Taffin

It looked super fun. They played through two scenarios from the new book but I only managed to see one. Game was played on a 4x4 board. In one corner there was 12"x12" temple or sacred ground with two entrances, one facing each players corner of the map. In the middle of that sacred ground of sorts there was a relic to be plundered. Warbands rushed to the artefact because the player with most models within 6" at the end of 5th round wins. BUT after each turn there is a warp-storm closing on the warbands. After the second round all models that were more than 24" away from the sacred ground got D3 mortal wounds and that distance shortened with every turn. Few models did not make it and where swallowed by the storm. Only the sacred ground was truly safe and it could only be entered via those entrances I mentioned. It was truly epic when one warbands last model alive barely made it before the storm and killed the only two models left from opposing warband. Guys from GW mentioned several times that this system is mostly for narrative play. They encouraged people to take existing battleplans and adapt them to skirmish games. But for those who like a challenge there will be some guidelines for more competitive play. I think we could use some of that stuff and blend it with Hinterlands to make an awesome game on par with Mordheim or Necromunda

Ok so for those of you who didn't mange to watch the live show with AOS Skirmish here are some facts: - only selected models are included in the game - models keep all their abilities - models have re worked point system now called Renown - warbands start with 50 Renown - Abhorant Ghoul King is 26 Renown and Glade Guard is 2 or 12 Renown (not sure didn't hear that clearly) - Warbands consist of 5 to 20 models, must have a Hero (I think you can have more than one), all models must be from one Grand Alliance -there are new spells, new traits and artefacts for Heroes - Battleshok tests are taken for the whole Warband using the leaders Bravery. if the D6+ number of models slain is higher than B of the leader you must pick that many models to leg it. That also means that some warbands will be almost immune to Battleshok - the winner gets 10 Renown and gets 3 dice to roll on Reward Table and picks any two dice; loser gets 6 renown and 2 dice for Rewards Rulebook will include renown cost, spells all all new stuff and 6 new Battleplans and campaign guide, it will cost somewhere around 6BP and will go for pre-order this weekend.

Hey! Check this out! Found this info on BOLS: AoS Games 2 – 18:00 (BST) – Ben Johnson vs Sam “Bottle” Pearson: “The guys will be playing through a couple of scenarios from the new book (AoS Skirmish Supplement) with Ben commanding Flesh-eater Courts against Sam’s Order army…” Link to the Twitch Channel https://www.twitch.tv/warhammer I know I'll be tuning in.

Few posts earlier I suggested to have full health Heroes at full price (and why I think it is a good idea) and had that in mind when writing these changes. Your right, forcing a player to cast spells and shoot at a enemy Heroes first makes no sense. Having Heroes at full health makes them a priority target and players will throw everything at them without the rules telling them to. As for charging the reasoning was to give the little guys a fighting chance. They can still be attacked in the combat phase when they get to close but can't be charged if there is a more juicy target in range. Maybe I overdid it with charging out of 3" range of an enemy model. That might work. When writing those rules I was focusing on dragging the might of Heroes away from little guys and towards other Heroes to have a less "hero-hammer" effect. I admit that I got carried away in some points.

I just had an idea regarding full health Heroes being OP. These simple changes will make fielding Heroes more challenging. This is just a first draft and I'm open for constructive criticism. Heroes are made, not born Warband leader must have the HERO keyword. If the model chosen to be the leader doesn't have it, he gains it. Normal limitations to number of Hero units apply. Warlords pride Heroes are proud individuals eager to prove themselves. When choosing a Hero to attack from distance be it magic or shooting or any other ability he must target enemy Hero(s) if in range. Normal rules for dividing attack apply and the First Rule of Three. In the charge phase if a Hero is declaring a charge and has at least one enemy Hero within 12", he must try to engage into hand to hand combat. If the charge roll was insufficient it can't engage other targets as they don't represent a proper challenge. Heroes must attempt to charge other Heroes even when within 3" of non-hero enemy models (standard restriction does not apply). In the combat phase a Hero must pile-in towards and use all of it's attack against enemy Hero (ignoring the rule for piling-in to the closest model). When at least two Heroes engage in hand-to-hand combat they fight a challenge which is always resolved at the end of combat phase - proceed activating other model possibly bringing more Heroes to the challenge. Other models can't attack or be attacked by models in a challenge. Challenges When two or more Heroes get within melee range of each other they engage in a challenge. When more than two Heroes fight each must divide their attacks amongst engaged enemy models before rolling the dice. Challenges are resolved just like normal fights but all attacks are made simultaneously. So even when a Hero is reduced to 0 Wounds he gets to attack, possibly dragging other models with him. If a model has an ability allowing it to move out of combat it can be used to avoid a challenge but that model forfeits all of its attacks (I'm looking at you Sakven Warlord). Models can retreat from a challenge using standard rules. To sum up. I think this tweak will add a bit flavour to the game and preserve little guys by forcing Heroes to fight each other whenever possible. Now players must rely on grunts to hold objectives as Heroes can run away head-hunting. This also opens up some possibilities for rewards based on winning challenges. I think that Warlords Pride rule can also be applied to MONSTER keyword and models with high Wound characteristic as they pose a threat for the Hero. What do you think? I know there are unit specific rules that will be not compatible with these changes but I believe players will figure out how to deal with them.

My method is still in testing but its more calculating the average damage output of a unit and how much effort it takes to wipe it out. Do it for couple different units against one type of foe and see if any patterns emerge. That will help estimate what portion of the units cost are base stats, weapon stats and abilities. I think the design team at GW has a system to estimate units power level based on stats alone and then they add abilities. What I'm trying to say is that an ability to re-roll Save is far more valuable on a unit with 3+Sv than on a unit with 6+Sv. So just like you said there must be a multiplier. It will be great if we manage to make a "Character Creator" for Hinterlands. @someone2040 Your ideas are also cool and maybe I'll borrow some of them.

If you have a method and you're willing to share it Ill be more than happy to help. Or I can try to distil my own method and we could compare notes. I know I'll be starting with Ironjawz models.

Yes that sounds scary and you are probably right nerfing Heroes. On the other hand if I take a Hero for 140g and three other dudes I'm fielding a warband that can be outmanoeuvred by more numerous foe and lose the mission. And when the aim of the mission is to kill the Hero, conditions can be adjusted to make it fair fight. My reasoning behind this was as follows: point value of a single model i calculated with regard to all its stats and abilities; halving the wounds does not necessary mean that the model should be half price; all other models keep theirs stats and point/gold cost in balance as designed; halving wounds an cost for heroes distorts balance making some non-hero models more efficient. I'm also very interested how the rule set will look like. Any words on the release date? Capping Heroes to 1 per warband an forcing him/her to be the leader is not that bad idea. Just had a thought. How about adding another layer of role playing and have wizards buy magical components for their spells, or fighters buy arrows and bullets for their missile weapons? Calculate the cost of magical aids from casting value of a spell, or a cost of a single arrow from number of wounds it can cause (better arrow heads cost money and you have to take more of them if you can shoot more than once). I know that adds complexity and forces player to keep track of every shot and every spell, but can be fun.

@hellalugosi I have very similar thoughts and ideas. This is how I see it: INJURIES 1 - major injury: fighter looses D3 wounds. If looses all wounds retire the model. If not "killed" misses next battle. 2 - minor injury: fighter misses next battle 3-5 - full recovery 6 - what doesn't kill you, makes you stranger: roll D6 and on a 6 fighter gets +1 wound ADVANCEMENTS After each battle players get a number of experience points to divide between their fighters. To advance a fighter player must pay a number of exp points equal to new level (to promote a fighter to lvl3 3 points are needed, lvl4 needs 4 points and so on). You have to advance one level at a time and only one level between battles. When a fighter is promoted you can pick one advancement from the list. One fighter can not pick the same advancement twice, that's why some effects are listed twice. Max level is still 10 +1 Wound +1 Wound +1 Save +1" Move +1" Move +1 casting/unbinding +1 To Hit for one weapon +1 To Wound for one weapon +1 Damage for one weapon -1 Rend for one weapon I'm still thinking how to adjust number of exp points after the battle. Maybe 5 points for both and +D3 for the winner? STARTING LEVEL AND MUSTERING YOUR WARBAND All models start at a level equal to their wounds including Heroes. Heroes also keep their wounds but cost full price. Starting funds are increased to 200 gold to compensate. Maybe gold rewards for Battleplans also should be increased? UNDERDOG RATING Compare both combined gold cost of all models put on the table and combined exp level. When comparing gold value ignore difference of 10 or less. There are two rewards for the Underdog. One roll on Underdog Gambits table or extra experience points. If one player is outmatched in one regard and equal in other than that player can choose either to roll for Underdog Gambits or gets 3 exp points instead D3 for winning the battle If one player is outmatched in both gold and exp level of his warband he gets both rewards. If one player has more gold on the battlefield and other player has higher exp level, players can decide that neither gets a bonus or both get a bonus (Underdog Gambit for cheaper warband, extra exp for having lower exp level). I know that full health Heroes seem scary but maintaining their cost will prevent hero-spam. Also high wound heroes will be more expensive to advance and will have less advancements. Heroes aren't unkillable. In my country is a saying witch I try to translate without butchering it: Even Hrecules is an ass when attacked by enemies in mass. What do you think? Are any ideas any good?

@hellalugosi Battle plans look like tons of fun. Those Ironjawz Command abilities are very powerful. Personally I would change the IRONJAWZ IS DA BEST! to affect only models in 6" range in the combat phase. I also was thinking of a different experience and advancement system. The one we have know is not bad, but after a few games with my buddies some patterns emerged. My group consists of 4 players. We started the game before the Second Role Of Three and decided to play without it. One particular Skaven warband with lots of magic and shooting is almost unbeatable. They take out other warbands at range and each kill gives them exp and makes them stronger and stronger to the point that even the owning player admitted is not fun any more. Did anyone experienced similar issues or is it just us? Then we started talking about the system in SW: Armageddon. It lacks in therms of "role-playing" but keeps kill teams with the same mission count more or less even. What do you think? Is anyone interested in an alternative system? I will be more than happy to write one down for you to critique and comment.

This is something I wrote to @bottle about. After a few battles models cost in gold is not representative of its power. Hoarding gold keeps the Underdog Rating low, but models are getting stronger after each fight. Taking into account warbands total experience level is also not ideal. My friends and I decided that as for now we will use warbands total gold earned as the Underdog Rating and the difference must be 10 gold or more for it to matter. This way the player that lost more games (or is less lucky) is more likely to be the Underdog. To us this approach seems fair enough.

@hellalugosi I think this will be to harsh for "horde" warbands. 25% out of 15 is 3.75 so after losing 4th model your leader makes a test with +4 modifier. So the leader must be at lest B5 to have 1/6 chance not to Rout. Maybe allow the player to order a rout only after losing 25% (rounding up) of his/her warband. Also I was thinking of something along the lines: whenever a friendly model is slain within X" throw a dice adding 1 for every model slain beyond the first and subtracting 1 for every friendly model within Y". If the roll exceeds models bravery it is removed from play but still gets its exp. This isn't also a good solution because it can force the player to test 3 times in one turn (hero, shooting and combat phase). But then again it adds another layer of rules for a system that is supposed to be nice and simple like

Adding a rule that allows a warband to rout only after losing 1/4 or 1/3 or 1/2 of their models? Or maybe something Bravery related? I don't like the idea of adding rules. I like the system for its simplicity, but sometimes there is no choice.

@Wartravs22 I think recruiting few cheap models to fill out your warband will solve that problem. After all, you can pick units not only from one faction. For Ogres I will take some goblins with bows. Goblins lack the staying power but your opponent has to waste some attacks on them if they hold a key objective. Bows give them a slight chance of harming something from a safe distance. Hope this was helpful.

@bottle I got a new Battleplan. I called it "Loot and Scoot" "Both warbands came across a rumour that somewhere in this area is a hidden loot and both leaders are eager to find it." LOOT LOCATION There are three possible locations for the loot bag. One is in the centre of the battlefield and the other two are placed on the centre line (left to right) and 8" away from the first location. Mark these locations with small markers. SET-UP Players roll a D6 and the winner chooses one table edge parallel to the "loot centre line" other player has the opposite edge . Then players alternate setting up models starting with the player that won the roll off. Models must be placed within 12" of their table edge. FIRST TURN The player that finished setting-up first may choose to take the first turn. THE LOOT If a model ends its move within 1" of a loot marker throw a dice, on a 5+ the loot was found and remove other loot markers. Test once regardless of number of models within 1" of the marker. If the loot was not found remove the marker. The last marker always has the loot. The loot bag may be picked up in the controlling player hero phase by any model within 1" and if there are no enemy models within 1" regardless of who found the bag (I can already see those thieving rats snatching the bag from under someone's nose). The loot is heavy and/or fragile and the model carrying it cannot move more than 5" in a single turn and can't fly. If a model is slain place the loot marker roughly where the centre of the slain model's base was (to avoid "slingshot" effect). VICTORY The player who has the loot at the end of 6th battle round wins the game. If a player brings the loot within 6" of his table edge the game ends immediately. If a player decides to Rout he leaves the loot behind and loses the game. If neither player owns the loot at the end of 6th battle round the game is a draw and count both players as "losing" when checking campaign outcome. CAMPAIGN OUTCOME Winner gets 20 + D6 gold + 3D6 form the loot bag. Additionally the model owning the loot at the end of the game gets either +D6 additional exp or +1" Move (players choice). Losing player gets 10 + 2D6gold. This battleplan is just a framework and can be easily adjusted to fit ones needs. If you want more risky game place 6 markers randomly on the map and on a 6+ find the loot. You can remove the movement restrictions giving faster models a advantage. IMHO the only fiddly part are the rewards. If anyone has an idea to make this battle plan better be sure to comment.