Public voting poll for alternative turn system

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is here! You can read all about it in the news.

    • Public voting poll for alternative turn system

      Is simultaneous turns in 9th age something we are curious enough to try once? (Give constructive and critical feedback?) 163
      1.  
        I have not playtested it and do not want to (107) 66%
      2.  
        I have not playtested it and want to (34) 21%
      3.  
        I have playtested it and do not like it (14) 9%
      4.  
        I have playtested it and like it (8) 5%
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      You can change your vote in the poll. But you can only vote once.

      Don't groan. I won't post on this topic again after this one.
      This is a game turn system that has been playtested and works without obvious abuse
      This post is for public playtesting and feedback.

      Please reply with any playtesting problems or feedback. Or arguments on why it's inferior to the traditional game turn system.

      For anyone confused, a traditional game turn is "player 1 turn (All turn phases)", followed by "player 2 turn (All turn phases)".

      This proposal will permit a reactive player to start and complete their own turn phase each time the active player has
      completed their own turn phase.

      Alternative game turn system: Here it is fully fleshed out, clearly black and white unambiguously.
      If you do find something ambiguous, please disregard and leave feedback on what is ambiguous for me to clarify.

      This game turn system is NOT FINAL, there is always room to improve. But it is complete, so there should be no huge problems.
      If there are, obviously leave feedback.

      At the start of the game, decide who becomes the active player (Refer to 9th age rules).
      Anybody who is not the active player is the reactive player.

      The game turn is broken up into turn phases- this is exactly the same as traditional warhammer.
      What is different, is in each game turn the active player completes his turn phase,
      then the reactive player completes their turn phase before the next turn phase starts.

      2 sets of combat are in place to fix the problem of only 1 combat when merging 2 player turns into 1 game turn.

      0)Start of game turn

      So the start of the turn would look like
      1) Compulsory actions - Rally, random movement etc
      2) Movement - Charging and remaining moves
      3) First Combat
      4) Magic
      5) Shooting
      6) Second Combat
      7) End of game turn

      The post was edited 24 times, last by Backstab: Clarify resolving active player. Clarified problem 1. Fleshed out charging and charge reactions more for clarity ().

    • I also would prefer are system where everyone moves and then everyone charges.
      If both player charge the same unit we go with higher charge value who got the boni (more speed)
      Etc pp
      This would make the game more interactive and speed it up I think.
      But it would change many tactics.

      Atm I think it is not the right time for such a big change. We can gladly discus this but we need a good a fast start and not too many changes ( see aos)

      Edit:
      I will ask to find a player who wants to try this just for fun but I won't pursue it atm :) perhaps in 1 year

                  

      Translation Team DE

      Product-Search

      KoE Community Support

    • Hi Klexe, thanks for your response. Honestly i would also like a situation where moving happens before charge.
      However there were objections based on difficulty deciding who can charge and who can march.

      So for convenience sake, and for the sake of minimising change to the existing rules, I've done it like this.

      If you have ideas on how to streamline moving and then charging, and address the potential confusion of who marched and therefore cannot charge. I'd welcome them.

      Matt
    • matthcnet wrote:

      norse wrote:

      Have you guys read about the 3rd edition of Warhammer or Fantasy Warlord?
      I have briefly read over them when I was searching for previous warhammer editions to review.
      I daresay I remember it used a similar game turn system. I take it you weren't a fan?
      Setting aside how it was different, what didn't you like about it?
      Um no I have no opinion on them at all right now.

      Have actually been looking to learn how to play the 1st through 5th editions of Warhammer. The 3rd and 5th editions have been particularly interesting to me.
      “Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise; seek what they sought.”
      Matsuo Bashō
    • Ah,

      Well when I look at the game and say it represented armies simultaneously charging into combat, I thought that there was a way to improve the current system. Movement itself doesn't seem so different, but the way moving around has changed makes the timeframe shooting is viable sooner. Makes it start viable sooner and makes it stop being viable (can't shoot into combat) sooner.
      Magic becomes more relevant sooner too.

      I'm surprised people do not want to playtest it to at the very least see how it works. I'd be curious to see some arguments people have why
      they are unwilling.
    • Mightm00se wrote:

      Battle royale is essentially this.

      Charge/Charge
      Move/Move
      magic/magic
      Shoot/shoot

      Repeat.
      Well yeah, that's basically what I want.
      But people get upset because combat happens only once per game turn instead of twice.
      So I tried to fix that and make combat happen twice.
      And people didn't like me suggesting swapping active/reactive player because it permitted abuse by reactive player getting to prepare and execute charges as an active player without any kind of preparation or resistance from the opposing player.
      So I disposed of the swapping active/reactive.

      Outside these 2 things, what you've suggested is exactly what I want. But since I haven't heard of it, probably other people haven't too.
      But it's handy to know it was already in the 8th edition rules. Maybe people will wake up and realise what they're used to in warhammer isn't the entirety of what warhammer is.

      Plus the fact it's put into such a large scale game (scenario? )with many players highlights the advantages of this game turn system.
    • When we did it for big battles, it kind of worked.

      I declare charged, You delclare charges
      I move, YOu move
      I magic, you dispell
      you magic, i dispell
      I shoot, you shoot
      I close combat attack, you defend
      You close combat attack, i defend
      I end phase, you end phase.

      The problem is, and this is from a tournament point of view.

      is it becomes a mind f!@# of whats going on - and it just isnt as fun as it sounds.

      Keeping it you go, i go makes less book keeping and more able to draft out your grand strategy and counter stategies.

      And its just really danged hard to get out of that mindset too. For a lot of us, the path ways have been constructed and reinforced mentally for the last 20+ years. To the point where i try to play active/reactive and just end up falling back into the standard, do each phase at once.. and i miss stuff.

      <- if you are curious.
      Knight Chevalier for the New Age.

      "The green skinn'd beast were caught unawares as clarion horn sounded, and knights charged forth from morning fog..."
    • Mightm00se wrote:

      When we did it for big battles, it kind of worked.

      Keeping it you go, i go makes less book keeping and more able to draft out your grand strategy and counter stategies.

      And its just really danged hard to get out of that mindset too. For a lot of us, the path ways have been constructed and reinforced mentally for the last 20+ years. To the point where i try to play active/reactive and just end up falling back into the standard, do each phase at once.. and i miss stuff.
      That's fair, thanks for your feedback. It's considerably much better than other reasonless objections I've had.
      I'll put some thought into it and try to come up with some solutions.

      If it is to work, I'm expecting the answer is something like clearly defining the turn phases, using markers or something to help.
      For example you said each person declares a charge. Where I would want to declare each charge, and then resolve each charge.
      Then it goes to the reactive player to declare and resolve each charge. But Already I can mentally see your problem that I have to figure out sorting between units that choose to stand and shoot, flee, etc.

      For the youtube video, I found that fascinating. I've also participated in things like that, such as learning languages both before and after i became older. I did notice in retrospect learning was easier when I was younger. At the same time, these difficulties that people have, like that guy taking 8 months to learn the backwards bike. In my experience I've never been that rigid a thinker, I've always been more flexible and had an easier time changing how I think about things. So I don't have the problems other people do.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Backstab ().

    • Mightm00se wrote:

      what i would probably consider doing, as keep it akin to how 8th ed did it. have battle royale as an "alternate" and list out a set of rules governing it.

      But keep it familiar with the UgoIgo.
      Yeah I agree, doing it the way 8th did and having it as an alternate setting that people can choose from is the best middle ground.
      But what I meant is that for the problems of confusion, and to enable ease of use. I will be giving thought to that.

      For example, for charges. It might be more appropriate to resolve charge reactions at the same time as resolving charges.
      That way we minimise the back and forth type actions demanding us to keep track of everything.

      For winning combat in the same turn as charging permitting 1 special charge. I wonder if that will present problems and how to fix it?
      That kind of thing I'll need to playtest a bit more thoroughly.

      In a formal setting it might be more appropriate to rely on tools.
      So on top of game turn markers, you can have charge markers, or simply use dice.
      Marking what needs compulsory actions,
      A coin or something that says active player/reactive player on each side.
      Flee status markers?
      Direction markers?

      Various things to help organise and guide gameplay.

      However people will probably find, outside movement and charging magic might be a difficult one to keep track of.
      Shooting should be easy, and combat has already been sorted into initiative order.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Backstab ().

    • Mightm00se wrote:

      When we did it for big battles, it kind of worked.

      I declare charged, You delclare charges
      I move, YOu move
      I magic, you dispell
      you magic, i dispell
      I shoot, you shoot
      I close combat attack, you defend
      You close combat attack, i defend
      I end phase, you end phase.

      The problem is, and this is from a tournament point of view.

      is it becomes a mind f!@# of whats going on - and it just isnt as fun as it sounds.

      Keeping it you go, i go makes less book keeping and more able to draft out your grand strategy and counter stategies.

      And its just really danged hard to get out of that mindset too. For a lot of us, the path ways have been constructed and reinforced mentally for the last 20+ years. To the point where i try to play active/reactive and just end up falling back into the standard, do each phase at once.. and i miss stuff.

      <- if you are curious.
      “Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise; seek what they sought.”
      Matsuo Bashō
    • matthcnet wrote:

      For the youtube video, I found that fascinating. I've also participated in things like that, such as learning languages both before and after i became older. I did notice in retrospect learning was easier when I was younger. At the same time, these difficulties that people have, like that guy taking 8 months to learn the backwards bike. In my experience I've never been that rigid a thinker, I've always been more flexible and had an easier time changing how I think about things. So I don't have the problems other people do.

      My own experiences have been somewhat different. Learning standard German in Junior High and High School was very difficult for me.

      However now I am finding I have the touch or understanding to learn new languages, even if any intensity or rate of learning is not that much more different.

      Some of this might be because I have learned more about language families, and thus understand that many languages share the roots of the words in the dictionary.

      “Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise; seek what they sought.”
      Matsuo Bashō
    • Interesting, also I swapped 1 and 2 to make compulsory moves after charging so that it is in line with 9th age.

      It's also interesting that the only people who object to the change are the ones that have not tried it.
      Nobody has tried it and found it undesireable.

      I think this contributes to the problem people have when facing something new.
      For anybody who says that my change is somehow different, please refer to all the things 9th age has done which is different to 8th edition.
      Then proceed to tell me you do not want to try this change based only on the fact it is a change :)
    • Honestly I think I would favor the base of the old turn mechanics, but maybe add in reactive countermoves and countercharges that are smaller than the active moves and charges. Maybe the same for magic and shooting subturns.

      Ever play Magic the Gathering?

      You could have instants that can be used by the reactive player, while sorceries could only be used by the active player in his turn.
      “Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise; seek what they sought.”
      Matsuo Bashō