Thrower still works). No more than 1 of a Rare Choice may be taken per Army unless they're Warmachines.

This is intended to prevent armies with cheap blocks, like Slaves or Night Goblins, from spamming the game and presenting an almost unbeatable layout of 50+ man blocks. This also encourages diversity in armies, which is where the strategy part of Fantasy shines by exploiting the synergies of unit types and special rules.

Likewise the Rare portion is to prevent doubling up of incredibly powerful units that often decide the games by themselves. Rare Choices are good center pieces and can get out of hand in pairs, i.e. Hydras and Hell Pits. The Warmachine exception is because most of the Rare Choice Warmachines are either not incredibly powerful, or the armies only access to them.


2. The following spells have been changed to add additional effects.
Final Transmutation
The Dwellers Below
Cracks Call
The Purple Sun of Xereus
Pit of Shades


These spells only inflict one wound with no saves of any kind allowed instead of killing outright.

This is to prevent the snipe spells from ending games, or just swallowing up very expensive units of Monstrous Infantry or Cavalry. Obviously having Dwellers wipe your General out or losing a unit of 6 Ogres to Purple Sun isn't very fun and makes some armies almost unplayable.

I don't think these spells being cast on Infantry blocks would be as big of a deal if they allowed characters to live, and also once you take into account the restrictions on Power Pools and decreased importance on Infantry. Having that one big spell makes your opponent hold back dice for it which is how the Magic Phase should work, it just shouldn't completely end the game if that spell goes off once and eats a General.


3. No player may add more than one Power/Dispel Dice to their respective Pools per turn except via Channeling, a Spell or Lore Attribute.

Magic and Dispelling can get out of hand, leaving one player either powerless to stop any spells or a player unable to cast any spells of their own. This takes away all the strategy that Magic brings to the table, which requires you carefully plan the use of your dice. It is intended the casting player has an advantage but not an overwhelming one, the dispelling player should be able to stop 1-2 spells a turn, not all of them or none of them.

I personally don't think this would leave Dwarves out in the cold because they can still take a Power Dice and turn it into a Dispel, run mass Scrolls and the banner that makes their army count as a Lvl 4 Wizard for Dispel purposes. That was my main worry but after rolling out a bunch of scenarios, I didn't find Dwarves to be shafted.


4. Any Flank or Rear Charge causes Disruption and units suffering from Disruption cannot benefit from Steadfast.

As is, most Skirmishing units, as well as Chariots/Cavalry are not very useful because they can be trapped in a unit that is Steadfast for 2-4 turns with no way to leave and no way to reliably break the opposition. Having an easier way to remove Steadfast would make those units better and again encourage more diversity in armies.

This is the one that is most risky because potentially blocks become worthless since one Chariot etc. can crash in the flank or rear and break them, however the game does regain that feel of jostling for position instead of slamming into each other head on and seeing who has less ranks at the end of the day. I am very open to opinions on this rule in particular.


5. All Lord Level Special Characters are Banned in addition to the following Items

Book of Hoeth
Folding Fortress
Power Scroll
Standard of Discipline
Neferra's Scrolls of Mighty Incarnations


Most Special Characters are either 100% crap, or to good to NOT use. However the Hero level ones are often way toned down and fun flavor additions, so I do not think letting those into a game will do anything bad. The banned items are the same one most every tournament bans because they are to good or easily exploited. Note: I have not read the recent WD so I don't know what the Power Scroll nerf actually was, but it's probably not a big deal if it stays out.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

My intention is not to make rampant changes to 8th Edition, just small ones that open up a lot more strategy and variation. If the game is played as written, there is very little incentive to not take units that can be easily made into huge blocks, add Magic, add Monsters and see what's what. That seems like a huge letdown since half the attraction to Fantasy is all the variety from the various units and types.

I know many have problems with TLoS, I do not. I had the same position when it came to 40k and it is much simpler in Fantasy because there is not multi-level terrain all over the table and units are not firing from tiny individual windows. The way buildings were handled is awesome and I hope 40k makes the same changes. I would classify removing TLoS as a big change and one that is not badly needed, so it is beyond the scope of what I am trying to do.

However I would be willing to put the old way of Charging (Double M) or Double M plus 1d6 to the test. I personally don't have a problem with Random Charges but I have absolutely seen it cost games or make a very well laid out turn into crap. Generally the less dice are involved, the more strategy is involved so that is something I want to try out.

The only other big one I know of is terrain, which I would never change. The terrain rules add a lot of humor to the game and open up new opportunities for both players. The simple fix for tournament play is to lay out each table before the rounds and label what each piece of terrain is and its special rules. No surprise Blood Forests or Sorcerous Portals when the game are anything but friendly seems like a way to keep everyone happy.

So please give me any opinions you have on these as I plan on testing them and adding them to the Arizona Fantasy League, as well as all Fantasy events I run after that if they're appropriate. I'd also encourage others to test them if they want and tell me the results, every little bit helps!
Last edited by The Prince of Excess on Sun Aug 07, 2011 5:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
SkavenInAZ
Hordemaster
Hordemaster
Posts: 1078
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:29 pm
Contact:

Re: Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby SkavenInAZ » Sat Aug 06, 2011 8:58 am

The Prince of Excess wrote:
2. The following spells have been changed to add additional effects.
Final Transmutation
The Dwellers Below
Cracks Call
The Purple Sun of Xereus
Pit of Shades


These spells all allow the use of "Look Out Sir!" and also only inflict one wound with no saves of any kind allowed instead of killing outright.


Things that affect every model in a unit and don't use a template don't get a LOS. Simply changing it to 1 wound with no saves is enough to save your characters, without making them totally immune to these spells -- which I don't think is the point.

The Prince of Excess wrote:3. No player may add more than one Power/Dispel Dice to their respective Pools per turn except via Channeling, a Spell or Lore Attribute.

I personally don't think this would leave Dwarves out in the cold because they can still take a Power Dice and turn it into a Dispel, run mass Scrolls and the banner that makes their army count as a Lvl 4 Wizard for Dispel purposes. That was my main worry but after rolling out a bunch of scenarios, I didn't find Dwarves to be shafted.


That's a 100 point banner.. if you're going to say they should take that in order to survive spells while limiting their additional dice.... that's a steep price for them to pay IMHO. I don't think that's balanced for them.

The Prince of Excess wrote:4. Any Flank or Rear Charge causes Disruption and units suffering from Disruption cannot benefit from Steadfast.

As is, most Skirmishing units, as well as Chariots/Cavalry are not very useful because they can be trapped in a unit that is Steadfast for 2-4 turns with no way to leave and no way to reliably break the opposition. Having an easier way to remove Steadfast would make those units better and again encourage more diversity in armies.


I think this goes too far as well. What's the point in having these large blocks if a single hero charging you in the flank makes you not steadfast? I think you could leave the disruption rule as it is (2 ranks) and have that then remove steadfast. That makes the unit in the side have to be substantial, instead of letting that 15 point Warlock Engineer disrupt your whole plan. There are a lot of armies nowadays that require the steadfast rule to work because of the larger unit sizes... everyone is using the hammer/anvil strategy. Allowing armies that have cheap throwaway units to stop this from happening isn't beneficial to game balance.
User avatar
The Prince of Excess
Clan Chief
Clan Chief
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:31 pm
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Contact:

Re: Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby The Prince of Excess » Sun Aug 07, 2011 5:43 am

I think a better way to handle Disruption might be based on model count, kind of a middle ground. The goal is to get Skirmishing combat units back to being useful, and also Cavalry. Ranks aren't a viable option for those units but numbers are and it makes protecting/killing them more important than it currently is. Chariots aren't left in the cold because they can do what they always did, just charge with a block and give the upper hand in CR, or run over small units.

The only other thing I can think of for Dwarves is to maybe cap them at 2 or 3 extra Dispel Dice, because anyone who has read the Dwarf book once can figure out how to eternally shut down Magic. That way you don't have to just write off 100pts for a Banner in every list in order to not die horribly but you can still take the Banner if you want to really hate on Magic.

Good suggestion on the spells, will re-write that.
SkavenInAZ
Hordemaster
Hordemaster
Posts: 1078
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:29 pm
Contact:

Re: Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby SkavenInAZ » Sun Aug 07, 2011 6:45 am

The Prince of Excess wrote:I think a better way to handle Disruption might be based on model count, kind of a middle ground. The goal is to get Skirmishing combat units back to being useful, and also Cavalry. Ranks aren't a viable option for those units but numbers are and it makes protecting/killing them more important than it currently is. Chariots aren't left in the cold because they can do what they always did, just charge with a block and give the upper hand in CR, or run over small units.

The only other thing I can think of for Dwarves is to maybe cap them at 2 or 3 extra Dispel Dice, because anyone who has read the Dwarf book once can figure out how to eternally shut down Magic. That way you don't have to just write off 100pts for a Banner in every list in order to not die horribly but you can still take the Banner if you want to really hate on Magic.

Good suggestion on the spells, will re-write that


I don't think that you need to make skirmishers useful again by making them able to disrupt large blocks in combat... That harkens back to 6th and 7th edition when units were smaller and movement was much more important in the game. If you'll notice, there are fewer skirmishing units in the world than there were previously. I think that they're going to be special purpose units and not something for you to built an army around a la Wood Elves. And, if they don't totally redo WE, I'm sure there will be some rule to allow them to do that -- but as for a general purpose ruling, I don't think it fits. As for cav and chariots.... both are still useful, they just can't break a unit on the charge like they used to be able to do, which necessitates they get cheaper -- which is slowly happening with book rewrites.
Last edited by SkavenInAZ on Sun Aug 07, 2011 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ninja Goblin
Warboss
Warboss
Posts: 382
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby Ninja Goblin » Sun Aug 07, 2011 12:48 pm

I would have to say the disruption getting rid of steadfast is an excellent suggestion. Although a single model doing so is slightly off kilter I definitely see the need for it to use fast and regular cav more effectively. While we see a point drop in the last two books for normal cav, the rest of the books may not be out for years to come (if at all this edition).

The magic phase would be fine as long as you make the proposed changes to the spells and get rid of certain items (like the ones listed). If somebody wants to go heavy magic let them limiting the amount of dice that can be made in general severely alters how some armies and lores work. Don't forget if you fail to cast that wizard is done casting!

I have also considered the double move plus 1d6 for charging, as well as a movement +3 or +4 and 1d6 with no pre-measuring. We played a few games like that and I kind of liked it!
Yes, I'm a ninja. No, I won't show you my moves.
I do not sleep, I wait.... It's a ninja thing, you wouldn't understand.
TigToad
Warchief
Warchief
Posts: 73
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 7:54 am
Contact:

Re: Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby TigToad » Mon Aug 08, 2011 6:13 am

I think these changes are too much IMO. All you really need is to tone down the level 6 spells.

I definitely don't think monsters, skirmishers, chariots should disrupt... that was the flaw of 7th ed in the first place. However, I'm not sure I'm even a fan of the steadfast rule in the first place. I'll have to think about it.

Overall though, I think you're on the right track for changes... I'm thinking though, less is more. The less that has to be changed to keep the game balanced, the better.
User avatar
cmccracken86
Clan Chief
Clan Chief
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:37 pm
Location: Florence, AZ
Contact:

Re: Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby cmccracken86 » Mon Aug 08, 2011 9:23 am

Do you really wanna go back to the days when one unit of chaos knights charges into the flank of your unit and evaporates half your armywith overuns ?? ...

i mean come on historically this doesnt pass muster and common sense it doesnt pass muster .. there is a reason the rules are the way they are. House rules pave the road to hell.
I really dont want to loose my 450 point unit of 40 dwarf longbeards to your 200 point unit of chaos knights that got into my flank with their 19 attacks at str 5 verse my 4 or 5 attacks at str 4 and im not stubborn .. so i loose by say ... 5 or 6 ... dead unit then another next turn as he is into my flank. House rules pave the road to hell.

The only spell thats over the top is dwellers ... Final Transmutation only works on characters on a 6 same as killing blow .. should we nerf killing blow because it can destroy your character instantly. If so your gonna have a lot of angry VC guys.
Purple Sun and Pit of Shades you get Look out sir. Same as a canon .. should we nerf canons cause you know those darn dwarves are WAYYYYYY overpowered. So dwellers is the only one that needs fixing.

The game is completely diffrent from last edition. I think people dont like the fact that a lot of the stuff they had doesnt work the same way and they now have to buy lots more basic troops. The basic game is fine ... some items and characters are not in sync with the new game and cause problems, i do agree to that. But ill say again .. house rules pave the road to hell.

What happens when we get used to playing this way and go to a big GT ... suddenly everything youve known isnt the same and you or your opponent have a horrible experience because you think things work a certain way (ie your house rules). I like this edition a lot. I think its balances out almost every army. Ive played a lot of games to this point and frankly ive never been in a game and said .. damn there is no way i can win this. Which i used to say in 7th edition on a moderately regular basis with my dwarves.

Chris
Last edited by cmccracken86 on Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
Black Templar
Clan Chief
Clan Chief
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby Black Templar » Mon Aug 08, 2011 10:25 am

cmccracken86 wrote: stuff


Well said, Chris. I was trying to figure out how to say what I was thinking in a constructive light, and you hit the nail on the head with your post.
User avatar
The Prince of Excess
Clan Chief
Clan Chief
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:31 pm
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Contact:

Re: Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby The Prince of Excess » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:23 pm

Sorry I couldn't read your post at all Chris, maybe try splitting it up so it doesn't look like a run on sentence.

I don't think house rules do anything bad, you're not being forced to play with them. This is for my group, we are just trying to find the best way to do things. If you don't like them I'll def read why if you can make your thoughts more pleasant on my eyes. :]

Good points Night Goblin, I think you're right about Magic. The charging is something I'd have to take more of a look at in real games, which I will try to do myself in the coming weeks.

I agree that Chariots and lone Characters shouldn't cause Disruption, Monsters I'm kind of on the fence about. Skirmishers I think should though, along with Cavalry if they have sufficient numbers. Many armies don't even bring fighting Skirmishers/Cavalry because they're extremely useless. Unless the unit in question can put out a ton of Attacks and is very resilient, it will never break anything and die. 1 Attack Cavalry with Lances just doesn't put the fear into anyone, it's just Blood Dragons, Chaos Knights and the like.

Right now most games are blocks vs. blocks, a few special units to support in some way and characters. You whittle down each others blocks, get stuck in and see who is Stubborn. I think having a bigger number of potential units to break blocks would add to the game, yes Chaos Knights can break a unit of _________ but you can also Shoot/Magic them down so they're to small to do that. It just adds more variety to the game, at least in my eyes.

My problem is I don't know how many would be appropriate.
User avatar
Ninja Goblin
Warboss
Warboss
Posts: 382
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Proposed "House Rules" Input Wanted

Postby Ninja Goblin » Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:37 am

The most simple way to go would be if you lose your rank bonus you lose steadfast. So a unit of 10 knights could do it (not sure about the skirmishers). It doesn't really change the rules or add rules. I also think steadfast should simply be whoever has the highest rank bonus with a tie at 3 or more resulting in neither side getting it! This forces players to make more strategic choices in the depth of their ranks on each unit and even allows the same type of unit to serve different purposes.

As for the idea about knights into bricks, this game in no way simulates real battle. If it did the knights would get to run through the unit they just charged and turn around so they could do it again or continue into another unit (or simply counter the other armies cavalry). They would not engage in a to and fro protracted battle like you see with massed unit combat.

Mike I also have a huge problem with victory points. Just saying the all or none thing is crap. I kill 36 of you 37 unit temple guard and I get nothing... very meta-game to me.
Yes, I'm a ninja. No, I won't show you my moves.
I do not sleep, I wait.... It's a ninja thing, you wouldn't understand.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron