Request for a minute of Reaper's time

[dispatchdave]

Hmm, wow. a 2d6 move would change a lot of tactics. Talk about nail-biting. Can I make the charge to that row of archers?

Lesser Defensive Strikes sounds like a move back to 1st Ed to me. I fielded entire armies of Warmaster ability to get around that. But I can see where you're coming from. Active player gets an advantage. Makes that card flip in your favor really important!

What's the problem in your opinion with the ranged attack rules? I don't field many archers so I don't see it.

I think they meant to switch to a 2d6 system (as opposed to the current 1d6*); not to change the move to 2d6.

 

*I just picked up a 1st ed box set, so I'm not familiar with the 2nd rules yet.

-Dave

[Shakandara]

*I just picked up a 1st ed box set, so I'm not familiar with the 2nd rules yet.

 

The game is, and always has been, d10.

 

Regarding a mobile copy of the datacards, without having to be tied to a computer... it's called a rulebook, or a print-out (goto the reapergames.com website, use the "Datacard Seach" link on the left side, and tick the checkbox for the faction(s) you want to see all the datacards for - you can even select whether you just want just datacards, or datacards and images). Inarah is right; the individual datacards were a cool idea, but in practical application were all but useless.

 

~v

[Maredudd]

Regarding a mobile copy of the datacards, without having to be tied to a computer... it's called a rulebook, or a print-out (goto the reapergames.com website, use the "Datacard Seach" link on the left side, and tick the checkbox for the faction(s) you want to see all the datacards for - you can even select whether you just want just datacards, or datacards and images). Inarah is right; the individual datacards were a cool idea, but in practical application were all but useless.

Cool! I completely missed that link. I've now pdf'd sheets with each factions data cards and will be printing them on card stock to make my own cards.

 

Of course, if Reaper decided to publish their own cards I'd still pick them up. :-)

Edited July 6, 2013 by Maredudd

[DanyBoy]

Does Warlord need a revised edition? Maybe? Maybe some of the special abilities and some of the data cards might need some adjustments. Is it a great game the way it is now? Yes it is! I’ve been playing this game for several years and the work that the Warlord 2^nd edition team has done to improve it over the first is fantastic! I would in any case support a Kickstarter for Warlord, especially if it means a nicer book and the rule in PDF.

 

The real questions are:

 

1- Is Reaper interested in Warlord?

2- Do they have the time and energy for it? (they are quite busy right now)

 

Anyway, I love this game and I know that I will be playing it years from now… I hope you feel the same!

Edited July 6, 2013 by DanyBoy

[ObsidianCrane]

I wouldn't just make a revised edition of the game now, but the launch of a Warlord KS allows money to be funnelled into doing a revision making it a meaningful endeavour as part of the KS.

 

As to DanyBoy's questions I think the answers are:

1) Absolutely.

2) I don't think anyone is really expecting them to do it "right now" but I'm sure they will have time and interest once all the KS1 madness is behind them.

[Darkreach Phil]

I Know this as been discuss before...but I also have doubt about Reaper interest in mass marketing game instead of just minis. They really miss the opportunity to push warlord during the last kickstarter. They could have add a stretch goal or an add-on to get pdf rules or to get a rulebook. I've seen Company like Mantic adjusting their Kickstarter to sale more stuff like Scenery and else when they see the reactions of peoples during the kickstater. They would have sale even more fig by pushing Warlord a little. Am I missing something !?! I love Reaper and love what they did with the second edition but I relly doubt they have big plans for Warlord, but I wish they would.

Edited July 6, 2013 by Darkreach Phil

[dispatchdave]

 

*I just picked up a 1st ed box set, so I'm not familiar with the 2nd rules yet.

 

The game is, and always has been, d10.

 

Regarding a mobile copy of the datacards, without having to be tied to a computer... it's called a rulebook, or a print-out (goto the reapergames.com website, use the "Datacard Seach" link on the left side, and tick the checkbox for the faction(s) you want to see all the datacards for - you can even select whether you just want just datacards, or datacards and images). Inarah is right; the individual datacards were a cool idea, but in practical application were all but useless.

 

~v

 

My bad. I've been poring over both my new (to me) Warlord rulebook and my new SBH rulebook. Thanks for catching that!

-Dave

[DanyBoy]

I wouldn't just make a revised edition of the game now, but the launch of a Warlord KS allows money to be funnelled into doing a revision making it a meaningful endeavour as part of the KS.

 

As to DanyBoy's questions I think the answers are:

1) Absolutely.

2) I don't think anyone is really expecting them to do it "right now" but I'm sure they will have time and interest once all the KS1 madness is behind them.

Well I am very glad you think so, I am a fan of this game and I would like to see it go forward. Unless I am mistaken I haven’t seen a reaper employee on the Warlord Forums in a very long time, and that makes me nervous. Don’t get me wrong, I love Reaper, I love Warlord, and I did not expect them to launch a second Kickstarter in the next few months, although it would be nice to know if they have something in mind for Warlord… The title of this thread is “Request for a minute of Reaper’s Time”…

 

Anyway, I am glad to see people coming here talking about this game we all love so much. If nothing else it gives us the opportunity to share between fellow gamers!

 

Finally, I would like to say thanks to all of those who have posted battle reports in the last few months! This kind of positive feedback is great for the game. I will try to do the same in the future…

Edited July 6, 2013 by DanyBoy

[Darkreach Phil]

Can you believe that half of the warlord faction discussion threads didn't get any post in over a year. I'm the last one who post in darkreach, in july 2012 !!!!!

 

I'm not here to complain but if Reaper really want to support this game a little they would have done a couple more post or update during 2013 and they would have seen the kickstarter as an opportunity to promote this game. Don't get me wrong I really love the game and really think that the peoples at reaper, the testers and the community here are a great bunch of peoples but at the same time I'm not much hopefull for the futur development of this game.I will support Reaper anyway and will still play the games for years...

Edited July 6, 2013 by Darkreach Phil

[JeffyBaby]

I laugh every time I hear someone at GW say they are a miniatures company, not a game company. In Reaper's case, though, that would be an accurate statement. They do not have any full time game developers on staff. They do not have any part time game developers. Gus is more interested in the Asylum and Magic than any of Reaper's game systems. Here are my answers to DanyBoy's questions.

 

1. No (add CAV, Reich, etc.)

2. No

 

I've got no problem with them answering in this way. Again, Reaper is a mini company, not a game company. I don't think Reaper sees Warlord as any different from Cowboys and Gunslingers. They released a game into the wild, and are happy to see it flourish or flounder. They provide a space and prize support for the annual ReaperCon tourney, but otherwise do not support in any official capacity. If they did, there would have been a PDF release of the rules along with the Kickstarter. Instead, they provided copies of other company's game systems.

[psyberwolfe1]

Hmm, wow. a 2d6 move would change a lot of tactics. Talk about nail-biting. Can I make the charge to that row of archers?

Lesser Defensive Strikes sounds like a move back to 1st Ed to me. I fielded entire armies of Warmaster ability to get around that. But I can see where you're coming from. Active player gets an advantage. Makes that card flip in your favor really important!

What's the problem in your opinion with the ranged attack rules? I don't field many archers so I don't see it.

 

2d6 would smooth some of the swinginess in this game and would improve and/or change tactics. I also just don't like how the d10 mechanic works in practice. I can't plan around the the die type because it's too swingy, so I take a small subset of troops to mitigate and make the die irrelevant which has basically made 50% of the models I own useless. Now I do understand how the d10 does makes one-hit-one-wound mechanic work, but as I said it makes the game a little more swingy than I like.

 

Lesser defensive strikes is about how I loathe out of sequence activations. It rewards lazy play and makes paying attention to the game optional. Currently full strikes back makes stand and wait as viable a tactic as hunt them down, and I am no fan of encouraging people to not engage in playing a game. This is slightly less of an issue with missions, but point me to a repository of missions. It doesn't exist.

 

The ranged rules have a few problems. First the troops are overpriced for what they can do. At their cost I can get better melee troops who can more reliably damage my opponent. Second defensive shots make it so no one shoots at other missile troops unless they have no other targets so it's a wasted ability. Third missile troops are useful only in turn 1 and depending on the draw turn 2 thus not justifying the points cost. This is how I play against missile. Deny shooting on turn 1 and be in melee on turn 2 thus making your missile troops overpriced underpowered melee troops.

 

I understand wanting to favor the aggressor. The mechanic handles this by the attacker getting all of the models in position and stacking the odds with numbers and reach attacks, plus all of the other things like spells. 2d6? I don't know if the bell curve would improve the game, but I do think that the archers getting defensive shots is a little wonky. It seems like you would never shoot at the archers to give them additional attacks. The way to resolve this would be to have a wait action, or hold, where they can shoot later, but as it stands, it's not a deal breaker for me.

 

Not really. If it was plus 1 for every group of number x in b2b then yes. As it stands taking a melee beat stick that costs what 3 basic troops cost is typically far superior than the 3 warriors. The MAV that beat-stick has is better than the +1 three models in b2b would get. Yes you'll get more attacks but usually those beat-sticks have abilities that are better (read damage causing abilities not requiring a roll.)

 

2d6 would improve the game. CAV:SO is already playing better because of it. It makes me not feel like I was yet again screwed by the swingy nature of the d10.

 

One of the ways to resolve why defensive shots suck is that if anything shoots in LOS of a missile troop they can shoot back, but then that ability would be too good.

 

I laugh every time I hear someone at GW say they are a miniatures company, not a game company. In Reaper's case, though, that would be an accurate statement. They do not have any full time game developers on staff. They do not have any part time game developers. Gus is more interested in the Asylum and Magic than any of Reaper's game systems. Here are my answers to DanyBoy's questions.

 

1. No (add CAV, Reich, etc.)

2. No

 

I've got no problem with them answering in this way. Again, Reaper is a mini company, not a game company. I don't think Reaper sees Warlord as any different from Cowboys and Gunslingers. They released a game into the wild, and are happy to see it flourish or flounder. They provide a space and prize support for the annual ReaperCon tourney, but otherwise do not support in any official capacity. If they did, there would have been a PDF release of the rules along with the Kickstarter. Instead, they provided copies of other company's game systems.

 

A million times this. Releasing a PDF of another company's rules when the D&D 1st ed rules it uses are free online already (OSRIC) was silly. Giving people access to the 2nd ed Warlord rules would've been the better move. But hey as you said they're not a game company. With a few hours work I could make a pretty decent Dungeon Crawl game using the Warlord rules and the D&D Tiles.

[ObsidianCrane]

As far as I can tell the vast majority of the backers for KS1 came from an RPG background, putting RPG rules in KS1 made sense. Another company said "we'll give you X for the cross promotion" it was pretty smart to take a 0 investment thing and make it a stretch goal; its the exact sort of stretch goal that helped ensure the KS was a large success for Reaper.

 

Launching a KS around Warlord changes that entirely. For the RPG people Warlord has a lot of useful models for Fantasy RPGs anyway so there is still plenty of reason to back a Warlord Bones KS, more so than a CAV one (sorry CAV fans). Such a KS can expect more backers than the first one if the focus models are widely applicable to Fantasy RPGs (eg: any humans, any elves, any dwarves, any undead, Kargir, Darkreach, Icingstead are good starting points). Given the potential level of success they can likely readily raise the funds for a third book and add factions should they wish, again expanding down popular fantasy lines like Fire Giants, Halflings, Oriental and so on.

 

While Reaper staff haven't responded here (which given how busy they are atm doesn't surprise me, they barely manage responses on the high priority topics) they have responded favourably in the past to suggestions for Warlord models being done in Bones, so they are both listening and interested.

 

What Reaper is not interested in is making their games their core business, which is fine, but taking the games and using a KS to specifically develop them and their market, including their core business of selling minis is perfectly reasonable.

[ObsidianCrane]

This thread also brings to mind this older thread: Karkarion faction?

 

[kristof65]

The more I think about it, I wonder if Reaper might be smarter to go with less ambitious Kickstarters for Warlord?

 

Rather than some monster one that focuses on the entire game with all the resulting stretch goals, why not ones that only focus on one or two factions at a time?

 

the KS could focus on a book for that faction, and a variety of models in both Bones and metal for it.

 

No, they're not going to appeal to everyone, and be the wildly successful campaign Reaper is finishing up. But the more focused approach could be better for Reaper, the players and the game over all because doing it that way won't overwhelm anyone, financially or resources.

[psyberwolfe1]

The more I think about it, I wonder if Reaper might be smarter to go with less ambitious Kickstarters for Warlord?

 

Rather than some monster one that focuses on the entire game with all the resulting stretch goals, why not ones that only focus on one or two factions at a time?

 

the KS could focus on a book for that faction, and a variety of models in both Bones and metal for it.

 

No, they're not going to appeal to everyone, and be the wildly successful campaign Reaper is finishing up. But the more focused approach could be better for Reaper, the players and the game over all because doing it that way won't overwhelm anyone, financially or resources.

A few years back I had a discussion with Ed about how the GW codex/ Faction model completely failed for them. The model of releasing a book with a fistful of factions and complete rules seems to work better for them.