Mordheim Community Edition?

Tulkas

Mr. Shadowlord
Mordheim Professor
Mar 23, 2012
2,182
1,177
133
36
Netherlands, Groningen
How's about we, the few, the pestulent, the proud (mordheimers) use this thread to rant about all the bits we don't like about Mordheim (things that go against you mostly). I don't really feel there's that much wrong with the book tho, but there are always things that bother you at some point, or you might like someone else's thoughts about (apart from the guy on the other end of the table who'll be worse off because of it most likely).
edit: find the official, digital, slightly tweaked compared to the hardcopy rulebook of Mordheim, HERE. From now on, all discussions will be (read: should be) based on the rules and statistics found herein.

I'll start off, because this always happens....

For your warband's "wizard" (in my current case, Carnival of Chaos' Carnival Master), I always roll a spell I don't like. So my suggestion is: upon warband creation, your warband's hero that can cast a spell gets to choose the first spell he uses. The rest of them, he rolls as normal. Obviously, this does not go for any Hired Swords.


Thoughts and your issues please.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tulkas

Mr. Shadowlord
Mordheim Professor
Mar 23, 2012
2,182
1,177
133
36
Netherlands, Groningen
Also here's another one: Handguns suck. There is NO sane reason one would have for buying them, in my very long experience with Mordheim. I've owned the game since it came out and played that long as well, and none of us have ever used armour, apart from gromril armor and shield for my dwarf noble, and that was only me. So, why then would anyone buy a handgun, when the crossbow is better than it in every way.

My vote: make them S5. I thoroughly enjoy fielding my Dwarf Thunderers WYSIWYG (I have the Marauder Thunderers, they're brilliant) but I'm handicapping myself by giving them Handguns, so I think to make them logical in any way, this could be it. Either that, or give them something akin to NCE's High Impact (more chance for going OOA/ Dead). I would really like to hear the opinion of others on this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aulenback

spafe

Executive Officer in charge of Hats
Staff member
Necromunda Custodian
Yak Comp 2nd Place
Tribe Council
Feb 8, 2013
9,923
13,199
283
Tilehurst, U.k.
some known issues that we auto correct whenever we play (not been for a couple of years now...):

Duel weilding is too good, as weight of attacks is too useful. Either knock this off henchmen, or completly, or shield change below

Shield should give additional +1 in combat, this makes armour more worth while, and makes shields more worthwhile, and decreases the spam of duel weilding

Skaven sling/club spam is broken, leads to them dominating a campaign very quickly

Nurlges rot should be downgraded, easiest one is it cant spread to other members, and if they roll a 1 they halt the rot.

shadow elves are broken, either get stomped quickly or dominate later, either way fun is decreased for one side or other

Thats all the main fixes on the core rules plus empire in flames. Lustria and khemri backgrounds have massive balance issues, but they are fine if played within their own settings.... take that how you will
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aulenback

Tulkas

Mr. Shadowlord
Mordheim Professor
Mar 23, 2012
2,182
1,177
133
36
Netherlands, Groningen
I agree on all points there spafe, personally I never understood why axes cost more than clubs, as the latter have the advantage clearly.
Shields getting a bonus is also a thing I like, as many of my Dwarfs are equipped w. that. I think offhand attacks should be at a penalty, -1 to hit comes to mind but Id like to see it playtested first. Then a combat skill that removes the penalty. The only weapon I can think of right now to be the exception would be daggers. Also some weapons need the add that spears got, where you can only have a shield in the offhand, not another weapon. Morning stars maybe? More thought required as well.

I like the suggestion for Nurgles Rot. As for the Skaven/ Elf issue, I think by a) increasing the cost of clubs (5gc?) you might already remove some incentive for the spam, and b) simply pointing out to your opponent what a c*** he's being for going down that road, could go a long way. Also, not sure if it exists already, but hows about putting in a 25% ranged wpns cap? Eg, no more than 25% of your warband may be equipped with ranged weapons, pistols and throwing weapons not included.

Let me know what you think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Redwart

spafe

Executive Officer in charge of Hats
Staff member
Necromunda Custodian
Yak Comp 2nd Place
Tribe Council
Feb 8, 2013
9,923
13,199
283
Tilehurst, U.k.
the offhand one makes a lot of sense. I agree, some playtesting might be needed for that. My group found jsut the incentive to have shields meant that it balanced out nicely, but that is a very narrow field for playtesting, other groups would need to try it out for them too.

My gut is no to the morning star, but then thats down to my group play again, so if we can get one or 2 more groups to test these then go with the majority findings I think would be best.

The 25% thing sounds reasonable, although not looked into mordheim for years so off hand cant think through all the warbands to see the knock ons. I think if pistols and thrown weapons are excluded then I cant see a problem. TBH even just limiting it to slings would have covered our group well enough as bows cost enough that they cant readily be spammed too much.
 

Tulkas

Mr. Shadowlord
Mordheim Professor
Mar 23, 2012
2,182
1,177
133
36
Netherlands, Groningen
Agreed, tbh I don't understand why slings are 2gc either. (It's 2, right?) They should be around 10, 15 and then we also solve the spam problem. Come to think of it, the 25% rule might be a bad idea. From personal experience, Dwarfs can have 5 Thunderers, and 12 men total. So in a full warband, I could only have 3 thunderers. Being slow as they are, they need all the range they can get. So lets scrap that idea :). Slings just need to cost more, but not sure what. I would say 10 or 15, so lets start at 12gc?
 

MeanBone

Juve
Apr 28, 2011
19
7
3
Dubuque, Iowa, USA
As for guns, if you cut the price of armor (we drop it by 40%) then more people buy it and guns become more useful with their added armor penetration. I think historically, penetrating armor was really the driving force behind the development of firearms.

We also make shields +2 in close combat (so you have a 5+ save if you have only a shield) and +1 against shooting -- makes sense, as it's harder to block a fast projectile.

We have dual wielding as -1 to hit with the extra weapon and the extra attack strikes last (except for daggers, pistols, and fighting claws). Heroes can gain a combat skill -- two-weapon fighting -- to remove these penalties. With the boost to shields in close combat, and the increased presence of armor making 2-handed weapons more desirable, dual wielding is no longer the obvious best choice.

Hope this helps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spafe and Tulkas

spafe

Executive Officer in charge of Hats
Staff member
Necromunda Custodian
Yak Comp 2nd Place
Tribe Council
Feb 8, 2013
9,923
13,199
283
Tilehurst, U.k.
They all seem like good ways to combat the lack of armour, spam of slings and obvs choice of 2 weapons! I like them all :)
 

Tulkas

Mr. Shadowlord
Mordheim Professor
Mar 23, 2012
2,182
1,177
133
36
Netherlands, Groningen
So, to summarise a few things: (comments on this please, to see if I'm getting it right).
--------------------------
Dual wielding is too strong. Any model dual wielding one-handed weapons that are allowed to be wielded in the offhand* suffer a -1 to hit with this weapon.
The combat skill Two weapon fighting removes this penalty. (Add Two Weapon fighting as a Skill to the Combat skills list).
--------------------------
Combining Shields with a one handed melee weapon (swords, axes and maces** and their special metal variants) provides another +1 armour save bonus to the Shield's armour save. This save (offcourse) combines with other types of armour saves.
--------------------------
The price of Slings is increased to 12 gold crowns.
--------------------------
The price of Clubs is increased to 5 gold crowns.
--------------------------
The price of Light armour is decreased to 12 gold crowns.
--------------------------
The price of Heavy armour is decreased to 30 gold crowns.
--------------------------


*Weapons allowed to be wielded in the off-hand: I'm going through this as I write, but I think so far the ones that stand out are spears and morning stars. Not yet addressing warband specific weapons such as Fighting Claws (which I don't see anything wrong with) and/ or weapons from other campaign settings.

**
If you don't understand that this includes Hammers and clubs, we shouldn't be speaking :p

Right, that's it for now. These are mostly the changes that _I_ like, if you agree/ disagree, let me know. I don't want a full re-write (lots of changes) just to tweak the weakspots. In my opinion this should be enough on the issues in this post. Nurgle's Rot and Shadow Elves are still something that can use work I think, but like I said, this is just the summary post so far.

If anyone wants me to elaborate on any of these changes, please ask, tho I would like to say I think all the clarifications for suggested changes can be found in posts in this thread.
 

Tulkas

Mr. Shadowlord
Mordheim Professor
Mar 23, 2012
2,182
1,177
133
36
Netherlands, Groningen
New point: should a close combat pistol attack have a Strike First rule identical to spears? I realise Crossbow pistols have a similar (tho very different) rule (I just read this after posting, tho still would like to throw it out there).
 

spafe

Executive Officer in charge of Hats
Staff member
Necromunda Custodian
Yak Comp 2nd Place
Tribe Council
Feb 8, 2013
9,923
13,199
283
Tilehurst, U.k.
Sorry, i'm confused byt he weilding offhand thing. Are you saying spears and morning stars cannot be weilded in offhand?

I would also include spear in the shield rule. Also specify that the extra save is only in combat.

I really like this summary so far though. One which I think we will need to keep an eye on is the cost of axes possibly. As armour useage increases I think axes may become too obvs a choice at their current cost. Would take a fair bit of playtesting first though.
 

MeanBone

Juve
Apr 28, 2011
19
7
3
Dubuque, Iowa, USA
Yeah, I think most of these changes address the most problematic issues that created a clear superiority for dual-wielding over using a weapon and shield or using a 2-handed weapon. 1) Penalize the extra attack 2) Boost the value of a shield, and 3) Make 2-handed weapons more useful by increasing the presence of armor.

As for slings, I preferred to nerf them (victim gets +1 to armor save and -1 to injury roll) rather than jack up their price to an unrealistic level. A sling at 12 gc costs more than a sword, which just doesn't make sense to me. You could also reduce their range slightly (to 14 or 16 inches) to nerf them further. I think Skaven and Sisters should be primarily hand-to-hand warbands, with slings giving them just a bare minimum of shooting.

Should pistols attack first in close combat? Makes perfect sense to me. They're fairly expensive (15 gc) and have a very short range for actual shooting (6 inches -- there should be no penalty for shooting at "long range" with them, either), and you only get one shot in each combat.

As for crossbow pistols, I don't think we've ever used them, and looking at their rules closer I can see why we haven't! That "shoot first at -2 in close combat" rule hardly justifies their ridiculous cost (35 gc!) -- as with a pistol, you get one shot per combat, but a crossbow pistol would usually need a 5 or 6 to hit (as opposed to a pistol which uses Weapon Skill, so you would typically need a 3 or 4 to hit with that). It would make sense to streamline these rules: Make the crossbow pistol 25 gc (it does have 4 inches longer range than a pistol when used for shooting, and you can fire it every turn) and then give it the same rules for close combat as a pistol, aside from the -2 save modifier that black powder weapons receive. Maybe take away the opponent's option to parry the crossbow pistol, to keep with the concept that it's a quick, stealthy weapon favored by assassins -- and to further justify the high cost.

Wow, this ran on for a bit ...
 

Tulkas

Mr. Shadowlord
Mordheim Professor
Mar 23, 2012
2,182
1,177
133
36
Netherlands, Groningen
Right, to clarify: GW released an online version of the rulebook at some point, in which they put in a slight addendum. In this, Morning Stars and Spears can only be used in combination with a shield in the offhand. I realise not everyone is aware of this fact, but it's an official improvement of which I'm very happy. I'm quoting here: If this version of the Mordheim Rulebook is not in the library, I can upload it @Malo . edit: FIND IT HERE

Morning star
A morning star consists of a wooden or steel shaft with heavy chains that have spiked steel
balls attached. It is very destructive and requires great skill to wield effectively.
Range: Close Combat; Strength: As user +1; Special Rules: Heavy, Difficult to use
SPECIAL RULES
Heavy: The morning star is extremely tiring to use, so its +1 Strength
bonus applies only in the first turn of each hand-to-hand combat.
Difficult to use: A model with a morning star may not use a second
weapon or buckler in his other hand because it requires all his skill to
wield it. He may carry a shield as normal though.

Spear
Spears range from sharpened sticks used by
Goblins to the impressive cavalry spears
typical of the Elves.
Range: Close Combat; Strength: As user;
Special Rules: Strike first, Unwieldy,
Cavalry bonus
SPECIAL RULES
Strike first: A warrior with a
spear strikes first in the first turn of
hand-to-hand combat.
Unwieldy: A warrior with a spear may
only use a shield or a buckler in his
other hand. He may not use a second
weapon.
Cavalry bonus: If using
the rules for mounted
models, a mounted
warrior armed with a
spear receives a +1
Strength bonus when he
charges. This bonus only
applies for that turn.

The reason I did not add spears to the +1 armour rule is twofold: Warhammer doesn't have it (AFAIK) and that's where the shield+ccw=+1 AS idea originally came from, plus speaking from personal, limited, melee fighting experience (re-enactor) a spear wields far differently than one of the other CCWs. Plus you already get to strike first with a spear, extra armour seems like having cake and eating it (which I always thought was the point of having cake but lets not start thát up).

Also, I would recommend browsing this new version of the Mordheim Rulebook beforehand, as I do not see the "parry crossbowpistol" part anymore either. I think they ironed out quite a few small things already.

As far as pistols and long range go, I have two ideas: Either change the rule for Duelling pistols to no penalty at long range (which in my opinion fits the fluff of a duelling pistol, accurate at long range) or remove the long range penalty for all pistols (blackpowder and crossbow pistols) which further strengthens the duelling pistol.

I still believe slings should cost more than the 2gc they do at the moment. They are BETTER than short bows (more range) and they have the sweet trick of two shots at half range? Right they're not as good as bows, which cost 10, so how's about 8gc for slings (still like the idea of 12gc) The idea of weakening slings again seems wrong, if you use a sling with a steel ball, it's a murdering weapon. It's S3 so all armour saves you might have still work fully, they don't need another armour save penalty I think.

Price of axes to be raised, what with the increased chance of encounterin armour: I believe all three melee weapons could or should cost 10gc. Either you knock him out, you cut him easier, or you parry his attacks. I need to playtest this, but please consider.

Right before I loose track of everything said and posted, I'll keep it at this. Please, C&C.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

spafe

Executive Officer in charge of Hats
Staff member
Necromunda Custodian
Yak Comp 2nd Place
Tribe Council
Feb 8, 2013
9,923
13,199
283
Tilehurst, U.k.
Thats what I get for downloading the digital version but still looking in my old battered hard copy! I respectfully retract my comments regarding the spears and morning stars :)

I would rate them as 6 for clubs, 8 for axes and 10 for swords, as my gut reaction, but might be wrong. This also shows the cost of steel/metals compared to wood (happy coincidence more than design).

I would go with just dueling pistols losing the long range neg, as it sets it as a pistol above the rest in terms of quality.

I have xbow pistols with the first shot in combat on my digital copy at -2 to hit using bs, but as an additional attack. looking at it, I think its cost should be maybe only 25 with the increase of armour, as it lacks the armour piercing, but is str 4 and can shoot every turn plus its weird snapshot thing before combat proper (note it doesnt stop you weilding 2 different weapons!)

Edit: Also slings are just throwing rocks... I'm not sure they are exactly murder weapons like a bow...I would say cost 8 and have range go to 14...but am not really happy with this either, really not sure how to deal with slings...
 

Tulkas

Mr. Shadowlord
Mordheim Professor
Mar 23, 2012
2,182
1,177
133
36
Netherlands, Groningen
A few things on slings:
for accuracy and a look at speed, and keep in mind these are "light" tennis balls (and thus travel less fast as they explain in the second video).

Something with a little more science in it (amongst others :rolleyes:)

Slings, in the hands of a capable wielder, are deadly weapons. Alot more than just "throwing stones". Agreed, they are also the cheapest weapons to make but the gold crowns in Mordheim don't just represent value, they are also to help balance things. The Skaven sling/mace mob is a clear example of a low price unbalancing things.

I would also like to hear from other people about changing Duelling pistols' accuracy rule to be changed from '+1 to hit' to 'does not suffer from penalties at long range.' It's a flavor thing, but in my opinion more flavourful representative of a Duelling pistol's fine balance.
 

MeanBone

Juve
Apr 28, 2011
19
7
3
Dubuque, Iowa, USA
Right, the digital rulebook released by GW is the one I'm using.

No doubt, slings are very dangerous and CAN kill, but after watching the videos above, I'd still rather have a rock or even a steel ball coming at me than an arrow from a bow (not that either one sounds appealing). If the sling hits in the head, it can definitely be lethal, but the arrow can hit elsewhere and kill. Slings should not be better than short bows, and the sling's "two shots at half range" rule can be tossed out, too: Is it really faster to load up a second rock, swing it around three times and release than it would be to nock another arrow, aim and release?

As for spears, a shield, buckler or dagger in the off-hand would seem to make sense, but anything else would be unwieldy.

Getting rid of the "long range" penalty for all pistols also seems like a good choice -- 10 inches or less really isn't "long range" anyway.
 
Last edited:

Tulkas

Mr. Shadowlord
Mordheim Professor
Mar 23, 2012
2,182
1,177
133
36
Netherlands, Groningen
I think the slings' fire twice at half range just adds something different for funsies, otherwise might as well remove it complete and give warbands with access to slings access to short bows/ bows (which I don't want to do).
 

MeanBone

Juve
Apr 28, 2011
19
7
3
Dubuque, Iowa, USA
Or just nerf slings so they are a little less likely to wound/injure than short bows. But as for game balance, yeah, you either have to jack up the price of slings to a higher cost than a mace or a shield, or nerf them so they just give the close-combat warbands that use them a low level of shooting.

Edit: The more I think about it, that bonus of "fire twice at half range with a -1 penalty to each shot" really should go to bows, not slings -- both from a price/game balance standpoint and a practical standpoint.

For a BS 3 henchman shooting at half range (no cover or movement penalty), you would have a 1-in-2 chance to hit if you fire once. If you fire twice at half range (with the -1 penalty), you have a 4-in-9 chance to hit once, plus a 1-in-9 chance to hit twice. So it is worth shooting twice at half range, even with the -1 penalty to each shot.

From a practical standpoint, loading the rock and swinging the sling to build momentum takes more time than nocking an arrow, pulling and releasing. As for price/game balance, a sling costs only 2 gc, while a short bow costs 5 and a bow costs 10.

If any weapon should get a boost, it's the bow over the sling.
 
Last edited:

spafe

Executive Officer in charge of Hats
Staff member
Necromunda Custodian
Yak Comp 2nd Place
Tribe Council
Feb 8, 2013
9,923
13,199
283
Tilehurst, U.k.
I like this solution, thinking about the warbands with accesses. skaven have numbers so can still get a lot of shots even with 1 shot per sling, but warbands with less shooting options can also then build up a level of firepower with 2 shots per bow...