What's In A Name Like The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles?

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

  • What's In A Name Like The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles?

    Please move if posted in the wrong section. @Pellegrim brought up the point that the name of the 9th Age is not strong enough, not memorable enough, doesn't have sufficient ring like names such as Warhammer or Frostgrave or Warcraft have. As @Eisenhans pointed out, it is usually highly detrimental to change well-known brand names, as various marketing disasters have shown, and perhaps it is indeed too late, but the issue needs to be discussed. Let's start in this end:


    • What do you and your friends think of The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles as a name?

    • And more importantly as per Pellegrim's point: What does uniniated people think of the name The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles? Especially those not familiar with Warhammer Fantasy previously.

    • And what do you, your friends and uninitiated people think of names such as Warhammer: Age of Sigmar, Kings of War and Frostgrave?

    • What would you and other T9A players and people knowing of the Ninth Age think if the wargame was to change name?


    Please ask relevant people in your social circles, and relevant strangers which you may encounter, and share the feedback.

    One thing is obvious: If something as fundamental as a name shall be changed, it must be changed as early as possible. The later, the greater the damage. Perhaps it is way too late, perhaps it is fundamentally uncalled for, perhaps it would be nothing but a source of confusion and loss of interest, or perhaps it is urgently needed for long-term gain and growth?

    _____________
    * I'm not advocating a name change and like the ring of the name myself - sticks out from the crowd and sparks the imagination - but it needs to be aired.

    The post was edited 10 times, last by Karak Norn Clansman ().

  • I like the current name. It is something different. Something people who are not familiar with and directly ask to explain. All those "Warhammer", "Kings of War", "Clash of Clans" things are always directly confused with "Warcraft". And therefore absolutely no interest. This is different with T9A.

    Nevertheless the name Frostgrave is really extraordniary cool, but it does like T9A not follow any typical stream of naming - which makes it simply cool ;)
    :VS: The Vermin Swarm is not mad, madness is to kill a dragon with your very last shot - Rattnarök Dragonslayer
  • Here are all the quotes from the relevant thread:

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Agree. 2.0 would be a great time to replace the name The 9th Age with a better name also. I know I'm being insensitive but 9th Age is an ok working name at best.

    Needs to be easy, powerfull, simple and cool. Examples:

    Saga of War
    Dawn of War
    Origin Wars
    Titans of War

    Saga of Battle
    Dawn of Battle
    Origin Batlles
    Titans of Battle

    Blood Saga
    Blood Dawn

    Stuff like that..

    Dalinar wrote:

    Personally I, and this is merely my own opinion, disagree with this ^. I quite like the name, and feel it sets us apart.

    Squirrelloid wrote:

    Ah hell no.
    That's like the suburbs around Chicago. They put a bunch of nouns into a pot, and took turns drawing two (with replacement). So we've got Oak Forest, Forest Oaks, River Oaks, River Forest, Oak Park, Forest Park, Park Forest, Park Ridge, Oak Lawn, Oak Brook, River Grove, Riverdale, etc... (I made one, and only one, of those up. Good luck figuring out which one).

    Slam two random 'thematic' nouns together is a terrible idea.

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Thats a nice theory. Imo the name does not stick, and people tend to forget it alltogether. It's just not a good name for a game. "Age" is ok, not very strong, and "9th" is weak; it's only relevant as an association with 8th ed., which we really should leave behind soon.

    Pellegrim wrote:

    @Squirrelloid your examples are .., well off topic. A good name is not about slaming together words - it's much more then that. The words need to associate and combine to stick. And need to sound good.

    Think of great names like Frost Grave.

    And poor ones like Kings of War -> too cheesy.

    A good name is def. worth it.

    Stygian wrote:

    Conflicthammer!

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Lol

    Keg Hammer!

    No but serious, we can make a great name, or a nutty one / but one with some x-factor.

    R we off topic btw?

    Karak Norn Clansman wrote:

    Blood of Ages.

    Though I like the ring of Ninth Age. Associations with Tolkien and history, hinting at many eventful centuries and millennia in the background. Something that sticks out amid the competition.

    As for a true world name, I might reject anything not grounded in short stout people with beards. What does those longshanks know, after all? :D

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Blood of Ages is saaaweeeet

    Pellegrim wrote:

    On second thought it's not that great. Ages isnt that strong.

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Tides of War

    Rise of War

    Marks of War

    Carcearion wrote:

    Considering your main competitors are Age of Sigmar and Kings of War in the search for a new name I'd avoid "Age of X" and "X of War"

    Personally I like the 9th Age...

    Salix wrote:

    Sēdecim, the battlefield of the sixteen

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Using the word "war" is powerfull, and it associates well with what the game represent , and shouldn't be ruled out because if other games use it. It is the collective word of what those games stand for, and it's just a little better then "battle".

    Squirrelloid wrote:

    Carcearion wrote:

    Considering your main competitors are Age of Sigmar and Kings of War in the search for a new name I'd avoid "Age of X" and "X of War"

    Personally I like the 9th Age...
    But Age of War! Noun mashup!
    (Wait, I think T9A has one as one of the 9 ages... :huh: )

    Giladis wrote:

    Though I have no intention to change the name of the brand one of the names that I would find sufficiently well sounding amd bit tongue in cheek considering the main demographis is

    CENTURIES OF CONFLICT

    That way people can just amswer what you are playing with "I am playing coc" :D

    There Is No Spoon wrote:

    Sounds fun, here are some more :P :
    • Practical Multiculturalism
    • The Land of 6x4
    • Dicey Times

    Karak Norn Clansman wrote:

    Pellegrim wrote:

    On second thought it's not that great. Ages isnt that strong.
    On the contrary "age" is quite strong, but in a more insidious way. It carries connotations of deep history and tingles the intellect, leaving you wanting to know more. This is why the 9th Age is a good wargame name. I was never put off by hearing it, on the contrary it raised curiosity. It stands out from the competition, and this is a strength.
    Just to illustrate:

    Age of War
    Bronze Age Warfare
    Age of Chaos
    The Dead Age
    Iron Age
    Age of Tyranny

    Or put differently: "It's hammertime!"

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Agree it's not bad. But lacks punch and coverage imo compared to other names. This a a war game. War or something very similar has to be in it. It is so important for carying the purpose of the game, as a value in the name.

    WastelandWarrior wrote:

    There Is No Spoon wrote:

    Sounds fun, here are some more :P :
    • Practical Multiculturalism
    • The Land of 6x4
    • Dicey Times

    +1 for dicey times! Maybe angley, angley, chaff chaff? Or cowboy cavalcade ;)

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Dicey Times is pretty brilliant :)

    Eisenhans wrote:

    It would be detrimental for the game to change name; if you have a brand that works one thing you do not ever do is rebranding it, my experience is that it goes badly roughly 85% of the time - I've been working sales for as long as I can remember. I know we are not selling the game per say but the mechanics of branding still apply and to do a name change without marketing (read MONEY) is pretty much suicide.
    Of course there is a connection to the game who shall not be mentioned but that only adds viability to our game as the ones keeping the tradition of the game going.
    If a renaming of the game should happen it cannot be from a unique name like we have, "The ninth age" demands to be explained when you hear it, to a generic name say "age of *something" or "*something* war" which just doesn't spark an interest. To diversify ourselves from other games if the generic road is chosen (IMO total crap) the background world must be finished and used in the name eg; "Age of Sunna" or for a campaign "Lhugar's war". As for specific words they only draw attention in the context they are in "Age of Sigmar", "Blitzkrieg" (krieg=war), "War of the roses" these are good examples; a bad example would be for instance "age of war" since it doesn't explain what it's about nor does it spark an interest like the others.

    On subject: Just call it a local name for earth OR as a possible extended middle finger to "the old world" creator's you can call it "The new world"

    Whatever happens with the name be sure that you always kill as many elves you can whenever possible, the knife-ears must die! :thumbsup:

    DeBelial wrote:

    I'm against changing a name of a game. I'd like a name of the world to be introduced, but name of the game itself has spread and is well recognised.

    I would like to be able to describe to someone that "I play The Ninth Age, fantasy battles game set in the world of (insert name)"☺

    Pellegrim wrote:

    I'm so happy every fanboy loves for T9A to remain niche.

    Think larger. The fanbase is still incrowd ex-wfb. If there is any ambition beyond that, pm or summon me.

    Salix wrote:

    I think Dicey Times would be a great skirmish game spin off in ten years. Have we said

    Earth in the 9th age

    Or

    Adjective Mars


    yet? Then we could use continental drift maps... just remembered we already have a very nice map.

    Why does it need to be a planet? All this could be happening on the back of one of the Great A'tuin's children. Then the edge of the map we have isn't just the edge of the known world, it is the Edge. Magic could be more powerful b/c younger world turtle. Many peoples on the Disc don't believe in Great A'tuin, so any race that wanted its own folklore could have it. EoS could be a little embarrassed about knowing the Truth.

    Then the Turtle's name could just be

    Bellum

    Social Media Team

    UN Coordinator, aka UNSG

    - druchii.net contribution: The 9th Age - Dread Elves
  • Karak Norn Clansman wrote:

    Please move if posted in the wrong section. @Pellegrim brought up the point that the name of the 9th Age is not strong enough, not memorable enough, doesn't have sufficient ring like names such as Warhammer or Frostgrave or Warcraft have. As @Eisenhans pointed out, it is usually highly detrimental to change well-known brand names, as various marketing disasters have shown, and perhaps it is indeed too late, but the issue needs to be discussed. Let's start in this end:


    • What do you and your friends think of The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles as a name?

    • And more importantly as per Pellegrim's point: What does uniniated people think of the name The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles? Especially those not familiar with Warhammer Fantasy previously.

    • And what do you, your friends and uninitiated people think of names such as Warhammer: Age of Sigmar, Kings of War and Frostgrave?

    • What would you and other T9A players and people knowing of the Ninth Age think if the wargame was to change name?


    Please ask relevant people in your social circles, and relevant strangers which you may encounter, and share the feedback.

    One thing is obvious: If something as fundamental as a name shall be changed, it must be changed as early as possible. The later, the greater the damage. Perhaps it is way too late, perhaps it is fundamentally uncalled for, perhaps it would be nothing but a source of confusion and loss of interest, or perhaps it is urgently needed for long-term gain and growth?

    _____________
    * I'm not advocating a name change and like the ring of the name myself - sticks out from the crowd and sparks the imagination - but it needs to be aired.
    Honestly everyone I know usually just calls it warhammer or fantasy. Sometimes T9A. Changing the name would mean little to us.

    To us:
    Warhammer = 9th age
    Age of Sigmar = Age of Suckmore
    Kings of War = models for 9th age
    Frostgrave = Frostgrave
    AVOIDANCE FAILS 28% OF THE TIME FOLKS. -SE
    Undying Deathstar Construction Inc.
  • Thing is, both The Old World and Middle Earth, are just the more explored regions in much bigger worlds (and pretty much meaningless names in themselves). Pretty sure warhammer fantasy just took place in "The world of Warhammer" and I doubt many people know what the world Middle Earth is part of, is called.

    Strictly speaking, I doubt it matters - to my family it's all just "playing with miniatures" and that's only because I've repeatedly insisted my wargaming miniatures certainly not are dolls!

    Does people who don't know cars prefer Ford or Toyota? Does people who don't know computes prefer Apple or Windows? One is a fruit the other is a looking hole in a house.

    If the game is good and people enjoy it I believe people will play it, even if it has a silly name such as Chess.

    Edit more: For people living without knowledge of the background - I get a title like Dragon Age. It's an age and there are implied Dragons. For people who don't know WFB lore what does AOS imply? Age of some germanic dude but then it turn out there is steampunk dwarfs and fantasy space marines.

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

  • Karak Norn Clansman wrote:

    Please move if posted in the wrong section. @Pellegrim brought up the point that the name of the 9th Age is not strong enough, not memorable enough, doesn't have sufficient ring like names such as Warhammer or Frostgrave or Warcraft have. As @Eisenhans pointed out, it is usually highly detrimental to change well-known brand names, as various marketing disasters have shown, and perhaps it is indeed too late, but the issue needs to be discussed. Let's start in this end:


    • What do you and your friends think of The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles as a name?

    • And more importantly as per Pellegrim's point: What does uniniated people think of the name The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles? Especially those not familiar with Warhammer Fantasy previously.

    • And what do you, your friends and uninitiated people think of names such as Warhammer: Age of Sigmar, Kings of War and Frostgrave?

    • What would you and other T9A players and people knowing of the Ninth Age think if the wargame was to change name?


    Please ask relevant people in your social circles, and relevant strangers which you may encounter, and share the feedback.

    One thing is obvious: If something as fundamental as a name shall be changed, it must be changed as early as possible. The later, the greater the damage. Perhaps it is way too late, perhaps it is fundamentally uncalled for, perhaps it would be nothing but a source of confusion and loss of interest, or perhaps it is urgently needed for long-term gain and growth?

    _____________
    * I'm not advocating a name change and like the ring of the name myself - sticks out from the crowd and sparks the imagination - but it needs to be aired.
    and do some actual marketing? Good idea :) Though considering the availeble time and scarce resources I know there's probably no chance to do so.

    Perhaps we can ask new players here: what do you think of the name "The 9th Age"?
    Carry of fancy a beard? Come over to bugmansbrewery.com/, a massive hold for anything Dwarf related
  • The 9th Age or T9A are established names now that work and are reckognized.

    IF somebody really wanted to change the name of this brand now, it must be something extraordinaryly cool. None of the above suggestions wiuld qualify, they are just bland and interchangeable...

    Changing a brand's name is giving up a lot of its capital, this should not be taken lightly.

    Monstagoblin wrote:

    Weniger weinen, besser spielen
  • Pellegrim wrote:

    Smythen, Kristian, both members sinds 2015, so not rooks, rather fanboys since the start I assume.
    Assume? Well you know what they say....

    I'm not new to wargaming at all, been playing since late 80's, but I would not call myself a 9th age fanboy. As long as the creators consider 9th the spiritual successor to WHFB, then keeping the name makes sence for those who transition from the old to the new. My own thought is that very, very few actual new wargamers, will have 9th as their gateway into wargaming. Keeping a name that bridges the gap makes a lot of sence.

    Changing it to something new might alienate current players and make the transition of older WHFB players harder.
    A new name might get in more actual new wargamers, but I guess that will be a minority compared to gamers that can still he siphoned from older wargamers.
  • I've given this a good deal of thought. I'm not sure that changing the name at this point is a good idea. In fact I think changing the name at this point would be a very bad idea.

    When I hear "9th Age", it compels me to ask questions, it draws me in....it's the 9th Age, so that that means other ages came before it. Why is it now the 9th Age of this world? I am curious and interested in what happened in the previous 8 Ages, etc. etc.

    What I really love about "9th Age" is that the name DOESN'T try to explain anything about the world. It simply says what the current time of the world is, and therefore you feel like you're being invited into taking part in something rather than having a name that TELLS YOU what you're supposed to be doing in the game.

    I also feel that 9th Age is a strong name precisely because it DOESN'T have the word "war" in it. The two other primary fantasy battles games out there now have "Age" and "War" in their names, but in GW's case it references a new age of a specific character (Sigmar), which I find compelling. Kings of War is to me really a cliche name that they came up with because they needed something that wasn't Warhammer Fantasy Battle. But I think Kings of War does go a bit too cheesy, it's too obvious.

    Squirrelloid made a really good point in a post a little while back. Hacking and chopping together those generic, classic, cliche war and battle terms really does feel like you're trying to come up with tired old names for roads and streets when all the other names have been taken...i.e. let's see how many different combinations of "Oak" can we make with "River" and "Ridge", etc.

    I feel strongly that words like "Saga" or "Dawn of" should be avoided at all costs. Again, too obvious. The fantasy genre has been so thoroughly scoured over the past fifty years, authors struggle to come up with names a reading audience will buy into and actually believe in.

    In reading through this thread, I was reminded of George Lucas and the documentary about making the Star Wars movies. One thing he always kept in mind in creating his own modern-day myth was that if you want people to believe in the world you are presenting to them, DON'T explain how and why everything works. Before Star Wars, classic space fantasy like Flash Gordon and other stuff would actually take time out and have a scene telling the audience for example how teleporters work. A character would actually stand there and explain it. That in many ways undermines the believability of the world because the writer feels that he or she needs to explain it to the audience and doesn't give them credit that they'll buy into it simply because of its own merits.

    You'll notice if you watch the original Star Wars trilogy, NOWHERE does George Lucas ever have a scene in the movies that explain in a scientific way how hyperspace works, or the technical details behind how people can communicate between ships, how the Death Star's planet-killing laser works, not even how or why regular laser guns work. Lucas simply implies that in this world, in this story, these things are REAL and they simply work because the story has them in it. There is a scene in Luke's house on Tatooine where he's having breakfast with his aunt and uncle. Luke is having what appears to be some kind of cereal, and he reaches for what seems to be some kind of milk to put in it. And the milk is BLUE.

    What's crucial here, and this might seem very trivial but it's not, is that when you watch that scene - NONE of the characters stop to explain why the milk is blue. In the Star Wars universe, breakfast milk is blue. It just IS. Therefore, as you watch the actors play out the scene, you BELIEVE they are a real family living on a farm on a desert planet. And that is why Star Wars works. You don't need to know why the milk in Luke's cereal is blue. The believability and credibility comes in that you're seeing something familiar: breakfast is a universal concept, pouring liquid into a dry cereal is familiar to us. The blue milk is saying to the audience, "this is our world, this is what we do, this is what we eat", and you accept it.

    You believe in the world of Star Wars because "it believes in itself". You buy into it and take it seriously because it DOESN'T try to justify itself.

    This is why I think 9th Age is actually a VERY strong name for this game and that it might be disastrous to try to "rebrand" it now. I'm thinking of when Coca Cola was renamed "New Coke" and how huge of a failure that was, they renamed it back to the original name and haven't changed it again since. That was like thirty years ago. Coca Cola corporation learned pretty quick that you don't mess with something if it isn't broken!

    For these reasons, renaming this game something like "Saga of War" or "Age of Battles" or "Dawn of Conflict" is a TERRIBLE idea. Those names are attempts to try to justify the game to an audience, and people sense that. Words like "blood" or "death" in the name are even worse. It's like you're taking the gaming audience by the hand and explaining to them that a fantasy battle game is going to have blood and death in it, as if they don't already know that!

    "The 9th Age" in my mind is actually brilliant in its simplicity. There is a danger here of overthinking this and really doing more harm than good. Whatever your feelings about GW are, think about the sheer brilliance of "40k". It's a three-character name that has become synonymous with fantasy space combat! Think about it! You don't even have to say the "Warhammer" part! People simply play "40k". It's literally become a noun in gaming. That is brilliant marketing. Like when you say, "I'm going to drink a Coke." You don't even think about it. Coke is a noun, a Coke IS soda.

    People who might want to get into wargaming or are coming from another kind of wargaming like skirmish are going to know that 9th Age is a fantasy battle game. The name doesn't have to tell them that.

    A final thought: All the brainstorming going on about what to call the actual world in which all the different factions inhabit?

    Again, I would go with something ambiguous over something obvious. Don't try to imply or explain anything in the name of the world they inhabit.

    How about something like the Russian word for "realm", like "Oblast"?

    Or maybe the Romanian word for "realm", like "Taram"?

    "Epic battles fought in the lands of Taram", or "Neverending war in the great realm of Oblast"...
    There are many magic rings in the world Bilbo Baggins, and none of them should be used lightly!

    The post was edited 4 times, last by Baranovich ().

  • Pellegrim wrote:

    Smythen, Kristian, both members sinds 2015, so not rooks, rather fanboys since the start I assume.
    Pell, just a friendly note:

    I don't think it's fair or constructive to call members who happen to like the name 9th Age fanboys. My post above explains in detail why I love the name 9th Age: and I am most certainly not a fanboy of anything, I simply happen to think it's a great name for the game. :)
    There are many magic rings in the world Bilbo Baggins, and none of them should be used lightly!
  • Right, I didnt have the negative association with the word fanboy in mind. But we're all fanboys in a way, and I am not going to be sensitive about it by denying it.

    Also. I am not pushing for a name change, but I surely want to open to discussion about it, certainly with the big release of 2.0 coming along soon, which is to offer long stability.

    The 9th Age is not a great name, in my opinion, and we need to rid ourselves of any relationship with 8th ed of another games, as that link will lose any value very soon, except for olhammers like us. If we decide to focus on new blood, we should look into it, but we have to do other things, like streamlining miniature model demand with production, and releasing PR material, going out there; something we started doing but never really got tracktion (I wont go into detail as of why).

    Maybe we do not want to do all those things; it's a matter of where we want this hobby to be in 5 or 10 years.

    And not going out big doesn't mean we can not do more - I hardly see any PR outside our own channels - that is something staff and players alike can change by going out on other forums / media and spreading the word.
    Carry of fancy a beard? Come over to bugmansbrewery.com/, a massive hold for anything Dwarf related
  • What I like about "The 9th Age" from a background perspective is that it implies that there were, you know, another 8 ages before that! :)

    That's an invitation to explore the background, learn about the (cryptic?) past of the world the game is set in.

    Although when you look at other successful games, they do put a bit more work into their title:
    - Memoir '44
    - Confrontation
    - Legend of the Five Rings

    To state a few.

    @Pellegrim: you'll see more activity from outside channels the moment that hobby shops get the ability to stock T9A books and eventually starter sets. ;)
    Making up Battle Reports since 1995
    9th Age Battle Reports
  • SmithF wrote:

    @Pellegrim: you'll see more activity from outside channels the moment that hobby shops get the ability to stock T9A books and eventually starter sets.
    Sure, but there is much much more we can do currently. A shop won't go mental by being able to offer one rulebook @SmithF. I don't mean to offend people who already work their hinds off doing great things for T9A. I'm saying we could launch 2.0 big, with a external PR campaign, printable book ready, a few models ready, etc. Maybe a new name ;) . It would work well a combined effort, in which we coordinate things, and also mobilise the players etc..
    Carry of fancy a beard? Come over to bugmansbrewery.com/, a massive hold for anything Dwarf related

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

  • Baranovich wrote:

    Or maybe the Romanian word for "realm", like "Taram"?

    Similar to the latin word for ground, which is Terram. Different from Terra and from Earth. I think that could work for the planet's name. Could also have some people call it 'The Globe'. Naming a world after it's shape worked for Discworld, after all. =P

    Campaign Team


  • I like T9A. I only have one minor issue with it: it is rather difficult to pronounce. It doesn't roll off the tongue like AoS or KoW.
    On the other hand it doesn't sound like the record of a cheesy metal band, which is a big plus in my opinion. :D (Nothing against cheesy metal bands. The 'cheese' is part of their charm. I just don't like it for a tabletop game.)
    Words like 'War' or 'Blood' should be avoided. The whole 'Noun of Noun' construct is so overused that everything named like that sounds like a knock-off to my ears. Even more so if one of the nouns is something like 'war', 'shadow', 'darkness', 'blood' etc.
  • Pellegrim wrote:

    Saga of War
    Dawn of War
    Origin Wars
    Titans of War

    Saga of Battle
    Dawn of Battle
    Origin Batlles
    Titans of Battle

    Blood Saga
    Blood Dawn

    Stuff like that..
    No, none of these, nothing like these please. Nothing that sounds like a cheap, terrible and exploitative mobile game. The point was to get a memorable and maybe even iconic (?) name, not something ultrageneric. Warface! Ugh.

    I think Ninth Age is an interesting name, even beautiful. I don't think I know its justification beyond it being what comes after 8th, but maybe there's some interesting history there.
    Let us lock blades
    You claim whatever you please
    I claim no right but you

    ― Badalle