"90's Hammer!" Topic

Inspired by websites like Classichammer, Herohammer and Warhammer For Adults, I've decided to throw my hat into the wring and support the sadly forgotten 90's editions of Warhammer Fantasy Battle. Much maligned today for not fitting into the preconceived mold of what proper Warhammer ought to be, 90's Hammer nevertheless holds several important distinctions in the annals of Warhammer gaming. It was the very first edition with a robust online community, spawning thousands of discussions, articles, battle reports, strategy guides, image galleries, house rules and much, much more. It also remains the most materially-inventive version of the game, with multiple box set releases, card-based magic minigames, tokens galore and unique templates for dozens and dozens of spells. It is the edition that inspired Warhammer Ancient Battles and Mordheim, two games which remain fan favorites to this very day. It is also the era that produced the most coherent and elaborated Warhammer setting, with gorgeous artwork and new army books that delved deep into each faction's history.

While some may claim that it was not as detailed as earlier editions or not as balanced and troop-centric as later versions, 90's Hammer nevertheless captured the imagination of thousands of players and spawned thousands of late-night games of gonzo, memorable fun. My new blog will attempt to capture some of those experiences, as well as collect, curate and republish the massive volume of early internet articles about the game that would otherwise be lost to the void of shutdown websites and bad links. It will do this (nay, it could only do this) in the true spirit of the internet in the 90's. So disable your autocorrect, turn on "frames", set your monitor to 640x480 and fire up Netscape Navigator for…

90's Hammer!

To get the ball rolling, what is your favorite memory of that period?

Well I remember writing the basic system over the Christmas holidays 1991 – mostly using endless sheets of A4 paper and hand writing the rules – using card proxy bases for units and my living room carpet as the battlefield. That was for the 1992 edition – the 4th edition – which came out that autumn. So, the basic development work would have started in the new year, including the design work on plastics and everything.

In many ways the 92 edition was an 'austerity' version of the game compared to the previous one – and that was simply because the company had changed hands and there just wasn't the money or staff for the full production values of the late 80's. However – by then Warhammer was pretty much dead in the water sales wise – the 92 version relaunched the game and was by far and away the most commercially successful Warhammer up to that time.

Despite being a step back in terms of the production values it has always been my favourite version of the basic game rules – and hence my and Jervis's adoption of the core game into WAB. It's nice to see the 92 – and 96 – versions of the game getting some love!

Haha, I think Rick just won the thread!

Can't touch this!

But seriously, what was with those balloon pants?

I loved the gobbos during this period, all the wacky troops types, just utter mayhem, not always for the other guy. It did slow the game down so tended to get tamed down a bit. Which led to a locally produced game which was surprisingly similar to the new version of Kings of War.

Also proxying my elf army with the less expensive Grenadier line.

Wait…there was a fantasy version of 40k? :p

I've always liked 4th ad 5th edition. 1st edition baffled me back in the day.

Wow Rick, amazing post! I'm sure that I am not the only one that would love to hear more about those early days. 4th and 5th were the editions that hooked me as a young teenager, having grabbed a GW flier on a family trip to Ireland one summer and oogled over it the entire flght back to the States. I think it's funny that Mordheim and WAB are still widely treasured, but their forefather WFB 4/5e has been neglected. Definitely a fun and hugely characterful and colourful game of Warhammer. To this day, the game system and rules behind 4/5e are the default in my mind when I read newer or later editions. Simply put, it is "Warhammer" for me, through and through.

This is actually the game, really the minis, that got me involved in miniatures collecting. The cheery goblins, the flamboyant Empire, the lunatic Skaven, the Mesopotamian/Ottoman inspired Chaos Dwarfs and their Achemaenid Hobgoblin allies, and the Black Orcs in their ceremonial "Heavy Armour" really struck me as how a Fantasy World should look.

the 92 version relaunched the game and was by far and away the most commercially successful Warhammer up to that time.

The best as well and then GW started to trash it and then kill it for good.

Was that the period when the GW studio used red paint on everything?

4th edition Warhammer was certainly a shock after 3rd edition some stuff was better (like the magic system) some worse (like whole regiments being wiped out when caught routing).

The biggest thing was 4th caused the rise of herohammer when tooled up hero's became more powerful than whole regiments something that, in my experience, never happened in earlier editions.

That's actually a misconception, albeit a very common one. I realize that you would have never heard this criticism… This may be the first time it has been said on the internet, but 3rd Edition characters are hand and fist more powerful than Herohammer characters. This is for several reasons:

Firstly, 3e characters benefit tremendously from to Hit the steep curve in 3e. A WS 8 character can hit a WS 3 character 87% of the time, while the WS 3 character can only hit back 8% of the time. Compare that to 4e's 66% vs 55%. 10x smaller hit chance vs 2x smaller hit chance, and WS 8 hits are less "guaranteed" over all.

Secondly, if you thought magic items in Herohammer were bad, check 3e one more time. You can custom build your magic items, so the combo potential is through the roof (and no, there is no point limit on magic items).

Lastly, the whole idea of Herohammer is based around the concept that your army can be 50% heroes. Well, in 3e, most armies could have as many or more heroes in their force composition than 4e armies could.

It goes to show, Herohammer is not about what the rules allow, but about how you choose to play.

Anyway, re: routing regiment being wiped out, I think this is as Rick was saying… 4e was an austerity edition. The rules were simple and you could play the game to a finish relatively quickly. If there are only 4 rounds in a turn, then you NEED to be removing at least one or two regiment blocks every round in order to be at a convincing finish by turn 4. With only four rounds to maneuver, your regiments were going to fight a maximum of around 2-3 rounds of combat… In that time frame, clear results were vital. If you cranked down the time frame to a more granular level (and thus had many more hours to play the game), then yes, you would see more back and forth.

One of the nice things about the high rate of routing was that it could theoretically happen to either you or your opponent, regardless of who was winning the battle at the time. Individual combats became little islands of action, where you could turn the entire battle around with a clever plan and a good roll. The more granular and gradual the game, the less chance for dramatic comebacks. People who didn't like their victory snatched from them by a losing opponent probably hated that, but the absolute chaos and open possibilities of the battlefield really hooked me on Warhammer. Just wait one more turn… If you can trap and rout his general, or suck his wizard lord into the warp, then you might have a chance!

With regards to Magic items in third you couldn't build as powerful items as you think for starters only magic swords were allowed more than one magic property (same with armour if I recall though you could have a magic shield and magic armour)and a lot of models didn't carry swords and there were points restrictions on magic items in warhammer armies.

With regards to routing I could never get my head around some hero hacking down a few grunts getting them to rout and then wiping them all out when he caught up with them. It made the game faster but somehow never sat quite right with me.

I played plenty of 90shammer and enjoyed it the time but for me 3rd was the best version. There is no real right or wrong with this everyone has a favorite version of Warhammer normally, in my experience, based on which ever version you played first in your youth.

I remember being startled by the whole 'rout and die' thing, but it gave my gaming group and I some memorable outcomes – such as Empire militia getting lucky against Dwarf heavies, and wiping them off the face of the Old World, following the Dwarf player's arrogantly confident predictions of the opposite result, and declaration that 'I've already won this fight.'

I was young and carefree back then! I was also alarmingly incapable of leading Dwarfs to victory…

With regards to routing I could never get my head around some hero hacking down a few grunts getting them to rout and then wiping them all out when he caught up with them. It made the game faster but somehow never sat quite right with me.

Sounds like one of Jackson's LotR/Hobbit battles, minus the shield boarding and dwarf tossing.

As the Purveyor of Classichammer, I am glad that you were inspired by our works there. That is exactly what I was trying to do with my website.