• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

9th Age Discussion of OpenHammer (ETC) and Ninth Age (Swedish Comp)

Pinktaco
Scar-Veteran

Pinktaco

Vessel of the Old Ones
Messages
2,696
Likes Received
879
Trophy Points
113
OpenHamner (ETC):

http://www.openhammer.org/index_en.html

We'll be working also to translate the already playtested Compendium in time for the ETC, which contains:
- special rules
- weapons, armors and other equipment
- common magic items
- spells
- prayers
... and ...
- 18 armies rulesets including all GW and Mantic models (yes, we're working on the AoS models rules as well)

We also are approaching to launch the project on Kickstarter and would like to stay open as now to suggestions, material proposals (especially the swedish guys from the "ninth" topic) in order to make all this mature and go mainstream. Have a nice reading

Ninth Age (Swedish Comp):
http://www.the-ninth-age.com/

1. Rewriting rules for broken parts of the game, keeping the parts that works and changing the parts that do not
2. Small updates to rules with minor issues
3. New lores (keep some spells, around 30-40% new spells for each lore, updates to attributes, casting values etc where needed)
4. New magic items (both common and race specific, again keep some, add some new stuff)
5. New points costs for very strong/weak units (maybe rules changes in a few cases)
6. Possibly add new unit entries to match new models released for AoS.
 
Last edited:
... So are there any major difference?
 
"winds of magic" = sum of all wizard levels + D3, dispel = sum of all wizard levels.
Line of sight = must see base of enemy partially or fully.
Creating your army appear quite different. There are "elite", "heavy" and "light" units and "characters" and "elite characters". There are still points, but you pick a set amount of units (who now have a maximum amount of models per unit I think).
Cannons = D3 wounds, no armour save allowed.
Great cannons = D3 + 1 wounds, no armour save allowed.
I *think* models allowed to attack = front rank + models in B2B with front rank (1 supportive rank). All attacks are allowed in second rank so all hail 2A + PF saurus warriors. Until we see the point allocation.

Stats are same sh1t different color. So strenght = ST and stuff like that.
 
Last edited:
So does this use the point costs from the Army books, or will there be made new "army books"?
 
I'm guessing new books with new points
 
So does this make our brainstorming on a modified 8th edition moot?
 
You know I'm not an actual representative of neither one of those groups, I'm just forwarding whatever I find :D

With that said no it's not mood. I know Swedish Comp will have a beta test of their own version in August and I'm guessing that even though ETC have already created a draft they're still welcoming suggestions.

On top of that we're also experts on our own army so I'd say that we more than others should be able to create a list of suggestions, however it's kinda hard when we're not quite sure where this is going. I mean all our current knowledge is based on 8th edition BRB/AB and changing the smallest of things mean that our army will change as well. Great cannons doing D3+1 wounds is HUGE for our monsters. We have no idea what the new magic items will look like and we have absolutely no clue how the new magic lores will look like. Those two can change the way our army works and compeltely change the meta and what "tier" we're at. Maybe they'll tone down 1+ saves and 4+ wards which will change our cowboys and thus the overall effectiveness of our army.
 
There are a lot of aspects about this that i dislike immensely. It feels too different.

The whole weather thing kind of throws me off too.

Having 3 dice, at most, more than your opponent seems kind of weird when it comes to magic.

I dunno. Its very extensive. But also very different. I dont know if thats a good thing.
 
Last edited:
I managed to translate it via google translation so it's rather rough, but from the first look it appear to be a "nerf" compared to current stats. 320pts for slann, 170pts for OB and only 5+ save. Carno is 200pts.

Saurus and skinks appear to cost the same, cameleons 11pts, kroxigors 55pts and have impact hit, CoRs 28pts and 3+ save although we can gain "large sheild so I'm guessing for 2pts for likely 30pts for 2+ save, 15pts templeguard (16 with regular shield and 18 with large shield). 70pts salamander..

Mean while CoK are at 25pts, witch elfs at 12pts, executioners 13pts <.<

It's obviously hard to fully grasp whether or not it's an actual nerf, but considering the units and points are roughly the same it would appear like it.
 
Last edited:
Hmm.. So at 18pts a templeguard have a 2+ armour save and with how there appear to be a focus on smaller units this might work out well.
With that said if we cannot use said shield in close combat it'll be all for nothing. The unit will then overall be weaker (no 3+ against shooting) and still at 15pts standard.

Magic items appear to have been severely reduced and less effective. 1+ saves will not be that common and I don't believe there'll be any common 4+ ward saves and hardly any other way of gaining better strenght except with mundane weapons. I'm thinking that great weapon won't be much of an advantage because we'll lose the big shield (+2 save) in close combat and our scaly skin on OBs have been reduced to 5+ and mount to +1 so with a heavy armour (magic armour) would grant us 2+.

**EDIT**

Yup halbards count as 2-handed and thus guards have been nerfed. Also spears and halbards grants a +1 initative against other non-long weapon units (swords). Saurus warriors can gain a 3+ save which is neat I suppose, they can also use pikes although I'm not sure what it does, the translation is: "+1 Force against models in office on the front
 
I just figured that since halbards gain +1 initative the bastiladon might still give +1 buff to nearby units and we can thus reach I4 with the guards. I'm still not sold on the saurus warriors.
 
I'm not sold on those changes, and I hope they change, Having oldblood with a scaly skin of 5 is wierd, and increase in points. But I guess we will see if something changes.
 
I think this is where this type of system fails. Let's say they nerf our book (in comparison to others), why would any of us decide to go along with this rule set.

Things have to be balanced slowly and systematically or the majority of the community will reject it. I'd say start with the BRB and FAQ updates first.
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
I think this is where this type of system fails. Let's say they nerf our book (in comparison to others), why would any of us decide to go along with this rule set.

Things have to be balanced slowly and systematically or the majority of the community will reject it. I'd say start with the BRB and FAQ updates first.
Click to expand...
I'll be honest and say that I was surprised to see stats for all armies completed. I didn't see predatory fighter anywhere, but it could be there.

So the big thing is that we obviously haven't tested it nor compared it to all armies. My initial impression is that this appear to be s clear nerf, but I'm baffled as to why Kroxigors needed s point increase? The issue here is that it wasn't a favoured unit to begin with and increasing the points will irk out most people.

I agree that they should've focused on the BRB and done very slight changes at best to the armies. I feel these changes to us are much more than that. For instance you can at most have 25 models in an elite unit which mean that our templeguards can now longer rely on numbers, but they also didn't see a stat buff which mean that they now appear to have a tougher time going up against stuff like executioners.

Now do remember that all of this is what I've seen. Other could check it out as well and have a different perspective on the changes and maybe better understand the reason or maybe find rules I haven't seen. For instance gaining ASF in the charge would change much for our guys.
 
It's nice to see that with the introduction to AoS people have keep the aim in improving the 8th edition. However for me this is looking to be getting out of hand as there are so many different people trying to introduce their own views and rules at the same time and without really discussing with each other. Although I believe this is what was to be expected before we get one set of views to build on something bigger.

The thing I dislike the most in these new rulesets is the need to change every single thing at once. I feel that people should just focus first on correcting the most absurd things in the core rulebook and work their way out of there. When you change everything at once there is no way of telling if it will make things better or worse.

That being said I still look forward for what people come up with :)

BR
Agrem
 
lets wait until it is translated properly, it would be weird if they nerfed units like kroxigors...our army book changes are dependant on brb changes...
 
i'm italian, i could translate it if you want.
I have to say that coming from 8th edition our army definetely doesn't need a nerf, so if they're nerfing us i have strong doubts regarding this project and its balance. It would be sad (expecially after the "OMG WE GOT BUFFED" moment AoS gave us)
 
we would also have to look at what happened to other armies, because every armys power is relative (it needs to be compared to others to realy know how strong it is)...

if you have the time to translate that would be great...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top