Jump to content


dedindahed

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0

About dedindahed

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. I'm not totally clear on what exatly triggers melee defensive strikes. Are defensive strikes allowed only by models that have at least one attack allocated to them, all models in base contact with an enemy that attacks or models in the same troop as a model that is attacked? For example 3 models from a single troop are all in base contact with a single enemy. If the enemy activates and allocates all attacks onto one model, does only that model get defensive strikes? And is the situation the same if 2 models from 2 different troops are all in contact with a single enemy?
  2. dedindahed

    Quick reference sheet for 2008?

    I mentioned a possibility of using some of the new rules as a better alternative than using new stats with old rules, though at the moment I'm playing vanilla 2008, and it's working fine for our current needs. Playing outside my current group is not a concern, Warlord players are very rare in the UK, I don't know a single other person currently playing outside my group. Seems the models and books are pretty hard to get hold of here, which is probbably a big part of the reason. I do have the 2008 chronicles, I just didn't have a single page QRS, and was wondering if I could get hold of one. I may one day switch to 2nd, and would have done already if the 2 armies I already own were both in the core book, but having to pay £44 ($71) + import tax just to get the core rules to be able to play the 2 factions I already own seems like a poor deal.
  3. Does anyone have a link, or a file, for a quick reference sheet based on the 2008 rage chronicles version of warlord?
  4. dedindahed

    Starting up again

    I've played 2008 before, and its quick enough for what we need (2-3 hrs) plus it plays better with skirmish sized forces than the mass battle systems we usually play. Using updated stats with the old rules seems like a bad idea, points and abilities will be off. A better plan may be incorporating some of the new changes into 2008, for example, ditching adepts & grunts, all alone and cohesion seem like the easiest.
  5. dedindahed

    Starting up again

    Can't say I like either of those options, guess I'll press on with the 2008 rage chronicles.
  6. dedindahed

    Starting up again

    So the need for some quicker playing wargames at my local club has turned me back to Warlord. Last time I played was 2008 Chronicles. The factions I already have are Reven and Korbolas. So in order to play these 2 factions in 2nd edition I have to buy 2 full core rulebooks? Any chance of there being web releases or smaller books with only the faction information? I don't really want to have to purchase 2 core rulebooks, or have to carry 2 core rulebooks around with me.
  7. dedindahed

    Mercenaries in Other Factions

    The thing that bugs me most with the current situation is that the disadvantage of adding a single troop of mercs, or any other faction is exactly the same as the disadvantage for playing a freelance company, i'd really like to see something inbetween, although there must be a disadvantage in some form to account for the additional flexibility. Someone mentioned the idea of having a new negative FA for each army list which is taken whenever non-faction troops are added, i like this, but the negative FA's would need to be developed.
  8. dedindahed

    Mercenaries in Other Factions

    I'd like this discussion to get back on track. I think there is potential to create some great thematic armies with a little additional flexibility in army lists. As i mentioned before I'd like to see armies that contain troops of different factions, but each troop must be a single faction, in fact I'd prefer this style of build to replace the current freelance company if there is no way to make it additional, the current freelance just seems a bit too hodge podge, a troop containing models from 5-6 different factions just doesn't feel right, at least to me. Not to mention that you can combine reven and dwarfs in the same troop under the current structure. I think that an idea that allows mixed factions but at a disadvantage (+points, - dis etc.) is possibly the easiest to implement as it prevents list gamers tuning a "perfect" list and imitation lists springing up all over the place, while still allowing people who want to try something different or thematic to do so once in a while. Not everyone is obsessive about must win at all costs, and most (i hope) would prefer to do their winning on the table top rather than in list selection. As i read the current rules it is acceptable to have multiple players on a side, and for each to field a single faction with SA, it would be nice to find a structured way to allow single player armies to do a similar thing.
  9. dedindahed

    Mercenaries in Other Factions

    I'm just collecting my first warlord army and it strikes me that it we be a good idea to have a different type of company, something that falls in between a single faction and a freelance company. I think it a great number of thematic and varied armies can be created by allowing each troop to come from only a single faction, but allowing a company to contain troops of other factions. A combined elf and dwarf task force hunting down a large reven party, a combined darkspawn and overlord raid seeking slaves and slaughter of a mutual enemy or a tentative crusader and reptus alliance trying to breakthrough from behind enemy lines all seem like great thematic forces. Such an army i also feel would be a great way to collect, a new player could start of with 2-3 different faction starter boxes and mix and match them into a wide variety of different forces before settling for a main faction which can be decided after playing them. As the rules stand there is no reason to build such a force as you lose both the benefit of faction SA and freelance's versatility. Obviously there would need to be some balances to counteract the increased flexibility over a singe faction army. Some possible conditions I've been mulling over include: One faction must be designated the main faction, troops from that faction benefit from their own SA but troops of other factions do not. Only 1 other faction can be included after the main faction Other than the main faction troops may only be led by sergeants (Warlords being unwilling to "lend out" their finest leaders). No solos allowed except from main faction Allied factions troops limited to one for every 2 (or 3) troops of main faction. Taking an allied troop replaces mercenary entitlement Penalty to dis checks for allied faction Allied factions troops cost 10-25% more I'm not settled on any of these, just initial thoughts to mix-and match. What do people think? any other ideas? My biggest concern would be overuse of a specific troop, (e.g. if every army suddenly contained a troop of elf archers) though the forces seem balanced enough to prevent this Also I'm sure I've seen in the past a rule allowing a regular company to take a portion of mercenary troops without negating a faction SA but i can't seem to find it... Am i mistaken? if not where is it?
  10. dedindahed

    Possible New Faction

    There is no reason you couldn't get some 28mm historic greek and spartan miniatures and play them as a mercenary troop, the only possible problem is that you won't be able to use them in official tournaments. The upside is that being mercenarys you can add the troop in to any other faction you happen to play with.
  11. dedindahed

    Warlord Rebooted.

    Well, one of the first steps to getting new players on board is to ditch the "my game is better than your game" attitude. If you approach people thinking like that they're not likely to pay much attention. Saying WHFB is bad because it requires a lot of models fails to take into the account the scope of the game, there's a time and a place for skirmish and for mass battle, one or the other may simply not be your thing, that just means it's not for you, not necessarily that it's bad. An Us vs Them mentality between rulesets simply forces people deeper into their own niche.
  12. dedindahed

    Warlord Rebooted.

    Have people tried getting WHFantasy players to try the game using their own armies, it's not really a big stretch between a lot of factions, empire/brettonian as crusader, orc as reven, dark elf as darkspawn etc. etc. If you can get people to try and enjoy the game, the small investment needed to get started will look very tempting. especially as the army lists are free to download. One of warlords big strengths is its campaign system, from my experience people love playing in campaigns, and the warlord system has so much more strategic scope than the "winner gets a territory" style that is most common. if you get a few interested try to get interest in a small 4-5 player campaign.
  13. dedindahed

    Beta Thoughts

    Hi all, I'm very new into warlord, I just bought the book a month ago, and just as i was choosing a faction this new revision was announced. I have to say i like what i've seen so far, the new changes seem very promising, especially the drive towards making every model an equally viable option, something i think all wargames should strive towards. A couple of thoughts i've had: I'd like to see a compromise between faction armies and freelance armies, When first browsing the rules i pictured bulding a force using a number of different troops, each troop coming from one faction list, i can see lots of good background reasons for a force comprised in this manner, but at the moment there is no reason to not go either total freelance or 1 faction only. I feel the new pdf should include the amended FA for reven armies, it took me ages to find the changed rules on the forum, and seeing as the idea behind the overhaul is that only the rulebook and the latest chronicle is needed to play, i feel this amendment to the main rulebook should be included. If i come up with anything else, i'll get straight back
  14. dedindahed

    Mob SA contradiction?

    I have a second edition printing, the example given definately shows a leader with troop size 4-10 and mob 10 but states a max troop size of 15
  15. dedindahed

    Mob SA contradiction?

    Hi all, I'm new to warlord, but can't wait to get started, looks like a great combination of things i like about wargames. Reading through the rulebook, the entry for the special ability mob seems to contain an error which i can't find addressed anywhere in the errata or forum. Description says whatever the mob # can be added to the troop # to give total troop size as long as at least Mob # of the troop have the mob SA, But the given example shows a goblin leader with 4-10/0 troop size and mob/10 and says he can have a troop of 15 models as long as 5 of them have mob SA, Shouldn't this be a mob of 20 as long as 10 of them have mob SA????
×