Bolthammer 40Action

For the discussion of anything related to Warhammer 40,000
User avatar
Primarch
Evil Overlord
Posts: 11513
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:33 am
Location: Nagoya
Contact:

Bolthammer 40Action

Post by Primarch » Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:22 am

Warhammer 40,000, a game about the grim darkness of the far future, where genetically engineered super soldiers battle giant space bugs across blasted death worlds and ruined mega-hives.
Bolt Action, a game about WW2, where regular people battle regular people across farmland and small villages.

Nothing alike, right?

Well, apart from the fact that they had some of the same writers involved at various stages. (Rick Priestley, Alessio Cavatore and Andy Chambers among others). But aside from that, completely dissimilar.

Take a peak at this (previous edition style) 40K profile:
WS:na BS:4 S:3 T:4 W:1 I:na A:1 LD:9
Gun - Range:18" S:3 Assault 2

That's the statline for a German Veteran Grenadier with an Assault Rifle.

Vehicle statlines work in a similar way. BA assumes that ALL weapons have a base strength of 3 and all vehicle AV scores are therefore 3 points lower. A half-track has AV10. A King Tiger has AV14.

Effectively, Bolt Action uses a very similar set of rules to older 40K rules. That's one of the reasons for it's success. 40K players who migrated to BA found the rules familiar and comfortable. You know those trick art pictures where if you look from one direction it's a picture of X and from another it's a picture of Y? That's 40K and BA more or less.

There are some significant differences though, the lack of a WS or Initiative value in BA for example. The game assumes that everyone is, on average the same. The way morale works is different, the turn structures are different and, looking at the previous version of 40K, BA uses to hit modifiers which 40K didn't.

So, the more patient of you may be asking, "Where is Prim going with this?"

Well, it's probably no secret that I have felt a tad disenchanted with 40K for the past few editions. Since late 5th ed, there have been more new games coming along with new ideas, new mechanics and some of them have been pretty innovative. I still like 40K's fluff and (my opinions about GW pricing notwithstanding) the GW range of figures has some truly awesome pieces. I just find myself being less and less interested in the game itself.

"But Prim", one of you may say, "there is a whole new edition and you haven't even tried it yet!"

Yeah, it's new and shiny and streamlined, but it's really just the same thing as before. You still have some units rolling dice by the bucketload. Super characters can no longer form a death star, but they are still around. The random pre-game rolls have gone, but been replaced by other randomness. Models can launch themselves from deep space and land with pinpoint accuracy, but no-one is sure how fast they can run or how many times their guns might fire. Gone are the Universal Special Rules (USRs) of old, only to be replaced by Unit Special Rules (USRs?). Literal Gods fight in small skirmishes.

Yeah, New40K is looking a lot like Old40K to me. It seems pretty popular though and I've seen more 40K on the table since 8th dropped (without scattering), than I did in the years of 6th and 7th. It's just not catching my attention though. After years when the idea of fielding official Primarchs would have allowed me to 'cut glass,' to borrow a Spevna-ism, I'm liking the small handful of dice and the almost non-existant special rules-ishness of BA. Plus the order dice mechanic is, IMHO, brilliant.

"You're still not reaching any kind of point here," the imaginary you in my head says in frustration. You imaginary readers are so impatient!

Fine, I'm thinking to try to adapt 40K to the Bolt Action rules, it's something I have tried before and it didn't work because we tried too hard to keep all of the 40K stuff in the game while adding the random turn mechanics of BA. That's not the plan this time around. What I want is to play BA with 40K models and flavour, not 40K with a couple of BA rules tacked on. I don't expect this to replace 40K or BA at Joshin. Quite possibly I'll just play it at home with a few interested parties. I certainly don't want to detract from others' enjoyment of either game. Despite my own lack of interest in 8th ed. I'd still recommend people play that as much as they'd like and tell me how awesome it is. (Who knows, I may change my mind in the future).

I am interested in what people think and if anyone wants to add some constructive criticism, I'm happy to listen. There are a few things that I think will be difficult to port over between the systems, so ideas are very much welcome. I'll be posting up drafts and so forth somewhere on this forum, so if you fancy the concept, have a look and leave a few comments.

"Ok, you're definitely insane," the voices are saying.
Yes, yes I probably am. :D
Painted Minis in 2014: 510, in 2015: 300, in 2016 :369, in 2019: 417, in 2020: 450

User avatar
Mike the Pike
Prince of Purple
Posts: 1948
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:42 pm
Location: Toyokawa

Re: Bolthammer 40Action

Post by Mike the Pike » Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:01 am

You soooooooo stole this idea from when I used to whinge about 7th edition! I’m sure we had very similar conversations several times. :lol:
Anyways It’s certainly doable, the leap to a ‘Modern’ setting was easy enough.
Morituri nolumus mori!

User avatar
Primarch
Evil Overlord
Posts: 11513
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:33 am
Location: Nagoya
Contact:

Re: Bolthammer 40Action

Post by Primarch » Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:56 am

Mike the Pike wrote:You soooooooo stole this idea from when I used to whinge about 7th edition! I’m sure we had very similar conversations several times. :lol:
Anyways It’s certainly doable, the leap to a ‘Modern’ setting was easy enough.
Given that I tried it with Badruck, I can't say I agree that it was your idea, but we have certainly discussed it at length. :D
Painted Minis in 2014: 510, in 2015: 300, in 2016 :369, in 2019: 417, in 2020: 450

User avatar
job
Destroyer of Worlds
Posts: 3368
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:29 pm
Location: Nagoya

Re: Bolthammer 40Action

Post by job » Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:14 pm

I recall Badruck running an event with these rules. It worked and it was interesting.
Models Painted, 2020
70 28mm miniatureS

User avatar
Mike the Pike
Prince of Purple
Posts: 1948
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:42 pm
Location: Toyokawa

Re: Bolthammer 40Action

Post by Mike the Pike » Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:42 pm

Anyways as that silly Kevin Costner movie said “build it and they will come”... or not... we’re a contrary bunch of grognards. :D
You should at least try 8th though.

<puts on devil’s advocate hat> :twisted:
As far as I am concerned BA works well with the WW2 setting because the physical differences between humans are negligible. Technology-wise too the differences are adequately covered IMHO. But a monstrous creature or a
Warp spawned Daemon are not really the equivalent of an IG guardsman. Perhaps, these could have multi-Wounds?
Also psychology. Tiger fear is bad enough but I think stumbling across a Nurgle Daemon would cause more than a -1 to most folks sphincter clenching roll. Actually, come to think of it, even 40K doesn’t really address the sheer horror of some of these creatures etc. Soooo... slightly adjusted morale checks. Minuses to charge or when charged etc.
Anyways that’s my two yen worth, for now, most other differences could be dealt with a lengthening if a distance or a +/- modifier there.
Morituri nolumus mori!

User avatar
Lovejoy
Legend
Posts: 1031
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 6:53 am
Location: Kiyosu City

Re: Bolthammer 40Action

Post by Lovejoy » Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:40 pm

It would be worth at least looking at modding Gates of Antares. Same DNA as Bolt Action, and it’s already Sci-Fi.
2018 Hobby Progress: A modicum of Middle Earth SBG

User avatar
The Other Dave
Destroyer of Worlds
Posts: 5293
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 3:46 am
Location: Nagoya
Contact:

Re: Bolthammer 40Action

Post by The Other Dave » Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:22 pm

Primarch wrote:The game assumes that everyone is, on average the same.
I agree with Mike that this right here is the $10,000 question - you have widely different skill levels and abilities to survive damage and weapons and armors just within single armies. (I was thinking about how to hack Chain of Command to a science-fictiony setting and ran up against similar issues.) When you're looking at historical settings, a guy with a rifle is a guy with a rifle no matter where he happens to be from, but a guardsman with a lasgun is very different from a marine with a bolter is very different from a tyranid warrior with a deathspitter. I think the danger would be that the design space between "40K with a couple of BA rules" and "just BA with 40K models" is pretty narrow.

Not to say it's insoluble! I'm a rules wonk and would love to see what you can come up with.
Feel free to call me Dave!
-----
Miniatures painted in 2024: 146
Miniatures painted in 2025:
32mm infantry: 47
Epic: 12 tonques

User avatar
Primarch
Evil Overlord
Posts: 11513
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:33 am
Location: Nagoya
Contact:

Re: Bolthammer 40Action

Post by Primarch » Sat Dec 09, 2017 4:22 am

With all this positivity, I can't fail! I may give up, quit, procrastinate indefinitely, get bored, dilly-dally, go off course, run around in circles, lose sight of my target or suffer from perils of the warp, but I cannot fail. :D

I think looking at Konflict '47 and Gates of Antares to see how they deal with things like armour, monsters and skimmers is a good idea. I think GoA is a step further away from BA's 40K parentage, (It uses d10s, right?), and I'd prefer to keep things simple and straightforward wherever possible.

As for the issue raised by Pikey and ToD:
The Other Dave wrote:
Primarch wrote:The game assumes that everyone is, on average the same.
I agree with Mike that this right here is the $10,000 question - you have widely different skill levels and abilities to survive damage and weapons and armors just within single armies. (I was thinking about how to hack Chain of Command to a science-fictiony setting and ran up against similar issues.) When you're looking at historical settings, a guy with a rifle is a guy with a rifle no matter where he happens to be from, but a guardsman with a lasgun is very different from a marine with a bolter is very different from a tyranid warrior with a deathspitter. I think the danger would be that the design space between "40K with a couple of BA rules" and "just BA with 40K models" is pretty narrow.

I have a few ideas I'm mulling over. If you look at stats for common troops in 40K, gaunts, guards and guardians aren't that dissimilar. Likewise, Marines, Tyranid Warriors (stat wise at least) and Necrons all fall within broadly the same categories. It's the big gribblies, living gods and city block sized warmachines where you get the really odd stats and pages of special rules. I'm not saying that it's impossible to have rules for those included, but they aren't a priority for me.

Anyway, since the initial response has been pretty good so far, I'm eager to push ahead with this. I think it is important to address my goals and keep them in mind as I move forward. As such, I have come up with a set of guiding principles. Have a look and let me know what you think.

0. Prim is not infallible. Prim's decisions are not set in stone. Prim must listen to feedback and act on it.
1. Keep things simple. Armies get 3 army-wide rules (the same as BA) for flavour. Units can get 1 special rule if they are a special unit. 2 if they are super elite. Most units won't have any.
2. Randomness should be a Risk Vs. Reward decision at a tactical/strategic level. Units will not randomly forget how to run or turn into imbeciles.
- Good Randomness - Order Dice: How do you use yours when you draw it?
- Bad Randomness - Random Charge Distance: How do legs work again?
3. This is a platoon level game. Infantry squads are the core. Tanks/Walkers/Gribblies are support units only. Wraith/Imperial Knights, [noun] Blades, Living Gods and Chapter Masters are better off left in 40K.
4. Everything should be intuitive. Less charts and rule conundrums, more playing, yelling Waaagh! and having fun.
5. Asymmetrical games are ok. Points are very hard to calculate and don't always accurately reflect a unit's power. (e.g. GW just pumped out new points values for the Marine 'dex which was released a couple of months ago). Try to find a balance in forces to make a fun game.

What do you think?
Painted Minis in 2014: 510, in 2015: 300, in 2016 :369, in 2019: 417, in 2020: 450

User avatar
The Other Dave
Destroyer of Worlds
Posts: 5293
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 3:46 am
Location: Nagoya
Contact:

Re: Bolthammer 40Action

Post by The Other Dave » Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:03 am

I think those look good - and yeah, a general light infantry / heavy infantry / superheavy infantry split would probably work "well enough" for troops on the ground. I'm fully in support of a focus on platoon-level (or smaller!) engagements at 28mm - an infantry platoon with maybe one or two support elements should do the trick.

On the topic of randomness, though, I as a fan of "battlefield friction" can see the thinking that leads to random movement as a design choice (like, say, Chain of Command does) - the distance a given trooper can move across open ground in a non-combat situation isn't necessarily reflected in how they choose to move right now, across this ground, under fire and without perfect knowledge of the disposition of their enemies. But maybe that's for me to think about in a "Chain of 40K" adaption, heh.
Feel free to call me Dave!
-----
Miniatures painted in 2024: 146
Miniatures painted in 2025:
32mm infantry: 47
Epic: 12 tonques

User avatar
Primarch
Evil Overlord
Posts: 11513
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:33 am
Location: Nagoya
Contact:

Re: Bolthammer 40Action

Post by Primarch » Sat Dec 09, 2017 7:39 am

The Other Dave wrote:On the topic of randomness, though, I as a fan of "battlefield friction" can see the thinking that leads to random movement as a design choice (like, say, Chain of Command does) - the distance a given trooper can move across open ground in a non-combat situation isn't necessarily reflected in how they choose to move right now, across this ground, under fire and without perfect knowledge of the disposition of their enemies. But maybe that's for me to think about in a "Chain of 40K" adaption, heh.
There seem to be two ways of doing it. Allow pre-measuring and then have a random move, or make people eyeball the distance, declare their action and then move up to a fixed distance. I'm a fan of the latter style tbh. I think it keeps unnecessary dice rolling to a minimum and fits my preference for Risks/Rewards being a player decision (Do I think I'm in range?) rather than a gamble every time. That's just my opinion though.
Painted Minis in 2014: 510, in 2015: 300, in 2016 :369, in 2019: 417, in 2020: 450

Post Reply

Return to “Warhammer 40,000 - ウォーハンマー40,000”