Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
eekamouse

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

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Carnelian said:

Another problem leading to ambiguity here is that Orruk Brute warscroll doesn't actually say 

no more than 1 in 5 Orruk Brutes in your warband can be armed with a massive gore-choppa 

it says

1 in every 5 models may instead be armed with a massive gore-choppa 

To me this is suggestive that you need to have 5 models before you get a gore choppa. 

But it's definitely ambiguous, and it was ambiguous in the old skirmish, so it's not great that this still remains an issue. 

Sort it out WD team! do it! Do it now! 

 

Haha 😂 I must admit that I’m just looking at the ironjaws for a skirmish warband. So clearly wrong example to take. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2019 at 4:46 PM, Aegisgrimm said:

Kind of a pain they changed how renown is calculated, it means I can't keep using the really nice Forgotten Heroes force list. 

I like a small premium for the Champions and Limited Weapons, though.  Better weapons costing nothing extra is a dumb part of AoS, right along with mounts being free for heroes.  Seems like mounts in Skirmish should have a premium, too, though.   Maybe house rule them as the same as the Champion cost?

Thanks. I'm a bit miffed as well. Probably going to convert the points formula in Forgotten Heroes to this, but I'm overall not happy with these new rules. Not sure how I'm going to approach this. It is better in some areas, but lacking in others. I think it's time for a full rewrite for Forgotten Heroes using White Dwarf as a basis.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be cool, I will definitely download it if you do.  Im still torn between buying both White Dwarves, or just paying half the price to buy the old book.

  On one hand the WD version sounds good as it makes the points costs line up with the Gold Coin costs used for warbands in Hinterlands, with the added benefit of the Champion and specialist bonus.  So theoretically someone could play skirmish with the current White Dwarf rules, Hinterlands for campaign play, and if you update Forgotten Heroes we'll all have a nice updated points list for everything in one place.

But....a blanket cost (what is it..5 points?) for specialists and champions seems to hinder the lower points value troops unfairly, as +5 points for a Liberator Prime is not as much a tax as +5 points for an Ironbreaker Champion.  The only benefit is that Champion and Specialist premiums are not something that can be done at all with the old renown costs being so small in the first place.

I'm tempted to stick with the current edition and just use the new points costs, because unless next months campaign rules are substantially changed, twice the price as the current skirmish booklet is too much until a new fully released booklet comes out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what other WD parts are for - you're not paying just for skirmish rules, but other content too. And I think that monthly issue of short fiction, new rules (both 40k and AoS) and guides how to create a narrative  for your army (e.g. realm of Aqshy in January WD)  is worth it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Aegisgrimm said:

But....a blanket cost (what is it..5 points?) for specialists and champions seems to hinder the lower points value troops unfairly, as +5 points for a Liberator Prime is not as much a tax as +5 points for an Ironbreaker Champion. 

It's worth noting that at least part of what you're paying for with the champions is benefits they get in the various scenarios - typically they're twice as good at claiming objectives as normal units. With lower point factions able to take more champions, and the scenarios being very objective based in general (and thus favouring higher body counts), my gut feeling would be this isn't going to affect balance overall.

And to be honest, Skirmish's balance problems are so much bigger than a tiny overcosting/undercosting on unit champions/special weapons that I really don't think it's a big deal. It's just a way of making things feel a bit fairer when people take champions and special weapons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aegisgrimm said:

That would be cool, I will definitely download it if you do.  Im still torn bet

But....a blanket cost (what is it..5 points?) for specialists and champions seems to hinder the lower points value troops unfairly, as +5 points for a Liberator Prime is not as much a tax as +5 points for an Ironbreaker Champion.  The only benefit is that Champion and Specialist premiums are not something that can be done at all with the old renown costs being so small in the first place.

I'm tempted to stick with the current edition and just use the new points costs, because unless next months campaign rules are substantially changed, twice the price as the current skirmish booklet is too much until a new fully released booklet comes out.

 

 I dont see the issue with the extra points either. Because you a. Like @robinlvalentine says you’re getting an in game advantage beyond the warscroll upgrade.

b. There are bigger issues.

c. But mostly it’s a choice. If it’s not worth it don’t take it. Let’s play test it first, because while it’s a blanket cost which doesn’t seem fully thought out*. I immediately ran in to a though choice thinking out s Ironjawz Skirmish warband if I dropped a the upgrade and champion on the brutes I could have another brute instead of filling it up with ard boys and leaving some points. Elite armies will run into those left over points more often. So how important will those 5 points be? 

For me, and yes also without really testing it yet, it looks to be perfectly fin.

* and let’s be honest, Skirmish won’t get the same effort that GW does for competitive games this way. Which is good in my personal view because it might mean limited rosters like with kill team. Which I wouldn’t like for Skirmish. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kramer said:

Elite armies will run into those left over points more often. So how important will those 5 points be? 

Yeah, this is another self-balancing aspect to it - I've been trying to find a list I like for a Stormcast warband, and they're so elite that it's actually quite tricky to hit 250. Even picking models almost purely for their points numbers, I still end up with like 240 or 245. So a few points either way isn't going to make the difference. Obviously I could technically fill in the blanks with some cheap chaff from a different Order faction, but only if I happen to have a bunch of skinks or whatever lying around 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Extra points not used in your first battle will actually work just a little more in favor of Elite factions like the Stormcast in campaigns, though, as even after your first battle you will have a few more points than just the between-game gain to buy other fighters.  Even a tiny bit of a boost to be able to afford more high-priced fighters than what other warbands might struggle with is nice.

Seems like to really see a more fun and balanced Skirmish game, even after this update the fan-made "two rules of Three" will have to be added in, which is something I had hoped GW would see the wisdom in including something similar with this new update.  Just those two rules look to make a HUGE impact on balancing powerful models/abilities.

Quote

With lower point factions able to take more champions, and the scenarios being very objective based in general (and thus favouring higher body counts), my gut feeling would be this isn't going to affect balance overall.

I may be mixing up fan supplements with the official rules, but isn't there a rule where any warscroll can only be used in a skirmish warband once?  Limiting you to either just a couple of Champions in a warband of mainly a Hero and one warscroll or two of troops, or mixing several different unit types just to stack up on Champions, (like taking just one of several types of troop unit of Stormcast, and upgrading them all to Primes).

Edited by Aegisgrimm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I recall that you can not field more than the minimum size in the unit. I.e. you can’t field 11 skeletons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, pseudonyme said:

I think I recall that you can not field more than the minimum size in the unit. I.e. you can’t field 11 skeletons.

Dont have WD here at hand but i’ll Check it tonight but I can’t remember reading that limitation. 

10 hours ago, Aegisgrimm said:

 

Extra points not used in your first battle will actually work just a little more in favor of Elite factions like the Stormcast in campaigns, though, as even after your first battle you will have a few more points than just the between-game gain to buy other fighters.  Even a tiny bit of a boost to be able to afford more high-priced fighters than what other warbands might struggle with is nice

 

Depends on how much points you get in between with the campaign rules I guess. Could well be true though but alternatively if I need to save a few points and wait a a game expanding to get the next addition you will not only have a harder time in those games in between but your opponent with a cheaper army might have expanded a few models which helps with board control. Never mind, if there will be an experience system for champions and hero’s. Then every game played could be hugely important. 

But we’ll see. I for one can’t wait to try out a few games this month. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it make sense as a variant format, to disallow Hero characters for balancing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, eekamouse said:

Would it make sense as a variant format, to disallow Hero characters for balancing?

Sure, just 1 champion to be nominated as a leader I’d think. Makes it possible to play lower points without one hero character feeling overpowered in that setting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else intrigued by the "Magic of Chamon" section of the warband roster?

A change of location for the next version of the skirmish rules, perhaps? Could be tied into this "Carrion Empire" boxed set coming out, which is apparently set in Chamon...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kramer

I think the contraint was in the original Skirmish book and that is what they mean by "just 1 warscroll".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, pseudonyme said:

@Kramer

I think the contraint was in the original Skirmish book and that is what they mean by "just 1 warscroll".

I think just 1 warscroll is meant as nog more than the max and no 3x the same warscroll so you have 3 champions, banners etc. 
It would be a hard sell, to me, if its meant as a complete ruleset if your meant to crosscheck it with an old edition. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dai-Mongar said:

Anyone else intrigued by the "Magic of Chamon" section of the warband roster?

A change of location for the next version of the skirmish rules, perhaps? Could be tied into this "Carrion Empire" boxed set coming out, which is apparently set in Chamon...

I hadn't noticed this! Yeah rather implies a new campaign setting set in Chamon, which could be interesting. Makes sense, as the default setting from the current Skirmish rules is a pretty out-of-date version of the Shadespire setting. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Kramer said:

I think just 1 warscroll is meant as nog more than the max and no 3x the same warscroll so you have 3 champions, banners etc. 
It would be a hard sell, to me, if its meant as a complete ruleset if your meant to crosscheck it with an old edition. 

I would say no more than the minimum number of models. I think it is less a cross checking thing than a "rule as intended that should be fleshed out in a dev commentary"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think it might be a really interesting variant where all warbands in the campaign may only use an upgraded Champion as the leader of a warband instead of a hero, but still give them access to the other things a hero has access to in Skirmish.  It would really shrink the focus down to heroes arising from simple origins, especially if Hinterlands-esque injuries and skills are added in between missions.

Imagine the aftermath of a huge bloody battle, where a Liberator Prime has to bring together scattered remnants of a Stormcast force and still doggedly try to complete a mission, but running into enemies who were forced to do the same. 

Edited by Aegisgrimm
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, pseudonyme said:

I would say no more than the minimum number of models. I think it is less a cross checking thing than a "rule as intended that should be fleshed out in a dev commentary"

There's really nothing in the White Dwarf rules that even implies this. All it says is a) you can only use one of each Warscroll, and b) the minimum size for all Warscrolls is changed to 1. This means that for any given Warscroll, you can take between 1 and the maximum size of the unit. So Sequitors, for example, have a max unit size of 20 - that means you could take between 1 Sequitor and 20 Sequitors. 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, robinlvalentine said:

There's really nothing in the White Dwarf rules that even implies this. All it says is a) you can only use one of each Warscroll, and b) the minimum size for all Warscrolls is changed to 1. This means that for any given Warscroll, you can take between 1 and the maximum size of the unit. So Sequitors, for example, have a max unit size of 20 - that means you could take between 1 Sequitor and 20 Sequitors. 

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

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 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new WD isn`t in my hands yet, but my buddy, who obtained the issue for me, told me that the new Skirmish rules in the WD require the GHB to be used. That is a huge step back. Skirmish`s strength was, that you actually got everything you needed in one book (with one exception, the old 4 page rules). For 8€ you actually got a huge load of hobby with this - three balanced scenarios, three challenging scenarios, if conected you`ve had a campaign that could be played over the course of one or two evenings and the setup of a 30-50 renown warbands could already be extremely rich with character. All Grand Alliances had the option to take a horde setup or one extremely powerful setup as well, if you pushed for eve more scenario oriented settings (like holding out against a big force).

Now don`t get this wrong, this is not supposed to be a rant, I`m just suprised. Nobody really seems obtaining the GHB to play to be an obstacle for this, even though this is actually changing the constellation of the pool of players quite drastically. While the original Skirmish rulebook seems to have been written entirely for rather narrative oriented players this feels to me like it`s a mini comp book now.

 

Do I have a wrong impression? As I said, not a rant, just a share of impression.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll look again in a moment but pretty sure the GHB is really only needed for calculating points, so plenty of ways around that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DinoTitanedition said:

The new WD isn`t in my hands yet, but my buddy, who obtained the issue for me, told me that the new Skirmish rules in the WD require the GHB to be used. That is a huge step back. Skirmish`s strength was, that you actually got everything you needed in one book (with one exception, the old 4 page rules). For 8€ you actually got a huge load of hobby with this - three balanced scenarios, three challenging scenarios, if conected you`ve had a campaign that could be played over the course of one or two evenings and the setup of a 30-50 renown warbands could already be extremely rich with character. All Grand Alliances had the option to take a horde setup or one extremely powerful setup as well, if you pushed for eve more scenario oriented settings (like holding out against a big force).

Now don`t get this wrong, this is not supposed to be a rant, I`m just suprised. Nobody really seems obtaining the GHB to play to be an obstacle for this, even though this is actually changing the constellation of the pool of players quite drastically. While the original Skirmish rulebook seems to have been written entirely for rather narrative oriented players this feels to me like it`s a mini comp book now.

 

Do I have a wrong impression? As I said, not a rant, just a share of impression.

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.

I don't think you could reasonably expect this White Dwarf to print, what, 6-8 pages of points costs, which themselves would just get outdated in no time too. Maybe it's not ideal to need a tome or GHB, but I think it's better than the alternative 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, DinoTitanedition said:

The new WD isn`t in my hands yet, but my buddy, who obtained the issue for me, told me that the new Skirmish rules in the WD require the GHB to be used. That is a huge step back. Skirmish`s strength was, that you actually got everything you needed in one book (with one exception, the old 4 page rules). For 8€ you actually got a huge load of hobby with this - three balanced scenarios, three challenging scenarios, if conected you`ve had a campaign that could be played over the course of one or two evenings and the setup of a 30-50 renown warbands could already be extremely rich with character. All Grand Alliances had the option to take a horde setup or one extremely powerful setup as well, if you pushed for eve more scenario oriented settings (like holding out against a big force).

Now don`t get this wrong, this is not supposed to be a rant, I`m just suprised. Nobody really seems obtaining the GHB to play to be an obstacle for this, even though this is actually changing the constellation of the pool of players quite drastically. While the original Skirmish rulebook seems to have been written entirely for rather narrative oriented players this feels to me like it`s a mini comp book now.

 

Do I have a wrong impression? As I said, not a rant, just a share of impression.

Yeah it's definitely not a start here concept anymore. I reckon that even combining it with the now more the 4 page rules still a lot of things will be missing. Not to mention getting 2 or more (back order if your later) magazines for 10-15 pages of rules, is not starter friendly. 

The flip side off it is, my expectation at least, that GW gets to let us playtest the rules. See if th expansions work and they can then easily release a full Skirmish set thats FAQ'ed and everything later. Then they can always start pushing it as a start here,  

'All Grand Alliances had the option to take a horde setup or one extremely powerful setup as well, if you pushed for eve more scenario oriented settings (like holding out against a big force).'

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, robinlvalentine said:

Most people ended up using a formula to work out the points for their warband, which just like this required the GHB.

I don't think you could reasonably expect this White Dwarf to print, what, 6-8 pages of points costs, which themselves would just get outdated in no time too. Maybe it's not ideal to need a tome or GHB, but I think it's better than the alternative 

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).

 

As for printing a list of points, this isn`t that uncommon - remember the Blood Angels Codex before it was a Codex? Printed in WD first. As have been many armylists and point values. Personally I don`t see the problem here, as those points could easyly be made available as a free download as well. I feel that an update that way is actually a big step towards fan service instead of an update that has to be bought via WD and the GHB in order to play. But then again...that`s just me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×