The ninth age

Platform for development and feedback of the ninth age project

Moderators: arthain, Lagge, fjugin, el rey, Keepers of the Peace

DarkSchneider
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 11:43 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby DarkSchneider » Sun Jul 12, 2015 4:09 pm

First of all thank you very much for taking the initiative to bring forward the Warhammer so many people love and want to keep playing.

Even if everything is clearly WIP I like the basic rules changes, and the fact that most of it is just clarifying points or making "official" things that were already applied in ETC environments. Don't agree with some of the proposed changes for Army Books but there is plenty of time for that.

My suggestion is that you take the path of making as few changes to the rules as possible to avoid alienating players. 8th edition was not perfect (what game is?) but trying to rewrite it too much would be a mistake and scare some players. After putting people together should be the final aim of this.

Finally, beware of an excess of democracy. Feedback and discussions are very good and helpful, but in the end you can't listen to everyone, and the more you encourage discussion the more people will be pissed when their ideas are not accepted.
So a committee should make the final calls (possibly made by representatives from many countries), after taking in account feedback and suggestions of course.

jouso
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 11:20 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby jouso » Sun Jul 12, 2015 5:16 pm

The new mechanic of spears can make an awful mess of a steam tank.

3 ranks in contact with 50mm frontage means 12 DT tests, meaning on average 2d6 wounds.

I know it's a way of making spears work, but I think it penalises chariots too much.

Maybe making the steam tank a "unique" troop type again or using a different mechanic like reverse impact hits at the troop base S would work better than this.

Frederique
Posts: 1109
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:53 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Norway

Re: The ninth age

Postby Frederique » Sun Jul 12, 2015 6:00 pm

It's probably not meant to inflict D6 impact hits on chariot, but rather a "normal" amount like cavalry. :wink:

fjugin
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:33 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby fjugin » Sun Jul 12, 2015 6:37 pm

Frederique wrote:It's probably not meant to inflict D6 impact hits on chariot, but rather a "normal" amount like cavalry. :wink:

Yes, which is why it specifically says "1 wound, no armour save" :)
That rule needs to be rewritten though, lots of text and not very clear how it works apparently.
Erik Aronson
ETC TEAM SWEDEN 2011 (Skaven), 2012 (Empire), 2013 (Beastmen), 2014 winners (Skaven), 2015 (Skaven)
Author ETC AR 2014, Swedish Comp System and The 9th Age

Frederique
Posts: 1109
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:53 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Norway

Re: The ninth age

Postby Frederique » Sun Jul 12, 2015 9:10 pm

Yes I guess it could be made more easy to read, but please don't default to the "models in base contact take a DT test". It's easier yes, but not powerful enought IMO since it does not take into account the amount of spearmen.

What if models armed with spears (who are charged by Cav in the front) get to make a round of out-of-sequence attacks at the start of the combat, with the Killing Blow special rule? And then also make their normal attacks at their initiative step. (A bit more elegant ?)

Or even simpler: when a model armed with a spear is charged by Cav in its front arc, it fights with the Killing Blow special rule for the first round of combat. (Not sure if this is powerful enough since they might fluff the To Hit rolls but it's the most elegant IMO and still a boost compared to before)

bombastian
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 9:13 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby bombastian » Sun Jul 12, 2015 9:21 pm

The out of sequence extra attack that Frederique proposed sounds like a good way to change the rule.

Might be worded something like this:
"At the very beginning of a combat in which a unit with Cavalry-Bane has been charged in its front by one or more Cavalry-, Monstrous Cavalry- or Chariot-units, each model in this unit with Cavalry-Bane that can attack may make a single Cavalry-Bane attack in addition to its normal attacks targeting the charging Cavalry- Monstrous Cavalry or Chariot-unit(s). A Cavalry-Bane attack hits automatically and wounds on a roll of a six with no armour saves allowed."

That way the rule results in the same thing as the DT-test but it's shorter and hopefully clearer (even if the first sentence grew quite long :P ).

realnoob
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:28 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby realnoob » Sun Jul 12, 2015 10:01 pm

fjugin - Marching in Warhammer is actually meant to be more of an "at the double" than just a fast walk, a rapid redeployment - or that's how the rule guys always explained it at GW.

If the idea is that Dwarfs can sprint 3xM, then it may be an idea to make it a different option, rather than marching. Dwarfs are balanced to make up for their lack of movement. If they become a quick infantry army too, they risk being seriously OP (they have infiltrators, scouts and flying gun platforms). A way to limit that effect might be to give them the option to sprint, but for it to come at a cost. So perhaps they would lose one point of rank bonus until their next turn as they reformed their lines and/or be unable to use their shield wall rule. Or you could make it a one-time use thing. That would mean that Dwarf players would have a tactical option to rapidly redeploy and screw with an enemy at a key point in the game, and give Dwarf players more incentive to build plans around their infantry line.

My own preference would be to let them sprint any turn, but then suffer some minor form of disruption until their next turn. I'd probably make them unable to be steadfast until their next turn, and lose shieldwall. So you gain offensive movement, but lose defensive perks. It seems to give different units different roles and keep things fresh.

I'm a Dwarf player, and we're already a pretty good army. There needs to be a limiting factor if you boost our movement.
Welcome to "Age of Sigmar": The game where everything's made up, and the points don't matter.

kylek2235
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 6:36 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: New Orleans, LA
Contact:

Re: The ninth age

Postby kylek2235 » Sun Jul 12, 2015 10:14 pm

Instead of the increased march move for Dwarves, have you considered working a change to the army using the rune system itself? In a few game systems, Dwarf magic works through one use only runes which could be paid for like normal. For example, a runic banner might double there move or increase their charge range for a turn. Multiples could apply for multiple phases. Combined with units like rangers and miners, this could lead to dwarves actually winning the positioning battle. All runes going to one use would also help fix the "I never miss" warmachines that naturally leads the army to being incredibly boring to play against.

Runesmiths and Runelords, having the lone purpose of scroll caddies at the moment, could possibly "recharge" runes on a d6 roll of 5+ or 4+ or something to that effect.

I know this isn't the simplest system, since the rune points would have to be reworked to an extend, but it does create genuine diversity in the list.

Any thoughts on the background? I know you're probably busy doing the heavy lifting of writing a rulebook, but a bare bones ruleset will not stop the impression that Warhammer is a dead game. There needs to be a world to go with it.


By the way, since I should probably identify myself in my sig, my name is Chris Saik, I'm the TO of Paul's Carnival of Chaos in New Orleans which is a South qualifier on the US Masters circuit. I should probably put that in a sig since credentials appear to be an important issue on these forums.

Thanks for all of your hard work

User avatar
Bugman
Posts: 2255
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 6:20 am
Pick number 4 to enter: 1
Location: Lincs, England
Contact:

Re: The ninth age

Postby Bugman » Sun Jul 12, 2015 10:29 pm

Dwarfs x 3 movement? #-o

The problem is not M3, but the fact there are no longer movement deductions for heavy armour which dwarfs where not subject to. Hey even KoW gives the bear riders

Some armies will always be different but use scenarios and missions to change how they work, not the books

Bugman
http://www.bugmansbrewery.com - The largest most informative Dwarf website in the old world, covering every dwarfers needs from forum to tactics, gallery and the infamous warhammer armies: Diaries!!!!
Feedback Thread

realnoob
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:28 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby realnoob » Sun Jul 12, 2015 10:36 pm

I'm not sure why credentials would matter, Chris; you're either right or wrong. Nice to meet you, anyway.

Runesmiths offer unit buffs these days (or I should say, they did in 8th). It might be an idea to increase the buffs they offer. So you have their ability to offer piercing -1 to a unit they join, and they are magic resistance (2). Perhaps you could have them offer one of 2-3 options, rather than just piercing. I might also have them grant the old grumblers rule to a unit they join, because you don't get much more old and grumbly than a runesmith.

Let's say you could give their buffs a range. You can choose piercing -1 or a 6+ ward (maybe 2+ vs fire or something fluffy). They also grant 'old grumblers' to the unit they are with. I might also consider giving them magical attacks as, even if you don't pay for runes, no runesmith is going to wield a 'normal' weapon.

That means you'd get 3 minor buffs per turn out of a runesmith, and they could apply their combat buffs to the unit near them that most needed it.

Recharging runes is possibly too powerful for a Runesmith, but it might be an Anvil of Doom ability.
Welcome to "Age of Sigmar": The game where everything's made up, and the points don't matter.

realnoob
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:28 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby realnoob » Sun Jul 12, 2015 10:54 pm

Bugman wrote:Dwarfs x 3 movement? #-o

The problem is not M3, but the fact there are no longer movement deductions for heavy armour which dwarfs where not subject to. Hey even KoW gives the bear riders

Some armies will always be different but use scenarios and missions to change how they work, not the books

Bugman


I agree with this; but then people tend to say Dwarfs are boring to play against. I actually feel that the new book helped a lot, but a lot of players were stuck with the idea that Dwarfs should castle and never move - unless they're slayers (which is a unit that needs revision in any '9th'). But with Oathstones, vanguard, Gyros, Rangers and miners, there were tonnes of options for more aggressive strategies.

If people want to make Dwarfs more "movey", then it has to be balanced with downsides for the Dwarf player.
Welcome to "Age of Sigmar": The game where everything's made up, and the points don't matter.

Logan054
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:39 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: London

Re: The ninth age

Postby Logan054 » Mon Jul 13, 2015 12:49 am

Looks interesting but with banner of the world dragon for 50pts 3+ wardsave for entire unit against anything magical is just to good, the whole concept of the item is silly, especially when it can be taken as a unit standard. MR4 and stubborn for dragons would still make it worth taking. Not keen on the change to spears. Simply allowing spear and shields to parry would be boost.

Bloodletters is fine, why not just change the weapons to be +1 strength so it doesn't also buff the protection against spells that work on strength tests? changes to KB are good. Blade of burning iron seems far to good and not really needed, you already have a weapon that ignores armour. What would be nice is some decent MR resistance rules or items that countered magic without actually having to buy a wizard ;)

olderplayer
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 3:57 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby olderplayer » Mon Jul 13, 2015 12:54 am

fjugin wrote:Small update

Work on "the ninth age" (suggestions for better name?) is ongoing as we speak. Basically it will be an updated version of 8th warhammer. Pretty much like how 7th edition was an updated version of 6th.

Personally I believe the best chance of saving the type warhammer we love is community driven rulebook and armybooks. If done right, such project could give us precisely what we have always wished for GW to be (writing competitive game, balance updates, writers that are in touch with the community etc).

If such project is to have any chance of success, we need a large player base, thus we want to maximise the number of people transiting to this. We therefore strive to create a version of warhammer that is close enough to 8th for people to still see it as warhammer and be able to pick it up and try it out without too much rules reading beforehand. But we still want to add some new stuff, both to create something to get people exited about trying it out, but also for improving the game.

So,
1. Rewriting rules for broken parts of the game, keeping the parts that works and changing the parts that do not
2. Small updates to rules with minor issues
3. New lores (keep some spells, around 30-40% new spells for each lore, updates to attributes, casting values etc where needed)
4. New magic items (both common and race specific, again keep some, add some new stuff)
5. New points costs for very strong/weak units (maybe rules changes in a few cases)
6. Possibly add new unit entries to match new models released for AoS.

Eventually we want to have an international committee, with representation from various communities, for deciding on all updates, rules changes, maybe even create new armybooks. Creating such committee would take time however (especially with most community representatives preparing for ETC at the moment), and releasing this soon seem important if we are to not lose to many players. On top of this, larger groups tend to work slower, so again creating a committee at this time is not optimal. We therefore intend to get the ball rolling and ASAP publish an alpha-version including points 1, 3, 4, 5. Point 2 will be mostly ignored in early versions in order to make the transition from 8th easier. For point 5, only points changes to the most imbalanced units will be changed in first version.

Goal is to get this out before ETC (beginning of August), with a few sneak-peak pre-releases of some stuff during the next few weeks to get some hype going and show that works being done. If alpha-version is received well, we can then start to gather a committee and with this create a beta version based on feedback on the alpha version.

/Erik


I fully support this. The way to deal with steadfast is perhaps the way Swedish comp did but imposing increasing points cost per model or, alternatively, allow for units in each flank and in rear to reduce steadfast ranks (also monsters count as one rank), allow for cumulative opposing ranks, or partial VPs for reducing units below certain starting sizes. Broken or problematic combos are best fixed by adding a points penalty the way Swedish comp did, but keep limited and simple. The US Masters community at Wargamers USA has ongoing discussions on WHFB 8.5 but has seemed open to and international comp and game system. They used Swedish comp the past two years at Masters. I suggest contacting and working with the heads of that community to get feedback in the end.

A few suggestions:
1. Add points costs for models proposed by other mini manufacturers. One of the biggest issues for older games is the lack of continued supply and manufacturer/company support.
2. Miscast consequences are scaled based on number of power dice used plus D6 was a consensus reached by a group on Warseer a couple of years ago. The idea was dimensional cascade was 33.3% chance with 6 dice and 1/6 chance with 5 dice and no chance for 4 or less dice. Possibly also double 1's are miscasts (like 7th) and trump double 6's. These rules reduce the thoughtless six dicing of uber spells tricks.
3. Consider scalability ultimately in the rules for units and power dice and dispel dice. (smaller min unit sizes and rank sizes, change percentage limits for small battles). In other words, a base set of rules for units below certain size dropping a lot of the more complex rules and points.
4. Allow for more fractional points costs for the rank and file models and upgrades like shields, spears, halberds, etc. to reduce the rounding error issue in attempts to balance or else rescale upward points costs.
5. Use an incremental points cost per model for rank and file units such that points per model are constant y up to size x, then y+a from x+1 to y, then y+b from y+1 to z, and y+c from z+1 to xxx and so on. This will change a lot depending on the Victory Points system (systems awarding partial VPs or heavily damaged rank and file units reduce the benefits of larger units; rules for breaking or reducing steadfast similarly will likely reduce the need for such incremental size penalties).
6. Drop the separate Swedish comp system if points are built into the army.
7. Consider for certain items and certain models variable points costs for units and items in combo such as Swedish comp did (like a cauldron of blood with largest witch elf unit) but ONLY when potential abuse is obvious and significant.
8. Try to avoid rock-paper-scissors types of situations. They are very frustrating for those going into a "bad" matchup like DoC against BOTWD units, ethereal units against armies with no or few magical attacks.
9. Less is more. The more one sticks with existing rules but with simple points and rules fixed the greater the chance of community adoption.


A consensus some people reached on cannons was limiting re-rolls (downgrade to avoid misfire on say 2+) and having shots scatter D3" rather than move forward 2" to 10" wrt to the target point, create a cover save if intervening units or terrain to target of shot. Also, cannons do not hit both rider and mount on rider monster and chariot models. m

olderplayer
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 3:57 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby olderplayer » Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:48 am

Encefalit wrote:as a copyright lawyer...

usable: mechanichs
Un-usable:
- all background story content,
- all pictures (even pictures with GW miniatures made specially for new book - unfair competition resons not only copyright plays role here),
- all names of units, places and spells with author's intent (dwarf slayers - no, spearmen - ok),
- all miniatures and their "upgrades" (as sculpts, here goes Chapterhouse case).

After all you want to create game what will not portrated in custommers minds as Warhammer Fantasy Battles - because thats unfair competiotion.

So either you create brand new game, without even mentioing something about warhammer or you have legal risks.

Or GW will just let you do this - eg forgive your infregments of their rights.

Thats the story when you make derivatives IP.

And really game without dwarf slayers wont make it for me :\


Not a lawyer but have done expert work on copyright. Common names and words can be used. Also country law matters, US being the most protective and greatest risk. It is very likely that GW has little ability in most places/countries to prevent the use of common names and uses and familiar concepts. So, simply renaming units to conform to a generic name will likely keep you out of trouble. Like Dwarf Beserkers or fanatics. Orc beserkers instead of savage orcs, although savage orcs is probably too common. Use common command model names. Renaming and rewriting special rules for "named" characters will likely be necessary. Also, there is a potential risk associated with posting unit and model stats completely in line with GW, but you might use similar concepts and terms just as well. Similarly, rename and revise the spells and you will be okay most likely.

Note how Army Builder for years has carefully avoided litigation with GW by heeding its concerns and having "community" volunteers manage and write the files and allow for download and use for free. As long as you are allowing people to play with their GW models and use them, GW may allow and encourage it if it is no longer expecting to sell army books and rule books for WHFB, like occurred with Warmaster and EPIC. Otherwise, GW may require continued purchase of its books to play the game. Additionally, allowing for adding additional units in say KoW and from a few other manufacturers not offered by GW will make this more of a community effort.

MightyM00se
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 11:03 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby MightyM00se » Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:34 am

Pursuant of my continued work to update bretonnia and just give them some flavour.

Major Point Changes right now.

Men at arms 4 points.
Hand weapon and shield.
Spear +1 pts
Halberd + pts.


Phase 1:- A matter of bretonnia.
(30% done)
The lance is one of the points of difference with how the Army plays and works. This is where our original focus is, on play testing how to make the Lance that one punch that can make or break a turn as how it was in 6th edition. Steadfast kicked out a few bretonnian teeth.

Currently working playtesting Lance formation as per my drop box link. Charged unit counts as disrupted and loses rank bonus. So far against 3 armies the consensus is it may still end up being under-powered - Thats okay we dont want a deathstar auto win option.

Until we sort out the grail benedictions, We have given grail knights "furor of the lady" which grants devastating charge.

Still unsure about the two new skills for questing knights.
its handy to be able to pick your weapons, however it still doesnt give them the punch for points.


Next phase(s) of testing.
Phase 2:-

Received only if the army prays.
Grail knight benediction table.
1 - Blessed suffering
no bonus

2-3 Furor of the lady
Devastating Charge, Impact hits

4-5 Unshakable faith.
+1 toughness, unbreakable.

6 Immortal Guardians
4+ ward save.

Arbalest units

Hunting dog units.

Phase 3:-
Characters:-
Roland the Marshal (errant character).
Armane the Zealous (peasant battle pilgrim character).
- makes a battle pilgrim unit of 10-30 a "body guard" unit.
few other things
And some old goodies from 5th edition.
The way most people are going is foot based k nights and stuff. That is Otiose for bretonnia, really. Given that at the end parts of fluff the king called for more jousts... so focusing on some new peasant units and some cool stuff here and there with guides on how to build any new units we make.

Phase 4:-
Re work of old virtues, and items.
Lore of the lady.
Newer unit additions and tweaks.
Key goal of my group with bretonnia.
We dont want OP. we want to meet the baseline but still be on the back foot as that makes it a skillful game vs insta win deathstar bs

realnoob
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:28 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby realnoob » Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:35 am

Sounds like an interesting project, MightyM00se.

We used house rules in 8th to try and boost the Lance and it worked fairly well. We gave charging Lances impact hits against infantry. If the number of pre-save wounds caused by the impact hits was greater than the unit's rank bonus, then they were disrupted - losing both their rank bonus and steadfast. The mechanic was meant to represent the sheer force of the horse's bodies knocking over the ranked troops and driving the knights into them.

What it means in game is that it is not a sure thing that the Lance will pierce the unit, but it allows the causing of additional wounds AND the removal of bonuses when it does work. You might find it lets you overcome the Lance being underpowered in your test games, without making it an auto-win - because you might gain the couple of extra wounds you need, but it could also fail. It also means that Lances are more effective the larger they are, which is as it should be.

Just an idea.
Welcome to "Age of Sigmar": The game where everything's made up, and the points don't matter.

Krokz
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 9:12 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby Krokz » Mon Jul 13, 2015 5:53 am

fjugin wrote:Yes, which is why it specifically says "1 wound, no armour save" :)
Since I like simplicity I would just do this and also fix Killing blow.

Killing blow does 1 wound with no armor save to the targets that cannot be slain by it.
Models with Cavalry bane have Killing blow versus cavalry, monstrous cavalry and chariot models in the first round of combat.
Last edited by Krokz on Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
ETC Team Slovenia WHFB Captain: 2014, 2015
ETC Team Austria T9A Player 2016

MightyM00se
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 11:03 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby MightyM00se » Mon Jul 13, 2015 6:31 am

realnoob wrote:Sounds like an interesting project, MightyM00se.


was hoping for a minimum "cool" :P

But i like the idea for the lance and im going to take it to my group and discuss it with them. We want to even go as far as making our own bits of fluff and battle magic cards.

Already starteed with some artwork for flavour. And hey, if it ends up that i have to rebuild the army ground up with original fluff and art work due to IP reasons. Happy to do so

arthain
Posts: 3328
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:51 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: The ninth age

Postby arthain » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:57 am

bombastian wrote:The out of sequence extra attack that Frederique proposed sounds like a good way to change the rule.

Might be worded something like this:
"At the very beginning of a combat in which a unit with Cavalry-Bane has been charged in its front by one or more Cavalry-, Monstrous Cavalry- or Chariot-units, each model in this unit with Cavalry-Bane that can attack may make a single Cavalry-Bane attack in addition to its normal attacks targeting the charging Cavalry- Monstrous Cavalry or Chariot-unit(s). A Cavalry-Bane attack hits automatically and wounds on a roll of a six with no armour saves allowed."

That way the rule results in the same thing as the DT-test but it's shorter and hopefully clearer (even if the first sentence grew quite long :P ).


Any Cavalry, Monstrous Cavalry or Chariot charging a unit’s front must take one Dangerous Terrain test for each model with this special rule able to attack it at the start of the Close Combat Phase. Wounds are distributed as unusual attacks and count towards Combat Resolution
ETC 2013 FAQ, Referee
ETC 2014 FAQ, AR, Spanish Captain
ETC 2015 Chairman
ETC 2016 Chairman, Referee
ETC 2017 Referee

jouso
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 11:20 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby jouso » Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:41 am

arthain wrote:Any Cavalry, Monstrous Cavalry or Chariot charging a unit’s front must take one Dangerous Terrain test for each model with this special rule able to attack it at the start of the Close Combat Phase. Wounds are distributed as unusual attacks and count towards Combat Resolution


Sounds good, but there needs to be a mention that chariots get only one wound, not D6.

User avatar
Maelstrom
Posts: 2513
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:21 pm
Pick number 4 to enter: 1
Location: London

Re: The ninth age

Postby Maelstrom » Mon Jul 13, 2015 11:02 am

So excited by this project! Well done guys and looking forward to following the development.

I'd echo the small tweaks and small rules changes than a complete overhaul. I really liked 8th, it's why I want to keep playing it. The last etc comp pack I think was brilliant, no need to reinvent the wheel. I'd say that oldergamers suggestions are too much change for example.

Point changes I think are absolutely needed some stuff is obviously overcosted and other stuff is undecosted. It's simpler as well than trying to rewrite rules to the extent you'd need to to make some units make sence. For example a beastman gor with a 2 point mark and additional hand weapon is no way worth the 10 points it costs. Simpler to drop them to 7/8 points than trying to give them a madeup rule with no basis or context to justify the points.

My club seem very keen on this. Please send me a PM if you want any play testing done. We are all experienced UK tournament scene players.
Washed clean by the blood of the lamb

Twitter: @tmuden

Motivate me to paint please!

realnoob
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:28 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby realnoob » Mon Jul 13, 2015 11:25 am

MightyM00se wrote:
was hoping for a minimum "cool" :P

But i like the idea for the lance and im going to take it to my group and discuss it with them. We want to even go as far as making our own bits of fluff and battle magic cards.

Already starteed with some artwork for flavour. And hey, if it ends up that i have to rebuild the army ground up with original fluff and art work due to IP reasons. Happy to do so


Sure, I'll go with "cool", if your prefer.

Brets have been a favourite of mine since GW launched them as reimagined knights of Albion (which was the fluff for the old Perry bros sculpts from the mid 80s) and shifted the ethos from Henry V's English army to the French.

I'd be interested to hear about your project in more detail. I'm intrigued as to how you want to balance the war dogs unit with the fact Brets already have a similar unit in mounted squires. Also, will Arbalests be replacing longbows for your army, or will you have both? Are you looking to keep the 6th edition 'feel' of the army, or will you make them more like the original faction Brets replaced and have foot knights and the like?
Welcome to "Age of Sigmar": The game where everything's made up, and the points don't matter.

bombastian
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 9:13 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby bombastian » Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:00 pm

arthain wrote:Any Cavalry, Monstrous Cavalry or Chariot charging a unit’s front must take one Dangerous Terrain test for each model with this special rule able to attack it at the start of the Close Combat Phase. Wounds are distributed as unusual attacks and count towards Combat Resolution



The problem with this is that if a unit it charged by say two chariots the same turn, the total amount of tests the charging player have to make can be greater than the number of figures that can attack them.

I read the intention of the rule as 1 guy raising his/her spear against a charging unit. And I find that it makes no sense that 1 spear can hurt more than 1 unit.

But I agree that it much easier to read the way you wrote it. :)

laribold
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 3:33 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby laribold » Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:16 pm

I've had a look through and like what I see so far. Keep up the good work!

A few comments to throw into the mix...

General principles:
I agree with simplicity being the key here. Try not to add more special rules ('cavalry bane' etc..) and use existing ones instead (even if you are changing how they work).

Hence with regards to infantry spears, I'd just go with them giving Killing Blow when receiving a charge and KB being the reworked (no AS/ d3W or whatever). That way you don't need to write long and convoluted paragraphs to explain a special rule. Now whether this 'powers up' spear users enough is another matter.
+1 to hit bonuses, Armour Piercing, there's plenty of existing mechanics that can easily be used.

I personally quite like the Dwarf x3M Relentless, but feel that you could use the Enemy Sighted mechanic here. So Relentless allows Dwarfs to March at x3M unless within 8" of the enemy, at which point they can only March at x2M. It represents the Dwarves 'sprinting' into position before grinding forward in formation (and again uses an existing mechanic).

Anyway, keep updating things. I'll try and get some of my club to play some games with the amended rules as you post them up and feedback.

All the hard work is much appreciated.

P.S. I think 'The Ninth Age' is an excellent name for this project, don't change it!
My trading feedback thread:
viewtopic.php?f=68&t=103203&start=0

arthain
Posts: 3328
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:51 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: The ninth age

Postby arthain » Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:26 pm

bombastian wrote:
arthain wrote:Any Cavalry, Monstrous Cavalry or Chariot charging a unit’s front must take one Dangerous Terrain test for each model with this special rule able to attack it at the start of the Close Combat Phase. Wounds are distributed as unusual attacks and count towards Combat Resolution



The problem with this is that if a unit it charged by say two chariots the same turn, the total amount of tests the charging player have to make can be greater than the number of figures that can attack them.

I read the intention of the rule as 1 guy raising his/her spear against a charging unit. And I find that it makes no sense that 1 spear can hurt more than 1 unit.

But I agree that it much easier to read the way you wrote it. :)


Intentional, as it is the charging model who impales itself, the spearman doesn't move at all, let alone raise its spear. The spears would be planted on the ground when holding the charge to recude the throwback effect of the impact, the spearman only maintaining the pointy end angled towards the charger. Plus additional simplicity.

Though i must admit I forgot the D6 multi-wound.
ETC 2013 FAQ, Referee
ETC 2014 FAQ, AR, Spanish Captain
ETC 2015 Chairman
ETC 2016 Chairman, Referee
ETC 2017 Referee

realnoob
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:28 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby realnoob » Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:45 pm

If you're going for a more realistic spear effect in the game, then you might want to consider that the major aspect of spear/pike walls on cavalry was that mounts would refuse. You could represent this with a LD check for cavalry to charge a spearwall, or by making cavalry reroll their successful charges against them.

The schiltrons deployed by The Bruce for example, simply had the effect of denying combat to the English heavy horse.
Welcome to "Age of Sigmar": The game where everything's made up, and the points don't matter.

simonbromley121
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 1:21 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby simonbromley121 » Mon Jul 13, 2015 6:07 pm

Please could you look at removing the cannot be 1" for friendly models and impassably terrain. Ifs unnecessarily, fiddly and slow the game down

Jesterhead
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:07 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby Jesterhead » Mon Jul 13, 2015 6:37 pm

olderplayer wrote:
fjugin wrote:Small update

Work on "the ninth age" (suggestions for better name?) is ongoing as we speak. Basically it will be an updated version of 8th warhammer. Pretty much like how 7th edition was an updated version of 6th.

Personally I believe the best chance of saving the type warhammer we love is community driven rulebook and armybooks. If done right, such project could give us precisely what we have always wished for GW to be (writing competitive game, balance updates, writers that are in touch with the community etc).

If such project is to have any chance of success, we need a large player base, thus we want to maximise the number of people transiting to this. We therefore strive to create a version of warhammer that is close enough to 8th for people to still see it as warhammer and be able to pick it up and try it out without too much rules reading beforehand. But we still want to add some new stuff, both to create something to get people exited about trying it out, but also for improving the game.

So,
1. Rewriting rules for broken parts of the game, keeping the parts that works and changing the parts that do not
2. Small updates to rules with minor issues
3. New lores (keep some spells, around 30-40% new spells for each lore, updates to attributes, casting values etc where needed)
4. New magic items (both common and race specific, again keep some, add some new stuff)
5. New points costs for very strong/weak units (maybe rules changes in a few cases)
6. Possibly add new unit entries to match new models released for AoS.

Eventually we want to have an international committee, with representation from various communities, for deciding on all updates, rules changes, maybe even create new armybooks. Creating such committee would take time however (especially with most community representatives preparing for ETC at the moment), and releasing this soon seem important if we are to not lose to many players. On top of this, larger groups tend to work slower, so again creating a committee at this time is not optimal. We therefore intend to get the ball rolling and ASAP publish an alpha-version including points 1, 3, 4, 5. Point 2 will be mostly ignored in early versions in order to make the transition from 8th easier. For point 5, only points changes to the most imbalanced units will be changed in first version.

Goal is to get this out before ETC (beginning of August), with a few sneak-peak pre-releases of some stuff during the next few weeks to get some hype going and show that works being done. If alpha-version is received well, we can then start to gather a committee and with this create a beta version based on feedback on the alpha version.

/Erik


Hi Erik,
how come are you thinking of implementing the new AoS units and miniatures? What are you thinking about round bases in a rank and file system?

Pellegrim
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2015 5:51 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby Pellegrim » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:26 pm

Hi guys,

New here (wheeheheee party) and joined because I want to follow the Ninth edition a little.

Like the idea of the initiative - have questions about the sneak preview and chosen direction, although it's goal is (somewhat) clear.

Some may know me from Bugmans (my favorite forum around :shock: ) where similar initiatives are rolling around.

We did a pretty good survey containing seven question about peoples expectations of the next version of table top wargaming. Very interesting results. I will post them here too viewtopic.php?f=10&t=129940 and hope many people will react.

See, we do not want to jump ahead and build something a few of us think is very cool - we want know what the majority wants first. Maybe we'll be much to late, and maybe such a poll will not help us - then it might help guys that are working on other projects, like the Ninth Age

I think these results can also greatly help The Ninth Age - if they are open for suggestions. It would be a shame if major effort where made - but the results would not match general consensus, if there is such a thing.

Also, we developed a generic model that can quantify any build you insert. It won't surprise you that a hammerer costs between 20 and 21,5 points, depending on how you tax abilities. The model cuts away all meta and special/rare discounts. It is a pretty complex model, but is survived some major tests. It can handle all stat combinations, weighed for gear, abilities, mounts and magic allowance. This allows you to compose an army without any restriction and play a game that was balanced better then any of the previous versions of warhammer. Do I have to proof to say this? Yes. Why? The model calculates points based on large sample of current (non-broken) builds (monsters, infantry and characters) that have been adjusted for meta (army specific) discounts. Then it tests combat results and indicates if the model cost should be adjusted. Feel free to shout out a build and I'll return the weighed costs.

Anyway, I hope to follow the development of The Ninth Age, and encourage the creators to define discussion points as to make the right calls for the final rule-set.

Best

Pellegrim

Pip Hamilton
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 8:23 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: The ninth age

Postby Pip Hamilton » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:38 pm

Just want to chime in to say that I'm really happy to see such a well-organised group taking this project on, and that I particularly like how the rules are typeset in LaTeX! I'm a member of Maelstrom's gaming club and like him I'd love to help out with playtesting if playtesting is required.

I could wishlist a bunch of things I'd love to see put into this version but I don't think that would be useful at this juncture. The only suggestion I have to make right now is a logistical one, and that is that the 9th age should get its own webspace as soon as possible. Hunting for the current ETC comp has always been a bit of a trawl, it would be great if the resources for 9th age were centralised and easily accessible. Great rules are half of what we need, the other half is an easy route for people to start playing and keep playing so that the community stays a healthy size.


Return to “9th Age”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest