New Warlord Rules Book!

[Shakandara]

This is not an official reply, but based on what happened with RC07 and RC08 (and the official responses to the same question regarding those documents), you can pretty much bet that generic cards are right out. There are literally nearly 400 datacards to choose from in the just the core factions, and with Reaper's very generous proxy rules for Warlord, there is no reason that you couldn't use an existing model's stats for the spider centaur. The old customizable cards were certainly fun, but customizing a generic card with a various + and 1 modifiers cannot compare to the very complex points formula used for calculating model values (especially when a model has one or more SAs or stats with synergistics effects). Sorry, but there is a reason that no one else does it for their game... it's cool, but potentially extremely broken.

 

As for #2... that's an excellent question. Cards have become less and less a part of the Warlord game as it has evolved; the most recent blistered have either been packaged with no card whatsoever, or just the generic faction symbol on the front, and the stats on the back. These seem like they are headed they way of the dodo, but I could be wrong.

 

~v

[Gaming Glen]

I hope there is an easy way to let people use round bases. At my store Warmachine was the big thing for awhile. Now perhaps I can get them to try out Warlord with their miniatures, which might lead to sales. *ka-ching*.

 

 

 

Glad to hear about large troops being more worthy. Love my elf-army dragon miniature, but it kept dieing too fast (and not having Tactician and Spy like the other WLs was a big minus).

 

Yep, get the small metal 1"bases and blu-tac them on to your round bases.

 

Doesn't work for the WarMachine round bases, they're wider than 1" by a small margin. Only the corners of the square bases stick out from under the round ones.

[Redfeild]

This is not an official reply, but based on what happened with RC07 and RC08 (and the official responses to the same question regarding those documents), you can pretty much bet that generic cards are right out. There are literally nearly 400 datacards to choose from in the just the core factions, and with Reaper's very generous proxy rules for Warlord, there is no reason that you couldn't use an existing model's stats for the spider centaur. The old customizable cards were certainly fun, but customizing a generic card with a various + and 1 modifiers cannot compare to the very complex points formula used for calculating model values (especially when a model has one or more SAs or stats with synergistics effects). Sorry, but there is a reason that no one else does it for their game... it's cool, but potentially extremely broken.

 

As for #2... that's an excellent question. Cards have become less and less a part of the Warlord game as it has evolved; the most recent blistered have either been packaged with no card whatsoever, or just the generic faction symbol on the front, and the stats on the back. These seem like they are headed they way of the dodo, but I could be wrong.

 

~v

 

As for the first part, fair enough. As much as I loved the idea of taking a DHL figgure and creating Warlord stats for it, I did see the potential breakiness of it.

 

The second part has me kind of excited. OK, so cards may be out completely. But if not, this idea of having a generic faction symbol instead of a picture I like. Its the what unit go's first part. As I recall, each player had a generic playing card for each unit. The cards would be shuffled and each turn a card would be drawn. The card drawn would be the unit to take action. What if you did not have to draw generic playing cards? What if it was your own Warlord playing cards you were drawing? Now a faction symbol is not a generic Warlord logo but it is a step in the right direction. But if the cards go, I don't think I'll miss them too much.

 

A little side note on the cards. My spectral hound looks very different from its card. The painted figgures on the cards are great, but I think that some people would feel compeled to paint the figgure like the picture. On the flip side, I dose sometimes help seeing another persons interpitation to inspire your own.

[WolfLord]

I just looked at the beta rules and things look good. My only problem is that my army may have been nuked with the new rules. I have Sisters of the Blade, led by Vasyl and I used changed of heart for Overlord crossbowmen. Oh, well, I guess I'll just have to by more Koborlas.

[Heisler]

It looks like Sisters will have their own list later in the year. So you may need a new list for the moment but they will come back so just think of it as your opportunity to start that second army.

[GreyHorde]

I've been reading the news and this thread, and downloaded the beta files, but haven't given them a good look, yet. Still, I am very glad to see Warlord settling down into a solid 2nd edition instead of the annual ritual of re-working datacards, errata, expansion...lather, rinse, repeat. I know, it comes at a cost of one more major revision, but if it's the last one for a while, that seems a small price to pay for some long-term stability.

[simombo]

Is the beta rules accessible for mere mortals like myself now? I'd like to check them out.

 

I really like the game, apart from a few things that I hope the 2nd edition will amend:

 

- Rules for morale has previously been limited to the occasional DIS check from spells and fearsome opponents. I like the combat rules, but the fact that most games are fought to the last model is tedious and kind of silly. A simple rule that forces you to make a DIS check for your models when you loose a certain amount of models/damage tracks from a troop (25%/50%) would speed up the game and create a more dynamic gameplay and involve risk assesments when using beat up troops to take objectives and the like. Which leads to the next point...

 

- Scenarios. Just a few standard, official ones that would change the way you have to play and create your army. The standard slug fest is ok, but without objectives and goals you might as well (sometimes) line up the data cards against each other and roll the dice. Being a skirmish game, scenarios really are necessary.

 

- Troop coherency or not? I've heard a rumour that the new rules will dispense with this completely. Which is ok I guess, but why have leader troop capacity at all then?

 

- Fluff. Not everybody needs it, but I really need to know what I'm fighting for (call me old fashioned).

 

Has any of these areas been given any thought in the rules making process?

[Stubbdog]

I guess each person will have their own idea of what is fun and what is not.

 

One of the staples of the new Warlord thru out our playtesting has been how successful we have been at having games for the most part come down to only a few models on the table, no matter how lopsided the game feels early on. I cant count the number of games where I thought after turn 3 that all hope was lost and I was gonna get slaughtered, only to have fortunes turn and I come back to win the game, or vice versa. The great games coming down to that final stand to figure out who is the victor instead of having the game decided way before the true end of the match.

 

Now, having said that.. I can also say that I agree that scenarios also make a game fun and different and breaks away from the continuous dogfight that happens in normal battles. To that end, I can only respond that it depends on you the fan and customer. The design team has several things in the works for the future growth of Warlord. But, the budget and fruition of those future items depends on the success of WL 2 in the initial release.

 

As for troop coherency and group wide DIS checks and such, those are ideas that come in to play much more on the epic scaled version of the game (hint hint) than the skirmish level.

[Rastl]

I won't have an issue making my scenarios available (if Reaper peeps allow) as I test them out to be useful. Maybe others can do the same thing.

 

I spent some time this weekend reading over the new rules and it's going to take me a while to put it all together since things are so changed from the last edition. It's not a bad thing at all. It's just something that will take me time and playing.

 

From what I've been able to absorb to this point I'm seeing a lot more streamlined play, fewer SA overall but more useful ones, and to me a slightly overwhelming list of model states. I know they won't apply in all circumstances but I'll still need to keep the book at hand.

 

The Non-Repeatable actions took some back-and-forth reading to fully comprehend but once I got it through my skull they make a lot of sense and will greatly enhance the special abilities. Having to choose between invoking a SA and performing combat was kind of frustration in the last edition. Now I can do both but I can't do a Repeatable action. Good deal.

[wildger]

I am extremely pleased that square bases are still used. All my figures have decorated bases and they were super-glued to the slot with putty filled in. It will be very hard to change to a round base. Besides, round bases do not work well with monster figures and calvary, no matter what games you play.

[Warpaint]

Hi Folks,

 

i couldnt found the daughters of Skadi anywhere in the Beta.

I hope they will still belong to the Dwarves, or will they be Part of the Sisters?

 

 

 

1st Post. Please excuse my english. I´m a german Guy.

[wildbill]

Hi Folks,

 

i couldnt found the daughters of Skadi anywhere in the Beta.

I hope they will still belong to the Dwarves, or will they be Part of the Sisters?

 

 

 

1st Post. Please excuse my english. I´m a german Guy.

 

I am not a Reaper peep, but having been a part of the playtest group, those models will still be part of the Dwarves, just not the Dwarves you are used to. Confused yet?

 

I promise that they will make a comeback.

 

Wild Bill

[shakhak]

@Simombo

Lot's of good questions

 

I don't know if there is going to be an open beta, perhaps Gus can answer that.

 

Disipline has became a larger part of the game, but not in how you suggest. There are more SAs that use it.

 

I don't know if scenarios will be in the core rule book, but you can bet your pants that you'll see a lot more scenario type of stuff fleshed out down the road.

 

There is no troop coherency. Leaders have capacities that vary and actions that only they may perform which helps them stand out.

 

There will be fluff. Lots of delicious model descriptions for you to sink your teeth into.

[Warpaint]

Thanks for that fast answer Wild Bill.

 

Sounds like Sublist

[Vil-hatarn]

I'm having a mixed reaction to the number of SAs and model states as well...mostly the significant number of melee SAs, the rest are easy enough to keep track off. But maybe it's not as extreme as it seems on reading in play.