Now that I have my Old World rulebooks after some delay I figured it would be a good time to write down my pregame impressions, just like I did for Age of Sigmar. As a reminder these are my impressions before playing any games. Ive read the various rulebooks and watched some battle reports, but have not gotten any table time myself. Once I get my first game in I will write and update article, and again after Ive had a substantial number of games in. So once again I will write out things Im excited for, and things that make me hesitant about the game.
But first a little background: I started my tabletop journey with Warhammer Fantasy (7th edition at the time) so I was very excited when Games Workshop announced they would be bringing it back, and have been patiently waiting for it ever since. For a long time Fantasy was my favorite game, and I even continued to play it for a bit after it died. Often times I would look back fondly on Fantasy as an amazing game that led me down the path of tabletop gaming. But, and this is a big but, I think at least some of that is with rose colored glasses. At the time when I started, I had no exposure to other games, and there definitely weren’t any major players on the market when compared to GW, like we have today. So while I will always look back fondly on Fantasy, I think some of its aspects need to stay in the past. That’s not to say that Im not excited for Old World, I am! Quite excited actually. And after reading the rules Im very optimistic for the game, but I want to put that out there first to acknowledge that I have bias going into this, but not enough to realize some parts of the game may be disappointing.
Excited:
Customization- One of the things I liked so much about fantasy was the customization options. You could customize what magic items a character gets, what a unit is armed with, even the number of models in a unit was customizable. Every army could be unique. And it seems that was brought back in The Old World. This time theres even a few more options, like choosing if a unit is open or closed order. Games these days don’t usually offer this level of customization. Most games let you pick what a unit is armed with, but are very restrictive of what the unit size is, or a character only gets so many options. Even amongst GW’s other games. AoS gives you units of preset sizes, same with 40k. Characters usually only get to pick between 1 of 3 options for being armed, and theres only a small list of magic items that you can take 1 of, sometimes 2 or 3. Fantasy offered a level of customization that has fallen to the wayside in modern games, and Im very excited that its coming back.
Faction Feel- This is a minor one, but every faction has a different feel, and is distinguishable from each other. This is pretty common in GW games, but some games lack this to a certain extent, and Im just glad to see it when I run into it.
Templates- TEMPLATES ARE BACK! I don’t really have much more to say about this, I just have really missed templates and scatter dice and misfire dice and the whole shebang. GW moved away from them after one of the previous editions of 40k, and other games that used to use them have also removed them (Im looking at you warmachine/hordes).
Nostalgia- Like I mentioned above, I am biased, and I have missed fantasy greatly. And after reading the rulebook this FEELS like fantasy. Somewhere in the warp there is a very sad 20ish year old me who is very upset that GW announced Fantasy will no longer be supported. And now he can find peace. Reading the rulebook this seems like an improved upon version of the game, much like if they had just made a 9th edition. And while there have been other rank and flanks on the market since then, they just don’t have the same feel. And Im sure a lot of what I miss is just nostalgia for my first game, and being a kid playing games, but it still elicits some sort of excited emotions from me, so I figured Id throw it in.
Hesitant:
Scenarios- Ok so this is the big one for me, and when I mentioned earlier how some things need to stay in the past, this is kind of the thing I was talking about. Outside of narrative scenarios, the rules have 6 scenarios. These are basically the same scenarios that were in 8th edition, with some minor changes. The problem is, 8th edition scenarios were basically just “Kill each other but you deploy differently”. And there was a watch tower in one of them. Even back then the scenarios were seen as not very engaging nor balanced. This led to a lot of tournament organizers coming up with their own scenarios and comps for their tournaments, which personally I cant stand, but that’s a separate conversation. The long and short of it is that my philosophy is that I should be able to walk into any store and say “Lets play X game”, and a complete stranger immediately knows what that entails, without me having to explain custom scenarios or deducting points because he built his list a certain way. The problem here is, that the scenarios are like 90% the same as they were back in 8th. That is to say each one has different rules for you deploying differently, and yes there is still kind of a watch tower in one, but the goal of each one is to still just kill your opponent. Theres no “Hold this objective”, “Accomplish this task” or anything of the sort, its just kill the enemy, and get bonus points for banners and leader kill. I think there was a time for those scenarios, but we as a community have evolved past that time. Every game should have a “just kill the opponent” scenario in its arsenal. Its great for new players learning the game. But it should have ONE. Beyond that the scenarios should be dynamic, interesting, and not just focus on one aspect of the game. It creates a shifted power balance from the start, if the scenarios are just to kill, theres no benefit to bringing units that aren’t just great at killing. Im also not a big fan of scenarios where you just score at the end of the game. To me scenarios should be scored throughout the game. For example, if you hold an objective you get 1 point for every turn you hold it, verse just getting 1 point for each objective you hold at the end of the game. One day Ill post up a whole article about my philosophy on scenario play, but for now suffice it to say I do not like the scenarios in this rulebook, nor do I like the idea of custom scenarios, so that just kind of leaves me without my cake and not having eaten it either. And the thing that kills me about this is not that other games have these kinds of scenarios and as a result are more dynamic or whatnot. Its that other GW games have these kinds of scenarios. Look at the scoring for AoS or 40k. They are vastly improved upon from where they came from. AoS has the battle tactics and the objectives you score each turn. 40k has objectives you score each turn (instead of just at the end of the game like they used to) as well as a deck of secondary objectives that you draw from randomly and have to accomplish that turn or miss out on points. So not only has the industry as a whole moved on to bigger and better scenarios, but GW is, in my opinion, one of the better designers of these better scoring systems. Now, all that being said, I see why they tried to keep it as similar to 8th edition as they could, but I do think this is something that should have stayed in the past.
Grindyness- The way combat works now with models not often breaking and fleeing, but falling back in good order, makes it seem like the game will be very grindy. By grindy I mean lots of long drawn out combats. For some this may be a plus, but Im concerned this will be a a facet of the game that gets boring and repetitive. I don’t want to look at a combat and have to roll out 20 attacks each with different stat lines and at different initiative steps, and then still have to fight that combat for 3 more turns just 2” back. Previous editions could get grindy at times, but this seems like its taking it over the top.
Magic- This one was something I was worried about when reading the articles GW was putting out leading up to release, and am a little less so now that I read the book, but I wanted to include it anyway. I don’t think Im going to like the new magic system nearly as much as the old. Back when you could roll multiple dice to try and get spells off, and you and your opponent each had different pools to draw from. Now everything is just 2D6+wizard level and maybe some other modifiers here and there. Seems very toned down, but I think that’s what they were going for. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, magic in 8th edition was crazy over powered, but my complaint here doesn’t lie with the power level of magic, but how it is manifested. My concern is that magic will just be a boring, I roll, you roll, do I get it or not interaction. Where as the magic in previous editions was much more dynamic and involved. But I will need a few games to make a real determination on how I feel about this one.
This was probably the article Ive been most excited to write, and Im glad I got to get out some pregame impressions. Im not sure when I will get my first game in, but once I do I will make sure to update my impressions. Until then, keep rolling dice!