Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Fantasy Adventures => Topic started by: Hobgoblin on February 09, 2023, 10:35:35 PM
-
I've been digging into 'grimdark' skirmish games a little bit recently, which led me back to their fons et origo: Mordheim. I've never played it; it was 'after my time' first time around. But after a glance at the rules, it looks largely familiar - not too far removed from the skirmishy games that early Warhammer championed.
I was drawn to it for a couple of reasons. First, I want a skirmish 'companion game' to be played alongside Kings of War. There are four of us in our regular HOTT/KoW group, and we typically play two vs two. But once games get going again (after the Six Nations!), I thought it might be good to try more one-on-one games (smaller armies, more room to manoeuvre, etc.) using chess clocks, with the two unengaged players playing a skirmish game at the same time.
If we're keeping score in KoW in a sort of league, then I thought a narrative campaign would be the best way to go with the skirmish. We all love SoBH and Mutants and Death Ray Guns, but the one weakness of that system is that it's probably best for one-off games rather than sustained campaigns; with only two stats, there's not a huge amount of room for progression and injury, etc. I gather that Mordheim really shines as a sustained campaign, and I'd be willing to put up with a fair bit of Warhammery clunk for that. In fact, I think things that work badly in rank-and-flank games can work well in narrative skirmish. Warhammer's 'to hit/to wound/to save' malarkey bogs things down in massed battles, but I can see that it adds a bit of story to a skirmish ('He would have been run through by that vile rat-man were it not for his good Estalian steel cuirass', etc.).
The second thing I'm thinking of doing with Mordheim is running a one-off for some old friends in a couple of weeks. We all played Warhammer a lot in our misspent youths and so would all be familiar enough with the statline and basic rules to get going right away if presented with a warband.
Anyway, I have three questions about Mordheim.First, is it slow in the way that Warhammer was (is!)? Would a typical game of KoW be over well before Morheim got going? That might not matter if we're only playing one KoW game in an afternoon, but we sometimes have time for two normal-sized ones.
Second, would it be enjoyable as a one-shot, or would I be better off using a Mordheim-style set-up and then running Song of Blades/Fistful of Lead/Forbidden Psalm or whatever instead? Or is the game good value regardless of the campaign factor?
Third, are there any things to be avoided in setting up four warbands for a one-shot? I thought I might avoid wizards for simplicity's sake. I'll probably run Skaven, Undead, Cult of the Possessed, Orcs and maybe Mercenaries - and possibly provide two different lots of Orcs and/or Mercenaries to give some choice.
Many thanks in advance for any pointers!
-
Love a bit of Mordheim and have been playing it solidly since it was released in 1999.
I wouldn’t say it’s particularly slow as the warbands tend to be low model count. It depends on your players though. Cautious or cagey players can slow things down quite a bit. It was designed as a one-on-one game. The multiplayer rules came later in the Annual. Inevitably, such games take longer.
I think it works fine as a one-shot and often use it like this for narrative games. You might want to consider using the rules for one-off games allowing access to skills and equipment not available to starting warbands. I recommend not overdoing it though. The odd skill, statistic increase or extra bit of kit to add interest without burdening the players with too much to remember.
Things to avoid? (1) Shooty warbands e.g. marksman heavy Reiklanders can suck the joy out of the game. Consider limiting shooters to no more than a third of a warband. (2) Ultracompetitive warband builds e.g. Skaven swarm all armed with club, dagger & sling. Much more interesting to have mixed equipment.
FWIW, I’d include casters as spells and prayers are quite straightforwards and add to the game. I’d recommend playing strictly WYSIWYG. Finally, you might want to consider organising a collaborative game with your players fighting against a large umpire-controlled force.
-
Thanks very much! That's very handy!
I wouldn’t say it’s particularly slow as the warbands tend to be low model count. It depends on your players though. Cautious or cagey players can slow things down quite a bit. It was designed as a one-on-one game. The multiplayer rules came later in the Annual. Inevitably, such games take longer.
Thanks - and that's a good point about multi-player games. There's kind of a double-edged sword with IGOUGO games and the likes of SoBH/FFoL here: on the one hand, the more modern games keep everyone tightly involved; on the other, the full turn can be quite satisfying (KoW is a good example of this) and 'orderly' in a way that keeps things clear.
I think it works fine as a one-shot and often use it like this for narrative games. You might want to consider using the rules for one-off games allowing access to skills and equipment not available to starting warbands. I recommend not overdoing it though. The odd skill, statistic increase or extra bit of kit to add interest without burdening the players with too much to remember.
Good points! I was planning just to go with the basics, but I'll have a good look through the lists to see what might spice things up.
Things to avoid? (1) Shooty warbands e.g. marksman heavy Reiklanders can suck the joy out of the game. Consider limiting shooters to no more than a third of a warband. (2) Ultracompetitive warband builds e.g. Skaven swarm all armed with club, dagger & sling. Much more interesting to have mixed equipment.
Aha - now this is very handy! I'm probably at the opposite end as far as warbands go, in that I have a couple of Skaven with pistols but perhaps just one or two slingers if any (will have to check and paint them up if they exist!). I do have a couple of ratmen with crossbows and some more with muskets, but those don't appear to be eligible. I'd be able to field a lot of orcs with bows, but I'm probably going to be around a quarter to a third with the others.
FWIW, I’d include casters as spells and prayers are quite straightforwards and add to the game. I’d recommend playing strictly WYSIWYG. Finally, you might want to consider organising a collaborative game with your players fighting against a large umpire-controlled force.
Great - and given my relative dearth of shooters, perhaps spellcasters will be all the more necessary.
I'll definitely go WYSIWYG - impossible to keep track of things otherwise with four players, I reckon! I can see that even necessitating buying some of those awful dog-monkey Skaven to get claws and throwing stars and whatnot - but perhaps I can convert my way out of that one!
That's a good suggestion - thanks! Would having the game two vs two suck some of the chaotic fun out of it? I could easily set things up so that two players are Skaven and the other two humans or orcs, but I suspect 'every man for himself' is truer to the spirit of the game, temporary alliances and all.
-
I was planning just to go with the basics, but I'll have a good look through the lists to see what might spice things up.
See 'Fighting individual battles' on page 121 of the rulebook. Starting warbands can be a little dull and ineffective. I think there's a brief sweet spot where they have a few skills and advances and some decent equipment. It might be good to introduce this in an introductory game if you want to sell the system to your players.
Would having the game two vs two suck some of the chaotic fun out of it? I could easily set things up so that two players are Skaven and the other two humans or orcs, but I suspect 'every man for himself' is truer to the spirit of the game, temporary alliances and all.
Could be. Your game could have two allied warbands on each side, but only one warband as the overall winner at the end. That should encourage players to think about how much they cooperate and/or treachery.
As an aside, don't be shy of tinkering with the game. I do this all the time for one-off games or mini-campaigns. The last one, for example, had the players divided into two sides for three linked scenarios. Undead on one with three warbands, led by two necromancers and a vampire, versus a mixed bag of rabble (Dwarf miners, religious fanatics led by a warrior priest & villagers). Each had restricted warband choices and conflicting objectives. The undead, for instance, had the necromancers each wanting to be their own boss and an overbearing vampire questioning why he needed two uppity necromancers.
-
I think you can go with Mordheim without serious problems and it is a solid and very good system. I would also regard Thud and Blunder as it is very complete, a bit quicker and very tactical: https://www.northstarfigures.com/prod.php?prod=13242
(https://www.northstarfigures.com/images/2/img13242.jpg)
-
See 'Fighting individual battles' on page 121 of the rulebook. Starting warbands can be a little dull and ineffective. I think there's a brief sweet spot where they have a few skills and advances and some decent equipment. It might be good to introduce this in an introductory game if you want to sell the system to your players.
Right - that's good advice: thanks! The one-off is less of a "sell the system" and more of "fun must be guaranteed!" episode (to take place between hiking and rugby-viewing), so anything that ups the amusement is good. I'm planning to have all the warbands statted up for SoBH as a fallback, should it prove too fiddly and complicated - though I think the familiarity of the rules should help avoid that.
Could be. Your game could have two allied warbands on each side, but only one warband as the overall winner at the end. That should encourage players to think about how much they cooperate and/or treachery.
More good advice - thanks again!
As an aside, don't be shy of tinkering with the game. I do this all the time for one-off games or mini-campaigns. The last one, for example, had the players divided into two sides for three linked scenarios. Undead on one with three warbands, led by two necromancers and a vampire, versus a mixed bag of rabble (Dwarf miners, religious fanatics led by a warrior priest & villagers). Each had restricted warband choices and conflicting objectives. The undead, for instance, had the necromancers each wanting to be their own boss and an overbearing vampire questioning why he needed two uppity necromancers.
Great - lots of good food for thought here!
I now have the prospect of three potential Mordheim diversions, as another old friend and his son are keen on a campaign (and they have the original witch hunters and flagellants and whatnot!). So any time invested in Mordheim should be worthwhile (even if the one-shot ends up as Song of Blades or whatever).
I've also been paying a bit more attention to the lists; a look at the undead section made me realise that I have everything I need for a warband with lots of options barring a vampire (and I have a suitable figure I can paint up over the weekend). I even have suitable dire wolves, in the form of the barghests from the old Descent boardgame.
Does the orc warband play OK? I could field four warbands of different orcs straight away, but orcs aren't one of the original sides, and I wonder if they've been shoehorned in at all. It strikes me that, in time, I'd be able to field my old Aly Morrison hobgoblins in the orc role - orc and hobgoblin stats were virtually identical in old Warhammer (I think hobgoblins had poorer BS for some unexplained reason, but M, WS, ST, T, I, A, etc. were all the same). The Morrison hobgoblins are a bit less outlandish than the later GW orcs, so might feel less incongruous. In the meantime, I'm painting up some cheap plastic orcs in a suitably "grimdark" style.
I think you can go with Mordheim without serious problems and it is a solid and very good system. I would also regard Thud and Blunder as it is very complete, a bit quicker and very tactical: https://www.northstarfigures.com/prod.php?prod=13242
Thanks! I'm increasingly leaning to just giving it a go for the one-shot for nostalgia's sake if nothing else.
I do have Thud and Blunder, and we played it a few times when it first came out. I must give it another look; I recall enjoying it, and I'm very fond of FUBAR by the same author. But I think it's the campaign structure and character progression that's the real attraction with Mordheim; if it doesn't work for the one-shot, I'd default to SoBH, which has never let us down and which I can run in my sleep!
-
Does the orc warband play OK?
I’ve not seen it fielded very often. Solid heroes, though only four starting ones, plus a bunch of boys for those that want to be contenders or funnies (Squigs & the Goblin fanatic) for those in it for giggles. The Troll’s decent (and immortal) though expensive to field from the get go. The animosity, unless managed properly, can be a kicker.
-
I did play a bit of Mordheim but long after it was released and in 15mm or in 28mm with both Vikings and Myceneans.
It is a lovely little game. A lot of what makes Warhammer slow becomes manageable when you only have like 5-10 models per side. It shines mostly however with the fluff and its incorporation into the rules. Squabbling orcs and gobbos, dumb ogres, grumpy dwarvws.
Shooty warbands (elves!) tend to be overpowered iirc, but otherwise it’s okay because it’s becoming imbalanced anyway as it’s going to be a campaign. So good luck with that.
It is slower than SoBH for which we ultimately gave it up again.
And in my experience with bothe the Viking and the Mycenean setting, it’s not really suited to one off games. Sure there are ruels, but if you make characters with these they are really overcosted. It needs some experience for this and it’s best done by a GM because it’s also really time consuming to build those warbands. Otherwise it’s nice because you can theoretically use all the special rules from any Warhammer from the specific period and add them without much trouble.
So for a one of, I’d suggest you go dor something different: larger SoBH can be fun. For the campaign Mordheim is definitely fun.
If you do this try to get all those nice add-ons, like the Empire in Flames. Atmosphere galore!
-
I’ve not seen it fielded very often. Solid heroes, though only four starting ones, plus a bunch of boys for those that want to be contenders or funnies (Squigs & the Goblin fanatic) for those in it for giggles. The Troll’s decent (and immortal) though expensive to field from the get go. The animosity, unless managed properly, can be a kicker.
Cheers! I'm sure I have two or three goblin fanatics kicking around that I have no other use for, so I might just dig them out!
-
I did play a bit of Mordheim but long after it was released and in 15mm or in 28mm with both Vikings and Myceneans.
It is a lovely little game. A lot of what makes Warhammer slow becomes manageable when you only have like 5-10 models per side. It shines mostly however with the fluff and its incorporation into the rules. Squabbling orcs and gobbos, dumb ogres, grumpy dwarvws.
Shooty warbands (elves!) tend to be overpowered iirc, but otherwise it’s okay because it’s becoming imbalanced anyway as it’s going to be a campaign. So good luck with that.
It is slower than SoBH for which we ultimately gave it up again.
And in my experience with bothe the Viking and the Mycenean setting, it’s not really suited to one off games. Sure there are ruels, but if you make characters with these they are really overcosted. It needs some experience for this and it’s best done by a GM because it’s also really time consuming to build those warbands. Otherwise it’s nice because you can theoretically use all the special rules from any Warhammer from the specific period and add them without much trouble.
So for a one of, I’d suggest you go dor something different: larger SoBH can be fun. For the campaign Mordheim is definitely fun.
If you do this try to get all those nice add-ons, like the Empire in Flames. Atmosphere galore!
Thanks! Yes, I'm definitely going to have Song of Blades in reserve for the one-shot - and wouldn't be averse to switching mid-game if circumstances called for it. The one-off might wind up being only a two- or three-player affair, depending on various family commitments, so I'm leaning towards giving Mordheim a spin if it's just a couple of us at that point and SoBH if we're all still there by that point.
I'll take your tip on Empire in Flames!
I've made a start on the terrain and have finished three corner-ruins with a couple of other bits well underway. If I can keep the pace up, I should have a fairly well-populated table by game day - and it's clear that Mordheim-style terrain is just perfect for any fantasy skirmish game. I've also found the multi-level ruins are a storage solution; I've put the finished buildings in the Cabinet of Shame and packed them with Skaven and ghouls, giving me a bit more space to work with!
-
The three completed ruins so far:
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCTw2iVNvnwHkCCEJGcfvRNg0D-srwo4o8DfaAZR00c94fhqah_JxqYNZm_cXAvQM0R9YqoVoVK2b8-5A8JUNpB6Oe2-0ub4HeXbPk3I3SXOjNYm3dYd6oYI2uFZvcD395kQHwrzUtVDyC-g2igzZWEin2vzrT5wD4tRYoSlh4rwZFA3ONHom0BIvgoQ/s4032/Mordheim%20ruins.jpg)
-
Good start! I assume that you're planning to fight in the ruins? Another option would be to use a rural Empire in Flames (EiF) setting. That would require fewer buildings and you could use any hills, woods, rivers etc. from your existing terrain collection. If that sounds appealing, Fogou Models have a bunch of lovely products that would be great e.g. ruined buildings, walls, barrows etc.
https://www.fogoumodels.co.uk/ (https://www.fogoumodels.co.uk/)
-
Good start! I assume that you're planning to fight in the ruins?
Thanks! Yes, I reckon so. I found a great big plaster ruined temple that I picked up for a couple of quid a few years back, and I'm painting that to form the centrepiece (former temple to Sigmar, whatever), with ruined buildings forming streets around it. As I've got a few other nondescript bits of ruins and buildings already, I reckon I can probably put a suitably crowded table together - at least if the current rate of progress continues (the non-6N weekend ahead should allow me to make further advances!). Some friends are on the case, too, for the campaign side of things.
Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a SOBH-style warband builder for Mordheim (if anyone knows of one, let me know!). But I'm going to aim to get four warbands statted up well in advance. I've got everything I need for Skaven, orcs (x2 or more if need be), dwarf treasure hunters and undead already painted, and I can probably put together a slightly makeshift band of mercenaries (more 'dungeon adventurers', but they'll fit the profiles).
It strikes me that Mordheim is probably the best use I can make of my collection of Aly Morrison half-orcs. There isn't a list for them, of course, but their stats were pretty much identical to human stats in Warhammer - and, in fact, would be absolutely identical in the later editions of Warhammer that dropped Int, etc. Half-orcs, somehow, seem a better fit for Mordheim than orcs - perhaps because they featured in some of the WFRP stuff with similar atmosphere. The early Aly Morrison ones have loads of interesting gear combinations (crossbows, knives, two-handed swords, etc.). And they'd make good dregs, too, I think.
Another option would be to use a rural Empire in Flames (EiF) setting. That would require fewer buildings and you could use any hills, woods, rivers etc. from your existing terrain collection. If that sounds appealing, Fogou Models have a bunch of lovely products that would be great e.g. ruined buildings, walls, barrows etc.
https://www.fogoumodels.co.uk/ (https://www.fogoumodels.co.uk/)
Thanks - I'll certainly give that all a look!
-
Yes, Mordheim is pretty good for micromanaging your models‘ inventory. Basically, in a campaign, even a knife hidden in a boot can be useful.
You can also have all kinds of monsters just imported from Warhammer. If you still have it 4th edition army lists (the thin booklet that came with the boxed set) or even 3rd edition entries can be used 1:1 in Mordheim (for 3rd edition simply ignore Coo, Int & WP).
-
My take on Mordheim is simple; the coolest setting with very frustrating rules (or warbands).
If you're going to start Mordheim you need to do it with the right people. Mordheim goes awry really easily. One character with the right upgrade or skill and the right weapon can slay your opponents whole warband in some instances. Certain warbands suffer immensely from balance...with fast/agile/shooty warbands basically running rampant over everything else.
Some warbands (elves mostly) have been banned in most campaigns with even the authors of the game and subsequent articles saying "yeah...don't use those".
My sad Mordheim story:
Around 2015-2016 a buddy of mine (with whom I used to play Mordheim in college) asked if I wanted to try Mordheim again. Heck yeah. I built an entire table of hand-made terrain (with towers, bridges, all kinds of crazy shit), I ordered a gaming mat, built and painted several warbands, compiled reference sheets, designed a new roster sheet - even bought sexy parchment paper to print them on. I mean, I went 110% balls to the wall on this.
Get together...he whips out old unpainted minis and beats me senseless in like 10 games in a row. While I had built a really cool and thematic undead warband lead by a vampire, and a cool dwarf warband...he simply chose the "start with 100 extra gold" warband, took a few shooty guys with good missile weapons and obliterated me. My undead and dwarves, while cool...were slow and had no agility. So he just ran circles around me, got a few "sniper" skills and that was the whole thing decided, more or less.
It's unfortunate, as a medieval/fantasy game it really just comes down to a shooting game most of the time. Some warbands are simply far better than others. He tried a witch hunter warband which can take wardogs which are 10x better than the undead zombie dogs...for less money, etc.
While Mordheim is one of the coolest settings in fantasy gaming...if you don't play competitively, you'll get trounced. Rule of cool will get you slain most of the time. My desire to have a "cool" warband basically meant I'd lost before we even began to play.
However, my loss is your gain - here are some resources I whipped up for the game:
https://myminiaturemischief.blogspot.com/2017/03/on-gaming-periphery-mordheim-hacks.html
-
I never was wiped out like Elbows described, :obut that’s definitely what I meant with, a GM would be best for constructing the warbands. Shooting is definitely overpowered since there’s no ammo and actually barely a disadvantage.
-
Hobgoblin, I am on the same path as you, getting stuff ready to play with a mate for a healthy dose of turn of the century nostalgia! Battlescribe has a mordheim warband builder, but it doesn't include all published warbands and I have found at least one error in it! However, it broadly works as long as you check with the rulebook.
As far as Elbows' experience goes, and with the caveat I last played when the game was released, it sounds like the table was not crowded enough. Missile weapons shouldn't be able to cover every avenue of approach to such an extent that they rule the field.
-
The tables were very crowded. lol
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_QFQ_VqODG8/WQecnldDBsI/AAAAAAAADU0/njksCCreQDwXlj-gYveNyphUDbNpFPUtACLcB/s1600/Streetfight%2B%25282%2529.JPG)
-
OK, so how did this happen?
"Took a few shooty guys with good missile weapons and obliterated me."
Very few scenarios have a time limit, did you not use the hiding rules? Undead certainly have elements that are very fast with dire wolves and vampires...
Not trying to have a dig, just not sure how you ended up in a situation where all your warriors ended up as pin cushions... and ensure we don't get the same experience when we start playing!
Apologies to hobgoblin for the minor hijack.
-
Just depends on your warbands match up.
All it takes is one or two guys to unlock bonus BS and a "ignore cover" skill, etc...and if you're not a fast warband, you're not getting near objectives. In typical Mordheim/Necromunda fashion - you win one or two games and you outpace your opponent more or less from then on.
You don't have to take my word for it. You'll figure it out for yourself the first time you run into Skaven slinger spam or a High Elf warband, etc. Now, could I have started arming all my guys with missile weapons too? Sure, but then why play Mordheim? I don't want my Vampire running around with a crossbow...that just seems stupid.
-
One of the most important ingredients to a good tabletop game is having the right (or compatible) players. I am lucky to have like-minded friends to play games with, those who like to play to the theme, story and general spirit of the game at hand. Any ruleset can be broken by those who want to gamesmanship their way to victory (and if that's how they get their kicks, then why not?), and campaign games might be more susceptible to it. I haven't seen a Mordheim-like game fix the issue of runaway success gangs yet, so it falls a bit to the players to mitigate it a bit, I guess.
-
I'm very much enjoying the highjack, so don't worry about that! ;)
Thanks, Elbows, for those links - they look very handy indeed!
I'm curious about the shooters issue. I've had a second pass over the rules, and one thing that isn't immediately apparent to me is why orcs and dwarves wouldn't have the same resilience to missiles that they had in our old games of Warhammer. Toughness 4 used to be a fairly good guarantee that you'd get the bulk of your troops into melee - especially when combined with armour.
I've seen a lot of Mordheim commentary saying that "armour isn't worth it," but I can't immediately see why. So what am I missing? A BS 3 bowshot at an orc has a 50% chance of hitting and then a one-in-three chance of causing a wound. So that's only a one-in-six chance of causing a wound per shot - and heavy armour + shield could take that down to one in twelve.
As far as our games go, I'll be creating all the warbands for the one-shot and letting the other players pick. For the campaigns, no one's a competitively minded player, and we'll probably have quite a few multi-player games as well as one-on-ones. I reckon that the ganging-up potential in the former should be enough to take care of any overpowered warbands tout de suite!
-
I've seen a lot of Mordheim commentary saying that "armour isn't worth it," but I can't immediately see why. So what am I missing?
Armour is comparatively expensive in Mordheim and critical hits negate it two thirds of the time. That’s why competitive build types don’t tend to favour it.
-
Armour is comparatively expensive in Mordheim and critical hits negate it two thirds of the time. That’s why competitive build types don’t tend to favour it.
Thanks! I've just been starting up a couple of WYSIWYG warbands with the orcs and Skaven I have to hand - and I saw the first point straight away: the gear for my available verminkin is worth much more than they are! I'd missed the second point, though.
I reckon WYSIWYG will act as a natural constraint on the warbands I can create for the one-shot. I'll probably stat up some starting warbands at 750 crowns and then back-ups at 500 crowns for those who get routed early.
I'm also inclined to ditch the restrictions on who can be armed with what; I've got plenty of goblins with two-handed weapons and orcs in heavy armour! From what I can see, costs are the same across the board (e.g a halberd or helmet is 10 crowns), and the expense of gear seems more likely to disadvantage the purchaser than the opponent.
Within reason, I should add: warplock pistols should be reserved to Skaven, and elf-bows to elves. But a goblin with a crossbow or a Ruglud's orc in heavy armour seems fair enough!
-
I have played tons of Mordheim through the years, and we still go back to it sometimes. The "official" warbands were fairly well balanced; but many of the later ones were not (elves are the obvious example). Eventually a few of the expansion warbands were upgraded to official status (dwarves, for sure).
To a fair degree, shooty warbands can we weakened by having a table crowded with terrain - which fits the setting as well.
Somewhere around here I have a scenario my group cooked up for a convention years ago. It would make a good four-player one-off, if you are interested.
Have you thought about collaborative play? We originally played Mordheim as intended (stalking each other through the ruins), but for years now our approach to the game has been collaborating warbands vs. a baddie force (more often than not, undead).
-Michael
-
Yeah, armour is generally ignored because of its expense, and remember even a Strength 4 attack is -1 so it negates some armour, etc. etc.
-
I’d be interested in seeing that scenario, Michael.
I'm also inclined to ditch the restrictions on who can be armed with what ...
I approve. Mordheim rules with WYSIWYG Oldhammer figures is right up my street. A few people are doing it. We should start an Oldheim movement.
-
The Lost Chest
The last survivor of an ill-fated Marienburger warband stumbled out of the ruins of stricken Mordheim this morning, and told how he and his mates had found a magically locked treasure chest – shortly before a Skaven band sprang an ambush. With his last breath, the Marienburger gasped out a description of the neighborhood where he and his doomed friends found, and then hastily re-hid, the chest before attempting to break out of the skaven trap. The Marienburgers lost the running fight with the evil rat abominations, but it is possible the chest remains undiscovered by the victors. For most who have heard the tale, the “Lost Chest” could be anywhere in the city, but a few captains have recognized landmarks in the dying man’s description, and have an idea where to start looking…
The “Lost Chest” scenario can be played by two players, but it is primarily intended for larger numbers of warbands. All of the warbands in the game have previously partially explored the section of Mordheim where the chest has been hidden, and have some knowledge of the area.
Set up. Blah blah blah. You will need several pairs of numbered counters to mark possible locations of the Lost Chest: three pairs for each player, plus one additional pair (for example, with four players you would need thirteen pairs of counters). Players roll to determine the order that they will place the first set of counters on the table. Place one set of the counters in a cup or similar container. Set the others face down on the table and shuffle them. Without looking at the numbers, the first player places a counter, and then the second player places a counter, etc., until all of the players have placed three counters and the first player has placed a fourth counter. These counters must be in a building, or some sort of enclosure. Counters must be at least 10 inches from the edge of the board, and they must be at least 10 inches apart from any other counters. Before rolling to determine the order of placement for the warbands, each player draws three of the duplicate counters from the cup. These counters will tell each player three locations where the Lost Chest will not be found, since its actual location will be determined by the last counter left in the cup after all of the players have drawn their three counters (the warbands have all partially searched this neighborhood before).
Players follow the standard rules for setting up warbands and determining the order of play.
Searching a location. If one or more members of a warband ends the movement phase in a location with a counter and are within four inches of the counter, the player can roll to search the building at the end of the his or her turn. The base chance for the search to succeed is 1 in 6 per warrior searching the location (i.e. in the building/site and within four inches of the counter). If only one warrior is searching, then the search will succeed on a roll of 6+, while three warriors would successfully search a location on a 4+. If the search is unsuccessful, the location may be searched by the same warband again in a subsequent turn, with a +1 to the search roll (and a +2 on the third turn of searching, etc.).
Note that the number and the identity of a warband’s warriors searching a location may vary from turn to turn, as their captain sends them to different locations or has them defending against or attacking rival warbands. Such changes to not penalize the searchers: at the end of the turn, a player totals the number of his or her warriors searching a location, and adds any modifiers for previous searches of the same location conducted by the warband, and rolls to determine if the search is successful.
Obviously, a warband can search more than one location a turn, although no single warrior can search more than one location a turn.
A warrior in hand-to-hand combat, or within six inches of an enemy model, cannot search.
If the search roll is successful then the player who “discovered” the counter flips it over and calls out the number. The player who secretly holds the other counter for that location must reveal the counter, demonstrating that the Lost Chest is not at that location. If no player has the counter for the site, then the searching player has found the Lost Chest. Players should check the last counter in the cup to insure that it corresponds to the counter at the site just searched. (If it doesn’t, then a player failed to reveal that he or she had the counter for the searched location; all of the inattentive player’s warriors are taken out of action, and the game ends. Assign experience points as normal – 1 for each survivor and 1 for each character who took an enemy out of action).
Removing the Lost Chest: Now that the Chest has been located, to end the game a warband must remove it from the board. The Chest is quite heavy, big and awkward, and securely locked. Players should use a model to depict the Lost Chest – the one that comes in the basic Mordheim box serves nicely. It can be carried as follows:
A single warrior with 4+ strength can carry the chest his/her full movement, but cannot run. Place the Chest behind the model, touching its base.
A warrior strength 3 or less can drag the chest at half the warrior’s normal movement rate, and cannot run. Place the Chest behind the model, touching its base.
Two warriors of strength 2+ can carry the Chest at the normal movement rate of the slowest of the two warriors. They cannot run. The two models should be placed base-to-Chest-to-base while they are carrying the Chest.
The Chest can be dragged behind a mount. The mount moves at its normal movement rate, but cannot run. Place the Chest behind the model, touching its base.
If a model dragging the Chest moves off of the board, then the Chest has been removed.
The game ends once the chest has been successfully removed from the table, or when all bands except one have routed.
Experience:
+1 for surviving
+1 per enemy taken out of action
+1 for the winning captain (the captain of the band that removes the chest from the board or the Captain of the last remaining warband if no band successfully carries the Chest off of the board before the game ends).
+1 for the searcher (or one of the searchers of the player’s choice) who found the Chest
+1 for the warrior or warriors (maximum of two) who actually carrird the Chest model off of the board. If the game ends because of routing before the Chest is carried off, no models receive this bonus experience.
Loot: All warbands take their normal search rolls after the game ends. Additionally, the player whose warband possesses the Chest at the end of the game may roll to see what the Chest contains:
Automatic 4d6 gold
4+ d6 gems worth 5 gold each
5+ Brace of dueling pistols
5+ Lucky Charm
5+ Rabbit’s Foot
One of the fun things we discovered running this scenario is the way a sneaky player can subtly convince his opponents that one of the locations that the Lost Chest is at a location the sneaky ones knows is wrong.
-Michael
-
Armour is comparatively expensive in Mordheim and critical hits negate it two thirds of the time. That’s why competitive build types don’t tend to favour it.
That and as Elbows says further below, anything with S4 ignores light armor (including models armed with polearms, xbows, ogres etc.) and S5 ignores even heavy armor (i.e. anyone with a two-handed weapon).
Sure you could add a shield, but seriously *gamewise* a buckler + sword is the better combination (or the offensive choice: two handweapons).
-
The Lost Chest
Many thanks.
-
Just browse reading mind but ... If shooty warbands are dominant why not house rule
Downpour
At the start of the scenario roll for weather 50/50 chance of pouring rain which will reduce BS stats by -1 due to saggy strings.
Alternately you could throw every turn and on a have the weather change to downpour on a 6 and back again on another.
Might make taking shooters predominant warband less attractive and is thematic? Surely Mordheim is a dull, wet dreary place with mud splattered dank, damp and depressing alleyways. I don't think the sun shines much there.
-
Like many games where your warband persists from game to game and levels up, there is an inherent issue where early success for some makes it much harder for the others to ever catch them up, and the imbalance gradually gets worse as the games add up.
What makes it more difficult for GW games is that they are D6-based (where getting +1 or +2 to a stat or a roll can be rather significant), and that as well as advancing (buffs), warriors can also get injuries (debuffs). In theory, these balance each other out, but in reality the winners usually get the buffs, and the losers usually get the injuries, and so the gap gets widened at both ends after every game.
Also, where model-count is generally low, having access to good shooting or models with very fast movement quickly becomes a big advantage. These are both issues that can be felt in Mordheim, as well as the experience gap, and in all cases is made worse by some warbands being able to reach a big size very quickly.
If you're reading all this and thinking that Skaven fit the bill in every case where there could be an advantage to be had, then you'd be right... I really don't know how they got through playtesting in their original form really. :?
There's not too much that can be done to stop all this since it's all baked into the games, but here are some suggestions that may help to varying degrees:
1) Missions include some which are distinctly unbalanced, and the underdog always chooses the mission. Ideally, they choose missions that favours them, which should offset enough of the gap to make it a better fight.
2) Terrain should be much denser, with more scatter terrain, and less movement-penalty scenery. This reduces the effects of shooting, and doesn't penalise movement too much except my making models go around more terrain.
3) Introduce weather and day cycle to the games. Randomly-generated weather like heavy rain, fog/mist, or even snow (or perhaps something weirder...) could affect visibility distances, and/or the ability to clearly see/aim at opponents. Similarly, the game could be played at dawn or dusk, with the daylight getting brighter or fading each turn, or even at night where the whole game takes place in the dark (and perhaps have rules around lamps/torches or things that make light briefly like blackpowder weapons). Of course, you would need to not allow Skaven and others to see in the dark, or it's all a bit pointless!
4) Prevent any unit and hero in a warband having the same primary equipment as another in the same warband (exceptions for things that use "natural" weapons, like wolves or such). Models should be restricted to two 1-handed weapons or one 2-handed weapon plus one 1-handed weapon, which are considered their "primary" weapons. This stops missile troops also being good in melee, and it also stops every model having the same "efficiency combo" of weapons. You may want to excuse the heroes from this restriction for Rule of Cool reasons, but if you do then the troops should be a bit more restricted instead. As most missile weapons are two-handed (apart from slings), this restriction also affects how much shooting a warband can put out. In the specific case of slings, you may want to just set a hard limit on these directly - like 6 or so).
5) You could restrict how many models fight in any given mission to something like 8. They would have at least one hero but not more than three (randomly chosen) and the rest would be the regular warband members (also randomly-chosen). This would seem to favour more elite warbands, and it can, but in general numbers are such a huge boon in Mordheim that it's not that much of an advantage anyway; bigger warbands weather the effects of injuries, deaths, and such better.
6) Whilst the game does provide underdog bonuses, I always felt that the upkeep costs should scale more to the overall warband rating. If you adjust this, either dynamically, or in "steps", it helps reduce the straight advantage than some gangs can get.
7) Armour could be re-costed and re-balanced to provide better protection. Of course, I think more armour types would need to be introduced as well, with varying access for each warband, so that everyone has some access to something that's reasonable and fitting to the style of the warband. As a minimum, you could reduce the negative save modifiers in the game by 1 across the board, and I would make criticals that bypass armour to force the armour to save successfully twice instead. So for example, a model with Strength 4 still wounds the same, but the armour save modifier is now 0 instead of -1.
8 ) In some GW games of the type, you cannot voluntarily retire fighters; I would always allow this, as it helps struggling warbands if they can jettison overly-injured members or to drop fighters which may not be contributing much to the warband's efforts. I can't remember if this is the default for Mordheim, but is worth bearing in mind.
Of course, all of the above are house-rules to the official game, even if many of the suggestions are things that were features to some extent of other games that GW would later release. And, if you're going to house-rule, you may well prefer something else entirely anyway - like just re-writing warband equipment options for example.
-
Lots of food for thought here - thanks, all!
Thanks for the scenario, mweaver - that looks right up my crooked-timbered, rat-haunted side-street!
That and as Elbows says further below, anything with S4 ignores light armor (including models armed with polearms, xbows, ogres etc.) and S5 ignores even heavy armor (i.e. anyone with a teo-handed weapon).
Sure you could add a shield, but seriously *gamewise* a buckler + sword is the better combination (or the offensive choice: two handweapons).
Right - so, say, Ruglud's armoured orcs (heavy armour, halberds, shields) would be OK at storming a position held by bowmen but more vulnerable to crossbowmen or gunners. And I hadn't factored in the -2 save for two-handed weapons: that's quite significant.
Am I right in thinking that there's no penalty for offhand weapons? From memory, two-weapon use in Warhammer meant -1 to hit for the first hand and -2 for the second, so it usually wasn't worth it unless the troops were subject to frenzy (hobgoblins and savage orcs, for example), which gave compensatory attack bonuses.
Are these rules peculiar to Mordheim, or did they reflect the way Warhammer had changed by the time of its publication? I have never played Warhammer after 3rd edition, so some of these shifts (no penalty for double-weapon use, big save reductions for strength and weapon) seem quite startling! I can see that they might be designed specifically to encourage 'swashbuckling' and rapid movement.
I am fairly confident that any superior warband will get ganged up on over the course of a campaign, but to underscore that, I should plan for multi-player games fairly regularly - so that perhaps every second session is a four-player game to allow the takedown of the overweening.
Also, am I missing something on the resilience of toughness-4 types to missiles? I'd have thought that a bunch of orcs or dwarves would be quite tough to snipe to bits - especially as a 'wound' isn't necessarily a kill. An orc with a club looks quite a cheap, durable proposition!
-
Ruglud's with T4 and heavy armour and shield would be pretty durable. Their starting save against S3 missile weapons is 4+ and 5+ in hand-to-hand when using those halberds. This will be modified by the strength of attacks against them, most critical hits and some weapons have enhanced armour penetrating capabilities e.g. axes & Elf bows.
Note that the -2 save for a 2HW (+2S) is based on a S3 warband member using one. S5 = -2AS.
There is no penalty for dual wielding though imposing one is a common house rule. You shouldn't have an issue with it using old figures and WYSIWYG.
Orcs and especially Dwarfs with their 'Hard to Kill' rule will be tricky to snipe to death. A lot of Mordheim 'kills' take place in hand-to-hand. Otherwise unengaged enemies only have to successfully wound a knocked down figure or be able to attack a stunned one. Shooting lacks this deadliness.
-
Thanks for that!
There is no penalty for dual wielding though imposing one is a common house rule. You shouldn't have an issue with it using old figures and WYSIWYG.
Yes, I think the WYSIWG principle is going to be an important balancing factor - especially as a restriction on the size of warbands. Almost all my orcs and Skaven have a mail shirt at the very least - though I can see some stray sprues of plastic plague monks being a tempting source of unarmored dual wielders in future ...
It does occur to me that the game could be 'rationalised' at a stroke by just using the Warhammer 3e rulebook (which I have) as the reference for weapons, armour and even stats. The injuries/criticals/climbing/falling could be layered over that, and psychological stats other than Ld simply ignored. That makes armour more cost-effective. I'd keep Mordheim's initiative-to-the-charger and sword/buckler rules, though - they seem fun!
-
Right - so, say, Ruglud's armoured orcs (heavy armour, halberds, shields) would be OK at storming a position held by bowmen but more vulnerable to crossbowmen or gunners. And I hadn't factored in the -2 save for two-handed weapons: that's quite significant.
Well, bows have a long range, and Orcs, in heavy armour, with halberds, are comparatively expensive and not particularly fast. You will (potentially, depending on terrain) be taking quite a lot of fire until you get to melee, and it only takes one successful hit to get through and end am Orc. Also, Orcs don't get access to heavy armour as standard, but if we take a standard Orc Warrior in light armour then the cost per model is at least 70gp, whereas a Human marksman with a bow is 35gp (or 40gp with a longbow instead). If you allow heavy armour, then the Orc's cost rises to 100gp. So, for the same gold you get three Human bowmen to one Orc. And a bow is range 24" (30" if a longbow) vs an Orc moving 4" (or 8" if they run), or heavy armour that's 3" (6" if they run); that's potentially up to 9-15 shots at each Orc before the Orc gets to swing! Not all will be hits/wounds/etc, but it's a lot to weather, and you won't have many Orcs equipped like that.
Am I right in thinking that there's no penalty for offhand weapons? From memory, two-weapon use in Warhammer meant -1 to hit for the first hand and -2 for the second, so it usually wasn't worth it unless the troops were subject to frenzy (hobgoblins and savage orcs, for example), which gave compensatory attack bonuses.
Correct; no penalty for offhand weapons. Like Citizen Sade says though, imposing a -1 to hit on both weapons is a common house rule.
Are these rules peculiar to Mordheim, or did they reflect the way Warhammer had changed by the time of its publication? I have never played Warhammer after 3rd edition, so some of these shifts (no penalty for double-weapon use, big save reductions for strength and weapon) seem quite startling! I can see that they might be designed specifically to encourage 'swashbuckling' and rapid movement.
Sort of. Whilst the weapons in WHFB from 4th onwards to 8th are fairly similar, there are some small differences between some of them from edition to edition.
Whilst Mordheim is based on 5th/6th rules, the weapon types are more separated out and heave more additional rules to differentiate them (Necromunda did the same with 40k weapons too).
Blunt one-handed weapons like maces/clubs/hammers are especially cost-effective for their Stun rules, and are often paired with a cheap second weapon like a dagger to maximise offensive output. For Mordheim, the Dagger+Mace is widely considered the best all-round weapon combo in the game in fact.
Two-handed weapons have the drawback of striking last usually (or, in some WHFB editions, with a severe penalty to Initiative which is functionally usually the same thing in most cases). This means that al though the double-handed weapon is powerful, the model carrying it may be struck down and killed before they get to swing it! Worth noting that if your opponent has the Parry ability from a sword or buckler, they cannot use this if the enemy's attack strength is twice or more their own basic strength so a S4 model with a two-handed weapon ignores parry attempts by S3 models!
I am fairly confident that any superior warband will get ganged up on over the course of a campaign, but to underscore that, I should plan for multi-player games fairly regularly - so that perhaps every second session is a four-player game to allow the takedown of the overweening.
In the same way that facing runaway warbands isn't that much fun, having a successful warband constantly ganged-up on is also not much fun and takes away any incentive to try and do anything well. Also, games with more than two players are often somewhat chaotic and can be a bit incoherent - thus ruining the feel of the game if you do this too often. Better IMO to set up imbalanced scenarios or similar for the higher-rated warbands to try and survive through!
Also, am I missing something on the resilience of toughness-4 types to missiles? I'd have thought that a bunch of orcs or dwarves would be quite tough to snipe to bits - especially as a 'wound' isn't necessarily a kill. An orc with a club looks quite a cheap, durable proposition!
Maybe... Check out the Critical Hit tables on page 116 of the big Mordheim book. The right critical, and you may as well be Lady Godiva in terms of an armour save!
Yes, I think the WYSIWG principle is going to be an important balancing factor - especially as a restriction on the size of warbands. Almost all my orcs and Skaven have a mail shirt at the very least - though I can see some stray sprues of plastic plague monks being a tempting source of unarmoured dual wielders in future...
I'm not so sure it will necessarily; rather, it will more depend on what models you happen to have. If one collection happens to be equipped relatively optimally, and another collection happens not to be, then you will still get the same imbalance as the original core game.
It does occur to me that the game could be 'rationalised' at a stroke by just using the Warhammer 3e rulebook (which I have) as the reference for weapons, armour and even stats. The injuries/criticals/climbing/falling could be layered over that, and psychological stats other than Ld simply ignored. That makes armour more cost-effective. I'd keep Mordheim's initiative-to-the-charger and sword/buckler rules, though - they seem fun!
Actually, the lesser-used stats are often a great way to balance things if you can find more ways to make them more relevant. Ignoring or removing them just makes models that are good at crumping even better with no drawback. And, if you want to play a skirmish version of WHFB 3rd, that's fine - but it isn't Mordheim, even if you draft in a few rules from it.
For what it's worth, I suggest as follows:
1) Play the rules and warbands from the core book as-is, and all players try to avoid too much min-maxing of equipment and models.
2) If you set a limit of say four games each before you end the campaign and review, you will have a waaaay better idea of what's good and what's not, what works for you and what doesn't. You can then modify to suit your tastes based on that informed experience.
3) If you want to use warbands that are not in the starting book, simply use "counts as" for one that is and implement a few sensible self-imposed limits to emphasise the theme. For example Orcs could use the Middenheimer Mercenaries rules, and you could give all the models helmets where possible (simulating an Orc's hard head) and avoid using too many missile weapons.
4) Depending on the warband, many of the non-core ones often don't work too well in basic Mordheim in terms of balance. However, they may (and often do) work much better in their own respective settings. So I would look to use Lustrian Warbands in the Lustrian setting for example, as that's where they'd be most balanced. It also give you more excuses to reset and relocate campaigns, and for players to try new warbands, all of which coincidentally helps ameliorate runaway warband issues where one player constantly succeeds.
-
Played, and still playing!, the computer version. It's a great game
-
Surprised no one has mentioned this: https://broheim.net/downloads.html#corerules
or this: http://www.indadvendt.dk/2013/10/coreheim-all-documents-for-coreheim/
Broheim has the base rules with some additional stuff and errata. Coreheim is a revamped version of the original game that claims to address issues of imbalance in the original rules.
Mordheim has fantastic lore and theme. It brought a lot of good to fantasy wargaming as a genre. That said, the rules are clunky and easy to abuse. I had exactly one experience with it, thinking it would be fun like Necromunda was. Between watching one of the resident munchkins abuse Skaven slingers and losing my entire warband crumbled to dust because I happened to roll two 1s in a row when it came time to settle up injuries (most of which were from being pelted by half a dozen sling stones each turn, and the best part is that was less than half the guy's warband), I said "no more" and never looked back.
Now that there are a ton of great fantasy skirmish options out there, most of which have campaign options, I see no reason to bother going back. It was great for its time, but why bother when one can find a better ruleset and just set those games in Mordheim?
-
Well, bows have a long range, and Orcs, in heavy armour, with halberds, are comparatively expensive and not particularly fast. You will (potentially, depending on terrain) be taking quite a lot of fire until you get to melee, and it only takes one successful hit to get through and end am Orc. Also, Orcs don't get access to heavy armour as standard, but if we take a standard Orc Warrior in light armour then the cost per model is at least 70gp, whereas a Human marksman with a bow is 35gp (or 40gp with a longbow instead). If you allow heavy armour, then the Orc's cost rises to 100gp. So, for the same gold you get three Human bowmen to one Orc. And a bow is range 24" (30" if a longbow) vs an Orc moving 4" (or 8" if they run), or heavy armour that's 3" (6" if they run); that's potentially up to 9-15 shots at each Orc before the Orc gets to swing! Not all will be hits/wounds/etc, but it's a lot to weather, and you won't have many Orcs equipped like that.
All true - though it would (if my maths is correct - never a certainty!), the marksmen would have only a 1 in 18 chance of a wound at long range and a 1 in 12 chance at short range. Add in dense terrain (potentially restricting shooting to a turn or two), and you can see a situation in which those marksmen have to be quite lucky to take down our notional spike-can commandos before being engaged (sure, the marksmen can go hunting for the orcs, but then their shooting chances drop further). And if there are a few hapless goblins screening the advance ...
Your point about the cost is obviously a good one, though! Armour does seem astonishingly expensive relative to its effect - kind of a compromise between a sort of RPG-ish realism and a Warhammer-style points system, perhaps.
Correct; no penalty for offhand weapons. Like Citizen Sade says though, imposing a -1 to hit on both weapons is a common house rule.
Sort of. Whilst the weapons in WHFB from 4th onwards to 8th are fairly similar, there are some small differences between some of them from edition to edition.
Cheers - right, that makes sense - and, yes, clubs, with their interaction with the 'stunned' rule, are the obvious example.
In the same way that facing runaway warbands isn't that much fun, having a successful warband constantly ganged-up on is also not much fun and takes away any incentive to try and do anything well. Also, games with more than two players are often somewhat chaotic and can be a bit incoherent - thus ruining the feel of the game if you do this too often. Better IMO to set up imbalanced scenarios or similar for the higher-rated warbands to try and survive through!
Fair points - but surely the Diplomacy-style potential for double and triple crosses on this can be quite entertaining. And if a successful warband gets stomped, presumably it's less likely to be top of the tree next time around.
Maybe... Check out the Critical Hit tables on page 116 of the big Mordheim book. The right critical, and you may as well be Lady Godiva in terms of an armour save!
Yes - the armour doesn't count for much, but toughness 4 is still quite a big deal (wound chance falling from a half to a third for 'normal' S3 attacks). I still have visions in my head of 1980s orc legions weathering bow and slingshots fairly well as they crossed the dining-room table ... ;)
I'm not so sure it will necessarily; rather, it will more depend on what models you happen to have. If one collection happens to be equipped relatively optimally, and another collection happens not to be, then you will still get the same imbalance as the original core game.
Ah - now this is where my knowledge of the models we all have on hand comes in. I don't think any of us have much in the way of optimally equipped characters - at least not in the unarmoured, club-and-dagger sense. Our mercenaries will be drawn from historical figures (Perry, etc.) or Aly Morrison half-orcs, so there will be lots of gear. And the same goes for my Skaven and orcs (certainly the ones I plan on using).
So to start with, at least, I reckon, WYSIWYG will compel us all to spend half our budgets on gear. The only exceptions to that I can think of offhand are the undead - but I presume ghouls and zombies don't really go in for much in that regard!
On that note, I realised that my undead were short of a vampire - but I reckon the old Jez Goodwin Elric will serve that purpose perfectly - black armour, white skin and hair, red eyes, etc.
Actually, the lesser-used stats are often a great way to balance things if you can find more ways to make them more relevant. Ignoring or removing them just makes models that are good at crumping even better with no drawback. And, if you want to play a skirmish version of WHFB 3rd, that's fine - but it isn't Mordheim, even if you draft in a few rules from it.
I'm not sure if we're on the same page here - I mean Int, Cl and WP. These had an unbalancing effect in early Warhammer in two ways. First, they cut the cost of certain troop types (e.g. orcs and lizardmen), but almost never had any effect - so orcs and the like were cheaper than they otherwise would have been. Second, for the troops that did use them, they really mattered (trolls and troglodytes, most obviously); testing for Stupidity on Int effectively crippled the creatures thus afflicted, because Stupid creatures always had low Int (and even if they were well led, the orc or lizardman in charge would only get up to a 7 if a major hero or wizard - who essentially became an ineffective nanny for most of the game unless you got very lucky). So abandoning these stats and testing on Ld instead seems eminently sensible to me!
Also, I don't think using WHFB 3rd as I suggest would be much different from common Mordheim house rules. Armour would be a little more effective; two-handed weapons and dual wielding somewhat less; but isn't that what a lot of standard house rules do anyway? I'll certainly play the first few games entirely by the book, but as long as climbing, jumping, parrying, stunning, knockdowns, criticals, etc., are in, I'm not sure that 3rd's armour and weapons would be a huge change beyond what one might want to tweak in any case.
For what it's worth, I suggest as follows:
1) Play the rules and warbands from the core book as-is, and all players try to avoid too much min-maxing of equipment and models.
2) If you set a limit of say four games each before you end the campaign and review, you will have a waaaay better idea of what's good and what's not, what works for you and what doesn't. You can then modify to suit your tastes based on that informed experience.
3) If you want to use warbands that are not in the starting book, simply use "counts as" for one that is and implement a few sensible self-imposed limits to emphasise the theme. For example Orcs could use the Middenheimer Mercenaries rules, and you could give all the models helmets where possible (simulating an Orc's hard head) and avoid using too many missile weapons.
4) Depending on the warband, many of the non-core ones often don't work too well in basic Mordheim in terms of balance. However, they may (and often do) work much better in their own respective settings. So I would look to use Lustrian Warbands in the Lustrian setting for example, as that's where they'd be most balanced. It also give you more excuses to reset and relocate campaigns, and for players to try new warbands, all of which coincidentally helps ameliorate runaway warband issues where one player constantly succeeds.
Good advice - thanks! I think the orc warband will prove irresistible, though; Middenheimers look a good fit for half-orcs (I can see a role for the Jez Goodwin Uruk-hai - the big ones - as particularly orcish and ugly S4 champions!). I gather that the orc warband isn't one of the 'broken' ones, though - it seems well accepted on the various Mordheim forums.
I don't think we'll use the Lustrian warbands at all - unless to have a distinctly Old World, Karnac-style (http://www.solegends.com/citrr/1rr11karnacs/index.htm) bunch of reptilian raiders coming up from below! Actually, that's quite tempting ... ;)
-
Surprised no one has mentioned this: https://broheim.net/downloads.html#corerules
or this: http://www.indadvendt.dk/2013/10/coreheim-all-documents-for-coreheim/
Broheim has the base rules with some additional stuff and errata. Coreheim is a revamped version of the original game that claims to address issues of imbalance in the original rules.
Thanks! I've had a look at both; I'll go back and have another look at Coreheim now I've read over the original.
Mordheim has fantastic lore and theme. It brought a lot of good to fantasy wargaming as a genre. That said, the rules are clunky and easy to abuse. I had exactly one experience with it, thinking it would be fun like Necromunda was. Between watching one of the resident munchkins abuse Skaven slingers and losing my entire warband crumbled to dust because I happened to roll two 1s in a row when it came time to settle up injuries (most of which were from being pelted by half a dozen sling stones each turn, and the best part is that was less than half the guy's warband), I said "no more" and never looked back.
Now that there are a ton of great fantasy skirmish options out there, most of which have campaign options, I see no reason to bother going back. It was great for its time, but why bother when one can find a better ruleset and just set those games in Mordheim?
Well, that's certainly my fallback position; ruined, multilevel buildings (which are great fun to build) are perfect for Song of Blades and the like. And Rogue Planet works best with dense terrain and handles swarms of Skaven.
What does attract me, though, to the clunky old Warhammer system, is the potential for 'detailed advancement'. Mordheim's long statline is an archaism (compare with SOBH's two stats!), but it does allow for 'granular' advancement in a way that many modern skirmish games don't. SO I'm quite keen to try that out.
The other thing is the sheer enthusiasm that Mordheim seems to generate - both online and among people I know (we have now have nine potential players lined up!). I'm a little curious about that - and while I think Warhammer proper is hopelessly clunky, I can sort of see how it might work in a more RPG-ish narrative skirmish.
Out of interest, what skirmish system would you recommend as a good alternative specifically for the campaign aspect?
-
Also, I don't think using WHFB 3rd as I suggest would be much different from common Mordheim house rules. Armour would be a little more effective; two-handed weapons and dual wielding somewhat less; but isn't that what a lot of standard house rules do anyway?
Ah yeah, I think we talked past each other a bit with regard to WHFB 3rd - it seems we did in fact mean similar things! lol
I'll certainly play the first few games entirely by the book, but as long as climbing, jumping, parrying, stunning, knockdowns, criticals, etc., are in, I'm not sure that 3rd's armour and weapons would be a huge change beyond what one might want to tweak in any case.
I think that's best really. I mean, lots of games are like Mordheim (or you can write one to to be), but once you start to change and swap too many things in Mordheim it becomes merely a similar-themed but different game. Maybe that's a good thing, but it'd be up to you to decide that! :)
I don't think we'll use the Lustrian warbands at all - unless to have a distinctly Old World, Karnac-style (http://www.solegends.com/citrr/1rr11karnacs/index.htm) bunch of reptilian raiders coming up from below! Actually, that's quite tempting ... ;)
The different settings are pretty good in many ways, and are all different.
The Lustria campaign is easy enough to do with FG:Ghost Archipelago and Wargames Atlantic plastic kits substituting for the official models as required. In fact, with those two manufacturers, I think you'd be set and not need any official GW models at all! ;) Of course, fighting over ruined South-American styled ruins in the jungles looking for treasure still allows you to use all the Mordheim rules too, but with added hazards and terrain types.
I think you'd like something such as the Empire In Flames supplement for Mordheim which is set in the wilderness areas of the Empire, especially around old ruins, abandoned villages, and deep forests. It adds Beastmen and the Carnival Of Chaos warbands to the setting, and I think it would accommodate Orcs (and Goblins) well too. Be warned that the CoC warband is rather strong, but the Beastmen are quite well balanced.
Anyway, I'll stop pontificating on the game now, and let you play some games and see how you get on. I hope you let us know how you get on and what your thoughts on it are.
-
NotifyGrout: "Now that there are a ton of great fantasy skirmish options out there, most of which have campaign options, I see no reason to bother going back. It was great for its time, but why bother when one can find a better ruleset and just set those games in Mordheim?"
Actually, I haven't found anything I like better than Mordheim. And I have tried a fair few (or at least read the rules).
We took a different approach to make two-weapon fighting less popular - we made shields give a 5+ save in melee combat (still only 6+ against ranged attacks, though).
-Michael
-
Now that there are a ton of great fantasy skirmish options out there, most of which have campaign options, I see no reason to bother going back. It was great for its time, but why bother when one can find a better ruleset and just set those games in Mordheim?
Hmmm…tricky question, because one of the reasons, people still *love* Mordheim so much is that even though everyone has tried, no one really beat it.
Frostgrave is cool, but not Mordheim in that it focusses completely on spellcaster heroes.
SOBH + campaign is imo the best but suffers from a lack of granularity.
LotRSG + campaign is awesome but suffers from the lack of detailed background rules from Mordheim ; it has granularity though and a better system.
Confrontation + Dogs of War…urgh, super clunky and even worse balance issues.
People say a lot of good things about the Mantic fantasy skirmisher and now that you brought me to buy KoW I see the beauty in the rather abstract but well tested Mantic systems. Maybe that’s worth a loook. Basic rules should be free.
-
Well, Malifaux is a pretty great ruleset, and would work beautifully in a Mordheim setting... But the fixed aspect of the models in the game (with most essentially being special characters) has a tendency to blind people to the rules themselves.
I agree though, there's many similar or "sort-of" games, but no full replacement. Surprising really, but it's somewhat the same with Necromunda too. It's the main reason I suggest minimal modifications to the game really. :)
-
Well, Malifaux is a pretty great ruleset, and would work beautifully in a Mordheim setting... But the fixed aspect of the models in the game (with most essentially being special characters) has a tendency to blind people to the rules themselves.
I agree though, there's many similar or "sort-of" games, but no full replacement. Surprising really, but it's somewhat the same with Necromunda too. It's the main reason I suggest minimal modifications to the game really. :)
I don’t want to derail the thread, but is it possible to play Malifaux without the profile cards sold with the specific models? That’s what’s also kept Confrontation into becoming a widely used ruleset with input from the outside (and a annoying tendency in many modern rules).
-
I don’t want to derail the thread, but is it possible to play Malifaux without the profile cards sold with the specific models?
Yes, and no. Mostly no.
The rules and model cards are all free to download (link (https://www.wyrd-games.net/resources)), and the game is played with deck of Poker cards (mapped to the game's own Suits, but there's a key for using a normal deck in the rulebook).
Part of the interaction of the rules calls to abilities and skills on the models' cards, and are activated in a variety of ways.
Whilst you could use the official cards and have them "count as" your own models, the structure and behaviour of the different forces would make this awkward if you wanted a different force composition than the official one.
My suggestion would be to try the rules as-is initially, and then have a go at writing your own cards, using the offical ones as a guide.
Making your own is doable, but you'll quickly find why I said " Yes. And no." above. Malifaux is a great game though, and I enjoyed it a lot.
____________________________________________
And now, we return you to your regularly-scheduled programme! ;)
-
Fair responses. If Mordheim works for you, it works. I may be too accustomed to having a munchkin or two in my usual play group; it's probably not an issue amongst more laid back players.
Most of the more modern campaign games out there aren't as granular as Mordheim or Necromunda, and I have to admit I find myself missing that sometimes, even though sometimes the advances ended up being mostly or entirely useless.
At one point I considered an advancement system for Frostgrave that would at least allow lower-tier soldiers who performed well enough (or even survived enough games) to eventually become a higher-tier soldier, but it seemed like it wasn't worth the effort after a while.
I'd probably go Coreheim if I found people that were interested, but lately I've been fortunate to get a game of Space Weirdos in, much less something more complex.
For somewhat obscure campaign options, one of the Alkemy journals had a campaign mode that looked interesting- I have no idea if it's even online anymore.
There was also talk about an optional campaign mode for M2E at one point, but I don't think it ever happened. Malifaux could probably be converted into a campaign-style game with advances, but it would require a severely restricted model pool and probably no Masters as they'd be far too powerful. The core rules of Malifaux are excellent.
Shoot People in Space has a campaign option, and I am hoping to try that out soon. I think(?) Brutal Quest is the fantasy analogue.
-
@ Major_Gilbear: Thanks! That’s really a pity. There have been several skirmish games in recent years, that had innovative ideas but suffered from this approach of tying specific models (or rather cards sold with them) to the rules, that made a decent reuse unnecessary difficult. Confrontation, Batman, Bushido, Freebooter‘s Fate and as you say Malifaux.
At least THAT is not an issue with Mordheim (and strangely even not with modern GW).
@ Topic: Coreheim seems to be a much more balanced game, but I assume that only from reading the rules, not playing.
However, when it was released, the strange misogynistic background as well as the lack of fluffy rules, yeah right those that often make real Mordheim imbalancded, really turned me off.
So maybe SoBH after all?! Or what about Fistful of Lead: Fantasy? Has anyone tried it? I own the WW and SF rules, which I like, but the price tag on the fantasy stuff made me hesitate to buy the new three books.
-
For what it is worth, digital stat cards for Malifaux models are free now, as are the rules. The only books that have to be purchased are those with lore. The app is quite good, and also free.
-
Great discussion - digressions and all!
I've been interested in Malifaux from time to time, but its intricacies have always put me off in the end. As Major Gilbear indicates, it looks like you'd need to put a lot of effort in to get it to run with proxies ("Who are these guys meant to be again ... ?").
Another thing that intrigues me about Mordheim is simply the wild divergence of views on it. Some see it as the best skirmish game ever; others as a hopelessly unbalanced disaster with great background - all of which makes me want to give it a go, especially as the mechanics are so familiar.
I do think that that long statline does give it a strength for campaigns that other games lack. The refined Warhammer statline (minus Int, Cl and Wp) does have the merit of having lots of things that can be shifted up or down, all of which will have an effect in the game. So that's quite an unusual amount of stuff to tweak for a skirmish game.
Fair responses. If Mordheim works for you, it works. I may be too accustomed to having a munchkin or two in my usual play group; it's probably not an issue amongst more laid back players.
Yeah, the people I'll be playing with are fairly indifferent to winning - except in the actual excitement of the game. I expect "what looks good" to dominate the roster choices.
I'm quite excited about putting together a mercenary warband from these guys:
(http://www.solegends.com/citc/c010halforcs/c2c10halforcsx-01.jpg)
(http://www.solegends.com/citc/c010halforcs/fly198408p5-c10x-01.jpg)
They're just so redolent of Warhammer's Old World (Silas Meel, etc.) - and have a lovely range of equipment, all the way from clubs to crossbows. There are also some unarmoured ones, like the slave-ogre's handlers - and the slave ogre would slot nicely into the ogre bodyguard slot.
(http://www.solegends.com/citc/c027slaveogre/fly198408p1-c27x-01.jpg)
I don't like the later, slottabased ones quite so much, but I have a couple (She-Devil and Sniper) already painted up and ready to go.
(http://www.solegends.com/citc/c010halforcs/c10halforcs-c3p22x-01.jpg)
And then there's the mounted hero and Mudak's mercenary maniacs ...
Meanwhile, I've been making some more progress on buildings - conscious that any efforts here will be rewarded in Song of Blades, Rogue Planet and Pulp Alley, etc., even if Mordheim ultimately falls flat for us:
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQ9qj5gQ2BQ5U1Ewcv0uok-QcZgd21R6-stAAh70HynQVy9SYgDPxZKM32jtxvogmICVz2TPDPRzltzGNJup7iXDq4Fuw_a6yhrs-g_D1Xa__r9-JzLKe9h556VJGjmPq08FLdN3XuD3fApcwx22lUj1HmIAuABsCxeITURVmI_qF19X9KbPWrKYlzWA/s1512/Ruin%20in%20progress.jpg)
-
I hope you post some pictures of the gangs when you get them together :) Excitedly reading along here.
For my own money, i can echo a lot of the experiences in this thread. In our group the problem was not so much the balance as what the game turned into at later stages of campaign-play.
The spiking lethality of crits, and volume of archer fire, along with punishing injury rules, meant that we ended up with very static and risk adverse games: Even if its a 1/12 chance to get crit on each shot, thats horrifying if it means you loose a troop its taken you 6 games to develop to be able to 'compete'.
It was balanced in that it was tense games that either player could 'win', but the actual gameplay ended up quite frustrating.
Funnily enough it was the same problem i have with frostgrave, in that it played out more like a wild west or sci-fi game than a fantasy game!
Cover hugging and tense line of sight checking and squad tactics to advance lol
but again, its also deeply fun and as you say, genrates intense excitement!
Mordheim is in many ways a monumental and epochal game.
I dont mean to be too dour on it, so hope this post doesnt come off like that! Just sharing some experiences :) Regardless i am always excited to see new old world-esque warbands and terrain, and especially mordheim!
And the ruins look splendid.
Makes me want to get back to logging what im working on myself too.
-
Just to inspire the folks who are going to give it a go, building terrain for Mordheim was probably my favourite part.
I hand-built all this stuff in about a week and a half - to be joined with the classic Mordheim houses/building that came from the starter box. I think all the effort I put into the project is why I was so put off (to the point that I haven't played it since 2017 and likely won't play it again, now having alternatives) when the game went sideways.
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dfjLQI2k0EY/WNF8yc-355I/AAAAAAAADOE/yMboDSoo6MsSl39vdM_9VMVt8jA61YlPgCLcB/s1600/MordheimTerrain%2B%25285%2529.JPG)
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Ns6NdakbhGo/WNF8w43t75I/AAAAAAAADN4/FkIiQh4HKT0kR92gQWM5xz4Kwo5T1QE_QCLcB/s1600/MordheimTerrain%2B%25281%2529.JPG)
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-q1Da1STRgtk/WNF8xPd0NtI/AAAAAAAADOA/EuxkcyZwcbMr9i3iTnw85AEbdefDpG16gCLcB/s1600/MordheimTerrain%2B%25282%2529.JPG)
I still have this terrain and use it for my other game, but it was really fun building chaotic stuff.
-
Great discussion chaps!
Those original C10 Half-Orcs are great, I have a few stashed away somewhere. They never really got used that much back in the day, perhaps because they didn’t quite fit in with any of our armies.
Elbows a great set of terrain - hope it gets use for other games.
-
I've tried using Mordheim in the past, never as a complete system (i.e. using the proper warbands, scenarios and campaign system), but as a means of playing historical Warhammer games in a skirmish format. For example, a few years ago I planned to use the Warhammer Ancient Battles profiles (particularly those from Chariot Wars) to play Biblical skirmishes, with Mordheim as the core rules system. Unfortunately I never saw it through.
I was very tempted to get back into Mordheim about a couple of months ago, this time with the idea of doing it properly. I planned to make two warbands (Cult of the Possessed and Undead) and managed to acquire suitable miniatures for both...but then I started to think about the aforementioned Warhammer "clunk" which, these days, sets my teeth on edge every time it comes to mind. That was enough to halt my plans.
After that, I quickly shifted gears to Forbidden Psalm, and so far I don't see myself looking back.
-
I've tried using Mordheim in the past, never as a complete system (i.e. using the proper warbands, scenarios and campaign system), but as a means of playing historical Warhammer games in a skirmish format. For example, a few years ago I planned to use the Warhammer Ancient Battles profiles (particularly those from Chariot Wars) to play Biblical skirmishes, with Mordheim as the core rules system. Unfortunately I never saw it through.
I was very tempted to get back into Mordheim about a couple of months ago, this time with the idea of doing it properly. I planned to make two warbands (Cult of the Possessed and Undead) and managed to acquire suitable miniatures for both...but then I started to think about the aforementioned Warhammer "clunk" which, these days, sets my teeth on edge every time it comes to mind. That was enough to halt my plans.
After that, I quickly shifted gears to Forbidden Psalm, and so far I don't see myself looking back.
Yeah, WAB Mordheim is a brilliant idea. You got hundreds of profiles and can play all those heroic skirmishes you always wanted…in theory.
In fact, we tried it with Bronze Age Greeks and Vikings. It was the Warhammer clunk as you called it that made the games pretty tedious, but also the rules themselves. You have to house rule so many things that it’s easier to use another rules system, like LotR SBG or SoBH, both of which are easier to convert.
What bothers me a lot with historical settings is that armor is way to ineffective. Homeric heroes all die like Achilles. With an arrow in their heel. And also swords are too expensive, so that without some more rules how to set up warbands or a GM, it’s not really fun to get clobbered by the peasants armed with clubs.
-
WAB Mordheim is a brilliant idea...
.…in theory.
There lies the crux of it; it can be done, but it introduces complications.
The biggest issue, I think, with importing "outside" material into Mordheim, such as the WAB: Chariot Wars example I mention above, is that it creates a rules "tapestry" with threads woven in from many different rulebooks that one has to consult to execute one's specific project.
I thought, at the time, that it would be a simple question of using profiles (stats etc.) from WAB: Chariot Wars, but using the rules from Mordheim (weapons included). Sounds very simple! I only need to consult two books, and once I've written down the profiles from WAB, I only need to refer to Mordheim for everything else.
Oh, but wait a minute...which point system are we using?
The profiles from Mordheim are costed a particular way (in the Mordheim currency of "gold crowns"), but you only get the prices for the official Mordheim characters and their corresponding stats; you most certainly do not get the prices for the soldier stats you're borrowing from WAB, because they're costed in a different currency (traditional "points" rather than "gold crowns").
Okay, no problem, how about we forget all about "gold crowns" and import the points system from WAB as well as the profiles?
Okay, but how are you going to pay for the weapons? In WAB, weapons come included with a soldier's profile; you don't get to buy them separately from an equipment menu, the way you do in Mordheim. What if you want to equip your Hebrew levies with javelins? Oh, Hebrews in WAB don't come with javelins. How much do javelins cost then, so I can add them? No idea!
Okay, so how about we forget the points system from WAB and go back to basics; let's import the points system from Warhammer Fantasy Battle 2nd Edition (1984), which breaks down the cost of each stat into its individual cost AND has separate costs for weapons. Yes, that could work!
So, now we're using the points system from WFB2E, the profiles from WAB, and all other rules from Mordheim? Yes, but there's more. Remember you wanted javelins for your Hebrew levies? And you want to use the weapon rules from Mordheim? Well, did you know that Mordheim doesn't have rules for javelins... UNLESS you also import the javelin rules from the Norse Explorers supplement.
So, now, all of a sudden, I've found myself cobbling together a historical warband from:
Mordheim (three PDFs)
Warhammer Ancient Battles: Chariot Wars (a physical book)
Warhammer Fantasy Battle 2nd Edition: Combat (another physical book)
Mordheim: Norse Explorers (another PDF)
And that's before I get into specialist units like Philistine giants and twin-mounted camel-riding Midianites (don't get me started on finding the exact rules for either of those).
For me, preparing any wargame project feels like walking a tightrope; keeping my interest/willpower up is a difficult task indeed and it doesn't take much for it to topple. Having to consult that many different publications to get what I want out of it (and finding myself getting muddled in the process) is guaranteed to cause frustration, which quickly leads to abandonment!
I'd rather have everything I need in one (or at most two) PDF(s)! And on that subject, Forbidden Psalm offers this, as well as warband advancements and many other aspects that have been discussed so far in this thread (such as weather conditions affecting ranged combat) all with a "grimdark" theme that is arguably "grimmer" and "darker" than Mordheim (albeit with a sprinkle of humour). It's also entirely soloable (as well as multiplayer) which is a huge plus for (mostly) secluded hermits such as myself! Oh, and there's no peculiar equipment restrictions either, and the table-size expectation (2ft x 2ft, as opposed to Mordheim's 4ft x 4ft) is much more manageable!
-
Elbows, those ruins are fantastic! Plenty of inspiration there!
Those original C10 Half-Orcs are great, I have a few stashed away somewhere. They never really got used that much back in the day, perhaps because they didn’t quite fit in with any of our armies.
It's weird - when they first came out, they had a Forces of Fantasy-style page in White Dwarf (http://www.solegends.com/citads1984a/198406/wd054p0101984067-01.png), which made them quite attractive as a Warhammer option, given the presence of up to 30 assassins, who had the advantages of elite stats, poisoned weapons and Frenzy. But that didn't survive into second or third edition, where half-orcs were essentially just humans with lower Int (from memory).
But they are such great figures! I like the fact that, despite their diverse gear, they're read to go as a unit with their skull-and-ribcage emblem.
After that, I quickly shifted gears to Forbidden Psalm, and so far I don't see myself looking back.
I'm working on the assumption that anything that can be used for one can be used for the other!
The 'Warhammer clunk' is definitely a consideration. The only justification I've ever been able to see for Warhammer's laborious sequence of rolls is that it does tell a little bit more of a story than most wargames: "It was only the chaos warriors' heavy armour that prevented them from taking casualties as the orcs unleashed their arrows ...".
I suppose Mordheim takes this a stage further, by having yet another roll if there's a wound and having even more detail: "Only his helmet prevented him from being stunned by the blow ...".
-
Oh, and there's no peculiar equipment restrictions either, and the table-size expectation (2ft x 2ft, as opposed to Mordheim's 4ft x 4ft) is much more manageable!
That's something I've been wondering: to what extent does Mordheim actually need a big table? I have a 6' x 4', but I'll obviously have terrain ready for 2' x 2' or 3' x 3' much earlier. From my experience with Warhammer, my suspicion would be that terrain density is more important than table size - which is not always the case; we've found that games of Dragon Rampant are much improved by having a full 4' of depth. But Mordheim's Warhammer-style movement is fairly slow - compared and contrast with Song of Blades and Heroes, for example.
Looking at Elbows' terrain, I can see one real advantage of SoBH in such an environment: the push-back combat outcome comes into its own when there are plenty of steep drops involved!
-
If I remember correctly 3x3 is ok and 4x4 is desired.
-
@ tikitang:
I get what you're saying, but in this instance I'm not sure I really agree.
Since combat is by individual model, and not by unit, the points for statlines and equipment are pretty consistent. So if an average human has a statline of 4-3-3-3-3-1-3-1-7, and doesn't have much/anything by way of special rules, then we can see from those entries in the official Mordheim warbands that they normally cost 25gc.
Similarly, equipment pretty much costs the same across warbands, so that's not really anything difficult to figure out either.
In fact, the only tricky bit to do, is to work out the cost of any special rules you may have/want - but again, using the official warbands as a guide, you should be able to make a very good guess about what they should cost first time around.
The 'Warhammer clunk' is definitely a consideration. The only justification I've ever been able to see for Warhammer's laborious sequence of rolls is that it does tell a little bit more of a story than most wargames: "It was only the chaos warriors' heavy armour that prevented them from taking casualties as the orcs unleashed their arrows ...".
I suppose Mordheim takes this a stage further, by having yet another roll if there's a wound and having even more detail: "Only his helmet prevented him from being stunned by the blow ...".
Lots of the "clunk" comes from the limited way there is to add variation to the games (which is somewhat necessary of you play a lot of them). Also, whilst GW games now roll (and re-roll) buckets-o-dice even for skirmish games, the older games generally only roll 1-2 dice per model for most occasions, so you need to string several rolls together to get some wider variety of outcome.
In combat specifically, it comes from the fact that statlines each go from theoretical 0-10 scales, but then everything is determined by a D6 roll (usually a straight roll at that). So you have to cross-reference WS on a table to find out your hit roll, cross-reference again on a different table for your wound roll, and then you might get an armour save and possibly another sort of non-armour save on top of that. In Mordheim, where armour is rare and limited, you normally just carry out the first two rolls, and sometimes a critical roll too. Then, if these are all successful, you also have a roll once more to find out if you are knocked down, suffer a light wounds, or are taken out, etc.
Of course, once you're familiar with the tables, and you don't need to keep looking up model stats or modifiers all the time, the game is a lot faster to play.
I get why Necromunda and Mordheim stuck to the mechanics of their parent games' rulesets, but re-writing them into something a bit more different would have probably produced a better and faster game.
That's something I've been wondering: to what extent does Mordheim actually need a big table? I have a 6' x 4', but I'll obviously have terrain ready for 2' x 2' or 3' x 3' much earlier. From my experience with Warhammer, my suspicion would be that terrain density is more important than table size - which is not always the case; we've found that games of Dragon Rampant are much improved by having a full 4' of depth. But Mordheim's Warhammer-style movement is fairly slow - compared and contrast with Song of Blades and Heroes, for example.
Looking at Elbows' terrain, I can see one real advantage of SoBH in such an environment: the push-back combat outcome comes into its own when there are plenty of steep drops involved!
You can get away with 3'x3' if the table is denser, because movement is not necessarily linear, and LOS should be often interrupted. And generally, more terrain (and at least some variety in terrain type) is also better. Some scenarios do need a 4' long distance though (like the scenario "Street Fight" for example). Some fast and agile units may dominate more however, and with denser terrain ranged weapons will be affected in various ways too (so the Long Rifle will be less useful, but the blunderbuss or sling more so).
And, I suppose it depends on what your terrain is actually like too. Ruined buildings, 1-2 stories above ground level, and arranged in some semblance of streets and alleys, and with some walkways between here and there and a few ladders or stairs inside buildings, is how the game was designed and playtested. If your terrain is sparse, or randomly plopped onto the table, or is more like an adventure/assault course with walkways and ladders everywhere, then you may well get different results.
One more thing to think about too - as players' models gain experience over the course of several games, they will become more reluctant to risk them on "unnecessary" manoeuvres that could result in death or injury. So fewer and lower jumps/climbs, avoiding high walkways or ledges, etc., unless they have a skill to assist them in that activity.
-
@ tikitang:
I get what you're saying, but in this instance I'm not sure I really agree.
Since combat is by individual model, and not by unit, the points for statlines and equipment are pretty consistent. So if an average human has a statline of 4-3-3-3-3-1-3-1-7, and doesn't have much/anything by way of special rules, then we can see from those entries in the official Mordheim warbands that they normally cost 25gc.
Similarly, equipment pretty much costs the same across warbands, so that's not really anything difficult to figure out either.
I think, tikitang (and I) were referring to the difficulty of translating WAB profiles into Mordheim without going through all this trouble. In my experience it’s rather time consuming and doesn’t really give the feeling you had hoped for. Plus: there is s lot of stuff in WAB for which Mordheim simply has no equivalent, like for instance large shields, thrusting spears, javelins etc.
-
That's something I've been wondering: to what extent does Mordheim actually need a big table?
While 4’x4’ is recommended for one-on-one games & 6’x4’ for multiplayer ones, smaller shouldn’t be a problem. I wouldn’t go less than 4’x4’ for multiplayer games involving more than four warbands though.
Looking at Elbows' terrain, I can see one real advantage of SoBH in such an environment: the push-back combat outcome comes into its own when there are plenty of steep drops involved!
Yes, though Mordheim’s initiative test for models knocked down or stunned near an edge adds some risk to going high.
-
While 4’x4’ is recommended for one-on-one games & 6’x4’ for multiplayer ones, smaller shouldn’t be a problem. I wouldn’t go less than 4’x4’ for multiplayer games involving more than four warbands though.
Yes, that makes sense.
Yes, though Mordheim’s initiative test for models knocked down or stunned near an edge adds some risk to going high.
Ah - I'd missed that! I see it now, and I like it - great rule. The initiative test in general seems to be one of the real innovations in Mordheim that distinguishes it from Warhammer (along with the injury charts). I suspect it may be the direct ancestor of SoBH's quality test.
-
I think, tikitang (and I) were referring to the difficulty of translating WAB profiles into Mordheim without going through all this trouble. In my experience it’s rather time consuming and doesn’t really give the feeling you had hoped for.
Exactly this.
Trying to make Mordheim work with Warhammer Ancient Battles, for the purposes of historical skirmishing (which so far is my only experiencing of playing Mordheim), sounds like it could be a great idea, but actually involves a lot more fiddling about than I'm willing to engage in, particularly if you obsess over exact point values and the use of the exact stat-lines of the various soldier types as published in the various WAB supplements.
However, if you ignore WAB entirely and just use the warrior profiles already included in the Mordheim book (and their respective cost in "gold crowns"), but then use models from whichever historical period you fancy, then yes, that would be a much easier way to play 'WABheim', I suppose, though personally wouldn't satisfy me as much as successfully incorporating WAB material, providing one has the patience to undertake the complicated method already outlined.
there is a lot of stuff in WAB for which Mordheim simply has no equivalent, like for instance large shields, thrusting spears, javelins etc.
Javelins are included in the Norse Explorers (https://broheim.net/downloads/warbands/unofficial/Norse%20Explorers.pdf) warband supplement, but that's yet another PDF to consult. I know that's not a big deal to some, but I really don't like having to pull so many different rules from so many documents.
But, it's important to stress that all of the above is only an issue when attempting to import aspects of other Warhammer rulesets into Mordheim, which I suspect is a rather niche activity that I'm not sure is particularly widespread. In terms of playing the game as written, which a small part of me would still quite like to attempt some day, my issue there is mostly:
[1] the clunky rules [models spending most of their time standing around trying to roll 4+]
[2] the inexplicable restrictions of certain weapons to certain factions [a problem with Warhammer in general ever since 4th Edition came out in 1992]
[3] the suggested play area [4ft x 4ft filled to the brim with multi-level buildings is just too much of an ask for somebody in my particular circumstances]
In my experience, a better (but very old-school) solution for skirmishing Warhammer than Mordheim is using the Combat rules from page 115 of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 1st Edition (1986) as a standalone skirmishing system, without using any of the RPG components from the rest of the book.
To do this, you simply take the profiles of models you wish to fight with from Warhammer Fantasy Battle 2nd Edition Battle Bestiary (to ascertain the point values), translate them into Roleplay mode using page 213 of the Roleplay book, set up a 1ft x 1ft play area (yes, literally that small) and have at it. I would describe these rules as "crunchy" rather than "clunky", though they do take a bit of studying to fully comprehend, and the old 1980s text format makes that a bit more challenging. Although that does require a bit of brainpower to execute, particularly in comparison with more modern streamlined rulesets, it doesn't feel like as much work as trying to compile a cohesive set of rules from multiple sources, like the WAB/Mordheim method I described earlier.
That said, given the particular pressures on me for time, space, and mental energy, I'd still opt for a simpler, more modern system for my grimdark skirmishing needs!
-
Some of the things that helped reduce bad experiences in O.G. Necromunda vs. Mordheim, in my mind:
- Armor was very rare, so armor saves were almost never an issue.
- No facing issues, so no flank and rear modifications.
- Almost everyone had a gun, so keeping to cover, sneaking into position before shooting, and so on felt right, as opposed to what Affun described earlier.
- The base game was innately pretty balanced, since outside of skills all of the gangs had access to the same stuff. Sure, Goliaths and Cawdor lost out a bit due to one or two skills not being very useful in Strength and Ferocity, respectively, but not enough to make too much difference.
- Barring a couple of specific, easily house-ruled abuse options (Scavvy cannibalism; Redemptionist flamers-on-everything), the Outlanders gangs weren't overpowered, either.
I imagine a Mordheim game with all human factions (or a WAB conversion) would probably be closer to my Necromunda experiences.
-
Trying to make Mordheim work with Warhammer Ancient Battles, for the purposes of historical skirmishing (which so far is my only experiencing of playing Mordheim), sounds like it could be a great idea, but actually involves a lot more fiddling about than I'm willing to engage in, particularly if you obsess over exact point values and the use of the exact stat-lines of the various soldier types as published in the various WAB supplements.
You might like to try the skirmish rules from WHFB 6th core rulebook then (which were later expanded on a little and released as their own free supplement PDF IIRC).
It's basically Mordheim-lite and is designed to build forces directly out of existing army books; it mostly details how to select the forces, and how to adjust the core rules to suit individuals - everything else, like weapon rules, unit profiles, etc, is all taken directly from the rule and army books. So I'm pretty certain you could use that as-is for WAB, with no conversion necessary.
Of course, it's a skirmish game only, so I don't think there are any rules for levelling up models (at least, that I can remember...). Since it's the levelling-up that usually breaks these games anyway, you may want to skip that and just have a series of linked games instead, a bit like a mini-campaign.
-
You might like to try the skirmish rules from WHFB 6th core rulebook then (which were later expanded on a little and released as their own free supplement PDF IIRC).
It's basically Mordheim-lite and is designed to build forces directly out of existing army books; it mostly details how to select the forces, and how to adjust the core rules to suit individuals - everything else, like weapon rules, unit profiles, etc, is all taken directly from the rule and army books. So I'm pretty certain you could use that as-is for WAB, with no conversion necessary.
You're right; it's basically Mordheim without the special weapon rules, warband progression rules, and without the specific Mordheim warbands.
I actually tried that one before, but found some of the Psychology rules confusing. I made a thread about it on LAF at the time (this was some years ago) and I remember everyone saying: "Just use Mordheim!" lol
-
I played a WFB Skirmish match yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. The host took a Skaven force and I played a vanilla chaos warband using his figures. Pretty much all low level mooks on both sides, with one hero, one wizard and one special figure on each side. Neither side had archers, but that might not have mattered as there was lots of terrain. Quality won over quantity that time but it was a fairly close match. It was a fun afternoon, anyway!
-
Love the terrain!
In the context of the discussion of game rules, what does "granular" mean?
I think one reason we were never much bothered by some potential imbalances between Mordheim warbands is that after the first two or three years, we mostly played collaboratively. It was a blast.
-Michael
-
Love the terrain!
In the context of the discussion of game rules, what does "granular" mean?
I think one reason we were never much bothered by some potential imbalances between Mordheim warbands is that after the first two or three years, we mostly played collaboratively. It was a blast.
-Michael
Playing cooperatively solves most of the issues discussed here. You can have a great time fighting endless hordes of zombies and trying to solve a mission.
Granularity: many modern rule sets eliminate the statistics to the absolute necessity; Somg of Blades and Heroes or A Fistful of Lead, for instance have just two stats, Dracula’s America even just one. The rest is solved with special rules. That works very well in one off games.
In a campaign, however, when you want to slowly progress from a band of nobodies to mighty champions. Mordheim allows some skills and advancement in M, WS, BS, S, T, I, A and Ld.
-
Well, the one-shot ended up not going ahead (instead, we played Cards Against Humanity - the family version! - with my kids until the early hours). But there's a good chance that the same players will be around for a full day's gaming in the summer. Meanwhile, we've got a six- or seven-player campaign scheduled to kick off once the Six Nations is out of the way.
I've been doing a lot more delving into the rules, and I generally like what I see. In particular, I like the initiative tests (which neatly make Skaven agile and orcs/goblins clumsy and hapless) and that spellcasters roll to see what spells they have for a given session. I'm also quite impressed with the weapon rules: the pros and cons of spears, greatswords and flails (for example) all seem quite neatly balanced, even if they don't always make much real-world sense (in that typical RPG way).
I'm not sure about the dual-wielding advantage, but on the other hand, your chance of causing an extra wound isn't that much different from the chance of a shield blocking a wound in a typical exchange (1 in 4 chance of a wound, assuming no armour save vs 1 in 6 chance of a save). Factor in armour in melee and the protection a shield offers against missiles, and the shield isn't that that undervalued, comparatively, I feel - though I see that some people increase the shield save to 5 or 6, which might be something we consider later. We'll start 'rules as written', though.
I've also played out a few little clashes during coffee breaks to familiarise myself with the combat rules. Despite all the rolling, they seem quite quick to resolve, and I can see that they throw up tactical choices that didn't occur in Warhammer (e.g. finish off a downed foe or deal with one who's still standing.
I do think WYSIWYG is going to be a big factor in avoiding min-maxing in our campaign. A review of my Skaven suggests that almost none have no armour (and the few slingers certainly do) and none have clubs. The orcs, meanwhile, are almost universally armoured. Even finding unarmoured goblins (to conform to Mordheim equipment options) is proving harder than expected! But I may finally have found a use for the odd goblin fanatic that I have in the leadpile!
-
finding unarmoured goblins (to conform to Mordheim equipment options) is proving harder than expected!
I assume you're referring to your own collection here?
-
I assume you're referring to your own collection here?
Yes - I'll be able to muster enough without problem eventually, but it's amazing how many classic Citadel goblins are sporting a mail shirt at the very least. I'd have no problem fielding dozens with light armour and shield!
-
But unarmoured goblins can certainly be found quite easily online if your own collection fails to yield anything.
Miniature Heroes sell a range called Mannequin Miniatures featuring goblins who are armed but not armoured (many of whom are even shirtless) and of course Foundry/Warmonger do a decent range of goblins all clad in the classic HeroQuest fashion of an open waistcoat and a pair of shorts!
-
Out of interest, what skirmish system would you recommend as a good alternative specifically for the campaign aspect?
Thud and Blunder. Came out a couple years back. My group organized a 4-6 player eight-game campaign around it and I thought it worked great for building warbands and advancing them over the course of the campaign.
-
But unarmoured goblins can certainly be found quite easily online if your own collection fails to yield anything.
Miniature Heroes sell a range called Mannequin Miniatures featuring goblins who are armed but not armoured (many of whom are even shirtless) and of course Foundry/Warmonger do a decent range of goblins all clad in the classic HeroQuest fashion of an open waistcoat and a pair of shorts!
Yes, definitely. But I'm trying quite hard to avoid buying anything extra for this project; the experience of organising (almost) all my miniatures over the winter has been quite a lesson in that regard!
One thing that projects like this are good for is stamping down on "morbid settism" - the inclination that I (and I'm sure many others) sometimes feel to keep miniatures of the same manufacturer and period together. I increasingly feel that that's a recipe for paralysis, so am happy to be led away from it by the need to pluck (say) unarmoured goblins from various of the labelled boxes that now make up the lead and plastic pile. I suspect I'll end up with a mix of Perry night goblins, modern plastic night goblins, ugly multipart 'goblin regiment' plastics and the newish Mantic goblins. For the orcs, I've already got a mix of various Citadel/GW, Heartbreaker and Warmonger nasties on the painting table. And for the half-orc "Middenheimers", I'm finding that kitbashed Oathmark/Frostgrave/GW/Perry plastics look good alongside the old Aly Morrison classics.
(I might subscribe to a bit of morbid settism with the Morrison half-orcs, but only because they have very distinctive insignia on their shields.)
Thud and Blunder. Came out a couple years back. My group organized a 4-6 player eight-game campaign around it and I thought it worked great for building warbands and advancing them over the course of the campaign.
I've just dug out the PDF for another look. We played a couple of games of it after it came out and enjoyed them, but I suspect we just scratched the surface.
One thing that's clear from looking at Mordheim tables is that any effort spent on building lots of ruins and walkways won't be wasted: that kind of terrain is pretty optimal for most good skirmish games (SoBH, Battlesworn, Pulp Alley, Rogue Planet, etc., etc.). In particular, narrow alleys and ledges are perfect for SoBH, given the Ambush and Push-Back rules.
-
One thing that projects like this are good for is stamping down on "morbid settism" - the inclination that I (and I'm sure many others) sometimes feel to keep miniatures of the same manufacturer and period together.
Going to be honest here; I had no idea this was actually a serious "thing" that held anybody back in any way! o_o
I mean, there's a small amount of logic in using miniatures that were made for a game system for that game - one assumes that they fit the equipment/setting/etc, and it can even be used as a "limit" on a collection. But even then, people having been using whatever they like/was available in games since I can remember! If one person used Kev Adam orcs, another used Brian Nelson orcs, and a third used used some puddle-based orcs from the 80s, I really wouldn't even blink since this is exactly what people did back when Mordheim was current.
Any, really, if your orcs/goblins all have a mail shirt, and you don't have any mail shirts in your roster, you just do what everyone has ever done since time immemorial - you hand-wave it, and you simply tell your opponent what's what. If this is too confusing, you can simply paint the non-mail in brown to look like coarse or pebbled leather, and keep the metallics for the models who actually do wear mail. <shrug>
-
One thing that projects like this are good for is stamping down on "morbid settism" - the inclination that I (and I'm sure many others) sometimes feel to keep miniatures of the same manufacturer and period together.
Not sure if this is a problem that needs stamping down? I am a full-blown "morbid settist" myself by that definition. For aesthetic reasons I find it most satisfying to keep miniatures of the same sculptor and period together. I'm not a fan of too much eclecticism, as I find it visually jarring!
-
Going to be honest here; I had no idea this was actually a serious "thing" that held anybody back in any way! o_o
It's certainly not a serious thing! ;)
I mean, there's a small amount of logic in using miniatures that were made for a game system for that game - one assumes that they fit the equipment/setting/etc, and it can even be used as a "limit" on a collection. But even then, people having been using whatever they like/was available in games since I can remember! If one person used Kev Adam orcs, another used Brian Nelson orcs, and a third used used some puddle-based orcs from the 80s, I really wouldn't even blink since this is exactly what people did back when Mordheim was current.
I don't hold with that logic at all - hence my lack of interest in Malifaux, despite all the good things I hear about it (I mean, I know I could proxy things, but it seems a bit of a chore ...). I very much take a "use what you've got" approach to all games, and the idea of having to use "official" figures is anathema to me.
No, the "morbid settist" urge is something that I think quite a lot of people feel: the lingering notion that all the miniatures of a particular sort really ought to be based and painted in the same way. I certainly feel that urge, though I often take action to crush it! ;)
An example: I have a few Marauder goblins lurking in the lead pile. I do have a creeping inclination to keep them all together, paint and base-wise, but I'm going to stomp all over that by plucking out unarmoured ones for the Mordheim project, where they'll mingle with Citadel and whatever else fits, gear-wise, and be based on muddy, 'grimdark' rounds. The armoured ones will probably end up on lighter-coloured square MDF bases for KoW, etc. Or they might end up with the grimdark basing for other skirmish games - but that will come later.
On the orc examples: I'm using Perry, Adams, Morrison/Carden and Nelson in the same warband - uniting them with the paint scheme and basing (and in some cases, mixing elements from different plastic kits). I love seeing miniatures by different manufacturers and designers mixed together - as in Bryan Ansell's famous chaos army or Spooktalker's wonderful orc warband.
Any, really, if your orcs/goblins all have a mail shirt, and you don't have any mail shirts in your roster, you just do what everyone has ever done since time immemorial - you hand-wave it, and you simply tell your opponent what's what. If this is too confusing, you can simply paint the non-mail in brown to look like coarse or pebbled leather, and keep the metallics for the models who actually do wear mail. <shrug>
No, I'll be able to find plenty without armour (though it might take a bit of a search!), so I'll stick with WYSIWYG - within reason: if one or two members of a five-strong henchman group have helmets, I'm happy to hand wave that or the equivalent.
Essentially, I see WYSIWYG as a prompt for creativity - whether that's using up miniatures that were languishing in search of a project (or because of morbid-settist impulses!) or kitbashing to get to the desired result (my orc leader is underway with a mix of GW goblin, orc and 90s black-orc bits in use so far, and I've got an orc pit fighter in progress too).
With Mordheim specifically, the other point is that WYSIWYG drives interesting and non-optimised roster choices. An example: I'm going to use the half-orc thief (bottom row, second from right) in my mercenary warband:
(http://www.solegends.com/citc/c010halforcs/c2c10halforcsx-01.jpg)
Now, he's promising Mordheim material: no armour or shield, a sword and dagger and a bow on his back. But wait! He's also carrying a huge two-handed sword (you see it between his legs in the drawing). So, if we're going strict WYSIWYG, he can't be a marksman. Sure, the two-hander is eminently handwaveable, but what if we run with it? He can't be a marksman, but he can be a youngblood with a rather extensive loadout: sword, two-handed sword and bow. And, actually, it gives him some interesting combat options. Fighting Skaven (or charged by anyone)? Draw the two-hander as you won't have the initiative anyway. In other circumstances, or if survival is at a premium? Go with the sword (for the parry!) or sword and dagger (it's a moot point, but I'd presume that all the Mordheim characters with two melee weapons still keep their free dagger, especially as the rules stress that daggers need not be visible and characters have one to start with, in which light "can be armed ..." would suggest additional gear).
I reckon that approach is ultimately more interesting - and that half-orc does look a little less grizzled than the rest of the group ...
-
Not sure if this is a problem that needs stamping down? I am a full-blown "morbid settist" myself by that definition. For aesthetic reasons I find it most satisfying to keep miniatures of the same sculptor and period together. I'm not a fan of too much eclecticism, as I find it visually jarring!
Yes, it's definitely a real (if not serious) thing! ;)
Each to their own, but I always find warbands/armies made from the works of different designers more interesting - and thus a good reason to combat my own morbid-settist tendencies. I mentioned Bryan Ansell's chaos army above - to me, it's an old-school marvel (http://eldritchepistles.blogspot.com/2013/09/bryans-cabinets-of-chaos-mystery.html)!
And just look at Spooktalker's amazing orc warband (https://www.flickr.com/photos/64202339@N00/9119513976)! I think there are five designers involved and there are quite significant evolutions in the style of at least two of them.
The other point is that, barring conversions, single-designer/period warbands can often look quite samey, regardless of painting: a lot of Warcry and Underworlds warbands end up like this - which makes the Garden of Hecate-style conversions so refreshing.
-
I'm sorry, but I regret posting anything at all now; I've completely lost the thread regarding what point you're even trying to make. So, I'll leave you to it; with best and kindly wishes for your project, and I hope you have fun! :)
-
I'm sorry, but I regret posting anything at all now; I've completely lost the thread regarding what point you're even trying to make. So, I'll leave you to it; with best and kindly wishes for your project, and I hope you have fun! :)
Thanks, but I don't see that you've anything to regret, and you've made some great and informative posts in an interesting thread. So I hope you won't bow out! :)
Put more simply, my point is just that WYSIWYG/RAW is a great spur for creativity. A hunt for (say) unarmoured goblins may well throw up more interesting choices (figure selection and kitbashing) than just sweeping together all the Citadel ones and ignoring armour where they have it. Necessity is the mother of invention - or the advantages of a limited palette!
And by the same token, WYSIWYG can enforce more unusual (and interesting) roster choices, as in the half-orc example.
-
I do agree that Major Gilbear's points have certainly generated interesting discussion and food for thought, and are therefore valuable to this thread!
my point is just that WYSIWYG/RAW is a great spur for creativity.
And by the same token, WYSIWYG can enforce more unusual (and interesting) roster choices, as in the half-orc example.
I also agree with all of the above, 100%, and it is precisely that philosophy that drives my own decision-making in warband construction, albeit I tend to purchase miniatures for projects rather than scouring through a vast collection of stuff I already have (mostly because I don't have a collection outside of my specific project!)
BUT, I'd also argue that sometimes MORBID SETTISM™ can produce creativity in its own way.
To be clear, I'm not talking about purchasing official miniatures for a specific ruleset, like Malifaux. I really don't like that sort of thing at all, no matter how good the rules may be. I definitely prefer systems which encourage you to choose the miniatures you want. But even with that freedom, I do like a consistency of design and style (though the modern GW miniatures are most definitely not to my taste), so once I find a sculptor whose work I like, I tend to try and stay within their range as much as possible. But that very limitation can generate creativity in the same fashion as the WYSIWYG "enforcement" you speak of. Self-imposed restrictions can often produce more interesting results than total freedom.
For example, you may recall me mentioning that before I decided to go down the road of Forbidden Psalm, I was strongly considering Mordheim as my next project. I went as far as purchasing a warband of zombies, an undead wolf, a necromancer and a (fully armoured) vampire to be my Undead warband, and for aesthetic/scale reasons, and in true Morbid Settist fashion, I purchased these from the same sculptor as the warband of cultists I already owned (which I planned to use for a Cult of the Possessed warband).
But when faced with the various frustrations of Mordheim (such as the suggested table size [too large], equipment limitations [why?!] and the amount of terrain required [yikes!]) I was turned off and decided to focus on FP instead. After switching rules, I wasn't really sure what to do with the Undead warband I had just purchased. Sure, In the Footsteps of the Mad Wizard allows you to field specifically undead warbands, but in truth I didn't really want to field an undead warband in FP!
As such, this weekend I came up with the idea of 'resurrecting' the zombies and turning them back into living, breathing human beings, with the aid of green stuff! So, I've been busy over the last couple of days patching up exposed skulls, exposed ribs, ruptured bellies and torn flesh to look alive again. That's been a very interesting and creative experience and has given me immense satisfaction to do. And yet, it wouldn't have happened if I'd allowed myself the freedom of choosing miniatures from a different sculptor/manufacturer to be an opposing warband (which I wouldn't have wanted anyway, as they just wouldn't have looked right).
-
BUT, I'd also argue that sometimes MORBID SETTISM™ can produce creativity in its own way.
To be clear, I'm not talking about purchasing official miniatures for a specific ruleset, like Malifaux. I really don't like that sort of thing at all, no matter how good the rules may be. I definitely prefer systems which encourage you to choose the miniatures you want. But even with that freedom, I do like a consistency of design and style (though the modern GW miniatures are most definitely not to my taste), so once I find a sculptor whose work I like, I tend to try and stay within their range as much as possible. But that very limitation can generate creativity in the same fashion as the WYSIWYG "enforcement" you speak of. Self-imposed restrictions can often produce more interesting results than total freedom.
Yes, I suppose that's really the nub of it: restricted choices often lead to interesting outcomes.
As such, this weekend I came up with the idea of 'resurrecting' the zombies and turning them back into living, breathing human beings, with the aid of green stuff! So, I've been busy over the last couple of days patching up exposed skulls, exposed ribs, ruptured bellies and torn flesh to look alive again. That's been a very interesting and creative experience and has given me immense satisfaction to do. And yet, it wouldn't have happened if I'd allowed myself the freedom of choosing miniatures from a different sculptor/manufacturer to be an opposing warband (which I wouldn't have wanted anyway, as they just wouldn't have looked right).
Ha! That's a brilliant - if bonkers - idea: bravo! And, actually, it's not that far from the ghouls-into-dregs process that I've seen some people go through for Mordheim. I can see how you might get a suitably doomed-looking bunch for Forbidden Psalm in that way.
-
Put more simply, my point is just that WYSIWYG/RAW is a great spur for creativity. A hunt for (say) unarmoured goblins may well throw up more interesting choices (figure selection and kitbashing) than just sweeping together all the Citadel ones and ignoring armour where they have it. Necessity is the mother of invention - or the advantages of a limited palette!
We’ve used Mordheim rules a lot with Oldhammer figures and with some ranges it certainly can be a challenge to find figures that aren’t well armoured and armed by Mordheim standards. We solved this ‘problem’ in various ways. For a Realms of Chaos warbands campaign weekend, we increased the GC available for warband creation. We’ve also halved the price of light and heavy armour on occasion.
With regards to equipment restrictions, we often simply ignore them and take the approach that you pay for the equipment on the figure. Ogre bodyguard hired sword with a halberd? Fine. Warrior Priest with a flail? Cool.
-
I can see how you might get a suitably doomed-looking bunch for Forbidden Psalm in that way.
That's exactly what it's going to look like when it's finished: a bunch of miserable wretches eking out the last drops of existence before the Seventh Misery occurs, with battered shields, scrappy weapons, missing shoes, ripped trousers and worn-out faces.
The only thing I have absolutely no idea how to do is paint rust, which I think will be a requirement for the authentic look!
-
We’ve used Mordheim rules a lot with Oldhammer figures and with some ranges it certainly can be a challenge to find figures that aren’t well armoured and armed by Mordheim standards. We solved this ‘problem’ in various ways. For a Realms of Chaos warbands campaign weekend, we increased the GC available for warband creation. We’ve also halved the price of light and heavy armour on occasion.
Those sound very good ideas - and the RoC campaign sounds terrific!
A lunchtime rummage yielded a few suitably unarmoured goblins - and no fewer than three goblin fanatics! As those are likely to prove short-lived, I'm pleased to have a few on hand.
With regards to equipment restrictions, we often simply ignore them and take the approach that you pay for the equipment on the figure. Ogre bodyguard hired sword with a halberd? Fine. Warrior Priest with a flail? Cool.
Yup, the equipment-list restrictions are the one part of the RAW that I'm inclined to ditch from the outset - or at least allow WYSIWYG to overrule it. There are a fair few nice Kev Adams orcs with black-powder weapons out there for one thing! And allowing orcs to have clubs doesn't seem outrageous (though was that an oversight that was fixed later?).
One thing I haven't seen rules for in the various Skaven lists is the good old warpfire thrower. Might have to house-rule something for that!
-
That's exactly what it's going to look like when it's finished: a bunch of miserable wretches eeking out the last drops of existence before the Seventh Misery occurs, with battered shields, scrappy weapons, missing shoes, ripped trousers and worn-out faces.
The only thing I have absolutely no idea how to do is paint rust, which I think will be a requirement for the authentic look!
The Citadel rust paint is pretty good. You can either paint the metal dark brown to start and slather on the rust or paint it in a normal iron/steel fashion and then add lots of it. And then pick out scratches and edges in silver.
-
... allowing orcs to have clubs doesn't seem outrageous (though was that an oversight that was fixed later?).
Yes, the club was added to the Orc equipment list in one of the Mordheim Rules Reviews.
-
One thing I haven't seen rules for in the various Skaven lists is the good old warpfire thrower. Might have to house-rule something for that!
Okay, okay, I'll help! :)
Skaven Clan Skryre Rat Ogre has a Warpfire thrower in Town Cryer magazine #25:
Range 6", S4, Sv-1
Special rules: Jet of Flame. Draw a line 6" long x 2" wide. All models in its path are hit on a 4+, with no modifier. Additionally, the thrower causes fire damage as per the Brazier Iron on page 85 of the 2002 Mordheim Annual)
Should be easy enough to treat the weapon team as one model, with those rules. You could also roll a D6 each time it fires and on a 1, the team counts as having shot themselves instead as the weapon explodes. Whether the weapon is then lost, or repaired in time for the next game, I'll let you decide.
It should be noted that Mordheim Skaven are Clan Eshin though, not Skryre. ;)
-
Excellent! That's just the ticket - much obliged! And blowing up on a 1 sounds about right.
And yes: it will have to be an inter-clan loan or something!
-
it will have to be an inter-clan loan or something!
It's the Skaven; more likely to be an inter-clan theft!
-
Especially Clan Eshin. Although, Clan Skryre are shrewd businessrats, renting out their infamous creations to other clans.
-
businessrats
This word needs to be used more often!
-
Another suggestion that might reduce effectiveness of shooting.
1 Spotting roll - every shot requires the shooter to spot the target. After all they are not sitting still and there is a lot of rubble (we just model a minor amount of it, all the rubble from the ruins must be somewhere). This can be modified by distance, actual cover on the table, and environmental conditions.) ( Battleground - WWII uses a similar mechanism)
2 Reduce the strength of missile weapons by -1 at range bands ...... half distance. The air resistance in the area might be high due to the shardstone dust in the area.
Skipper
-
Those are great ideas! Our first game has been pushed back until May; we'll probably go rules as written for that and then see what we want to tweak after that.
One thing that occurs to me (not least because I just uncovered a whole load of partly painted Renaissance-era fighters that I'd been prepping for En Garde a while back ...) is that Mordheim could possibly do with another type of armour. So rather than just light and heavy, you'd have light (6 save), heavy (5 or 6) and full plate (4,5 or 6). And of course, full plate with shield would be 3, 4, 5 or 6.
I can see a few advantages in that. First, we know it works (think of space marines in 40K). Second, it models the sort of armour that Citadel miniatures tend to have more accurately. Is that orc with a long hauberk in light or heavy armour? What about the guy with a padded jack? What about a mail shirt with vambraces and greaves? And third, it means that your 'tanks' with full plate and shields will have a decent chance of getting through a volley of missile fire.
-
Personally, I’d be reluctant to further nerf shooting in order to avoid advantaging hand-to-hand monsters like The Possessed too much. Even if you don’t restrict the number of shooters per warband, dense terrain, sound tactics and good scenario choice should be enough to stop shooting becoming a problem.
Regarding armour, I think Mordheim already has the bases covered with toughened leathers, light armour, heavy armour plus its Ithilmar and Gromril variants. You could use the Gromril rules and cost for full plate. If you want it to slow the wearer down, reduce the cost to say 100 GC and use heavy armour’s -1 penalty to movement when combined with a shield.
-
Hooray to those ideas! The armor is something we have houseruled for quite some time to adequately represent all those knights walking around in metal.
Spotting roles sound like a good idea. Never tried them. Maybe limit them to targets that are actually in cover or whose base touches cover?
We’ve been playing with ammo (6/model) and that also worked fine and allowed for cool moments when Legolas needs to do knifework…
The disadvantage is of course a little bookkeeping. We used mini d6 next to the models.