House rules with consensus needed

[midismirnoff]

Hi frostgravers,
me and my buddies are going to start playing this awesome looking game. I've read many of you tweaked a bit the rules to enhance the campaign game. Is there some house rule that collects the overall consensus of the community?
I've read about turn limit and other stuff. Can someone point me where to find a good discussion / blog or such on that matter? Thank you all!

[Timeshadow]

I would say the 8 turn rule or something like it is needed in a campaign to prevent xp milking a mission otherwise whatever makes it more fun for you.

[Darkson71]

I don't think you'll find a consensus on house-rules. Some groups are happy with the rules "as is", some groups have had a plethora of house rules (the "Bad Karma" set for example [currently not online]) and some have a few house-rules, but many different ones.

I think the best thing is to play a few games within your group (not as part of the campaign), have a chat within your group what you did and didn't like and make your own house-rules around that.

[Ray Earle]

The only 'house' rule I'd offer for serious consideration is one I'd discussed with Joe at the wargames illustrated campaign day, and that was to only have five treasure counters on the table. It creates a winner and loser, and stops those really dull games where everyone goes home happy with half the loot.

Put one counter at the centre of the table then place the other four as normal.

[Azzabat]

I agree. We place 1 treasure token in the middle, and then the other 4 must be within 8" of this. This stops people placing then in front of their deployment zone, grabbing them and running off.

We also play that if you get the central treasure it's worth 2 rolls on the treasure chart. This means we still have effectively 6 treasures on the table, and makes the central treasure it more likely to be fought over rather than both sides hanging back and shooting each other at range.

[Darkson71]

The only 'house' rule I'd offer for serious consideration is one I'd discussed with Joe at the wargames illustrated campaign day, and that was to only have five treasure counters on the table. It creates a winner and loser, and stops those really dull games where everyone goes home happy with half the loot.

Put one counter at the centre of the table then place the other four as normal.

While I like the idea of 5 to force a winner it still does nothing to stop one (or both) players playing "KillWiz" and ignoring the treasures to try to kill the other side so they get all the treasures.  That's why we have a turn limit in force.

[Azzabat]

We've set a limit of 6 turns, plus you only collect the treasures your Warband actually carries off the table.

When the game ends any treasure on the board NOT being carried are lost. Anyone still on the table and carrying a treasure rolls a dice (whichever one you like) with a 50/50 chance of keeping it or dropping it. This pretty much prevents Killwiz and stops people "Chest Camping".

[Soss]

We use a random turn length which we start to roll for at the end of turn 6. You add the turn number to the roll and on a 16 the game ends. It mostly last 6-7 turns. This has made for some race type of situations that you don't get the treasure before the game ends or you get that extra turn to get one. We play that if you are in possession of the treasure at the end of the game you get it wether you got it off the board or not.

We also add +1 to the encounter roll for each treasure token that has been found.

We have a cut and run rule that we have only used a couple times were if you have have less models than your opponent you can call the game. You roll for each member holding a treasure and on a 1-5 they drop it. Your opponent then gets all the remaining treasure regardless if he is controlling them or not.

We say the one item limit doesn't apply to swapping out existing items for magic ones.

We have been adding in the option to roll once on the Golem campaign for the Construct scenario and rolling once on the Lich treasure table for the mosulem scenario. This is so other players can get a taste of the loot with out having to do the whole campaigns, or you don't have to do it again. We also added a gold crown addition that is 10x the roll you rolled on the table. So roll a 1 and you get 10 gold plus what the item is on the campaign treasure table.

[midismirnoff]

Thank you all, reading your precious comments I reckon both the turn limit and the treasure number have a consensus on them. For the very very limited experience I have had they are both sensitive amendments. One last question: I read once the wizards with zap spells (Elementalist and Necromancer by name) have a much higher xp income and so leveling capability. Is anyone complaining about this?

[Azzabat]

We certainly found Elementalist Wizards were advancing faster than any other Wizard due to being able to kill miniatures more often with their spells.

We remedied this by simply removing the XP gain for killing characters. Now we just give XP for successfully casting spells.

[gary42]

Absolutely.  No xp for kills.  20 xp for any successfully cast spell.

[midismirnoff]

That's it. So the common sense agrees with Bad Karma amendments in terms of game length and no kill xp. Those were the two main points I was thinking of. Thank you all very much.