Fellow Generals,
If we are going to do a fresh campaign soon these can be delayed until then, but since we still seem to be fighting this one here are some questions:
1) If a bow captain loses his arm can he re-roll for his special ability or add a point of might? It certainly changes how he will be practically used. Otherwise, I guess I must lower his value accordingly? Since all Gondorians are assumed to have hand weapons it doesn't change his fighting, but that might effect Elves (draw daggers anyone)? I think you should be able to re-roll on one of the non-shooting charts, and that warriors without hand weapons can trade (or whittle) their bow into one.
2) I assumed that someone with a shield who is promoted still has a shield if it is possible for them to carry one. By the way, that makes my Guard of the Fountain Court very nasty. You all seemed agreeable to that months ago. How about if a Ranger gets promoted to a captain. I assume he becomes a captain Ranger (with the 4 fight value and 3+ archery), He does not go down to being a regular bow guy if he advances to being a hero does he?
3) I vote we must declare what any piece is if you are not using the appropriately modeled piece.
4) I vote that we should consider the battle company "out one" rule to mean "out one turn in our campaign" not "out one fight."
5) Should a company not break at 50% as the rules state, not over 50%
6) Why can't spears fight over the shoulders of the buddies over barriers again? Can bows shoot over their buddies who are behind a barrier? Why are Gondorian citadel guards issued spears or longbows then? What about door ways and elevated places that are barriers yet obviously not in the way for the defenders?
7) So can we adjust the scatter chart on Catapults/Trebuchets launching at battlefield targets to make it more just, rather than banning it all together. How about for volleying siege engines at battlefield targets we say a 1-2 misses all together, a 3 forces a courage test for the target :), a 4 - 5 hits someone near by, and 6 hits the target?
8) Boats are listed in the hardcover rules book. Can we build them? Cost? Use? Next Campaign?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
1. I've been playing two campaigns with a useless special ability (dwarf hero with "Deadly Strength" but no two-hander). I simply don't count the ability in the rating...
Actually, dagger is considered a hand weapon now, I think. I can't think of a model that doesn't have a weapon anymore, other than the Gollum.
2. This is something I proposed a while back. Promotion should never strip characters of abilities or equipment. They will need to be valued accordingly.
All that happens when promoted to hero is that the character gets a point of fate, so yeah, the rest remains the same. This DOES allow for a broader variety of heroes in BCs, I've noticed (such as Khazad guard hero). In fact, one definitely wants warriors to promote before they hero, as they can't promote afterwards.
3. That's why I usually ask about everything before a game, but just about equipment. How would Joe Orc know if the unkempt ranger he is facing is Aragorn or not?
4. I counter that a BG must rest for this to happen. Warriors shouldn't be able to heal while on the run.
5. I think Banys covered this in the rules. If I remember right, he went by GW rules.
6. I don't think there was any reason why spears were ruled incapable of fighting through at barriers, other than a ruling had to be made. I was not really in favor of this, but as it benefits my spearless dwarves, I don't sweat it.
Bows CAN shoot from second rank behind a barrier. They just have to make an ITW roll for the barrier as they are not in base-to-base with it.
Actually, I've been thinking that second rank firing is a crock to start with, especially since volley fire was added to the rules. I don't know which of YOU I would trust to fire a bow from behind my back as I am dipping and dodging... Perhaps a case could be made for crossbows kneeling or something...
7. I think we've beat this Trojan horse to death already.
8. Oh no! Here come the floating siege towers! (shoulda known...)
1. I vote N on warriors comp. A wound's a wound.
1. No. If you were an expert marksman, and then lost your arm in battle, would you suddenly have masterful skill wielding a sword? Nope. And of course you wouldn't count the value of the useless skill.
2. Yep, I don't think you should lose your equipment/skills either.
3. I think it's a little rude to use a completely different model to represent a major character and not declare who it is (i.e. using a normal warrior of gondor to represent Aragorn). If you are using the correct model, there is no need to specify. There is no need to specify who your heroes are in your BCs, as they're not technically "named" units. I'll have to disagree with Richter slightly on his comment regarding the unkempt ranger being Aragorn. Here's my thought -- if you have a ranger who is clearly leader his troops, that will be obvious to the opponent, and hence the opponent may not know it's Aragorn from 100 yards, but they WILL know he's their leader. The rangers COULD choose to disguise Aragorn in amongst their ranks; in that case, of course, the enemy would have no idea who is who. BUT in real life, if they do that, then the rangers will also not benefit from Aragorn's leadership as he's blending with the other models. In our game, no matter if your model is "hidden" or not, you get the same leadership from your general--YOU. :) So I think that disguising your model wouldn't be fair.
Ok, all that to say that I think if a character is represented by a model that is NOT representative of who he is, then it should be declared to the minimal extent necessary to identify him. If you are using archers to depict spearmen, then I think that needs to be declared at the beginning of a game. If I have Elven archers on the board and they are meant to depict haradrim archers, I do NOT have to declare that -- their weaponry is clear, and my opponent better know that I don't have Elves fighting for me. But if they were representing Warg Riders, then I better declare that at the beginning. If I have a wraith on the board, I do NOT have to declare what he's carrying (i.e. morgul blade, etc.). If I have orcs on the board without shields modelled on them, and they ARE carrying shields, I should declare that.
4. I agree with Richter that there would need to be a "rest time." However, that just gives us one more thing to track. And each move is technically a week in time as we've structured this. Is a week sufficient to heal a battle wound? Maybe -- depends on the wound. I vote that since we have this campaign structured around BCs, that we leave the rule as-is -- one fight out means one fight out.
I think in a future campaign, where maybe we don't use BCs, then modelling rest would be a good idea.
5. Earlier versions of the rulebook were not consistent with breaking percentage (some intimated <50%, while others seemed to say AT 50%). I personally have always felt that the number should be LESS THAN 50%. Hence, in the rules it is explicitly written: "Courage tests must be made BELOW 50% force remaining, not AT 50%." Consider this a house campaign rule, if you want.
6. Richter is correct -- we just had to make a ruling on spears & barriers, and we chose that route. My thinking was that storming a barrier was already hard enough.
Also agreed with Richter -- Bows can shoot from 2nd rank but must make ITW roll.
7. Interesting idea. No.
I think this is something we can revisit for the next campaign, but for this one, we're settled on the current rules. I think your suggestion is a good one though. Actually, my preferred suggestion is the following. We use a scatter die in which 2 sides are a HIT and the other 5 sides are arrows drawn. We also use a template (size TBD). You pick your target and place the template over the target model. You then roll the scatter die plus 2d6. If you roll an arrow, your shot scatters 2d6 inches in that direction. If you roll a HIT, then you roll one more die. A roll of 6 means you hit your original target. A roll of 1-5 means that the opponent gets to pick one guy underneath the template as the person who gets hit. If the only person under the template is the lone individual, then the shot misses.
This models the difficulty of hitting a lone moving figure during the heat of battle. but it also means that you have a 1/3 chance of hitting somebody in that area, and a 2/3 chance of scattering. Oh, I should also mention that the opponent gets to choose which unit under the scattered template is hit by the shot.
8. Next campaign.
1) Understood, Heath suggested I ask you guys.
2) Right on.
3) I agree with Mike B, model it or declare it.
4)I like Richter's rest one turn idea. Could we not track that individually like we do everything else with battle companies?
5) House rule is fine, just clarifying
6) Perhaps a spear guy fighting over a buddies back should have to randomize to see if his spear hits the barrier when he strikes to wound. Interestingly GW answers simply that spear fighters CAN fight over barriers.
7)I like the lobbing rock scatter idea Banys has, we should discuss this more.
8) Next campaign it is, The ships of Numenor will be ready!
3. I'm fine with "model it or declare it." A unique character should have a unique feature or model. The tin foil bit is fine.
6. GW rule, from the way it was phrased, probably dates from when the spearman got the extra attack. Since the second edition, it's been that a spearman adds an attack to the front man.
BTW, I suspect GW modeled citadel guard with spears b/c that's how Peter Jackson imagined them. It's conceivable, their use most of the time being to police the rowdy denizens of MT rather than stave off assaults. I simply don't know WHY anyone would put a defender on a wall without a ranged weapon. Well, there's always dropping slushies, I guess...
8. Hm. I wonder what catapults do to ships? ;)
Post a Comment