Chaos Dwarfs in AHQ

[RECIVS]

Neuralstasis, I just wanted to say I've enjoyed seeing this develop. The flavour and structure are coming together nicely. Looking forward to seeing where it goes.

Indeed! It's just that KO'd Heroes, for example, only have their WS reduced; the monsters attacking them don't become stronger in any way. Besides, the OP's tweaks to critcal hits would have to be harmonized accordingly for obvious reasons. I'm just saying that some consistency is in order—thematic and otherwise.

[Neuralstasis]

Neuralstasis, I just wanted to say I've enjoyed seeing this develop. The flavour and structure are coming together nicely. Looking forward to seeing where it goes.

Thanks. Thanquol and I have been having a fair amount of back and forth on the rules and he's provided much useful feedback and suggestions. And yes, the hats are definitely compensating!

Vulnerable spots? What are your tweaks to critical hits for, then?

Besides, the OP's tweaks to critcal hits would have to be harmonized accordingly for obvious reasons.

I'm not making any changes to crits. I'm writing the rules to be as compatible as possible to the original and EAHQ rules. Theoretically you could use my weapons changes I suggested in the other thread but they should be seen as a 100% separate and optional rules.

Neuralstasis wrote:
I would have preferred a +1 "to hit" but that opens up a bunch of problems with crits and fumbles.

Examples?

I'm talking about players interpreting a +1 or -1 to hit as affecting crits or fumbles. Does a +1 to hit mean that a sword now crits on a 11 and 12 and cannot fumble? Does a -1 to hit mean a sword cannot crit? Does a +1 to hit mean an automatic hit if I normally need a 2 to hit? I have seen players go different ways to how I would interpret this.
Original AHQ rules did not include the more modern dice rolling terminology which these days would probably go: "A natural roll of a 1 ALWAYS misses and a natural roll of a 12 ALWAYS hits, irrespective of any bonuses or penalties to the roll". People have been playing AHQ for a long time and are used to playing with their interpretations, I chose a +1 to WS to avoid these interpretation issues. I cannot say conclusively how it should be played.

In development news, things have been going ok. Lots of subtle rules re-phrasing and tweaks to the spells. I'm now currently working on the monster matrices and doing some art for the project.

[RECIVS]

I'm writing the rules to be as compatible as possible to the original and EAHQ rules.

Yes, and (as I said above) KO'd Heroes in AHQ, EAHQ, and EAHQ 2nd Edition, for example, only have their WS reduced. Their attackers are not supposed to become stronger in any way, as that would be an inconsistency.

I'm talking about players interpreting a +1 or -1 to hit as affecting crits or fumbles. Does a +1 to hit mean that a sword now crits on a 11 and 12 and cannot fumble? Does a -1 to hit mean a sword cannot crit? Does a +1 to hit mean an automatic hit if I normally need a 2 to hit? I have seen players go different ways to how I would interpret this.

You may be right, though at this moment I don't recall anyone ever being confused by it. Besides, I see it explained in your rules.

[Neuralstasis]

Preview of an illustration of a Chaos Dwarf axe that I'm putting in the supplement.



First 3d modelled it in Maya, rendered with some basic lighting, then painted over in Affinity Photo.

[RECIVS]

It looks deadly. I guess the additional damage die is justified then.

No, seriously. If we are to preserve thematic consistency in the game, besides the WS penalties I'd consider increasing the chance of rolling brutal damage (aka cleaving) instead of adding damage dice. We've seen how that ability makes weapons more customizable in AHQ, which expands its potential even further.

[Thanquol]

I'm just dropping in to say the axe illustration's got a solid industrial feel – very Chaos Dwarf. The short haft and heavy blade definitely echo the older model styles, and the greyscale gives it a grim, forged-in-fire vibe. I'd be curious to see it in colour or in a pose, but even as-is, it's well executed. You can tell it's crafted by someone with game art experience.

It's thematic in the art sense, which is what matters here. Not everything needs to be wielded to carry weight.

Sarcasm: Oh yes-yes, Chaos Dwarfs make mighty weapon-things, yes? Big-big axe, short-short stick, forged in fire-fire by stubby-fingered beard-things who worship furnace gods with no tail, no whiskers, no vision! Hah! Skaven laugh-laugh at such crude crude hammer-hacking!

Skaven sorcery? Better! Skaven warp-tech? Stronger! Skaven engineering? Explodey! We make Ratling Guns, Doomrockets, Warpstorm Cannons – yes-yes, all glorious! Sometimes explode too soon, but that's feature, not flaw! Chaos Dwarfs build one axe. Skaven build thirteen – then throw twelve away and use the one that screams loudest!

And "thematic consistency"? Pah! Skaven invent themes! We twist lore, chew canon, spit out brilliance! Chaos Dwarfs cling-cling to old-old ideas like rusted chains. Skaven evolve! Skaven adapt! Skaven win! Yes-yes always!

So yes, keep your stubby axe. Skaven will take warp-blade, warp-fuel, warp-madness – and cleave-cleave reality itself! /Sarcasm

[RECIVS]

Yeah, you can tell it's crafted by someone with game art experience, but that's not supposed to be the point here! Posting that image (and giving feedback on it) is blatantly contradictory if we are to take the first post of this thread seriously. I have to admit that you guys confuse the hell out of me sometimes.

Stephen, your site seems to be down, by the way. I've been trying to look into those PVs more closely.

[Daedalus]

I have made a pre-release version of my Chaos Dwarfs for AHQ supplement. It’s been created so players can use Chaos Dwarfs and their Hobgoblin slaves as monsters in original AHQ and Enhanced AHQ 2nd Ed. It contains background, monster cards, special rules and Chaos Dwarf spells. Primarily based off the Warhammer Chaos Dwarfs army book released in 1994, it’s the “Big Hats” era all the way.

I would love any feedback that anyone wants to give. Specifically, I would like feedback on:

- The rules. Do they make sense? Are they too simple or complex? Do they seem fair?
- The monster cards. Are their characteristics fair? Do their Points Values seem about right?
- The Magic Spells. Are they too powerful or too weak? Do the rules make sense?
- Overall flavour and feel. Does it match the AHQ style and setting?
- Any typos or mistakes.
- Anything else you would like to see in a monsters supplement?

What I don’t really want feedback on, as they are not yet complete:

- The graphics and images.
- The document layout.

You can get the PDF from my website at:
https://www.stephenmonteith.com/advance ... fs-in-ahq/

It seems to me that the poster is adding to his OP in this topic in a relevant enough way (bolded-underlining mine). He's just adding in another pre-release image to this topic for future inclusion in his supplement. It's looking great, by the way! Lots of passion showing for the game.

[RECIVS]

Sure! Nothing wrong with that. It seems that I was taking the first post of this thread too seriously. My bad, of course.

[Neuralstasis]

The current version 0.2 pdf only has a couple of stand-in diagrams I quickly made and some of the miniature images on the monster cards are scans from the Chaos Dwarf Army book. So I was trying to head off anyone moaning about how crap the graphics were before I had a chance to make them nice. I was concentrating on the substance before I got stuck into the style. Now I'm just starting doing some art while I finish up the rules.

So yeah, comments are welcome on the proper art I'm posting now. Next I'll do a blunderbuss I think...

Stephen, your site seems to be down, by the way. I've been trying to look into those PVs more closely.

I just checked myself and it seems to be working on all my devices here. Maybe it was down for a bit...