Planning a retro Warhammer scenario - and a question on points costs

[Hobgoblin]

So ... for complicated reasons, I find myself charged with putting together a multiplayer Oldhammer game for next summer. I'm going to use second edition as the core rules and aim for a sort of 'large skirmish' set-up with lots of small units (5 or 10 strong for the most part) and colourful characters (as in the classic second-edition scenarios).

I'm planning to make a couple of changes to the core second-edition rules. First, I'm going to allow units to break up and reform as the player sees fit: so that the leader of a unit of goblins can send a couple of wretches scurrying up a tower to secure a bolt thrower or other objective. I think that's easily done - it's basically all about scenario objectives, and the Warhammer system handles this well. There's a nice risk/reward built in too: if that goblin leader has a decent Ld, it won't extent to the wretches that he sends off to complete a task, and it will also weaken the unit in terms of ranks and potential break point.

Second, I'm just going to use Ld for psychology tests. The main reason for this is that I want to use things like troglodytes and trolls, which suffer from Stupidity. Now, that isn't too bad under first-edition rules (no psychological stats at all, and Stupidity just has a 1 in 6 chance of a really deleterious effect - so more like Animosity in Mordheim). But under second- and third-edition rules, it's tested on Int and becomes crippling - because lizardmen and goblinoids, who are likely to be leading these creatures, have a base Int of 5.

I gather that later editions rolled all the psychological stats into Ld (as in Mordheim), which makes perfect sense. But I have a question: how did the point values of orcs, goblins and lizardmen change in later editions? In second edition, an orc cost 5.25; this was rounded to 5.5 in third, I think. In both cases, the orc was quite good value compared with a 5-point human, because points were docked for the low Int score, which only really mattered when trolls were involved.

From the second-edition points calculator, I reckon that an orc should be 5.75, rounded to 6, if Ld is the only stat. Meanwhile, lizardmen should be 17 points (including the price of natural light armour) rather than 20, reflecting higher Toughness, Wounds and Leadership, along with lower Initiative; the costs of higher Cool and Willpower, partially offset by lower Int, are erased.

Is that in line with points costs in 4th, 5th etc.? Slightly more expensive orcs and hobgoblins, and cheaper lizardmen, feels about right to me. Second had no points reduction for things like Stupidity, but I think the Ld test will make the value of cold ones, trolls and troglodytes a bit more reasonable, especially when offset against the benefits of Fear, Regeneration and Nausea.

This may all sound madly nitpicking, but I want to ensure this long-in-the-planning game is as fun and balanced as possible while still suitably nostalgic. Any help with the points gratefully received!

[Hobgoblin]

(I've changed the title to make this more of a general thought dump about the planned scenario)

So ... I've read quickly through some of the classics (Orc's Drift, Dolgan Raiders, McDeath, Kremlo), and I reckon I'll be best served devising my own scenario for two reasons: one, we'll probably be doing a single day's gaming, so a single battle will work better than running or extracting part of a campaign; and two, devising a scenario with handouts and army sheets to use the painted miniatures I have will probably much less time than painting up scores of villagers/Dolgans/Slann/whatever.

I have at least 60 square-based orcs, with more based and undercoated, and around the same in goblins. I also have plenty of dwarfs on the go, plus a lot of fully painted beastmen, 20+ based and part-painted or undercoated chaos warriors, and lots of based and prepped lizardmen, troglodytes and cold ones, with a few painted.

This suggests a rough plan for a four-sided battle, which in turn suggests a theme and a title (in the best bad-wordplay Warhammer tradition): The Hunt for the Harkenstone.

Here's the rough idea:

• A group of dwarfs has returned to a ruined dwarf outpost after being tipped off about buried treasure left by a mad dwarf lord of sinister reputation. They've excavated the ruins heavily and repaired the outpost's old defences (bolt throwers and maybe a stone thrower). And they've also discovered the legendary Harkenstone, a huge stone rumoured to have occult properties.
• The unearthing of the Harkenstone (so-called because it causes things on the Other Side to listen ...) has sent magical energies rippling across the land, drawing the attention of the local necromancer, who has reanimated some corpses and mustered his red goblins and other goblinoid rabble with the intention of seizing the stone.
• A champion of chaos has also been alerted to this discovery and has led his motley crew of monsters and mutants down from the north. Like the necromancer, the champion is well aware that the Harkenstone can be used to summon and even control beings from the Other Side.
• The dwarfs have, of course, delved too deep. In so doing, they have disturbed the chthonian ancients who lurk beneath the surface - a tribe of lizardmen of various shapes and sizes. These monsters know nothing of the Harkenstone but wouldn't mind adorning their deep halls with it. They are, however, much more interested in feasting on surface beings.
• The dwarf leader has sent a raven to his kin. A relief party should arrive at some point - if the dwarfs can just dig in and hold on ... and using the powers of the newly unearthed Harkenstone might be one way of doing that. But it's a dangerous process.

I'm thinking that the dwarfs will be the weakest force, at least until the relief party arrives, and will start in the centre of the table, beset by the necromancer's orcs, goblins and worse from one side and the chaos champion's from another. They will, though, have the advantage of being able to man the siege engines and use the Harkenstone.

The Harkenstone enables the holder to treat with entities on the Other Side. But its effects can be dangerous and unpredictable. I'm going to draw up tables to show these. At best, you can summon an entity that you can actually command (probably until a 5 or 6 is rolled at the end of a turn - these manifestations are typically short lived). At worst, the entity attacks you. You might also be transformed into something ... peculiar or be able only to summon an entity to a spot within 12", from where it will proceed to attack the nearest living creatures until it vanishes again.

The entities will range from packs of minor threats to something like a Balrog. If the holder of the Harkenstone is attacked and killed, the entity vanishes. So there should be a fair chance that using the thing destroys the user, leaving it up for grabs again.

The lizardman player will have several potential entry points and can divide his forces between them, to enter on a specified turn between one and three. He'll write this down after the other forces are deployed (e.g. on three folded strips of paper, one for each of those three turns).

The aim for all of the three other starting sides is to escort the Harkenstone off a specified table edge. The lizardmen will have a separate system of victory points, based on kills.

I'd like each side to have a few 'specials' (ogres for the dwarfs, perhaps? Trolls and chariots for the orcs/goblins? A monster or two for the chaotics? And trogs and cold ones for the lizardmen) and a few small units (5 strong for the real toughies; 10 for normals and 15 or 20 for goblins), along with aa couple of heroes.

I should have at least a couple of opportunities to play this out and refine it hereabouts before delivering it in earnest next summer. I want to have all the information known to everyone (rather than having to GM it), so uncertainty will come from things like the Harkenstone summoning table and the timing of the dwarf reinforcements, etc.

Finally, I'll create a couple of minor 'scavenging' warbands (based on fewer points) that players can use in case of an early rout.

[fred]

Sounds great!

Not quite sure what the question is though?

[Hobgoblin]

Sounds great!

Not quite sure what the question is though?

Cheers! Ha, yes it got a bit buried:

From the second-edition points calculator, I reckon that an orc should be 5.75, rounded to 6, if Ld is the only stat. Meanwhile, lizardmen should be 17 points (including the price of natural light armour) rather than 20, reflecting higher Toughness, Wounds and Leadership, along with lower Initiative; the costs of higher Cool and Willpower, partially offset by lower Int, are erased.

Is that in line with points costs in 4th, 5th etc.?

Just curious how the later editions of Warhammer value those species after the condensing of the psychological stats!

[Lost Egg]

Sounds like a cracking idea, I love it!

[Ogrob]

Should be quite possible to find the Ravening Hordes booklet as a pdf. That was the intro to 6th edition when they rebalanced point costs, so they released a booklet with condensed army lists until proper books could be done. Some factions were playing with that for years and years.

Unfortunately my 5th and 6th edition army books are all long gone.

[Hobgoblin]

Should be quite possible to find the Ravening Hordes booklet as a pdf. That was the intro to 6th edition when they rebalanced point costs, so they released a booklet with condensed army lists until proper books could be done. Some factions were playing with that for years and years.

Unfortunately my 5th and 6th edition army books are all long gone.

Thanks! I had a look, and it seems that the answer isn't terribly simple: humans seem to have been rebased to 4 points at some stage, with orcs at 5. That at least suggests that a point's difference for the extra Toughness and slightly lower initiative is about right.

Sounds like a cracking idea, I love it!

Cheers! Yes, I hope it will work out - hence logging it here to act as a spur (and, hopefully, hoover up some tips along the way).

I've had a few more thoughts, some as a result of discussion with a friend with more recent Warhammer experience. First, the power of characters: I reckon this has to be kept low with most equivalent to 'champions' or 'minor heroes'. Perhaps an exception might be made for the dwarfs, given their predicament - a major hero to lead them and challenge leaders of chaos-warrior units to duels.

I want duelling/challenges to be a key thing, and I'll use the Mordheim rules for those individual fights, as all the players will be familiar with them. So, hits on 4s when all is equal, special rules for weapons (e.g. parry for swords) and - most importantly - critical hits! Those should give fights between opposing character models some extra spice, making them bloodier and less predictable. Challenges to ordinary unit leaders could be quite a powerful tool if you have a hero doing it - accede to an unfair fight or lose Ld for your unit. But a Mordheim overlay will stop it being too certain.

Controlling magic will be key. I'll make sure the spell casters aren't overpowered. I can't remember at all what second-edition magic is like (it was certainly overpowered by third), so will give that due attention.

I'm thinking that the ruined outpost will be very ruined, so not hugely defendable. But the dwarfs might have had time to position some barricades in some areas - barricades that can be broken down during the game. There shouldn't be enough of these to completely defend the outpost, rather than to fence off some areas. So some dwarfs left to crew siege engines will be 'beyond the Pale'.

[Citizen Sade]

How about Dwarf sappers building barricades during the game a la Orc’s Drift? Ravening Hordes has the rules for this.

[Hobgoblin]

How about Dwarf sappers building barricades during the game a la Orc’s Drift? Ravening Hordes has the rules for this.

Ooh - brilliant! I've just had a look, and it's perfect. Yes, that would make for some great risk/reward calculations (especially if the sappers could also be crewing war machines or firing crossbows). Thanks very much!

I'm thinking that the main challenge for the dwarf player will be balancing the fast-moving red goblins (with wolf riders and wolves) of the necromancer against the slow-moving but much more formidable chaotics. So stockade-building will play into the tactical decisions to be made there.

It would be too cruel to have the lizardmen coming up inside the dwarf fortifications - at least not the central ones; I'm imagining three or four excavation sites a little further out where the reptiles can make their entrance. Cold ones have five wounds in second edition ...

[Citizen Sade]

How about giving your Dwarfs too much to adequately defend forcing the player to make uncomfortable decisions?

I remember being put in this position in a Charlie Don’t Surf attack on a firebase game. I ended up rigging an outer emplacement with explosives and leaving it unoccupied in the hope that the enemy would seize it and that my cards would come up when they did. You could do something similar in your Warhammer game e.g slow-burning fuse on barrels of gunpowder or fire in the tunnels undermining a building. Uncertainty about exactly if/when the gunpowder explodes or the props burn through could add to the mix. There’d be trade-offs of course e.g. powder earmarked for demolition leave less for shooting or lumber used in undermining means less for field defences.

Maybe throw the Dwarf a bone by allowing him to shore up his defences before the battle. However, undermining a building means less barricade gets built, trenches get dug, water gets collected to douse fires etc. Make everything a trade-off. Decisions, decisions, decisions.

[tikitang]

I had a look, and it seems that the answer isn't terribly simple

Unfortunately this is pretty much the rule for trying to work out anything related to points cost between different editions of the game!

Any attempt I have made to mix and match rules from various editions has ended in near-madness, but I am sure you won't have any difficulty!

[Hobgoblin]

How about giving your Dwarfs too much to adequately defend forcing the player to make uncomfortable decisions?

Yes, definitely! I'm envisaging the ruins of the outpost as being quite scattered: a bit of the keep here, a bit of the outer bailey there, half a watchtower there. The siege engines will be widely distributed over those (I think most won't be mobile, other than swivelling), so there will be lots of decisions at deployment and then later in the game (spend a turn disabling the machine when it looks set to be captured? Or keep shooting until the end?).

I remember being put in this position in a Charlie Don’t Surf attack on a firebase game. I ended up rigging an outer emplacement with explosives and leaving it unoccupied in the hope that the enemy would seize it and that my cards would come up when they did. You could do something similar in your Warhammer game e.g slow-burning fuse on barrels of gunpowder or fire in the tunnels undermining a building. Uncertainty about exactly if/when the gunpowder explodes or the props burn through could add to the mix. There’d be trade-offs of course e.g. powder earmarked for demolition leave less for shooting or lumber used in undermining means less for field defences.

Maybe throw the Dwarf a bone by allowing him to shore up his defences before the battle. However, undermining a building means less barricade gets built, trenches get dug, water gets collected to douse fires etc. Make everything a trade-off. Decisions, decisions, decisions.

Excellent ideas all! Thanks very much again!

I'm homing in on the idea of having six envelopes (one for each of the first six turns) in which each player places a slip with an 'order' that will be executed in that turn. This could be done in advance, so that each player turns up at the game with labelled orders on folded slips that go into the envelopes. Some will be blanks; others might be pretty drastic events. They'd include the arrival of the lizardmen in various groups, at various times and in various locations. And they'd also include any traps that the dwarfs have set.

There might be some scope for incorporating magic here too - perhaps the necromancer's main spell is one that will allow a proportion of the battlefield slain to coalesce as a unit of ghosts or  zombies under his command (play it too early and there might not be many dead; play it too late, and the zombies/ghosts might not be much use).

The dwarf relief party could also be included by this: raven-based messaging might mean that the dwarfs know when their allies are going to turn up - although it might be better left as a random happening.

Unfortunately this is pretty much the rule for trying to work out anything related to points cost between different editions of the game!

Any attempt I have made to mix and match rules from various editions has ended in near-madness, but I am sure you won't have any difficulty!

Yes: I think the points thing is a bit of a red herring. The second-ed calculator's 6 for an orc and 17 for a lizardman (based on Ld-only psychology) seem about right, so I'll just use those. After three and a half decades, I can finally look forward to a game in which troglodytes and cold ones are worth the points!

On mixing and matching, I think I'll keep it to core second with these minor tweaks:

• Shooting as in first edition (so everyone shoots in every shooting phase - which will make bolt throwers less anticlimactic; I recall lots of 80s games in which they just kept missing).
• Psychology on Ld only - as above - or maybe just use Ld for Stupidity tests and keep the other stats for things that might crop up in the game (Ld seems right for prodding a troll into action whereas Int might be appropriate for figuring out how to use a bolt thrower or the Harkenstone); it's just occurred to me that if I use hobgoblins, they benefit from having a low Cl for frenzy tests. In which case, I can probably just keep all the points the same on the basis that testing for Stupidity on Ld rights a wrong in the original rules.
• Units can split off individuals and send them to do things (grab loot, close gates, man war machines, etc.).
• Mordheim rules for personal combat between leaders (faster, bloodier and less predictable!) and anything that seems appropriate (climbing, jumping, falling, etc.).

[Hobgoblin]

For all I've disparaged Ravening Hordes recently ("when the rot set in" on the GW thread!), it is a great source of extra profiles and new rules. For this project, some key things are the profiles for chaos thugs and marauders. Given the pathetic aesthetic that I'm aiming for, those are very handy. I reckon I'll use Copplestone half-orcs as thugs (the old Grenadier half-orcs are much bigger and butcher than the Ali Morrison ones and fit nicely on 25mm bases) and classic preslotta chaos warriors as marauders, with perhaps just one or two full-blown warriors as leaders.

(I did, however, get a flashback to the 'problem' with Ravening Hordes, at least as I saw it in the 80s: there were suddenly lots of classic Citadel figures that weren't usable WYSIWYG if you followed the lists: orcs with darts, half-orcs with crossbows and two-handed swords, orcs on wolves ...)

[tikitang]

For that reason, 2nd Edition remains the best edition for the completely customisable fantasy battle experience; its only disadvantage, in my view, being spread over three separate books instead of being contained in one tidy package!

[Hobgoblin]

For that reason, 2nd Edition remains the best edition for the completely customisable fantasy battle experience; its only disadvantage, in my view, being spread over three separate books instead of being contained in one tidy package!

Yes - I entirely agree. I also think it's actually the best-looking of the early editions. I love all the Dave Andrews drawings that populate its pages, along with the John Blanche and Tony Ackland stuff. I always feel sorry for that poor lizardman having his head squashed by lesser goblins in the Blanche drawing by the lizardman entry!

For some reason, third edition didn't recycle all of the best illustrations from second (although it did use some), and it added some distinctly inferior ones by other people.