BOYL 2019 - Realms of Chaos Sandbox

lenihan

Moderator
Grumdril":2jshpurc said:
I like Snickit's suggestion about the bottling out rule, it sounds like a good way to ensure that several games are resolved so we can then do subsequent rounds and see the warbands develop. One other thing I'd say along those lines is that we don't all want all to go one after another (i.e. a turn per the number of players) as that would take ages. Perhaps 2 or 4 sides or groups (purely from a turns perspective), perhaps by drawing from a pack of cards (either colours or suits)?
Click to expand...

I didn't see this at first about going in turns as groups, with the cards randomly generate groups and order for that turn. I think that's a very nice simple and workable system (as long as someone brings a pack of cards!)

As this game is going to be on Saturday, I wonder how many of us might be around Friday evening to have a "beer summit", i.e. chat over a pint about what house rules etc. to use on the day, then we can get straight into the fun on Saturday!
 
Grumdril

Grumdril

Member
lenihan":1wmjlgkx said:
While I definitely respect the decision to go "by the book", I think by the looks of it people have painted up warbands that are closer to the "2013 method" and it would be a shame if that work was to go unused. I also reckon more things to move around could create more interest in the game, though that's a debatable point.
Click to expand...

I think there are two different points being discussed here and it depends what we're trying to achieve. If the aim is to have a RoC campaign then we should start off by the book (i.e. basically with sod all, average would be a level 5 hero and 7 or 4 beastmen depending on whether you're using the Lost and the Damned or the Slaves to Darkness followers tables) and progress from there. If the aim is to fight some interesting RoC skirmishes then start with bigger warbands. I don't think there's any questions that starting off with more followers, and hence having more tactical options, makes for a more interesting game. However by starting off small and simple you'd expect more games (perhaps 4 or 5) would be able to be played within the time, and hence more opportunity for progression.

If it is that we're aiming for a RoC campaign then where people have painted up more stuff it can just be that they've pre-rolled what their additional followers will be as they acquire them in subsequent games.

Paul / Grumdril
 
weismonsters

weismonsters

Member
I am planning to start off with a champion of Tzeentch with the starting rewards (a magic item and d3 chaos attributes). And i will generate a couple more rewards just to have some pre rolled advances.

The problems i have:

If appearance-changing mutations are rolled up, between games, the models will not reflect this. Not an insurmountable problem, i guess just fudge the results or use the model as a proxy.

There is some difference between the followers charts in the two books. The second book produces fewer ordinary troops but can give some high level characters as followers.
 

lenihan

Moderator
Grumdril":2s8cx3jj said:
I think there are two different points being discussed here and it depends what we're trying to achieve. If the aim is to have a RoC campaign then we should start off by the book (i.e. basically with sod all, average would be a level 5 hero and 7 or 4 beastmen depending on whether you're using the Lost and the Damned or the Slaves to Darkness followers tables) and progress from there. If the aim is to fight some interesting RoC skirmishes then start with bigger warbands. I don't think there's any questions that starting off with more followers, and hence having more tactical options, makes for a more interesting game. However by starting off small and simple you'd expect more games (perhaps 4 or 5) would be able to be played within the time, and hence more opportunity for progression.

If it is that we're aiming for a RoC campaign then where people have painted up more stuff it can just be that they've pre-rolled what their additional followers will be as they acquire them in subsequent games.

Paul / Grumdril
Click to expand...
My aim is, as always, that people have fun and get some fun minis on the table. People paint up stuff for BOYL and often it's the only chance the get to use it, so I'd hate for people to have the stuff they've prepared sitting in their bag while their champion gets killed off first round, or just wanders around and never sees action ;) For that reason I'm reluctant to make a decision to go by the book on other people's behalf and I'm trying to speak up for people who want to get their stuff on the table... even though personally I don't care and can definitely see the fun in starting from scratch. I do think that as long as we're sensible with the rules (i.e. grouping turns rather than each individual taking their move in turn and everyone else having to wait) we should get through a good few games anyway, as we'll have all Saturday!

Obviously also we'd have to be sensible to a certain degree in "fudging" rolls based on what people have available to bring on as followers, mutations, etc...
Though the idea of a mutation conversion station could be a very fun one!
 
Snickit

Snickit

Member
Just a foot note about the bottling out rule, if memory serves (and I could be wrong) Slaanesh Warbands may get penalised for failed psychology tests so maybe make that one a "freebie" fail for them.

I'll butt out now, let you guys plan your gaming =)
 

Zoglet

Member
Having spent the weekend painting up potential warband members for this, greatly looking forward to it. Do you want players to bring some scenery items also? I have some ruins, obstacles and the Chaos Lizard GateMouth (aka a piece of random aquarium scenery) if required.

I assume we will use WFB3 rules as that is the edition most closely associated with the original Realm of Chaos - but do say if thats not right. I can try to find my copy of Rules and Armies if helpful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top