My friend always included an imperial assassin who could take a piece of wargear that let him take the place of an enemy trooper. He would then pop out and throw a vortex grenade onto my very expensive Avatar or Greater Daemon of Khorne and kill it automatically on a 2+. One game, he forgot to face the assassin properly and the Avatar was out of his arc. I called him out on it and long story short we got into a fist fight and he rammed my head through some dry wall. Ahhhh 1994! To be 14 again!
My ork kommandos carried a scanner and vortex grenade for that same tactic. Deploy the other side of cover from character. Turn on scanner throw grenade
And explains why it was so freaking hard for 14 year old me to understand 2ed rulebooks, especially being non-native english speaker with very rudimentary understanding of english. Brutal.
Haha yeah! We just played the way it made sense. We used the sustained fire dice the way explained: roll die, roll to hit with that many shots. Surprisingly the cover rules never were a problem, we just asked "do you want to hit the guys in soft cover, hard cover or in the open - and applied the penalty as such - if someone chose open and killed all of them, the rest of the shots would be wasted. No one tried sniping with blasts AFAIK. Large target we just used any vehicle large as, or larger than a rhino or on a monster base. Also, we didnt modify the dice roll as described. 0+ to hit and hard cover meant 2+ to hit. It all just made sense back then! 😂 Then again, we were a RPG crowd that just used to play it more similar to an RPG.
@@JPilestedt Funny, always assumed you had to use blast markers like flame templates were you had to try and hit as many models as possible and weren't allowed to snipe.
The randomisation of hits in combat was difficult but fun. To this day i pain my Chapter Master with a headwound from the time he was taken out in a 3 way game by a lone grot aiming for the hive tyrant he was fighting.
One great thing about GW games of the time was they were a big gaming tool kit. It was expected you would bend and break the rules as you and your group saw fit. No one I knew at the time ever considered sticking to the rules as written, it just wasn't done! You very much could make the game you wanted to play. There was definitely a GW 40k dice blister, I know because I bought one and I still have all the dice!
Andy Chambers even wrote that the rules were not to be taken in a "lawyer" fashion...or something like that. But yeah, the original writers intended us to put it to the dice. Then discus later.
2nd really was alot of fun. with barely any good computer games or graphics at the time tanks and crazy tyranid monsters on a really good scenary board just looked epic. You really felt like a general about to make your next decesion.
Champions were a character type in Warhammer Fantasy Battles. They were characters, but regimental captains who were beefed-up versions of a soldier of the regiment they led. They were permanent parts of that regiment. Players could get a champion, a musician and a standard bearer for each regiment. You could also attach other characters to a regiment, so a regiment could have both a regimental champion, a wizard or two, the army general and a priest if you so liked. Champions had meaning when other heroes showed up and called for a duel. Instead of sending your wizard, also a character, into the duel you could let your champion take it on the chin a round. A bit like calling a veteran sergeant in 3rd and up a character.
In the spanish 2nd edition of the "Angels of Death" codex, veteran sargeants were called veteran sargeants. In the rulebook were called champions to generalize, i imagine.
I'm reminded of the house rule we instigated for vortex grenades - if you rolled a 1, it exploded on the thrower. Not in any of the rulebooks, but it ws an attempt to balance the game. Especially if someone had the combo of warp jump and a vortex grenade.
It could feel as though this era of rules were saying: "Here is a wargaming framework with some novel minigames, here are guidelines for messing about with models, be a good sport and use common sense while enjoying a narrative gaming experience". Maybe this is why we can't have nice things.
Capital N for Nostalgia! Part of the point you are eloquently making I feel, but I always felt BS 5+ essentially put you in credit for modifiers - e.g. bs 6 can hit target in soft cover (-1) on 2+
As a filthy casual myself this video made me chuckle quite a bit!😂 Another great video that really highlights the struggles of the game before we all just made up our own rules on the spot (at least that's what me and my brother did)... They still ended in arguements but we had a lot of fun too.
"None of these were sold in a gw store to my knowledge" At the time you could buy a blister pack that contained a d4, d8, 2d10, d12 and d20, each in different colours.
As someone that started at 8th edition. I really treat this as a history class of the Hobby i love so much. Also helps that i have an absolute hard on for classic models.
I bought official GW dice set at the time that did include d4's,d8's,d10's,d12's and d20's.... so they did exist. They came in an old blister pack from what I remember.... probably still have some in my big bag of dice.
Started my wh40k playing in 1995 2nd edition and played a ton until around 2001. My brother and I always took an individual case approach to units in cover. We would apply modifiers depending on a good faith visible situation. Each shot situation was decided based on closest unit not in cover and would work back to IN cover if units were split up die rolls based on how much cover... so a 10 Ork squad that had 3 units not in cover, 2 in half cover, 5 in hard cover were simply targeted and rolled against in that order. The shots favoring the not cover units until they were killed and then the half cover units hit etc etc. Shooting angles we were never that picky about. You could split fire how you saw fit based on the previous rule... distance/cover. Never made that big of a point about mini standing angle. Just that you could have two shots to a squad closer to the left and 3 shots closer to the squad on the right of the units were in those positions. Close range also applied if applicable. We never felt this was very difficult to execute and quite honestly felt more granular and fun. Now when things are generalized you do get more streamlining but then model positions aren't as important as the general squad position and we tend to prefer the granular cases for the narrative vs just raw trying to crank through numbers faster.
I remember selling my Legos to by this box! Each time we would not be able to resolve something from the book, we would call a "+4 im right, -3 you are right". And we kept going 😂
The first GW D10 I am aware of came with the Inquisitor game system though interestingly you can now get them as wound markers that serve no randomisation purpose. There may be earlier examples but this is the limit of my grognardery
I'm certain I got a D10 in the GW 40k dice pack when 2nd ed released. It had a D3, D10, D12, D20, and maybe something else, a D8? I've still got them in my dice box so I'm going to have to check or it will drive me up the wall!
@@bilko991 D4 rather than D3, but yeah, I remember there being a blister pack of special dice in 2nd edition, though I started in the mid 90's rather than at the start of 2nd.
10:00 I started in the mid-90's and recall my local GW selling a pack of dice that included D8, D10, D12, D20 and I think it had a D4. I remember because as a snot nosed little kid I would sit in the store wondering if I should spend my chore money on finally getting the dice, or just being more models, lol. I dunno how many years before I started they were selling it, but so many weapons required them that I feel like they must have been selling them?
I love these oldhammer videos! I can only guess that add i don't remember arguing all these points back in the day we must just have all gone with what felt right and agreed on that feeling.
I'm so happy to have 360 degree firing arcs and controlling players allocating casualties as standard now, though it does seem a little odd to me when my land raider somehow broadsides it's target with a set of guns on it's other side
I played Second Edition, I bought a blister pack of dice (D4, D8, D10s, D12s and a D20) from a GW store at the time. I remember getting them vividly, I still have the yellow D4 and red D20. So they did carry them.
Very entertaining, it is still hard to drill into the head of some of my friends that the beauty of board/tabletop games, is that you can play it how you want, as long as all players at the table agree.
2nd Edition was messy, but what really killed 40K was the way 3rd so massively over-weighted the lethality of close combat that it created the phenomenon of the "Close Combat Army." There wasn't such a thing in RT or 2nd. Everyone could shoot, even Tyranids. Because all of a sudden there were "Close Combat Armies," the armies that could shoot became "firing line armies" whose sole tactic was to attempt to stay as far back as possible and hopefully kill enough of the enemy before they made it to close combat. No game designer in their right mind would ever try to balance medieval knights against a WW2 infantry company. That would be insane. And yet, that's exactly what Games Workshop tried to do with 3rd Edition, and they literally never figured out how to balance the game ever again. Somewhere out there is an alternate universe where 3rd Edition 40K streamlined some of the most bonkers elements of 2nd Edition, got rid of the Psychic Phase, etc. And in that one alternate universe, 40K is actually a good game.
I've only just found your channel, brilliant content I must say. I came to the hobby just as 3rd was taking over and stopped playing just as 4th hoved into view, though maintaining an interest in the miniatures and fluff through to today. I've always been more interested in finding out more about the crunch of Rogue Trader and 2nd, rather than lcatching up with 4th onwards so I'm looking forward to watching the rest of your current videos and your future uploads.
The space marine dreadnought rules in codex Ultramarines seems to suggest you can unclear a jam while firing other guns. I like to allocate a crewman/gunner to unclear a jam for other vehicles.
games workshop DID sell dice blisters with the various odd sized dice, including artillery and sustained fire dice. I know because I bought one in 1993
The funky d6 dice for sustained fire remained in use in Necromunda/Gorkamorka. Orks could have a cheap six-shoota, a sort of horrendous full-auto revolver.
To pick random model out of 24 models using dice you need 2 D6 dice. You roll 2 x D6 dice , remember which dice is "first" which is "second", you roll random number from 1 to 36 by (Dice 1 result -1 )* 6 + Dice 2 result. If the number you got is between 1 and 24 - this indicates the model you have picked, if it is between 25 and 36 - roll again.
If you'd asked me anything about 2nd edition back in 95-98 then I could have answered it perfectly. Now watching this I can't believe that I had every rule and weapon stat memorised
Might not be RAW, but in my view the most intuitive way to deal with shooting at units in partial cover or LOS is to split up the squad into different targets. The shooting player then chooses how much shooting to allocate against each target. If some models are out of LOS, they can’t be targeted and wounds don’t spill over.
Hmm, I can see where your interpretation of the 'roll to hit' rules comes from, but we always played it like this: (sorry if the following seems as patronizing as that 2nd ed range table, I'm just trying to make myself clear :) ) Although a roll of a 1 always misses, this doesn't make the higher BS redundant. Basic roll to hit for BS 10 without modifiers = -3. BUT, a roll of a 1 always misses. Rolling a -4 modifier on the dice means that the dice scores become the following numbers: 1 (-4) = -3 2 (-4) = -2 3 (-4) = -1 4 (-4) = 0 5 (-4) = 1 6 (-4) = 2 As a roll of a 1 always misses, rolling the 1 misses even though it meets the BS requirement. However, a roll of 2 or more means you have *not rolled a 1*. You rolled a 2 or more. The BS modifies the roll produced by the dice, but because you didn't physically roll a 1 the resulting score of -2 or higher still meets the BS requirement. So a roll of a 2 or more would still hit in this situation. The confusion comes from the line "your dice roll to hit is modified". But we took this to mean you miss if you physically roll a 1, but then the modifiers are applied to any number above 1 to see if you gained a roll high enough to meet your BS requirements. It would be simpler if the rules had distinguished between 'roll' and 'score', but as we've already seen from the use of the word 'hero', the writers did tend to use terms in both general and specific ways, even when the two contradicted. Our final point of persuasion is that doing it like this meant the full BS chart was actually used. If the writers hadn't meant the rules to be used like this, why would they have written the BS chart in that way? Again, I can totally see how your interpretation is also valid. Thanks for reading this far. As someone who still plays 2nd ed I'm really enjoying your work.
Yes, your way does seem to make use of all the appropriate tables and charts. But the rules just needed a second pass by another set of eyes to really clear up most of these points.
I like to think the rules as less a definitive document of what is/isn’t permitted in play, more a lengthy description on how the studio played. Thats why odd little bits pop up here and there in the tone of “oh yea, we also sometimes do this!”
Just found your channel, and oh man...this brings me back to the many arguments at my buddy's house playing this. Look forward to more videos! Great work!
About turning the models I would say, that turning them away from a very near enemy is a question of the idea of the model. It is a moment of bravery or experience. About the probability's of hitting models in close combat engaged with your models I would say, we just estimate. The game is not chess. Every single step of following the rules is a process of immersion. That is why a periscope is used. I played with the german rulebook and there wasn't a periscope mentioned. But we used it and taking the perspective of my heroes and fighters was one of the best part of the game.
The frustration of fire arcs meant having people armed with heavy weapons in both 40k and Necromunda could be caught out simply by attacking them from the direction they weren't facing. "Oh, you want to turn to fire your heavy weapon armed dude in overwatch at my charging character - shame - you'll need to move in order to face me and thus remove your ability to fire your gun..." Also, in hindsight, some of the best bits about the game were the randomness of the game and watching blast markers flying around the table!
The thing is that is good gameplay, if strategy and tactics cause your enemy to be put into bad positions that's a good thing, though a stipulation for this could be that they can pivot for a small reduction in damage output, player one is rewarded for flanking, player 2 doesn't feel like he's robbed by the flank
I would argue that there is a difference between great tactics and the poor placement of miniatures and by poor placement I mean picking them up and placing them on the board. I would be annoyed if I'd picked up and moved a model and when placing it back on the board I hadn't placed it back the way I wanted it to be facing.
I thought models could rotate on the spot for free. But going around the back of the bloke with a heavy stubber sounds like a very Necromunda thing to do. Space Hulk was all about facing. Terminators use an action point just to turn 90 degrees. The genestealer player had to come at the marines from a blind angle where the least amount of storm bolter overwatch would hit them. Otherwise your only hope was to throw so many 'stealers down the corridor that their bodies clogged the gun of the terminator and allowed one or two to slip through when he reloaded.
7:01 I absolutely never read that it was affecting the “Dice Roll” after it was rolled, but the ‘Dice Roll To Hit’ before the dice was rolled and then if it was still 1/-1/-2 etc you had to roll a 2 or more. Let’s laugh and not cry as the arguments start. Ps pretty much here just for the pretty pictures. I love the art so much
Bit late to the discussion, Rogue Trader defines large target as anything over 3meters high or wide and the intended scale design was 1 tabletop inch = 2 meters. Assuming that’s what they intended for 2e as well!
Games Workshop York actually did have multiple atypical dice on sale when second edition came out. I know because I still own some that I bought at the time.
"OK, so let's agree on some ground rules." "OK." "So, This is 2nd edn, not 10th edn, right?" "Yes." "So we're not going to massively overcomplicate the entire process in a tragic, desperate attempt to prove that our meta-armies of toy soldiers are better than each other, and instead we're just going to have a lovely time playing a sci-fi wargame." "Sounds good." "OK. You go first." "No, you go first." "But I insist." "Well, Ok then. If you're sure." And therein lies the difference between oldhammer and Poohammer.
Honestly, most of these rules are rather clear. Like the to-hit chart is clearly saying that you still keep your normal score but always fail on a roll of 1, so a BS10 means that you can take up to -5 in penalties and still hit on 2.
We used to have an over-riding rule of "dont be an arse", which we used to apply to anything like the blast template assassinations. 😂 Realise thats not mucu good for tournaments and the like, but you can absolutely tell that that type of play wasnt the designers intent!
At 07:20 you said that a BS 10 shot deducting 4 from the roll would hit on a 6. However I’m pretty sure that they would actually hit on a 2+. That’s because they hit on a -3 basically, so if you apply the modifier it becomes 2+. That interpretation actually also eliminated your previous critique that the part of the “to hit” table that dealt with high BS models was obsolete; its included precisely because of the scenario you outlined (ie a high BS model with several negative modifiers)
@@samgibbs8194 (as I think you are aware), if a model is hitting on a 7+, they have to roll a 6, follwed by a second roll of 4+, in order to hit. Any additional negative modifiers would apply to the second roll, so a "to hit" roll of 8+ would require the player to roll a 6, followed by a second roll of 5+. Then a 9+ would require a 6 followed by another 6. I'm not sure if the rules ever allowed for a roll as high as 10+, or if that kind of shot was considered functionally impossible.
6 + 6 was the highest allowed. Fact is, most of the issues in this video i never faced because we applied common sense. Until 3rd edition when people started to be ultracompetitive.
What I've seen from battle reports of the time, while you can ignore the closet target with blast markers to try and hit more units you still need LOS of the target you are aiming at; it looks like some of the Death company brothers here would block shots to the Chaplain 11:50 If the Reapers were on higher ground that'd be a different story. (If I'm wrong about this that's certainly how I would balance it.)
Blast markers? yeah, they could be abused horribly. I am proud to say I never did though. Nope, not me sir. I was an eldar player so simply resorted to everybody's favourite completely overpowered unit....Warp Spiders!!!! Oh dear, is that a bloodthirster? Not any more it isnt!
For a lot of combat situations, I like "defender chooses where damage is allocated" system. The amount of time you save is colossal, really. I especially like it in melee engagements, since it gives you a little bit of extra "footwork" control without adding another phase to movement. Want to be aggressive? Remove casualties from the back of the unit: as models at the front fall, models in the rear surge forward to fill the gaps. Want to fall back? Remove casualties from the front of the unit, and nobody moves up to replace them.
I think 3rd ed did away with the facing of infantry models, but kept the weapon facing of tanks. A tank's sponson gun could only fire 180 degrees to each sides. A forward-facing heavy bolter mounted up front could only fire forward. Cannons and other weapons in turrets, or the commander popping up to shoot a pintle-mounted stormbolter, still had 360 degrees.
The heroes targeting issue (around 4:30) was answered by Andy Chambers in a White Dwarf magazine. Heroes can shoot at whatever they like ignoring the easily circumvented "shoot the closest applicable target" rule. They could not pick out a character standing in a squad if the character was in coherency distance (the character essentially using the squad as cover) as that was a different target selection limitation to the "shoot the closest thing" rule that characters and heroes can circumvent. They didn't have to fire with the rest of the squad. As someone who played back then this wasn't actually all that hard to understand was it? Don't get me started on short vs long range penalty and measuring how much of a unit was obscured for partial vs hard cover... those are headaches I thought I had long since left behind me. It's the whole reason I'd just play Eldar and say "whatever gives you more advantage opponent, you're not winning anyway" Loved the trip down memory lane and I did indeed laugh out loud multiple times remembering
I have absolutely loved this art style of bat rep. I remember reading many of them when I was younger. Can you let me know what program you are using to make them? I suppose I could just make it using Gimp and/or other photo editing software but it looks like it might be a bit easier with your workflow. great stuff man I subbed. I remember getting into 40k when I was so young. My first game was 12 Eldar guardians and a farseer vs Abaddon and a squad of chosen... It was not close lol. but I scared my buddy by taking out everything but abaddon and bloodying him up some too. I look forward to more of your stuff.
the current 360 degree firing arc for infantry models makes more sense than you think. the old version you are descrbing reflects a bit of over realism of infantry sitting in one spot and having a limited field of view. the current version takes into account that as much as infantry would have that limited realistic view, they would react based on their sergeants or comrades orders of where the enemy was located and "adjust" based on that and making it so you dont have to move the models facing is just a way to stop padantic rules lawyering like you described about forgetting to "face" your models the right way. ill take the "its assumed" method becuase some people really will be asshats about if your heavy bolter marine is facing the right way to shoot at their valuable unit. especially in the competative level of the game.
My friend always included an imperial assassin who could take a piece of wargear that let him take the place of an enemy trooper. He would then pop out and throw a vortex grenade onto my very expensive Avatar or Greater Daemon of Khorne and kill it automatically on a 2+. One game, he forgot to face the assassin properly and the Avatar was out of his arc. I called him out on it and long story short we got into a fist fight and he rammed my head through some dry wall. Ahhhh 1994! To be 14 again!
I wish I’d written this into the script
@@OldenDemon you can’t make that stuff up! Good old 2nd Ed.
Thank god this was before monster energy drinks were around.
My ork kommandos carried a scanner and vortex grenade for that same tactic. Deploy the other side of cover from character. Turn on scanner throw grenade
@@Mauricebrogan-uf6qx dirty. Filthy even. Love it.
Every one of these videos reminds me just how little we actually followed the rules when playing as 8 year olds.
Loool same
And explains why it was so freaking hard for 14 year old me to understand 2ed rulebooks, especially being non-native english speaker with very rudimentary understanding of english. Brutal.
So much this!
Haha yeah! We just played the way it made sense. We used the sustained fire dice the way explained: roll die, roll to hit with that many shots.
Surprisingly the cover rules never were a problem, we just asked "do you want to hit the guys in soft cover, hard cover or in the open - and applied the penalty as such - if someone chose open and killed all of them, the rest of the shots would be wasted.
No one tried sniping with blasts AFAIK.
Large target we just used any vehicle large as, or larger than a rhino or on a monster base.
Also, we didnt modify the dice roll as described. 0+ to hit and hard cover meant 2+ to hit. It all just made sense back then! 😂
Then again, we were a RPG crowd that just used to play it more similar to an RPG.
@@JPilestedt Funny, always assumed you had to use blast markers like flame templates were you had to try and hit as many models as possible and weren't allowed to snipe.
"it's short range now, you filthy casual"
Made me laugh out loud! Thank you for putting together these videos, they are brilliant.
rip in peace franz ferdinand. may noughties indie pop bands sing thee to thy rest.
Me when playing Arbites in KillTeam
The randomisation of hits in combat was difficult but fun. To this day i pain my Chapter Master with a headwound from the time he was taken out in a 3 way game by a lone grot aiming for the hive tyrant he was fighting.
GW did sell RPG dice, in a blister set that included a D4, D8, D10, tens D10, D12, and D20. They were all different colours.
One great thing about GW games of the time was they were a big gaming tool kit. It was expected you would bend and break the rules as you and your group saw fit. No one I knew at the time ever considered sticking to the rules as written, it just wasn't done! You very much could make the game you wanted to play.
There was definitely a GW 40k dice blister, I know because I bought one and I still have all the dice!
It was a time when most matches were expected to be among friends. Now it seems they target the competitive type.
Andy Chambers even wrote that the rules were not to be taken in a "lawyer" fashion...or something like that. But yeah, the original writers intended us to put it to the dice. Then discus later.
Please keep making these. I've only been in Warhammer since 9th, but I love learning about the older versions, and you're really interesting
2nd really was alot of fun. with barely any good computer games or graphics at the time tanks and crazy tyranid monsters on a really good scenary board just looked epic. You really felt like a general about to make your next decesion.
I think squinting at the scatter die and determining the precise direction a blast marker scattered caused more arguments than anything else.
Precise??? I'd get opponents trying to change the vector by more than 30°and they honestly thought they were right.
And how many models the blast token was covering
Champions were a character type in Warhammer Fantasy Battles. They were characters, but regimental captains who were beefed-up versions of a soldier of the regiment they led. They were permanent parts of that regiment. Players could get a champion, a musician and a standard bearer for each regiment. You could also attach other characters to a regiment, so a regiment could have both a regimental champion, a wizard or two, the army general and a priest if you so liked. Champions had meaning when other heroes showed up and called for a duel. Instead of sending your wizard, also a character, into the duel you could let your champion take it on the chin a round.
A bit like calling a veteran sergeant in 3rd and up a character.
In the spanish 2nd edition of the "Angels of Death" codex, veteran sargeants were called veteran sargeants. In the rulebook were called champions to generalize, i imagine.
The core rules of 2e were a clusterfuck, but by far my favourite army and wargear lists to this day. More is more!
I'm reminded of the house rule we instigated for vortex grenades - if you rolled a 1, it exploded on the thrower.
Not in any of the rulebooks, but it ws an attempt to balance the game. Especially if someone had the combo of warp jump and a vortex grenade.
It could feel as though this era of rules were saying: "Here is a wargaming framework with some novel minigames, here are guidelines for messing about with models, be a good sport and use common sense while enjoying a narrative gaming experience".
Maybe this is why we can't have nice things.
I started when 2nd dropped.
These old photos are tearing my heart out.
Please continue.
Capital N for Nostalgia!
Part of the point you are eloquently making I feel, but I always felt BS 5+ essentially put you in credit for modifiers - e.g. bs 6 can hit target in soft cover (-1) on 2+
The table seems to imply it works that way. I suspect a second pass over the rules would have clarified it
@@OldenDemon What Jimbo wrote is what we applied.
As a filthy casual myself this video made me chuckle quite a bit!😂 Another great video that really highlights the struggles of the game before we all just made up our own rules on the spot (at least that's what me and my brother did)... They still ended in arguements but we had a lot of fun too.
Yes I’m pretty sure in 90% of the games rules were considered optional
@@OldenDemon 😂👍
This is why my groups games would take approx 3 days to finish. Ah second ed', how I genuinely miss you.
"None of these were sold in a gw store to my knowledge"
At the time you could buy a blister pack that contained a d4, d8, 2d10, d12 and d20, each in different colours.
This video has me crying with laughter. Oh how I loved those days....
As someone that started at 8th edition. I really treat this as a history class of the Hobby i love so much.
Also helps that i have an absolute hard on for classic models.
Came for the Ferdinan, stayed for the shoulder mounted heavy-bolter, which was apparently exactly like a regular bolter, but bigger.
'BEARDY!'
now I know we are of the same generation/era/epoc
It dates me
I bought official GW dice set at the time that did include d4's,d8's,d10's,d12's and d20's.... so they did exist. They came in an old blister pack from what I remember.... probably still have some in my big bag of dice.
That's where I got mine too in the 90s
Can confirm, I still have them to this day. One of each in a blister.
Started my wh40k playing in 1995 2nd edition and played a ton until around 2001. My brother and I always took an individual case approach to units in cover. We would apply modifiers depending on a good faith visible situation. Each shot situation was decided based on closest unit not in cover and would work back to IN cover if units were split up die rolls based on how much cover... so a 10 Ork squad that had 3 units not in cover, 2 in half cover, 5 in hard cover were simply targeted and rolled against in that order. The shots favoring the not cover units until they were killed and then the half cover units hit etc etc. Shooting angles we were never that picky about. You could split fire how you saw fit based on the previous rule... distance/cover. Never made that big of a point about mini standing angle. Just that you could have two shots to a squad closer to the left and 3 shots closer to the squad on the right of the units were in those positions. Close range also applied if applicable. We never felt this was very difficult to execute and quite honestly felt more granular and fun. Now when things are generalized you do get more streamlining but then model positions aren't as important as the general squad position and we tend to prefer the granular cases for the narrative vs just raw trying to crank through numbers faster.
I remember selling my Legos to by this box! Each time we would not be able to resolve something from the book, we would call a "+4 im right, -3 you are right". And we kept going 😂
The first GW D10 I am aware of came with the Inquisitor game system though interestingly you can now get them as wound markers that serve no randomisation purpose. There may be earlier examples but this is the limit of my grognardery
What I did was the envy of all my friends: I stole my dad's AD&D dice when he wasn't looking.
I'm certain I got a D10 in the GW 40k dice pack when 2nd ed released. It had a D3, D10, D12, D20, and maybe something else, a D8? I've still got them in my dice box so I'm going to have to check or it will drive me up the wall!
@@bilko991 D4 rather than D3, but yeah, I remember there being a blister pack of special dice in 2nd edition, though I started in the mid 90's rather than at the start of 2nd.
@@wolfie54321 indeed it was a D4, I stand corrected.
Ah the joy of 2nd edition.
The discussions, the arguments, the tantrums - fond memories.
"Beardy" now thats a word I've not heard in a long time
10:00 I started in the mid-90's and recall my local GW selling a pack of dice that included D8, D10, D12, D20 and I think it had a D4. I remember because as a snot nosed little kid I would sit in the store wondering if I should spend my chore money on finally getting the dice, or just being more models, lol. I dunno how many years before I started they were selling it, but so many weapons required them that I feel like they must have been selling them?
It’s one of those things that much have happened but I found no blisters or prices for them anywhere. I always make mistakes in these videos.
@@OldenDemon Hmm, odd, from memory it was a blister pack.
@@wolfie54321 Yeah, I remember this myself, my first set of dice bigger than d6s!. They admittedly then ending up seeing more use for DnD!
please never stop making these! You had me in stitches the whole time watching your video. Thanks for the great stuff!
I love these oldhammer videos! I can only guess that add i don't remember arguing all these points back in the day we must just have all gone with what felt right and agreed on that feeling.
I'm so happy to have 360 degree firing arcs and controlling players allocating casualties as standard now, though it does seem a little odd to me when my land raider somehow broadsides it's target with a set of guns on it's other side
It's one of those things you just don't think about too hard, or you'll drive yourself up a wall.
I played Second Edition, I bought a blister pack of dice (D4, D8, D10s, D12s and a D20) from a GW store at the time. I remember getting them vividly, I still have the yellow D4 and red D20. So they did carry them.
Very entertaining, it is still hard to drill into the head of some of my friends that the beauty of board/tabletop games, is that you can play it how you want, as long as all players at the table agree.
2nd Edition was messy, but what really killed 40K was the way 3rd so massively over-weighted the lethality of close combat that it created the phenomenon of the "Close Combat Army." There wasn't such a thing in RT or 2nd. Everyone could shoot, even Tyranids. Because all of a sudden there were "Close Combat Armies," the armies that could shoot became "firing line armies" whose sole tactic was to attempt to stay as far back as possible and hopefully kill enough of the enemy before they made it to close combat.
No game designer in their right mind would ever try to balance medieval knights against a WW2 infantry company. That would be insane. And yet, that's exactly what Games Workshop tried to do with 3rd Edition, and they literally never figured out how to balance the game ever again.
Somewhere out there is an alternate universe where 3rd Edition 40K streamlined some of the most bonkers elements of 2nd Edition, got rid of the Psychic Phase, etc. And in that one alternate universe, 40K is actually a good game.
This video was awesome. Please do more of these for the other phases 🙏🏼oh man 2nd was some crazy times.
I've only just found your channel, brilliant content I must say. I came to the hobby just as 3rd was taking over and stopped playing just as 4th hoved into view, though maintaining an interest in the miniatures and fluff through to today. I've always been more interested in finding out more about the crunch of Rogue Trader and 2nd, rather than lcatching up with 4th onwards so I'm looking forward to watching the rest of your current videos and your future uploads.
The space marine dreadnought rules in codex Ultramarines seems to suggest you can unclear a jam while firing other guns. I like to allocate a crewman/gunner to unclear a jam for other vehicles.
games workshop DID sell dice blisters with the various odd sized dice, including artillery and sustained fire dice. I know because I bought one in 1993
The funky d6 dice for sustained fire remained in use in Necromunda/Gorkamorka. Orks could have a cheap six-shoota, a sort of horrendous full-auto revolver.
To pick random model out of 24 models using dice you need 2 D6 dice. You roll 2 x D6 dice , remember which dice is "first" which is "second", you roll random number from 1 to 36 by (Dice 1 result -1 )* 6 + Dice 2 result. If the number you got is between 1 and 24 - this indicates the model you have picked, if it is between 25 and 36 - roll again.
So a D66/D56. :) Better yet: A D3-1 for the tens, and a D6 for the singles.
If you'd asked me anything about 2nd edition back in 95-98 then I could have answered it perfectly. Now watching this I can't believe that I had every rule and weapon stat memorised
This belongs in a museum.
*Happy Indiana Jones noises*
Thanks for bringing back wonderful memories of 2nd edition wee sausage dog!
Still better than 10th edition 😂 Love these videos!
I just started playing 2nd Ed this month and this video was actually really helpful.
Thank you, technically these are “how to play videos”. Just done differently
@@OldenDemonMore like how not to play lol
the AI dice on the dog photos are peak 2023
The dot configuration is peak AI, look out for the GW "AI dice set" for £50 soon :)
God i loved second edition i still get warm when i think of a hughe stack of wargear card and blast templates with different decoration
Might not be RAW, but in my view the most intuitive way to deal with shooting at units in partial cover or LOS is to split up the squad into different targets. The shooting player then chooses how much shooting to allocate against each target. If some models are out of LOS, they can’t be targeted and wounds don’t spill over.
Thank you for the nostalgia.
Hmm, I can see where your interpretation of the 'roll to hit' rules comes from, but we always played it like this:
(sorry if the following seems as patronizing as that 2nd ed range table, I'm just trying to make myself clear :) )
Although a roll of a 1 always misses, this doesn't make the higher BS redundant.
Basic roll to hit for BS 10 without modifiers = -3. BUT, a roll of a 1 always misses.
Rolling a -4 modifier on the dice means that the dice scores become the following numbers:
1 (-4) = -3
2 (-4) = -2
3 (-4) = -1
4 (-4) = 0
5 (-4) = 1
6 (-4) = 2
As a roll of a 1 always misses, rolling the 1 misses even though it meets the BS requirement.
However, a roll of 2 or more means you have *not rolled a 1*. You rolled a 2 or more.
The BS modifies the roll produced by the dice, but because you didn't physically roll a 1 the resulting score of -2 or higher still meets the BS requirement.
So a roll of a 2 or more would still hit in this situation.
The confusion comes from the line "your dice roll to hit is modified". But we took this to mean you miss if you physically roll a 1, but then the modifiers are applied to any number above 1 to see if you gained a roll high enough to meet your BS requirements.
It would be simpler if the rules had distinguished between 'roll' and 'score', but as we've already seen from the use of the word 'hero', the writers did tend to use terms in both general and specific ways, even when the two contradicted.
Our final point of persuasion is that doing it like this meant the full BS chart was actually used. If the writers hadn't meant the rules to be used like this, why would they have written the BS chart in that way?
Again, I can totally see how your interpretation is also valid.
Thanks for reading this far. As someone who still plays 2nd ed I'm really enjoying your work.
Yes, your way does seem to make use of all the appropriate tables and charts. But the rules just needed a second pass by another set of eyes to really clear up most of these points.
@@OldenDemon Oh, most certainly. That bloody elephant rule!
I love those old battle report diagrams. They mesmerized me. I'm still hooked on the game, it's the best.
I like to think the rules as less a definitive document of what is/isn’t permitted in play, more a lengthy description on how the studio played. Thats why odd little bits pop up here and there in the tone of “oh yea, we also sometimes do this!”
Just found your channel, and oh man...this brings me back to the many arguments at my buddy's house playing this. Look forward to more videos! Great work!
Another fun, informative and clearly presented video; thank you!
About turning the models I would say, that turning them away from a very near enemy is a question of the idea of the model. It is a moment of bravery or experience. About the probability's of hitting models in close combat engaged with your models I would say, we just estimate. The game is not chess. Every single step of following the rules is a process of immersion. That is why a periscope is used. I played with the german rulebook and there wasn't a periscope mentioned. But we used it and taking the perspective of my heroes and fighters was one of the best part of the game.
6:46
If you can' see them they're not being shot at. The only visible models are in hard cover so a -2.
The frustration of fire arcs meant having people armed with heavy weapons in both 40k and Necromunda could be caught out simply by attacking them from the direction they weren't facing. "Oh, you want to turn to fire your heavy weapon armed dude in overwatch at my charging character - shame - you'll need to move in order to face me and thus remove your ability to fire your gun..." Also, in hindsight, some of the best bits about the game were the randomness of the game and watching blast markers flying around the table!
The randomness and the unpredictable stories is what I miss most. Current 40k unfortunately plays like an accountants wet dream.
@@JPilestedt 8th/9th honestly isn't worth playing (and I doubt 10th is any better).
The thing is that is good gameplay, if strategy and tactics cause your enemy to be put into bad positions that's a good thing, though a stipulation for this could be that they can pivot for a small reduction in damage output, player one is rewarded for flanking, player 2 doesn't feel like he's robbed by the flank
I would argue that there is a difference between great tactics and the poor placement of miniatures and by poor placement I mean picking them up and placing them on the board. I would be annoyed if I'd picked up and moved a model and when placing it back on the board I hadn't placed it back the way I wanted it to be facing.
I thought models could rotate on the spot for free. But going around the back of the bloke with a heavy stubber sounds like a very Necromunda thing to do.
Space Hulk was all about facing. Terminators use an action point just to turn 90 degrees. The genestealer player had to come at the marines from a blind angle where the least amount of storm bolter overwatch would hit them. Otherwise your only hope was to throw so many 'stealers down the corridor that their bodies clogged the gun of the terminator and allowed one or two to slip through when he reloaded.
You beauty! 😂 The real question though is which elephant for the reference? The African Forest or the Asian? 🤔
Just make sure its a laden rather than unladen elephant and you are good?
😂😂😂😂😂 this literally had me in stitches! Absolute gold. I still prefer 2nd edition to anything from 9th edition. :D
srill planning to play some 2nd edition eventually, but the more i learn about it the less i know
Every time (and I mean every time since 1995) I've played a 2nd edition, it begins with, "Right, which rules do we both agree to ignore?".
aaaah that thumbnail art. I still want to see tactic discussions in that form.
Maybe one day
Hilarious. I can't even decide if you love or hate these rules. Keep up the good work :)
Thanks. I needed that kind of humour after the (work) day I've had.
7:01 I absolutely never read that it was affecting the “Dice Roll” after it was rolled, but the ‘Dice Roll To Hit’ before the dice was rolled and then if it was still 1/-1/-2 etc you had to roll a 2 or more.
Let’s laugh and not cry as the arguments start.
Ps pretty much here just for the pretty pictures. I love the art so much
Bit late to the discussion, Rogue Trader defines large target as anything over 3meters high or wide and the intended scale design was 1 tabletop inch = 2 meters. Assuming that’s what they intended for 2e as well!
Games Workshop York actually did have multiple atypical dice on sale when second edition came out. I know because I still own some that I bought at the time.
I cannot wait for the video on the Fight phase.
"OK, so let's agree on some ground rules."
"OK."
"So, This is 2nd edn, not 10th edn, right?"
"Yes."
"So we're not going to massively overcomplicate the entire process in a tragic, desperate attempt to prove that our meta-armies of toy soldiers are better than each other, and instead we're just going to have a lovely time playing a sci-fi wargame."
"Sounds good."
"OK. You go first."
"No, you go first."
"But I insist."
"Well, Ok then. If you're sure."
And therein lies the difference between oldhammer and Poohammer.
I remember buying D4 D8 D12 D20 blister at Games Workshop in the 90's (in France)
Honestly, most of these rules are rather clear. Like the to-hit chart is clearly saying that you still keep your normal score but always fail on a roll of 1, so a BS10 means that you can take up to -5 in penalties and still hit on 2.
Oh no my entire ork army blew itself up in one round of shooting
We used to have an over-riding rule of "dont be an arse", which we used to apply to anything like the blast template assassinations. 😂 Realise thats not mucu good for tournaments and the like, but you can absolutely tell that that type of play wasnt the designers intent!
I love how these videos are the nuclear flash to utterly annihilate the rose-tinting
I remember finding the melee super confusing so for ages we just used WFB style attacks and WS
360 degrees is a circle, a circular shape is a ring, *confirmed* GW is the second coming of Annatar
Thats Danyerus bruh
They did do a a dice kit in mid 1990s for second edition that had all the unusual dice.
Amazing. Thank you so much for these videos 😂
And it was still vastly superiour to everything that followed.
As someone who has rose tinted glasses for 2nd, you've firmly ripped them off. Fair enough
If its exactly 8 inches it doesn’t get the short range bonus. Its 8-16 meaning that 8 inches and above there is no modifier. >:(
Get Rekt.
Well if it 16" it long range so that means 8" is short range.
You're 100% right - this was the best edition of 40k... after Rogue trader... lol
I just found this channel. I can't wait until you get to the vehicle rules ....
I played rogue trader and 2nd for years when I was a kid and literally none of things were an issue
I'm fairly sure GW did do a pack of alternative dice sizes? Maybe not when 2nd came out but before 3rd probably?
At 07:20 you said that a BS 10 shot deducting 4 from the roll would hit on a 6. However I’m pretty sure that they would actually hit on a 2+. That’s because they hit on a -3 basically, so if you apply the modifier it becomes 2+.
That interpretation actually also eliminated your previous critique that the part of the “to hit” table that dealt with high BS models was obsolete; its included precisely because of the scenario you outlined (ie a high BS model with several negative modifiers)
Also, modifying the dice roll would be extra trick y if hitting on 7+? I that case which roll would be modified?
@@samgibbs8194 (as I think you are aware), if a model is hitting on a 7+, they have to roll a 6, follwed by a second roll of 4+, in order to hit. Any additional negative modifiers would apply to the second roll, so a "to hit" roll of 8+ would require the player to roll a 6, followed by a second roll of 5+. Then a 9+ would require a 6 followed by another 6. I'm not sure if the rules ever allowed for a roll as high as 10+, or if that kind of shot was considered functionally impossible.
6 + 6 was the highest allowed. Fact is, most of the issues in this video i never faced because we applied common sense. Until 3rd edition when people started to be ultracompetitive.
What I've seen from battle reports of the time, while you can ignore the closet target with blast markers to try and hit more units you still need LOS of the target you are aiming at; it looks like some of the Death company brothers here would block shots to the Chaplain 11:50 If the Reapers were on higher ground that'd be a different story.
(If I'm wrong about this that's certainly how I would balance it.)
Excellent avatar and username. Models do block line of sight. Exactly -how- is unclear, but the Death Company could theoretically block the shot.
Blast markers? yeah, they could be abused horribly. I am proud to say I never did though. Nope, not me sir. I was an eldar player so simply resorted to everybody's favourite completely overpowered unit....Warp Spiders!!!! Oh dear, is that a bloodthirster? Not any more it isnt!
I better get myself a reference elephant in anticipation for 11th ed. I'm gonna be ahead of the curve this time.
Honestly, randomizing hits is a great mechanic that should be brought back. "But it's a hassle!" it's a hobby game, not Angry Birds.
For a lot of combat situations, I like "defender chooses where damage is allocated" system. The amount of time you save is colossal, really.
I especially like it in melee engagements, since it gives you a little bit of extra "footwork" control without adding another phase to movement.
Want to be aggressive? Remove casualties from the back of the unit: as models at the front fall, models in the rear surge forward to fill the gaps.
Want to fall back? Remove casualties from the front of the unit, and nobody moves up to replace them.
Meh, I think it's tedious and doesn't add much to the game.
I think 3rd ed did away with the facing of infantry models, but kept the weapon facing of tanks. A tank's sponson gun could only fire 180 degrees to each sides. A forward-facing heavy bolter mounted up front could only fire forward. Cannons and other weapons in turrets, or the commander popping up to shoot a pintle-mounted stormbolter, still had 360 degrees.
“It’s short ranged now, you filthy casual!”
The heroes targeting issue (around 4:30) was answered by Andy Chambers in a White Dwarf magazine. Heroes can shoot at whatever they like ignoring the easily circumvented "shoot the closest applicable target" rule. They could not pick out a character standing in a squad if the character was in coherency distance (the character essentially using the squad as cover) as that was a different target selection limitation to the "shoot the closest thing" rule that characters and heroes can circumvent. They didn't have to fire with the rest of the squad. As someone who played back then this wasn't actually all that hard to understand was it?
Don't get me started on short vs long range penalty and measuring how much of a unit was obscured for partial vs hard cover... those are headaches I thought I had long since left behind me. It's the whole reason I'd just play Eldar and say "whatever gives you more advantage opponent, you're not winning anyway"
Loved the trip down memory lane and I did indeed laugh out loud multiple times remembering
I have absolutely loved this art style of bat rep. I remember reading many of them when I was younger. Can you let me know what program you are using to make them? I suppose I could just make it using Gimp and/or other photo editing software but it looks like it might be a bit easier with your workflow.
great stuff man I subbed. I remember getting into 40k when I was so young. My first game was 12 Eldar guardians and a farseer vs Abaddon and a squad of chosen... It was not close lol. but I scared my buddy by taking out everything but abaddon and bloodying him up some too. I look forward to more of your stuff.
It’s After Effects and Procreate. It’s not easy but it seems to allow the best options for animation
Hi, instant like, watch it later!
the current 360 degree firing arc for infantry models makes more sense than you think. the old version you are descrbing reflects a bit of over realism of infantry sitting in one spot and having a limited field of view.
the current version takes into account that as much as infantry would have that limited realistic view, they would react based on their sergeants or comrades orders of where the enemy was located and "adjust" based on that and making it so you dont have to move the models facing is just a way to stop padantic rules lawyering like you described about forgetting to "face" your models the right way.
ill take the "its assumed" method becuase some people really will be asshats about if your heavy bolter marine is facing the right way to shoot at their valuable unit. especially in the competative level of the game.
if you were BS10 with a -4 modifier. you'd actually hit on 3+ because when you minus a minus number you add. -4 - -3= -1. Hit on 3+.
This is all as chaotic as those AI generated long dog pictures and I am here for it.
All of the sudden, i get why battletech was popular back then
Ahhh simpler times
where can i get that graphic program you were using called "90's batrep sim"?