Is Progression too Fast?

[tys123]

I like the rate of progression as you get to choose a few things to upgrade slightly after each game.

The biggest problem is the difference between a new wizard and one that has played a game.
You start out with an Apprentice and soldiers worth 300
The cash you get from the 1st game goes towards improving your soldiers as that makes the biggest difference.
So from game 2 your soldiers could be worth around 600.
It will then stay around 600 for every game after that ( Though they will end up with magic items ).
That jump makes a far bigger difference than anything else.

The easiest way to get rid of it would be to just let starting wizards get their apprentice for free.
Then you could start out with 2 barbarians , 2 Treasure hunters , 2 archers and 2 thugs for example.
You then wouldn't be outclassed by someone who has played a match as their soldiers will be about the same they just have a slightly better wizard.

[djicelatte]

I think leveling fast is fine because you have a lot of stats and spells to upgrade but the biggest problem we have encountered is the exp greatly favors attacking wizard spells and makes elemental bolt the best spell in the game. (10 exp for cast plus 40 exp for all the easy kills it generates on soldiers.) these are the changes we use and it rewards the warband as a whole so not everyone has to learn elemental bolt, bone dart, grenade

Experience:
10 for every spell cast
10 for every kill of an enemy warband
50 for warband killing enemy apprentice
100 for warband kill enemy wizard
10 for every level difference for the underdog
50 for each treasure removed from the board by a warband

Treasure:
Winning player collect any remaining treasure by rolling 16+ for each
Does not get exp for getting treasure this way

Spells:
Line of Sight spells have range of 24 inches

[Awesome Adam]

I'm afraid that making the rewards warband centric instead of Wizard based would turn the game into a kill them all style hack and slash.

Many people feel treasure may be flowing a little too freely. Awarding treasures that were not even removed from the table only makes that worse. It also encourages players to kill for Xp and roll for free treasures afterwards.

If you have lots of line of sight greater than 12", let alone 24, you are not playing with enough terrain density. If you played with more terrain, the range of line of sight spells wouldn't be an issue.



 

[Nooblord]

Agree with all of Adam's points in the above post ^^.

As I said before I'm in favour of elegant solutions that involve the least amount of rules changes.

No XP or material gains from onboard treasure at the end of the game may be all you need (and game can't end before turn X to prevent any 'grab a treasure ASAP and everyone leaves the board' cheese).

Alternatively go with 5 treasures not 6 in the standard scenario, or both.