Alternate Club/Axe Setup: Which Would You Use More?

yes it is doing well shields especially and armor is becoming useful without being overpowered.

we have been using 4 different warbands so far - dwarves, reiklanders, posessed and skaven. all of them have played a few games

the dwarf noble is an absolute beast as he wears gromril armor and carries a shield, but it seems balanced.

That is how it should be, an armored rock. That is what makes the difference of playing a dwarf warband (or at least what it should)... I think i'll try on my next campaign.

Thanks

By the way, do you play with the -1 to hit (dual wield) rule?

we do. I like it.
The rules Im trying to put in our group are
Shields +2 save in cc
Armor modifiers start at str5
-1 to hit when using two weapons
a combat skill to negate the dual wield penalty
also I gave warbands the option to have 1 hero switch 1 skill list for another(I have a mutant crossbowman)

after maybe 10 games i think were going to different warbands. I want to be able to test out my mutated mercenaries by then.

I would think the shields = +2 in CC rule combined with the -1 to hit rule for two weapons combined would pretty much have everyone turn to handweapon and shield and ignore the two weapon option (except maybe for a warrior whose weapon skill was so high he'd pretty much always still hit on a 4+). Is that the case, Dmig, or does two weapons still seem a fairly viable option?

Well, if there is a skill that negates the dual wield penalty, then DW can be a viable way to equip any hero that starts with experience... I'm trying the thing this weekend to see how it works. It indeed seems more balanced than no penalty for DW and no +2 WS for wearing shield...

Our current armor/DW is the following:

1. All body armors grant an additional +1 AS against HtH attacks. Body armors retain their original costs.
2. An AS roll of 1 always fails.
3. Toughened Leathers grants a total AS 6+ against HtH (counting the above bonus), no AS against missiles, and stacks with shield.
4. Shield cost is 3gc.
5. Off-hand attacks suffer a -1 S (Manic Warrior Combat Skill removes this penalty; Manic Warrior is added to some models from the start).
6. Daggers suffer a -1 S (rather than granting a +1 AS to opponent) [this was taken from Asp's rules].

Result:

1. DW is less effective, especially with the starting free dagger. An S3 warrior with an off-hand dagger can no longer cause a critical (and can no longer bypass the armor of) a T3+ opponent.
2. Armor retains its expensiveness, but has a bump in HtH effectiveness.
3. The entry cost to armor (shield) is the same as the entry cost for a more-effective DW weapon (club).
4. We have a mix of DW and shields now. Even those who use DW will get armor when they have the extra crowns.

I don't like the -1 hit on both DW attacks, as this actually penalizes higher-Attack profiles who use DW. I also don't like increasing shield's AS (though we used that for a while in playtesting) - doing so makes it more effective than Light Armor and just as effective as Heavy Armor.

Back to the thread topic - a +1 S to axes on a hit roll of 6 may indeed be overkill using other official rules, as Asp has noted, and I haven't thought of another possibility. We implemented it as part of a Critical Hit system (used along with a simplified Critical Wound system inspired by Asp and Mordheimer) to give the variety of Advanced Critical Hits without the additional Critical Wound roll. Those concerned with sword effectiveness will be happy to know that swords get the same Critical Hit Effect as Axes. Club's Critical Hit Effect is only to make the opponent suffer a -1WS for the current HtH round.

2-5 stunned for clubs is pretty cool but what about dwarves and models with the no pain special rule? 2-5 stunned on clubs makes clubs relatively more effective against dwarves than models without the hard to kill special rule. Otherwise I really do like the idea a lot.

Wykdhunt: "I also don't like increasing shield's AS (though we used that for a while in playtesting) - doing so makes it more effective than Light Armor and just as effective as Heavy Armor."

Historically, I expect that would be right - shields have a good chance of blocking blows, where armor might keep you from taking damage but more likely would just reduce the damage (I do not even pretend to be an expert on this sort of thing). However, in game terms this is an interesting variation of the +2 in CC for shields we have been using (taken from the WH rules). (Being too lazy to go look, I expect that relatively speaking shields are more costly in WH than in Mordheim). It does indeed make shields better than light armor (which cost 4x as much) and as good as heavy armor (10x the cost of a shield).

On the other hand, moving the +1 save to armor instead of shields goes back to making 2-weapons the default choice, unless you make another change to compensate (which many of you have of course done). Being on the conservative side with adding/changing rules, I am inclined just to keep the shields as the bumped armor, to avoid having to add this rule because I added that rule...slippery slopes and all that. Why, if you aren't careful in no time at all you have rewritten most of the rules. Wait, some of you have, haven't you? And they probably work pretty well, too. But like I said, I tend toward conservative modifications.

I will mention the armor +1 instead of shields to our group. Groups.

I do like the -1 Str to the off hand change to 2-weapon fighting better than -1 to hit with both weapons, which is far too much of a nerf, I think.

wyldhunt wrote:

5. Off-hand attacks suffer a -1 S (Manic Warrior Combat Skill removes this penalty; Manic Warrior is added to some models from the start).

What about a Skaven with 2 paws? or a Skaven wielding a sword with the tail?

under vanilla ive never seen axe used as much as club

Dual wielding has still been pretty effective in the games Ive played as normally its a 5+ to hit when DWing still giving a better chance of hitting than 4+ with one weapon, and the chance to hit twice.

Maybe the next time I try playtesting I will use the -1str in off hand, although im going to keep the shield rule as otherwise I just dont see shields getting used and DW remaining the default

"Dual wielding has still been pretty effective in the games Ive played
as normally its a 5+ to hit when DWing still giving a better chance of
hitting than 4+ with one weapon, and the chance to hit twice."

Yes, but you are also losing +1 (or +2 if you use the common house rule) of armor save because your forgo the use of a shield.

To be honest, we haven't had the shield modification in play enough for me to know for sure, but it does look like just the adjustment to shields has produced a good mix of warriors with weapon and shield and 2-weapon warriors. If in the long term it looks like most people still default to two weapons, we'll probably try one of the nerfs frequently mentioned. Of the various house rules I have read, the two that seem most reasonable to me are -1WS for both attacks and -1 Str for the off-hand attack.