Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
The things I pick up from this article is: they will do army specific items and spells, and the stuff dont look to be gamechangers, yet usefull.

The horn that turns off flying seems pretty game changing. Especially since it appears that it can be used every single turn!

What did it do before - its not a new artefact.

It was a one-use item that just turned off Flying for 1 turn. Had no potential to turn off Flying for literally every turn of the game.

 Rihgu wrote:


It was a one-use item that just turned off Flying for 1 turn. Had no potential to turn off Flying for literally every turn of the game.

It will likely be one-use again. They can't be that daft.

I like the sound how they have split the turn so far. I'm also quite keen to see more of the new magic - not having one phase is interesting.

 BertBert wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:


It was a one-use item that just turned off Flying for 1 turn. Had no potential to turn off Flying for literally every turn of the game.

It will likely be one-use again. They can't be that daft.

Well you also have to roll to make this one work whereas I assume the old one you did not I assume? GW can be that daft - I seriously doubt there has been any actual playtesting

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
The things I pick up from this article is: they will do army specific items and spells, and the stuff dont look to be gamechangers, yet usefull.

The horn that turns off flying seems pretty game changing. Especially since it appears that it can be used every single turn!

What did it do before - its not a new artefact.

not sure about the horn but there was a artifact that prevents flying for a turn that was one use only


Automatically Appended Next Post:
important note is that fly looks to be with its own speed instead of using the movement stat

so no flying might just remove the "ignore terrain" feature

Yeah, there are still too many unknown variables. What is Flying (X), how do morale tests work, what LD do bret characters have, are there LD modifiers and so on.

If we just go by the old rules, it equates to a 72/83% success rate on paladins/lords respectively, which seems quite strong.

The second requirement means you want to be out of combat by the start of the next turn, which is usually what you are going for with Brets anyway.

 kodos wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
The things I pick up from this article is: they will do army specific items and spells, and the stuff dont look to be gamechangers, yet usefull.

The horn that turns off flying seems pretty game changing. Especially since it appears that it can be used every single turn!

What did it do before - its not a new artefact.

not sure about the horn but there was a artifact that prevents flying for a turn that was one use only


Automatically Appended Next Post:
important note is that fly looks to be with its own speed instead of using the movement stat

so no flying might just remove the "ignore terrain" feature

Fly always (at least as far back as 6th) used it's own speed instead of using the movement stat. In previous editions, it was 10-20" (depending on edition and which, and many flyers had much lower move speeds. For example, Lizardmen Terradons were M2. But with Fly, moved 10 and marched 20.

I assume the Fly (x) rule is just a more granular version of that concept. An M2 model like a Terradon might have Fly (10) or Fly (8) or Fly (12) depending on how fast the rules writers find appropriate.

I'm also open to the possibility that enchanted items in general have a net "one use only" restriction, which would make this item one use only.

edit: I don't want to suggest that the stats are going to remain the same, but if it's implemented as I suspect, and as per above...
a 72% chance each turn you're out of combat to reduce a dragon from Flying 10-20" per turn down to moving 6-12" per turn, without ability to move over units that might have been deployed ahead of it due to it's speed... is pretty painful for the dragon's player.
Less painful if it's a 72% chance of stopping it once but still game changing.

edit2: I'd also like people to consider how many people are going to be playing Bretonnia, as one of the major faction releases, who have both this artifact, and pretty notable flying units.
Two armies of pegasus knights tooting horns at eachother, waiting for the opponent's toot to hit the wrong note.

that is the point with M2-4 and flying 10-20, grounding flyers is very different to M6-12 and flying 10

so without context, the item show of says nothing

Also there were items previously that turned flying off all game.

E.g. the Skaven Storm Banner.

glad to see units flee in this game and not vanish from the table when they fail a moral check.
it's a feature in modern gw games I've really come to loathe.

Empire had the Orb of Thunder as well, although it was a bound spell and not taken that often unless you knew you were up against a significant flying force.

Voss wrote:

In the realm of 'new from the ground up' I have... unkind... thoughts about featuring a reroll 1s spell.

What's wrong with this kind of thing? I always figured it was a good way of just adding a *bit* more power, without the larger step of turning a 5+ to hit unit up to 4+ instead for example. Especially if you're rolling more than 10 dice for attacks in a combat.

Promising start with the rules. I do have a giggle at people who stamp their foot and declare they're not interested in the whole thing just because of X-single-rule. (er in general, not aimed at Voss)

 RustyNumber wrote:

Voss wrote:

In the realm of 'new from the ground up' I have... unkind... thoughts about featuring a reroll 1s spell.

What's wrong with this kind of thing? I always figured it was a good way of just adding a *bit* more power, without the larger step of turning a 5+ to hit unit up to 4+ instead for example. Especially if you're rolling more than 10 dice for attacks in a combat.

Promising start with the rules. I do have a giggle at people who stamp their foot and declare they're not interested in the whole thing just because of X-single-rule. (er in general, not aimed at Voss)

Not sure exactly what Voss's objection is, but mine is that re-roll 1s is an incredibly bland, uninteresting effect that is already grossly overused in 40K and AOS. It's a flat 17% increase in damage output against all targets under all conditions, woohoo.

Adding +1 to hit is more impactful, yes, but its utility varies depending on what you're hitting on to begin with, restricting it to certain conditions or certain attack types can add a layer of strategy to its use, and it doesn't involve extra rolling.

I'm not going to leap to any conclusions on the basis of a one-off preview, but magic being showcased via the toast sandwich of gameplay effects does not bode well.

 catbarf wrote:

Not sure exactly what Voss's objection is, but mine is that re-roll 1s is an incredibly bland, uninteresting effect that is already grossly overused in 40K and AOS. It's a flat 17% increase in damage output against all targets under all conditions, woohoo.

GW has taken early player feedback into account and has decided to integrate mechanics to make the gameplay more active and exciting! For example, if a Bretonnian player brings a chalice to the game and shouts FOR ZE LADY their units may gain +1... etc and so on

Surely "reroll 1s" is just ONE tool in the toolbox of game design, does it have to be some sweeping harbinger of Bad Game?

 BertBert wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:


It was a one-use item that just turned off Flying for 1 turn. Had no potential to turn off Flying for literally every turn of the game.

It will likely be one-use again. They can't be that daft.

This is the company that gave HE the Crutch of the World Dragon. Don't be so sure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lord Zarkov wrote:
Also there were items previously that turned flying off all game.

E.g. the Skaven Storm Banner.

COULD turn flying off the whole game. IF it was activated in turn 1, and never failed the 50/50 chance of shutting off during each player's turn. Something like a 0.05% chance per game...

Granted, waiting until later in the game to activate it does increase the odds of it still being active on the last turn (if the Skaven player activates it on the top of turn 5 there's a 6.25% chance it'll still be running at the bottom of turn 6), it's still pretty unlikely.

Odds are it kills flying for a full turn, maybe two. Not a whole game.

 Vulcan wrote:

 BertBert wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:


It was a one-use item that just turned off Flying for 1 turn. Had no potential to turn off Flying for literally every turn of the game.

It will likely be one-use again. They can't be that daft.

This is the company that gave HE the Crutch of the World Dragon. Don't be so sure.

This is the company that made entire armies untouchable except by crutch lists. Don't be so sure.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
The things I pick up from this article is: they will do army specific items and spells, and the stuff dont look to be gamechangers, yet usefull.

The horn that turns off flying seems pretty game changing. Especially since it appears that it can be used every single turn!

What did it do before - its not a new artefact.

One Use Only: The horn may be sounded at start of any Bretonnian turn, until the start of next Bretonnian turn, no enemy unit may fly -- they are forced to use their ground movement. Note that this may also alter the enemies' flee/pursuit distance.

From 6th edition Army book. The new horn better be the same or it's a free pass to air control area all game.

I hope they don't removed the Wind of Magic pool from the game, while there's not a magic phase, they can still generate the dice pools before the first phase and had to conserve spell use throughout the turn.

ray648 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Utter Speculation? Pushed Back strikes me as something that could be linked to relative unit size. Like, if I have more ranks, or more wounds (to allow Ogres and the ilk some literal heft) you might end up pushed back by the difference if I win combat?

Warmaster had literally that. The whole combat was pushed back a number of cm equal to the combat result. It would be interesting to see that make it's way into the 28mm game.

3rd Ed. WFB had pushback, and that predates Warmaster by a bit...

Voss wrote:Completely new from the ground up! But also kept complexity from old editions!

In the realm of 'new from the ground up' I have... unkind... thoughts about featuring a reroll 1s spell.

Turn structure seems workable (and familiar). Return of morale is nice, though double 1s for <25% is just pointless rolling.

Seeing the turn explained makes me cautiously optimistic. As long as they burn random charge distance in a fire...

 Just Tony wrote:

Seeing the turn explained makes me cautiously optimistic. As long as they burn random charge distance in a fire...

No, I like random charges. Maybe not bugnuts random, but from both a battlefield perspective and a game perspective, its just better.
I don't miss the old WFB days of people knowing to move 1.255" inches back to stay exactly out of charge range of their opponents and being able to sweep opponents that don't know to precisely partition and mentally map the battlefield.

And from too many real battlefield tours, what people think of as 'perfectly flat' ground... isn't. For a unit to stay in formation and keep up (especially on the charge) is actually rather difficult and unreasonable. Its not something that can be done with precision down to fractions- a battlefield isn't a football pitch, its probably farm land or wilderness, which means uneven in unexpected places..


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 catbarf wrote:

 RustyNumber wrote:

Voss wrote:

In the realm of 'new from the ground up' I have... unkind... thoughts about featuring a reroll 1s spell.

What's wrong with this kind of thing? I always figured it was a good way of just adding a *bit* more power, without the larger step of turning a 5+ to hit unit up to 4+ instead for example. Especially if you're rolling more than 10 dice for attacks in a combat.

Promising start with the rules. I do have a giggle at people who stamp their foot and declare they're not interested in the whole thing just because of X-single-rule. (er in general, not aimed at Voss)

Not sure exactly what Voss's objection is, but mine is that re-roll 1s is an incredibly bland, uninteresting effect that is already grossly overused in 40K and AOS. It's a flat 17% increase in damage output against all targets under all conditions, woohoo.

Adding +1 to hit is more impactful, yes, but its utility varies depending on what you're hitting on to begin with, restricting it to certain conditions or certain attack types can add a layer of strategy to its use, and it doesn't involve extra rolling.

I'm not going to leap to any conclusions on the basis of a one-off preview, but magic being showcased via the toast sandwich of gameplay effects does not bode well.

Exactly this. They can't combine 'built from the ground up' with 'staple mechanic that they been overusing and plugging into every spare hole at every opportunity for the past several editions of every game they put out.'

I also dislike the game time lost to rerolls. And as written, this is a probably a 12" to 16" bubble. Every single attack for the round in command range of the caster. (actually probably a bigger area, since its 'within' rather than 'wholly within.'

Voss wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

Seeing the turn explained makes me cautiously optimistic. As long as they burn random charge distance in a fire...

No, I like random charges. Maybe not bugnuts random, but from both a battlefield perspective and a game perspective, its just better.
I don't miss the old WFB days of people knowing to move 1.255" inches back to stay exactly out of charge range of their opponents and being able to sweep opponents that don't know to precisely partition and mentally map the battlefield.

And from too many real battlefield tours, what people think of as 'perfectly flat' ground... isn't. For a unit to stay in formation and keep up (especially on the charge) is actually rather difficult and unreasonable. Its not something that can be done with precision down to fractions- a battlefield isn't a football pitch, its probably farm land or wilderness, which means uneven in unexpected places..


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 catbarf wrote:

 RustyNumber wrote:

Voss wrote:

In the realm of 'new from the ground up' I have... unkind... thoughts about featuring a reroll 1s spell.

What's wrong with this kind of thing? I always figured it was a good way of just adding a *bit* more power, without the larger step of turning a 5+ to hit unit up to 4+ instead for example. Especially if you're rolling more than 10 dice for attacks in a combat.

Promising start with the rules. I do have a giggle at people who stamp their foot and declare they're not interested in the whole thing just because of X-single-rule. (er in general, not aimed at Voss)

Not sure exactly what Voss's objection is, but mine is that re-roll 1s is an incredibly bland, uninteresting effect that is already grossly overused in 40K and AOS. It's a flat 17% increase in damage output against all targets under all conditions, woohoo.

Adding +1 to hit is more impactful, yes, but its utility varies depending on what you're hitting on to begin with, restricting it to certain conditions or certain attack types can add a layer of strategy to its use, and it doesn't involve extra rolling.

I'm not going to leap to any conclusions on the basis of a one-off preview, but magic being showcased via the toast sandwich of gameplay effects does not bode well.

Exactly this. They can't combine 'built from the ground up' with 'staple mechanic that they been overusing and plugging into every spare hole at every opportunity for the past several editions of every game they put out.'

I also dislike the game time lost to rerolls. And as written, this is a probably a 12" to 16" bubble. Every single attack for the round in command range of the caster. (actually probably a bigger area, since its 'within' rather than 'wholly within.'

Good for you. Random charge length is still a non-starter for me. If it's in, then I'm sticking with 6th. Period. It's one of 5 mechanics that will make TOW D.O.A. to me if it's incorporated.

Voss wrote:

No, I like random charges. Maybe not bugnuts random, but from both a battlefield perspective and a game perspective, its just better.
I don't miss the old WFB days of people knowing to move 1.255" inches back to stay exactly out of charge range of their opponents and being able to sweep opponents that don't know to precisely partition and mentally map the battlefield.

and how does random charges change that?
so you just stay 0,01" out of range whatever the maximum number of the random roll is and be able to sweep opponents who don't know or are just don't care with sometimes someone doing a risky roll and gets the maximum for little effect

of course it helps players because they can blame the dice for the outcome of the game
which is something I dislike in general, I want to play against the opponent and not against the game and not need lucky rolls that decide the outcome

so if random charge ranges are there, I am out as well

Depends what you want a charge to do, be part of the tactical thinking of the game, or just a mechanism to get you to a different set of rules (melee attacks).

It would however make more sense if all movement was random, rather than just charges. If the uneven ground makes it impossible to determine an average movement over an abstract time frame, then it should also make marching/walking impossible to determine as well.


If you wanted to add a little crunch, you could actually combine the two.

Your optimal charge distance is 2xM, but you roll 2D6 to see how far you move anyway.

For each point over your 2xM the dice roll is, you lose an attack from being disordered and over stretching your line, but you can still move that far and complete a charge anyway.

Notice that anything with a movement of 6+ can't do this, because their speed is so high they will never have an issue.

So basically foot troops get a 'slogging' effect, while everything else is fine.

You could also just do 2xM+1D6 for all charges, if you really need randomness without it being crippling.

Random charges generate failed charges a lot, and I'm not sure if that's a valuable aspect of the game to have nor not.


It might be worth having a threat aura around all regiments - their M in inches.

If an enemy regiment is within their threat after they've charged and failed, it tests for fear or something similar.

The effect of a regiment bearing down on you doesn't go away if they don't reach your line within the aloted amount of time.

Voss wrote:
For a unit to stay in formation and keep up (especially on the charge) is actually rather difficult and unreasonable.

My ancestor General Upton would disagree. His charges were so organized they were extremely effective. I mean ... He did threaten to shoot you if you didn't keep up or fired your musket too early... But his charges were so awesome that one of them is immortalized in art and poetry.

Crikey we don't need another thread derailment into the age old random vs fixed charges, go fight in the Fantasy sub forum about that You either like them and want them or don't, 500 words won't change someone with the opposite opinion...

For the record I hope they're in

The article looks good. As person who normally does not play GW games im actually really interested in ToW as its the game of my childhood that i wanted to play, had a few models but just could not afford anything near an army. Im sure the rules will be pretty similar or an enhancement of the old fantasy ruleset. Like most GW games the rules will be good to good enough.

What im more interested in is what is "the package" going to be. Costs for models, model overlap between ToW and AoS, cost of the app (if any), will all the model rules be in the app or will I have to buy a app, subscription AND physically buy a sodding book like 40K? Will GW finally move away from a requirement for physical army books like the rest of the damn world. etc etc. How will the game be actually implemented and rolled out? Once I know that then I can solidify my interest (or not).

I do like that the graphical layout of the material looks similar to the 6th ed book, which was IMO really pretty graphically, with all its borders and vignettes.

They are also reusing a lot of classic WFB art, which while perhaps lazy, is fine for me because it's good art.

I hope they don't go digital only. The printed books are the only reason I can play older editions currently and will lose that ability the SECOND the online version is obsolete.

I can't see GW going digital only - they make so much income off their books. Plus for a lot of people miniature games are a way to disconnect from the online.

GW aren't a small firm, they can afford to invest into a wave of printed books and expect them to sell. It's not like smaller wargame firms where a book is a major cost for them that is a huge financial risk if it fails to sell

 RustyNumber wrote:

Voss wrote:

In the realm of 'new from the ground up' I have... unkind... thoughts about featuring a reroll 1s spell.

What's wrong with this kind of thing? I always figured it was a good way of just adding a *bit* more power, without the larger step of turning a 5+ to hit unit up to 4+ instead for example. Especially if you're rolling more than 10 dice for attacks in a combat.

Promising start with the rules. I do have a giggle at people who stamp their foot and declare they're not interested in the whole thing just because of X-single-rule. (er in general, not aimed at Voss)

Slows game down for one.

Look at 40k where despite increased lethality the game kept going SLOWER as the rerolls were being added...

If games take longer despite models being removed faster there's something wrong and large part of that was all the damn rerolls.

Units can be Driven Back, that's very very interesting. I hope it is like in Warmaster.