Zhu Bajie
Baron
Been flipping through old French gaming magazines, and came across a review of Warhammer from 1985, so gave it a quick Google Translate and using my extremely limited French, here it is:
"Bastard ruleset!" I like that. While the review is of the 2nd Edition, the majority of comments address things that stayed mostly throughout every edition of WFB, except Magic which went through substantial changes in 4th onwards. What do you think? A fair review?
The pretty presentation - very flashy and commercial, conceals the organisational flaws of the rules. The books are not very clear and in spite of the precise chapter headings, it is easy to get lost while looking for a specific rule.
Magic: This is the strong point of the ruleset. Indeed the Battle Magic booklet offers many original spells, for the most part well adapted to the scale of the battle (despite some imprecision of time to cast, on the saving throws and the effects on the terrain). The magic is connected to five classes of magicians; necromancer, illusionist, witness, elementalist and mage. Casting a spell costs a certain number of points depending on the level and the effects of said spell; however, a caster is limited in the number of points he can spend.
Magic weapons are numerous and surprising, but sometimes their cost is too small compared to their power; for the same price it is possible to have a sword allowing its user to absorb the magic and to recover its power or a swordfish that gives you the possibility of having a chat with it!
Bestiary: Although there is a repetition from the Force and Fantasy, complement to the previous edition of Warhammer, which offered a wide variety of species subdivided into several parts (northern man, western man, wood elves, high elves elc ...) the bestiary nevertheless offers a wide choice of monsters whose description is quite detailed. In addition, the player can adjust the point-cost that each figure costs him by choosing his equipment. Once again we see imbalances in the monsters, at the level of the point-cost: a fire-breathing dragon costs the same price as a dragon that does not have this ability, in the same way a poison spitting chimera has the same point-cost as its sister devoid of that charming habit.
But suddenly I see a deep doubt in the haunted eyes of some readers, what is a point-cost? It is an almost indispensable element in all games with miniatures. Each model is allocated a number of points increasing with its power, so in Warhammer a goblin is worth 2.5 points while a dragon costs 682 points. These points added together give the point-cost of an army; thus according to the scenarios or the taste of the players, they can balance or unbalance their point-cost, that is to say have the same number of points in each army or a different number.
It turns out that in Warhammer the construction of point-costs is both tedious and fragile because of the disproportion between the cost of the Monsters and their power as well as the cost of the weapons and their effectiveness.
Scale: Warhammer (as it is not specified on the box) is a basic rule of 1 for 1, that is to say a model equals a man, which prevents it from considering massive battles. In addition, given this scale, the range of throwing weapons is very short, a bow only shoots 64 meters when in reality it should shoot at more than 150 meters, so lack of realism that is found in elsewhere at various points of the rule. The problem is also compounded if the ratio is increased, for example a figure for ten men.
Sequence: Let's observe any battlefield: are the armies advancing and firing one after the other? Certainly not, the armies advance and fire simultaneously, but Warhammer's sequences are not simultaneous! It must be seen that the game with miniatures allows and involves simultaneity which reinforces realism. We can cite a simple example of the inconsistency of this system: a sheltered unit can, on its movement, reveal itself, shoot, and return to hide without its victim being able to retaliate, since it was not his turn to shoot.
Movement: They are made in inches! When will the British adopt the metric system? Although all mass maneuvers are possible, 1/2 turn, 1/4 turn, pivot, skew forward, not all of them are reasonable in a 1 to 1 scale, and can be tedious when you have a lot of miniatures to move. The movement procedures are sometimes hopeless, the charge multiplies the movement by two, nothing less! In the frontage of a unit, four models can be added or withdrawn without penalty of movement or eight in which case the unit can no longer move, there is no half measure; What for ?
Combat: This is divided into melee and ranged combat but the resolution system is identical for both cases and just as incoherent and absurd. To hit the victim, roll as many D6s as there are fighting miniatures and make a required number; it is then necessary to see if the blows which have reached do damage (once again with D6) and finally the opponent makes a saving throw again with D6, in short, a very expensive system in D6 if one does not want to spend his time throwing dice! Moreover, this system is completely illogical since in one where one can either not touch anybody or eliminate all the models of the enemy, this process rests exclusively on luck and can only discourage the strategists.
The ranged weapons are so efficient that with a little luck the armies will not even fight on contact, for lack of combatants. There is still a lot that can be said about Warhammer's combat system, but listing it would be tedious.
Other rules: The morale rules are satisfactory. It is the leadership of the commander or unit which gives the base morale of that same unit, the weaker this leadership the more the troops are subject to rout. Some troops are exposed to other handicaps, such as stupidity for trolls, instability for the living dead, animosity of goblins for dwarves etc ... which could be fun if they weren't so fiddly.
To enhance the game, some interesting rules are offered: the flight system for flying creatures, heroes - often powerful - poison, campaign rules, etc.
Our Impression: Warhammer is a bastard ruleset which is neither satisfactory from the point of view of role-play nor a wargame, given its scale. The interesting and fun ideas do not fill the gaps of the rule in terms of pure wargaming. What you should expect from a miniatures wargame is above all a set of good, clear and logical simulation rules, and not an overflow of optional though entertaining rules. Could this new edition just have been created to sell Citadel Miniatures, as the illustrations and scenario may suggest?
"Bastard ruleset!" I like that. While the review is of the 2nd Edition, the majority of comments address things that stayed mostly throughout every edition of WFB, except Magic which went through substantial changes in 4th onwards. What do you think? A fair review?