8th Ed. Which set of rules to use?

I am just curious, with all the new aditions to the game with the end of times and all the rules that have been changed, there seem to be a lot of people playing the game in different ways. Since I havent had an oportunity to play a lit furing the last couple of months i would like to know what your preferences regarding to rules are!

Also feel free to vote, it would be great to see which sets of rules are more popular.

 

None of the above. (...NOT PLAYING AT ALL)

 

I voted for 8th edition unchanged. I'm not at all a fan of the entire end times series (fluff, models, rules). I believe that the rules unbalance the game, as many armies get spiffy new options while others get nothing. I'm not claiming that regular 8th edition is completely balanced, but I feel that it was pretty good.

The uber characters (Nagash, KFA, etc.) are a bit ridiculous. Combining the Chaos factions gives them an unfair advantage (and I play Warriors of Chaos). Same can be said of the Elven unification. The Khaine magic rules are horrendous, IMHO, and it slows the game quite a bit.

But to each their own, I'm curious to see how everyone feels about the End Times.

 

Hit that nail on the head. I have a great friend who plays some really mean vampire counts lists who was completely convinced that The End Times were the new standard rules and could use those whether we were playIng end times games or not. I hope that this doesn't rub anyone here the wrong way and hope o not open up a can of deep debate but I have always viewed the rules as an optional and supplementary just like storm of magic and since the release of Nagash he has refuse to play unless I accepted his view of these new rules. He's a great guys and a fun opponent but it was sad to see how these rules had effected his game. I was wondering if I was the only one with this opinion or if others had the same view as my friend? I just have the hope that when 9th comes out that it ignores to a large extent ET storyline etc.

 

I think there are a lot of mixed opinions when it comes to the end times. There was a huge (and sometimes quite heated) debate on my Warriors of Chaos forum on the topic of the official vs supplementary nature of the end times. Your friend is definitely not alone in his way of thinking... but either are you!

My view is exactly the same as yours, the End Times are a supplement and thus you must get your opponent's "permission" before invoking any of those rules. The only exception is the 50% lords/heroes and the lore of undeath, because of their faq/errata inclusion in the BRB.

I think there was a pretty big split down the gaming community initially, but I think more people have come over to the "regular/unedited" 8th edition side as the End Times rules got progressively worse. I think there was a big shift when the Khaine rules were released since many players don't seem to like or accept that rule set.

I wish that turned out to be true, but rumours indicate that End Times was the tranistion into 9th edition, which looks to reboot the game of warhammer as we know it. Sad times

 

The only thing that suggested that the End Times was a change to core rules was those made in ET: Nagash - the 50% Lords & Heroes allowance and the Lore of Undeath. It explicitly states these rules are operable no matter what your opponent may think.

ET: Khaine states that ET Magic is only used at the the agreement of both. Similarly, the option to remove all points limitations when selecting from categories/removing the 25% core requirements/ allowing duplicate models/multiple battle standards/unit champions can be generals found in ET: Archaon is there specifically to reflect the chaos of the concluding part of The End Times, and is therefore in no way a mandatory rules requirement.

I can't see how the new factions in the End Times are anything but supplementary in nature - ET: Khaine established and removed two new ones in the same book, how is that supposed to translate across into core game mechanics if it's anything but supplementary? It's not as if they've specifically released new codices for the Grand Legion of The Everchosen/The Aestyrion/ The Host of Life etc.

 

The only things I know about these ET rules are the snippets about them I have read here. It almost sounds like they are using and have used the remaining fans of the Game to beta-test various new ideas for rules: new kinds of magic, tinkering with core requirement, Lord choices...and I don't know what else.

 

I can't quite figure out how to vote on this, so I went with "mixture".

The Elven Hosts are completely overpowered, and borders on 40ks "unbound" type of army. The Undead Legion is cool as hell, and I would never say no to someone wishing to use it, especially a Tomb Kings player.

Beastmen allowed Marks of Chaos is fine, they really needed a helping hand, and this is a good way to do it - Besides, I'm still hoping we get Spawnings back at some point, and adding these kinds of "marks" to more armies might bring it back for us as well in the long run.

Uber characters are fun and all, but not something to be used outside of thematic/prearranged games where I know they'll be used before even building my list.

Most of the additional units are fine in my opinion - The new "regular" units seem pretty balanced, overall. At least from a Lizardmen perspective. Units like Stormfiends cause serious pain to anything it targets, but so does the Warp Lightning cannon and the Hell Pit monstrousity - The alternatives aren't more or less appealing, so the internal balance is pretty good, which also means that, while all options are horrible to face, the Stormfiends aren't really WORSE than the others. This seems to hold true for most of the options, honestly, with the Verminlords being the odd ones out - They are just invariably bad, despite how cool and interesting they seem, but that's mostly for the same reason that these kinds of Monsters are always bad - Too expensive, too squishy, and will never be able to take on anything their own point cost, either because they have no way of ever breaking it, or because they'll be shot to death before doing anything useful. On top of taking up a ton of Lord points, ruling out Grey Seers, which are significantly easier to protect.

The 50% Lords and 50% heroes doesn't really count as an End Times change, because it has been applied directly to the BRB. Disregarding it is the equivalent of disregarding any other FAQ, which is a slippery slope I'd rather keep away from.

Overall, I actually like the End Times changes. The only thing I'm still undecided on (As are the players I play with) is magic. The End Times spells are an interesting addition, and the rules certainly change the dynamics of the magic phase... But I have no idea whether I think its better, or worse. I think I like them equally well, but for entirely different reasons, so I'm not really sure whether I'd prefer the old or the new ones, if I had to pick one.

 

It is Nice to hear all your opinions! It seams to me that even though the end of Times started like an awesome strategy to breath new air to the game and most people liked it ( the nagash book). As it progressed people didnt like it, I personally dont like the idea of having huge unkillable characters or overwelming powerfull army unions. But what I am most worried about is having my army become useless next month.

 

First I voted mixture, then I changed to '8th unchanged' based on the comments that 50/50 is now part of the main rules, which I agree with.

Though maybe I should change back, because we are playing with Lore of Undeath in all its quirkyness (shrugs).

For the tournament community (yes it's only a small part of the whole, but its the part I ascribe to), the ET became 'not a real thing' when the 2nd book came out, and the magic phase got ridiculous (and slow). We had a couple of 1-day events try the adjustments with that book, and found that the games became horribly unbalanced, and the magic phases started doubling overall game length.

Like the 50/50 change though - it's been a nice tweak. Still wrapping my head around the applications for Lore of Undeath.

 

So I'm curious how many of the people who voted actually own and have played at least 3 games with the full end times rules?

As it stands I'm the only one who plays with all the end times rules in this thread, possibly this forum, and I have a lot of experience playing from all angles and in very competative games. I grew up on Lizardmen over 15 years ago, and have recently finished collecting every fantasy army other than brets and dwarves. Now at first glance I thought that every end times book was completely broken, but after playing with all the rules over and over I have found that it only adds a very fun dimension and actually balances out quite a bit.

In pure 8th edition I almost always regretted taking a Slann in my lizardmen list, heck I regretted almost every caster in every army I played, my most competitive army builds generally had one lvl2 with scroll that just played defense. Why? Because the point cost, effort, strategy involved in making magic work far outweighed the actual game result it could give, it is my belief that simple strategies beat complex 9 out of 10 times, I have actually made completely core lists before and every time I do I have won, seriously I have never lost with a 100% core army list. No one can even come close to the sheer numbers and manueverability that I can field, and I don't care that you have a 30x grave guard unit with blender vampire, you can put out 20 wounds every round, but my front unit of 30 skinks with poison, flanking unit of 30x saurus, and rear unit of 30x saurus (all for the same points as your unit) will still cause 16 wounds and win combat by 2 points, and the next round that happens there won't be any grave guard to respond to my 14 wounds so the vampire loses by 10 even after causing 10 wounds himself (real world example). But I digress.

My point is that playing with all the end times rules is a blast and so far I have yet to experience anything stupidly overpowered. What you want to purple sun my poor I1 lizzies to death? Good luck getting the casting value after rolling to use 3 power dice. What Nagash can summon TRIPLE the points of monstrous infantry??? Good luck on getting that spell out with variable power dice and then if you do I can throw a scroll or cube it. Of course loremasters are much more dangerous and can effectively lower level buff or magic missile some key areas of the battle, now the fun spells are incredibly useful

Using 2D6 winds of magic a good magic phase would see me get off two spells, one of which is useful and the other was a throw away that my opponent knew wasn't worth dispelling, magic was more of a nuclear deterent in 8th, we both take as much as possible to try and nuke the other or just ward it away until we get into the actual fun parts of the game. Now there is less than a 50% chance to get anything with a casting value over 16+ off to begin with, then add dispelling to it. I highly suggest using all the rules first for a few games and writing up some battle reports over it.

FYI last time I faced Nagash he died turn 3 after losing combat to my Skrox, all it took was an average roll on his to hit and a good roll on my parry, Krox did 2 wounds and CR did the rest lol. By the way, that equals a 300pt core unit taking out 3 times its worth in lord points.

Also an equal points unit of Skink Cohorts with poison will kill KFA before he kills them based on average dice rolls.

 

You make an interesting point protector. Definitely some food for thought.

Out of curiosity, what is your playing environment? Like, are we talking tournament play/players here, or what? I know this question can be frustrating, but for a person like me, that type of backing makes a difference.

-Ghost

 

I know this is a tired argument but i really don't know what else to say on the topic. If magic wasn't good every single "top" tournament player wouldn't be using level 4s. All the major tournaments wouldn't be won by armies with level 4s. It just wouldn't happen. If all core armies were that good, thats what would be played.

There is a reason it's not. There is a reason magic is soo soooo important in top lists.

This argument always comes up. And I always ask the same thing. Why don't "non magic" lists do better in major tournaments? Why don't the best players in the world, the players interested in winning tournaments above all else, use what is "most effective"

Or is it possible they already are?


Regarding the rest of your point, i think end times is fun overall, but not balanced for tournaments. It exaggerates the natural rock paper scissor of warhammer to extremes and leads to some really unfun matchups when you look at a holistic competitive experience.

I think it has a place, and i think it makes casual games much more fun (most of the time) but most of the added rules (beastmen marks, and TK changes are certainly exceptions) don't add anything to the competitive scene.

 

I voted for "mixture". We use the 50% lords/heroes thing, and we have no problem if people want to bring combined lists or use the new models. That said, we are sticking with classic magic, as no one really wants to waste their time with Khaine magic.

So far as I'm concerned, as long as they are not using the combined lists to go full on super cheese, everything plays just like normal 8th edition and is fun.





Unless they bring Malekith. Screw those guys.

 

I've played local tournaments off and on and different gaming groups in different states (Im in the US military so I move often) the most competative games I play are all in house against my brother though. These are the most brutal matchups you could probably ever find, we are both totally in love with the game and have read the main rulebook cover to cover at least a dozen times each, along with memorizing all the stats and rules for every army (And although I don't have brets or dwarves we still play with their army books using proxy models). That of course means we are both constantly making sure we are playing according to the rules and we don't let the other person get away with anything no matter how small. Also since we are brothers there is no worry about hurting the other persons feelings when we bring a list that you would never see in a friendly match, or even a tournament where you are competing for anything other than straight up wins. Against my brother I get a game a week, possibly more, and the size ranges from 1500 which is really small for us to about 8000 points, I had to buy a second full realm of battle board just to fit the bigger games. So that should give you some background on how my games are played, I usually win against any local gaming group and place in the top 3 of every tournament I've played, but with my brother I'm probably at a 60% win ratio (I win more than he does but then when he wins it is by a much larger margin than I do).

If this was true then the winner of every tournament would be the most disliked player by virtue of them only playing to win and not to have fun with other players. I know personally I play tournaments with choices that are not optimized just because they look cool or because I have a certain theme I want to play with, generally the only games I go full cutthroat on are against my brother, I don't want to set up against someone else and have them cuss me out and throw the game because of what I just fielded. And I'm not saying magic isn't good at all, there are times it completely wins a game, but my experience has taught me that it is much less important than what everyone else thinks. In fact give me a list that you feel is something a "top" tournament player would use and I will provide a battle report on it against a list with no magic, I might lose the battle but I still think it will be eye opening.

Again is this from your experience playing tournament games with the full rules or just your initial take on reading them? nothing wrong with not being able to play the games yet, I'm in the unique position of living with another player and having the opportunity to play as much as we want to test out anything we are curious about.

 

QTF. In an ultra competitive environment, a level 4 is crucial for not only magic, but also for magic defense.

 

I think this is the biggest part of it. You're behind 1 die every time you try to dispel if he has level 4s and you have level 2s. It works okay for High Elf high magic spam/BotWD but not for anyone who doesn't have a 2++ or 3++.

 

Thank you for your response. It is helpful to understand context.

Challenge accepted! (though not directed to me, I know)

Lords
Dread Lord (G) Steed, HA+SDC+Shi., Giant Blade, OTS, Dawnstone
Dread Lord Peg, HA+SDC, Cloak, C. Shi., Ogreblade
Morathi
S. Sorceress LV4 Life, Steed, Dispel Scroll, Talisman of Protection
Heroes
Master BSB, Steed, HA+SDC, GW, Crown, D.Helm, Luck
Core
8 Dark Riders FC, RBX Shields
5 Dark Riders Musician, RBX, Shields
5 Dark Riders Musician, RBX, Shields
5 Dark Riders Musician, RBX, Shields
5 Dark Riders Musician, RBX, Shields
Special
RBT
RBT
RBT
Rare
10 Warlocks Champ
2500

This list had been built for 20-0 scale (150vp dividers) plus objectives, but should work equally well for just W/L/D format or whatever. It even does a bang up job at building assaults (go Warlocks and Dreadlords!).

 

Excellent, I think that is a great example of a list most would think of as highly competitive. I will of course use Lizardmen since we are seen as an army that needs magic to remain relevant, and I will not tailor my list for just this fight (I will have my brother make his own list as well and I will fight both battles with the same army so as to keep me honest lol)

Although if you would rather I could probably use dark elves as well for my non-magic list just to show the performance difference between two very similar armies?

 

Whilst others may argue that a lvl 4 is necessary in competitive play, my argument is simply that it is necessary for competitive play with lizardmen.

Edited to expand:

For instance, I've watched Ogre armies do well in comped and uncomped environments with just 2 Firebellies. Now, in those dudes both had a defensive Arcane item (scroll, hellheart), so that helped mitigate the damage output of the opponent. When combined with the natural resiliency of the Ogres and their ability to create character walls in their units, offensive magic wasn't 'as needed' for buffing purposes.

I also think the DE lists can do well without the Level 4 (thanks in large part to the Warlocks).

But...

I playtested Lizards for several months (nearly a year) under the assumption that I would NOT be taking a Slann (fell in love with the Adam Daly modelled Cav Bus, with some tweaks). I played against club mates who were going to GT's and brought their GT lists. I practiced as if I would take the Lizards to events that were both comped (largely Swedish) and uncomped. Events that allowed special characters, and those that didn't. My findings? The list could be made to compete against every army out there, except for 2 - Dark Elves and Wood Elves (optimal lists from those armies, to be clear). The Dark Elves, because they had such fast combat troops and very powerfully built Lords, and the Wood Elves because they could shoot so much off whilst denying me from being able to engage any of the units/characters worth any real points. The common theme? Lizards have a tough time dealing with powerful Combat Fast Cavalry (anything more powerful then a High Elf Reaver, imo).

The solution? Put more pressure on those units to engage quicker in what would ideally be more advantageous combats. We don't have long range artillery that causes any damage in volume (like a Stone Thrower or Organ Gun). We have few templates (Salamanders). We have great small arms fire (Javelins), and those do decently well at killing non-character fast cav. Note that the Salamanders and the Skinks require us to put our models into charge range of Fast Cav opponents, which is quite a drawback in this instance. We aren't as fast as them without magical support. So now I have to look at magic to either speed my Lizards up, or kill more of his troops at range. Heavens and Beasts magic don't do that* - but High Magic (or Wandering Deliberations) can. Since the only way to get those is via the Slann, he becomes a necessity. In addition, he provides a focal point that your opponent wants to attack - I mean look at all those points invested in that single General/Lvl4/BSB model. Knowing your opponent will want to engage that (most reliably through combat), you can develop a strategy to counter. And if he chooses not to engage him, you're well on your way towards killing more points of his then he does of yours.

*Comets are nice, but really they just prevent the Fast Cav player from entering a zone; a neat, but not useful trick against great players.

I think if the Skink Priests had access to the Lores that the Slann did, I could be on board with not needing a Lvl 4 in the Lizard army.