Friday, 1 May 2015

Which rules I use.

There is much discussion on the interwebs about what exactly can be regarded as 'Oldhammer'. Whilst the majority seem to be in favour of the 3rd edition of the rules, there are also many (including lots of the aforementioned majority) who believe it to be more about the ethos and approach taken by the players. 

This is something I wholeheartedly agree with and is how I generally approach games. Because of this, I am perfectly happy to enjoy 4th edition along side of 3rd. To me, this is the edition in which the Warhammer World truly came together and became what I would recognise as being 'modern' Warhammer. I love the army books (easy to collect now without spending much) and the background they contain. I love the simpler rules which give quick, fun games. I love the unique and different troop types and warmachines which emerge during this period. It is just plain fun. BUT, it is best approached with an Oldhammer mentality. In fact the magic supplement for this edition specifically recommends placing a limit on some of the power. If you agree to limit magic and heroes then 4th is a perfectly good edition of the game (and isn't the Oldhammer spirit all about cooperating together to play great games?!)

But to me, it is 3rd edition which is more serious, detailed and full of depth. It is the flip side of the coin. There are many things I like about third which are missing in 4th, but there are also plenty added in 4th which I miss from 3rd. To me, which I play depends on what kind of fantasy game I want. The more bonkers 4th or the more serious 3rd. And there is room in my collection for both!

So while this blog primarily covers my adventures in 3rd edition, you can expect to see some 4th as well. 

And as for Warhammer 40k, well, I only own and play Rogue Trader, so I'll leave that side of the discussion to someone else!

What rules do you use for your Oldhammer games and how do you approach them?

Comments always welcome. 


  1. Hey There,

    I came in on Warhammer 5th Edition and played till the beginning of 8th, and so i have no experience with 3rd and 4th. What are the major differences between the two? I personally feel 6th was the strongest of the "Modern Warhammer" batch and with a few tweaks to magic, its quite a balanced edition. I had always heard that 4th is Hero-Hammer, and as i do have some of the army books from that edition, it certainly looks that way, lol. I also play 15mm fantasy, though with Hail Ceasar rules, as well as a blog at

    1. Hi there. Sorry got for the late reply, I just got back from holiday. 5th and 4th are basically the same, but there were a few rules updates for 5th, along with a revised magic system. 5th is commonly considered the height of 'Hero-Hammer' (although the two editions share most of their army books). In my experience this only really applies with people who want to play it that way. In my games I just agree with my opponent to limit what is allowed in terms of heroes and magic items.

      People often regard 4th as a 'dumbing down' of 3rd. It is true that 3rd is a lot more complex and detailed, but I enjoy 4th for more 'fun' games with a decent set of streamlined rules. There is a lot more focus on maneuvers and formations in 3rd. It is hard to describe a lot of the differences as they are essentially the same at the core. Just imagine that every rule you know from 5th was expanded and developed by about 200%!

      I shy away from declaring either of 3rd or 4th as 'better'. They are just different in ways that mean I like to play both!

      I hear a lot of good things about 6th, but I also love my collection of 4th ed books too much to give it up! :)

      Hope this helps and thanks for your comment.

      (PS: I tried to check out your bog but got an address not found error...)