Over at The Warhammer Forum, there is an initiative to preserve a massed ranked battle game for Warhammer Fantasy Battles. You can find the forum here
The initiative is called "THE NINTH AGE" and is being led by members of the group that put together the Swedish Comp system and includes contributors to ETC comp and FAQs from the past few years.
Now generally I am skeptical of attempts to keep an unsupported game going. However I think that if there is any chance of success then it is probably best with this grouping of guys.
I'm really interested in what they come up with. There is a sneak peek of both rules and army construction ideas up with promise of a full beta within a couple of weeks (the intention is to have a playable copy available for discussion at this year's ETC).
While we don't know how Age of Sigmar is going to crystallise I think it's good that there may be alternatives available.
I'm looking to contribute ideas - under Skaven I've suggested a reintroduction of the "Mainstay" rule to ensure armies contain a backbone of Clanrats - which have the potential to breathe new life into existing books (preferably without a change in points). There are some point changes mooted - DE Warlocks are 35 points - so it will be interesting to read the discussions.
Interesting times.
EDIT: Sneak Peak of the first draft can be found here.....very much WIP with not all rules sections addressed and only two books (Beastmen and Daemons) given full review
It looks like it's going to be an extremely extensive re-write. Probably not what I would have hoped to see.
ReplyDeleteAlso, unless their spells change, 35 points is still too cheap for a Doomfire Warlock. If they're trying to balance the game perfectly to eliminate comp or something, I don't think it's enough.
See that doesn't worry me as much. Having a re-write after 5 years can probably only tighten the rules and improve them.
DeleteIt's what you expect with an edition change.
However the fundamentals of the game will remain the same - massed ranks, critical facing, two-way combat mechanism etc
My biggest concern remains whether it is strong enough to survive more than 6 months. To do that it needs buy-in from a critical mass. To get that it will need to be attractive to enough people who can get over the hurdle that it is not commercially supported.
As I said "Interesting Times"
I think for better buy in it could be better to start with a tweak to the rules. If these guy have a full do over you may not like what you end up with. This doesn't mean after it's bedded in you could not have a bigger change as an update down the track.
ReplyDeleteI think I agree with this. If they were planning a massive overhaul, it might be better to start with something simple and solid, then release something more significant later, once they've gained traction.
DeletePeople don't like change nerds as much as anyone in some regards more so. With all the nerd rage around how ago of sigmar was a whole sale change (and fail) I just hope they don't go to far with it.
DeleteSo far I really like most of the changes.
ReplyDeleteI think there is too much change on magic which will encourage deathstars as it looks like there is little risk to taking them.
ReplyDelete1. 5 dice max
2. Certain death for caster on a miscast using 5 dice
3. Only L4s are likely to want to try casting the high level spells
4. Effectively a LoS on top level spells
5. The overwhelming power can still be dispelled.
Unless there are some other mechanisms he is thinking of for tackling big blocks I've missed, I think that these suggested changes need toning down.
Neil
Yeah I would be happy with overwhelming power not being dispelled.
DeleteBut I do not mind that only top casters will be attempting the tough spells, it sort of makes sense. A low level mage would struggle to cast purple sun etc.
I don't mind having the auto-death for a caster on 5 dice, high risk and high reward, not this 6 dice monkeying we see all the time.
Maybe it could instead be changed to 1-3 is auto die / 4-6 Lose D3 levels including the spell cast, + big detonation.
I think everyone has their different opinion about what they don't like with the current edition of the rules. Developing a community version will attract some followers.
ReplyDeleteThere is another group based in America that is doing something similar. Whether they will get through the whole process or not will be interesting.
To be successful the community edition needs to:
be appealing to the customer base with existing armies.
be adopted by the tournament scene
when the warlords created their own compilation of the full thrust rules we created a new period that suited us and created a whole new period to play. Some other groups around the world have used our rules and it has been discussed as one of the better compilations.
I think it will also be interesting to see what the uptake is for AoS at tournament style events.
I like Pete's idea of the return to a mainstay unit or making slaves not count towards compulsory core minimums. Along with shooting into combat being randomised in proportion to the number of models would go along way to solving the slave problem.
I do see a lot of backlash from people that are seeing their favourite toys taken away.
Someone built an algorithm for pointing the AOS models. If we are going to make a community edition there needs to be a transparency about the points costs so everyone can see how and why points costs are what they are.