Mordheim Rules Engine, 6th Edition - Thoughts?

Hey, after checking a new arrival at the forums (Asp) I saw his link to the pdf to his (or someone's) rules revisions for Mordheim, 6th Edition.

As a 'professional' lurker here, I do not recall if these were discussed. I took a QUICK read at them (less than 2 minutes) and every change I saw is something our group had 'house-ruled' back when I actively played Mordheim or that DaBank have tweaked when designing our 40k Skirmish Game.

Many of the changes seem reasonable, and I think that our forum would be a good place to discuss them. So, what do you think of these rules revisions?

Mordheim Rules Engine, 6th Edition http://www.indadvendt.dk/mordheim/MORDHEIM6.pdf

I don't think the Mordheim rules are broken or anything. A complete re-write should be left to GW. Until then I can perfectly live (and play) with the current rules set.

I've read over them in the past - so I'll need to find some time to have a refresher. There's a lot of good stuff in that, if I remember correctly - lots of things you could easily house rule. For me, I love making up new rules and ideas for the game, but the mechanics itself (in my opinion) are pretty sound. While I'm all for people tweaking rules to their tastes (it is a game after all) I feel a complete re-write of the system is not needed.

Hell, I play rarely enough as it is that I have trouble remembering the regular rules!

But, that said, if someone feels they are improving the game, cleaning it up for their own gaming group and possibly people here on the forums take something away from it, then I think that's great too. Mordheim is a vast game, the more people that add to it the better I feel.

cianty wrote:

I don't think the Mordheim rules are broken or anything. A complete re-write should be left to GW. Until then I can perfectly live (and play) with the current rules set.

Same as the quoted rapscallion above.

Rewrites are ok but i think its better for people to play with the official rules unless their group wants things altered. makes it easier when meeting up with others you dont know to play games

As I only play with the same people all the time, having a very clean, concise, short rule set (as compared to the book) would be in favour of this rewrite. The only details that struck me right up front was that there are no slings here, weapon effects seem to have changed (i.e. Swords give Ini+1 instead of a save) etc.; and armour seems different.

As stated in the other post => you have no Orcs&Gobos, so it's a no go anyway.

No parry, thus no bucklers... I like parry due to our group's slightly modified ruling of it...

Handguns being S5 is... odd.
Slings missing is odd.
Halberds striking first like spears almost makes spears redundant.

"Burdensome" on armours I don't really like... not losing 1 initiative makes Ithilmar not wanted by me, and I used to use it alot just so you guys know...
Plus the magic resistance on Gromril armour doesn't make sense to me either. Doesn't happen in the Fantasy game, so why in this game?

Forcing wizards to take a staff (club) seems stupid. What if you want a warrior wizard with a pair of swords? Or like my Beastman shaman who takes a Halberd...

Merc marineburgers getting haggle for everyone? For free? Not fair. Middenheimers getting no pain and berzerker rather than strength makes little sense to myself honestly... and reiklander marksmen not getting BS4 is annoying.

Basically, too many changes. I'd prefer fixes, not things that prevent me from using much of my previous gaming experiences.

P.S. And no Orcs & Goblins. No Sisters of Sigmar. What's the deal?

Mordheim is a sound product and does not need an overhaul.

There may be a Rules Review again, I am trying to contact Andy Hall again on the matter as we had permission to start one but ran out of time as the SG site went down and didn't come back up again.

If there was to be one. A thread would be started (somewhere) with people's input but this doesn't mean it will change.

The next rules review (if we do) will only cover better explanations or FAQ as GAMING Mechanics will not be touched. Mordheim rules are very sound and are in fact (in my humble opinion) one of the best Skirmish games out there.

ANSWER_MOD_DABANK -Answer Mod for Mordheim.

Fallen wrote:

Merc marineburgers getting haggle for everyone? For free? Not fair. Middenheimers getting no pain and berzerker rather than strength makes little sense to myself honestly... and reiklander marksmen not getting BS4 is annoying.

P.S. And no Orcs & Goblins. No Sisters of Sigmar. What's the deal?

Firstly, you misread it, but then we've just spent the past hour going over it on msn and have broken the entirety of the game haven't we by these rules. Marienburg CHAMPIONS only get haggle, still the best warband out of the mercs maybe on par with the brokenness that is Reikland now. Middenhiemers aren't even worth mentioning, why take such a crap warband with no benefit when i can take reikolanders and call then middenhiemers? Beauty of the actual Official lists is all are an equal choice nota no brainer.

No sisters? WTF! And those NG's are fine and all but where are the Orcs?

I'm gonna point outa few things and yes my view of this entire re-write barring a very few things which are interesting takes and nice small improvements (mainly one or two skills making a bit more sense -knife fighter and unstoppable charge) is that this re-write is a complete NOOB job. Go off at me for being harsh but teh rules here are broken.

Swords at 7gc, no parry, meh, +1 initiative makes spears negated, on the charge yoiu will ahve higher initiative now then the spearman so why take a spear? Why take anything else really when you can just spam swords and ensure you're going first? Yeah there's you being charged but that's not an issue to a skilled player. Me and Fallen just broke everything and can't stop. Skaven are the power house untill you read one nice thing that negates their skill list almost entuirely:

Quote :

Skaven Special Skills
Master of Poison
One of the warrior’s weapons is automatically
coated in Dark Venom each battle. (Weapons
coated in Dark Venom will automatically wound
on natural 6’s to hit. Take armour saves and roll
for critical wounds as normal.)

Sneak Attack
The warrior always has an extra -1 to any
armour saves the enemy has to take against
wounds he inflicted in hand-to-hand combat.
(Cumulative with ‘Cleave’.)

Infiltration
The warrior is always placed on the battlefield
after the opposing warband and can be placed
anywhere, even above ground level, as long as
it is out of sight of the opposing warband and
more than 12” away from any enemy warrior
or scenario objective. If both Warbands have
warriors that Infiltrate, roll a D6 for each, and
the lowest sets up first.

Lethal Strike
Warrior has an additional +1 to

Now to that Night Goblin List:

Quote :

Night Goblin Special Skills
These Skills are unique to Night Goblins and no other races may learn them.

Master of Poison
One of the warrior’s weapons is automatically
coated in Dark Venom each battle. (Weapons
coated in Dark Venom will automatically wound
on natural 6’s to hit. Take armour saves and roll
for critical wounds as normal.)

Jump Up
The warrior ignores knocked down. Cannot be
used while mounted.

Infiltration
The warrior is always placed on the battlefield
after the opposing warband and can be placed
anywhere, even above ground level, as long as
it is out of sight of the opposing warband and
more than 12” away from any enemy warrior
or scenario objective. If both Warbands have
warriors that Infiltrate, roll a D6 for each, and
the lowest sets up first.

Sneak Attack
The warrior always has an extra -1 to any
armour saves the enemy has to take against
wounds he inflicted in hand-to-hand combat.

Master of Poison, Sneak Attack and Infiltration can't by the rules be learnt by the skaven! Wow! Good thing too, Skaven with the rights et up will auto put opponents out of action on the roll of a 1.

Possessed for 50gc with stats that far exceed anythingt of a similar cost anywhere in the list.

The amount of things that increase initiative is appauling.

Long Rifles at 80gc.

The complete and utter nerfing of the Witch Hunters, a warband many players refuse to play already because they are difficult to use and not the best in the grand scheme of things.

The different spell lists doing the same things witha different name eg:

Magic Weapon (Chill Touch) Difficulty 7+
The weapons of the Necromancer become imbued with the touch of death.
Wizard gains +2 Strength on profile.
Lasts until the beginning of your next shooting phase.

Magic Weapon (Might of Sigmar) Difficulty 7+
The weapons of the priest glow with a golden light.
Priest gains +2 Strength on profile.
Lasts until the beginning of your next shooting phase.

Magic Weapon (Black Hunger) Difficulty 7+
With a chattering incantation the Sorcerer turns into a monstrous rat-like creature.
Wizard gains +2 Strength on profile.
Lasts until the beginning of your next shooting phase.

Magic Weapon (Might of Gork) Difficulty 7+
The Shaman’s weapons gleam with green light, signalling the favour of Gork.
Shaman gains +2 Strength on profile.
Lasts until the beginning of your next shooting phase.

Magic Weapon (Manreaper) Difficulty 7+
The wizards weapons come alive with daemonic vigour.
Wizard gains +2 Strength on profile.
Lasts until the beginning of your next shooting phase.

Missile Storm (Dark Blood ) Difficulty 7+
The Chaos Mage summons bolts of corrosive black blood to hurt his enemies.
Magic Missile. Range: 12” Damage: D3 S3 hits.

Missile Storm (Silver Arrows of Arha) Difficulty 7+
Silvery arrows appear from thin air and circle around the wizard, shooting out to
strike his foes.
Magic Missile. Range: 12” Damage: D3 S3 hits.

Missile Storm (Deathcuts) Difficulty 7+
Corroded magical blades appear around the Sorcerer’s enemy, slashing away at him.
Magic Missile. Range: 12” Damage: D3 S3 hits.
[/quote]

The list goes on.

Why play a warband if the spell lists are not characterfula nd exactly the same? Why even bother with magic if you don't have the character of the warband reflected in the spell lists? Where the heck is the underlying strength of the Mordheim game in the fact that it is all about small individual warriors as opposed to the same warriors with teh same skills just with different names all doing the same thing ultimately?

Skaven are broken, more so then normal.

Middenheimers are redundant, so too with Witch Hunters and the Hatred against Wizards does nothing for an across the board weaker statline then the Night Goblins ie:

Flaggelants
M WS BS S T W I A Ld
4 2 2 3 3 1 3 1 6

Night Goblin Fanatics:
M WS BS S T W I A LD
4 2 3 3 3 1 3 1 5

Both have the same rule:
Frenzy (Frenzied warriors have +1 A on profile
and are Immune to Psychology.)

Both cost 30gcs.

Thus the leadership 6 is negligible on the flagellants and the extra point of BS over the flaggies where both units are allowed a shortbow and a flail as the option makes the Night Goblins the superior choice of the two and this also disregards the fluff of the respective characters within the game and Warhammer Fantasy as a gaming world as a whole!

The Witch Hunter Warband you no brainer max wardogs and even then the superior stats over the rest of your band does nothing ultimately.

I'm not even gonna go into the formatting and editing issues of Gromril armour with a:

Quote :

Gromril Armour 150gc rare 11
Save: 5+
Magic Resistance: Unmodified 4+ special save
versus the effects of spells, both friendly and
hostile. (Other warriors may still be affected
by the spell.)

And the possessed special skill:

Quote :

Magic Resistance
Warrior has a +4 special save against the
effects of Spells, both friendly and hostile.
(Other warriors may still be affected.)

read literally we now are immune to spells, all spells as a 1+ from a 4+ and a +4 save actually a 0+ mathshammer fails me...



In sum, this rules set makes even noobs fresh to the game insiatnt power gamers, and those of us that know the system inside out annihilate everyone else and do it in absolute unchalleneged force. Go Go Skaven Assassin Adepts and the non-existent Eshin Overseer!

Ram.

P.S. I expect a PM saying I was too harsh or rude in the above post, but put it this way, you wanted feedback and an honest review, so there's an honest review of it all without actually rantying liek I could on this piece of work. There's a reason why Playtesting was invented and why 1 random game is not enough and 50 is still not enough...

this is exactly what is needed to shut people up who nag about a new version of the game

If you don't like it, don't play it, but certainly this could have been handled better in a Private Message to Mordheimer.

Lord Xi wrote:

If you don't like it, don't play it, but certainly this could have been handled better in a Private Message to Mordheimer.

why shouldnt we be able to have a public discussion about this? This is a forum, if you think things should be talked about via PM get MSN and some buddies to talk with.

If we dont like it we wont play it, but if no one says anything nothing will change and it will remain the same horrible bland thing it is now.

Me, not to get into an argument, I'm just curious as to how many people get into situations where they just throw their hands up and say "dang, this game is broken!" Now, I don't play near as much as I'd like, or near as often as some of the folks here so I'm asking for actual enlightenment on this - of the games I've played, there's never been a reason for me to shake my head and say "these are some bad rules for such a situation to arise, it needs fixing." I'm not picking on the people that feel a whole re-write is needed, I'm just generally curious to know how often the Mordheim rules fail you?

As I said in my earlier post, I'm all for people house-rulling until the cows come home. It's a great game, I love making up my own Hired Swords, Warbands, extra material, and such. But the actual mechanics I don't usually touch. Yeah, I use the odd optional rule (+1AS w/ Hand Weapon and Shield, etc), but that's about it. But an entire new game - why not play a different skirmish game then?

Call me crazy, but I don't think I've ever found a game that didn't have hole or a mid-game question. There will ALWAYS be those moments when you turn to the other members of your group and ask "what do YOU think is fair?"

I can understand the whole '5th Edition WF basis vs. the 7th Ed. WF" debate (as to whether mordheim should shift with the changing WFB rules or stay fixed... personally I think the latter, but that's just me.)

So personally, I don't see the need to fix what ain't broken.

First - I have not read these new rules... so there will be nothing specific about them.

I have played a great many games over the 3 decades I've been a gamer. (Wow, that makes me sound ancient... ). In all that time, I've learned one major thing; it is not the game system, it is the people playing that makes it enjoyable. A game with the best rules can be made unplayable by a rules lawyer who does not care about fun, only about winning. Conversely, some of the worst games can be fun, if everyone playing is in it to have fun.

Do I think the Mordheim rules are perfect? No; I'd be lying if I said anything different. In my first game, did I have fun using the rules to have a henchman with no armor and only a dagger as a close combat weapon do a suicide Diving Charge into 2 Skaven? You bet I did! Mostly because 3 other players were standing there going "Cool! A Diving Charge!"

And, honestly, that's why I probably will not read this rewrite of the rules. I'm having fun, and do not see a need to fix that.

I assume that Flavio/Asp had reasons to rewrite the rules as he did. I hope (but do not know) that it was to make it more fun for his group. And, if that was the goal, good for him. If, having read his rewrite, you think you will have more fun using them, then good for you.

Me, I'll take the group of people I currently play with over specific rules every time. That's the part that makes any game fun...

(OK, I promise to stay away from soapboxes for at least a week, or until someone provokes another urge to pontificate... )

I skimmed through "Gentlemen's Mordheim" a little, and I have to say I personally would not play with it.

I agree with what Oldcastle said: the Rulebook is NOT perfect. But it works, is intuitive and with a few house rules and some good will, the game runs smoothly.

I am sure Flavio did his re-write with the best of intentions, however I think the changes made are too drastic for my taste. Also I think advertising this work as "the better Mordheim" is wrong.

I personally do not see the point in heavily "modding" something that works fine: according to the motto "if it ain't broken, don't fix it".

It feels a little like those mods for popular PC games that are made with a lot of enthusiam to make FPS shooters more "realistic" but end up altering the game in such a way that if feels awkward.

mrbretonnia wrote:

this is exactly what is needed to shut people up who nag about a new version of the game

Dude... chill pill, please.


MY POINT is not to cause controversy, but initiate a civil discussion on how and why other people have gone into the trouble and difficulty of documenting AND SHARING their personal (or groups') visions of rules revision. There are groups who like a combat oriented game and make house-rules that reflect so. Those players would like to see a Mordheim evolution geared towards that play-style. Other players like evolving a warband. Others the Sigmar's Comet Landfall period (they replay that point in history at Mordheim in every campaign. Others like to transport Mordheim's game system to other settings while others enjoy creating campaigns (like BTB).

Each group makes of the game what they want. One thing that Mordheim has right is that flexibility... everyone leaves the table satisfied. The rules were VERY good when they came out, but as the game moved on and players became better at it, certain things were to be found lacking or poorly worded ot confusing... this got exasberated when players started designing (and submiting) the Unofficial Warbands (as they are now known).

These warbands pushed the very limits of the Mordheim game system. The act of balancing them, especially on a campaign mode, is very difficult. For example, the Druichii start as a tough warband, but after 10 games (or so) they have moved to a bracket that is nearly impossible to win against, due to mathematical and statistical constraints. On that realm, the Ogre warband! Completly fun fluff, horrible game mechanics.

While many would argue that I'm an authority in things Mordheim, I would personally disagree. I would love to see an Official rules revision, not to add more stuff, but to clarify many things... have you seen the Ultimate FAQ at my site? WTF?!? It is time to sit down with that thing, and address it 100%... no need to change the game system. Also, time to Officially play-test the Unofficial Warbands and make them tournament legal. Confusing things, like armor, should be clarified, improved or removed. Masterpieces like, Border Town Burning, should be included in the rulebook... other campaign settings should be mentioned AND officially preserved (GW can spare couple Servitors for a week or two).

I know of very FEW people that can sit down and write a 'revision'. Asp (and company) should be commended for their efforts and the community (US!) should encourge such behaviour... at least to send a clear message to GW that we are here to stay and that fans care not for their laziness.

Fan rules 'revisions' are NOT about "everyone should play the game OUR way", but about "let me show you how we play the game, feel free to adapt your game and send us suggestions."

Last, but not least... I do not want this to become a poop-throwing contest. If it is a community-sensitive topic, please receive my apologies. It is not my intentions. If you want to comment of Asp's rules suggestions or make suggestions on your own... please post. If you are tired of those "who nag about a new version of the game", please state it on the forum... but be civil. Our non-native English speakers (like myself) may have trouble understanding sarcasm and may feel Tom's Forum is not a welcoming place.

Do it for Tom... do it for the children.

This message was brought to you by:

Mordheim Orphanatorium,
Come to Mordheim to adopt a child... it will change your life!

Mordheimer wrote:

Do it for Tom...

Listen to the man!

LOL

Wow. I had not seen this thread before now.

Yes, these are my rules.

I will attempt to adress the multitude of responses shortly.

(1) Fist, it's okay that people are critical. As long as they're objective. Further criticisms are welcome. And I can handle the volume. It's the emotional personal attacks that I think do us all a disservice.

(2) I am honoured that people would actually take the time to read through our rules. Tank you all - I see that some of the criticism in this thread pertains to earlier version of our rules. And I apologize for that. Having spent your time going through the rules you should be treated to their most current version. I will upload ver. 6.1 soon.

RESPONSE TO THE MULTITUDE OF FEEDBACK VOICED IN THIS THREAD

First of all, let us make it clear that the Rules are continuously updated in minor areas. As such we can divide the criticism into two kinds:

Essence-Criticism: Some people don't like the essence of how these rules are designed. Which are: Smooth, simple, tactical over detailed, realistic and business as usual. These criticisms are hard to adress because, essentially, if you don't like it, then you just don't like it. End of story. Kind of.

Balance-Criticism: You like the rules but you think that this or that is unbalanced. - These criticisms are easier to accomodate.

I guess this confusion is partly our own fault as we simply uploaded our rules and assumed to the people who would like them would eventually play with them. Perhaps I will write a short intro sometime in the future explaining the design principles and what things we have willingly abolished in this game.

-------

Now, on to the responses:

Quote :

Cianty: I don't think the Mordheim rules are broken or anything.

Nor do I. But I think that they could have been both smoother, clearer and more balanced. Which I believe that my rules are.

Quote :

A complete re-write should be left to GW.

Well then, I wouldn't sit around waiting for them to get moving. They can't even support their own games properly.

Quote :

SomeOrc: There are no slings here.

Right. Slings simply count as short bows. Works quite will. But of course it sacrifices detail and realism on behalf of simplicity and clarity.

Quote :

weapon effects seem to have changed (i.e. Swords give Ini+1 instead of a save)

I can understand how this seems very wierd at first glance. The reasons, in part for this are:

- Parry rolls slowed down the game.
- Parry was pretty useless as per vanilla.
- Alternate parry rules are usully pretty complex (slowing down game)
So we decided to do away with parry.
Adding +1 I to swords gives something else:
- With better 'to hit' tables for close combat, striking first is important because more hits will go in. - So Initiative is better than per vanilla.
- With heavy armour giving -1 I, it seems appropriate to give your heroes swords.
- With the Fencer skill giving enemies -1 WS, heroes really want those swords

So from an aesthetic viewpoint it also promotes Sword-slinging heroes and Club/Axe-using henchmen.

Quote :

armour seems different.

Armour is one of the jewels of our design. Try it!

Quote :

Fallen

Handguns being S5 is... odd.
Slings missing is odd.

These critiques are really taking issue with the fact that things are not business as usual - the way we are used to from GW. But if you take the rules within the
context of the Mordheim-Game itself, Handguns with S5 isn't odd at all, but quite natural from a balance-perspective

Quote :

Halberds striking first like spears almost makes spears redundant.

Not everybody who can use Halberds can use Shields.
Spears can be combined with Shieds.

That said, we contemplated merging these two into a single Pole-arm weapon that confers +1 S if the warrior is *not* using a shield.

Quote :

"Burdensome" on armours I don't really like

-1 M is so harsh that none of our players used it. - On the other hand, -1 I forces heavyly armoured heroes to forego the benefits of Clubs/Axes in favour of Swords (that now give +1 I). - And also, this means that ranged heroes who like to climb buildings will think twice before taking heavy armour. - This is the principle of tit-for-tat and that makes a strategy game more tactical than the principle of 'pile-on' as is encouraged by the vanilla rules.

Quote :

not losing 1 initiative makes Ithilmar not wanted by me
the magic resistance on Gromril armour doesn't make sense to me either. Doesn't happen in the Fantasy game, so why in this game?

Ithilmar and Gromril are considered luxury items at 150gc. They are not supposed to acutally be worth their price. That said, Ithilmar is *almost* worth it if you have a ranged, clibing hero (see above).
Gromril break with GW-business-as-usual. Again, the principle here is simplicity rather than detail.

Quote :

Forcing wizards to take a staff (club) seems stupid. What if you want a warrior wizard with a pair of swords? Or like my Beastman shaman who takes a Halberd...

Agreed. In the next version (6.1) we will remove the penalty of not having a staff

Though the skill warrior wizard is removed. - Wizards should be fragile and not able to soak up missile fire.

Quote :

Merc marineburgers getting haggle for everyone?

No, only for the two champions.

Quote :

Middenheimers getting no pain and berzerker rather than strength makes little sense

The reasoning is that Strength is only useful in CC while No Pain is useful at range also. So this allows greater tactical variety.

Quote :

and reiklander marksmen not getting BS4 is annoying.

annoying. or balanced

Quote :

Basically, too many changes. I'd prefer fixes,

Fair enough. That is a matter of taste. I expect you agree with Cianty's notion. Which is cool with me.

Quote :

[this] prevent me from using much of my previous gaming experiences.

a sound criticism if you don't want to devote time to re-learning rules. which again is fair enough. these rules were not written with the current mordheim rules in mind. in fact they were written by taking a step back and thinking: What would make this game a better game _in itself_?

Quote :

no Orcs & Goblins.
No Sisters of Sigmar.
What's the deal?

Personal opinion. Though of course people are very welcome to write up such warbands for this rules system. our group doesn't like nor play those particular warbands, so we didn't take the time to balance them ourselves. it can be alot of work if proper balance is to be achieved, you know

Ram Rock Ed First

criticism is welcome, but please be nice

Quote :

Swords at 7gc, no parry, meh, +1 initiative makes spears negated, on the charge yoiu will ahve higher initiative now then the spearman so why take a spear?

because polearms strike first _categorically_. you misread something.

Quote :

Master of Poison, Sneak Attack and Infiltration can't by the rules be learnt by the skaven! Wow!

oh come one now! - you misread on purpose! - but it will be corrected in the next version.

Quote :

Possessed for 50gc with stats that far exceed anythingt of a similar cost anywhere in the list.

True. The Possessed warband is the least tested of them all as our Possessed player missed alot of games. - But we will try another set-up in the next version. If you are willing to tell me what you think in a constructive manner, I shall be happy to listen.

Quote :

The complete and utter nerfing of the Witch Hunters, a warband many players refuse to play already because they are difficult to use and not the best in the grand scheme of things.

I don't get it. What is the nerfing part exactly? - I play the Witch Hunters in our campaign and I almost always win. - What is the nerfing you are talking about?

Quote :

The different spell lists doing the same things witha different name

This is on purpose. Clarity and Simplicity over detail and clutter.

Quote :

Why play a warband if the spell lists are not characterful and exactly the same? Why even bother with magic if you don't have the character of the warband reflected in the spell lists? Where the heck is the underlying strength of the Mordheim game in the fact that it is all about small individual warriors as opposed to the same warriors with teh same skills just with different names all doing the same thing ultimately?

See above. - This might not be everyone's cup of tea, but I can promise you that it ensures more balance, speed of play, and recognition amongst the gaming group.

Quote :

Skaven are broken, more so then normal.

Why?

Quote :

Middenheimers are redundant,

Why?

Quote :

so too with Witch Hunters

Why?

Quote :

and the Hatred against Wizards does nothing for an across the board weaker statline then the Night Goblins

What you don't seem to recognize is that Witch Hunter Flagellants have higher maximum stats than Goblins.

That said the prices of the two will be corrected in the next edition.

(Nor will they be allowed to use Short Bows. We experimented with that and found out that it was not a good idea. Such is the nature of innovation.)

Quote :

read literally we now are immune to spells, all spells as a 1+ from a 4+ and a +4 save actually a 0+ mathshammer fails me...

if you really wanted to spend 150 gc and a skill to make ONE HERO immune to magic, it would not consider that broken..

Quote :

StyrofoamKing

Call me crazy, but I don't think I've ever found a game that didn't have hole or a mid-game question

Let me tell you about this game called Chess...

Quote :

Oldcastle

I assume that Flavio/Asp had reasons to rewrite the rules as he did. I hope (but do not know) that it was to make it more fun for his group. And, if that was the goal, good for him. If, having read his rewrite, you think you will have more fun using them, then good for you.

Thanks. And yet. Most of the players in that group are NTs who prefer something more balanced than the Vanilla version. Its not that the vanilla version is broken as I have agreed with several other players, for NTs its the principle of the thing

Quote :

Admin Tom

the Rulebook is NOT perfect. But it works, is intuitive

I disagree that the rulebook is intuitive. For example, a Skaven hero with M6 has not speed skills, while another hero with M5 does have those skills. Intuitive?

Quote :

and with a few house rules and some good will, the game runs smoothly.

true. But never as smoothly as with universal 'to hit' tables

Quote :

I think the changes made are too drastic for my taste

that's cool with me. but its also essence-criticism, so I can't really answer that

Quote :

Also I think advertising this work as "the better Mordheim" is wrong.

well I'ts my opinion and the opinion of my group. of course its not cathegorically better mordhiem, (i.e. people have different tastes) but if we earnestly believe it to be better mordheim, i personally see no problem with standing by that

Mordheimer

Thanks

6.1 is up

if the document says 6.0 you need to empty your browser cache

These are house rules for a specific gaming group but not for all of Mordheim.

I will let you know this will never happen to Mordheim in an official sense.

The game is sound not matter those who say it is not.

The game is actually pretty siimple to figure out and what the intent was if you have an open mind and willing to read back archives of data on the matter.

First and foremost, I would like to say that Asp has taken this all rather well, unlike some other rule-writers out there I've seen before. All criticisms have been responded to, and there seems to be no hostility, which is rather admirable and quite mature.

However, the responses to MrBretonnia's comment I find rather hasty, hostile and unfair.

Quote :

this is exactly what is needed to shut people up who nag about a new version of the game

This to me seems not to be a mean comment. To me, it sounded like "People who suggest rules being rewritten probably won't like rewritten rules no matter what they are or even if they're an improvement or a total change of the game". It seemed not at all targetted against anyone, more so a joke on the fact that everyone is different and nothing will please everybody. So I fail to see why anyone would consider this offensive.
(I also PMed some people about being hostile, can't we all just get along?)

Now, onto futher rules discussion (please note not in order, done in the order I word them out in my head):

Quote :

Quote :

not losing 1 initiative makes Ithilmar not wanted by me
the magic resistance on Gromril armour doesn't make sense to me either. Doesn't happen in the Fantasy game, so why in this game?

Ithilmar and Gromril are considered luxury items at 150gc. They are not supposed to acutally be worth their price. That said, Ithilmar is *almost* worth it if you have a ranged, clibing hero (see above).
Gromril break with GW-business-as-usual. Again, the principle here is simplicity rather than detail.

The ithilmar explanation actually makes alot of sense, but paired up against buying Gromril armour I don't think it's balanced... theoretically, an armour made by the not-as-good-as-the-old-world's-greatest-smiths would cost alot less than armour made by the best?

I still don't understand why there is a magic resistance on gromril armours though?

Quote :

Handguns with S5 isn't odd at all, but quite natural from a balance-perspective

Just another change I'm sure would take me a few games with them to get used to

In regards to swords granting +1I being "better than spears", I am assuming that Ram has assumed that the rules for striking first are the same as the current rules, where the spear user gets to strike in initiative order when charged rather than automatically striking first. Thus, when charging a spear user it's bonus would be removed from a warrior being faster on thhe initiative anyways. But, your rules are different to that.

Quote :

Quote :

Skaven are broken, more so then normal.

Why?

The ability for them to get a ridiculously high initiative (skills and swords), coupled with their high movement, and high injury rolling abilites (skills yet again) makes them a decisvie hit when you want to close combat force, even though skaven are not stronger than a man. A strategy that wins more games than friends.

Quote :

Quote :

Middenheimers getting no pain and berzerker rather than strength makes little sense

The reasoning is that Strength is only useful in CC while No Pain is useful at range also. So this allows greater tactical variety.

Quote :

Quote :

Middenheimers are redundant,

Why?

No pain firstly is granted to either disease clan pestilens or undead, due to their unnatural state of body. Having a human immune to being concussed temporarily just makes him no longer really a human. The Strength bonus as well is extremely useful in close combat, which is where most games are decided, whether in your rule set or the original.

Quote :

Quote :

and reiklander marksmen not getting BS4 is annoying.

annoying. or balanced

If you count it as a stat not further increasable when levelling up a henchmen unit, then it is annoying. The amount of cover, moving, and other modifiers make shooting hard enough, making it harder for marksmen warbands is not very nice honestly...

Um, not sure how (or where) to comment elsewhere, except that Lances being +S3 when charging is like woah, THAT'S HUGE compared to +S2. Also, Halberds should strike after spears (if strike first remains) as halberds are more designed as bigger (and thus heavier) spears with choppy bits, which would make their use harder and slower...

Quote :

Fallen:
theoretically, an armour made by the not-as-good-as-the-old-world's-greatest-smiths would cost alot less than armour made by the best?

Its true that fluff does not hold primacy over these rules. From a fluff perspective you are right, howeverm fluff can mean many things and if it is really bugging you you might look to economic theory stating that the dwarves are closer to mordheim than the elves and therefore the supply of gromril will exceed that of ithilmar, thus driving up the price of ithilmar

Quote :

I still don't understand why there is a magic resistance on gromril armours though?

It is an allution to dwarven magic resistance and magic resistant runes which they could imbue the armour with. - do you have a better idea? (no 4+ saves!)

Quote :

In regards to swords granting +1I being "better than spears", I am assuming that Ram has assumed that the rules for striking first are the same as the current rules

Yes. Which they are *not* Spears/Halbers strike first unless the hero has the skill "lightning reflexes" or is armed with a Polearm himself

Quote :

Skaven are broken

Did you notice, that Skaven can only field 15 models under these rules, and have max ld8? - Do you still think they are broken?

Quote :

No pain firstly is granted to either disease clan pestilens or undead, due to their unnatural state of body.

well, as I said the rules are not written with fluff, but gameplay, in mind i know that not all players prefer this. some prefer a more feeling arroach to rules. - with regards to gameplay, however, it play fine

Quote :

making it harder for marksmen warbands is not very nice honestly...

did you notice, that there is no long-range modifier under these rules? - and also, that BS3 hits on 3+? - that makes shooting *very* lenient!

Quote :

Lances being +S3 when charging is like woah, THAT'S HUGE compared to +S2

but mounts take up slots from your total warband size under these rules, which makes it balanced

Halberds should strike after spears

well, as I said the rules are not written with fluff, but gameplay, in mind - the more universal the rules are, the simpler it will be. people will learn faster, play faster, and spend less time on book-keeping and rules-lawyering. - but still, I know that not everybody sees it this way