Oathmark 2nd edition wishlist

[pixelgeek]

I posted this in my Oathmark project thread but thought that it might make for an interesting discussion on its own.

Here is a short blog post with my wishlist of additions/changes for Oathmark 2nd edition

https://zacgaming.neocities.org/posts/oathmark2wishlist/

Anyone have any changes or additions they would like to see?

[Mikai]

In regard to the new troops I think that each of the existing factions can get used as proxy. Having some various mercenaries generic troop profiles would be nice though, yes. Additional factions are hard to integrate into the existing kingdom systematic. For monsters you could also use some of the existing monster profiles as proxies.

Can't really comment on the spells since that's the part to which I gave no real attention yet. In regard to the better background you want to have added, the missing background is intentional. Everyone can plant his favourite universe in there. Easy to say for me since it's leaning on "Battle of Five Armies" as you point out yourself and I am myself playing in that universe. Although if you see everything as placeholder you should have no problems to fit into the game your imagination. I would regard it as a sandbox tool for people to bring their own background to life, not really as a support tool to craft an own universe. The campaign system just gives an option for some little story mechanism at your realm.

My wishlist would be more for Northstar than for the ruleset itself
Of course, the units still missing (Heavy Human Infantry and Cavalry, and Revenant Cavalry), with Heavy Human Infantry probably on the way. Then I would be interested in generic sets for catapults, ballistas and chariots. Perhaps also some kind of generic flag/banner set with a mixture of styles? I am really bad at doing my own banners and would prefer to have them in plastic 

[Pattus Magnus]

I have only played a couple games, but I found artillery a bit overpowered, especially if it is stacked with one of the spells (maybe in the Dwarves list?) that produces exploding shots. It seemed to turn the game into a horse and musket game rather than medieval. I think the problem comes down to basing artillery on how it performs in Hollywood movies rather than actual historical examples. It was useful in certain situations (sieges, covering river crossings) where the sides were static and slow reloading wasn’t a problem, but never really caught on for field battles (even the Romans never used artillery as a main arm in field engagements. The legions had them along to allow efficient reduction of enemy strong points/ fortifications.) I can’t really fault Oathmark for that design choice, it follows pretty well every fantasy game since 3rd Ed WFB, but it’s still unbalancing, in my opinion.

[pixelgeek]

I have only played a couple games, but I found artillery a bit overpowered

It is overpowered even without the Dwarven Exploding Ammunition spell :-) I think that the terrain in Oathmark should only provide you with a single artillery piece.

[pixelgeek]

In regard to the new troops I think that each of the existing factions can get used as proxy. Having some various mercenaries generic troop profiles would be nice though, yes. Additional factions are hard to integrate into the existing kingdom systematic. For monsters you could also use some of the existing monster profiles as proxies.

There has been an additional Halfling kingdom that was added easily enough. You just need to create a terrain list for any new faction you want and you are done. You can proxy but that only get you so far. And some of the monsters are pretty distinct.

The issue with the monsters is more about getting appropriate figures. Since North Star already has a lot of them available why not use those instead?

[Ultravanillasmurf]

Heavy Infantry characters are previewed in the latest North Star newsletter.

I like the lack of background,  partly as it allows you to use your own choice of background - for me Game of Thrones and The Witcher (possibly https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hussite_Trilogy).


My Nilfgaard Spearman.

Wishlist units:
Pike (human, dwarf, elf)
Human slings/javelin
Zombies
Crossbows
War wagons
Elephants (baseline up to heavy armoured fighting platforms)

[pixelgeek]

I like the lack of background,  partly as it allows you to use your own choice of background

I doubt it will change but I can dream :-)

I don't want anything deep. No army books or anything like that. Just a touch of background here and there

[cadbren]

Some of the units need models like the eachy and some artillery crews would be good. The artillery itself could be generic as mentioned by others and sold without crew.

[Ultravanillasmurf]

I forgot to mention gnolls, though there are possibly contractual issues there.

[Aethelflaeda was framed]

I definitely have zero interest spending money for any sort of milieu material or background for Oathmark (or Frost-grave), for that matter not even the rules, as i use home brewed.

 I DO want more figures, the plastics boxes are great!  I would like to see some woodier elves and some different shield shapes for humans and elves.  Round and ovals so that they fit alongside historical dark age figs. the Oath-mark humans are rather boring and the least useful figs in the range. 

I would like to see the cultists in particular, but all of the figs could expanded upon, with weaponry from different time periods so that they can be used in gothic horror, western and pulp, ww2, VSF, modern, and sci-fi.  Muskets, ray guns, six shooters and schmeissers!  It was a great mistake that Ghost Archipeligo stayed too fantasy, and did not feature muskets.

Not sure i would welcome artillery, but some super heavy Mallorian elf cavalry and plastic ogres and beasts would be nice.

[Rick]

I forgot to mention gnolls, though there are possibly contractual issues there.

I think it might be a missed opportunity not to use the Gnolls, Lizardmen, Barbarians or Demons that they already have models for. You could always use them as proxies but I think they could have used them in Oathmark somewhere - perhaps a complete Mercenaries supplement with them being different mercenary groups (except for the Demons - either use them as a demon-kin/dragon-kin mercenary race or have them as a summoned demon army). Heh, you could always use the crew box set as piratical mercenaries! 

[Hobgoblin]

Not sure i would welcome artillery, but some super heavy Mallorian elf cavalry and plastic ogres and beasts would be nice.

I've long thought that there's plenty of scope for a 'large humanoid' kit that can build trolls, ogres, eachies or whatever, through the use of different heads, limbs and equipment - in the same way that the Frostgrave cultist sprue allows you to build cultists or undead.

[Ultravanillasmurf]

I think it might be a missed opportunity not to use the Gnolls, Lizardmen, Barbarians or Demons that they already have models for.

As I said, there may well be contractual reasons why Osprey Games and North Star cannot use the Frostgrave stuff in Oathmark.

[Aethelflaeda was framed]

As I said, there may well be contractual reasons why Osprey Games and North Star cannot use the Frostgrave stuff in Oathmark.

That I really doubt…the monster types are fairly generic, found in many tales, books and games for so many, many years now they cannot be claimed as IP.  That the two game systems and the miniatures created “specifically” for each are all created by the same two companies strikes me that they might not be too concerned by overlap, the profits go to the same folks, but perhaps royalties might have an effect. 

As a consumer, I use both miniature lines together all the time, and for omitted official rules…there is always a pencil for DYI

[Rick]

Hmm. Same author, same publisher, same miniature producer. Not completely sold on a contractual issue.