House Rules Help

[Aethyr]

As per the other 'what do you expect from 8th Edition' thread, some discussion was brought up about weapons vs weapons etc and i was wanting to try create some house rules, so without procrastinating furthur.

Something akin to the +1 STR vs Cav for spears, +1 AS to Swords/Shields vs Pikes/Spears(to reflect Sword/Shield knocking aside Pikes/Spears, a WS 'to-hit' bonus does not feel right in terms of both getting to the Spearmen/Pikemen and also is generally a useless stat in its current 3+ status), Halberds -1 AS.

Cav already get their bonus on the charge however I was thinking of a variation of impact hits which do not cause an actual wound but could stop the effected amount from fighting the first turn.
Example, 5 Silverhelms charge 10 Orcs. The Lances score 3 hits, two wounds. Horses cause 2 impact hits (resolved at the horses strength) and a single unsaved wound. No armour saves are allowed vs the impact hits because it simulated troops being knocked aside. 3 wounds are caused for the turn, but 2 other Orcs where knocked down and dont get to fight back for turn one.
Might be a little over the top, so perhaps only allowed for over 3/4 of the charge distance to be counted as to show for momentum.

Any more idea's, especially to do with fast cav and skirmishers would be very welcome!

Thanks. Aethyr

[Arellion Sapher]

In all fairness, my contribution to the actual combat mechanism rules will be limited. I consider the WHFB melee rules to be monstrously complicated already, so don't ask me about weapon V weapon as my solution would be to build a new combat system from scratch, which would be a different game.

But my suggestions for your light brigade:

First, skirmishers should be compelled to flee if charged by any cavalry or ranked-up infantry. These guys are supposed to harry, not fight toe-to-toe with the combat troops. Stand-and shoot is inappropriate, not even a Shadow Warrior is going to happily get trampled by a chariot.

As for Fast Cavalry, I don't know how it works these days but all rules about turning and manoeuvring should be abolished in their case. Fast cavalry should function as skirmishers on the move, and hit hard as ranked cavalry when they charge.

I'll say this on all counts: Don't make it any more complicated than it has to be. If you want to make more realistic house rules, abolish Armour Saves altogether. But someone's going to object to that, doubtless.

[geoguswrek]

IfRId you force skirmishers to flee make them auto rally and move as normal (they fall back not run away and aretrained to do it) I'd take away the bonus armour save for mounted too

[Citizen Militia]

I love that rule for skirmishers it would make them a brilliant tactical unit. I mean they're good at the moment but our SW are overpriced and I don't usually use them. A unit that autofleed when charged, auto rallied and could then move as normal would be amazing. you could draw the enemy out and then just move out of their line of sight anyway!

[Arellion Sapher]

Yes, Auto-rally would be good and would fit with the role of skirmishers. Woe betide them if they were overrun, though.

[Citizen Militia]

I've been thinking; I sometimes run a unit of 20PG FC warbanner at 350 points its costly but its almost too powerfull all thanks to the rule about 'beaten in combat by an outnumbering fear causing enemy'...

Does anyone else think it would be fairer to change this rule so that the CR is doubled before taking the leadership test if beaten in combat by an outnumbering fear causing enemy. Just seems like a simple change but that way high leadership troops won't get spooked so easily. I've played that unit a few times vs dwarves and it just seems almost unfair on my opponent, seeing dwarves auto run cos they lost CR by 1

[Prince of Spires]

My regular opponent play TK and VC (he likes dead things I guess), so I am familiar with the flee when outnumbered rule. And I agree it sucks. It's a real pain when losing combat. One thing to consider here though is that changing this would make stubborn units a lot better (as they would test on their unmodified leadership).

But it is a pain to have to spend loads of points on fear protection. Lots of other fun things could be done with those points agains other armies I think.

Rod

[Citizen Militia]

yeh that occoured to me too after posting... I think the rule does need some modification. I also believe that a unit of stubborn Ld9 Hammerers, White lions or black guard shouldnt run away just cos they lost to a massive hoarde of skelletons (to take your case as an example)

But maybe modifying like this would make stubborn units too good, unless you said that stubborn units were immune to fear for the purposes of break tests but that they lost their stubbornness in those break tests (ie for break tests ONLY and they cancel each other out)

For example I charge my 20 PG with warbanner into my brothers 15 hammerers and win by 3... he would then have to make a leadership test with a 3 modifier rather than the 6 modifier this rule adjusting would otherwise imply

[geoguswrek]

does seem a little bit more complex than "double ones or nothing". Also, fear is costed for the extreme effect, not the namby pamby version you suggest.