Club Tweak

Club
3gc
Common
+1 S to all attacks versus enemies knocked down



What do you think?

Boring?

It does bring it closer to an axe though. Actually I'd now prefer an axe I think. Which is good because an axe costs more so it should be better. For starting warbands I am always trying to squeeze as much models in as possible (because of the XP) so probably I would still use clubs for starting members and then switch to axes later.

...which seems like a reasonable development for any warband.

So, are you saying that this should replace the concussion ability or is it in addition too? I suppose either way what's wrong with consussion? Does it really need fixing?

The only tweak I've been considering is bumping up the price to 5gc.

AFKzombie wrote:

So, are you saying that this should replace the concussion ability or is it in addition too?

He does list the full rules so, yes, this is a full re-write...

AFKzombie wrote:

I suppose either way what's wrong with consussion? Does it really need fixing?

...in order to stop clubs being the super obvious no brainer weapon choice. Free dagger plus club/mace/hammer all day long. Not factoring in the whole dual-wielding vs. shield+weapon vs two-handed weapons issue, it would be nice to at least have some equal variety amongst the single-handed weapons. But clubs win hands down by being the cheapest and having the best special rule. The goal is to have more equally viable weapon choices.

Well part of the problem is that the special rule for axes is basically useless because no one uses armor. Making armor viable will go a long way toward making axes better. Clubs still may need adjustment regardless

Quote :

The goal is to have more equally viable weapon choices.

I'm completely on board with balancing the weapons better, but I can't get behind a +1 S against KD opponents. This feels more like something I'd ascribe to thrusting weapons.

What about this replacement wording for Concussion: if the hit roll from this weapon's attack is a 6, an Injury roll of 2 from the same attack counts as Stunned.

I think rather bumping up the Armour value might help more actually – makes the armour more worth. Also adding some kind of penelty to Dual Wield makes the club less worth; I prefere the sollution of giving Dual Wield a one time cost (like a purchased skill) that any warrior who can wield weapons may be trained in for a onetime cost (per warrior) of 15g. This would mean that if you wanted to DW a club & knife it would gost you 18g.

well in my playing experience i haven't seen too many balance issue problems with the weapons, however seeing as how everyone else says it is i must be doing something wrong. maybe maces can subtract 1 from the save from a helm (kinda like how an axes cutting edge but for helm saves) so you would need a 5+ to save a stun from a mace.

For some reason every time I see the title of this thread I think of a nightclub handing out uppers.

Quote :

I think rather bumping up the Armour value might help more actually – makes the armour more worth.

Club
3gc
Common
SPECIAL RULE
Blunt: +1 enemy armour save

like this?

edit: oh. forgot that this is a vanilla dagger. i have gotten so used to thinking of daggers as giving -1 s

Asp, I just realized you and I both are missing something obvious: just remove the Concussion special rule and don't replace it with anything. That makes clubs just the standard HtH weapon against which all others are measured.

Asp wrote:

IDEAL solution would imo be to make club 5gc and make it exactly on par with axe

I like that idea.

Asp wrote:

IDEAL solution would imo be to make club 5gc and make it exactly on par with axe

(concussion > armour piercing)

Ideal solution if you need everything absolutely perfectly balanced but boring in every other way (hence your I guess). If duel wielding is nerfed a little bit and armour is made more viable then would the club naturally become slightly less useful anyway (granted that even then it may still be seen as "cheap" for its special rule)?

why boring, RationalLemming ?

Asp wrote:

only major downside is, people have heroes modelled with clubs :/ - IDEAL solution would imo be to make club 5gc and make it exactly on par with axe

Hmm - to satisfy those players, you may need to make a difference between a run-of-the-mill no-special-rule club/mace/hammer and some superior hero equivalent. We already have a model for this with hammer to Sigmarite Warhammer, and with swords to Weeping Blades.

Perhaps a Warclub/Warmace/Warhammer retains the Concussion special rule, costs 10gc, and is Rare 6.

If WYWISYG modelling absolutely must be done for distinction from normal clubs/maces/hammers, large spikes (flanges for warmaces) could suffice and wouldn't be that hard to greenstuff on existing figures.

However, in a best-possibly-balanced Mordheim ruleset, a 3gc club/hammer/mace should likely have no special rule at all.

Quote :

If WYWISYG modelling absolutely must be done

it must. non WYWISYG players should go play video games :p

Quote :

However, in a best-possibly-balanced Mordheim ruleset, a 3gc club/hammer/mace should likely have no special rule at all.

good solution, but not necessarily: i have often thought that weapons are too cheap compared to warrios in mordheim. for optimum balance, warriors should be somewhat cheaper while weapons should be more expensive

I just make a club and a staff a base line melee like so:

Club/staff: Range: Close Combat; Strength: As user; Special Rule: None

Then I leave the Hammer and Mace as is and adjust the cost like so:

Hammer/Mace: Range: Close Combat; Strength: As user; Special Rule: Concussion

After all, there has to be a reason that people spend time and money making hammers and maces. Why do it if it is only a good as a big stick you picked up off the ground.

My very quick 2 cents:

I agree with Mortimer, just bump up the cost to 5gc, easy, fast and remains different from axes.

@ Asp:
My idea is generally the opposite, if we should speculate about that. I think certain weapons should be cheaper while models "could" be more expensive. The high prize with certain weapons is the exact reason why we are not encouraged to have variety. People always go for more models with cheaper weapons.
An overall exaple could be 2-handers: 15gc and strike last. For a lower prize (13gc) you get sword AND club... (side note: lowering 2-handers to 10gc???)

@ JaFisher44:
Why people spend money and time creating maces and hammers? Because they are more durable... Clubs made from well seasoned wood are perfectly able to crush through 3mm iron plates or to make you see all "black and sparkles" on an equally thick iron helmet (seen and done myself), only you'll throw them to the garden after 1 session of beating... maces and hammers need only to replace that wooden handle, if any.
This is hardly the case in Mordheim, as "durability" is not IN as a factor, and I hope it remains OUT, too much to keep track...
For this reason I see no need to differentiate maces from clubs: think of it as the primitive version, much like goblin spears are nothing more than sharpened sticks, while elves use impressive cavalry spears (check Spear description in the rulebook).

Cheers!!!

I have always been of the opinion that the "basic free weapon" should be a club and that it should follow the same rules that a dagger currently has (+1 AS since thick/padded clothing would soften the blow of a simple club) while the dagger should be the "no special rules" weapon. I'd be okay with Hammers and Maces going up to 5-7GC and keeping the concussion rule as is, but the fact that a dagger is cheaper, less effective, and more common than a chair leg/stick/bone has always given me pause.

Asp wrote:

why boring, RationalLemming ?

You have already combined slings and short bows to be exactly the same in your version of Mordheim rules. This reduces variation in weapons which I know some people don't like but if models who can get slings cannot get short bows and vice versa then it doesn't matter too much I guess. However, most warbands have access to axes AND clubs and if you make them the same then effectively you are removing a type of weapon that can be chosen at the expense of balancing. This is why I said that it would be boring.