January 2019 White Dwarf "overwrites" Skirmish book from 2017?

[pseudonyme]

55 minutes ago, Kramer said:

To be honest @pseudonyme I did also check the old Skirmish rules for that restriction as I played a fair bit of skirmish when it came out and never ran into that rule (or it being an issue because most people went for only a few of every scroll for maximum champions and options) and I still can’t find that restriction 

I guess is the alchohol

[Kramer]

1 minute ago, DinoTitanedition said:

That is an unknown situation to me, as everybody from my circle of players does have the Skirmish rulebook and we played with those renown costs. It simply seemed to make sense, as it also restricted the use of big models which simply destroyed the immersion of a warbands setting. The loss of the characterful warbands setup is what I mourn most at the moment, since it was more likely to see warbands chosen rather from a Grand Alliance in general (okay, this is based upon the impression I get from my player group, so that`s very substantive).

 

Did you play a lot of newer factions then? Because for Old world factions so much was missing. Not just bigger models. I think every metal model was excluded.

Slaves to Darkness could not get: Chaos Chosen, Exalte Hero of Chaos, Sorcerer, Darkoath hieftain, Lord on daomnic mount (but he was also quite expensive).

Wanderers which is also an amazing fit for Skirmish were missing all heroes except for one (nomad prince from memory). 

As for bigger models, yeah i get that. Personally I expect the scenarios to balance that a lot but the occasional swarm the gargant is a fun challenge too. But house rule it if it doesn't work for you.

[Kramer]

Just now, pseudonyme said:

I guess is the alchohol

Must have been a hell of a year, haha

[DinoTitanedition]

13 minutes ago, Kramer said:

This is still the case right?👆 Nothing limits you to a faction? Even more models are available now but with the old Reknown list there was a lot of stuff missing

That is right of course, the limited selection, even though it was only plastic models, wasn`t actually hurting the game - it actually helped it. Seeing a couple of more options though is correct as well, and this what I would`ve prefered to see. Not a "take everything" rule, but a bit more thought on what makes a Skirmish book feel more rounded. Making "everything available" is not more thought through than "only the plastic stuff".

 

Did you play a lot of newer factions then? Because for Old world factions so much was missing. Not just bigger models. I think every metal model was excluded.

 

I played various factions. With Destruction I played a small Ironjawz only warband, not filling up all renown (i usually have around 2 left, but it feels off to throw in a Gobbo or regular Greenskin) and a "Savage" list, with Bonesplitters, an Ogor Grot, a Vanilla Grot and a Spider Rider.

My order warband is my favourite mix, as it tells a great story in it`s setup already: Freeguild General on foot, Liberator Prime, Freeguild Guardsman Sargeant, Longbeard Oldguard,  Glade Guard Lord`s Bowman (there`s your classic Wood Elves, they`re in the book).

 

The Darkoath Chieftain is in the book too. Pretty awesome bad guy vibe, if you play him as the leader of a horde of Reavers (even though a Blood Stoaker is as stylish and makes the setup a challenging force to play against).

[DinoTitanedition]

24 minutes ago, Kramer said:

As for bigger models, yeah i get that. Personally I expect the scenarios to balance that a lot but the occasional swarm the gargant is a fun challenge too. But house rule it if it doesn't work for you.

It doesen`t even have to be balanced, that`s pretty much always the case if you play a bit more narratively, as telling a good story becomes more important than to simply win. I have a pretty good feeling for this situation, as I did a lot of written Blood Bowl match reports in earlier days. When you try to show the reader something interesting, the game suddenly grows to a whole different dimension. And yeah, going up against a beast from time to time is always fun. I feel that this easier houseruled than a whole book thou 😀

 

[robinlvalentine]

56 minutes ago, DinoTitanedition said:

That is an unknown situation to me, as everybody from my circle of players does have the Skirmish rulebook and we played with those renown costs. It simply seemed to make sense, as it also restricted the use of big models which simply destroyed the immersion of a warbands setting. The loss of the characterful warbands setup is what I mourn most at the moment, since it was more likely to see warbands chosen rather from a Grand Alliance in general (okay, this is based upon the impression I get from my player group, so that`s very substantive).

But nothing's changed in that regard... you still choose a Grand Alliance. You can actually take even more different models now than you could before. I don't really get what you mean here. 

[robinlvalentine]

47 minutes ago, pseudonyme said:

I guess is the alchohol

I'm now wondering if you're thinking of the Skirmish Order rules from the Narrative Play special rules, which restrict armies to just minimum size units? Despite having the same name, that rule's got nothing to do with Skirmish, it's just an optional rule for Narrative scenarios. 

[DinoTitanedition]

35 minutes ago, robinlvalentine said:

But nothing's changed in that regard... you still choose a Grand Alliance. You can actually take even more different models now than you could before. I don't really get what you mean here. 

I was a bit further with my thoughts already than with the words that my fingers wrote. This is an assumption, gathered by what I have seen on the tabletop so far - faction rules work better, when you stick to one army and do not mix a lot within the Grand Alliance. This seems to be one of the core traits from the GHB. You now pick your warband by choosing from the GHB. It means people with access to the GHB are now the next Skirmish players. As I assumed that they choose mostly from a single faction, I automatically assumed, that the warbands will become less colorful and rather competition focused, as chosen from the pool of the army that is led in a rather competitive sourruoundung/Organised Play.

 

Of course, it might also mean that the next GHB player might hail from the Skirmish domain - but even if not, if the wish to play Skirmish persists, the person is definitely the next buyr for the GHB. Probably a bit of a chaotic chain of thoughts, but I think you get what I mean 😁

[EMMachine]

2 hours ago, robinlvalentine said:

The original Skirmish rules are the same - I'm not sure where you got this idea from

 

2 hours ago, Kramer said:

To be honest @pseudonyme I did also check the old Skirmish rules for that restriction as I played a fair bit of skirmish when it came out and never ran into that rule (or it being an issue because most people went for only a few of every scroll for maximum champions and options) and I still can’t find that restriction  

There wasn't a rule, but the old skirmish rules used there own tables quite similar to the pitched battle profiles with unitname, minsize, maxsize and points, so Liberators for example had Min 1/Max 10 / Renown per Model 4.

1 hour ago, robinlvalentine said:

I mean, this hasn't been true of that original book for a long time, because as new units and factions were released, and points costs tweaked, its roster lists got more and more out of date, leading to loads of fan-made lists online. Most people ended up using a formula to work out the points for their warband, which just like this required the GHB.

Yeah, that was the main problem. 

• After the Skirmish rules came in May 2017 the Pointvalues came from the first Generals Handbook (2016) with the lose formular min points / minsize / 5 (in case of Liberatiors 100 / 5 / 5 = 4 points per model), there weren't point changes after Generals Handbook 2017.
• Only plasticmodels were printed, so many models were missing
• it took a long time after a new army was released until points were officially announced via errata (don't know if it was 2-3 month until Deepkin had points), it was quite messy

The new way, using the newest point value / minsize is more easy caring for the system because it doesn't need a separate update when points are changed or new models are released.

[pseudonyme]

So finally there is still hope I am somewhat mentally sane?

Beyond my déduction , maybe it is because I think it would be sad to field more than 5 times the same profile in a warband.

[EMMachine]

@pseudonyme yeah, in this case you are still mentally sane  🙂

I knew about the lists because I know this thread:

and I wrote Skirmish point tables for some of my own fanmade battletomes, and had to update them now (that those lists are only for the old skirmish rules)

20 minutes ago, pseudonyme said:

maybe it is because I think it would be sad to field more than 5 times the same profile in a warband.

I have the feeling some people want this for blood warriors because the goreglaive is a 1 for each 10 models choice (so you would never see a goreglaive in skirmish if you couldn't take one if you have less than 10 Blood Warriors.

[robinlvalentine]

1 hour ago, DinoTitanedition said:

I was a bit further with my thoughts already than with the words that my fingers wrote. This is an assumption, gathered by what I have seen on the tabletop so far - faction rules work better, when you stick to one army and do not mix a lot within the Grand Alliance. This seems to be one of the core traits from the GHB. You now pick your warband by choosing from the GHB. It means people with access to the GHB are now the next Skirmish players. As I assumed that they choose mostly from a single faction, I automatically assumed, that the warbands will become less colorful and rather competition focused, as chosen from the pool of the army that is led in a rather competitive sourruoundung/Organised Play.😁

Yeahhh I think this is a lot of very big leaps and assumptions. People go single-faction in AOS matched play because of allegiance abilities, artifacts, etc, which you don't get in Skirmish. The GHB is only involved to give you points costs, not any benefits like those. So how people choose their warbands, and how seriously they take Skirmish, is entirely up to individual players and groups, there's nothing in the rules that encourages less diversity or more competitive play.

[DinoTitanedition]

1 hour ago, robinlvalentine said:

Yeahhh I think this is a lot of very big leaps and assumptions.

Yep, and it`s not that far of a stretch if you look at how much the AoS scene has changed since the original rules (for the better or the worse of course is an individual point of view).

 

1 hour ago, robinlvalentine said:

there's nothing in the rules that encourages less diversity or more competitive play

That is not correct - batallions in GHB do exactly that.

As for an exact sentence encouraging competition, I`ve yet to read a rulebook that mentions this. Not even the games that are promoted as competitive games, like Underworlds, do.

 

Aside of the little off topic strive...if there is folks looking for a Skirmish rulebook as a complete experience, like the last one we had from the company, those days seem to be counted for. After all...at the moment Skirmish players do need an additional rulebook.

[robinlvalentine]

1 minute ago, DinoTitanedition said:

Yep, and it`s not that far of a stretch if you look at how much the AoS scene has changed since the original rules (for the better or the worse of course is an individual point of view).

 

That is not correct - batallions in GHB do exactly that.

As for an exact sentence encouraging competition, I`ve yet to read a rulebook that mentions this. Not even the games that are promoted as competitive games, like Underworlds, do.

I really can't follow your train of thought here. I'm just talking about Skirmish, I'm not talking about core Age Of Sigmar. Skirmish doesn't have battalions. I think we're totally talking past each other. 

All that I'm saying is that there's nothing in the new Skirmish rules that encourages people to do single-faction warbands - they're as much based on Grand Alliances as they ever were. If you think there's a trend towards single-faction Skirmish warbands as a result of core Age Of Sigmar trending towards that, fine, but that's totally independent of the Skirmish rules. 

[Jackroks981]

So do characters just use their normal ghb points cost then? Don’t think I’m gonna be using my Tzeentch much for skirmish if that’s the case!

[JPjr]

7 minutes ago, Jackroks981 said:

So do characters just use their normal ghb points cost then?

Yes, it's basically just the basic unit cost divided by basic number of models in it, so heroes just divide by 1.

Now I think about it the only place actually that this does become a bit tricky would be 2nd season Underworlds Warbands where you have a single point cost for the warband but separate warcrolls for the hero character and their minions.

Still easy to fix and someone will soon figure something out there, as I'm sure there's a few that people will want to include for both competitive and thematic reasons.

Actually of course now I think about it even more it'd be an issue for 1st season warbands too as you have a single cost for them but they're made up of models with in some cases wildly different strengths and abilities.

[eekamouse]

Just now, JPjr said:

Yes, it's basically just the basic unit cost divided by basic number of models in it, so heroes just divide by 1.

Now I think about it the only place actually that this does become a bit tricky would be 2nd season Underworlds Warbands where you have a single point cost for the warband but separate warcrolls for the hero character and their minions.

Still easy to fix and someone will soon figure something out there, as I'm sure there's a few that people will want to include for both competitive and thematic reasons.

I think in that case you just bring the whole warband at it's full cost, just like a character.

It would be similar to using a War Engine or Behemoth with "multiple models"... but it's really just one model (not on the same base).

[JPjr]

1 minute ago, eekamouse said:

I think in that case you just bring the whole warband at it's full cost, just like a character.

Yeah guess that makes sense, maybe a bit limiting for some people but they're a nice basis for a ready made skirmish warband with some great individual looking models so sure people will want to use them.

[robinlvalentine]

11 minutes ago, Jackroks981 said:

So do characters just use their normal ghb points cost then? Don’t think I’m gonna be using my Tzeentch much for skirmish if that’s the case!

I'm certainly finding it tricky with Stormcast, where even the cheapest hero takes up nearly half your points... but at least the points limit is much higher than in original Skirmish! 

[Jackroks981]

20 minutes ago, robinlvalentine said:

I'm certainly finding it tricky with Stormcast, where even the cheapest hero takes up nearly half your points... but at least the points limit is much higher than in original Skirmish! 

Yeah man I can get a gaunt summoner, 1 blue horror and 3 pinks for 250 points. All the Tzeentch spell casters are 180 min. 

[Tzaangor Management]

On 1/8/2019 at 6:57 PM, Jackroks981 said:

Yeah man I can get a gaunt summoner, 1 blue horror and 3 pinks for 250 points. All the Tzeentch spell casters are 180 min. 

Yeah, I was struggling with this a bit, as I really want to use the Ogroid. You do have a few options at under 180, but they are all fairly pricey still:

Chaos Sorceror Lord - 160

Curseling - 160

Daemon Prince - 160

Herald of Tzeentch 140

Magister -140

Blue Scribes - 140

[a74xhx]

From what I can tell, the Sylvaneth Branchwych is still terribly broken.....

Her spell is for each UNIT within 9 inches roll number of dice equal to the casting roll. Each 6 causes a mortal wound.

Probably wipe out every 1 wound model with that! Think I'll hide her behind a guard of two Kurnoth Hunters, and pad with three Dryads.

[eekamouse]

12 minutes ago, a74xhx said:

From what I can tell, the Sylvaneth Branchwych is still terribly broken.....

Her spell is for each UNIT within 9 inches roll number of dice equal to the casting roll. Each 6 causes a mortal wound.

Probably wipe out every 1 wound model with that! Think I'll hide her behind a guard of two Kurnoth Hunters, and pad with three Dryads.

Ya. I’ve been playing with the house rule of “No Heroes”. Works better that way.

[a74xhx]

15 hours ago, eekamouse said:

Ya. I’ve been playing with the house rule of “No Heroes”. Works better that way.

That would fix it.

I suspect skirmish is more of a game that you should compare teams before playing to make sure the teams are roughly balanced. (or if not, the fun of trying to see where you can get to when the odds are stacked against you).

[Aegisgrimm]

The 2 "rules of three" From Hinterlands also balances Skirmish immensely.  

1.  In any Phase, no model can attack or use an ability against more than three enemy models.

2. No model can inflict more than three Mortal Wounds in a single turn.  Any other Mortal Wounds are dealt as normal wounds with "-" Rend and a Damage of 1.

 

But I also like the idea of removing Heroes to larger games of AoS, and having the leader of a Warband be a  selected Champion upgrade who gains all the other abilities of a Hero leader, to represent Skirmish conflicts being small actions where a Commander or General is elsewhere.  Makes the warbands more intimate.