Warmaster Revolution project

[Aldhick]

Hey guys. Just wanna to present our Czech WM community based project.

 Warmaster Revolution is a project supported by Czech Warmaster community. It aims to implement Warmaster Ancients rules into Warmaster Fantasy. Main motivation for this project is the fact (stated by Rick Priestly himself), that WMA is in fact second edition of Warmaster that was firstly released for historical environment. Unfortunately for us who love the Old World, the version for fantasy setting has never come to light. This fact motivated us to check WMA rules to see how would have the second Warmaster edition looked like.
Though Warmaster is very well working rules system, it is obvious, that WMA are simply advanced version especially regarding combat. Apart from introduction of skirmishers and light cavalry which was not planned for fantasy setting due to miniatures (also confirmed by Rick), it clears all the blind spots that occurred in WM. The main differences are in limitation of number of orders, number of combat rounds and introduction of new infantry support rules which make infantry (unlike in WM) adequate tactical force. For these changes, the supremacy of cavalry over infantry is gone and the course of events tends to go less random, not mentioning bunch of minor rules adjustments making situations clearer. 
 You can find more info about the project and pdf with the rules here: http://warmaster-cz.blogspot.cz/2016/11/warmaster-revolution-introduction.html

[Stormwind]

Very interesting, I will read this better after I come back from work!

Also I shall share it on my local gaming forum.

[empireaddict]

@aldhick, thanks for flagging this up and for the work that has been done.  I have just read the rule-set and it's very interesting.  I will be discussing it with my fellow tournament organisers in the coming weeks.

[Ole]

Great Stuff, Thank you.

We used to play a lot with a similar ruleset. You might need to adjust the unit point costs. because the way you play the swarm units are a lot more powerful. And monster like the hydra are less effective.

Ole

[Aldhick]

Thanx guys.

The point cost issue was already brought up in connection wiht French WME rules some years back (here: http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=4830.0 )

Our experience is exactly as what Vincent wrote back then:

Thank you for summarizing, Vincent, it's very useful for non-frenchspeakers!!.

How does the rule of supporting before removing the killed stands work in Warmaster Fantasy?.

Do you think it's unbalanced regarding the armies with cheaper infantry units?.

I'm not totally sure of that change :-(

You are welcome

No it doesn't unbalance the game. In fact it does re-balance the infantry vs knights game without unbalancing other aspects. You could suspect that it is unbalance with a) very string infantry (chaos warriors becoming unstoppable e.g.) or b) very cheap infantry (giving too much of an advantage for low cost) but the 3-round limit re-balance both perfectly it perfectly, and by the way, bad infantry is alway bad I've played with/against Chaos, Dwarven, Lizardmen, Skavens and Tomb Kings where you can find a lot of very string and/or very cheap infantry and never found balance a problem with this rule.

And I can say that all french players I know who tested WMMF now plays with it rather than with plain old WM just because it is more balance and as more depth without increased complexity.

The philosophy is to compile original rules from WM and WMA without any further unnecessary adjustments. That's why are our house rules in separate chapter as optional. If we had any suspection it was inevitable to touch such sensitive issue as point costs, we wouldn't probably even started the project.

[Dark Omen]

At last!  This is what I have been waiting for since I started playing Warmaster Ancients!

At present I play both systems but it is obvious to me that Ancients in the better rule set.

If this becomes the new standardised fantasy rule set then I won't have to keep flicking from one rulebook to the other.

Many Thanks

Iain

[andys]

Has anyone considered taking the Ancient/Medieval army lists and adding a fantasy element to them? Options could include:

1) Wizards, with spells chosen from the nearest geographical Warhammer world equivalent nation to the Ancient/Medieval one.
2) Ogres, 1/1000.
3) Giant, 1/1000.
4) 1 suitable monster mount per 1000 points, monster type perhaps chosen by dice roll.
5) Mercenaries/allies from a Warmaster fantasy army list.

The only problem might be that the historical lists seem to have different points values for unit types in comparison to fantasy ones.

[raia]

Has anyone considered taking the Ancient/Medieval army lists and adding a fantasy element to them? Options could include:

1) Wizards, with spells chosen from the nearest geographical Warhammer world equivalent nation to the Ancient/Medieval one.
2) Ogres, 1/1000.
3) Giant, 1/1000.
4) 1 suitable monster mount per 1000 points, monster type perhaps chosen by dice roll.
5) Mercenaries/allies from a Warmaster fantasy army list.

The only problem might be that the historical lists seem to have different points values for unit types in comparison to fantasy ones.

Are you talking about creation of new armies / sets for fantasy worlds like "Game of Thrones"? Because WMR project is not primarly about it, but you can use WMR for your own fantasy world of course. I think that armies from GW Fantasy world are fair balanced.

[toadie]

Nice project, I really like this!

Blog states "PS: Current version is still considered as Beta until all the typos are found." 

Can anyone contribute to identifying typos? If so, where and in what format?  e.g. here's just one I found but did not find a place on the blog to submit it:

v0.3 p.99 Typo: "4. Terradon. Terradons can fly. Terradon riedrs".  Suggested change:"riedrs" to "riders".

[Aldhick]

Hi Toadie, thanx for your contribution. I have found many typos since it's been published, but not this one :-)
You can  put any other finds here as you just did or you can message it to me.
I was just about to publish v.0.4 but I'll wait little longer.

[andys]

Has anyone considered taking the Ancient/Medieval army lists and adding a fantasy element to them? Options could include:

1) Wizards, with spells chosen from the nearest geographical Warhammer world equivalent nation to the Ancient/Medieval one.
2) Ogres, 1/1000.
3) Giant, 1/1000.
4) 1 suitable monster mount per 1000 points, monster type perhaps chosen by dice roll.
5) Mercenaries/allies from a Warmaster fantasy army list.

The only problem might be that the historical lists seem to have different points values for unit types in comparison to fantasy ones.

Are you talking about creation of new armies / sets for fantasy worlds like "Game of Thrones"? Because WMR project is not primarly about it, but you can use WMR for your own fantasy world of course. I think that armies from GW Fantasy world are fair balanced.

No, just adding a fantasy element to the historical lists, to enable them to play against "standard" Warmaster Fantasy lists. It wouldn't be "fair" for a historical list to not have any monsters, flying units or magic, would it?

So Empire, Orcs, Tomb Kings, Chaos, etc., playing against a Crusader, Imperial Roman, Mongol or Korean historical army list that has had fantasy element added to it for example.

One obvious difference is that all Fantasy cavalry is based as "Shock", whereas most Historical cavalry isn't. But that might just be a challenge for the Historical General?

Alternatively, the Fantasy army has it's fantasy element striped from it. So no monsters, flyers or magic!

Both might make for interesting battles?

[Aldhick]

Andys, wouldn't it be worth dedicated topic? WMR is about WMA combat mechanism being implemented into classic WM. We do not plan to mess with army lists.

[andys]

Andys, wouldn't it be worth dedicated topic? WMR is about WMA combat mechanism being implemented into classic WM. We do not plan to mess with any army list.

Done 

[Aldhick]

Just heared the 39th episode of Warmaster Podcast here http://warmasterpodcast.podbean.com/e/episode-39-new-world-order/ where our project is discussed. And I must say I'm really moved.

I put some comments here pointing at Paul and Barry if they don't mind.
First- WMR is made by community for community. Though we didn't have an idea whether anyone is gonna be interested, we made it in English so whole Warmaster community can comment or even contribute to it. So we will be happy for any form of reasonable cooperation.

On shooters arc of view - I personally wasn't sure about this one for most of the time. I probably like more the WMA version myself (definitely the arcs for bowmen etc., no so in the case of warmachines). However we didn't want to do any unnecessary changes so the rules are more accesive for wider WM community which is used to it. By leaving it as it is, we also avoided some possible editorial complications. 

On the army list section - this is simply our community preference, nothing more. We like core armies of the known Warhammer world, and we used the opportunity to put the rules and the lists into one book. But it doesn't imply the game wouldn't work with any of the published lists - it would. I'm curious about that comment on High Elf Tournament list - according to my experience, it (along with the Daemon tournament list) was made for a reason, wasn't it.

The notes on Roads are overtaken from Core Rulebook Appendix 2 - Terrain.

BTW great job with the Warmaster Podcast guys. You do great job to keep Warmaster alive.
 

[cjbennett22]

maybe an official list of terrain types and terrain rules as well?