Caps on troop numbers in 3rd ed

Gallivantes

Gallivantes

Vassal
Reading up on army composition in 3rd and the idea of fixed caps is new to me. For example max 20 warriors in a chaos army. But then an ally contingent expands that cap by 20 more and works around that seemingly rigid aspect. Can you even have more than one ally contingent to so to speak blow that limit wide open?

Getting some mixed messages from the setup. Thoughts?
 
You can have multiple ally contingents, but only one of each Ally type, as far as I was aware.

So with chaos as the example, you could have a Chaos Ally Contingent, as well as a Skaven one, but not two separate Chaos Allies, all within the points constraints, obviously. That's how we interpreted it, anyway.
 
Thanks DieselMonkey. Having one of each type sounded sensible but I wasn't sure I was reading it right.

I am really liking the freedom of the Allies, Mercs and Hosts rules for 3rd.

Things in my collection I didn't know I could incorporate in my Chaos army that way:
- A griffon
- A bunch of Skaven with a warpfire thrower team
- Carrion
- Lots of Orcs and Gobbos

It's a veritable cocktail of evil.

Hey what's up with Fimir not being an ally option for Chaos? They are described as Evil and consorting with Daemons... doesn't that sound like they would be total best friends?
 
Possibly one of a host of errors, most obvious one being no list is allowed Dwarf Allies even though they inlude one.

Things to remember about the lists:
1) They're optional, you can just make up an army using BOB (the Big Orange Book that is the rules)
2) They're based around 3000 pts so lowering the min max for smaller games is encouraged (to a third for 1000 and two thirds for 20000) therefore, within reason, you could in theory expand them for larger games.
3) How big a game are you playing? 20 Warriors is 15000pts for a start, add in 20 knights and that's another 16000pts.
4) Don't forget Marauders in this version are lower level Chaos Warriors, equivalent to Chaos Warriors in latter editions. Thugs are the Marauders in later editions as even these guys are suped up humans.

Bear in mind that Chaos Warriors and Knights are actually units of level 10 characters, how many do you think you should have?
 
Also putting all your eggs on one big unit shaped basket is fun, but breaks easily. Last time I played a big unit of mounted knights they ended up running off the battlefield!
 
ramshackle_curtis":26urf76e said:
Also putting all your eggs on one big unit shaped basket is fun, but breaks easily. Last time I played a big unit of mounted knights they ended up running off the battlefield!
Click to expand...

Shhhhhhhhh, I'm Skaven, Oeuf Baggery is my only tactic!!!!!!!!!
 
Snickit":1cxgw76e said:
Possibly one of a host of errors, most obvious one being no list is allowed Dwarf Allies even though they inlude one.
Click to expand...
Wow. Yeah ok, I am starting to take on board how much one should be willing to use the books as guidelines and not set in stone.

1) They're optional, you can just make up an army using BOB (the Big Orange Book that is the rules)
Click to expand...
I can see this really encouraging games with a narrative emphasis

2) They're based around 3000 pts so lowering the min max for smaller games is encouraged (to a third for 1000 and two thirds for 2000) therefore, within reason, you could in theory expand them for larger games.
Click to expand...
And this feels logical and easily adaptable.

3) How big a game are you playing? 20 Warriors is 1500pts for a start, add in 20 knights and that's another 1600pts.
Click to expand...
I don't have a set points level to aim for because I'm not playing at the moment. But I'm building with future play in mind so I'm mucking about with sample army lists as I go.

My latest test list was around 5000 points. (This had 2x10 warriors (plus champ), 7 warrior horse (plus champ), 5 minotaurs, a Lord on Griffon, 5 hounds with two masters, 30 thugs and an Ogre Mercenary contingent of 2x8 ogres (plus champ) and an Ogre commander). Your rule 2 works out beautifully here because another 20 warriors would push the army to 6500 and there would be a 40 warrior allowance in a 6000 point army. That 20 warrior max limit for any size army that seemed a bit weird to me is dissolving before my very eyes.

4) Don't forget Marauders in this version are lower level Chaos Warriors, equivalent to Chaos Warriors in latter editions. Thugs are the Marauders in later editions as even these guys are suped up humans.
Click to expand...
You have redefined my view on this quite a bit, indeed an allowance for 30 near-warriors on top of the 20 warriors gave me more warrior clout than I thought all along.

Bear in mind that Chaos Warriors and Knights are actually units of level 10 characters, how many do you think you should have?
Click to expand...
All of them! Jokes aside this is a good point. Showing up with an army of nothing but character levels can have downsides. Curtis has a point here :grin:
 
Also bear in mind you can have thugs in heavy armour with shields. They may not be warriors or marauders but they still come on a 25mm base and, more importantly, have a WS of 4.

The main point to be made though is that it's a different beast to 5th edition lists onwards, the intention of the 3rd ed list is to steer you towards the majority of you foot troops actually being beastmen as you can have up to 200 of them.

Chaos Warriors are your elite and should be rare, where as Beastmen numbers are vast.

5th edition and the addition of plastic regiment boxed sets saw a shift, if Chaos Warriors were super expensive points wise people were only going to buy one regiment of them. The answer? Make them cheaper points wise so people bought more, move the Beastmen into their own list and bring back Thugs (who disappeared in 4th), call them Marauders (oh and make them barbarians not just generic depraved ruffians and bandits) but also make them in metal so the cheap troops cost a lot (without much variety) so instead people gravitated towards larger numbers of warriors
 
Snickit":136kt00o said:
Also bear in mind you can have thugs in heavy armour with shields.
Click to expand...

On this point why does the Wahammer Armies Thug picture depict someone with no armour but they get light armour as standard (which means I can’t use my bare chested Citadel barbarians as Thugs)
 
popevaderii":3v9o0ssu said:
Snickit":3v9o0ssu said:
Also bear in mind you can have thugs in heavy armour with shields.
Click to expand...

On this point why does the Wahammer Armies Thug picture depict someone with no armour but they get light armour as standard (which means I can’t use my bare chested Citadel barbarians as Thugs)
Click to expand...

Tough skin?

Light armour can leather armour bear in mind.

Also Paul Bonners artwork (awesome stuff) was probably produced well in advance of finalising the lists (bearing in mind how many images he had to produce for the book) so early drafts of the Chaos list may of seen light armour as an option.

Also, 3rd has a 50% ruling meaning that if 50% of the unit has it then they all do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top