First Impressions

[ElOrso]

Hi All,

Last weekend we played our first 2 games of Frostgrave. In short we had a lot of fun & really liked the pace of the game.
We played 2 scenario's with 2 very different warbands.
One was aimed at offensive power while the other worked more around improved maneuverability & durability. During the game we saw both warbands do what they were built for and at the end of the 2 games the difference between both was not that big. We really liked that aspect of the game.

We did however have a few remarks after game 1 that really stood out.

- Offensive mages acquire more XP with the current XP system. I know this has been covered here in the past , so we were already expecting this up front.
But i think we will find some way to smooth this out. For us this is not really an issue that reduces the amount of fun. Also when playing with more then 2 people you can just gang up on whoever needs a bit more punishment. :-)

- We are also think about increasing the chances for random encounters, i think this will increase the fun factor of the game & remove the focus from killing the other warband to just make sure you stay alive yourself. In both games we only had 1 random encounter (16+ is hard to get). Additionally we were thinking of just adding a random encounter extra at the start of each turn. It's just an aspect of the game that we like, and it might also help a little with the next "remark" that we saw.

- The thing that stood out the most was one soldier in perticular. It's the Archer. We found that for it's current cost it is by far the best choice, certainly early on in a campaign. If you compare it to an infantry man/woman with the same cost it just outshines it every game. It shares all stats , except the fight stat+weapon, but provides just a lot more flexibility & killing power.
Our hand-to-hand troops had maybe 1-2 combats, at most, in our games, in most cases they did nothing but move. Archers on the other hand were key in every game. Moving and shooting every turn, guarding treassure from a distance. In the rare case that your archer gets charged by an infantry man , your odds aren't that bad at all. He just has +1 on his d20 roll and his +2 damage modifier from the two-handed weapon.
We really noticed this in our first game where i had setup a more structured city ruin with big lanes and open spaces. Due to the lack of cover archers were really devastating.
In game 2 we setup terrain to allow more cover and this somewhat helped but still we had the feeling they were superior to the others troops.
I have added 2 pictures of the terrain setup. Nothing much or fancy for now but we are working on getting more terrain ready soon. :-)
For now I think we will fix the archers by adding a lot of terrain and increasing the number of random encounters to force warbands a bit more in combat. If this doesn't help we will probably up their cost or change some stats.

I know we only played 2 games so far , so maybe it's a bit too soon to make these conclusions in general. But it's what we both agreed on after this first session.

To close i want to repeat we really enjoyed the game and will be continuing our campaign in the coming weeks. Everybody is enthusiastic and we will probably get more players to join in our adventures. These were just minor things that we talked about after each game and were wondering if you guys also experience this?

I look forward to see if you guys also have similar thoughts.

Kind Regards
ElOrso





 

[Laniston]

For random encounters we house ruled in that for each time a creature doesn't come in reduce the roll needed by one until a creature shows up then reset.  It is enough of an effect that you will likely get something showing up rather than a few games where nothing does.

[Roger]

My friend and I thought the same thing would happen with our archers, ( as we both do archery we had an interest with that idea) but its taken about 2 months before they came good. The terrain makes a lot of difference, you start adding +2 ,+3 and carefully laid plans go pear shaped pretty quickly  .
Its all down to the dice rolls, archer rolls well and can do a lot of damage, but if your target rolls better you're back to square 1 .
Just 1 question, what are the stats on the wandering construct that looks suspiciously like a plate of chips?

[gary42]

And then you roll the Worm scenario and hit random encounter on every treasure in a 3 player game!:)   
You definitely have to add a mess of terrain to nerf those archers!  I do think we might have the monsters drop treasure though.  Last game we played I made one successful spell roll the whole game and that was a crumble spell that I cast just for exp on the last turn (We play Calmdown rules.) On all previous rolls I didn't  even roll close enough to "Bleed to Succeed"!

[Polkovnik]

The thing that stood out the most was one soldier in perticular. It's the Archer. We found that for it's current cost it is by far the best choice, certainly early on in a campaign.

The terrain makes a lot of difference, you start adding +2 ,+3 and carefully laid plans go pear shaped pretty quickly 

You definitely have to add a mess of terrain to nerf those archers!

I agree about archers being overpowered. And yes, more terrain reduces their shooting capability, but the trouble is they are hardly any worse at hand-to-hand combat than most other troops. You would think someone only armed with a dagger would be at a significant disadvantage in melee against a sword armed opponent, but that is not the case in these rules. IMO archers should be Fight +0.

[Polkovnik]

We are also think about increasing the chances for random encounters, i think this will increase the fun factor of the game & remove the focus from killing the other warband to just make sure you stay alive yourself. In both games we only had 1 random encounter (16+ is hard to get). Additionally we were thinking of just adding a random encounter extra at the start of each turn. It's just an aspect of the game that we like, and it might also help a little with the next "remark" that we saw.

This is a good idea. Wandering monsters are quite infrequent and often wander randomly around and can be avoided. We played last week with more wandering monsters and it worked well.

[Awesome Adam]

Offensive mages acquire more XP with the current XP system.

I know people get that impression when they look at the XP chart, but it's not the same once you start playing.

I play an elementalist whose use of Leap to get treasure toting soldiers off the table faster earns him vastly more XP every game than any of his offensive spells.

Sure Elemental Bolt is sweet, but there are soo many things that can go wrong when casting it.
Do I have line of sight at the enemy ?
Does having line of sight at the enemy put my wizard in undue danger ?
Can I  roll a 12+ and not to injure himself casting the spell ? (My apprentice can't. I swear that boy has a death wish)
Can I beat him in the opposed roll ?
Was that enough damage to take him out of the game ?
Did he move out of line of sight ?
Is he going to counter attack ?
On an average roll I'm going to need to do this whole process twice, can I do that ?

If so, you eaned that XP. Greater risk = Greater Reward


I found the next scenario to be more effective.
Use combined move in the Wizard phase to get soldier onto treaure.
Soldier uses second action to pick up treasure.
Wizard casts Leap on soldier.
Soldier now 10" closer to table edge with treasure. (Anyone want to get how far into the table I place my treasures ?)

In an average game I have 3 treasure off the board before the end of turn 3, scoring me 210XP (150 for treasures, 60 for leap) without even risking combat

Last game, just for giggles, my Archer took a warning shot an an apprentice 23" away. My archer rolled a 20 and took the apprentice out of the game turn 2.
It didn't even earn my XP, and I even apologized for it, but it made me respect how deadly things can get in Felstad, and I keep my spellcasters as safe as possible.

Okay, it also probably has something to do with my first Frostgrave Wizard dying after his first adventure, but you get the point.  

Terrain makes all the difference in Frostgrave. Seriously, I can't empahsize this enough. I have yet to see an online Batrep with enough terrain on the board. It changes the game. With LIne of Sight offensive spells and teleports, and 24" ranged attacks, you need to keep line of sight to 12" and less as much as possible.

[Fencing Frog]

I would agree with Awsome Adams points

[Helznicht]

I agree with most points made.  On terrain, the trees look real good, but most dont really provide as much LOS blocking as their bulk is above figure levels, only leaving the trunk to deter LOS mostly. 

All the other stuff we have house ruled to our liking.

[ElOrso]

I see that most things we noticed are actually quite common and not linked to the fact we only played 2 games yet.
My trees also don't block LOS completely. There is always a foot/head sticking out somewhere. This caused 4-5 archer shots each turn on models i was trying to hide.  Its only a matter of time before your model goes down.

Instead of reducing fight to 0 i was more thinking about reducing the armor. I would assume it would wear less armor then an infantryman.And/Or just up the cost a little bit. 10-20gc.

@Roger: The plate of chips spawns on an 20+ in the fist turn but gets -1 after each turn as the hunger increases. 

@Awesome Adam: The only reason i was able to take game 2 was because of the leap & heal spell. In total i had 10 successful castings (wiz + app) granting a lot of XP and indeed securing a treasure in turn 2 & 3. This was also my plan for game 1 , but due to the lack of terrain i got killed before even reaching the treasures.
With regards to the offensive mage, if you yourself don't have something like Elemental Bolt   or a lot of archers it doesn't really matter that he's in LOS. So the danger for being "in the open" is not that high. I had Elemental Bolt as well but it was only castable with my wiz (14+). My Apprentice was losing a lot of health to risk casting it on 16+.

The point is I know my friends quite good and i know they will exploit things like this to win. We take a lot of joy in winning. :-)
His list for game 1 was 7 archers , 1 thief & 1 warhound with an elementalist mage (bolt,scatter shot,...). By the end of turn 2 i had lost 3-4 models due to archery and a double scatter shot. From that point onwards my models were always 2" apart. :-)
But it almost got to a point were game 1 was decided in turn 2. But through sheer luck i was able to secure 2 treasures and not take any permanent casualties , except losing an eye with my mage.

I will try to add more terrain in the coming games and will let you know the result.

We had so much fun with the game i doubt it will take long to get a second session going. :-)

I'll keep you posted on what comes out. I have no doubt we'll find a "solution" for these kind of things. I think playing with 3 players, increasing terrain & more random encounters will fix all of the above.

[Darkson71]

We have found playing to a turn limit helps.  We play on a 3x3 table and have 5 guaranteed turns, with a 6th on a 50/50 roll.
We also removed the rule that gives all the treasure to a player that wipes out his opponent, and added a rule that if a treasure is held but still on the board once the game ends, the player keeps it on a 50/50.

We've found this has made people play for the treasures more than for the kills (though kills never hurt of course!) and has also made people think more on their spells than just "Elemental Bolt, Bone Dart" etc.

Also, to back up what others have said - more terrain! We play Mordheim as well, and our first couple of games we set the boards up like we would a Mordheim game - we soon learned that was a mistake!  Really needs to be a very full table.

[Nooblord]

In addition to what others have said,

1. Remember the +1 for each intervening piece of terrain - the effect of lots of small rubble piles or snow drifts, for example, can soon add up.

2. Warbands that rely on archers and other ranged guys have to remember that spell that increases the wind level which can make them quite impotent. Also, some scenarios, especially in the new Lich Lord book, have environmental effects that reduce the effectiveness of ranged attacks.

[ElOrso]

@Darkson71, those are also quite good recommendations. We played on a 4x3,5 table i estimate. Maybe the table was too big for just 2 players. We did move the table edges a bit up the board. But reducing the table size could also help.

@Nooblord, after game 1 i doubted really hard & long to get the "Call Storm" spell but it was a bit too expensive, knowing what i know now i would be afraid to pick it up front when creating a new warband.
We also used the +1 for each intervening terrain + hard cover. But if the archer rolls 19/20 you're pretty much done. :-)

Twice i had +7 on my fight roll vs his shooting and ended up with a higher figure but he still killed me because he had rolled a natural 20. Even though my total was higher.

[gary42]

I was pretty happy to have trees on the table when there were 2 Wizard Eyes were cast on tall terrain.  AND they go look rather nice:)

[ElOrso]

Just played another game. Had a lot of fun & had many emotional moments. :-)

Again a few situations popped up that we were unsure about.

This time it was about supporting figures in combat.

Does a figure need to be in base to base contact with both your own model and the enemy in order to grant the +2 for supporting?
Like this:
A1 - B
A2

Or does he also support in the following situation where he is behind his warband member:
A1 A2 - B

I presume that in case 1 if A1 is your wizard he's unable to cast spells? Does the same apply in case 2 where he is not in base to base and supporting from the back?
So can he cast a spell (e.g heal,possess,...).
If A1 would be an archer in the second case, could he shoot & support figure A2 during his attack round?

We didn't really find conclusion in the rules. 

I'm interested to see how you guys handle this situation. We had a big melee over the last remaining treasure with 9 models in total and were unsure how to correctly calculate the whole thing. It looked something like this at some point, but during the rounds it took all kind of formations to be honest. :-)

A1 A2 - B1 B3 - A5 A6
A3 A4 - B2