Jump to content

Sell Me On Warlord!


Recommended Posts

I haven't played 1st edition, despite having the rulebook and two armies. Just never had the time or people to play with. But, with 2nd edition fresh on the market (or at least it will be when the second printing is ready) and having moved to a bigger city with plenty of gamer friends, I figure it could be a good time to start playing Warlord in earnest.

So, what can I expect from Warlord? I play most GW and PP games, and a few others, so comparisons to those are encouraged. Also how big is a usual army size, how long for a game etc etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 27
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Big reason to go with WL over GW (and toa lesser extent PP) the price.. reaper, by far, is the most reasonable company to buy mini's from... unlike GW who charge you based on the point value of a model, reaper charges based on how much metal the mini uses. Typical army size is around 1000 points, and depending on the faction, a 1000 or near, point army can cost as little as ~75 bucks, to as much as ~200. Some armies are point minimal so you have to have a lot of mini's to fill it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't played 1st edition, despite having the rulebook and two armies. Just never had the time or people to play with. But, with 2nd edition fresh on the market (or at least it will be when the second printing is ready) and having moved to a bigger city with plenty of gamer friends, I figure it could be a good time to start playing Warlord in earnest.

So, what can I expect from Warlord? I play most GW and PP games, and a few others, so comparisons to those are encouraged. Also how big is a usual army size, how long for a game etc etc.

 

The Second Edition rocks, the miniatures are metal (a big deal to me), and the ability to buy "one unit" at a time for 4-10$ and paint it over a weekend makes the hobby more fun to me than trying to keep up with GW sets. I really enjoy browsing the figure finder and selecting a mini or two that i can afford during a pay period that fill a need for my Warlord army or a PP game - I like to use my reaper minis in my D&D games which they work well for, and there is a huge variety of Captains, Solo, Sgt, Monsters and Warlords as well - GW seemed to really be "squad" oriented with very few identifiable heroes. I also like the factions for Warlord!!! Not to mention the talented team of artists that create the sculptures, and Talin's fantastic artwork. Reaper Rocks!

 

Veronus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I myself am a veteran of GW and other companies tabletop games. I have hundreds (maybe thousands) of dollars in their minis. I've spent long laborious hours poring over army lists so that I may come up with the correct combination for assured victory only to see it go belly up by mid turn 2. I've nearly ruined untold numbers of friendships over rules disputes about who was where and what was where when X needed to happen. I've also forgotten on numerous occasions that I had certain abilities or had to leave them at home because they weren't modelled on the current figure I had. I had pretty much given up on tabletop gaming until I was introduced to Warlord. Luckily I still had a spark of love for the genre within me, for now I know those troubled days are behind me.

 

Warlord brings the one thing all the other tabletop games I ever played lacked. . . . Fun! I enjoy playing warlord. Whether winning or losing, I almost always have a fantastic time. I've seen games where one side loses 40% of it's forces in one turn yet somehow manages to scrape a victory in the end. I've seen games that are decided in an epic conflagration of melee during turn one!! I've born witness to battles where noone won because both sides mutually anhilated each other.

 

I ask you, have you ever played a tabletop wargame that allows for those scenarios to come to fruition? Have you ever cheered on your opponent as he laid waste to your own forces just because the way he was doing it was so unbelievably audacious and cool that you wanted to see it work, just to see if it really was possible? If you answered yes then I know you are already playing Warlord. If you answered no, then you're missing out. ::D:

 

Joshua

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies!

First of all, I don't need to be sold on Reaper as a minis company - I love the work these guys are doing to bring out quality, affordable minis every month. I couldn't believe my eyes when I first saw how cheap they were!

I'm not too fussed about how much it costs for an army as I already have two (Necropolis and Crusaders). Like I say, I love Reaper minis! From what I understand of the rules, I'd have four Troops for each faction.

@ ViciousPanzer: I think the only game I've played that sounds like what you describe is Blood Bowl, but it doesn't really fill the need for a "real" fantasy game.

So I should just need to get the 2nd Ed book, right? It has stats for all the Necro and Crusaders minis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, a game of Warlord tells a story so much better than other war games I've played. In my last game, my Warlord stood toe-to-toe with five Dwarves and six Nefsokar. He took everything they could throw at him and he did not fall. It was heroic! It was amazing! He finally died on the last turn, but the pile of bodies around him made me think of 300.

 

So play Warlord for the great stories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I should just need to get the 2nd Ed book, right? It has stats for all the Necro and Crusaders minis?

 

The second book has the stats for all ten fractions. Elves have a few figures that are not included because they will be put in a new fraction. For Necro and Crusaders, everything is in the 2nd Ed book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best thing about WL in its newest manifestation is the speed of play. Once you get yourself familiar with the rules and your models, the game plays out pretty quick.

 

Secondly, I like how the newest edition is even more friendly to real skirmish-style play. With the removal of Adepts and the Troop Cohesion rules, you can play real small-unit tactics rather than feel as though you should keep your Troops grouped together base-to-base (like in Warhammer).

 

Finally, I like the ease of army construction and how spells are bought. 2nd edition made things much simpler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having played GW and read through the PP rules, the order of the day on the fantasy games is HUGE heroes wiping the peons off the table. While Warlord has some deadly personalities, everyone has a chance to do some damage. However, not so much that wise gameplay can keep the big'uns in the game creating a serious amount of hurt.

 

In other words, strategically balanced with a good "Epic Battle" feel to it!

 

That's my broad-swath comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only played one GW game in my life, and that convinced me not to try any others. I have tried Warmachine. Parts of it I like, other parts I don't. One big factor is the initiative system. Warlord's card based system has me spoiled. I love the random chance of when my troops will get to move. Warlord and PP have the same concept with special abilities to create unique troops. Warlord stuff dies pretty quick, and even turn one can be deadly. Play is fast once you learn the system, and the game can be learned quickly. The number of troops available give you lots of options, so if one army doesn't work well, you can play around with other styles and still keep the same faction. Warlord games run the full range of totally lopsided fights to nail biting, last minute decisions. Games frequently change which side seems to be winning from one turn to the next. I don't know how many times I've thought it was a done deal only to have a couple dice rolls or initiative cards totally change things around. The big nasties are truly nasty, but they are not imortal. Lucky hits can and do happen, and if not played well the big nasties can be swarmed and brought down by the little fellas they normally destroy easily.

 

GW I can't comment on. Warmachine is fun, although I dislike the crossover between Warmachine and Hordes. Warlord is one of the two best miniatures games I've played, and I've been gaming for 40 years of so. Warlord 2 is the best version of the game. It takes us back closer to the original version, but it fixes some of the original flaws and spices up a lot of the data cards.

 

Castlebuilder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My two cents:

 

Defensive Strikes seal the deal for me. I've played countless games in the past where the player with the fastest army gets to attack first, and with those very first attacks is able to deal a crippling blow that will reduce the other player's chances of winning to some pitiful low number. It creates a situation where the only meaningful stat is speed. And it's lame spending time creating your army and setting them up, just to know the winner within 10 minutes of the start of play. Bummer!

 

Warlord lets you hit back. Is your model getting attacked? Even killed? Great. It has an opportunity to get in a few swings of its own before dying (or taking damage, if it wasn't dying). There are certain bonuses when it's your turn and you're attacking, so it's still better to attack than to be attacked. Well, usually! But gone forever is the army that that charges in, slaughters half of the enemy army, and is in perfect condition. You'll take losses on your own charge which keeps you honest.

 

Also, once you get the rules down pat and get used to your models' stats, you can get a 1,000 point game (often ~20 models each, for a round number) finished in around an hour. How cool is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm an old GW player and there are three main things I like about Warlord.

 

Firstly I pretty much gave up on GW games after getting kids, there simply wasn't enough time on most weeks, and when I did have the time I wanted to spend it on something else. Fantasy Battle (at least the way we played it) was just a LOT of effort for very little game IMO. WHFB is simply such a massive investment of time to play a game of the points size I find enjoyable, that it no longer was an option for me. With Warlord I can get one or two games done at a relaxed pace in an evening... and still get home reasonably early.

 

Second WHFB (and most other IGOUGO games) has a lot of downtime. When playing WHFB it was "OK now I stomp on you for half an hour, while

you look on and then it's your turn to do the same to me. WL keeps you involved during the whole game. I find that in comparison, when I play WL I spend nearly all my time gaming and chatting with my friends, while with WHFB I'd spend at least half the time being bored or even worse frustrated at my inability to participate. There is also only minimal downtime caused by looking up rules during play compared to FHFB.

 

Third. Fun. It links into the other two, but it's a separate reason for me. WHFB seems to bring out the worst in many people (including myself). In WHBF the game is such a major undertaking that there's simply too much invested in it for me to be casual and relaxed about it. I've spent a lot of money and time getting my army ready. I've spent hours constructing my army, I've spent a lot of time setting up for the game and it'll take time to pack up again afterwards. The game will be very long and much of it will be downtime. A game of WHFB is also often decided very early on and the last few hours is simply playing out a game that you already know the conclusion of. That makes me a bad player when playing WHFB. I get upset when the game isn't going well for me and I'm not relaxing and having a good time. With warlord it's all very relaxed and casual in my experience, even at tournaments. I enjoy a game of WL even when I'm getting severely beaten, and that's one of the reasons I enjoy the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever cheered on your opponent as he laid waste to your own forces just because the way he was doing it was so unbelievably audacious and cool that you wanted to see it work, just to see if it really was possible?

 

Warwick and I have played probably hundreds of Warlord battles over the years. The vast majority of our games involved something like this. One of us pulls a new combination out of our butts, and then the other is like "doom DooM DOOM!!" as we are laughing and carrying on.

 

Sure, we have our frustrating games, but who doesn't? ^_^

 

Wild Bill :blues:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never played WHFB. I started miniature gaming with Orks in 40K and that was a big mistake. I never understand how people can invest so much time, money and effort in a game with revision after revision, one new edition after another and constantly remodelling. The game does not even play well. There are still people interested in 40K but I have not seen anyone for WHFB in any FLGS except those in the offical GW retail stores.

 

Warlord is very unique. The mechanic is simple and fast. Within each faction, there are various composition and tactics you can have and not restricted to a certain stereotype. Your army size in a 1000 pt army can arrange from 7 to over 70 figures. That is amazing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...