*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 05, 2021, 07:03:25 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1483753
  • Total Topics: 103682
  • Online Today: 368
  • Online Ever: 1675
  • (December 28, 2020, 04:48:59 PM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: Oathmark - Who's Playing?  (Read 23616 times)

Offline BZ

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 445
  • https://oathgrave.blogspot.com/
    • Oathgrave
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #525 on: January 23, 2021, 10:05:20 AM »
I'm of the opposite opinion generally. Absolutely the rules feel like a good take on the classic Warhammer engine, but it is so refreshing to see a mass battle game that isn't just Warhammer again. If we are to add another race to the game my vote would be for Halflings as I think they fit nicely into the more Tolkien/Early Medieval fantasy feel.

I think that the world of Oathmark (the Marches) is a pretty big world, with a very free-to-imagine history, which is able to integrate a lot of stories, races and different places. It isnt as closed as the Old World with its official fluff. I can imagine here colorful lizardmen with aztek/inka feeling and floating pyramides, and tolkienesque, dark age, low(er) fantasy kingdoms as well. Because why not? And the good thing in this free world (did I mentioned how much I love the mixed armies?), that you can use, what you like, and ignore, what you dont like. As long, as balanced rules support it... That is, why I think that official rules for more races would be needed. It could attract a lot of people, but most not scare off anybody. Would you stop playing Oathmark, if there would be a new lizardmen faction in the next supplement?
I good example is another great game from the author/designer: Frostgrave. Do I like that demons are coming to Felstad in the last supplement? Not really. Do I have to use it? Absolutely not. Does it limit me in anything, does it change the games I play? Clearly not. So do I like the supplement? Yes, because it widens the world of Frostgrave, attracts new players, lets my beloved system grow bigger and live longer!
I also like the idea of halflings in Oathmark, but to be honest, Im not fully convinced, if they could fill an independent army list... I would love to take them as auxiliary troops, but not sure if they are interesting enough to make a whole army of them. BUT! As I wrote before, its a free universe, so, may I like them or not, may I find them interesting enough or not, there is for sure place for them! There is a figure of speech in my native language: Let every flower bloom!

GW in their run up to releasing news that the Old World was returning let it be known that the old type square base was making a come back so I would imagine that the game will use 28mm figures?
Its good to see new games systems on the market even if they are not something I would have a go at myself...though some of the Oathmark figures are starting to look very nice. I do hope that their world expands as one never knows what figures may turn up and how they could be used in existing collections.

I could not imagine, that GW would make an in-house cannibalization of players with another 28mm fantasy battle game... If it still would be something like that, I think it would be like the Horus Heresy for 40k: a very similar ruleset but with more exclusive (and even more expensive) miniatures. And that would be not a real successor of WHFB, neither a competitor for Oathmark.

Offline Ultravanillasmurf

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 7698
    • Ultravanillasmurf
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #526 on: January 23, 2021, 05:35:48 PM »
I am not so sure that Oathmark needs loads of additional figure types, what is probably more useful are some (un)official mappings of other game's various figures.

Each new figure/unit type needs to be tested in battle against a representative selection of opponents. What we do not want is the apparent arms race that has blighted various games where the most recent releases are better than their predecessors. This takes time and reduces the time available to create new stuff.

Not having my second edition WHFB books to hand (and there being plenty added afterwards), I am really unaware of the USPs of the various WHFB races and I would not want to offend anyone who thinks I am slighting their chosen faction.

Skinks - Mapped to Goblins

I am not saying that there are no gaps in the available figure stats.

Beyond the absence of figure portable crossbows (even though the technology is available at artillery scale), I would like to see berserker types (high Charge, Wild Charge but low Defence) for Humans, Elves, Dwarfs and orcs (there is a box of GW Witch Elves in the loft somewhere) plus for my Northmen army. I would also like to see Pike (I have an Empire Regiment box with ten archers and twenty two handed spear), with lower activation (well drilled) and improved Brace (remove two levels of Charge).

My (current) armies are oriented towards colder climes (with the GOT influence toward Human vs Human with some additions and the official Oathmark ranges).

However, after looking at the boat rules in Battlesworn (plus reading GRRM's pre-GOT book and the thread on here), I have been thinking of a Ghost Archipelago campaign with various factions having to protect their scattered islands. That has a slightly different set of figure types, but I would map lizard men (skinks) to Goblins, Snake Men to Orcs etc.

Offline Pattus Magnus

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 159
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #527 on: January 23, 2021, 06:18:19 PM »
One possible way to add crazy barbarian types to a human army is to take an orc city (for garden-variety barbarian fighters or spearmen), or an orc smithy (for tougher warriors and linebreakers), during the kingdom building. All you need to do then is make up new names for the terrain and unit types, entirely game-legal and it won’t change the game balance... Might work for witch-elves, too, I don’t really know much about them.

A theme I’m noticing in some posts in this thread is suggestions for changing unit profiles to get closer to unit types in other games. Just my opinion, but that’s not the direction I want to go, because it brings back in the problems I had with the other games in the first place. For now, at least, I’m happy to mostly just look for ways to ‘re-skin’ existing terrain and their unit types to get close to representing forces from other backgrounds. The kingdom creation system in Oathmark gives a lot of freedom for customizing armies to fit a vision, while also forcing some trade-offs that keep super-armies in check.

(Disclaimer: a few pages back in the thread, I stated that I liked some suggestions about new unit types derived from having two complementary terrain types in a kingdom- I still like that notion and admire the creativity, i’m just saying I think re-skins and small adjustments can do most of the work for fitting Oathmark to different settings.)

Offline SotF

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 743
  • Shadow Of The Future
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #528 on: January 23, 2021, 10:38:45 PM »
GW in their run up to releasing news that the Old World was returning let it be known that the old type square base was making a come back so I would imagine that the game will use 28mm figures?
Its good to see new games systems on the market even if they are not something I would have a go at myself...though some of the Oathmark figures are starting to look very nice. I do hope that their world expands as one never knows what figures may turn up and how they could be used in existing collections.
Hopefully they'll bring back their customizable movement trays

Offline BZ

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 445
  • https://oathgrave.blogspot.com/
    • Oathgrave
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #529 on: January 23, 2021, 10:50:51 PM »
Sure, you can use the actual rules with other races, like a skink as a goblin and a saurus as an orc (just to stay by lizardmen). It will work, its a valid solution. But what Im missing in this, is just a little flavor, which could make these races unique. Lizardmen could have the same stats as goblins and and orcs, but with other specials: cold blood (no modifiers for morale rolls), poisoned weapon (+1 damage at winning the combat), waterwalk, something like that instead of charge and wild charge (with adjusting the point values if needed). Sure, it had to be game tested, but these dont have to be such enormous power creeps as by the new, newer and newest GW editions.
Would You stop playing Oathmark, if a new faction would be released? I dont think so, if its balanced (did anyone stop playing because of Oathbrakers?).
Could somebody start playing Oathmark, if a new faction would be released? I very much can imagine that!
Dont forget, Oathmark is admittedly an open ruleset which welcomes house rules, and its not competitive. Not like GW. That is why, it must not make the same mistakes.

Offline bobhope

  • Bookworm
  • Posts: 63
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #530 on: January 29, 2021, 08:09:29 PM »
So just (finally) bought a copy of the rules to try out this weekend
And first impressions - the book is shiny!!

Quick observations/questions... there’s no skirmish function - is that right ?? seems a bit of an omission, or a misread on my part

No direct fire bow options- seems an odd choice to restrict tactical choices, same with lack of “long” pointy sticks and “berserkers”


Combat mechanic looks sound, but definitely “transactional” rather than “heroic”- I’m sure it works fine but not a skirmish/1:1 game is it??

Quite enthusiastic about running it though...


Offline Pattus Magnus

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 159
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #531 on: January 29, 2021, 08:41:06 PM »
While there isn’t a skirmishers unit type in Oathmark, I found that it is possible to achieve a screen by taking few  5-man units of archers and deploying them in front of the main line. They soak up some enemy missile fire and then can retreat behind the follow up line, or let the main line pass through them (as long as the troops have enough movement).

There is the risk that the archers will be disordered, and then rout, causing morale tests by the main line units, but it isn’t very likely to be catastrophic, especially if there are some leaders with the command ability nearby to give the extra die on the morale test.

Can also get a approximation of pavisiers by pairing a small spear unit with a unit of archers. They don’t activate together on a single roll, so maneuvers can be slow, but it does give the archers a screen (and most archers can still shoot using the “fire over” rule). 

Offline pixelgeek

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2006
    • Zac's Gaming Blog
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #532 on: January 29, 2021, 08:43:38 PM »
The next expansion will have rules for unit types like skirmishers, pike blocks etc

Offline pixelgeek

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2006
    • Zac's Gaming Blog
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #533 on: January 29, 2021, 08:44:37 PM »
No direct fire bow options- seems an odd choice to restrict tactical choices, same with lack of “long” pointy sticks and “berserkers”

I don't think that Joe intends for it to be that type of game.

Offline bobhope

  • Bookworm
  • Posts: 63
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #534 on: January 29, 2021, 08:58:05 PM »
Makes sense, just intrigued - strongest bit of these rules seems to be the enabling of tactical options with fairly “light” structure,

How do people run champions? Do they add value?




Offline Ogrob

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1207
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #535 on: January 29, 2021, 09:01:11 PM »
I like champions and find them pretty useful, but your champion die luck can be a big impact on if you feel like they add value. My regular opponent has sworn of champions as useless, while mine seem to murder officers every game.

Offline BZ

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 445
  • https://oathgrave.blogspot.com/
    • Oathgrave
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #536 on: January 29, 2021, 09:13:20 PM »
While there isn’t a skirmishers unit type in Oathmark, I found that it is possible to achieve a screen by taking few  5-man units of archers and deploying them in front of the main line. They soak up some enemy missile fire and then can retreat behind the follow up line, or let the main line pass through them (as long as the troops have enough movement).

There is the risk that the archers will be disordered, and then rout, causing morale tests by the main line units, but it isn’t very likely to be catastrophic, especially if there are some leaders with the command ability nearby to give the extra die on the morale test.

Can also get a approximation of pavisiers by pairing a small spear unit with a unit of archers. They don’t activate together on a single roll, so maneuvers can be slow, but it does give the archers a screen (and most archers can still shoot using the “fire over” rule).

These are great ideas! If the spear+archer unit has a leader, they can activate together (however, they will be a bit pricey).

Makes sense, just intrigued - strongest bit of these rules seems to be the enabling of tactical options with fairly “light” structure,

How do people run champions? Do they add value?
They definitely add value! Champion dice can be great for adding more damage, and/or killing the enemy officer. And for example by mounted units, the champions dont cost much more, then a simple unit member...

Offline Knight-Captain Tyr

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 417
  • Journal Keeper
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #537 on: January 29, 2021, 09:19:49 PM »
Having just got into Oathmark, how many more expansions do people think are in the pipeline? I ask as I see Joseph McCullough left Osprey, so am unsure what the plans for Oathmark are. I saw he said there were a few more expansions written but just curious if people think it's going to keep being updated beyond that. Not that it necessarily needs it - just interested :)
" ... the seventh wave of Thrall stumbled and climbed over the slippery, piled dead and Mazzarin saw The Watcher with them and at last knew the number of his days."

-Thrall Flavor Text, Myth: The Fallen Lords

Offline BZ

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 445
  • https://oathgrave.blogspot.com/
    • Oathgrave
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #538 on: January 29, 2021, 09:25:07 PM »
Having just got into Oathmark, how many more expansions do people think are in the pipeline? I ask as I see Joseph McCullough left Osprey, so am unsure what the plans for Oathmark are. I saw he said there were a few more expansions written but just curious if people think it's going to keep being updated beyond that. Not that it necessarily needs it - just interested :)
One for sure. But as a lot of plastic sets are on the way, I think there will be more supplements (because why wouldnt Joe write more?). But if not, the game still feels whole to me...
Recently I wrote a post about the future of Oathmark, where I collected news, rumors (and my wishes :)): https://oathgrave.blogspot.com/2021/01/25-future-of-oathmark.html

Offline Ogrob

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1207
Re: Oathmark - Who's Playing?
« Reply #539 on: January 29, 2021, 09:27:20 PM »
He said he will continue to support Frostgrave and Oathmark, probably just doing so freelance. Ghost Archipelago seems to be dropping off in favour of Stargrave, but I'd imagine we'll see one or two Oathmark books this year. In fact I think I have seen the title of the next one, but I can't seem to find it now.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
653 Views
Last post June 23, 2020, 06:45:55 AM
by Hobgoblin
0 Replies
355 Views
Last post July 18, 2020, 03:52:34 PM
by MustContainMinis
184 Replies
14631 Views
Last post February 21, 2021, 12:47:48 PM
by Little Odo
7 Replies
1166 Views
Last post August 12, 2020, 08:36:11 PM
by killshot
18 Replies
1448 Views
Last post November 03, 2020, 08:36:10 AM
by BZ