8th Ed. WHFB 8.5

I've never played it myself, but I typically hear good things about it.

 

This is i feel something that might become a problem later, to many people playing different game systems that in time will just die out due to a low influx of new players. I think this idea is great, but it is best if we just stand behind one project, that one being 9th. We are stronger if we are united in our system, the fora are already getting split up enough as it is with KOW, AoS, 8th and 9th.

 

You are completely correct, but I don't think people will be able to agree on what is the best path forward. In the end I think there will exist small pockets of players that subscribe to a particular edition/update, but there will never be a united front. Up until recently I believed that 9th Age might be the way forward, but that seems to have become a colossal blunder. I think they will lose a great deal of support for the decisions & directions they have chosen to make. Time will tell I guess.

 

Yes ok, that was also my fear before we knew that 9th was going to be something of a main system. I do think it is way to early to write 9th off though, we all know why this version was not up to scruff and it seems to be a bit unfair to write it of on just the failings of one compassionate but probably overwhelmed writer. Judge them on v1.0!

 

I do not believe that 9th will ever be a main system for war-gaming. I admit that I was fully on board with them (before the last release), but even then I recognized that at best it could be a fringe system enjoyed by small pockets of people. Unfortunately the forum interest/activity in regards 9th Age has been pretty poor. That is probably indicative of an overall lack of interest held by the community as a whole. That is not to say that it might not turn out to be a fantastic game, I just feel that it will only appeal to a very small percentage of the gaming community.

That's just the thing, why was it left up to one person? How could they have no other backups or checks in place? One guy quits and one guy goes on vacation and the whole thing is left to fall apart. Then we have the statement released by the author which makes things even worse. Once again, can things turn around? Sure, but how long will players wait to find out?

That is definitely final judgement day for me. Mr. Phat has mentioned that changes are likely to occur, while the author of the army book said that the changes will likely be very minor (in the form of small nerfs if anything). I'm unsure which statement is the most recent and up to date. As it stands the SA army needs some major changes. There are a couple of items that are auto-killers for me... if they are not rectified then I have no further interest in the game no matter how great everything else may be. That's just my personal thoughts on it, others may very well disagree. In my view, 9th Age hasn't been eliminated as of yet but it is badly trailing behind 8th Edition proper.

 

I'd argue that nothing stops us from playing multiple systems.

Personally nothing tops 9th Edition for me, but I have no qualms playing a round of 9th Age or classic 8th edition since that's what my city has decided for it seems. In the age of digital media rules questions have become so much easier that it isn't really a problem anymore.

Still, 9th Age walks on a wonky path of wanting to create a new game identity whereas most people were outraged at GW killing 35 years of history.

 

Exactly.

 

Couldn't agree more! At them moment I have some buddies that I still play 8th ed with, one guy that is one of the creators of the 8.5 project and he tests some of the changes with me and some guys that 8 play 9th age with. I've also tried KOW as some of my buddies are playing that and it's quite strong here.
I hope for the 9th age to succeed in gettong a balanced ruleset and army books together where multiple builds are viable. I like to go to some tourneys and play with the same power level.

 

So do you not feel that the community is highly fractured? Do you not find that the player base for each of the different game systems is laughably small? Take a look at the activity on this forum for example, aside from AoS the other game systems receive little to no attention. That is my observation. Of course player bases and such will vary depending on where you reside and as such your community could be extremely healthy and vibrant.

 

Personally I subscribe to 9th edition, but that's partially because I love the breadth of change and possibilities offered by having twice the amount of army books. At the same time I acknowledge that most tournaments are running 9th age, which is fine, and I have no problems tailoring my lists to play some rounds there instead.

Look at it from the perspective of the Italian city states (my profile image depicts Machiavelli - funny coincidence). They're all slightly different, and some are bigger and more prevalent than others, but in the end you're still playing the same game. Making small adaptions is no big feat.

 

Maybe a dumb question: but what is 9th edition?
Also, how does it have twice the number of army books?

 

Think I posted about it earlier in this thread, but 9th edition is Mathias Eliasson's definitive Warhammer edition.
He's been known to (re)publish army books from older editions as well as some that only existed in the fluff.
http://warhammerarmiesproject.blogspot.co.at/2016/02/warhammer-9th-edition-beta-out-now.html



I wrote a pretty comprehensive review, I'll post it here if you don't mind.

Warhammer 9th edition: A Review


Mathias Eliasson has finally completed it. The slightly belated, never hated, hotly debated 9th edition of Warhammer. But what change does he bring to the table? Will it fix the many qualms people has with previous editions? His army books have so far time and time again proven that he is in fact capable of balancing the rules, but maybe he took a bite too big for him this time? Keep tuned and find out!

Magic

Magic has always been an important part of Warhammer, and Eliasson did a very elegant job at fixing the main gripes of it in 8th edition. Bound spells were scarcely seen due to the fact that the bonus to cast meant that it was usually a loss of investment on power dice. Equally, magic had a strict mantra of favoring high leveled Wizards over lower leveled ones, making Lord tier level 4 Wizards borderline mandatory. As it is now, lower casters use power dice just as efficiently, but they have lost access to the most powerful spells and the limit on power dice used makes it difficult to cast the big versions of regular spells. One major gripe remains, which is Eliasson deciding not to revamp the magic list itself. Some lore attributes straight up feel underwhelming and situational (notably Heavens, Metal and Light). Both Furion and the 9th age did a compelling job redoing the 8 basic lores and while I personally prefer Furion’s approach (minor, but important changes allowing for all lores to be competitive at some level whilst removing the worst offenders and replacing them with new spells), I can understand how investing time in this when so much work is left concerning the army books is the wrong move.
Additionally the change of the miscast table does what many have asked for, which is punishing according to power dice used. Here however, I have to admit I think the 9th age has a better way a handling it, making the strength of hits depend on the power dice directly while keeping the roll the same. All in all though, a major improvement without being nearly as wonky as the 9th age bonus to cast apprentice clusterfuck.


Rank and File and the Removal of Supporting Attacks

A bold move for sure, greatly reducing the amount of attacks definitely changes up the game, though this is a callback to older rules, making a strong front, more precisely Characters, to whom we will get to later, very critical. As a whole, smaller units have gained a lot, with units being forced to have a bigger frontage than width (a necessary change, though not elegantly executed in my opinion - hey, I’m not judging). Perhaps it would be better to force units have said bigger frontage at the end of the turn, since otherwise they can’t move through small ridges. With the additional removal of stomp, the biggest losers here are Monstrous Infantry. It will be interesting to see what is done to the Ogre Kingdoms, as they have lost many attacks while getting basically nothing in return.

Combat Results and Cavalry Charges

9th edition has added a substantial amount of factors to combat results. Coupled with the fact that Infantry has lost a couple of inches on the charge (poor Dwarves, hopefully we’ll see triple march movement or else they’ll probably never make it into combat) we may finally see Cavalry return to the glory it had in previous editions. The nerf to steadfast and the buffs to shooting certainly make for greater importance of maneuverability.

Shooting

Ranged combat got a major buff in form of the removal of long range and the addition of short range. Was it needed? Hard to say but since warmachines, most notably the infamous cannon were nerfed the fear of gunline armies appearing everywhere is in all likelihood unwarranted.
Personally I’d have gone with keeping long range on the first 25% and giving short range on the last 25% but one would argue that most ranged units should spend the turn running at the proximity. Bows of all kind also got buffed with double shot which might make them a mainstay in armies with access to them. It would be a shame if Warhammer Fantasy (or at least the 9th Ed. Version of it) morphed into some sort of 40k shot-fest with melee being an afterthought but as is it is probably fine.

Ninthhammer Herohammer?

As we have already discussed, rank and file took a hit in terms of dishing out damage. However, heroes are looking better than ever on this front with magic weapons becoming cheaper than ever and with the added removal of unit champion challenges Lords and heroes can wreak havoc among their foes from turn one. Stacking ward saves (up to 4++) and parry saves now applying with magic weapons make Ward saves very easy to come by and with Heavy armour now being a 4+ you’re looking at highly durable one man armies. Arcane items have also obtained some new additions, but the old mainstay of the Dispel scroll is still as prevalent as ever at 25 points. Not only that, but the destroy magic scroll gives you a second one with a chance at removing that spell once and for all. This all seems grave but I’m sure I was overhyping the severity of Lords and Heroes and the new items make for a welcome change.

Monsters

With stomp being replaced by impact hits, the charge becomes ever more important with the big fellas. It only seems fair, since infantry lost their supporting attacks, so do Monsters lose their stomp attacks, but for some monsters stomp offered more than half of their offensive capabilities. Removing them might necessitate increasing the amount of base attacks of monsters by one or two. I’m also still missing disruption caused by monsters, hardly any of them have 10 wounds and yet I find it hard to imagine that a gigantic creature spawned by the unholy hells of the abyss doesn’t make a couple of minutemen break a sweat.

It is important to note that while the review may at times seem to have been written grumpily, I am very thankful for the time and work Mathias Eliasson has put into this rulebook. In conclusion, the 9th edition is a wonderful start, but some aspects can still be improved upon.

 

Definitely not a dumb question. I was thinking the exact same thing.

 

Quite a lot of different opportunities for a community of players to choose from suddenly. If you're into variation that can't be that bad

The good thing about all these new emerging games, like ninth age, is that it at least keeps the hobby alive

 

At the very least the effort and desire must be applauded.

 

Exactly!
It must mean that there's a lot of people, with the desire to keep the hobby as a living and breathing entity. Who knows maybe one of these great project will be a dominant game one day, maybe they'll keep being scattered across communities. I hope this means that we will see people in the future, still playing their favourite tabletop, with these lovely figures and enjoying it.
Multiple systems doesn't necessarily mean that we'll see a more divided community either, sometimes it's fun to have different options.
Just because my favourite pen and paper is GURPS, doesn't mean that I don't enjoy D&D, ruin quest or any of the other. They all have their own advantages, for a specific desire. Perhaps this will bring the same

 

Hm, my post appears to have been suckered into oversight.

Might make a new thread discussing 9th edition and Armiesproject in general later.

 

Yeah I noticed that. Wierd,