Frostgrave: Additional Rewards for doing battle with mighty adversaries !!

[Awesome Adam]

Anyone who is familiar with such games as Mordheim, Necromunda, and Bloodbowl is used to a Handicapping system of some sort to reward lower leveled teams who are fighting greater forces. Forstgrave's lack of such a mechanic is one of the only criticisms I have ever heard about the Frostgrave Game.

I have an idea for such a system and would be interested in your thoughts on it's validity.
0-9 levels difference, underdog recieves 10 bonus XP per level diference
10-19 levels difference +1 to spellcasting check by the underdog wizard, 1 extra treasure, underdog recieves 10 bonus XP per level diference
20-29 levels difference +2 to spellcasting check by the underdog wizard, 2 extra treasures, underdog recieves 10 bonus XP per level diference
30-39 levels difference +3 lto spellcasting check by the underdog wizard, 3 extra treasures, underdog recieves 10 bonus XP per level diference
Extra treasures are placed by underdog, after deployment,  but following the standard treasure guidelines for placement.
Underdog must make earnest effort to earn bonus XP. Routing without earning XP will cause underdog to forfeit bonus XP.

 If you get use out of this, or want to offer suggestions on how to improve it, I would look forward to the feedback.
 

[grant]

Handicapping should only be on the pro tour. Like golf.

[Bloodaxe]

That's a good idea. There was an underdog bonus in Mordheim.  A lesser warband got a bonus for taking on a more experienced powerful warband.  Could be the same in Frostgrave comparing levels of the Wizards.

[Awesome Adam]

That's exactly what I was thining. It's always been one of the biggest complaints about campaigns, in my experience, that the people ho don't get to play enough fall hoeplessley behind the fanatics who do, leaving very little incentive to play between new and veteran players.

At least this way, underdogs will still benefit playing against a superior force, even if they are likely to lose.

[Coenus Scaldingus]

Extra experience sounds good, as does the amount: a single level difference isn't all that big a deal, meaning just a single difference in a casting value or stat. Larger differences add up though, and by this system, so does the compensation.

Not sure if placing extra treasure is a good idea - there is a risk that it may only further empower the stronger warband. This is especially true as treasure is placed before each warband's table edge is selected, but even if this extra treasure is deployed later (as with the reveal secret spell), a crafty opponent may still benefit.

As one of the risks is that a more experience warband also has better soldiers, perhaps give the underdog some guaranteed extra gold after a game (to more easily replace dead soldiers, or hire stronger henchmen), or perhaps re-rolls on the treasure table or when rolling for the survival of troops?

[Awesome Adam]

I didn't want to automatically reward them with extra gold. It could create a situation where a player just deploys and retreats taking the gold and XP without doing anything other than running of fthe board the first turn.

We could just ammend it so that they place the additional treasures after deployment. That way the treasures are closer to them, but it's not automatic gold.

[Bloodaxe]

If there is only a level or two, I don't think there should be a bonus. If the difference is significant  (4+) then an underdog bonus would be appropriate. Just my opinion.

[Awesome Adam]

While I agree with you that a level or two gap doesn't necessarily need an XP boost, I think the virtue of keeping the mechanic simple outways anything gained by complicating the mechanic further with exceptions.

[Achilles]

A simple way to encourage actual gameplay while still rewarding the underdog is to increase the Treasure XP the same way as previously suggested. Make each Treasure counter secured by the underdog warband worth an additional 20XP per level difference.

So the underdog wizard still needs to try to accomplish the mission, but the risks are much more worth the effort.

[Awesome Adam]

That vastly increases the potential reward. Which could easily reach absurdity.

If they were able to grab the 3 closest counters and run they would get 60x the level difference in additional XP. For something like a 10 level gap, they would get 6 levels worth of bonus XP in a single match up.

I do appreciate the suggestion though.

[monkeylite]

That vastly increases the potential reward. Which could easily reach absurdity.

If they were able to grab the 3 closest counters and run they would get 60x the level difference in additional XP. For something like a 10 level gap, they would get 6 levels worth of bonus XP in a single match up.

I do appreciate the suggestion though.

Then divide the bonus by three, so at least you have to work for it.

Istm simply getting stuff for just turning up is exactly what's wrong with younger warbands today. In my day we had to adventure into a frigid wasteland and search for treasures with the ever present threat of wandering monsters and belligerent rivals. Then we had to drag the treasure off at half speed while risking ambush and any number of dangerous spells. These days newcomers just expect to turn up and get experience for free on the back of our endeavour without putting in the hard work and facing the same hazards.

And get off my frosty lawn!

[Fencing Frog]

This hasn't been an issue for my group yet but I feel the some thing simple like an extra 25 XP fro every 5 levels difference is the way to go.  I haven't seen too many games with a significant level imbalance my own wizard is level 7 after 3 games in one game I was equal level to my opponent, in one game I was two higher and another I was one lower those minor differences has little impact on the game as far as I could tell.

If you have a significant level imbalance say level 0 or 1 vs 10 the the sporting thing to do would be to run a level 1 war band, rather than make the rookie take on the champ in his first fight.

[Awesome Adam]

I get what you are saying about being sporting, but if you are playing in a league, like at  a store, it's not fun, or practical, to expect people to create new warbands every time a new player, or a player who only shows up occasionally, shows up.

No one is arguing that small level gaps are imbalancing at all. 20Xp is a single round's of successful casting. It's not a big amount, but it is a tanglble reward.

I do want to avoid a situation where they can just show up and rout to collect free XP, but I don't want to make it a complicated mechanic.
Applying it per treasure it too much.
25 XP per 5 levels is not enough.

Okay, so I think we are all on board that they need to apply at least a minimal effort before earning the additional XP. I originally thought of a turn limit, but that seemed overly artificial. How about they need to earn at least a minimum of 50XP ? That's one treasure's worth, or 5 successfuly cast spells. That way thney have to be actively engaged in the game, but the match could still go brutally against them and they still have something to show for it.

Lower Level Wizards, that have earned at least 50xp this scenario, will recieve an additional 20XP per level difference between thier and the opposing wizards level

[monkeylite]

I know what you're saying, but istm this might not be the best way of going about things. To be honest, I think you're using the wrong tool for the job.

I guess first you need to decide exactly what you're trying to address. If you're trying to increase the rate of progress of lower level wizards then something like extra xp will be the way to go, but if you're trying to redress the gap in power between different level warbands on the table, then xp will have no bearing on that (on the game you're playing at that moment).

A tenth level wiz will have the same advantage over a first level wiz whatever xp reward you give them. And if there is a significant advantage (and I'm not actually sure there is too much of one) you're effectively handing the extra xp to the more powerful wiz. Eg, if there's a 50xp bonus going and so the weaker wiz is content with getting only two treasures, then the strong wiz effectively gains the extra treasure (so you're not only giving him the advantage of a one-sided battle, you're rewarding him extra xp on top of what he would earn in a fair battle). If the weaker wiz gets three treasures then why is he getting an xp bonus any way?

Istm if you just want to redress the power difference and make the fight fairer then the best way to do that is give the weaker side an advantage in the battle there and then, eg, an extra man. Say, let them field an extra soldier, over their normal maximum, up to the cost of 10 gold per level difference. That will have a real effect on the game.

If you want, instead, to make a weaker wiz advance more quickly to match the stronger wizs in the game, then I don't see why you need to bother with an in-game mechanism, you make as well just give them extra levels out-of-game to help them catch up.

[Fencing Frog]

I get what you are saying about being sporting, but if you are playing in a league, like at  a store, it's not fun, or practical, to expect people to create new warbands every time a new player, or a player who only shows up occasionally, shows up.

Actually that's exactly what I expect of myself at least(and what I have done for when and if it happens in my local group).  Mind you I am not saying I'll play my low level band against them forever but for their first game or two.  

I don't really understand the "not fun or practical" Objection. Addressing piratical first I use the same figures after all so its not any additional work other than printing off an extra reference sheet for my war band at level 0.  If you are saying the game is only fun with your high level wizard then I guess I just don't understand that feeling.