The One Ring :: View topic - Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?

I'd like to see Riders of Rohan be able to use their throwing spears as lances.

- Adding bonus to single faction plays or some specific like what happen to white council and such....

Farmer Maggot wrote:

I'd like to see Riders of Rohan be able to use their throwing spears as lances.

a throwing spear and a lance are very different weapons.

I would reintroduce the same-base support, because I find the idea of a single haradrim being able to support a mumak absurd.

I'd try to feint a why to reduce the feinting. Do not get me wrong, feinting is a nice touch, but is almost riskless. Lower fight? Feint. Supported? Feint. It's automatic, you don't really have to think about it.
Then I'd add a penalty for piercing striking model with D3. Let's say they face a S5 model (unusual, but not rare): They have nothing to lose. I'd add that a piercing striking model who drops to D1 can be wounded on a 2+. Or reduce the maximum strenght bonus to 2, or even 1.

Would like the possibility to build a hobbit army, without breaking the bank. Why was there never a release of a box set of 12 hobbits just like any other army?

Author:	infinateremains [ Tue Jul 05, 2016 10:17 am ]
Post subject:	Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
I have been thinking about this; what would you like to see change moving forward with the existing range of models or rules? Be it new sculpts for models or slight changes to existing profiles. I know this has been started by the GBHL Podcast crew but I was wondering what the community thought. My initial thoughts are a new sculpt of Elladan and Elrohir and Gil Galad and update Glorfindel to have some magical powers?

Author:	Farmer Maggot [ Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
I'd like to see Riders of Rohan be able to use their throwing spears as lances.

Author:	Galanur [ Wed Jul 06, 2016 9:53 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
Changes I would like to see: (other than those already mentioned). - Adding again the seige rules for walls, gates and such with all its complexity. - Adding more objective game scenarios - Adding back volley fire (once per game). - All the named High elf heroes get a spell at least under their sleeve. Making able to get some named heroes under certaint army conditions. (ex: Gandalf the white on a Minas Tirith host, Aragorn/Legolas and Gimli on an army of the death host). - Creation of more mid term captains to uncomplete factions (ex: army of the dead, Blackroot, Lossanarch so on). - Adding bonus to single faction plays or some specific like what happen to white council and such.... - Allow to create heroes epic duel challenges in the field, accept get something, refusing get penalty for a bit... things like similar to other systems... - Allow heroes to regain Might/Will/Fate points achieving deeds in the battle (moments of inspiration or stubborness may happens during a battle) - Allow the use of strategic assets we had on the magazines battles in middle earth last alliance volumes for each faction, bringing an unique flavour and gameplay to each faction/army. - Give scenario options to score even more points if the general dies.

Author:	chiefhugh [ Thu Jul 07, 2016 12:24 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
I would like to see al OOP miniatures available for purchase again. Also if GW decides to stop the production of a miniature, they should at least give us a three month notice before discontinuing it. It is very frustrating to see miniatures disappearing from their web site without warning.

Author:	Dikey [ Fri Jul 08, 2016 4:41 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
Farmer Maggot wrote: I'd like to see Riders of Rohan be able to use their throwing spears as lances. a throwing spear and a lance are very different weapons. I would reintroduce the same-base support, because I find the idea of a single haradrim being able to support a mumak absurd. I'd try to feint a why to reduce the feinting. Do not get me wrong, feinting is a nice touch, but is almost riskless. Lower fight? Feint. Supported? Feint. It's automatic, you don't really have to think about it. Then I'd add a penalty for piercing striking model with D3. Let's say they face a S5 model (unusual, but not rare): They have nothing to lose. I'd add that a piercing striking model who drops to D1 can be wounded on a 2+. Or reduce the maximum strenght bonus to 2, or even 1.

The One Ring http://ww.one-ring.co.uk/

Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range? http://ww.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=32292	Page 1 of 3

Author:	aelfwine [ Fri Jul 08, 2016 5:21 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
I am still dreaming of new, better scaled high elves on foot. For starters. Be nice to see Riders and Warriors of Rohan in a better scale too. (Also Riders and Warriors which are portrayed similarly - the Warriors of Rohan models were an odd mix of movie portrayals of the actual Rohan soldiery and the peasant conscripts at Helm's Deep) But things like small little factional flavour rules would make a huge deal - making Gondor feel different to Rohan, and different from Rivendell, as mentioned upthread.

Author:	infinateremains [ Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:46 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
Galanur wrote: - Adding bonus to single faction plays or some specific like what happen to white council and such.... I would love to see themed army based benefits to, like the three hunters and army of the dead, much like that of the white council and the ability to build armies like that along the same lines as the hobbit army building lists. Almost like formations in 40k. Dikey wrote: Farmer Maggot wrote: I'd like to see Riders of Rohan be able to use their throwing spears as lances. a throwing spear and a lance are very different weapons. Completely agree, but as everyone always says, it would be nice to see the throwing weapons unaffected by movement penalties. Dikey wrote: I would reintroduce the same-base support, because I find the idea of a single haradrim being able to support a mumak absurd. Couldn't agree more with this, support should be same base or smaller. Dikey wrote: I'd try to feint a why to reduce the feinting. Do not get me wrong, feinting is a nice touch, but is almost riskless. Lower fight? Feint. Supported? Feint. It's automatic, you don't really have to think about it. Then I'd add a penalty for piercing striking model with D3. Let's say they face a S5 model (unusual, but not rare): They have nothing to lose. I'd add that a piercing striking model who drops to D1 can be wounded on a 2+. Or reduce the maximum strenght bonus to 2, or even 1. I think all the weapon special strikes need to be relooked at and addressed to bring balance as to when a good opportunity to use a special strike and make it not an instant use.

Author:	LordoftheBrownRing [ Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:04 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
Monsters throwing from any part of their base.

Author:	infinateremains [ Tue Jul 12, 2016 8:51 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
I would also like to see box sets of plastic (or now forge world resin) multi-part hobbits.

Author:	infinateremains [ Mon Jul 18, 2016 12:55 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
Give Gildor a bow, or the option for one, would be another nice little touch.

Author:	LordElrond [ Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:59 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
I'd like to see Eregion and Rivendell merged with Elrond's Household. In addition, I would just plain scrap special strikes and mak heroic strike less effective so that it isn't always the go-to tactic against anything that costs more than 100 points, cause that's kinda boring. Move and shoot should also be removed for throwing weapons. Maybe make them S4 instead of S3 so that they actually do something?

Author:	ServantOfAngmar [ Mon Jul 18, 2016 11:44 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
There is a lot I would like to see both in rules and the range. Things I believe need addressing in the range are quite a few but in priority and what can be used in a few lists from different eras: 1- High Elves should be redone in plastic at this point. While I have no problem with the poses and sculpts themselves, they have held up decent in detail and dynamics for single casts even today, the warriors of the last alliance box suffer the most out of all for scale though and look silly now because of that. The numenorians were tall, the elves are too small at this point vs the other elves. Both are the smallest in the range for scale, and since FC is being done away with FW/SBG team should consider these in plastic or sculpt the whole line again up to scale, that is 4x4x4 warriors of numenor and 4x4x4 high elves. Release a new sourcebook based on the last alliance too to help sales and while they are at it make some numenor captains too. 2- Plastic dunlendings/carn dum barbarians...these should be similar to the rangers of middle earth plastic box, dunland has perhaps the weakest lack of troops/heroes list next to arnor. Carn dum should have had a profile in ruin of arnor since they did play a major role in the battle of the north, dunland was also at war with rohan for ages, a generic "evil men" hill men barbarian type box would be excellent, along with a few other units to branch out the force. Keep in mind GW themselves painted up a bunch of boxes of warriors of the dead to proxy them, only it would truly suck having to greenstuff on noses and eyeballs when a kit would sell decent to well I believe. I mean they released the corsairs in plastic! 3- Arnor needs at the least some "elite/royal guard" type unit, and for there to be a few more either named heroes or generic heroes, also hobbit archers should be able to be taken again without heroes or melee hobbits, since 500 hobbit archers DID fight historically in the north...and dunedain ranger heroes SHOULD be able to lead rangers of arnor, they should NOT be indy heroes, Arnor really got shafted with the all in one army books perhaps in the worst and silly way. 4- Mounted grey company, armed with spears, bow, sword, chainmail and helmets. That's how they were in the books and they were all mounted, we have the twins mounted and the three hunters, in order to make a real grey company army that is one model ( even if the had 2 sculpts like the riders of the dead ) that would be most welcome. A plastic box again would be preferable for some variety. 5- Giants and troll variations that were written about in the books ( snow trolls, hill trolls etc ). Along with a few monsters like vampires and werewolves, although these would probably be more natural looking like real wildlife just with a more sinister over the top push to their design based on tolkiens descriptions that is. I think the terror of arnor vampire was OK...but perhaps a bit too much of a push towards the balrog, I think maybe some smaller units based a bit on him but more of a push towards bat than man would work, maybe a bit like warhammer vargheists just half ogre sized. 6- For the rules: I think there should be a mandatory push towards revamping the army books for actual units that can be taken, I know I know people will say oh that's too much and they just came out with the reprints yea I know, but the truth is the current warbands and zero restrictions have caused way more problems for middle earth lore and theme armies. This is aggravating for those us who play and collect mainly themed armies, yea we get it that it's cute n funny that you can take aragorn and his daddy and warriors of arnor, but we should be able to build accurate themed lists for middle earth timelines, not be forced to take people who were not even born in order to make a pure army...that is just stupid and a serious oversight by GW devs, this is not warhammer universe where it's pay to win slap down every expensive kit, it's a rich world with tons of insane fake history that we KNOW was set in stone, not some terrible fan fiction. Lastly I would like to see war of the ring somehow added into what will eventually be the new rulebook, and bring back the movement trays. If you cannot do WOTR then see about making some expanded rules where we can build like 3-4k sized armies but that certain troops are easier to take down only in "large play" so we are not bogged down for hours.

Author:	Dikey [ Tue Jul 19, 2016 7:33 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
this came to my mind last week, during a game where I was playing mordor. My opponent was using Gondor, with Boromir and Faramir. I had a Nazgul, unnamed, on horseback, almost full power. That nazgul made Boromir useless in one turn, and basically led him to his death on the third turn (and he only survived the second turn because of the 3 wounds,3 fate). I Thought "isn't it too easy?". I mean, the strongest heroes have, at best, 3 will. A Nazgul can Sap Will on a 3+. And even if the hero resist, it will usually last just one more turn. After turn 2, your Aragorns, Gil-Galads, Boromirs, are sitting ducks thanks to a 3+ spell. And it's not like you can do anything to avoid it. Sap will doesn not need a straight line, and not every hero has access to elven cloak. I believe it should be changed. on another (Nazgul) note, I also think that Fell beast should be more expensive. There's just a 10 points difference between a Nazgul on fell beast and a wizard. Yet, the impact the Nazgul has on the battlefield is on a whole other level.

Author:	MacCollac [ Tue Jul 19, 2016 7:47 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
Would like the possibility to build a hobbit army, without breaking the bank. Why was there never a release of a box set of 12 hobbits just like any other army?

Author:	infinateremains [ Thu Aug 25, 2016 1:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
How about this sort of change to berserkers? would you see them more? Uruk hai berserker 15pts F S D A W C 4/ 4 4 2 2 5 2HW Unshakable - 6+ "fury" save 9pts - +1 A = +1pt - +2 C= +2pts - 2HW +1pts - SR +2pts

Author:	Galanur [ Tue Aug 30, 2016 3:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
Give the armies faction special rule like some mentioned.... Maybe to invest people playing single lore armies? like a faction overall without much mixing... or just the special rule applies if you have a majority of the army % in question... Special rules like.... (this special rules only apply if at least 50% of the army is made up of that faction and each go kinda lore wise depending to which faction in question). Noldor´s Lineage (Eregion/Rivendell warriors automatically pass courage tests if the´re within 12" of an Eregion/Rivendell heroe, in addition Eregion/Rivendell warriors and Captains re-roll shooting rolls and duel rolls of 1s as long the´re in base contact with eachothers in groups of 6 or more) Forth Eorlingas! (Rohan Warriors re-roll courage test rolls of 1 if the´re within 12" of a Rohan Heroe, in addition, all mounted Rohan warriors and Captains re-roll wound rolls of 1 the turn they charge). Ancient Numenor (Numenor Warriors gain +1 to the Courage roll if the´re within 12" of a Numenor Heroe, in addition Numenor Warriors and Numenor Captains gain +1 to their fight value as long the´re in base contact with eachothers in groups of 6 or more) Move or you´ll feel the lash(Mordor Warriors gain +1 to the Courage roll if the´re within 12" of a Mordor Heroe, in addition Mordor Warriors and Captains Fury roll gain +1 to the result as long the´re in base contact with eachothers in groups of 10 or more, however if by any reason a model rolls a 1 of the Fury roll, that model suffers a wound) Hosts of the Woodland Realm (Mirkwood Warriors automatically pass courage tests if the´re within 12" of a Mirkwood Heroe, in addition Mirkwood Warriors and Captains re-roll rolls of 1s both in duel and to wound rolls as long the´re in base contact with eachothers in groups of 6s or more) These are some examples that came up....

Page 1 of 3	All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Dikey [ Wed Jul 20, 2016 8:38 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
MacCollac wrote: Would like the possibility to build a hobbit army, without breaking the bank. Why was there never a release of a box set of 12 hobbits just like any other army? it's forgeworld now. You will still have to give them your firstborn and/or your eternal soul.

Author:	Oldman Willow [ Wed Jul 20, 2016 2:53 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
MacCollac wrote: Would like the possibility to build a hobbit army, without breaking the bank. Why was there never a release of a box set of 12 hobbits just like any other army? Why is a good question. I built my GW LOTR army based on the Scouring Of The Shire source book. The largest number of figures was used in the Battle of Bywater, 4 Sheriffs,8 archers and 12 Militia plus Frodo,Sam, Merry and Pippin. I also collected the named hobbits. I do not think more new models were produced. I based my hobbit collection around the source book. I have never used the current rules to purchase an army.My collection is complete.I have had to replace some stolen figures but have not added to the size of the collection for years. There is no generic hobbit captain model. So no new rules with out new models

Author:	Sacrilege83 [ Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:29 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
No shooting penalty for movement of models using their throwing weapons. Also I dislike lying down models because of the paint job or because of a model being fragile itself.

Author:	polywags [ Mon Aug 29, 2016 8:17 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on changes to the existing rules/range?
I would really like to see some more special rules. I know a lot of people feel like the games is well balanced because there isn't much differentiation army list to army list other then +1 D here and +1-2 fight or STR there but I would really like to see more special rules given to races or more specifically different troop types with in an army list so when you're building and playing there's a little more complexity to it. I haven't played Warhammer but I've glanced through the books and there's stuff like wood elves get bonus to dice while in wood ect. I know woodland creature exists and I am not even saying thats I change they should make elves are pretty strong as is I would just like to see more abilities that have real upsides and downsides that you have to play and or build around. I think old school orcs having such low courage is a good examples of a trade off. You can have a ton and swarm people but if you start to lose they all run away. It feels right and is a trade off. This is of course countered by fury so, eh, I do in general like the tactical considerations of magic though so I can't complain too much. Maybe something for dwarves where you can roll a dice and on 4-6 they don't get knocked down when they would be. I think that goes double for heroes. I think everyone would agree Legolas and Aragorn are two of the most fun heroes to use because they have abilities that make them play like how they feel in the movies and books but are also useful. I guess I just would like to see less heroes give +1 courage or have a bigger standfast or higher then average fight or strength but instead have something like Knight of the Pelenor Eomer where when he charges he gets a strength boost so you having him mounted is more important and you're rewarded for using him like Eomer should fight. Something to differentiate between army lists that are very similar other then different heroes would be nice too. Like the elf army lists are all basically the same troop wise with maybe one to two different troops but it could to see more army wide rules like the Mirkwood rangers from Thranduil's halls. I like the variety of troop choices in that list too although, again I'd like more choices. One examples for Mirkwood is maybe have all the mirkwood elves have only 4 courage but a little cheaper since its hinted at that they are lesser elves then high elves or maybe even then wood elves from Lothlorien. That would be a cool way to add diversity and a draw back while adding new abilities like the knife fighter or the bonus to fight value the palace guards get ect.