Hinterlands: Skirmish Campaigns in the Mortal Realms

[bottle]

1 minute ago, HeadHunter said:

The rules look interesting and the presentation is absolutely fantastic! I'm just disappointed because there's no way I could do a Beastclaw warband ulness it's all Yhetees and Frostsabers.

You could have an Icebrow Hunter too!

[The Jabber Tzeentch]

1 hour ago, bottle said:

2 more days guys  I hope you're all excited!

I am very excited for this! 

[rokapoke]

1 hour ago, bottle said:

 

What was book 1?!?!

[HeadHunter]

2 hours ago, bottle said:

You could have an Icebrow Hunter too!

But he would cost 160 gp wouldn't he?  He's who I'd choose as a leader for my warband but I thought he'd be too costly.

Edited January 26, 2017 by HeadHunter

[bottle]

1 hour ago, rokapoke said:

What was book 1?!?!

Book 1 (or version 1) is the original Hinterlands book from October. They are not really different books, that's just me being silly with photoshop. This is a new version with an updated design, tweaks to the core rules based on player feedback and then some cool new features that'll you see when it drops.

 

21 minutes ago, HeadHunter said:

But he would cost 160 gp wouldn't he?  He's who I'd choose as a leader for my warband but I thought he'd be too costly.

Heroes cost gold coins worth half their points, and (in the new version) have their wounds halved and rounded up. I think not being able to include heroes would be really dissatisfying, so the comprise for them being made weaker points is having their wounds halved.  

[rokapoke]

4 minutes ago, bottle said:

Book 1 (or version 1) is the original Hinterlands book from October. They are not really different books, that's just me being silly with photoshop. This is a new version with an updated design, tweaks to the core rules based on player feedback and then some cool new features that'll you see when it drops.

I'm definitely looking forward to trying this out with my play group. It looks awesome!

[HeadHunter]

6 minutes ago, bottle said:

Heroes cost gold coins worth half their points, and (in the new version) have their wounds halved and rounded up. I think not being able to include heroes would be really dissatisfying, so the comprise for them being made weaker points is having their wounds halved.  

Ah, I guess I overlooked that.  Still it doesn't leave me much - a Hunter, a Saber and a Yhetee if I'm reading right?  It would still be fun, I guess I'm used to Necromunda-sized warbands.  Either way I'm delighted to have the option for skirmish-style play in AoS and really appreciative of the extra effort you put into designing it!  GW should hire you because you've single handedly turned out a supplement with production values equal to their own.

[bottle]

2 minutes ago, HeadHunter said:

Ah, I guess I overlooked that.  Still it doesn't leave me much - a Hunter, a Saber and a Yhetee if I'm reading right?  It would still be fun, I guess I'm used to Necromunda-sized warbands.  Either way I'm delighted to have the option for skirmish-style play in AoS and really appreciative of the extra effort you put into designing it!  GW should hire you because you've single handedly turned out a supplement with production values equal to their own.

Thanks! For everyone else apart from BCR you do get a Necromunda sized warband, starting off around 10 models and moving up to 15. With a skirmish system like this its always the big tough armies that get represented the worst. If you were to add in some gnoblar/grots they are 5 gold coins per model so you could have a Hunter and Saber and 8 gnoblars to begin. As you win games and get more gold you can slowly start replacing the gnoblars with Yhetees and Sabers  

[HeadHunter]

I'm sure I'd be able to do an impressive warband once I finish this army and get some Dwarves.  At least 6-8 models.  In the meantime I did notice that I could eventually buy more followers (as I used to in Necromunda, never got a chance to play Mordheim).

[Grand Exemplar]

Looking forward to the read.

 

As far as my campaign goes I've made a few personal tweeks to the original rules. Such as limiting wizards for example and making Mortal Wounds into Auto wounds without rolling rather than ignoring saves completely. 

 

Ive also taken some of the mordheim flavour in the form of critical charts (might make mortal wounds auto crits), Parry and an injury chart. So just by reducing a model to 0 wounds doesnt neccessarily mean hes out of the fight. 

 

Good work Bottle. Im happy to share my ruleset with you if you would like a look, once they are finished of course.  

 

[bottle]

2 hours ago, Grand Exemplar said:

Looking forward to the read.

 

As far as my campaign goes I've made a few personal tweeks to the original rules. Such as limiting wizards for example and making Mortal Wounds into Auto wounds without rolling rather than ignoring saves completely. 

 

Ive also taken some of the mordheim flavour in the form of critical charts (might make mortal wounds auto crits), Parry and an injury chart. So just by reducing a model to 0 wounds doesnt neccessarily mean hes out of the fight. 

 

Good work Bottle. Im happy to share my ruleset with you if you would like a look, once they are finished of course.  

 

This sounds fantastic! Now, I was going to hold off talking about this till tomorrow, but I will share a little now...

 

With the new version of Hinterlands coming out tomorrow I like to say I have made everything "modular" and what I mean by that is players and player groups can tweak, tailor, add and delete any part of it without it causing headaches and needing fixes else where.

Don't like the new battleplans? Sure remove them and add your own - as they will no longer be tied to the treasure system its a 5 minute job to create something better suited for your group. What I also hope this does, moving forward is encourages the rest of the community to create their own "add-ons" to the rules - This could be for narrative extras, for example if someone is intrigued by the Shadow Realm, they could create a Hinterlands add-on that has new Battleplans, Triumphs (which  play a big part in the new hinterlands), Command Traits (also new ) etc, all themed around the Shadow Realm (for example), and then release it as a pack that meshes seamlessly with the original rules allowing for people to then add those rules to their gaming group without any fuss.

This also goes for extra rules too, like the ones you mention in your post (they sound great!) so, the question I would like to ask, is if you are happy to put them into a pack and put them on TGA for download I would love to include a link for them in the main post of this thread (which is going to evolve into a mini directory from tomorrow), so would you be interested?

What I really hope to do moving forward is open this up to everyone to get involved and see if we can make something really cool!

 

 

Edited January 27, 2017 by bottle

[Grand Exemplar]

I'm happy to share I've always loved skirmish games with character growth, its taken on more of a Mordheim flavour, so becomes more complex. Ive never posted anything for download on the fourms so I will have to figure out how

Its a mixture of some of your original but tweaked rules, some modified Mordheim rules, modified Mordheim scenarios. Slightly modified movement rules. I cant take credit for how some of the rules are written as they have come from the Mordheim rulebook, but I've modified them in a way which is compatible with Age of Sigmar. (or so I think) I'm happy to collaborate and together maybe we can create Modern Mordheim so to speak.

Regarding the name of my rule set. Ive called it Shardsfall, as a meteor of pure magic (relevant to the Realm) has crashed into the wilderness and shattered into the Wyrdshards. The alliance leaders want to accumulate these shards to give them a magical edge in the Realmgate wars. But rather commit armies to the cause (more important battles for armies to be involved with) they have sent small groups of warriors to collect these shards. Be it in ruins, wilderness or even underground.

 

[bottle]

VERSION 2.0 is here

Download Link: http://www.tga.community/files/file/19-hinterlands-skirmish-campaigns-in-the-mortal-realms-by-sam-james/

Hey everyone, version 2 is now live. Hopefully you'll love all the new content!

Changelog:

• I have tweaked the core rules based on all the amazing feedback. This ranges from small changes like Heroes wounds being havled-rounded-up rather than capped to 3, to some bigger changes such as the 'Rule Of Three' designed to curtail some powerful AoE abilities (looking at you, Knight Azyros).
• 5 new battleplans including rules for adapting any other Battleplan. No more treasure system. No both sides get awarded gold coins and the winner gets a unique Triumph!
• Warband Roster! Record every detail on this 2 page sheet, it also has some nifty counters like a 'Kill Count' etc.
• Underdog Gambits - this is a new mechanic to give the weaker side a little boost in the game. The page is set out like a Allegiance Ability so it will feel familiar.
• Command Traits! The old Allegiance Abilities of version 1 have been replaced. Each Grand Alliance now has 2 command traits to choose from - one will make your general a force multiplier (buffing nearby units) the other a killing machine. IT WILL BE A TOUGH CHOICE   

 

Community Involvement

So now I feel that the rules are more stable, and also easier to adapt, I want to open this out to everyone in the community. Do you have some cool ideas for a themed version of the Hinterlands, or perhaps just some rules tweaks (be it to make it more detailed, or to make it more suitable for tournament play). Well if you are happy to share it on TGA as a download, I am very happy to add it to the main post in this topic and hopefully we can build up a wealth of cool community made skirmish material!

What I would be looking for:

• Downloadable as a file from TGA with its compatibility  listed in the details.
• Good presentation of the document (doesn't have to go all out like mine, but something with a little bit of flare).

So if you are interested. Drop me a PM, or just drop a link to it in this thread!  

 

[Double Misfire]

Looks great Bottle, can't wait to sit down and have a proper readthrough when I get a free moment!  

[Salathon]

Love the idea of this and would love to try it if I can find anyone that isn't a GW purist and considers this type of thing heresy. my one gripe is I cant take a Jezzail as there artillery. And have you thought of doing open scenarios like Mordhiem where you have the objective and can be played with as many players as you want.

Anyway keep up the good work. I look forward to seeing where this goes

[nicromancer]

Had a read threw just now. Absolutley amazing work bottle! 
I've been recomending it to anyone buying AOS stuff at work and hopefully can get a campaign set up soon. 

[bottle]

2 hours ago, Salathon said:

Love the idea of this and would love to try it if I can find anyone that isn't a GW purist and considers this type of thing heresy. my one gripe is I cant take a Jezzail as there artillery. And have you thought of doing open scenarios like Mordhiem where you have the objective and can be played with as many players as you want.

Anyway keep up the good work. I look forward to seeing where this goes

Thanks for the comment and reading! Yes I would allow Jezzails if you get to play this. The ban on artillery is to rule out Warp Lightning Cannons and such. I'll have a look and will stick a better wording in the next update (banning units that are both Warmachines and Artillery).

Multiplayer games are planned for version 3! I am already sketching together a 4 player gladiatorial style battle that should be great fun! (And allow the 3 weaker players to gang up on the strongest). I really like the convergence of fate battleplan too, and might try and adapt it for Hinterlands!

Thanks for the comments everyone  

Edited January 28, 2017 by bottle

[HeadHunter]

3 hours ago, Salathon said:

Love the idea of this and would love to try it if I can find anyone that isn't a GW purist and considers this type of thing heresy.

I think your friends forget the point of this hobby.  It would kind of be like people who will only play D&D if the GM is running an official module (that's the sort of gamer that gets a swirlie and stuffed into a locker by the Chess Club).

[PC Veteran]

Played 3 games last night. For the most part it played really well. There are a few things that need more game time to decide if they need fixing, but for the most part it went smoothly and we had fun.

Couple of thing you might consider for your next version.

The injury table seems to be too punishing or rewarding. 1's and 6's came up allot. Maybe make it 2d6 with double 1's or 6's being the really bad or good rolls. Suggestion, maybe 20% bad, 70% nothing to sit out a fight, and 10% good.

Underdog rating:  So instead of it just being gold spent. Make it gold and exp added together. The gold only approach doesn't account for the level difference between models. If we had a lvl 10 warband that cost 100 gold go up against a level 1 warband that cost 150. The level 10 would be considered the underdog while most likely being the top dog.

 

Edited February 5, 2017 by PC Veteran

[nicromancer]

Hey bottle, Would you consider making a facebook page for hinterlands in the same way that INQ28 and Inquisimunda have a centralised page? Could help combine people from dakka, here and other forums ? 

[Thundercake]

In reading through the 2.0 rules, the gold a player gets after a battle plan/game/scenario is over is used to recruit new models to their warband? I didn't see any additional rules about what to do with it in between games.

[bottle]

12 minutes ago, Thundercake said:

In reading through the 2.0 rules, the gold a player gets after a battle plan/game/scenario is over is used to recruit new models to their warband? I didn't see any additional rules about what to do with it in between games.

Someone on Dakkadakka caught this today too!  

Yes, that's the intent and is implied but apparently never stated! I will update to 2.1 soon and add a line somewhere to overtly state it.

Nice catch!  

[kyle261]

I've read through most if not all of the rules in 2.0 and can't seem to find anything on unit abilities, i am curious how the hidden killer ability works in this if i take an assassin i play skaven so the abilities of my units are important but i don't know if i can hide an assassin in the armor of a single clanrat. 

[bottle]

13 hours ago, kyle261 said:

I've read through most if not all of the rules in 2.0 and can't seem to find anything on unit abilities, i am curious how the hidden killer ability works in this if i take an assassin i play skaven so the abilities of my units are important but i don't know if i can hide an assassin in the armor of a single clanrat. 

Thanks for the comment! By default all the core rules (the 4 pages + warscrolls) are meant to work as normal unless stated otherwise, so this means yes, you can hide an assassin in a single clanrat. (To help it not break immersion you could imagine he clanrat is "bait" while the assassin lurks in the shadows nearby). It is a super risky tactic though, because if that clanrat dies the assassin can't be deployed as the unit has been wiped out!

On 2017년 2월 5일 at 8:26 PM, nicromancer said:

Hey bottle, Would you consider making a facebook page for hinterlands in the same way that INQ28 and Inquisimunda have a centralised page? Could help combine people from dakka, here and other forums ? 

It sounds like a great idea but I think other people are better to set this up! Perhaps Bruticus from Ex Profundis as he is really pushing the AoS28 side of this, with Hinterlands being just one ruleset you can choose to play your games with. :-)

On 2017년 2월 5일 at 5:29 PM, PC Veteran said:

Played 3 games last night. For the most part it played really well. There are a few things that need more game time to decide if they need fixing, but for the most part it went smoothly and we had fun.

Couple of thing you might consider for your next version.

The injury table seems to be too punishing or rewarding. 1's and 6's came up allot. Maybe make it 2d6 with double 1's or 6's being the really bad or good rolls. Suggestion, maybe 20% bad, 70% nothing to sit out a fight, and 10% good.

Underdog rating:  So instead of it just being gold spent. Make it gold and exp added together. The gold only approach doesn't account for the level difference between models. If we had a lvl 10 warband that cost 100 gold go up against a level 1 warband that cost 150. The level 10 would be considered the underdog while most likely being the top dog.

 

Thanks for trying out the rules and for the feedback! I think these two things would make excellent tweaks to your own gaming group's version of the rules - as the rules are designed to be tweaked and modified as much to suit your needs. The injury table got softened up in version 2.0 as in the first version a roll of a 1 straight up killed your model no matter the wounds and there was no slow recovery. I will take your feedback into account as I play through my own campaign too and we can decide if it needs to be altered for version 3.0  

For the underdog rating I kept it at just gold coins, firstly to make it simple and secondly I think that no matter how much experience a Warband has, being outnumbered points wise almost always means you'll be on the back foot and could do with something up your sleeve. As experienced Warbands will generally have accrued enough gold to recruit more expensive models I think it won't come up too often that a Warband with loads of experience is worth less than 150 gold coins, but I will keep my eye on it and see if it's worth the change in the next update too. Thanks!  

Edited February 7, 2017 by bottle
Autocorrect makes odd sentences

[Kevlin]

This is an amazing fan product Bottle, 100 gold stars for the effort.

I have a question about the XP system. Why does the Hero have to start at lvl 5? You have paid for her in GP already so there is no unfair advantage between her and a regular soldier. But the regular soldier will have gained two advancements at the same time as the hero have gotten only one with her 20XP. I understand that there must be a progressive curve for advancements but the hero have the unfair disadvantage of skipping the first cheap advances.

Say you have a cheap hero lvl 5 vs an expensive soldier lvl 5. The expensive soldier have the same stats since power level is connected to price but he has had 4 advancements to the hero making him much better. 

Morheim and necromunda have the same system so I see the reason to include it but I could never wrap my head around the logic back then either. Maybe someone could explain it to me like I was a 6 year old so that I could see the reasoning behind it once and for all.

Cheers for all the hard work!