Total power. Is there room for 4th in Oldhammer.

Erny

Member
As I say, is there room for fourth ed in Oldhammer or am I going to have to coin the word Midhammer (I quite like it, sounds like a 1st ed DnD campaign). Don't get me wrong, I'll always love third but there is always room in my affections for younger models, just not too young like 8th.

Ze blog contains my initial reminiscing ion the subject:

http://ernysplace.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/total-power-showing-4th-edition.html

I was just wondering if you good folks could show any love for the much underrated 4th?
 

Chico

Member
4th fan/2nd 40k is when i started actual gaming, before that it was just buying a few toys here and there, so aye i have much respect for both 4th Fan and 2nd 40k.
 

Zhu Bajie

Member
I think "Herohammer" is used to describe 4th/5th largely because of the awesome power of Hero characters and their dominance in the game in comparison with later editions, it's got a nice ring to it The Herohammer Renaissance!

It's produced by a post management buy-out GW and the dynamics of the company were very different, no longer the creative pioneers, they are in step-repeat mode play safe, make everything slicker, faster, shinier. If it's not Bryan, Rick, Richard and John working together on some level then it's not Oldhammer IMHO.

You could throw away the background fluff ,the army lists and in a GM and Oldhammerify it (you can do that with anything!) but as a thing, I think it is something different.
 

ardyer

Member
Fourth edition was my first "proper" edition as well. And I'll always have a soft spot for it. Especially early on, it retained some of the grittiness that was lacking in Fifth edition (I mean there were freakin' cartoons in the margins of the rules!) and way overboard in Sixth edition. I also think that somewhere, mid-way through, was when their metal models began to slip. They became much more static and many lacked the "character" of previous editions, although the detail and casting quality was way up.

One thing that confused me for years with Fourth edition (and my age probably didn't help :grin: ) was that the rule book detailed point costs for armor, shields, and weapons but didn't mention that those points were already built into the cost of the troops that had those as standard. Unfortunately, the rest of my group wasn't so dense! This meant my dwarfs always went to battle at a point disadvantage because I double paid for things like light armor.

Ah, those were the days!
 

Padre

Member
4th was when I stopped buying the latest rules - can't remember the details but I was not at all happy with the changes. I then stuck with 3rd until 6th, at which point I though 'ok.'

But of course, there has to be room for 4th in Oldhammer as 4th certainly ain't 'Newhammer'.
 

phreedh

Member
The key issue for me with 4th and on isn't the rules (actually the only WHFB I've ever played) but the army book concept. If there was one Armies book (as in 3rd) I'd gladly play 4th (well, that's all very theoretical as I rarely get to play miniatures games).

I was in a local FLGS the other day and was apalled by the prices of the current army books! £30!

And the kids nowadays, and their loud music. Get off my lawn!
 

Erny

Member
OK then Midhammer it is..or I guess hero hammer but that's to play up to the prejudices. In 3rd as a kid I used a totemic standard to put all my wizards MP in and cast multiple elemental hordes. Kids just overplay the gamey aspect and in the 90's the demographic of the hobby got younger.

Played an Undead Vs Chaos 4th ed battle the other day with my brother it was so much fun, so quick, so mad.

Just today I noticed one of our new intake post grads (so born 91/92) was sitting in the lab listening to Alanis Morrissette. The 90's are coming to get you all.
 

phreedh

Member
Erny":1ietdopb said:
it was so much fun, so quick, so mad.
That's what I'd like to experience once again, and what's holding me off 3rd... I just want to get on with it. =)
 

Padre

Member
Zhu Bajie":2orvlwdc said:
Padre":2orvlwdc said:
But of course, there has to be room for 4th in Oldhammer as 4th certainly ain't 'Newhammer'.

Yes, it is. It is the exact point where Newhammer begins. ;)

Oh yeah. I never thought of that. Case closed. No 4th Ed on here. (Unless someone plays it, photgraphs the game, then does a full report showing what it was like - then yeah, bring it on.)
 

Zhu Bajie

Member
Just to be clear, I didn't mean editorial policy on this site, as far as I am concerned people can talk about whatever game systems or miniatures they like on here, such matters are down to Bruno and the mods, if he chose to enforce such policy.

But 4E is not "Oldhammer", it's just a matter of terminology. AFAIK I coined the term "Oldhammer" and defined it here:
http://realmofzhu.blogspot.co.uk/2011/1 ... tract.html

With specific mention of 1st, 2nd and 3rd editions, an the spirit ant attitude within which those games were written. For me it's just a matter of semantics, if a word becomes too loosely used it ceases to have any real meaning, so I'd prefer "Oldhammer" to be used as originally intended, and other terms be found to describe other epochs and the attitudes / playstyles arising from them.

I think someone on facebook mentioned Redhammer as 4E / 5E had a lot of red in the packaging? Sounds revolutionary comrades!
 

ardyer

Member
Zhu Bajie":3m79low8 said:
I think someone on facebook mentioned Redhammer as 4E / 5E had a lot of red in the packaging? Sounds revolutionary comrades!

That term does make sense considering GW itself refers to that time as "the red period" because the 'Eavy Metal team used lots and lots of red on their models. I think it has a nice ring to!
 

Blue in VT

Moderator
phreedh":8kik3fo9 said:
And the kids nowadays, and their loud music. Get off my lawn!

:lol: :lol: ;)

this made me laugh....I resemble that remark... :roll:

I agree...4th is not Oldhammer....its the death of Oldhammer... :cry: I'm not saying that it has no value...in fact I incorporate some of the rules into my 3rd ed games...but am very selective about it. I played it a few times when it came out...and wasn't too impressed by most of it so was quite happy to return to my big orange book of joy!

Cheers,

Blue
 

Thantsants

Member
Just been flicking through my WD's of this era - certainly lots of red, lots of 40K battle reports involving Orks V SM or Eldar, lots of Epic Space Marine.

As for Fantasy - we played quite a lot of 4th as kids but it didn't have that je ne sais quoi of 3rd. We all played with identikit armies - big nasty general on big nasty flyer, rock hard cavalry regiment, loads of artillery and large regiments of grunts who did nothing but get shot at and mauled by cavalry and flying generals!

Plus a lot of the minis weren't to my taste - 90's undead, goofy black orcs, identikit beastmen, Tyrion and Teclis and all the other OTT High Elf stuff, Big Hat Chaos Dwarfs, plastic wolves for Gobbo Wolfriders...

There was some great stuff too of course - I'd kill for a full Empire army and I am the proud owner of the Marauder Giant. Man O War is great too.

I don't have much against the game itself, although when we played it always seemed to follow a really predictable pattern involving the aforesaid artillery and flying generals dominating things, but that was probably as much to do with the lads I played with as anything else.

All the above is my own opinion of course and I'd actually be really interested in hearing what you chaps have to say about 4th - just not my cup of tea ;)

Endakil seems to like it on his blog, Diario de un Friki, from what I can tell from Google translation!
http://frikidiario.blogspot.co.uk/2013/ ... icion.html
 

Just John

Moderator
4th was the end for me and Warhammer. Stayed playing 3rd for a while but drifted away. I jut couldn't deal with the new figures and the obsession with red - red this, red that and red the other. Its not that I don't like red its just why did orcs and goblins paint their bows red? Why did Chaos dwarfs start wearing big hats? Bad fashion (at the time) was a thing of the 80's not the mid 90's! Bah humbug! Grumble mutter grumble....
 

bug16

Member
I hated 4th edition due to the streamlining, I understand why they did it but it was too harsh for me at that time. The emphasis on Herohammer didn't fit my play style. I didn't like the sculpts they were coming out with (why are they nearly all in YMCA poses?). I hated the really bright red kiddie paint jobs everything was getting, the artwork was very kiddie friendly. I just didn't connect with any of it. It had lost the grit that 3rd edition had. 3rd edition felt heavily influenced by fantasy writers of the 70's and 80's along with the darker fantasy movies in the 80's (everything from Labyrinth, pick your Terry Gilliam movie, Conan, etc) 4th felt like it was being aimed fans of the Dungeons and Dragons cartoon. I said "sod it" and dove headfirst into Space Marine 2nd edition, which was admittedly also very "red", but what a great game system!

I reluctantly bought into 5th edition due to my then gaming group and while the core rules of 5th felt better than 4th (I still enjoy WAB v1.5) the army books just destroyed that version of the game. 6th edition rekindled my interest in WHFB, 7th removed it, and I look at the models in 8th and they're overpriced action figures. It's just not for me. The only editions of the game I've kept are 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 6th.

Btw, I think "Redhammer" is a great term for 4th and 5th edition. :)
 

ardyer

Member
I've noticed a couple of people have stated that the army book format was one of the things they disliked about fourth edition. I'm curious to know why. I've always liked the army books as they give you more insight into the army.
 

Erny

Member
The problem I have with many of the army books was the big selling point, the background. I found in many cases it was just badly written fan fiction. Clearly it had to be tamed down for the kiddies. Also just blindly following the army books meant many options previously open to you within certain armies were now gone.

However the core game was a joy, decisive, tactical, fast play was possible the magic was fun. Indeed all the point previously expressed about 3rd apply here. In 3rd it was possible to have a Vampire with a parasitic blade riding a zombie dragon casting daemonic horde, a considerate opponent wouldn't do that. We have full points values in the core rules so making up troops is no issue.

As to pantshammer, that's just rude ;) A more neutral term is needed and I'm plumping for Midhammer (no jokes about Middenhammer). Even HeroHammer and Redhammer are poring scorn on a perfectly nice system. We have old and new hammer so Midhammer makes sense to me. Its Oldhammers shallower but more fun little brother.
 
Back
Top