Hosting 1.1 rules for download in parallell with new versions on the 9th Age site

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

Wondering how the new magic phase feels like? Try it yourself! The Behind The Scenes blog gives you enough to playtest it, including spells of four paths of magic, all hereditary spells and the Dwarven runes!

  • Hosting 1.1 rules for download in parallell with new versions on the 9th Age site

    Seeing as how the 9th Age have departed on more of its own path after, in practice, producing a more polished version of Warhammer Fantasy Battles with 1.1 than was ever released by Games Workshop; and seeing how much of an uproar there seems to be about 1.2 among many players; and seeing as how it would be virtuous to keep the up-to-date ultimate Warhammer 9th Age edition available for all the future for the sake of choice and legacy upkeep and reduction of player friction; how about hosting the complete 1.1 rules with army lists, magic etc. in the download section under a legacy spoiler at the bottom of the rules page?

    This would be advantageous for everyone, and disadvantageous for no one. Note that this proposal is not a judgement upon 1.2, since we've not playtested it yet in my group (expectations neutral), but rather a simple way of preserving the finalized original WHFB fan edition efforts while dampening much conflict and still moving onwards in a direction of your own with future rules updates.

    Some third party could always host the 1.1 rules on some external website, but there would be something to gain from having the legacy rules set available on the 9th Age proper. Please consider it.
  • JeroBeam wrote:

    Sure, I have them all. I can send them via email at monday, because I'm Not at home till then.
    If I can give a suggestion:

    It would be a lot more efficient if you (or anyone really) put up the files in a cloud storage account (Dropbox for example gives you 2GB for free) and provided links to that for people to download, instead of people individually mailing files back and forth.
  • The post was edited 3 times, last by Windelov: Unclear legal implications of distributing previous rulesets, links back up after consulting 9th age legal ().

  • Vulcan wrote:

    unstaible child wrote:

    that would be a good idea though that sounds like fracturing the community that wont help anyone....
    Too late, the community has already fractured. Twice now - once after the release of AoS, and now again after 1.2 confirmed that T9A will not be Nexthammer like many hoped it would be.
    we dont know that yet tabletop gamers are dynamic they move from game to game its if the group gets too small it ends but 50/50 not really a problem
  • Windelov wrote:

    Hi all

    I would urge all to support the 9th age, and not start parallel development.

    The 1.2 v is not perfect but we will only improve it by play testing and providing constructive feedback.

    Thanks,
    Nis
    I totally agree with this, i can't even start to express my feelings about this.

    i really don't get why people got so upset that the 9th age decided to change the rules and not just make a game that is an errata corrige of WHFB 8th edition.
    i do believe this was the original purpose of the 9th age: to create a game sistem that feels like WHFB, but it's not shitty and buggy AF like warhammer was.

    WHFB went to crap from waaaaaaay before the AoS heresy, which is more a hit on the fluff than it is on the rules; those were already a huge pile of dungs without the help of Sigmar and Pals.
    i got into warhammer when 5th edition was out, it was crap. 4th edition was even worse, ( 'member herohammer?). GW always chose profit over quality.
    all the good ideas that got implemented in the various editions of WH (especially 6th) were the work of amazing game makers they hired, but the general layout of WHFB is a shitty, grotesque, and insanely overpriced ripoff of historical battles reproductions.

    Now, i'm not trying to say that t9a 1.2 is a good game, because clearly it's not, its a pile of very confused and unorganized change to the rules of an already shitty and unbalanced system (warhammer 8th edition WAS and IS crap), but atleast i'll give the staff credit, and trust, for trying to fix the hellhole of bugs and OPness that WHFB was.
    i personally believe they went too soft on the changes, both for the sake of the community and because, as you can clearly see from their work, they really love warhammer fluff and lore as much as anyone on this forum.

    I've been in the game making business for quite some time, not even nearly on such a big scale as GW and not with the huge response from players as the 9th age team received, but i can clearly understand the meta behind a game; and i see in the army books the efforts they are making to keep this as much "warhammerish" as possible, despite all the problems this causes to the mechanics.
    it could be so easy to just implement a completely new and fresh ruleset and just copy/paste all the units names and accomodate their profiles to such new system.

    just look at other game systems like Kings of War, (which was originally designed by Alessio Cavatore, one of the best game makers GW ever hired) or the older chainmail rulesets, pike & shotte... even 40k has a way better game meta than warhammer fantasy.
    there are a ton of ideas t9a could use, but they're not. this is clearly to keep the game closer to the spirit of the community, to your spirit.

    so please don't go around creating a "10 age" ruleset, or a 1.1 with fixes, just because you are not satisfied with the current patch.
    i'd rather see you creating a whole new game experience than just creating another copy of the same game system.
    as @Windelov said, T9A can only grow with the support of the community.
    just play the game system you think it's more appropriate to your needs.

    you already have all the previous editions of WHFB if you really wish to go back, 6th was pretty good imho but if you like 8th better Matthias made a 9th edition which is basically 8th edition with fixes and erratas implemented in it, it's pretty fun, even tho i think its a little too much, and it's completely free.

    i am currently playing both KoW, T9A, WHFB 6th edition and 40k, i just play them in different occasions.

    don't hate the player hate the game. :)
  • Note that the purpose of this post is only to point out a logical flaw in the above post, with the relevant parts emboldened below. We've still to try out the new patch in our hobby group and this has nothing whatsoever to say about the benefits and downsides of 1.2 or similar. It's just the matter of the principle.

    TileanBastard wrote:

    ...
    so please don't go around creating a "10 age" ruleset, or a 1.1 with fixes, just because you are not satisfied with the current patch.
    i'd rather see you creating a whole new game experience than just creating another copy of the same game system.
    as @Windelov said, T9A can only grow with the support of the community.
    just play the game system you think it's more appropriate to your needs.

    you already have all the previous editions of WHFB if you really wish to go back, 6th was pretty good imho but if you like 8th better Matthias made a 9th edition which is basically 8th edition with fixes and erratas implemented in it, it's pretty fun, even tho i think its a little too much, and it's completely free.

    i am currently playing both KoW, T9A, WHFB 6th edition and 40k, i just play them in different occasions.

    don't hate the player hate the game. :)
    Splendid post which deserves to be read with interest (whether or not one agrees with its points). Well written!

    This is playing the devil's advocate with no personal stake or interest in it whatsoever, but it needs to be said for the matter of discussion:

    What if the game system most appropriate to one's needs is something as close to 8th edition as possible, but fixed and much fuller and balanced? What if this happens to be, from all the existing and previous games and editions there are to choose from, T9A 1.1? This is not as completely an unlikely situation as may seem at first sight, since the 9th Age started out its career by fixing the flaws in GW's last WHFB edition without breaking the Warhammer framework (and then, now, it wishes to move forward), whatever the project goals were and wherever the road ahead may lead the project.

    When playing 1.1, I was under the impression of playing the best Warhammer game so far. The Infernal Dwarf army list, the options to take spears and additional hand weapons with Dwarf warriors and so on, and the very varied top tournament armies at the tournament I attended all lent themselves to this conclusion. Now, WHFB may be a flawed and indeed very flawed game, but at least many of its players enjoy it, and if they were to choose the best version of the game, chances are many would point to the 9th Age, whatever patch they happen to prefer. The official old WHFB editions out there are indeed plagued by the drive for profit and much more besides in the rules, so having a fan-made rules set be a top contender would not be strange.

    And given that T9A is the only fan-made rules set to have become widely played, any version of it would be likely to contend for being the game system which a Warhammer player think is most appropriate to his needs.

    And this includes 1.1.

    In fact, if the game was to sever its close links to Warhammer such as you propose, or at least delve further in its own direction for good and ill (and much good could come from it, make no mistake), then the virtue of retaining the 1.1 rules (or perhaps a polished fix version of them) as the pinnacle of the old Warhammer Fantasy battle game style is self-explanatory. Somewhere this ultimate version of Warhammer (flawed as it is) ought to be found, and if there is one, why reject it for something inferior?

    Furthermore I too would like to urge people to not split off with T9A for the sound reasons already mentioned.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Karak Norn Clansman ().

  • thanks for all the love man!

    i can completely understand your point, and i didn't mean my post to sound against your proposal, i like the idea of a legacy ruleset for t9a as much as i like the idea of a WoW legacy server to go back to vanilla. But i fear the 9th age staff got their hands full with the upcoming fixes, and i doubt they'll be returning on the 1.1 rules anytime soon and, as much as i love the idea of creating a different path for the legacy that 1.1 is, i have the feeling that creating a separate website/development team to fix and upgrade the 1.1 version of the game would badly split the community and the strenght that comes from numbers.

    Opinions aside, i can perfectly understand how you feel about 1.1 right now, i am experiencing the same thing with KoW. is fast paced, extremely balanced and feels a lot more like a game of chess than warhammer does. plus i am really short on time lately thanks to work, life and such, so playing a 2k pts game in less than 2 hours is really what i need to stick with the hobby.
    any other ruleset feels just inferior to me right now, so i totally hear you on that point. :)

    you can stick to the latest 1.1 manual for now and see if there will be a chance to build such a project as a legacy ruleset inside the heart of the community, here on t9a.

    btw just wanted to say thanks, and sorry if the post sounded a little too strong, it wasn't directed to this topic in particular but as a personal opinion about the general feeling almost half the community is expressing lately about the changes in 1.2 and the direction the 9th age is going. feelings went full tsunami and words just kept flowing! :P

    cheers
  • Cheers! Fair points. Perhaps if some few enthusiasts wished to give a little polish to the 1.1 rules it could be done low-scale in the fan-rules section of this forum rather than setting up a whole new team? For the record my hobby group have not played any fantasy games since last tournament (meaning also no 1.1), and we will not stick to an old rules set but play along with the rules updates and see where they lead us. Also I have little against big changes in and of themselves and will gladly follow along. Yet a legacy rules set for someone wishing to return temporarily to an older form of the game could be a good thing. (Granted, I wouldn't be any interested in returning to e.g. 1.1 for a very long time.)

    At the moment my hobby group practically only play at tournaments, coming unprepared to them and getting trampled into the bottom rows. :D If we had played more often, we'd have given KoW, War of the Ring and historicals a serious shot. But for now, following the routine rules rut in the road, and we like what we've seen of T9A so far.

    Have a good time!

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Karak Norn Clansman ().

  • In my play group, none of us like the 1.2 or 1.3 ruleset, we were really happy with the 1.1 rules. It looked like a fixed and improved WHF game. So would be nice to have the armybooks and rules from that edition avaliable (with the latest fixes to the armybooks).

    You can disagree with us, but it was more simple to build an army with those rules, and we would like to keep playing that version. It wasn't perfect, but we don't play competitive, so any "bugs" it might have, we will solve them in the table, taking the more obvious solution.