• Roll-up! Roll-up! Come one and all the fantastic Turning the World to Darkness painting competition. Welcome to any skill level, you can find out more here.
  • It's time once again to ferret out those murderous vampires in a new VAU - Vampires Amongst Us. A cross between Cluedo and a roleplay, sometimes gory and often hilarious! Find out more here.

Alternate fan-made armies

Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
708
#1
I guess alot of you will already know these Fanmade books by Matthias Eliasson but some also might not.

Ive had knowledge of their existence for quite a while now and looked through them several times, although it would be better qualified as 'glancing through'. Taking in the major rules and looking at unit statlines but not going in much deeper.

Alot of them seem quite alright, definately not overpowered in a general sense. No one can contest the fact that he has put in alot of work and effort into creating armybooks (updated to 8th edition) that reflect the style and content of all the regular GW-armybooks.


Now what i would like to know is;
Has anyone here actually played with any of these armies and tested it for its viability. IF so i would love to see nice long posts with your experiences in it and which armies you have played.


One that has my real attention is Nippon (being a fan of feudal japan)i really like the rulesets he has created, it kind of tends towards Vampire/undead rules tbh :D


Here are the two links for good view/download possibilities. First is his own blog, second is scribd (obviously)
http://warhammerarmiesproject.blogspot.nl/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33025584/Warhammer-Nippon
 

MasterSpark

Nostalgian
Staff member
True Blood
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
4,691
#2
I haven't played with them but I was right about to start an army of them. I had lined up a number of good miniatures to use, and I'll share the list with you for your inspiration.

Wargames Factory for samurai (foot/mounted) and ashigaru.

Perry Miniatures for ninjas, fighting monks and the flaming arrow.

GW for sumos (needs reworking).

Urban War game for kabuki dolls (hard to find, though).

I know you didn't ask for miniature tips, but I hope it'll be helpful anyway. :)
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
708
#3
Well, all info regarding these books is welcome. Somehow there is barely anything on youtube except for two clips about Nippon army.... As if no one has ever bothered playing one of these armybooks.
Id play by simply using my VC army and making a proxy of every unit just to know how it works.
 

Blutsauger

Vampire Count
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
1,091
#7
I think most people struggle to accept some GW rules, as bent and twisted as they can be. But at least they have a veneer of being official, which makes them palatable no matter how bad they taste. But unofficial rules have historically been broken, over-powered, undercosted, poorly thought out the source of many arguments so people are naturally wary of them, and most groups very unlikely to allow players to use them. A lot of groups don't even let people use FW rules, and they're GW official!
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
708
#8
I understand that but,

Since you pointed out yourself, GW rules are as broken as anything else, they may idd be official, many of the AB have unbalanced-undercosted-overpriced-OP-etc rulesets.
I just have a hard time to imagine that the team that worked on these alternate armybooks would allow themselves to fall into that same pit of bad rulewriting.
Honestly i didnt read any rule in Nippon, Norse or Cathay (havent really read the others) that i felt was overpowered or completely ludicrous.
Obviously sometimes things on paper turn out differently but this is an entire enterprise with over 40 people involved in writing, editing, playtesting etc. This is pretty much professional armybook writing done for free, out of pure love for the Warhammer world.

An AB can never be 100% perfect and something or some rule will always be a little off, writing a really balanced book and set of rules is the hardest part by far in creating a game, especially since you have to take into account all the other armies and their own specific rules and synergy.

I really do believe that the guys involved in the writing of these books really did all they could to work out a balanced, fun, fluffy, stable AB every time. Also this is the work of years, with updating. So its not some quick half-wit job.

I just really hoped to find people that might have played with the rulesets within their own META, i still hope some people did and will answer ±D

In my meta there are maybe 1 or 2 guys willing enough to try these out, just for the fun of it but obviously many are against it, simply because its not officially stamped GW...
 

Ripper

Grave Guard
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Messages
224
#9
I know I would be annoyed playing against a fandex when I have to deal with how awful VC core is. Fandexes may not be OP, but they don't have any units that straight up suck, let alone an entire section of the book that sucks a large bag of dicks like the VC core section does.

I would love to make a VC fandex with great weapon skellies and zombies that behave the way I like to think of zombies from a childhood spent watching romero movies:

M 3 WS 1 BS 1 S4 T3 W1 I1 A1 Ld4 ASL and a rule called "sever the head" or something like that where no matter what, your opponent needs a natural roll of 5+ to wound them to represent how they only die via being decapitated. I'd gladly pay 10 point a model for these zombies, I don't think they'd be OP, but my opponents wouldn't want to play against them.
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
708
#12
Ripper said:
I know I would be annoyed playing against a fandex when I have to deal with how awful VC core is. Fandexes may not be OP, but they don't have any units that straight up suck, let alone an entire section of the book that sucks a large bag of dicks like the VC core section does.

I would love to make a VC fandex with great weapon skellies and zombies that behave the way I like to think of zombies from a childhood spent watching romero movies:

M 3 WS 1 BS 1 S4 T3 W1 I1 A1 Ld4 ASL and a rule called "sever the head" or something like that where no matter what, your opponent needs a natural roll of 5+ to wound them to represent how they only die via being decapitated. I'd gladly pay 10 point a model for these zombies, I don't think they'd be OP, but my opponents wouldn't want to play against them.


I just dont see your point, nor do i see the added value of this post to the subject.
Your reasons for being annoyed at fandex are your perceptions of our very sucking core. You despise a fandex for not making very bad core?
I just dont see how this adds up... If a book is wellwritten and balanced, it is a good book.


e.g.:

M WS BS S T W I A Ld
Slave 4 2 2 3 3 1 3 1 3
Slavemaster 4 3 3 3 3 1 3 1 7
TROOP TYPE: Infantry.
SPECIAL RULES:
Slaves: Slaves do not cause panic to any unit, other
than other units of Slaves. They may not be joined by
any characters. Slaves may never be Steadfast, joined
by any characters, and are not affected by the Sultan's
Holy Commands special rule.
Slavemaster: The Slavemaster is deployed in the rear
rank of the unit, and may be the only model in the rear
rank. He counts as a unit champion in all respects. If
the Slavemaster is killed, the Slaves must take a Panic
test at the start of every turn.

These cost 3 points, as much as a zombie.... I wouldnt call this anything close to good, except at fulfilling the same role as zombies... tarpitting and dying.... they dont even have steadfast, which makes them worse than zombies.

This comes from the book "Araby"
 

Ripper

Grave Guard
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Messages
224
#13
I apologize if you inflected tone to my post where it wasn't intended.

What I mean is, I would find it frustrating playing against a non-official book with an official book because there are things I'd like to change in the VC book which I can't. And just because I think those changes that I want to make are fair, doesn't mean my opponent, who's taken the time and challenge to build a list from a book he had no input in, is going to appreciate playing against a modified VC book that I feel better fits the theme/spirit of the army.

I gave that zombie example, because, to me, it would make our core much more useful if they were harder to kill as you could throw your knights into a flank, and while your zombies wouldn't be able to kill much, at least you wouldn't be losing 30 a turn and crumbling your knights in the process. This would make it a lot more fun for both players as your buddies' witch elves wouldn't just get stuck in a unit of 100 zombies all game while the rest of your army just avoided his killy unit because you couldn't afford to fight them for fear of crumbling.

But every time you won with these new, improved zombies, you're opponent would have that nagging feeling in the back of their mind that you only won because you were using a fandex that wasn't, perhaps, balanced properly.

I'm not trying to be rude. I'm just explaining why I would be annoyed if someone brought a fanmade book to the table.

If you want to run a fanmade book, fine. But just know that if you bring that to the table, a lot of other players are going to be annoyed by it.
 

Blutsauger

Vampire Count
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
1,091
#14
Skittelz1981 said:
I understand that but,

Since you pointed out yourself, GW rules are as broken as anything else, they may idd be official, many of the AB have unbalanced-undercosted-overpriced-OP-etc rulesets.
I just have a hard time to imagine that the team that worked on these alternate armybooks would allow themselves to fall into that same pit of bad rulewriting.
I think the key is that GW is an neutral third party. If I write my own fandex, I'm not impartial.
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
708
#15
yea im aware that its not orthodox and i understand what you say about it not being official and therefore might raise alot of suspicion.
But, with official books, you also dont have a say in it how they turn out.
The fact that you want to change things about VC has nothing to do with a group of people trying to create an Armybook about a race that exists only in rare fluff and adding it to the World of Warhammer. Something which you can be sure GW will never be doing.
Like an AB from GW, you will simply have to trust them to make it as balanced, fair and coherent as possible.


What i really would like to achieve with a post like this, is bringing these AB under more popular attention and hopefully acceptation as being a fair, playable races that do fit into the choices we already have.


I approach these AB as a mod made by fans for computergames. The best games ever made are either mods or professionalised versions of a mod (counterstrike and the entire fps community, dota and the entire spinoffrage, dayz and the entire survivalhorror gaming), the list goes on about fanmade games that prove to be more fun than the original one.

Ofc it is a bit different but my point is that, reading through these fanmade codexes.... they just really look good and wellbuilt. I just hope that people can put aside their predetermined mindset about fandex and approach it as a true AB made by people that really want to serve the community and give something extra.
Looking down upon fandex simply because its fandex makes little sense imo, GW doesnt do a good job at writing books (Tombkings being the major example amongst others)
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
708
#16
@ Blutsauger, i disagree with you on that.
GW is a neutral party? i hardly think so. I dont even think any of their writers are neutral.

+ what this team of fandexwriters have done is not just one fandex about the one race they would really love to see... They wrote about all the races we know exist but GW simply doesnt want to spend time, money and effort into it. That goes far beyond any will to create a cuddly fandex.
This is a team of people writing Armybooks that fit fluff, rules and balance, im pretty sure you cannot get closer to impartial
 

Ripper

Grave Guard
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Messages
224
#17
Well you seem to have your heart set on using the fandex, so go ahead. I just think you might be disappointed to be missing out on the tournament/semi-competitive scene and possibly even on local campaigns and gaming clubs.

If you're just playing in a small group of friends, you should have fun though. Provided your friends allow it.
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
708
#18
http://warhammerarmiesproject.blogspot.nl/



Dunno but this does more in terms of updating/information/ etc than GW will ever be doing :D
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
304
#19
The slow grow I'm part of has allowed these codexes, but we have a strong anti-GW tendency... many of the players use Mantic models, other lines, etc. However, no one chose to go with the non-official codexes, which is a shame, because I agree with that Skittelz that they are quite well-made, almost showing the amount of polish that we see in official releases.

I wouldn't play one, however, for two reasons:

  • First, because I tend to move around a lot, and I know a new gaming group probably won't be as relaxed as my current group, which is fairly noncompetitive by most standards, and lets you mess around with rules, and so on. A true beer and pretzel group, mine.
  • I don't like having to give an in depth explanation of what my army is. I built an Imperial Guard regiment using the Ork codex, once (a fallout-esque, biker-raider gang), and I always have to explain who and what they are (Necromundan conscripts fighting on Armageddon). And, people usually stop listening after about five seconds. They just don't want to hear your ten minute diatribe about the fluff origin of your models, and I can't blame them. So since then, I try to play fairly established armies.
Now, that's not to say I wouldn't love to play against one of these armies... and if I settled down in an area with other fluffaholics, I could probably persuade myself into doing one of them myself. But even then, I'd probably rather do something more mainstream...
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
708
#20
Why does it have to be fluffy?

I would just explain what units are and what they do, pure RAW statlining and ruleconsideration. Who cares about the fluff of an armybook when youre playing a battle.

'these are swordsmen with these rules, and those stats' 'this is a monster that can do x and has x stats' etc.

Its basically like being relatively new and playing against an army you never played before. I dont need to hear the background setting of the army, i just need to know what units can do so i can deploy accordingly and anticipate.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
81
#21
I´ve played with & against the Dogs of War list & found it to be really well made, nothing OP, nothing too bad, maybe except the Hobgoblin Wolfriders animosity being a bit extreme. I recommend trying out a few games with the different lists & if you & your friends appreciate them, then screw what is legal & what isn´t. The most important rule is to have fun!
 

Duke Danse Macabre

The Duke
True Blood
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
3,711
#22
Personally the only one i really use is kislev, mainly because they were a small supplement force before but they are pretty much part of the empire in the first place steadfast allies.
I hope in time if anything we will see them come back in a campaign book or some other form.
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2011
Messages
64
#23
I don't mind fan made armies but I just think that trying to stay 'fluffy' with units thigns tend to become better than otehr armies. I looked into stating and Estalia army.

Estalian Steel- Units have the Armour piercing Special Rule
Tactical Supremecy - Roll £d6 for deciding leadership tests, discarding the hgihest.
Most units in the army have Either one or the other if not both..thats not to mention the 8pt core unit with both...and WS 4.

I'm a fan of the GW alternative lists that they've published, the Vampire Pirates, aything out of the Storm of Chaos book heck even the Hell Pit army list is cool. It jsut feels like fan made armies are better than the regualr armies and its becasue they want to encoruage you to play them, and they are often much better than there GW counterparts.

its just my opinion and i'll admit I have't skimmed through other books, but correct me if i'm wrong..Araby has camals...these cause fear in horse mounted units? thats almost every Normal GW army suffering against their arabian counterpart and it doesn't feel balanced.
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
708
#24
I don't mind fan made armies but I just think that trying to stay 'fluffy' with units thigns tend to become better than otehr armies. I looked into stating and Estalia army.

Estalian Steel- Units have the Armour piercing Special Rule
Tactical Supremecy - Roll £d6 for deciding leadership tests, discarding the hgihest.
Most units in the army have Either one or the other if not both..thats not to mention the 8pt core unit with both...and WS 4.

I'm a fan of the GW alternative lists that they've published, the Vampire Pirates, aything out of the Storm of Chaos book heck even the Hell Pit army list is cool. It jsut feels like fan made armies are better than the regualr armies and its becasue they want to encoruage you to play them, and they are often much better than there GW counterparts.

its just my opinion and i'll admit I have't skimmed through other books, but correct me if i'm wrong..Araby has camals...these cause fear in horse mounted units? thats almost every Normal GW army suffering against their arabian counterpart and it doesn't feel balanced.

Why do camels causing fear in horses not feel balanced? How many units of horses does an army field? how many units of camels do araby armies field? its just a minor advantage in cavalry, which are not the best units in the meta anyway. Our entire army causes fear in cavalry..... I dont think the Camels are that much overpowered in that regard... they cause fear in horses... so ill have to try and pitch them against horses everytime? Not really a big advantage imo.

Estalia has armourpiercing? -1 to as... nice doesnt compare to armywide ASF if you ask me and its only for hand weapons.....
Estalia can roll 3d6 on leadership test and discard the highest result? yeah really nice but its only for reforms, redirects, rally and march..... really not overpowered.
Place it next to an elf of any kind with ASF and their racial secondary combat ability and i dont think Estalia has that much of an upperhand anymore.



Ofc i havent read all them into detail but from what ive read, theyre good armies. Well designed without being Overpowered. Just good and that can be matched by the stronger GW armies. Which is very good imo.
 

Banat

Varghulf
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
791
#25
I ultimately hope to convert a unit of skellies into skelly pikeman, using the pike rules in the Dogs of War book. Fluffwise my army is from Tilea.
 
Top