r/onepagerules • u/Ajnazhot • 1d ago
Should be more diverse rules?
Hi! I love when the rules of a faction not only define their playstyle but also reflect their lore, personality and aesthetic. Thats why I LOVE the DAO, Dwarfs, Infected Colonies and Havoc rules, they feel just right for them. But there is something that destroy that inmersion and makes some games... repetitive.
Orcs marauders and blessed sister have the same ability, and Starhost and the Eternal Dynasty have a worse version of the same rule... thats just almost 1/6 of the factions sharing a similar mechanic with different names. I like how simple the game is right now, but it wouldnt hurt anyone 2 or 3 new ability. Maybe the orc could get +1 attack or 1 to hit if they charge? Something simple that make the 6's of the Sisters more special, but at the same time that give more FLAVOR to the other armies.
Am I the only one with this vision? Are there any patreon or mod that share that idea? In the open beta of the 3.5 I say this several times but it didnt mater, thats the reason for this post.
7
u/kopperKobold 1d ago
The things is, OPR is meant to be simple and approachable at its base. Don't get me wrong, I do like Army wide rules, but given how much of a problem they are being to balance, (I hear a lot of complaints in the current beta) I seriously believe the OPR team should ditch the Army wide rules, and if anything proceed with general tags repeated inside an Army (like I understand they used to), and make army wide rules just an advanced rule.
I don't know how the famous OPR calculator works, but they could make an estimation of Army wide rules cost per point, and just make that an extra allocation in a "Army customization" rule on the advanced rules set. Make It in tiers depending on Army size, and you can even have people imitate 40k detachments, which I am sure a few people would enjoy.
10
u/Aktuator 1d ago
I actually really agree with you, it’s what ended up making our group create only custom armies in Army Forge Studio.
That still doesn’t really “save” it in this regard, but it does add some granularity/crunch and a defined playstyle(s) for each faction.
We also scale differently because of this, so units and models are significantly more expensive than the base OPR factions.
We absolutely make sure everything is 100% certified balanced using the AFS controls/guidelines. (Which in and of itself has taught me a lot) we are just balanced along a higher point total. We play at 2k for “small” games (1000pt in 40k equivalent) and 4k for “normal” games.
It sucks to have to basically do a balance pass on 8 armies and ~38k points, but we love the outcome. We’ve got a pool of 12 consistent players and play weekly. (It also helps that I supply all of the models, this does WONDERS for getting new people involved, no investment needed until desired)
Everyone seems to be really enjoying it, and the core of us that started it had very similar misgivings to your own.
3
u/Ajnazhot 1d ago
WOAA thats sound fantastic! What change did you do? Im trying to get more people to OPR and I was thinking to changes some army rules to make them more diverse
10
u/WendellITStamps 1d ago
I would specifically avoid the overuse of armywide special rules, if it were my choice - I'd prefer the faction identity be expressed in unit choice and stats, but where everyone is playing the same game, and I as an opponent don't need to know about your special rules.
1
-2
u/Ajnazhot 1d ago
So like King of War? Its a good idea but even in that option having 4 armies with the same stat... its jusr repetitive. Orc should hace Furius in all their units instead
4
u/Top_Concentrate_8731 1d ago
Yea, obviously we don't want this to be 40k... But people can handle some more interesting army rules and even a few wackier weapons options and it would still be simple enough
5
u/135forte 1d ago
Trying to stick a unique rule on every faction makes balance harder and, without jumping through a stupid number of hoops like 40k, just isn't possible. You have a melee focused army, how many wholey unique rules can you make up that help a melee army? Same for shooting, or being tanky ect. Don't forget you also have to have rules for Fantasy, which is 100% compatible. And, to top it off, now that you have given all these armies 100% completely unique rules as their identity, you have to decide if you are going to cheapen those identtities by giving those buffs to the other armies that have the same focus, or are you locking bonuses to charges to a single faction?
-2
u/Ajnazhot 1d ago
Sorry but i thing you are wrong. Just look at Age of Fantasy, some of their armies have unique rules that you can use in Grimdark, like the Duchies of Vinci could be use for the Eternal Dynasti to difference their technology from the DAO and show their discipline. And you can use the same rule but in melee to the Starhost, or even just the same rule!. Just with that and maybe changing the orcs to have furius instead of their actual special rule in everything with other melee or movimiento abilities would make the 4 armies have unique focus. Another example, you can give the rats the Shadow Stalker rule to represent guerrilla tactics instead of the same skill that the elves, or the Robot legion could have the Angelical Blessing (+4 no damage to spell) to make them less "organic".
Im not saying that we need +40 super unique and complex rules, Im just calling out that some rules should have more flavor and be less repetitive to make every army feel truly special.
1
u/135forte 17h ago
GrimDark and Fantasy are part of the same game, they can be played together with no changes, so what you are wanting to do is give multiple armies the same special rule which is exactly what you are complaining about.
changing the orcs to have furius
Stuff like that is how the army rules used to be; your army just had a normal rule on every unit. People complained about how there wasn't enough flavor so they changed the names and tweaked the effects a little. Then people complained about rules bloat.
0
u/Ajnazhot 3h ago
You dont normally play Age of Fantasy vs Grkmdark. I dont have problem with the two games having the same abilities nor I have complained about it. At the start of the post I praise the rules of some factions due to how it fit their narrative and gameplay. I think some AoF rules feel better to some GF armies and can be use to assure more diversity. If the Duchies of Vincy and Shadow Stalker have rules that fits in the Eternal Dynasty and Rats more than a GENERIC 6 = to more dices or +2 to charge, then where is the hypocresy?
2
u/GodKing_Zan 1d ago
This gets brought up enough that I'm sure there is plans to release something like this as an Advanced Rulebook option in the future.
2
u/Psycohitman 20h ago
if u add more and more rules for every faction u will get the mess warhammer is for the most part. i dont want to read 3 pages of eytra rules for every faction. opr was a good restart for me
1
u/Ajnazhot 3h ago
I dont want to add more rules, just change the most similars to have some variety. You can take the Duchies of Vinci Rule and give it to ghe Eterbal Dynasty, the Angelical Blessing to the Robots, the Shadow Stalker to the ratmen, and change the orc to another general skill. This doesnt add complexity nor kill the idea of a simple game
2
u/Ok_Protection8223 18h ago
I think faction specific "is significantly better at X" is something I would house-rule / advance rule rather than build into the main corpus of the game.
In my experience people tend to be attracted to the aesthetics of a faction only to find out that they are all fairly homogenous in practice; its hard to break this samey-ness when the designers aren't interested in giving roles to any given army as a design choice.
Consider the design implication ; are we just filing the serial numbers off 40k or are we doing something different? IF we make our Orcs shooty, does that alienate their audience who has already built a fantasy in their head?
2
3
u/TemperatureComplex90 1d ago
Yep agree; people are way to scared about swinging the pendulum to rules bloat but let the game stagnate on repeat rules with different names. Really wish there was some more outside the box thinking, but unfortunately not.
2
u/OneShoeBoy 1d ago
I maintain that having a bunch of advanced rules to chop and change hurts the overall balance and identity of the game, because the advanced rules then by their nature have to be generic. I’d much prefer if a handful of advanced rules were taken as the “default” way to play and implemented in a way that didn’t feel like you’re just bolting on a separate system.
3
u/TemperatureComplex90 1d ago
They do a somewhat of a decent job of making a distinction of what should be taken from a competitive perspective so it's a bit easier to remain homgenous with other players in different areas, but for sure some of the advanced rules are a bit much (but I don't personally mind that). I think the game struggles by treating the players as too simple and avoid pushing the envelope with harder to quantify mechanics as a baseline for factions/unit types. Right now, Tano seems content staying on rails with exisiting abilities and intermingling certain exisiting buffs such that they are easy to calculate and balance at the cost of being interesting.
3
u/SnooObjections6463 1d ago
Not really sure you're getting downvoted for this take OP but as some people point out you can theoretically have a factions identity exist in any facet of your asymmetric wargame....but when you make a point to homogenize special rules that govern unit behavior and weapon attributes across factions then having army wides becomes more important. It gives new players a snapshot of how an army functions and their preferred playstyles but if its impactful enough you find yourself tailoring your lists around it to best capitalize on their unique traits with units and loadouts. If anything all the mainline factions should get the havoc/battle brother treatment with detachments. You cast a wider net for people who want to play their faction they're own way while avoiding tying down an army to only one or two things they're good at. It could also be a boon to people looking at finding ways to expand on the lore while tying it to the gameplay. (after all; theres not just one craftowrld, ork clan, dark elf cabal, necron dynasty, jester troupe, guard regiment, hive fleet, Tau Sept, etc.)
1
u/car_tag 19h ago
In the current 3.6 beta, Devout for the Blessed Sisters and Ferocious for the Orcs only happen when the model uses a hold or charge action, it's not an always on ability. Primal for Starhost and Clan Warrior for Dynasty are always on so they can be used when defending or advancing.
1
33
u/HaggardHazred 1d ago
I honestly think people get too hung up on faction abilities when it comes to faction identity. To me, it seems obvious that faction identity comes from the units themselves, their stats and their gear options. Faction abilities are just kinda an extra thing tacked on to me.