[johngb1840]

My elven cavalry suffered a similar fate when charging a unit of dwarven rangers armed with crossbows. Next time I will upgrade to spangly armour and warhorses.

[johngb1840]

Hi Colin
Page 113 of the rule book (both editions) contains the following statement “We refer to this number of dice as the warband’s break value. Warbands that reach their break value are described as ‘broken’, and in most scenarios this signals defeat. it is perfectly possible for both forces to be broken in the same turn or for broken warbands to achieve their scenario objective, so don’t give up hope!” The key word, to me, is MOST which implies that in this particular scenario you would won had you achieved the objective even though your warband was broken. However since you had not reached the edge of the board then the fact that your warband was broken overrides the secondary objective where you were within two moves of the edge. Sorry, you lost. I’m sure that there will be different opinions on this.
Cheers, John

[johngb1840]

This would appear to make it more effective to attack with units of archer (many shots) first to bring down the Res value and then go with a bolt thrower (max 3 shots) to use its higher SV.

[johngb1840]

Ok. Do you work out the mulitple damage according to the status of the Monstrosity at the beginning of the turn or, if it is weakened, assess against its reducing Res (if so affected)? Hope that makes sense.

[johngb1840]

Personally I think crossbows and bbas are worth the upgrade cost, the former because of the range and SV and the latter because of the SV.

[johngb1840]

Doug, this has the potential to do my head in. Of course it could be easier if you knew which units you were going to do battle with but might count against you if you prepare a Warband expecting particular opposition and a different enemy turn up. Looking at dwarven axes (axe, big axe, bloominmg big axe) the “better” weapons sometimes cost more, are less likely to hit but cause serious damage when they do. Part of the fun is deciding which options to go for.

[johngb1840]

Does this now mean that whilst artillery such as bolt throwers cannot shoot “over the heads” of a friendly unit thay can be shot at if positioned behind a friendly unit?

I also struggle with the fact that artillery are large but cavalry are not even though they are much taller than the artillery piece and crew.

[johngb1840]

The updated Warband lists are on Rick’s own Erehwon website – https://thisgaminglife.uk/ – he also has a contact facility to allow gamers to ask questions.

[johngb1840]

Mark, had you spotted Rick Priestly’s statement – “I have not included the Warband lists within this errata because amended and updated versions are already
available as online downloads including corrections.” – on the first page of the errata? I agree that it would have been helpful to have a list of the changes, I have only identified a few.

[johngb1840]

I suspect that we will continue to have different views on this one. You could try asking Rick Priestly for his understanding of what should happen. If you do it would be great if you could post his response here so that we all can see what he says.

[johngb1840]

I see where you are coming from but this is probably a case of not overthinking a rule otherwise the rulebook could end up like WFB and become totally unwieldy.

[johngb1840]

I think the answer you are looking for lies in the Army Lists for each type of warband. For example a Dwarven Organ Gun (included in Version 2.0) has the special rule of Slow(3) which means its standard move is 3″ rather than 5″. In the Weapons Summary it has D6 x Ranged SV3 meaning that is has D6 shots each with a Strike Value of 3. A roll of 6 could wipe out an enemy unit.

You can find the updated Army Lists and the Rules Errata on Rick’s indispensable website: – https://thisgaminglife.uk/

[Author]

Posts