Article: Thoughts on Frostgrave Soldiers

[Calmdown]

Any thoughts on the relative merits of an apprentice against, say, four archers? Our first game suggested that four archers was a pretty good deal. I know that the received wisdom is that an apprentice is a must, and I suspect that we were overly focused on using wizards essentially as heavy artillery, but the archers seemed to have a much bigger influence on our game (lots of failed casting attempts by the apprentice vs lots of successful shots by the archers).

I have no thoughts on it beyond "spells are amazing and you'd be crazy not to take an Apprentice", really

If Archers/XBows are having a huge influence on your game, you may not be using enough terrain or people may just be playing non-cautiously (eg not using cover). Shooting is no doubt powerful in any case though, though it does tend to miss more than hit (on average).

Apprentices (and Wizards, for that matter) may fail a lot of casts early but in time they will get better and you need those casts to grab more XP to get to that point. It's important to pick your spells correctly for your Apprentices - I try to make sure mine always has something easy to cast (Enchant Weapon or Telekinesis for my Enchanter Apprentice) for example.

Also bear in mind that your Apprentice means you get two tries to cast out of game spells (even the ones that can only be successfully cast once) - Write Scroll, Create Grimoire, Brew Potion, Illusionary Soldier, Raise Zombie, and more.

Definitely don't leave home without one!

[Captain Blood]

I'm not intending to spam you all, I promise, but I just can't stop writing about Frostgrave. I'm like a kid at Christmas. A wordy kid at Christmas.

Whatever did you do before Frostgrave came along? 

Well, it's nice to have a hobby   

[Calmdown]

Whatever did you do before Frostgrave came along? 

Well, it's nice to have a hobby   

I got a lot more work done

[Hobgoblin]

I have no thoughts on it beyond "spells are amazing and you'd be crazy not to take an Apprentice", really

If Archers/XBows are having a huge influence on your game, you may not be using enough terrain or people may just be playing non-cautiously (eg not using cover). Shooting is no doubt powerful in any case though, though it does tend to miss more than hit (on average).

Apprentices (and Wizards, for that matter) may fail a lot of casts early but in time they will get better and you need those casts to grab more XP to get to that point. It's important to pick your spells correctly for your Apprentices - I try to make sure mine always has something easy to cast (Enchant Weapon or Telekinesis for my Enchanter Apprentice) for example.

Also bear in mind that your Apprentice means you get two tries to cast out of game spells (even the ones that can only be successfully cast once) - Write Scroll, Create Grimoire, Brew Potion, Illusionary Soldier, Raise Zombie, and more.

Definitely don't leave home without one!

That all makes a lot of sense. And there was certainly a bit of luck involved; when the losing wizard was caught, he had just failed to cast Elemental Bolt, which could well have killed his attacker (he should have cast Shield!).


That said, though, we did use a lot of terrain, and the apprentice did make good use of a successful Wizard's Eye casting high up on a tower, but the five archers on one side still seemed to get a lot more bang for their buck than any of the spell casters. For our next game, I'm tempted to remain apprentice-less and go with even more conventional firepower - two marksmen and six archers, for example - just to see how it plays out.

[Philhelm]

Any thoughts on the relative merits of an apprentice against, say, four archers? Our first game suggested that four archers was a pretty good deal. I know that the received wisdom is that an apprentice is a must, and I suspect that we were overly focused on using wizards essentially as heavy artillery, but the archers seemed to have a much bigger influence on our game (lots of failed casting attempts by the apprentice vs lots of successful shots by the archers).

During party creation, four archers are indeed better than one apprentice for the cost of 200 gold, but not in the long run.  A better question would be, out of nine characters, would you rather have four rangers/marksmen or three rangers/marksmen and an apprentice?  As your wizard progresses, the apprentice will be the second most powerful character in your party, and it isn't even close.

Also, as others have stated, you should consider the following:

1.  You will lose out during the Apprentice Phase, in which the apprentice and up to three models can move all at once.  Without an apprentice, the opponent will be able to move up to four or five (depending on the initiative roll) models before you get the opportunity to move again during the Soldier Phase.  That would put you at a great tactical disadvantage.

2.  The apprentice can carry more equipment than soldiers.

3.  The spells, obviously.  While the apprentice's casting ability is poor to start, he will improve along with your wizard.  Furthermore, the apprentice can roll creation spells between games, without any risk.

[Hobgoblin]

During party creation, four archers are indeed better than one apprentice for the cost of 200 gold, but not in the long run.  A better question would be, out of nine characters, would you rather have four rangers/marksmen or three rangers/marksmen and an apprentice?  As your wizard progresses, the apprentice will be the second most powerful character in your party, and it isn't even close.

Also, as others have stated, you should consider the following:

1.  You will lose out during the Apprentice Phase, in which the apprentice and up to three models can move all at once.  Without an apprentice, the opponent will be able to move up to four or five (depending on the initiative roll) models before you get the opportunity to move again during the Soldier Phase.  That would put you at a great tactical disadvantage.

2.  The apprentice can carry more equipment than soldiers.

3.  The spells, obviously.  While the apprentice's casting ability is poor to start, he will improve along with your wizard.  Furthermore, the apprentice can roll creation spells between games, without any risk.

Yes, that all makes sense - and the fact that our game was a one-off (or perhaps the first of campaign) was obviously a factor. Point 1 was less of a factor than I expected, but I think that was principally because one side had wizard, apprentice and just five high-quality soldiers (more, gc-wise, than it should have had, it turned out), whereas the other side had three thugs, four archers, a tracker, a templar and a ranger.

The other point was that the archer tactics - wait for the other side to gather treasure and then shoot them from cover - worked pretty well. As some of the treasure was at the top of a precarious tower, the enemy soldiers were highly vulnerable during their slow descent.