# Using scenery in 8th



## Luisjoey (Dec 3, 2010)

do you use scenery in 8th edition of warhammer fantasy? 

I always do love to use lots of scenery, but players of fantasy in 7th and earlier edition use the minimun scenery to play because usually any building (been a loghouse, a lego castle, a major house or a diet coke can) were a BLOCKING TERRAIN and forrest prevent you from moving (except you are WE) because you have to reform to surround terrain, and gives some headaches for charging and line of sight. 

As far i can remember my gaming group used to place around 3 or 4 scenery per game, mostly been the hills that don´t prevent your movement but give you sight advatages. 

Nowdays with 8th, and lot of rules for scenery (encouraging the gw product) people field more scenery, but many people still complain about it. 

What is your position about scenery in fantasy? do you field lots or still play with the few the better rule? do you like the new terrain rules that everything from hills to fences could be magic with lots of rules that could boost or hex your army? 

I did enjoy the stubborn Dwarven Brewery! :victory:


----------



## Arli (Mar 4, 2010)

I use Scenery in all my games. I love the extra dimension that it gives the game.


----------



## kain1989 (Dec 1, 2009)

I usually like having scenery, it makes the games look that much better, especially when their are 2 painted armies. 

but on the other hand, I hate the special rules for terrain, it makes the game incredibly tedious, and complicated. but the average terrain rules i'm ok with. the only problem with them, is that when you field alot of terrain, it heavily favors close combat armies, which are already favored anyway.

the problem with using alot of terrain is that it makes moving difficult, which is the majority of fantasy. 40k can have alot of terrain because their are no movement trays, and with vehicles, moving isn't too much of a hassle like fantasy. but this is my humble opinion.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

I find that it is best to limit the retard table of random crap to 1-2 pieces of terrain per game.


----------



## Drannith (Sep 18, 2010)

We use the random terrain chart that is listed in the BRB and it has caused some really fun games just from the lack or overabunance of terrain on the field. 

I like having terrain as it makes each battle different and fun.


----------



## cranvill (Jul 20, 2008)

i think it realy inproves the game as long as you are sensable with it and both players agree to it, pluse as Dranith said if its done properly it can make for some realy funny games.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

The random terrain table is great. People complain that terrain makes moving hard, that is the point DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. Two armies have come to fight over something and that something is not usually a billiard table. The random terrain is part of the game and if you're not using it you're not playing the game correctly, you're playing something similar but not WHFB.


----------



## effigy22 (Jun 29, 2008)

I use the Random terrain table, makes it interesting and you get a different terrain set each time!!! But i tend to agree with opponents that we re roll if things like 3 to 5 rivers get rolled up... buildings - no problem, mean we get to fight for a small village / town!


----------



## Durzod (Nov 24, 2009)

Terrain is the backdrop on which the game is played. When it dominates the game something is wrong. Using the full "wacky" terrain rules, I've seen too many games where the terrain does more damage to an army than the enemy. One game where this happened would be an anomaly, but I've seen more than that.

My preferred method is to let a third party set up the battlefield, if one is available. Otherwise one player sets up the field, then we roll for scenario. The player who didn't set up the field gets to choose sides. If we want to throw in wacky terrain it's usually limited to Mysterious Forests.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

That's just not playing the game though. The Random terrain and turn about terrain deployment is part of the game, it's tactical as your deployment. If you cannot cope with the random terrain or play it to your advantage then my only suggestion is the tried and tested learn to play.


----------



## clever handle (Dec 14, 2009)

Aramoro this is true to a point - but when you end up with 10 peices of terrain, all of which are magical to one extent or another the game does suffer. Durzod is correct in that the terrain should be a backdrop & not a major force. When every player turn comes to a full stop for 30 minutes to go through each peice of terrain & shoot magical missiles/buffs/debuffs across the table the game ceases to be fun. I find that it's not the moving around / through terrain that becomes tedious but rather managing all the rules for the different magical pieces. If magic is rare & special why does every single battlefield have 3-4 magical terrain features?


----------



## Arli (Mar 4, 2010)

I agree with Aramoro on this. I do not like having 11 pieces of terrain on the board, but if that is what is rolled, so be it. I make a note of each terrain feature with a short (two or three words on what it does or a page number at least) description of what it is or does. This does not affect our games at all. Most of the time, if anything, we go out of our way to avoid them.


----------



## Anarkitty (Jul 29, 2008)

Too much terrain, especially too much "special" terrain is a problem, but too little is as well.
Armies are created and balanced on the assumption there will be a reasonable amount of terrain on the board. Take Chaos (any Chaos). They're balanced assuming there is some assortment of terrain on the board. 
I've played WoC vs Dwarfs on a board where the only terrain was a few hills, most of them in the deployment zones. It's not fun.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Terrain may make moving harder, but that's the whole point. If your tactics can't adapt to a few units being restricted in movement a bit then maybe wargaming isn't for you. Personally, the terrain rules are excellent, I just wish they had expanded on them more. Different biomes and such. I don't see why a Nehekharan Sphynx and an Elven Waystone are together. Most of the time me and my friends just set up terrain in a cool looking way, declare what it is, and roll with it.


----------



## Drannith (Sep 18, 2010)

Like I said earlier the random terrain is where it is at. True we did get one game that had 15 things of terrain one game but we threw out some of the walls and fences as it was just too much. 

After a few games with the terrain you shouldn't have your game slow down more than what 40k does with terrain tests and what not. 

Also I wish I could get a map with 5+ rivers in there... freaking chaos would eat my spells and posion wind mortar for at least an extra turn or two depending on how they got set up. 

Two of the best things to have come out of a river was against lizardmen in the same game. First one his lore of light slaan/temple block moved accross a river of light and got banishment casted on the unit, S5 hits thanks to the slaan being a light mage. Second thing was his unit of skinks fleeing from a charge hit the river of light, had the net casted on them and I rolled enough to catch them while fleeing... the look on his face as that happened was awesome.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

I tired to charge a unit just over a Barricade with my Brets (not touching it just behind it) hit the Fence killed 4 of my own guys, broke and fled over a different fence and killed the rest. Fence FATALITY!


----------



## Majere613 (Oct 14, 2008)

My current terrain setup is a series of 1"x1" modular boards that I made years ago, with built in hills etc. For the most part, the random terrain rules aren't very practical with this board, so we don't generally use them.

As for the forests etc, that varies from game to game. If we're playing a game where the armies are meeting in neutral territory, we tend to use them, but if one army is meant to be on home ground, we don't. It stretches credibility that a unit that's been garrisoning a town for a month hasn't noticed that the wood next to it is a Venom Thicket, for example.

GW themselves don't even insist on random terrain all the time. You'll often find they make a board that looks fun, and then say, for example, 'we decided this cave should represent a Haunted Mansion'.


----------



## Luisjoey (Dec 3, 2010)

Remember that RULEBOOK says 4+D6 pieces of terrain, a range from 5 to 10 pieces! that could be a lot in a single battle and many people would complain a lot. 

I love table filled with terrain, but remember when playing 6-7ed that we used to avoid and surround the terrain (mostly woods, swamps and buildings) Nowdays there is a good rules for buildings (like wh40k vehicles) 

With the new rules i love playing with lots of terrain, but it could become weird a brewery besides a khaine altar and a idol of gork or else. maybe GW should think of a better rules for terrain disposition. 

some people that complain about the terrain calls that wars in fantasy era used to be in open fields with the less obstacles possibles as in our medieval world, but i do dissagree because they fight in towns or to take special places.


----------



## Durzod (Nov 24, 2009)

Masked Jackal said:


> Terrain may make moving harder, but that's the whole point. If your tactics can't adapt to a few units being restricted in movement a bit then maybe wargaming isn't for you. Personally, the terrain rules are excellent, I just wish they had expanded on them more. Different biomes and such. I don't see why a Nehekharan Sphynx and an Elven Waystone are together. Most of the time me and my friends just set up terrain in a cool looking way, declare what it is, and roll with it.


If the terrain rules restricted movement as much as these magnificent models restrict the physical placing of our carefully painted units that would be one thing. But unless you're riding on something, the current terrain rules rarely impede movement. But those movement trays sure don't balance well. Especially when packed with my old lead figs!


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Durzod said:


> If the terrain rules restricted movement as much as these magnificent models restrict the physical placing of our carefully painted units that would be one thing. But unless you're riding on something, the current terrain rules rarely impede movement. But those movement trays sure don't balance well. Especially when packed with my old lead figs!


Hills sometimes offer an issue, but otherwise, I don't really see the problem. Either that, or the people in your area who make terrain just aren't making it for Fantasy.


----------



## Durzod (Nov 24, 2009)

Or maybe we don't play with pieces of green felt for forests.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Durzod said:


> Or maybe we don't play with pieces of green felt for forests.


Removable trees. Use them.


----------



## Wingman (Jun 27, 2011)

I like the scenery rules but we often decide ahead of time what the terrain will do and for the most part 30-50% of the terrain will do something while the rest is just regular stuff because it's kind of hard to think that everything would have a magical property.


----------



## Alexious (Apr 13, 2009)

I love terrain and it's implications for Warhammer are some of the most overlooked areas of the game... Terrain is about as Amaroo has discussed part of the idea of WHFB, if your not using it then your not really playing the game properly.

I have an extensive terrain collection and use as much as I can within the rules. But what a lot of people forget is that it can change and it is up to you to decide what types of terrain and how it impacts how you play.

How I do it...

1). Every terrain part I build or make or buy... I think what is the affect.

Here is an example of a piece of I built recently. A wyrding well. (Work in Progress)



















Without roof... I am experimenting with water affects atm...

The first thing I did was look at the description and what it had to do...

The rules are simple... 3 inch of the well roll a dice and this happens..... So the base is designed to ensure that a unit that comes into contact with the large base below as shown here.... is and can drink from the mysterious amber liquids... and then fall dead or whatever.










It is simple and effective so that anyone who played me and we used it could see quite clearly what is in the area or what needs to happen to have an affect on the unit. I have not come across anyone who has said... hey! measure it from the centre of the well mister!!!!! I model based off the simple fact that a unit is square based and will require to touch the base of the stone.... area to drink.


The well is simply a terrain part that will give bonuses or detractions to a unit. So it does not need a huge base or a lot of muchking about. However when I build woods etc I ensure that I have done it so that anything in the wood etc.... means it has that affect happening to it. I also try and make my terrain simple enough to have a centre point so measuring is not tough or defined edges so that it is instinctive of where to measure from. 

Lexi.


----------



## Arli (Mar 4, 2010)

Nice work. Here, have some rep +.


----------

