How Warhammer: The Old World broke my heart, a personal history of Warhammer Fantasy Battle.
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 07. 2024
- In the first of what will hopefully be an ongoing series, Glenn goes into a Deep Dive on Warhammer: The Old World, its problems and features, and relates it back to the history and hardships of Warhammer Fantasy Battle from first right through to eighth edition.
Film Deg Miniatures channel:
/ @filmdegminiatures
00:00 Intro
07:37 History
36:18 A Short Rant
38:47 The Old World
51:50 Herohammer
1:01:55 Linehammer
1:11:58 Conclusion
Check out Man O' Kent Games here: www.manokentgames.com
Check out Planet Smasher Games here: planetsmasher.games
The Rule of Carnage discord server: / discord
If you want to support the channel financially you can join Mike's Patreon here: / planetsmashergames
If you want the number on Glenn's Patreon to go up one, you can join his Patreon here: / manokentgames - Hry
Well done, that was a heroic effort! My Warhammer lived and died with 3rd edition, but that was a great look at everything that followed. I will need to watch it again to take it all in. Great stuff.
Mike and I went back to third edition recently for some Slaves to Darkness based chaos warband action. I really think its a good toolset if you want to dip in and take bits and pieces.
Old world is the 9th edition we never got. It’s the best edition in regards to core rules. The introduction of give ground and fall back in good order stop the level of swinging games due to one failed leadership test.
Yes removing factions from the game(for now) is not great. 7th during the Storm of Chaos campaign with all those sub-lists was the peak of fantasy IMO
"The introduction of give ground and fall back in good order stop the level of swinging games due to one failed leadership test."
There are 100 other ways to fix that other than a tedious "move your models back and forth" mechanic.
7th core rules are way more balanced and generally better to play
I liked 8th ed and was hoping for ToW to be '8.5 ed' and it is the furthest thing from.
That said, with now several games under my belt I really enjoy ToW and am super excited to keep playing and building new armies for it.
Regarding marching column and charging - it was clarified in the FAQ that drilled units can declare charges in matching column and then reform out of that formation to charge. Marching column doesn't change charge ranges.
Overall the rules are badly worded and the book is badly formatted (you often have to look at several pages at once to understand 1 rule or interaction) however once you successfully ram your (and your gaming friends) thick heads thru the rules to gain understanding it plays well and feels great.
Magic pre ToW was a gem and part of me misses it however ToW has destroyed the '6 dice your most important spell to win' gameplay and magic is interesting in different ways. For example certain spells are only cast in certain phases which is interesting and wizards can cast spells in close combat now, including in duels!
I love that combats move around and hope it stays for all future editions. It's hard to explain how much depth it adds...the battlefield is constantly evolving, which means you have to guess using your best judgment where combats are going to go when trying to maneuver for say a flank charge. Also it just makes the game feel more real and alive, reminds me of an RTS like Total War hmmm 😅
Lastly and most importantly it feels like WHFB, and if you skip it you are missing out. It has been also since the end times that I last played WHFB and its absolutely like old times - maybe better, for all the issues in ToW 8th had as many. I'm not sure you changed so much as to not enjoy what was once your favorite game. Now all that said I couldn't and wouldn't negate your feelings of betrayal. I will *never* feel like ToW is here to stay. Never. I've decided that I don't need certainty. That I don't need trust. If GW kills WHFB again then whatever. I have models and friends and rules. And loads of 3rd party manufacturers. But thats a personal choice and anyone that went through finecast and The End Times will respect yours if you decide to permanently sit out.
Like I said, I'm sure I will one day play ToW, it would be mad if I didn't, but there was a day when I would have already had ten or twenty games of it by now and re-written multiple armies. Currently its more like system 20 on a list of things I'd like to get to at some point.
That's interesting on the charges, because I checked the FAQ before starting to make the video and that correction wasn't in there, when I look now I see its a magenta recent change, so presumably got added in the time between my starting to make the video and finishing it. Which is really one of the main problems with a system that relies quite heavily on FAQs, not everyone reads them.
The issue is though, that the FAQ answer there brings up more problems than it answers. First of all, the FAQ says that a charging unit can redress its ranks to adopt combat order before charging, but the core rules say you can only change formation by reforming, which redressing the ranks is specifically stated as not being. So their fix in the FAQ goes directly against their own rules there. Secondly, they then state that marching column units with frenzy are still forced to declare impossible charges and it might be useful to declare a charge with a unit in marching column, such as one that causes terror and so might cause an enemy to flee, which directly contradicts the statement that you can't declare a charge that you clearly can't complete. So again, even while specifically trying to clarify the specific issue, they're still not just pinning things down, using clear keywords and resolving the actual issue. Are they saying that a unit with terror that can charge can simply sit at the start of the game and declare impossible charges to force terror tests? I really don't think that for a company of this sort of size and experience wanting things to be just clearly worded and pinned down is too much to ask. There simply is no reason for this to be made as hard as they're making it.
I love rank and flank combats that move dynamically around, but I just don't see the push back resolution here as moving dynamically around, it seems just a bit of book-keeping and fiddlyness. Breaking up combats by a tiny amount is my least favourite part of games like Saga and Lion Rampant and I just find it disappointing that what could have been an area with real potential for dynamic flowing play seems so underwhelming.
All that said, I'm delighted that you're enjoying The Old World, I'm genuinely happy that its sales are doing well and that the reception for it is good. I have very complex and mixed feelings about it. In all honesty, I think what I'm most likely looking for is The Old World second or third edition. The most annoying thing for me about The Old World not being WHFB 9th edition is that WHFB was shaped by decades of fixing and refining to be really good at what it is, and by resetting to something around third edition they seem to be chucking out a lot of those learned lessons. I think that a few editions in, this might be a really interesting game, but at the moment its just so janky with the rules as written that it gives me heartburn.
@@RuleofCarnage You haven't even played the game?! I was saving this to watch later but not anymore damn.
@@Mrbeardable Its a video as more about my two decades as a competitive tournament player of Warhammer Fantasy Battle, how that leads into my feelings about The Old World and a close reading of The Old World rules and where they relate to the previous editions of Fantasy Battle as much as it is about playing The Old World itself.
@@Mrbeardable I didn't mention in my disjointed post that your video essay was really well done and interesting so I'll do that now. I think I've already said enough about my thoughts of the game having gotten a few in so I won't repeat myself. When/if you do play it a follow up/review would be super interesting from someone as educated and experienced on the subject as yourself.
There's nothing good about ToW. The game doesn't react to your choices, like 7th edition it's about bringing deathstars and smashing your opponent with them in a grind
You're fantasy background of Fighting Fantasy, Heroquest, Shadowrun, Spacehulk is my childhood..(!)
It was a good time. I have a battered copy of Deathtrap Dungeon that has seen at least three different countries during its long life, and I had to get a new copy of The Warlock of Firetop Mountain because the original's cover wore through.
"They removed the fallen giant template... 🤬holes" - made me genuinely laugh out loud.
Super interesting video. I watched start to finish and wasn't bored one moment, and I'm not an oldhammer fanboy 🙂Malifaux next?
Well, that's the second vote for Malifaux and it was one I had in mind for a possible next video, so it looks like I need to pick up the latest edition of the rules...
I'd love to see a Malifaux and WarmaHordes deeper dive
I'm working on just such a thing...
I have been a 40k player since the end of 7th ed and the part of consistency speaks to me already, im tired of the constent rules changes so i have kinda fallen out of it temporarily atleast. But the old world has reignited my hobby interest, mind you i already loved the warhammer fantasy universe and had picked up some tomb kings and vampire counts over time but without any real expectations to ever be able to play them. Now old world is out and i have painted like 1k points of tomb kings in 2 months and are just waiting for 2 of my friends to finish building some models/actual be able to buy them(one of them is completely new to tabletop. Cant wait to start playing it and i hope its gonna be a consistent experience that if changed is a slow process and not the hyper release cycle of current 40k
Nice, always happy to see someone inspired to get hobbying by a ruleset. I totally agree, the release schedule for WHFB was always less punishing than 40k and I'm hoping that will continue with The Old World. I have a bit of trepidation from them charging for the new set of temporary lists, but still hopeful.
This is fantastic! Please do more. I should share if I still used social media, sorry. Liked and commented!
I'll try and do further ones, I'd really like to put out more.
good stuff, stil a better camera and mic would go along way in reaching a broader audience (with less tolerance for amateuristic video skills). Not meaning to be harsh, but it's really quite obvious. On the other hand your thinking and talking is way better than 90% of other youtubers on these kinds of topics, so i do enjoy it. Thanks
This was my first shot at a long form video essay and even just doing it really taught me a lot about making such videos. Oddly, I think its more about finding ways to rig the camera/lighting/mic rather than just having them because I have a pretty decent yeti mic at this point, I'm still just working on the logistics of using it properly I think.
Amazing video, super fun watch! I would LOVE to hear you give a talk this thorough about Malifaux through the years if you've got experience with the system. Or even Gaslands from pre-playtest on through current state!
I played Malifaux a lot through first edition and then a bit through second, and its certainly one of the games I've got in mind for doing this one. I'd like to do Gaslands also, though I worry it might be a little self indulgent.
@@RuleofCarnage It's not self-indulgent when the audience asks for it 🙂
No. Really. It would be interesting to hear about the ins and outs of how the game changed from beginning design and write up to the Refueled edition.
The faction creation and interplay and the voting system alone would be interesting.
@@gizmomathboy I'm sure that a deep dive on at least Gaslands will be in the mix at some point, but I think I should at least wait a few videos of the series before that.
@@RuleofCarnage deep dives into chainmail or lion/dragon rampant?
To be honest, most of by table top experience is RPGs and not a lot of wargaming.
I think most of my tabletop wargaming is probably Chainmail. Then after that probably Jagdpanzer or Fast Rules.
I don't think Crimson Skies is fully wargaming, which might be second most if it does count as tabletop wargaming
@@gizmomathboy Those are really good calls. Chainmail would be fascinating for its historical importance. Lion Rampant would be a strong choice, I don't know Crimson Skies as a tabletop game at all, only as a digital game. You don't mean Blood Red Skies?
Great video! I really enjoyed the deep dive and hope to see more in the future.
Thanks, I really enjoyed making the video.
This a very entertaining video and a good watch. Probably worth going back and re-reading some of the rules you are complaining about.
I definitely think ToW has some significant issues and believe 8th is a superior ruleset, but I am very, very glad it exists and even (dare I say it) shows GW still create games even when the financials are a risky prospect for them.
Jankhammer cometh! Hearing peoples deep dives are great fun.
Gotta love a Jankhammer. I really wonder how much of the jank in The Old World was intentional and how much accidental. Part of me thinks that a game where the narrative non-competitive players can rise above taking advantage of the rules while the hardcore tournament players can feel clever that they've discovered a loophole they can leverage is essentially exactly what might be desired...
I've not played it yet, but likely will in the next 6 months. I think your right that they think this game is for more advanced GW fans and for list build enthusiasts, so throwing some confusion into the mix probably helps generate engagement.@@RuleofCarnage
@@EarlofChutney I think its certainly aimed at people who have at least a passing idea of third edition Fantasy Battle. If you get it to the table, let me know what you think of it.
This was interesting, I worked on Warhammer back in late 90s and OOs, and have played every edition. I did a lot of play testing. I own large armies, which have been unused in a long time... so a new version has got me back into it all, revamping the armies to actual use them again (it irks me the time and effort, not be playing with them). The new game itself is shot through with problems, it's not great games design imho... but I love the world, the models, etc. so I'm just treating as any other game, it's mine, my free time and I'll rewrite anything/everything I need to to make the fun games I can enjoy with my models. So, Linehammer ends with a house rule of 10 wide max - easy. Archery works better when the front 2 ranks can fire, etc. Most of the issues are only a problem for the competitive scene, which I'm not interested in... I want to play narrative on-going campaign games... and have started. It's a different way to play to the 'standard mode', nothing to do with meta's, list buildings, hero-hammering, etc... it just requires a bit of effort and your own imagination. The RAW, well, they aren't written in stone, so house rule away. The magic system, for instance, needs a huge overhaul.. it's pretty garbage atm. I'll use the same spell lists, just create a new system, or revamp the old 'dice pool' one.
The only reason WH ended was a hard nosed business decision... it didn't make any much money, and for a company that had 2 IPs, and 2 main games, 1 not making money was unsustainable, 40K was propping up the rest... it had to change, for something that would make some £s... one reason it didn't make money... older players didn't buy new armies... your strength for the game was its commercial weakness... (and I agree with you as a man still using armies bought 20 years ago). Supporting older armies and models, using free pdfs... isn't a business model.
I think the thing for me is that if I turn Old World into something I can't play in stores, pick up games or events, I might as well just play 8th Edition, which is the same world and uses the same models. If I'm looking for a GW fantasy mass battle game that I'm only going to play with friends or casually, then I'm more likely to mash up Man O War/Might Empires and 3rd edition to at least have my nostalgia trip be an epic one.
I agree that the ability to return to existing armies isn't a great business choice, but 40k has just the same model and seems to have been made to work. Free PDFs have a decent place in relation to customer loyalty, Malifaux is available free to download, and barely usable digital version don't feel like a great business model either.
Damn... I just watched a 1.20h video of a game I never played nor will play. Your presentation is amazing mate haha. Nice video, thank you for that
Glad you enjoyed it. Hoping that something with a bit more length and detail will appeal to people.
@@RuleofCarnage Same here about a game I have never played nor intend to play.
Interesting to see how a game changes over time and how a player reacts to those changes.
Good stuff.
@@gizmomathboy I think that tracking the changes through the editions is really enlightening.
It was 3rd edition WFB that sparked my interest in wargaming at age 12 (although Epic ended up being my first game). All that wonderful jank appealed to one part of my brain, that galaxy of art styles to another. I hated 4th and 5th because of the style of game they encouraged, but got huge mileage out of 6th (due in no small part to Ravening Hordes).
I played Old World and it was a dreadful experience. As crunchy as 3rd but with no joy in any of it. Luckily Oathmark exists and is a delight, and my Skaven adapt to it well - although I will go back and play the odd game of 3rd just to revel in the "kitchen sink" approach.
Yeah, I think much of my own experience is along the same lines.
What Glenn thinks we want to know: his views on Warhammer
What we really want to know: how he picked up a chick at a Warhammer store
Sheer animal magnetism. My musk draws them as they pass in the streets.
Fair bit I think you're being overly pessimistic about mate but still, a well articulated argument coming from a place of passion and experience. Well done.
I buy they change things … I buy they change things… the cycle of business hammer. Quite happy with Featherstone rules and map and chit games based on Forgotten Realms here.
The churn is real!
I really think that GW took more inspiration from Total War then there previous games, some stuff is simpler and the most important stuff is over complicated I just want my free wheel for the charge or make ist even simpler a up to 90 degree pivot on the spot
I very much agree. The thing is that they seem to have increased complexity in the parts the game forces you to interact with and reduced it in the ones that are optional, which feels like a very odd way of doing things.
44:28. Page 118 The 1” Rule, I thought it was pretty self explanatory that this also means no base contact because it would be within 1”.
Unless you've declared a charge. Which you would have. Then you wouldn't make, and therefore not fail, a charge move, because you cannot, and then you'd march into combat.
@@RuleofCarnage im confused ? How can you march or make any other move when you declared a charge even if the charge isn’t possible. If the charge is not possible, you can’t just move with that unit afterwards.
@@amarmunaev7939 Exactly, I agree, I'm confused too, which is exactly the point. The rules say that if you declare a charge and then try to make a charge move and don't reach the opponent, the charge move fails and so on. It doesn't say what happens if you declare a charge and then can't try to make a charge move. Units in Marching formation don't have a charge move of zero range, they don't have a charge move, so they can't fail to complete a charge move. It says you can't declare a charge where the charge move is sure to fail, but that you can declare a charge without a charge move, so the implication of those two points seems to be that a charge without a charge move is different from one with a charge move. Otherwise, why make those specifications?
I loved and watched this video over and over being one for learning game design myself.
I have to say Old World is a pretty vicious attempt to exploit an increasingly elderly fanbase before that market is literally gone.
I also have to say, watching this project closely, that the game was clearly rushed out the door. Anyone who knows GW's cycles knows 2025 was the only realistic time slot for a release this big. Yet it was pushed out the door 2023, only for an unrelated delay to force it out Jan 2024. The bizarre release schedule seems tailored to make sure they milk each faction for every ounce of fat (£$) rather than trying to maximise long term sales or new players.
And there won't be new players, because the game is a bloated, overly complex mess with quite poor miniatures being sold at premium prices. It is dead on arrival and designed that way. Yes, it often sells out but that's because so little is being produced.
The game was in production for so long it seems more than likely a superior ruleset was in the works (with the rumoured full faction releases) only for a "nostalgia" set of rules to be dropped: one that will appeal to absolutely no one new. Thus why the rules are such a hack job that could have been knocked out in a month.
Everything GW could have done wrong, they did. They didn't even set it in the correct time period to capitalise on the 100,000s (million?) Total War players. Insanely expensive miniatures that were mostly made in 1997-2004. An even bigger ruleset that should have been less than 20 pages, not 200+.
Warhammer died in 6th Edition, and it died for a reason. That's why when 7th edition came they halved the investment: because the writing was on the wall for 6th. 8th was a superior ruleset held down because of a select few rules inserted to drive sales from existing players (having given up on attracting new ones).
GW have repeated all the causes of Warhammer's death. It's sad. People are in denial. If you thought £37.50 for three Pegasus Knights (from 2004) was insane, how about three dodgy Tomb King Chariots from 2003 for £47.50! Or better still, TWO terrible Orc Chariots from the year 2000 for £47.50?
The game was assassinated, it never stood a chance.
I agree, there were a lot of weird choices, it really feels like someone decided that the main driver wasn't to make a good game, but rather to make a nostalgia trip.
I enjoyed and respect your opinion as well as your summery of the Warhammer tabletop edition. As a player since 4th edition myself, Im loving the old world.and think it's a great ruleset. Especially since it seems to encourage and facilitate kitbashing and customization in a way that no other mini games have in some time. That makes the hobbyist part of me happy.
More hobby is always a good thing. It doesn't generally take too much encouragement for me to kitbash something, but I wonder what about The Old World in particular drives you want to kitbash?
@@RuleofCarnage the old world gives you rules for both entire units as well as equipment/options for those units without planned model releases representation. Unike current 40k and age of sigmar where everything has its own stat card and exact model. The fact that the old world gives you a base size is also kinda like saying "hey if u want to make your own Version of this just make sure it fits on this size base "
@@saintetienne373 I totally get that ToW encourages kitbashing more that AoS or 40k, I mean when you say "no other minis game in some time" how has it inspired you beyond something like, say, The Doomed, Hobgoblin or Turnip28, for example?
@@RuleofCarnage i guess i should have said no other GW game . Of course miniature agnostic games like frostgrave , stargrave . one page rules , and many others encourage kitbashing more , those games just arent as widespread and easy to find players for as TOW currently.
@@saintetienne373 I see. Yeah, I think I agree, of the GW products TOW has the most space for conversions at the moment because its the least served by an active product line. I guess its ironic that as the rules are going to get better the space for hobby with it is probably going to get worse.
Line hammer isnt a really issue my guy. No tournament I have been to has had the issue
I don't think its going to ever much bother tournaments because of exactly the issues I point out in the video. I think its upset people far more than the actual effect its going to actually have.
@@RuleofCarnage nobody is upset about expect for “influencers” who are saying people are upset about it. Nobody who actually plays the game is…
Dragon spam on the other hand hahaha
@@johnnnysaint01 I think it might be around in casual metas, but its always tough to tell this early on what is really going to make an impact.
@@RuleofCarnage in the admittedly, small match cool I’ve played I’ve seen a dragon or equivalent monster in every single list in every round of all three tournaments I’ve been a part of I bring two big monsters the Ragnarok spider which in fairness is complete ass and the orc warboss wyvern
But usually in the early rounds, people have more monsters than me. It can’t be as much as three monsters and a giant, but as you said, it does kind of out in the round one or two in every list.
Well, probably one or two. Overall, I really like your video and I wish that you could enjoy the game as much as I do. I understand why you don’t.
Great work - that was epic. And I understand your issues with trust.
As a long time Fantasy Battles fan I was initially very excited about The Old World but once I'd got my hands on it I was baffled by some of the poorly written, unnecessarily complex and often ambiguous and unintuitive rules.
Having said that, It's certainly not all bad and I will probably persevere with it, if only to let my armies have a run about from time to time.
Obviously, the previous editions were also often far from perfect so there was always the chance this would be similar, but I do think this was a missed opportunity for GW to create the best possible, if not definitive, fantasy battle game. I guess we'll just have to view it as a work in progress and in the meantime get busy with the house rules.
The issue for me is that since I'm not actively playing it it isn't a case of persevering with it, its a case of getting into it and there's just too much interesting competition out there now.
That’s true. And if I didn’t already have painted up armies I definitely wouldn’t bother. It still may struggle to find a space between my other go to games 🙂
It's extremely terrible. Linehammer, hero hammer, dumb magic, grinding
You can get all the rules for old world for free easily. No need to buy the rule books.
I know, but I don't think "Its very easy to pirate it" should be a reason to recommend something.
Tried open deployment once and didn’t like it - part from that time Only ever played “blind” , using drawn maps, from 3rd ed to old world.
Its really odd to me that a system that is how they played it in the studio and makes the game stronger was never made the standard mode of play. I get they don't expect people to build a curtain across the table, but there are plenty of practical ways of doing it.
This was amazing. Thorough, hilarious, and I think you just made me a better sixth edition player.
Thanks, one of the things that I love about the history of WHFB is that there are now fans of almost every edition out there.
hmmmm, so Oathmark rules it is :p
Great video mate. really resonated with me. I recently got back into the game, but with WAP, and that scratches the itch that I'd missed since the end of 8th. But, as you said, times have changed, and its a different feeling now. I'm less competitive than I was back then, and I'm enjoying discovering the little and large changes the unofficial 9th ed. has made with some likeminded folk. I doubt we'll take the dip into the Old World, but you never know!
Good luck with your hobby path mate, and the Youtubing, definitely earnt the Subscribe and like with this vid!
Great video, I see malifaux has been popular but I wouldn't mind seeing infinity covered if that was something that interested you.
Corvus doesn't seem to have had the ups or downs of wyrd or privateer press and that's always been fascinating to me.
I'd love to do an analysis of Infinity certainly. I've not followed Corvus like I have some others, but that could well make it an interesting thing to research.
you cant march-charge! The reason for saying you can declare a charge in marchcolumn is because of "drilled". You can declare a charge then reform the unit and make a charge. Dont seem that difficult to understand.
Drilled states that a unit can redress the ranks. The rules state that changing formation requires a reform move, not a redress the ranks move. So you can't change formation, according to the rules as written, with a redress the ranks move.
@@RuleofCarnage The recent FAQ proves this as an incorrect interpretation.
@@Mrbeardable Well, strictly speaking the recent FAQ makes a statement directly against the RAW, without explaining or clarifying that statement. I suspect that comes from the fact that in the core rules they've used "Reform" to mean "Anything a unit does to change its shape, ranks and files" and also as a specific maneuver with a specific rules status, without ever clarifying either clearly and concisely. Which is exactly the point.
Equally that FAQ states that a unit can declare a charge that it has no possible chance of completing, directly against the core rules, and opening up another can of worms allowing terror causing units to force tests from anywhere on the table.
@RuleofCarnage If you want to split hairs sure. The writings not perfect I'll grant you, but this is pernickety.
The issues you raise don't stand on the tabletop and the clarifications dispel the those that were there, but you wouldn't know that not having played the game.
@@Mrbeardable The issue isn't about what does or doesn't stand in play, but the atmosphere created by leaving loopholes and how that relates to a choice to build a more club/home play, games master, house rule driven rather than tighter more competitive style of game. But you wouldn't know that not having watched the video.
Very good commentary and presentation! Excellent.
Consider upgrading your production if you're looking to grow the channel. Video and audio could be a lot better.
I fully agree, this is the first video like this I've made and I'm still figuring things out. Just from one of making it to the other I feel I've picked up a lot, and hopefully things will continue to improve.
Warhammer Fantasy Battle has long been surpassed by better competitive games. And even before that, it struggled to be something that rewarded decisions on the tabletop, rather than at the ‘codex buying stage’. Which is why i’m fine with Old World being sort of a mess that you can pick and choose from, the games i’ve played have been very casual, very fun and they have been with likeminded others who are in this for the nostalgia, the chance to use old well loved models and the chance to buy those models that we never got to have first time around.
If I want a tight ruleset, i’ll play Kings of War, or Deadzone etc. but I have sympathy for those people who hoped Warhammer would return in a state to play tournaments. Plenty of games out there though, which I think is what you’re basically saying.
More or less, yes, though to be fair I'm almost always saying that there are plenty of games out there to all tastes. What I find quite curious about The Old World is that 8th edition is essentially a list building game with a bit of tabletop play attached, while 3rd edition is basically an extended RPG with a bit of list building attached and The Old World is somewhere between the two.
ToW isn't really fun, it's 7th edition nostalgia. You get run over by deathstars, not much of interest
An hour and a half? A veritable extravaglennza. Will pop this on while I do some hobbying.
It took a while, but I think doing a few long format videos will give me a while to really go into some things in a bit more detail.
@@RuleofCarnage You put them out and I'll watch them.
@@jammywesty91 They take a while because rather than the usual RoC vids where Mike and I pretty much spend half an hour prepping then just pop off whatever comes to our heads, I really put the effort into researching and looking into these, which I loved doing, but its a lot of work. But I'll start working on another one soon.
You seem like a nice guy who I would go to the pub with but I cant really condone the fact you're making a deep dive on a game you don't seem to have played. AND the thing that you use as the premise "for breaking your heart" was FAQ'd two weeks ago.
That's a fair position, I would say a few things in response:
Firstly, its not the rules problems that broke my heart, I've house ruled bigger loopholes than that, my point in examining the janky bits of the rules is to observe that this is not a ruleset created to be tightly written, and in turn question why that might be the case, because I'm not totally convinced its totally accidental. The thing that broke my heart with GW is their movement from being the company that put out Ravening Hordes to support the creation of one new edition, free and excellently written, to being one that charged money for a digital edition that I'd feel humiliated to put out for free as a one man creator on another. The thing that broke my heart isn't something that I think can be FAQ'd.
Secondly, the FAQ explaining the marching column rule is full of its own rules problems. It states that you might want to declare a charge you can't complete to force another unit to take a terror test, despite the rules stating that you can't declare a charge you clearly can't complete, opening up its own can of worms as to whether terror causing units of any kind can force tests across the battlefield. It also states that you can change formation with a redressing the ranks move, while the core rules state that it requires a reform move, which is an entirely different thing. Relying on FAQs to fix your rules that you can't be certain everyone has read is one thing, failing to make them not contradict the main rules is quite another. Furthermore, that FAQ doesn't state in any way shape or form that you can't do what I suggested in the video, it only points out that you can do several other things, which isn't the same thing.
Thirdly, I never claimed this to be a review of gameplay, this is a close examination of the rules, their roots and contradictions. With over 20 years of playing Warhammer Fantasy Battle and over 5 as a professional game designer, not to mention the hours of examining the rules of systems like these on this channel, I think I'm reasonably qualified in being able to judge a ruleset very close to Warhammer Fantasy Battle as having problems and contradictions from the text alone. You can disagree with my conclusions, but I think I have a right to at least make them.
@@RuleofCarnage No you clearly said the thing that broke your heart was a specific rule. You highlighted it, misrepresented it and released your video two weeks after it was FAQ'd. Yes it was to highlight that the game has jank but if you haven't read the rules correctly then sorry, the argument collapses.
I can see that you wanted to make an broader point but unfortunately the fact that you've based it on a problem that doesn't actually exist undermines the whole video.
Loads of your contradictions are actually answered within the rule book. You haven't read it enough. It's terribly laid out so I don't blame you but it's the sort of thing you'd probably double check before making a long video like this.
Like there is nothing wrong with having a negative opinion of the old world but when you are going to reinforce that opinion with factual information you have to make sure that information is correct.
In this review you get several simple rules wrong while talking about a tactic that just can't work in the game. This proves you can't review this game purely based on reading it alone.
Also the game has been out for four months. We are three arcane journals in. Your point about GW charging you 30 bucks for temp army lists is just wrong. Those are the rules that army will have for the whole edition. This combined with your rules mistakes make me think you haven't actually done that much preperation for this video.
You can state your opinion. You can even state your opinion when it's based on faulty information. But when you state it with the false information then you're just spreading misinformation and contradicting yourself. Thankfully it's a games workshop specialist game and not some small studio like yourself relying on word of mouth. Because this is a deeply deeply unfair review even though your conclusions are legit.
@@morerobotwarscontent1476 i thought the entire premise of the video is that Old World broke his heart because it didn't recreate the nostalgia he expected but then explained why that was an unrealistic expectation? Like he went on about it for ages.... He admitted to all sorts of naughty stuff to illustrate his point... ?
@@britainbetterthanyou he clearly highlights a rule then says it was that. Its in the video.
@@RuleofCarnage i think its done this way because they wanted to relese the game as a test run this is why they limited the factions so they can get threw the test run with less commitment. then if the game collapsed they could say well we tried but as it has been vary successful they will probably do a re reralece with more new model content and more factions inperticuler Kislive and Cathay. they will probably titen up the rules and release more expensive books and every one will pat them on the back for it. they did it with necromunda and blood bowl. if the game was well made people would complain when they repackaged the rules to sell again
Excellent work my dude. Arise, the age of Hobgoblin!
I am entirely independent and unbiased.
Malifaux.
Yeah, Malifaux seems to be a popular choice for the next video, so I'll have to brush up since the last time I played it at all seriously was back in second edition.
Normally I avoid vids of people reacting saltily to GW behaving like a corporation under capitalism, but Glenn's take is like a master chef adding finest Himalayan rock salt as the pot simmers, then sprinkling with delicate crystals of fleur de sel, and finally beating them with giant salt-licks normally reserved for horses as he tears through the horrors of the rules. Delicious! Thank you for confirming that my fantasy battle nostalgia should remain in the past, and the demonstration of why some rules 'improvements' are actually disastrous was eye-opening. Does the 9th Age have a following in the UK? As I consider dusting off old minis, it seems that is the ruleset of choice here on the continent.
Very kind of you to say. The thing is, I set to making the video assuming that The Old World would be more or less 9th edition and I would talk about the personal journey I had and then examine some tweaks and conclude that while it remains a solid old warhorse of an engine, that I had still moved on. As I waded through the horror show that is the digital version and saw that every single change seemed to be a move for the worse I realized I had to highlight some of them.
9th Age had a strong following back when 8th first died and for a few years after at least. I think that since then the diaspora of WHFB fans have variously spread across the OPR version, 9th Age, various earlier WHFB editions (I believe 6th is particularly popular where I am) and Kings of War.
I like the game but it is a very poorly written rulebook.
Many things have been left out or written vague even though the rule (or similar) existed in previous editions so a simple copy/paste would have been an option but I guess the brief was to keep the word count as low as possible.
Its very odd, much of the book feels like it was written without reference to previous Warhammer editions.
The more I watch videos with earnest middle aged men talk endlessly about how much their hobby (and therefore their lives) has been destroyed by an evil corporation, the more I wonder how I’ve managed to survive. I’m 55 and have been buying and playing GW products since WFB 4th edition and I can happily report that nothing GW have done has adversely affected my life. I’d be concerned if they were able to.
I don't mean to suggest that my hobby has been destroyed by GW, I mean, since stopping playing WHFB I've become a published games designer and played more games with more people at more conventions than ever before. It would be odd to characterize that as my hobby having been destroyed. What GW destroyed for me was my interest making long term commitment to GW games, and despite their efforts to suggest otherwise, GW are not the hobby entire. I don't think that suggesting that there's something quite melancholic about something that you made friends with and spend hours engaging with being gone is overly melodramatic. Honestly, I'd be sort of concerned if losing something that I invested so much time in didn't adversely effect my life.
Fair point. Obviously your videos title is an attempt to grab attention and not completely indicative of your position.
I guess I’ve never felt that GW owe me anything or expect them to support any product that I have bought from them. They are artefacts and I use them how I see fit.
I would say that I’m still using 5th edition Orc Warriors in my AoS games without any problem - if I wanted to play a game of 3rd edition WFB, I still could.
Broken hearted? Really?
@@nuttyknatty Well, I still expect products to be functional in the state they are when I purchase them, so the state of the digital copy of the rules featured in the video is I think a more than legitimate case for complaint. Certainly you can continue to play out of print games, Man O War continues to be one of my favourite games and is one I've featured on the channel, but when the thing you really value from a given game is its community that feels like missing the point a bit.
Broken hearted? Well, clearly that's a metaphorical phrase and how heartbroken I am by losing a thing is, for example, lesser than how heartbroken I am by losing a person. I'm not suggesting that I'm laying around like a romantic poet composing eulogies for my lost love. But on that lesser metaphorical level, yes, I think so, a bit. As I said in the video, this is something that I spent time with for twenty years and through which I became part of a community that was dispersed quite casually. I think its legitimate to feel sad about that.
On another level I would say that seeing a corporation moving from servicing and supporting its customers as it did with things like Ravening Hordes as I mentioned to gouging them for a near unreadable new digital equivalent of the same thing is a sad loss. You might not expect them to support products, but there was a day when they did, and this is a day when they don't. That's pretty objectively a company getting worse, and I think that unhappiness over things getting worse is legitimate.
This is a scarecrow designed to evade corruption in game design
6th Ed is the best Ed.. ToW is alright but.. The percentages for Heroes etc are ridicolous. Core needs to be 50& mandatory.
6th is the last not awful edition
Wacthed more and some valid opinions on TOW..
The writers of the most offensive BS books in 7th Ed appaerently got alot of shit.. Well,I honestly think alot of it was deserved. Detah threats is a bit pathetic but if you do put your name on the garbage they did, you asked for it. They did a terrible job and they always had the opportunity to walk off and say fuck it. Get a real job or another joke job..
The first minute and a half of this video is just a string of cliches.
Surely the fact that my personal experience is repeated in the experience of many people within the hobby is exactly what lends it relevance? What did you think of the remaining 1 hour and 22 minutes?
@@RuleofCarnagei’m listening to it now! I just hate hearing the same turns of phrase regurgitated, especially by journalists, thinking they are being deep or amusing. Direct language is always much better than flowery language.
@@idiotproofdalek Well, happily I'm not a journalist, just a game designer trying to give some personal insight. Hopefully as I get to the more specific examinations you'll find the language more direct than when I'm talking about personal history.
OMG I can't believe the layout on those ebooks 🫢😬
I'll stick to the wonderful, stapled, courier-new font of the glorious 2nd Edition books 😅
I know, I genuinely didn't believe it, which is why I went hunting for fixes and was told by reddit that nope, its not you, its them.
I thought it was me choosing the wrong set of epub readers for their Old World e-books but nope, something is wrong. Why not PDF or free PDF also with the physical copy. It's all a bit pants. I just ordered all the hard copies which are in stock right now including the Arcane Journals.
@@user-ub1dz8js7s To be brutally honest, the more cynical part of me thinks getting people to buy the hard copy is exactly why the digital versions are that bad.
Great video! Many of my feelings as a fantasy tournament player put succinctly was great to hear
@@tychoimmega9741 Well, I very much am a fantasy battle tournament player, so I imagine there's a good chance we share many of the same feelings.