the 40k future of fantasy

[Skittelz1981]

So, with the release of End of times and 9th ediion on its way soon. accompanied by many rumours and knowing how GW works.
Can we safely assume that WHFB will be given a strong 40k injection considering its rules?

Apparently even staff from GW-shops think this is what headquarters are up to.


How many of the fanatsyplayers will make that switch to a 40k-oriented game?

 

[Patrunkenphat7]

What do you mean exactly? Like unbound armies and basically no structure to lists? I really, really hope that doesn't happen. I am a fan of combining Lords and Heroes to a cap of 50% total for characters, but apart from that I really like the current system for building armies in Fantasy. 40k spammy lists are dumb and not fun. It takes away from the tactics of playing with and against well rounded lists and becomes completely dependent on matchups.

 

[Banat]

Army structure and restrictions are part of what makes fantasy great IMO. I would refuse to play an unbound list, the possible combinations are far far too broken.

 

[Carnivale]

I'm not even sure what all the rumors mean. "Making fantasy more like 40k": does that mean Grimdark? The villains are on the rise and the heroes are rare, races in decline, infighting leading to further destruction, an issue of fluff? Or making it more like that ruleset? Because in my experience, 40k became more like Fantasy--all the moves that are going on with current 40k are ones that were "tested" out in 8th Fantasy. I think we have to be clearer about what types of "more like 40k" notions are potentially on the table, before saying yea/nay to the whole.

Cheers.

Andrew

 

[Banat]

IMO the OP means ruleset. Personally I think Fantasy is already pretty grimdark. You have Order and Disorder and neutral, but even within "Order" there's not much good to be had... just look at Teclis! High Elf posterboy sacrificed the Everqueen's daughter on purpose! Even the Lizardmen would have few qualms razing an entire city if it meant preventing a big invasion etc.

I also agree Carnivale that certain elements of 40K rules have become more like Fantasy. I mean, the added in a whole new phase, the Psychic phase which is basically the Magic phase in Fantasy.

 

[Sanguinus]

Agreed. I don't think either game is becoming more like the other, rather - and I've said this before - they seem to be homogenising the two. By minimising the difference between them, the barrier to entry is reduced making them both, at once, both accessible to new players, and for each to be accessible to players of the other, potentially increasing profit.

While it may not necessarily be a good thing (and I fully expect those who only play one or the other don't consider it such), as a player of both, I don't think it's a bad thing either.

 

[John Rainbow]

Well at least for the recent releases 40k seems to be going more Fantasy rather than Fantasy taking from 40k (at least rules wise). I can see a big argument for the introduction of allies in WFB though and it would seem like a sensible thing to expect.

 

[Banat]

There already are! You can have suspicious allies etc, they can't use the general's Inspiring Leadership amongst other rules.

 

[Skittelz1981]

Well, biggest example is that they will likely remove the Movement characteristic from units. thereby changing fantasy to its very core and pushing it towards how 40k works.
Truth be told. i really dont know much about 40k. nor does it interest me much. for some reason, that skirmish type of gameplay with few units and loads of shooting just really isnt my cup of tea.
And i would really, really dislike fantasy going in that direction.

 

[Patrunkenphat7]

Well, biggest example is that they will likely remove the Movement characteristic from units. thereby changing fantasy to its very core and pushing it towards how 40k works.
Truth be told. i really dont know much about 40k. nor does it interest me much. for some reason, that skirmish type of gameplay with few units and loads of shooting just really isnt my cup of tea.
And i would really, really dislike fantasy going in that direction.

That would be very strange, and I'm not sure I see that happening. The movement characteristic is a HUGE part of Fantasy. Think about how Dwarfs and Elves would be affected by that. I am assuming they would get army-wide rules affecting standard movement, but there is still all the M6 monstrous infantry, varying movement of different mounts, etc. I think it would be a bad move for them to get rid of the movement characteristic.

In the end, the games can never become too similar because of the simple shape of the unit bases. Square vs. circular unit bases massively impact how the two systems play differently.

 

[HERO]

I'm not sure what the OP means.

Here is what I expect from 9th Ed. Fantasy:
- Allies to be included and be the norm.
- Movement to be simplified some more, so kinda like Kings of War.
- Steadfast tweak, how exactly, I'm not sure.
- Cannonballs rework, to either decrease accuracy reduce wounds generated; same with Stonethrower.
- Less powerful death magic and kill spells; maybe bringing back wizard levels in respects to max dice they can cast as well.

 

[Skittelz1981]

What i mostly meant was a:
-simplification of rules
-major change to the movement-aspect of whfb


2 things that in my opinion will ruin the fun of whfb (for me at least and for every single person in my meta and beyond that i know)

 

[HERO]

What i mostly meant was a:
-simplification of rules
-major change to the movement-aspect of whfb


2 things that in my opinion will ruin the fun of whfb (for me at least and for every single person in my meta and beyond that i know)

Can you expand on both of these?

What do you mean by simplification of the rules? In what way? In which areas particularly? Simplification is not a bad thing, as long as it doesn't strip battlefield tactics or eliminate strategy.

What kind of major changes do you have in mind?

 

[Skittelz1981]

Major change would include rhe disappearance of Movement characteristic, hereby changing WHFB to its core.
Simplification would be the overall simplification of BRB. less rules and less AB exceptions to the BRB rules. Overall, a less complicated and exceptional ruleset to make the game easier to step into.

While i can understand the simplification, i just hope itll have no impact on tactics.
in comparison, i dont want whfb to turn into the League of Legends while DOTA or HoN is still available.

 

[HERO]

Major change would include rhe disappearance of Movement characteristic, hereby changing WHFB to its core.
Simplification would be the overall simplification of BRB. less rules and less AB exceptions to the BRB rules. Overall, a less complicated and exceptional ruleset to make the game easier to step into.

While i can understand the simplification, i just hope itll have no impact on tactics.
in comparison, i dont want whfb to turn into the League of Legends while DOTA or HoN is still available.

I don't think they're going to remove the movement characteristic. That's just completely outlandish. If you have the chance, check out Kings of War and their movement style. It's essentially the same thing as WHFB, but the rules are much more simplistic and doesn't take away from any core strategies and tactics. It just eliminates weird and wonky movement situations while making the rules simpler, and thus easier to learn and understand.

 

[najo]

Ironically 40k 1st edition was based on 2nd/3rd edition Fantasy and the Realms of Chaos books connected the two. Fantasy spells were used by greater daemons in 40k for example. 4th ed fantasy and 2nd ed 40k were still very similar systems. It wasn't until 3rd ed 40k that they stripped down the system and removed the Move characteristic.

The other irony, fantasy had allies at one point and honestly has needed them for quite some time. Chaos armies just scream to mix Warriors and Daemons together. Empire armies should have Dwarf allies. Bretonnian and Wood Elves against Beastmen and Undead. High Elves and Lizardmen against Chaos. There are so many viable allegiances that make sense and can't easily be done with the last 3 editions of the rules.

I think well implemented ally rules would be welcomed.

As for movement rules being simplified, I think we won't lose the Mv characteristics, its more likely we will get simpler rules for maneuvering, reforming and the like. Our regiments will move more like individual characters, monsters and chariots.

I welcome a streamlined system with easier to use rules as long as it still has the same depth of game play. Easy to learn, difficult to master is the sweet spot.

 

[Emicrania]

My biggest fear is the appereance of bigger,pricer,deadlier big boys that fuck up the balance of game, AS Nagash looks like is doing...

 

[John Rainbow]

There already are! You can have suspicious allies etc, they can't use the general's Inspiring Leadership amongst other rules.

I meant an even stronger implementation much more akin to the 40k version at it is now where allies are the norm in most events, not just team games.

 

[crafty0ne]

more like 40K....so Sigmar will return but be a shell of his former self? The Empire will have 17 more armies released for them, elite fighters that are supposed to represent the upper 1% of warriors and be massively outnumbered despite the fact that every game will feature them on one side of the battle field? All of them pretty much the same with troops who have 2+ ward saves all around? In addition to the standard Imperial army which is crap, but features huge steam tanks and even bigger cannons? Each army will have some type of massive flying unit that is super overpriced? (can you tell that I absolutely despise the Imperium in 40K yet?)