Page 1 of 1

ETC Openhammer

Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 3:57 pm
by Amboadine
Thought this would be worth sharing. Posted on Warseer

Maybe I'm in the wrong forum but this, clearly, is going to the be biggest and most widely accepted adoption of WHFB 8th edition out there with ETC behind it. They are including a full review and update cycle for both army balance and rules revision.

The announcement is here, along with their manifesto and the current rulebook.

I've read through and there are clearly some difficulties with finer points in the translation and there are no units, spells or special rules are included, but that will be in the coming compendium.

Key points:

Random charges remain
Steadfast is gone
Cannon damage and range is reduced but accuracy is about the same
Optional weather and time of day effects are included
Cover and large target rules now apply in combat
Units now pivot around the centre, up to twice in the movement phase
Priests are now included as a type of caster
Magic dice is now summed caster levels plus d3
Dispel dice are now summed caster levels
Maximum dice per cast attempt are now caster level +1
Double ones are an auto-fail to cast
Double sixes are still an irresistible cast, but the caster takes a number of saves equal to dice used against their caster level, with failures causing a wound each
Characters now auto-pass Look Out Sir tests in units of 5 or more
Character displace command models in the front rank
Maximum of two characters per unit
Minimum unit widths and maximum models per unit enforced based on army size
Army selection is by slots not percentages

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 5:11 pm
by Calisson
Sounds very promising.
ETC is for certain "THE" body which can lead no-longer-supported WH8th to a long lasting WH9th that would satisfy the needs of many gamers.

I'd like to see Druchii.net involved in discussions related to adjustments for Dark Elves (hint: our FAQ was based on RAW as much as possible, it could well be amended in a more RAI/practicability as those ETC rules lean towards).

In this respect, I would be highly interested in Killerk's opinion. I understand he has a voice in ETC - and in D.net, too.
I'm not aware of other ETC leaders members of D.net.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 5:56 pm
by jeffman
+1
I'm a fan!

Not into AoS at all!

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 8:13 pm
by Asraifrog
Nice to see that the Old World still lives :D

Consider this stolen for Asrai.org ;)

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 8:49 pm
by Cailil
I applaud these guys' moxy and I hope it works but although I'm not a lawyer this is all way too close to WHFB for GW's lawyers to ignore IMHO. In fact there's more than GW out there, DnD (wizards of the coast), Tolkien estate (and New line cinema), possibly even game developers who worked with GW and others (Bungie, THQ etc) and Mantic who sell and their KoW rules. They all own IP in this area (even if they aren't all charging for you to have their rules ppl like KoW still own that IP). This might be a bigger issue than it seems at first.

But , don't get me wrong, that's not a reason to scrap their overall dream - its a damn good dream. They should get advice on the legal stuff and go from there.

One small piece of feedback if they're going to "go generic" they need to include round bases too.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 12:21 am
by Diobarach
I've looked at a few of these updates and I'm surprised how much people want to change stuff. I feel like only a few things needed to change: accuracy of cannons, miscast results (harsher consequences for using more dice), moving from true line of sight to some level-based system, and some units getting point cost adjustment or slight rule modification.

I think starting with small changes and slowly making adjustments over time would make more sense and be less controversial. With so many changes being made, twocentitis is going to be a pandemic and likelihood of any chance of consensus greatly diminishing.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 9:36 am
by Haagrum
Removing Steadfast is an enormous mistake, IMHO, although I would understand if units could not be Steadfast when disrupted.

Most of the other changes seem reasonable, although the changes to magic will likely see a marked decline in numbers of hero-level casters.

I would've liked to have seen a rule which prevented facing abuse with small units or single models (along the lines that the player whose unit has the most ranks chooses who closes the door on a charge, with the charging unit doing so in the case of a tie). I believe it's frowned upon in ETC play, but still legal based on the OP.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:37 am
by Daeron
Man, what a boring read! But it does look (very?) promising. It almost looks like a blend between Warhammer and KoW IMO.
I'll be sure to try it out, if I find an opponent.

Note: depending on the support this wins, we may consider a forum dedicated to it. For now, reports, army lists and discussions can be hosted in the 8th ed forums.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 12:31 pm
by Calisson
Whatever path ETC will take will be "the" mainstream future of WH8th.
They are the only ones for a foreseeable time with enough audience and commitment to lead gamers to invest in them.
Think of it, they had already a large audience despite competing against GW about rules, and now GW forfeits.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 1:09 pm
by Rork
Looks like a massive nostalgia-fest in many respects (I see rules from 4th-6th in there). Removing the chance from Look out, sir! seems a little odd - An effective 2+ ward vs templates meant it wasn't worth sniping most of the time (And they're telling me it would "never" happen?).

Removing steadfast just puts the game back into cavalryhammer again. Tinkering around the edges doesn't solve the problem that some types of units seem to gain supremacy. This is the sort of reason why GW tearing down the rules and starting from scratch makes sense.

While a few of these do help, some are rules that are quite familiar and created an imbalance in their respective editions.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 1:28 pm
by Daeron
If you use a simlar font-size as AoS and leave out the scenarios, the openhammer rulepack is about 5 pages long. :D
A funny little thought.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:46 pm
by Vulcan
True, but it's more of an errata than a full rules set.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Sat Jul 25, 2015 11:10 am
by Killerk
To be honest it is verry dull, like a reheated left overs. Sure you can eat it, but you could also order something fresh. it's like going backwards in evolution.

Re: ETC Openhammer

Posted: Sat Jul 25, 2015 10:54 pm
by toots
Agree wholeheartedly!!

Haagrum wrote:Removing Steadfast is an enormous mistake, IMHO, although I would understand if units could not be Steadfast when disrupted.

Most of the other changes seem reasonable, although the changes to magic will likely see a marked decline in numbers of hero-level casters.

I would've liked to have seen a rule which prevented facing abuse with small units or single models (along the lines that the player whose unit has the most ranks chooses who closes the door on a charge, with the charging unit doing so in the case of a tie). I believe it's frowned upon in ETC play, but still legal based on the OP.