Oops Rules

RationalLemming wrote:

We have made many mistakes over the years. Here are some of our mistakes...

* Warbands had to start rolling for rout after leader was taken OOA.
* Warriors did not need to roll to wound when shooting and hitting a warrior that is knocked down or stunned.

you do only for knocked down, when stunned you only have to hit

I'm afraid when shooting at a stunned model you must roll to hit, roll to wound and roll an out of action result. A stunned model is only removed automatically in melee combat.

After all our years of campaigning we only realised last year that each model can only get a maximum of one Critical Hit in any combat. They were some brutal fights when people scored three or four at a time!

Quote :

PDF Rulebook, Page 16 wrote:

critical hits

If you roll a 6 when rolling to wound (for hand-tohand
combat and shooting only) you will cause a
critical hit. Roll a D6 and consult the Critical Hit chart
below to determine the damage caused by the critical
hit. You should also roll to see whether the target
makes its armour save or suffers damage as normal.

In addition, if the attacker normally needs 6s to
wound his target, he cannot cause a critical hit. His
opponent is simply too tough to suffer a serious
injury at the hands of such a puny creature!

Each warrior may only cause one critical hit in each
hand-to-hand combat phase (see the Close Combat
section), so if he has several attacks, the first 6 you roll
to wound will cause a critical hit.

If a critical hit causes more than 1 wound, and the weapon
the attacking model is using normally causes several
wounds, then use the one that causes the most damage

It took me the longest time to figure out how the Master of Blades special skill for the dwarf treasure hunters worked, it was actually here on this very forum that it was explained clearly and in detail to me.

how does it work?

Funky rules FAQ thread.

If a warrior has the 'Hide In Shadows' skill then it's always helpful if one of the players remembers that the model has this during the shooting phase.

We used to do the full house during Exploration; 3 of these, pair of those.

There's probably loads. They don't all spring to mind at once like blatant cheaters using Rabbits Foot to re-roll their rout test.

Quote :

Gherma: To close the OT, the translation of google translate is not perfect, because he only give the broadly meaning. The literally meaning is even worst: it is piece of sh*t!

I'm very confused if I'd like tho try or not that beer XD

One bottle of 'Golden Turd' and a pint of 'Proud Bastard'. I'd like to try this out Stronzo!

Anyone who has not been to a pub in England will be blissfully unaware that ales here have been named with many offensive titles! You can find pretty much anything here including pint of Pig Swill.

Quote :

Lord 0: After a good many years of playing it was only recently that we realised that while poisons are one-use-only drugs are not.

Oh yes, the *effects* only last for one game. That is why you have to keep using them at the start of each game to keep getting the effects. If you want to keep getting the good part you have to keep risking the bad part. As you mention, part of the bad stuff for crimson shade is that once you get addicted to the stuff you no longer have the discipline to take it only when you need it, but instead chow down on the stuff all the time and end up using a week's worth or month's worth in only a day or so and therefore have to keep buying a new each time.

In any case, I think the over-riding factor is fun. Treated as one-shot-wonders they are too ineffective to justify purchase so noone ever took them. Now that they last they are enough value that you can take them without gimping your chances of winning more people are taking them from time to time; either because they want to take a gamble or just for the hell of it. In these circumstances more options means more fun.

This is utterly wrong Lord. Drugs & poisons are both bought in batches.

The Mordheim Rulebook gives a useful example of what happens when a batch of addictive narcotics has been used.

Your flippant description of Crimson Shade addiction is wrong on account of the drug being 'rare'. It is certainly not in readily available supply in Mordheim of all places. Not only that but this testimony on how a drug addicted warrior behaves is not in fitting with the behaviours of Crimson Shade addicts as they have been depicted in Warhammer stories.

I would strongly urge anyone to disregard the notion. Making an infinite supply of all 'one use only' items is anything but fun. This sounds like changing the rules to suit your own ends.

If anyone is worried that certain luxury* items aren't seeing enough play due to financial constraints then I'd suggest running some scenarios in your campaign where such items are given away as rewards or used during games as part of the special rules in completing objectives.

*Winners don't need drugs kids, but your Heroes might!

Quote :

Warboss Kurgan: Each warrior may only cause one critical hit in each hand-to-hand combat phase (see the Close Combat section), so if he has several attacks, the first 6 you roll to wound will cause a critical hit.

That's a good one that was being discussed only the other day. Fortunately there aren't many incidents where your warrior needs 2 instead of 1 Critical.

It's worth noting that the Mordheim Rulebook guidelines for Criticals refers specifically to close combat. The relevance of this being that multiple Criticals can be achieved in the shooting phase as a result of a lucky sequence of dice rolls for ricochets.

Regards,

Werekin

"After all our years of campaigning we only realised last year that each model can only get a maximum of one Critical Hit in any combat."

Yes, we discovered that one almost immediately after one of my youngbloods took out a three-wound ogre in one round of melee, after rolling two crits.

Quote :

Yes, we discovered that one almost immediately after one of my youngbloods took out a three-wound ogre...

It never happened... In a weirdroot-juice induced dream perhaps!

werekin wrote:

Drugs & poisons are both bought in batches.

They are both bought in batches, of course, but only Poisons only last for one battle.

LRB - Poisons and Drugs wrote:

The use of poison is almost universally abhorred, but
in the ruthless and brutal battles fought in
Mordheim, desperate warbands often resort to the
use of envenomed blades.
Poison may not be used with blackpowder weapons.
When you buy a vial of poison, there is always only
enough to last the duration of one battle. You can
only poison a single weapon with one vial of poison.

As you can see, it is clearly only poisons that last for the duration of one game. Drugs are not mentioned at all.

werekin wrote:

I would strongly urge anyone to disregard the notion. Making an infinite supply of all 'one use only' items is anything but fun. This sounds like changing the rules to suit your own ends.

I think discouraging people to experiment with something only impedes their chance at finding new fun, perhaps in un-thought-of places. In any case, that is not quite what I was recommending. I think that pretty much everything in the rule book that is marked 'one use only' should *stay* one use only (with the possible exception of nets - I think they could be one use per game too) because they are generally one use for a balance reason. Also, I was not changing the rules to suit *me*. I didn't use them at all because I considered them worse than useless and I don't use them now because my play-style is more risk-averse than one needs to be to use drugs. However, I am not basing the campaign rules on what *I* like, but rather on what my group says they find fun and what I see them actually doing.

werekin wrote:

If anyone is worried that certain luxury* items aren't seeing enough play due to financial constraints then I'd suggest running some scenarios in your campaign where such items are given away as rewards or used during games as part of the special rules in completing objectives.

That is the thing though, it wasn't *just* the financial constraint, it was more the fact that they are poo *and* don't last *and* are expensive. Luxury items should still serve some purpose other than to punish those that use them. Basically, nobody that knew any better purchased them at all (waste of gold and a rare roll) and even when given for free people would rather sell them for the gold e.g. you use your Crimson Shade that you found for one game and I will sell it and buy a bow and two clubs and we will see who does better over the campaign. The only people that would ever use them rather than sell them were those that would do so for story or background reasons and they suffered for it. I don't think people doing things for story and background reasons should be punished, on the contrary, I think there should be incentives for doing so. Our first attempt at making this so is playing them by what seems to be RAW, and so far it seems to be working.

Averlorn wrote:

how does it work?

If your model is using two weapons with the parry special rule he is then allowed to parry two attacks, if he is armed with two dwarf axes, then you can also reroll any failed parries.

Quote :

As you can see, it is clearly only poisons that last for the duration of one game. Drugs are not mentioned at all.

Ah the old "doesn't mention it" chestnut... Which does not entitle you to an infinite supply of Madcap Mushrooms by way of assumption.

Quote :

I think discouraging people to experiment with something only impedes their chance at finding new fun, perhaps in un-thought-of places.

We misunderstand one another here. I am merely recommending a veto on experimenting with narcotics that haven't been paid for... Before the local drug dealer finds out what you've been doing with his stash.

Quote :

However, I am not basing the campaign rules on what *I* like, but rather on what my group says they find fun and what I see them actually doing.

Perhaps we can start a separate thread about how much wine is drank and how much weed gets smoked during our Mordheim game sessions.

Quote :

Luxury items should still serve some purpose other than to punish those that use them. Basically, nobody that knew any better purchased them at all (waste of gold and a rare roll) and even when given for free people would rather sell them for the gold e.g. you use your Crimson Shade that you found for one game and I will sell it and buy a bow and two clubs and we will see who does better over the campaign. The only people that would ever use them rather than sell them were those that would do so for story or background reasons and they suffered for it.

Did I mention winners don't do drugs! Sweet, I just found an elf emoticon.

Quote :

I don't think people doing things for story and background reasons should be punished, on the contrary, I think there should be incentives for doing so. Our first attempt at making this so is playing them by what seems to be RAW, and so far it seems to be working.

I agree it is unfortunate that more items don't end up getting utilised. The list of various equipments is long, so long even the basic Pricing Chart from the Mordheim Rulebook is beyond some new players. Expert level players will have a brilliant understanding of what is on offer. With knowledge comes responsibility to share the experiences of fair trade in the marketplace.

We are using an 'Argos Catalogue' of items so that players can go away and research what they do... The 'Marienburg Manifest' in itself is not enough to enlighten.

A lot of groups use rewards charts. Still, as you say, that doesn't necessarily mean the items will get used. It is quite true that pawning the rewards off to purchase tried and tested items or pay for hire expenses is the natural response for most player.

I have incorporated some 'try before you buy' incentives involving equipment in some new scenarios to provide warriors with a memorable experience... If they live long enough...

My most recent discovery:

We have played using the Chaos in the Streets rules since they were originally published.  This week some one asked a rules question on the facebook about how the underdog bonus worked in multi-player games.  The rule is the lowest rated warband compares their rating to the NEXT highest.  

Mark Havener wrote:

Underdogs: In multiplayer Mordheim, the underdog is not so
clear. Any warband can be an underdog if it is attacked by two
or more of its rivals! Still, there may be cases where one
warband is simply playing out of its league. To determine if a
warband is an underdog in multiplayer Mordheim, simply
take the warband with the lowest warband rating and
compare it to the warband with the next highest rating. Use
the difference in ratings and the chart from the Experience
section of the Mordheim rules to determine if any experience
bonus is justified for the lower warband, just as you would for
the lower of two warbands in a two player game.

And that's it.  Wow, what a bad rule!

We've always compared every warband to the highest rated warband and ALL eligible warbands may collect an underdog bonus.  

Not changing our ways, but still discovering new things we do wrong.

Von Kurst wrote:

My most recent discovery:

We have played using the Chaos in the Streets rules since they were originally published.  This week some one asked a rules question on the facebook about how the underdog bonus worked in multi-player games.  The rule is the lowest rated warband compares their rating to the NEXT highest.  

Mark Havener wrote:

Underdogs:  In multiplayer Mordheim, the underdog is not so
clear. Any warband can be an underdog if it is attacked by two
or more of its rivals! Still, there may be cases where one
warband is simply playing out of its league. To determine if a
warband is an underdog in multiplayer Mordheim, simply
take the warband with the lowest warband rating and
compare it to the warband with the next highest rating. Use
the difference in ratings and the chart from the Experience
section of the Mordheim rules to determine if any experience
bonus is justified for the lower warband, just as you would for
the lower of two warbands in a two player game.

And that's it.  Wow, what a bad rule!

We've always compared every warband to the highest rated warband and ALL eligible warbands may collect an underdog bonus.  

Not changing our ways, but still discovering new things we do wrong.

Yeah, we noticed that some years ago as well; garbage rules, so we carried on doing whatever we had been doing so far: Comparing the warband's rating to the average rating of all other competing warbands; i.e. a 100 rating warband fighting against a 300 and a 250 rating warband would thus be up against a '275' rating warband and thus taking in a hefty amount of experience.

Burlok Blackaxe wrote:

Averlorn wrote:

how does it work?

If your model is using two weapons with the parry special rule he is then allowed to parry two attacks, if he is armed with two dwarf axes, then you can also reroll any failed parries.

And matching the highest "to hit" roll is enough also, not just beating the roll. Awesome defensive skill.

In my group we also used to think pistols were like in Warhammer 5th many years ago. No -1 for long range, and able to use them as clubs in HtH... and that was before the revision of the dwarf engineer special skill. Little dudes with pistols were something to fear.

Oh! We played pistols that way for years without noticing as well. It took a fan made setting's special warband rules to get us to read the pistol rule finally. We grudgingly accepted the -1 for long range, but kept the club as a house rule.