Gruesome goblin-ing

On Saturday Nick and I headed over to Paul D's place for some long-overdue Oldhammer. Paul had set up a scenario and I was to field a goblin-only force for the first time. It's something I've been interested in trying ever since I got back into the hobby - I was wary of their general cowardice but intrigued by the possibilities of the ultimate horde warband.

Goblins are way down my painting list at the moment though, so it was great to be able to make use of Paul's extensive collection for the experiment. Much easier than painting the 103 figures needed for my 750 point force!

I'd like to write up a proper report but given that I still have to do the write-up of our Kremlo games from a couple of months ago I'm kind of hoping someone else will beat me to it... Meanwhile I thought I'd give some first impressions.

Underlying it all is the issue that I'm clearly not good at this generalship lark - Paul had lots of advice (or perhaps more accurately classed as astonished questions) at the end of the game which, if the ideas had occurred to me at the time, might have made things less heavy going. One was distinctly situational but others were more routine and in at least one case I should have known the better course of action. More games and hence more practice are probably a big part of the answer, but one of my weaknesses seems to be that I'm not good at seeing some of the tactical possibilities of the terrain.

Other challenges had more to do with goblins, specifically their appalling personal stats, and my warband selection. My deployment, and not remembering to keep my general central, were also slightly self-inflicted hurdles.

• On the selection front I really don't like warbands where the troops are just cheerleaders for the heroes, but I went a bit too far down the opposite path having only two heroes and two low-level wizards (albeit that my general was level 20 - and still extremely cheap being a goblin). In future I'll go for at least two decent level heroes (15+, so as to get a Cool bonus as well as Leadership).
• Even with heroes it's a given that goblins are going to fail most Leadership, panic and rout tests. That being the case the key is to minimise any such tests. So for example, if being charged, running away is not really an option - it will likely turn into a rout, and other nearby units will follow suit. Far better to hope for the best in combat (and trust to deep formations).
• Deployment and maneuvering are also key - flanks need to be kept protected. That unit at the bottom middle in the photo above is outside of the wall so that they can safely deliver their cargo of fanatics - but having them exposed like that turned out to be bad...
• Generals don't belong in flanking forces or off chasing objectives - best to keep them central where their Leadership bonus can be used as widely as possible. This is the one that annoys me most, as I remember it being a mistake I've made before!

It'll be some years probably before I get to give goblins another proper go, and I'm kind of looking forward to the challenge. Meanwhile I'll go back to painting my chaos warband, and revelling in their stats...

The ox with a rocks in a box - some GMing lessons learnt

On Friday we had another Oldhammer get-together which I was privileged to GM. Rather than do a report I wanted to make a note of the lessons I learnt in the process but fear not, there's a report from the half-orc point of view on the Oldhammer forum.

My main conclusions are perhaps obvious in hindsight -

1. The players only know what's in their briefing, and have fairly blunt tools with which to learn more
2. They also don't know what not to worry about
3. The players will do the completely unexpected
4. Prepare for what-ifs (as far as you can)
5. Preview (and if necessary mildly tweak) player-selected forces

My starting point was that I had three forces to cater for: some half-orc mercenaries (who were more interested in the looting than the fighting side of their profession), undead and beastmen. We were aiming for 750 points each roughly from the 3rd edition Warhammer Armies allies or mercenaries lists, although these were more of a starting point than a hard and fast rule.

Three-way conflicts are tricky to set up, with the main solutions being that everyone wants the same thing (the Vengeance of the Lichemaster approach) or a triangular affair. The latter seems slightly less forced to me - although it's very handy that everyone turns up to sort out their differences at just the same time! I feel though that I came up with a good-enough justification for this...

So my basic premise was this:

• The half-orcs have been hired to guard a sorceror who's on his way to a tor where magic is particularly strong, carrying some heavy artefact (with the help of an ox)
• The beastmen want to kill the sorceror
• The necromancer is near the tor for his own reasons, and decides to get involved

And on a slightly more detailed level:

• The half-orcs' primary objective is to survive, ideally getting some loot in the process and without completely destroying whatever reputation their mercenary company has. They know that the sorceror they're guarding seems weakened (but in hindsight should have known more)
• The necromancer knows that magic is strong near the tor and also that there's some sort of spirit tied to the tor. He believes that enough bloodshed near the tor will enable him to release or summon the spirit

Or at least that's what I thought would happen...

The initial setup has the sorceror, ox and half-orcs approaching the tor (from the top of the photo) as the undead arrive from their right. The table edge on the right hand side of the shot is marshy and impassable.

Lesson one: the players don't know what the GM knows (which after all, is kind of the point!). But unlike with an RPG, where you get the chance to drop increasingly unsubtle clues, anything which isn't made explicit to the players will probably remain unknown: they're too busy focusing on the tactical situation as they see it, and a wargame doesn't really provide the tools for investigation. "Me and my warband are going to go and talk to that other warband" doesn't often happen (although perversely it did in this battle!).

Lesson two: players don't know what not to worry about (also pointless GM backstories are largely pointless).

I have a mild loathing of GM PCs, in RPGs and wargames. They're especially troublesome in the latter where they call into serious question the GM's impartiality. Nevertheless I'd included Peelbone the sorceror in the scenario and was running him myself, as having the half-orcs control him would have unbalanced things too much. He was a powerful-ish sorceror (in order to give him enough wounds to keep things interesting), but with a fairly weak and situational selection of spells. In addition he starts the game with only 6 magic points.

To go more into the backstory (as it's the only chance I get!) also unbeknownst to the players Peelbone doesn't really know what the McGuffin is or what it does, having acquired it from his former mentor as the latter slipped into insanity (being betrayed and murdered by your protégé practically counts as natural causes amongst chaos sorcerors, surely?). He believes that if he energises it near the tor (via the demonology Summon Energy spell) it will summon a powerful demon which he'll be able to control.

The first turn saw Peelbone's familiar (who's reduced to ox-handling duty) take the ox towards the tor and unload its burden, with Peelbone seeming unfazed by the approach of the undead. The undead shamble forward at which point the beastmen arrive -

Peelbone is somewhat more concerned about the beastmen (I'm assuming he recognises them and knows they're out to kill him - he must have good eyesight!), and orders the half-orcs to deal with them. At this point I'm starting to refer to Peelbone and the half-orcs as "us", which causes the odd raised eyebrow from the other players. I know I can trust me, but they don't...

On his next turn Peelbone calmly casts Summon Energy, and all the factions see a swirling mist appear which is drawn partly into Peelbone, and partly into the McGuffin. On the one hand hopefully this worries them slightly, but on the other hand it probably also has them muttering to themselves about GM PCs... The undead and beastmen continue to advance, with the half-orcs turning to deal with the beastmen.

Lesson three: no scenario survives contact with the players. Given the half-orc backstory and the stacked odds against them, at this point they were meant to start worrying primarily about their own skin. But instead they got all professional...! Also the necromancer wants stuff to die near the tor so should have been backing off and letting the beastmen approach, but fascinated by the two-headed ox he was instead determined to take possession of the bundle it was carrying and so raced forward (or at least as fast as his force could shamble).

Peelbone now works out that the McGuffin doesn't do what he thinks, or at least something has gone wrong, so starts trying to save his own skin while keeping possession of the ox and the McGuffin (which his familiar now loads back onto the ox). He casts Cause Panic on the centaurs (as the fastest and hence most immediate threat) - they fail their willpower test but pass the panic test with flying colours.

Lesson four: think through what might happen. The necromancer, moving rapidly forward, casts Fire Ball at Peelbone. And is close enough to the tor for it to be twice as powerful as normal - Peelbone is toast. I was quite glad to see this on the one hand any concerns about GM PCs evaporate, but on the other hand it's part way through turn 3 and the beastmen's objective has gone up in smoke...

Fortunately the beastman general decides there's killing to be done so carries on regardless and from here we got into a fun little game. The necromancer was determined to take possession of the McGuffin (and is delighted to find out that it's a rock in a box carried by an ox, but somewhat unsure what to do with a large, heavy, rune-inscribed rock), while the half-orcs try a mixture of delaying, fighting and negotiating with the beastmen, hoping for reinforcements to help avenge their former employer.

I had plenty to do as a GM as in this sort of open game situations crop up which aren't covered by the rules, or which the rules don't allow but which seem reasonable under some circumstances. For example the half-orcs beat back a charge from the beastmen and then wanted to push them back without following up - for a second chance at negotiation, hopefully this time with a bit of stick to go with the carrot. By the book this isn't an option, but I allowed it on condition of a leadership check (to keep the victorious side in check).

Lesson five: balance player's freedom to chose their force with a bit of oversight (and know in advance what they're going to bring). This didn't have any real impact on the game but I now remember this tripping me up once in the past, and it also left a couple of oddities this time around. The first oddity was that the half-orcs had a shaman, and so should have known a bit about the McGuffin and one of its effects, but I didn't know this in advance and wasn't prepared for it. The second oddity was that the beastman leader had the attributes of Cowardice (fear) and Manic Fighter (hatred) - it made for some fun situations in the game, but probably isn't a sensible combination for the leader to have. In future I think I'll generate attributes ahead of the game.

My other, slightly depressing conclusion is that as well as all of the forces I need to be painting (chaos, orcs, vikings, dwarves) I also need a few oddities and objective markers to add flavour to scenarios. My two-headed ox from BOYL '15 added immeasurably to this game, and there were several other bits and bobs I could have done with for this time around, or will need if we take this story forward. There's never enough painting time...

(Why) I still prefer Warhammer Fantasy Battle

I spent last Sunday playing the good guys for a change, in a scenario organised by Paul of "more orcs than Sauron" fame, and on the drive home was pondering not just that I prefer WFB to the more modern games that I'm generally playing at the moment, but why I prefer it. Aside from the familiarity and no doubt nostalgia value it boils down to -

• The excessive detail (in troop characteristics, weapon bonuses, etc.) make it both easier and more prone to having a role playing game feeling
• It still handles a breadth of scale from handful of miniatures to small hundreds

To explain what I mean a few details of the scenario are relevant. I was leading a small band of samurai whose goal was to rescue some kidnapped damsels - facing me were around 100 barbarians and half-orcs, and some people on a war mammoth (very cool model - not room for one in my paint queue at the moment though!). A good number of the samurai characters had magic weapons, which naively I thought was to balance things out a bit...

One of the weapons was a Frenzied Blade.

In Dragon Rampant, to take a counter example, things are very much abstracted. You can build a narrative using the fantastical abilities, the various troop types and the Reduced Model rule. But actually the number of levers which are available to twiddle are fairly limited. This has a lot of good things going for it - the game can be more balanced and less open to abuse - but at the end of the day units end up somewhat alike and it's harder to really feel you know a character as an individual.

Back to the scenario: the Frenzied Blade wielder saved my bacon at a crucial interval (frenzy being a bit of a monster when it comes off) and looking back he becomes one of the key narratives that emerged from the game. There were also several other narratives, actual and potential - an interesting wizard duel, and the barbarian horde being held off by some seriously unlikely dice rolling. But those two factors - the detail and the breadth of scale - are what made the scenario truly memorable.

It can so easily degenerate into Herohammer or a "win in the army design" mess, but with a good GM and scenario Warhammer Fantasy Battle still seems, in my admittedly limited experience, hard to beat.

Realm of Chaos campaign reflection, suggestions and MacGuffins

I spent last Saturday enjoying a Realm of Chaos campaign put together by Gaj, along with Jeff McC and Paul D. For all of us I think it was our first "proper" taste of RoC, although Jeff and I had also played in the big warbands game at BOYL '13, and I think it's fair to say we're all keen to play again another day. There are a few things we'll probably do differently next time, mainly down to what seem to be shortcomings with the campaign system itself, although probably a degree of user error was involved as well.

There are photos too, but if that's all you want to see then probably best to scroll down...

Observations

• We played in pairs across two halves of a 6' x 4' table - small was definitely better
• Warbands games are small (and fast - we managed to fit 4 (and even 5) in the day), but because of that also spikier than a typical game of Fantasy Battle. Although WFB can also be prone to bouts of streaky dice it's exacerbated with a warband where for example a lucky round of combat can lead to enough casualties (maybe only 1 or 2) for rout tests to be required
• In a bid to even up the starting strengths of the warbands we'd settled on each having a level 10 hero plus two rolls on the followers table. This seems in hindsight to have given (slightly) overpowered champions.
• In every game the losing warband also had its champion killed / incapacitated - typically there was a fight between the champions which tended to also settle the scenario outcome. In one case at least though a champion was killed by missile fire alone
• Overall though the RoC campaign system seems to have a significant flaw - once a warband starts to fall behind in strength it doesn't seem possible to catch up.

Suggestions

• Personally I feel the "Dying in battle - No rewards" rule is wrong - instead I feel that as long as your actions were aligned with your chosen power's wishes then a degree of failure can be overlooked (bearing in mind that half the time "dying" only means knocked out). So I'd suggest the major actions (e.g. killing a sorcerer if a Khorne follower) should be rewarded, but halved. The minor (i.e. half point) rewards wouldn't be earned. Hence if you're zealous enough you have a chance of some reward from any battle.
• We were awarding a reward for achieving the scenario objectives (which I believe is a stated rule in Lost and the Damned, but I could be wrong). Hence we nearly always had a situation where one of the warbands got 2 rewards, and one none (as their champion was dead / knocked out), leading quickly to disparity between the warbands. I think we shouldn't do this in future, especially as achieving the objective tended to set the winner of the battle, hence invoking the "survive on the winning side" reward. More importantly from a flavour point of view though, presumably the scenario objectives is the champion's worldly concern - it may or may not please your chosen power.
• The survival rules are quite generous in often making models "killed" in combat actually just incapacitated / knocked out / etc. and hence available for the next battle. However they also (not unreasonably) state that the loser's survivors "become prisoners of the victor, who may dispose of them as he wishes". Consequently I'd suggest that, where appropriate, the scenario conditions encourage the winning side to vacate the field as part of the scenario, hence increasing survivability for the loser.
• I think our starting champions were too strong. You could of course just play as written and roll randomly, but if, as we did, you don't want to start with wildly inbalanced champions then perhaps go for level 5 heroes rather 10. Or, when starting out, roll on the tables but cap the rolls at level 15 (for warriors) or 10 (for wizards), but if one player is re-rolling part way through a campaign after being wiped out then they use the full table (and hence have a slim chance of starting with a powerful warrior or wizard).

Note: the median roll on the standard champion tables is a level 5 dwarf or elf, and with my suggested initial caps a level 5 human. However the modal value is a bog-standard human so I think (my stats knowledge is a bit shakey) you're better off settling for a level 5 than rolling. But then if playing it safe is your thing then the path of the chaos champion probably isn't for you...

MacGuffins

Many little lead (and plastic) people were locked in combat for a day in pursuit of a MacGuffin known simply as "the MacGuffin", which seems a little undignified. So, in Realm of Chaos-style, a MacGuffin generator seems useful -

d10	First part	d10	Second part
1	Eye of	1	Chaos power (d6: 1: Khorne; 2: Slaanesh; 3: Nurgle; 4: Tzeentch; 5: Malal; 6: Hashut)
2	Tears of	2	Old World god (d6: 1: Morr; 2: Taal; 3: Ulric; 4: Khaine; 5: Grungni; 6: Liadriel)
3	Claw of	3	the Oathbreaker
4	Essence of	4	Eternity
5	Orb of	5	Hunger
6	Blade of	6	Eldritch Sight
7	Gourd of	7	Dispair
8	Casket of	8	the Archmage
9	Crown of	9	Avarice
10	Tome of	10	the Earth

 

The games

Finally, on to the pictures...

Scenario 1 - below ground. A band of adventurers find the MacGuffin, and now must escape past a warband who are also after it. They routed a pack of wolves, after which it was a simple chase to the exit, which we decided was a bit dull. So mysteriously the exit became barred by a door - surely the adventurers could break it down before being caught by the warband's main strength...?

 

Moral of the story - adventuring party modelled on a low-ish level WFRP party can't go toe-to-toe with a warband. If we use this idea again it needs a bit of a re-think (and a buff). Or less doors.

Scenario 1 - above ground. Meanwhile two further warbands are fighting for control of the area, to give them a chance to find another entrance to the dungeon.

 

Scenario 2 - below ground. The adventurers must escape the tunnels (still), but this time through a different warband. Somehow they manage it this time.
 

Scenario 2 - above ground. Now in possession of the MacGuffin, the winning warband from below ground must escape past another, whose champion has now ascended to pseudo-daemonhood. Or, rather than escaping, kill the champion and all his followers...

Scenario 3 - in town. The warband with the MacGuffin have infiltrated a town for nefarious purposes, and are now resting up in a barn before making good their escape at night. But the adventurers have tracked them down.

Meanwhile various townspeople and guard patrols do their best to overlook groups of armed somethings in the dark, but the guards can't quite ignore obvious sounds of battle.

Scenario 3 - the bridge. A couple of chaos champions have worked out that if they can take possession of - or better yet destroy - this bridge, they can prevent the escape of the warband with the MacGuffin. If only they can get out of the surrounding mud for long enough to make a contest of it...

Finale. The warband with the MacGuffin is getting relatively powerful at this point. But the other two warbands, and the adventurers, get one last chance to acquire it.

Next project - Gulgan's Raiders

The first half of this month was hectic on the real life front, meaning I barely had time to pick up a paint brush. I did though have time to keep up with what's going on elsewhere in the Oldhammer community, and think about the next project that I could fail to find time to paint...

With hobgoblins being very much a current theme - mine should even make it to the front of the paint queue next month, just in time for Orctober - Gaj's chaos thurauder post sparked my imagination. A lightweight chaos force would be a good substitute for the human side of the Dolgan Raiders scenario from the second Citadel Journal and tick a couple of boxes for me. Not only could I use the first Warhammer scenario I ever played for my Newhammer project, but I'd also have some extra options for my combined orcs and chaos force.

I'll concede that this isn't exactly original, but to me using lots of chaos thugs - as my ally Leromides did in our chaos and orcs versus undead game at BOYL - is a bit of a revelation. To me the whole point of a chaos force is getting to field these chaps -

The models are cool, and they're excellent fighters, but as an embittered orc commander the best thing about them is the lack of animosity, and rock-solid personal characteristics (in wargame terms, at least...). I also have to admit the high points cost is quite attractive when you're trying to assemble an army in the quickest possible time!

But, before I talk myself out of it, may I present ... Gulgan's Raiders.

Guldan - chaos warrior (double handed weapon, protection rune)*

12 beastmen (light armour, shield)†
Steffen - beastmen champion (light armour, shield)

18 thugs (light armour, bow)
Jurgen - chaos marauder (light armour, shield)

Chaos centaur

3 chaos hounds
Tarak - beastman minor hero (light armour)

Nikolai - human level 2 wizard (5 spells)

As near as I can make out these come within a point or two of the original forces.

* I'm curious why rune weapons were removed between 2nd and 3rd editions (although you could see the case for ditching the Greater Death Rune!). In 3rd edition terms think of this as a cool but expensive way of equipping Guldan in light armour...

† Perhaps these should be thugs as well, but having played lots of WFRP I just can't have a chaos raiders force without beastmen. Plus I've some that I'm itching to paint...

I'm not sure tactically how good the beastmen will be in a fight, given the loss of Static Combat Resolution so beloved by the theorycrafters in moving from a 20 strong unit to only 12. It's also interesting to me to note that none of the units in the Dolgan Raiders scenario nor the later Blood on the Snow have standards - it makes sense in the context of the scenario especially for the former, but I'd not realised until now how much they only became ubiquitous in 3rd edition.

To represent these chaps on the table I nearly have enough beastmen, but only a couple of genuine thug miniatures plus a couple more good proxies for the archers. Instead I plan a mixture of Foundry's Men at Arms and Viking archers, plus some of Warlord Games' Germanic archers for the slightly wilder look.

I'm not sure what to do about the chaos hounds - at some point in the distant past I acquired some AD&D blink dogs for reasons that now escape me, but I'm a bit reluctant to use them as conversion fodder for some reason. So Warlord's mastiff pack might well be the answer there as well.

But first I must concentrate on my previous paint queue, before growing the lead pile!

Stone thrower alternative house rules for Warhammer Fantasy Battle 3rd edition

I got two good games of WFB in over the BOYL weekend, on Saturday participating in the staggeringly impressive siege game, and on Sunday a "smaller" 3000 point orcs and chaos versus undead battle.

As I start once more to get a feel for the game a few rules begin to stand out as off or a bit broken, one of these being the power of stone throwers - particularly in comparison to bolt throwers - to the point we partially house-ruled them during the siege game. Another aspect then reared its head during our Sunday game, and further thoughts since make me want to take this further.

I'm clearly not the first to notice the power of war machines in 3rd edition, it's quite a common theme over on the Oldhammer forum and in fact Dreamfish and Gaj have already introduced some house rules which attempt to tone them down somewhat.

I think those rules take the toning down a bit too far - while you don't want stone throwers to be the focus of a battle, having them being devastating but unpredictable is part of their charm! That said I've always stuck to 3- or 4-man throwers, the large template from a 6-man thrower adds another dimension.

With this in mind these rules attempt to make a couple of things less broken -

• The accuracy of speculative fire in the rules as written
• The attractiveness of stone throwers as a way of killing opposing characters

Speculative fire

Speculative fire as written seems far too powerful, since it's meant to represent the crew chucking rocks at a target which they don't actually know the location of - speculatively. They might have seen a unit move behind a wood or hill but they've no real idea of where it is, and certainly not the exact location of the unit leader (unlike their controlling general).

With this in mind in the siege game we doubled the "miss" chance, so that as well as deviating twice as far the missile also deviated on rolls in the range 1-16, rather than only 1-12. How to handle the direction of the additional deviations is up for debate, you could roll an extra d12 for these but I like the neatness of having everything resolved with a single dice roll, like this -

You could also ban the targeting of characters with speculative fire - or, in the words of Erny, just remind your opponent not to be an ass!

Survival of the fittest

In later additions of Warhammer there's apparently a rule called "Look out sir" where a character, if targeted by a war machine, is only hit 1 time in 6, with a normal trooper being the true target the rest of the time.

To be honest I mainly object to this rule on account of its name - it doesn't seem to belong in a Bretonnian or Empire army, never mind orcs and goblins! It also seems to give characters a bit too much immunity compared to the rules as written, so I'd suggest something like this instead -

Heroes are quicker, more ruthless and luckier than is typical of their kind. As a result, when associated with or leading a unit, not only do they not get hit by ordinary missile fire, they're rather less vulnerable to war machines as well. If a hero is a target in this situation then roll 1d6:

5-6: the hero spots the incoming projectile, or perhaps reacts quicker to a warning shout, and manages to move out of the way. They take no damage
3-4: the hero is slow to react and only manages to avoid harm by shoving past their fellows, inadvertently pushing one of the troopers into harm's way. If there is a "spare" trooper (i.e. one not originally within the target area) they take damage in place of the "hero", if not no additional damage is caused
1-2: the hero is hit as normal

Aside from the above two suggestions I'm also not sure about the points values of stone throwers, particularly in relation to bolt throwers. I've noticed that Warhammer Armies doubles the cost of both of them compared to the 3rd edition rules, but stone throwers still seem rather cheap for a couple of reasons -

1. For a target you can see the hit chance is always 40% with a stone thrower (13-20 on d20). By contrast for orcs or humans (BS of 3) the hit chance with a bolt thrower is 50% under optimal conditions but given any modifiers (long range, soft cover) this swiftly drops away
2. For stone throwers any target under the template is automatically hit and you then just need to cause a wound for each individual model. For bolt throwers second and subsequent casualties are subject to diminishing returns - not only do you have to wound the previous target in order to have a chance of wounding further targets, but also the strength of the missile is progressively reduced. Therefore bolt throwers just aren't the mass killers that stone throwers can be.

Countering this is that bolt throwers don't present a threat to their own side in the event of a miss, and also have no minimum range, but taken overall still seem much worse value than stone throwers. I feel then that stone throwers should cost twice the points of the equivalent bolt thrower (as in fact was the case in 2nd edition).

Comments? Thoughts?

A year's worth of painting

I'm in retrospective mode at the moment. To be more honest I was planning to be in 6-month retrospective mode in July, although as with so many other things it's been pushed back to "after BOYL".

I'm not sure I have enough stuff painted yet to qualify for the Army Shots thread on the Oldhammer forum, and my output (and quality) pale in comparison to Orlygg's three years' worth of output, but in the last year I've gone from this -

to this -

Not an army yet, especially as I wouldn't be cheesy enough to field two war machines in a force that size, but a decent allied force for a battle or siege.

At my current rate I'll be at my BOYL target (24 more figures!) by about the end of the year, and my year target by who knows when...? But progress is being made!

Looking for Newhammer

Some posts on the Oldhammer forum and around the wider internet (Old Fogey, Lee Brady) have got me thinking. Oldhammer (assuming by that you mean to be playing in a certain narrative style with old rule sets - 2nd / 3rd edition in the case of fantasy) is all very well, but it's by definition limited in scope because of those rule sets. The fact that they're out of print means you're reducing your number of potential players, within an already niche hobby.

So I thought it worth trying to understand what's appealing (at least to me) about those older rule sets other than their out-of-print-ness (and hence GW no longer making your army obsolete in favour of their current sales target). And then I want to discover what current rule sets - if any - reasonably support an Oldhammer style.

Here's what I came up with:

1. Character-driven (within reason) - characters shouldn't be the be-all and end-all, but should be important. You should know, and care, if they're injured or killed, without them sweeping all before them.

2. Characterful units - as well as being the crux of the fighting, units should have character and differentiation. Goblins should be cowardly and none too dangerous in a fight, dwarves should excel over men in a straight toe-to-toe fight.

3. Support 'large skirmish' games - this sort of follows from point 1, in that if characters sway the battle then we have large groups but not armies. Not to say that a character can't be significant in a meeting of armies, as the tale of Troy will tell you, but I want characters to be people not demi-gods. So 100-ish figures per side at a 1:1 ratio suits me nicely.

4. Complete and self-supporting - the rules should contain everything you need, including spells and a bestiary, and a method for creating and costing your own creatures.

Although not on the list, since as long as (2) and (4) are catered for you should be able to fit this in yourself, a strong game world and a balanced set of factions are also important to me.

Although Warhammer's Old World is often derided as being derivative (or, more to the point I suspect, derivative but lawyered-up), to me that's one of its great strengths. Its use of archetypes not only allows a wide range of figures, from dark ages to late medieval, to find a place, but also provides a good starting point for narratives. It's also interesting (to me at least) to find out more about the parallels it's drawing from, and the often even more fascinating stories to be found there. Thanks to the Empire and hobgoblins I now know a lot more about the Holy Roman Empire and the Mongol invasions than I did a few months back (more on the latter another day).

On the balance side of things 2nd edition is pretty good, since there's only one race-specific weapon (ball and chain) and very general war machines. On the war machine side of things 3rd edition started to lose the plot (in hindsight), although within the context of the rules themselves the race-specific side of things was reasonably muted. Over the next few years this became the norm (or so it seemed to me) with various additions via White Dwarf in support of new model releases, which coincided with my exiting from the hobby. I'm sure with appropriate discussion / house ruling all of this could be worked through in a mature manner, either agreeing on certain aspects being overpowered or working in ways for items to be used by the 'wrong' faction. However whether a rule set tends towards the 2nd or late-3rd edition model might well be a reasonable indication of where a rule set is heading and hence whether it's right for me.

I love this stage of miniature painting...

... when you finally get to the shading / highlighting bit.

My painting's going very slowly at the moment, mainly due to real life commitments, and I've pretty much resigned myself to not getting the miniatures I want painted done by the time BOYL 2014 comes around.

However I did realise while painting my last batch of orcs that I struggle with enthusiasm at the base coating stage, so this time around I tried changing from my normal routine. Rather than basecoat everything then shade and highlight second, I tried with a couple of chaos warriors doing each main area fully from basecoat to finished, then moving on to the next. It does seem to help with the motivation side of things, even though I'm not sure it makes me any faster. So I think I'll stick with that approach for a while.

I'm not 100% happy with the way these two ended up. The shields especially I think are rather weak, after thinking with my last batch I had done a decent job on shields. And the green armoured guy has a rather heavy handed shading wash, amongst other things.

Other than doing the bases I need to move on to the next pieces now though. I'll come back these along with others of my recent efforts once I can field a useful amount of painted figures. Meanwhile the lesson learned is (surprise) preparation is key - although I'm loath to chop at the figure the green chap needs to lose his shield boss to give me a flat area to work on, whereas his compatriot needs some work to flatten out the join between his shield and the figure.

I've a battle looming in less than a week though, and at least 3 more figures (ideally 5) to get done by then...

Random parenting insight into my hobbies

Inspired by Snicket's vaguely related post about younger relatives and gaming I've finally dusted this off my draft pile... Posts on consecutive days? Whatever next?!

Being somewhat older now than I was when I started playing RPGs, and Warhammer Fantasy Battle a few years after that, I now have children who are themselves (independently) showing an interest in these hobbies. And it's enlightening to consider my own reaction to their interests.

A few years ago (before I'd discovered the Oldhammer movement, perhaps before it even recognisably existed) our eldest boy got into Warhammer 40k. I vaguely mentioned I'd played myself in my youth, and my wife and I saw it as a convenience in terms of buying Christmas presents, but otherwise I didn't express much interest. In hindsight I should have at least involved myself in the painting side of things but was held back by a couple of factors, partly not wanting to encroach on the hobby he shared with his friends but also coloured by my own rejection of the Games Workshop of 20+ years ago. Anyway, after a year or so his interest waned and that was that.

Then several weeks ago our number 3 son (counting in age order only, I hasten to add!) very hesitantly explained that he wanted to play Dungeons and Dragons with his friends, and seemed a bit nonplussed at our casual acceptance of this.

The point (I'm getting to it, honest!) is that, if he'd wanted to play Warhammer rather than D&D, my reaction would be more complex and probably in many ways less supportive. My reason - I'm betting the current edition doesn't contain anything along the lines of "Of course, there is nothing to stop you developing your own world background, or of adapting the background from any book you have read to form the basis for your games" (WFB 3rd edition, Introduction, p9).

Warhammer has always been a sales tool for a miniatures manufacturer, but from what I've seen (although this could be me confirming my own prejudices) modern Warhammer is proscriptive rather than creative, whereas a role playing game can't help but be about creation and imagination.

In the hypothetical scenario where he did want to play Warhammer I could of course espouse the virtues of Oldhammer, but it'd be my eccentricities versus what his peers are playing and the marketing budget of the 800lb gorilla. And (again, from what I've seen) modern Warhammer doesn't even give you the tools to make it up for yourself - for example number 1 son's version of the 40K rulebook is only a third of a rulebook by 2nd edition standards (Combat only, no Battle Magic or Battle Bestiary, and with the points values section of Combat removed).

Hopefully I'd be able to create a small bubble of enlightenment amongst him and his friends, but I'm guessing that (for example) giving gifts of non-GW figures would lead to the same expression of contained disappointment as when, in years gone by, a relative bought him the big console game of the season - but for the wrong console.

Brand new hobgoblins (sort of)

I'm a big fan of Whiskey Priest's how to Oldhammer initiative which has been taken up enthusiastically by the community on the forum.

While I still covet a fair number of Citadel miniatures that were successfully marketed to me in the late 80s I think it's important to emphasise the gaming as much as the collecting, and to support current manufacturers making some great miniatures at sensible prices. I also like the mindset of finding a miniature you like then working out what rules should represent it on the table, which seems diametrically opposed to the GW marketing message of the last 20-some years of selling the model by making the unit it represents desireable or required.

So, inspired by Aiteal's hobgoblins and zoggin-eck's 'back to the source' approach I took a second look at a number of figures that I'd previously rejected as suitable orcs but which I realised would make fantastic hobgoblins, at least in my view of them (heavily influenced by the 2nd edition Bestiary): scrawnier than orcs, with a distinct eastern / Mongol horde vibe and head hair.

So, over the last couple of weeks I've taken delivery of a number of packages of brand new models - a mixture of Armalion Red Moon orcs (via Ral Partha Europe) and old Grenadier Nihon orcs, eastern hobgoblins and goblins:

And here they are ranked up, with Harboth and a C36 Hobgoblin for size reference:

The Red Moon orcs are a great fit for the older Citadel hobgoblins. I'm not so keen on their hairy arms and legs, so I'm trying to work out how to represent that as furs instead (easy on the arms, might need a bit more work around the feet).

The Nihon orcs are slightly taller and bulkier than I'd have liked, but I'm sure their mates will be glad of some big lads to push to the front rows! The great thing about goblinoids in general is that a bit of size variation is to be expected, so the overall impression is fine. I wouldn't want too many of these in the unit though.

The eastern hobgoblins and goblins are just perfect. Unfortunately, although there are other variations in the range, those are a bit hunched for my taste (a bit of a Nick Lund trademark) so I've limited myself to just three of them.

I'm really looking forward to starting painting these. I need to get the orcs that are front of my queue finished first, then we'll see if my painting can do justice to the models.

Thank you Whiskey Priest for helping me broaden my horizons a little!

Old world / real world empires

My official excuse for buying dwarves on eBay is to put together the entire forces of the Blood on the Snow scenario from White Dwarf 91. It occured to me that, given reasonably priced old school dwarves are hard to come by (but plenty of manufacturers make compatible humans), my non-orc force could be the human elements from that scenario plus (initially) a few of the dwarves.

I thought I'd look a bit into which period of European history most closely relates to the Warhammer 3rd edition Empire, so as to be able to interpret historical figure manufacturers' catalogues. It's commonly known that Brettonian armies are early medieval and Empire armies are late medieval / renaissance, but what does this mean in terms of dates (or, more importantly, historical wars and hence figure ranges)?
There is clearly some hand-waving involved, however taking Warhammer Armies* as a reference point my guidelines were -

• The dominant infantry weapons are the halberd and crossbow
• Pikes and spears are also in use
• Arquebuses are used but unreliable

According to Wikipedia -

Arquebuses were first used in any significant numbers by the Black Army of Hungary (1458–1494) but this was unusual for the time. They started to come to the fore when pike and shot formations were developed by the Spanish following their defeat at the Battle of Seminara (1495), with the first notable success of this tactic being the Battle of Cerignola (1503). By the Italian War of 1521 these formations were starting to dominate the battlefield. Battles such as the Battle of Ceresole (1544) still have a Warhammer 3rd ed level of technology, but it seems to be that the Empire is earlier than this.

Halberds were a primary infantry weapon during the Burgundian Wars (1474–1477) and Wars of the Roses (1455–1485) - though the English used bills. Pike regiments at the time also incorporated halberds or zweihanders when fighting other infantry but when the role of pikes became primarily protection for gunners the role of halberds declined. The English retained the bill (in conjunction with the longbow) for some time after the pike and arquebus were adopted on the continent, with the Battle of Flodden (1513) being notable amongst other things for being a contest between the two systems.

So where does this leave me? It seems somewhere between about 1470-ish and 1521; perhaps if I had to go for a specific date then 1493, the start of the reign of Maximilian I as Holy Roman Emperor.

I could have reached a very similar conclusion by noting that Wargames Foundry sell their ex-Citadel Empire figures as Wars of the Roses, and that the Perrys have similar ranges both for WotR and European Armies, 1450-1500. However I wouldn't have learned so much in the process, for example why historical Burgandian armies are also a good reference, or why Foundry's gendarmes seem as appropriate as their Renaissance knights as Empire substitutes.

As an interesting aside I came across a useful Brief History of WFRP Time in my search which states that Sigmar's real world equivalent (except without the godhood, obviously) is from around 714-814, which might be an interesting campaign one day.

* For extra old school appeal I could have used Ravening Hordes and the results would have basically been the same. WA is handy though because of the additional illustrations

On His Excellency's Service - Conclusion

Nearly a month on I look back on the game with very mixed feelings, which probably says more about my self-critical nature than the scenario itself. So I'll try to give a balanced view of my own, and also pick the brains of the players themselves over on the Oldhammer forum.

I was aiming for a scenario in the style of The Magnificent Sven or those from old Citadel Journals, where players can win without necessarily dominating the battlefield, and I think this was mostly achieved. As with many things in life, the things I agonised over before the game generally worked out OK, while the things I didn't agonise about came back to bite me. Although human nature being what it is there are almost certainly things not agonised about which didn't bite anyone, and I'm totally unaware of as a result...

The good

Not to be forgotten - a game of Oldhammer was played in good spirits. Figures were deployed, dice were thrown, and both players set out to achieve their objectives in an even-handed fashion.

There was good "fog of war" due to the involvement of a GM. Neither player was an omniscient general overseeing the battlefield - the high elves didn't know quite what they were up against, whereas Wezma didn't quite know what his own forces were up to (and the players seemed reasonably happy with this). There are a couple of caveats to this though, which I'll mention below.

The scenario seemed reasonably balanced (again, with a major caveat). The high elves' limited objectives seemed to counterbalance their inferior numbers, although in fact in hindsight Wezma's objectives are quite hard to achieve before his reinforcements arrive.

I'm also quite happy with the way the scenario development went. I set out to let the players field whatever forces they wanted, and in fact was expecting the defenders to be orcs/goblins led by either Paul or Gaj. The main issue with the game would have been avoided if I'd picked all of the forces, but at the cost of less ownership for the players I feel.

The bad

The elephants in the room for the scenario were the demons. When Paul first shared his draft army list with me the thing that concerned me most was their ability to fly, especially as it was unclear at this stage whether we would be playing 2nd or 3rd edition - and flyers are very tough in 2nd ed. Their profiles aren't especially powerful, and they seemed to me to be slightly inferior, fear-causing and flavourful chaos marauder replacements. I think I had in the back of my mind to ensure Gaj had counters to their immunity to normal weapons, but failed to follow through on this. There were various options - to rule that these were somehow mundane (and hence vulnerable to normal weapons), to provide the elves with one or more magical weapons, or to select Wanda's spells for her. Any one of these would have worked, and while it would have slightly changed the nature of the scenario to say that here is a unit that is a counter to that unit (a whiff of newhammer, perhaps?) it would have been better than the outcome that we did end up with which was to have one side have a unit with no counter. I think that part of my procrastination was the thought that, even in this situation, the high elves' objective was still achievable, but this fails to take into account just how much the demon's presence colours the scenario.

In character / out of character briefing - I wanted to have the player briefings be in character, however in hindsight I should have been more open with Gaj about what the scenario was aiming to achieve, i.e. to state explicitly that his forces were outnumbered, but the intention was that his objectives balance this out. It's OK for the general to not know what he's up against, but in only our second Warhammer game together and my third meeting with Gaj the mutual understanding is not yet there to spring quite the surprises on him that this scenario entailed. Also, when playing Oldhammer it's fair to trust the players to keep in and out of character knowledge and motivations separate.

Rules knowledge and application - I'm far less familiar with the rules than I was 20 years ago, and even then (I now know) I was applying some rules wrongly. I didn't worry about this too much ahead of the game, as I knew that any different interpretations or misunderstandings could be resolved in a grown up manner. This proved to be the case, so while there were probably half a dozen instances of rules being wrongly applied or missed altogether I don't feel these significantly impacted the outcome of the game. However I want to be running games as per the rules, mainly so that we can then fairly judge how the rules stand up.


Time - it would have been good if the game had come to a decisive conclusion in the 3 or so hours the club is open on a Friday. It would have helped if I'd arrived on time, but even so with an extra 20 minutes I feel the battle would have been even more pregnant rather than concluded. I'm not sure if this is simply a matter of fighting across rather than along the table, however that layout seemed to suit the scenario the best.

Afterword

By a strange coincidence both players had the spell Cause Animosity available to them and both considered its use on the demons (in Paul's case to influence the uncontrolled demons in going after his foe - which would again have shown the benefit of having a GM in order to adjudicate this sort of creative generalship). If the demons had been made to attack Wezma's forces in this manner it would have highlighted the situation that neither side had a counter to them, other than their wizards.

I'm not sure what to conclude from this, except I'm wondering if we might develop a local meta to always have a wizard or magical weapon on each side, except where the game has no mages, scrolls, etc. It also brings into question the balance of demonologists (although many would argue that balance and 3rd ed are mutually exclusive) - albeit at the (generally low) risk of failure to control, the ability to summon uncounterable allies seems rather powerful! My main thought though is that scenario design requires much more "what if" than I put into my first attempt, with a greater review of (and perhaps control over) which tools are available to each side.

I also one day want to run a scenario where one side has an unkillable unit (inspired by the discussion on the Oldhammer forum about magically armoured characters [registration required], and ideally avoiding demons altogether!), but it would need to be clear from the outset that this was the point of the scenario, rather than being an unintended consequence of the army selections.

***

Battle navigation

Prologue

Forces

Turn 1
Turns 2 and 3
Turns 4 and 5
Turns 6 and 7 

Turn 8

Conclusion

On His Excellency's Service - Turn 8

The clock was clearly against us at this point, as the club was packing up around us. And with the dark elves arriving Gaj seemed to see this turn as the last throw of the dice...

High elf turn 8

The silver helms moved out from behind the covering cultist rout, into a position to charge Wezma in a future turn - but with equally exposing themselves to whatever he could do to them. Wanda moved forward, curiously close to the chaos warriors, but at the same time giving her line of sight on Wezma. Bhonnd also left his unit, again giving him line of sight on Wezma.

Bhonnd fired on Wezma, but failed to wound, and Wanda's cast fireball proved to be slightly out of range and so fizzed.

Chaos turn 8

Paul chose to draw proceedings to a halt, and so draw the curtain on a very enjoyable no-score draw. But we'll never get to know what the demons would have done next...

***

Battle navigation

Prologue

Forces

Turn 1
Turns 2 and 3
Turns 4 and 5
Turns 6 and 7

Turn 8

Conclusion

Prize winning blog

It's like an award winning blog, only less deserving...!

I was lucky enough to win the giveaway in Erny's Orctober, and the boyz arrived in the mail on Friday. And even lucker that Erny threw in a champion to keep them in line, which just happened to be the one miniature I was after from that page of the 1988 Citadel catalogue! Not that I have all of them by any means - only 4 in fact - but I'm attempting to keep my "wants" list as small as possible, for the sake of my sanity and marriage.

Hopefully I'll find some time over the Christmas period to get paint on at least some of them.

Thank you Erny!

On His Excellency's Service - Turns 6 and 7

I have to confess I'm a bit hazy on exactly how the fight between the halbardiers and cultists went. As far as I can tell from the photos and my memories of the overall battle, it was like this...

High elf turn 6

The silver helms failed their strength test to move towards Wezma, meanwhile the merchant company wheeled to face the oncoming warriors. They also tried a shooting them, but with no greater accuracy than before.

The combat between the cultists and halbardiers continued, with Drumman killing the cult leader but the cultists counterbalancing this with their hits on the unit. With their follow up bonus from the previous round they pushed back the cultists once more. The rebel demons clung on for one final round.

Chaos turn 6

A further setback for Bhonnd - Wezma's dark elf allies finally appeared on the table edge and moved towards the battle! The chaos warriors also continued forward, wheeling slightly towards their target.

The combat phase had two decisive results*. With Drumman able to attack the rank and file, and with the halbardiers strength of numbers, the cultists were finally stopped in their tracks and pushed back. And with the cult leader dead they failed their rout test and fled. Further damage was done in the free hack, but with Drumman's heavy armour the unit was too slow to catch the fleeing cultists and the halbardiers stopped, unformed. In the other key combat the rebel demons finally gave way to instability and were lost to the void.

 * As I said before, I'm pretty sure this is what happened, but I distinctly remember being surprised just how poor the additional hand weapon of the cult leader proved in practice. Hence I thought his combat with Drumman lasted longer. More notes next time! I think that part of the problem was that by this time we were too absorbed in the game to be taking enough photos which is probably the preferable way around.

High elf turn 7

Despite the looming threat of the demons the guard unit elected to charge the routing cultists. This had the effect of them fleeing towards the swamp, directly into the path of Wezma's wind blast spell (I'm assuming this was a cunning plan). Wanda took the opportunity to move away from the chaos warriors.

More arrows were wasted in the direction of the chaos warriors, but otherwise this was a turn full of potential rather than actual outcomes.

Chaos turn 7

Wezma's newly arrived allies... sat back to watch. I thought this was a great example of roleplaying over tactical need from Paul - his background for his elven allies was that they'd happily join in any fighting and looting that was to be done, as long as it was to their advantage. In this instance where things were looking less certain from their point of view they preferred to sit on their hands. Maybe they'd get involved once their hated cousins moved into shooting range...

The chaos warriors and demons squared up to the mechant company and halberdiers respectively. The cultists and guards meanwhile were deemed to have their rout move the previous turn (when running away) and so didn't even attempt to move under the wind blast spell. I think they probably should have been free-hacked this turn, but that got lost somewhere amongst the discussion as to just what the wind blast was doing.

***

Battle navigation

Prologue

Forces

Turn 1

Turns 2 and 3

Turns 4 and 5

Turns 6 and 7

Turn 8

Conclusion

On His Excellency's Service - Turns 4 and 5

High elf turn 4

The silver helms charged gloriously at the jabberwocky with their comrades shuffling forward in support. All except for Wanda who wanted to get a few friendly units between her and the hostilities and decided the left flank was more to her taste. Meanwhile the merchant company started to earn their reputation for the game - that of elves who couldn't hit a sizable enemy unit at moderately close range.

The silver helms elves did OK with their charge but the real stars of the combat were the warhorses with their hits finishing off the jabberwocky. Unfortunately for the silver helms by this point we'd worked out that not only was the monster subject to stupidity but that it could also regenerate, which it promptly did for all but the fireball wound inflicted the previous turn. This didn't stop it being pushed back however.

The rebel demons lost their combat, and were all but wiped out by the resulting instabity roll.

Gaj was by this point rather concerned about what the chaos warriors were so interested in on his left flank, presumably concious that other bad stuff had appeared from out of sight earlier in the game. As a result, in what was perhaps my favourite move of the game, Wanda was sent off on a scouting mission to see what was over the hill!

I was rather surprised by this, especially as I could guess that mainly Issbig was being kept as far away from Wezma as possible, thanks to the not-so-subtle hint in Wezma's briefing. But it did serve to illustrate that Gaj at least was operating under the fog of war, and as a GM that I felt was part of my role fulfilled.

Chaos turn 4

Most of the chaos warband seemed content to sit and watch the jabberwocky fight... all except the warriors who, with victory conditions of killing the enemy's leaders, pressed eagerly forward.

With the impetus of their initial charge lost the silver helms were less successful, and the jabberwocky killed two of their number with its retaliatory blows. They managed to push the monster back but once again it regenerated all of the wounds scored.

The rebel demons lost one of their number to combat, and another to instability. It began to look as though the elves would have to deal with these all-but-invulnerable opponents sooner rather than later!

High elf turn 5

Both the halbardiers and the guard regiment began to square up to the cultists, while the merchant company were left facing the demons. Wanda continued her quest towards the ridge of hills.

The merchant company killed a single cultist in their shooting phase, while the jabberwocky combat broke from its usual pattern with the monster not dying, but killing no silver helms in turn. Once again the monster was pushed back, and regenerated all hits lost.

Chaos turn 5

The cultists had enough of being bystanders, and charged into the halberdiers. The chaos warrior's advance continued, and you got the feeling that Wanda probably was feeling she'd wandered too far.

Drumman Bace challenged the cult leader to single combat, with each opponent scoring a hit. The cultists and the halberdiers each killed a single trooper, and the halberdiers were pushed back.

The jabberwocky however finally failed to regenerate the hits caused that round, which were sufficient to kill it. Wezma was left looking rather exposed...

Fortunately for him he had the presence of mind to cast Wind Blast, and to not fail his Intelligence test (now being down to 11 magic points). The cavalry was held off, for now...

***

Battle navigation

Prologue

Forces

Turn 1

Turns 2 and 3

Turns 4 and 5
Turns 6 and 7

Turn 8

Conclusion

On His Excellency's Service - Turns 2 and 3

High Elf turn 2

More lovely manoeveuring from the elves. Starting like this -

 And finishing like this -

Wanda tried another cast at the cultists, but failed her Intelligence test again.

Chaos turn 2

The original demons (still under GM control) failed their Leadership test again, and headed in the general direction of the cultists.

The cultists, jabberwocky and Wezma did a combination of advancing and avoiding the demons, as did the newly visible chaos warriors and marauders on the right flank.

Having had his previous demonic servants betray him so badly, Wezma did the only sensible thing and summoned more demons! This time the control test was passed and the elves were starting to look rather outnumbered. Personally I was wondering just how many summonings Wezma had the nerve for...

High elf turn 3

Despite the seeming eagerness to grasp the nettle tape implied in the photo above Gaj had a good long think before his next move. But move he did, lining up nicely to attack.

The cultist ranks were thinned out slightly by the arrows of the merchant company, and Wanda finally passed her intelligence and hurled a fireball at the jabberwocky causing a single wound. She also sensibly departed from the halbardier unit, given the likelihood of close combat at any moment.

Chaos turn 3

Undeterred by the fireball (and everyone not realising he was subject to stupidity) the jabberwocky advanced.

The rebel demons passed a Leadership test and headed for the table edge, only to be charged by the newly summoned demons under Wezma's control.

The warriors and marauders merged into a single unit and continued to advance, giving the demonic combat as wide a berth as they could.
 
The rebel demons lost the combat and were pushed back, taking a single casualty and earning a penalty to their hit rolls for the remainder of the fight thanks to instability.

The jabberwocky reserve moved closer to Gaj's well dressed line, and Wezma shuffled closer to the cultists for protection.

***

Battle navigation

Prologue

Forces

Turn 1

Turns 2 and 3
Turns 4 and 5
Turns 6 and 7 

Turn 8

Conclusion

On His Excellency's Service - Turn 1

On with the show!

Despite being offered the opportunity to pick their spells both players decided to roll for them, with mixed results. My last chance to resolve the demon situation was gone...

The battlefield, before deployment -

And after -

Wezma's forces had been marked up on a map before Bhondd deployed, and then only his visible troops placed on the table. The jabberwocky is visible because of its size, but there's more lurking out of sight.

Gaj knew there was something afoot, as Paul and I were having "GM chats", but looking at the units of cultists and demons and the large monster in front of him he probably thought most of his opposition was on the table already.

High elf turn 1

Wanda's unit passed their initial stupidity test with flying colours, and the elves proceeded to set themselves up for battle as though on a parade ground! Many leadership tests were taken and passed, and it was all looking rather impressive. As a long time orc commander I could only watch in wonder (although I was probably still recovering from seeing someone deploy in a line astern). Lack of animosity, decent leadership, and musicians - they really could do no wrong.

 

In the magic phase Wezma attempted to cast Dispirit on the cultists, but failed her Intelligence test.

Chaos turn 1

Paul started out with one of those moments that turns a game, deciding that his demons had been summoned as the final act of deployment rather than them just being troops like the rest of his warband. This makes a lot of sense, although in hindsight they should be already bound and so on, since he'd paid the points for them, much like an undead army would be. Anyway, he rolled a double 6 on his control test, and hence suddenly had a large unit of unfriendly demons sitting in the middle of his deployment. Control of them passed to the GM.

This also meant he had to deploy the remainder of his warband, as they were now visible to unfriendly forces -

I got the impression that this caused as much consternation to Gaj as to Paul, as not only had an extra 600 points appeared on the table, but it seemed to bring home that he didn't know what else was out there.

I was now in a tricky position as to what do do with the demons. The classic reaction would of course have been to eat the summoner and then leave the table, however Wezma was saved both by his fluff and the demands of the game.

The warband's backstory is that they seek to emulate the style of the demons they worship, so it seemed to me that for them to attack would be as though Elvis had been kidnapped and taken to a really bad impersonator's convention. Yes, they're angry at being summoned, but to kill the warband would be a bit like kicking a puppy (although Warhammer demons do that - and worse!). They can't help but be slightly flattered so their natural murderous rage is tempered somewhat.

On a pragmatic note, had they attacked the demons would most likely have killed Wezma or at the very least have forced him to flee from the table. With Wezma dead the game would become a race between Issbig and Bhondd with Issbig as the likely winner. Issbig might then chose to fight it out (as the defender can still meet his objectives in this situation) but at the time this didn't seem like it would offer much in the way of a game.

In the end I copped out slightly and turned to the dice for help. Each turn the demons would take a leadership test, and if they passed would head to the table edge nearest me in search of whatever entertainment the Old World could offer 13 vagrant demons. If they failed the test they'd move in a random direction on the table, attacking any unit they encountered.

This turn they failed the leadership test, but the random move was to stay still.

The remainder of the warband moved away from the demons as best they could. In the magic phase Wezma attempted a Bind Demons on his rebel unit. They passed their magic save, and I made a mental note that their patience with these sycophants was now exhausted.

***

Battle navigation

Prologue

Forces

Turn 1
Turns 2 and 3
Turns 4 and 5
Turns 6 and 7 

Turn 8

Conclusion