Retro-RoC

[Masterwork]

So I've been having fun using the tables to roll up some chaos warbands. But the whole process has got me thinking - which is an obviously dangerous development.

What if RoC could be made 'better'?

Would *slightly* more balanced tables be an improvement? Don't get me wrong I thoroughly enjoy the randomness aspect of the game and the inequalities thereof are part of its charm! So I'm not looking to turn it into a points buy/army list creation exercise. But there are already suggestions on how to 'balance' new warbands. Would defining the characters starting level at 5 (or 10) allow for a more realistic progression?

Would having a separate followers table for each chaos power allow for a bit more diversity? Khorne might have more Thugs and Warriors whereas Slaanesh might have more Dark elves for example. We could create tables for Malal or go crazy and create new ones for Good/Law warbands.

The other thing that slightly annoys me is the number of chaos attributes that end up with 'No Effect'. New effects could be added and could be Chaos Patron related.

What about adding the odd lesser demon or specific Characters to warband followers tables - perhaps taken from the later versions of the Warhammer World ethos?

How would you go about making RoC better?

 

[Zhu Bajie]

How would you go about making RoC better?

I'd make LatD look more like StD - get Ian Miller to do the bulk of the illustrations, lose the soft pencilwork ones, standardise the layout based on StD. The visual differences between the two volumes is irksome.

I'd ditch the army-lists, and keep the whole thing warband / campaign focused, the lists just feel tacked on imho and add very little.

Probably add some WFRP elements for how the 4 main Khaos Kults operate outside of the RoC itself, which could then feed into scenario generation etc. I'd have liked to have seen more developments of the themed warbands, Minotaurs, Beastmen etc. fleshed out with Monastic orders a la Red Redemption, Chaos Dwarves, Witch Elves, But still end up using the random warband generator.

In terms of balance, I don't think that's the point of RoC. There are many rulesets that attempt to achieve those goals. RoC does something quite different - it has it's own trajectory, a kind of inner narrative that deserves to be played as written. Most of what appear to be bugs are actually features.

 

[Grumdril]

In terms of balance, I don't think that's the point of RoC. There are many rulesets that attempt to achieve those goals. RoC does something quite different - it has it's own trajectory, a kind of inner narrative that deserves to be played as written. Most of what appear to be bugs are actually features.

Personally I think there are trajectory issues with the campaign side of things. The balance (or opportunity for lack thereof) in the tables I'm happy with.

I waffled about this on my blog a little while back but in brief I'd suggest -

• Ensure the looser of a battle has some opportunity for reward (if played to their patron's wishes)
• Be careful about how easy rewards are for the battle winner
• Try to have it so that the winner leaves the table rather than slaughtering the loser's casualties

But this is on the basis of just one campaign, and it's better to play more I feel before adjusting the RAW.


Paul / Grumdril

 

[daddyorchips]

to me it seems like the lack of balance and sheer randomness is the point of it still using it all this time later!. If you want balance then RoC is not for you!

 

[AmongLions]

We could create tables for Malal or go crazy and create new ones for Good/Law warbands.

Now that sounds like a lot of fun! I remember playing with a guy who'd put together a list for an Empire warband, this was pre-Mordhiem, you could really tell he was reaching in a few places, but the list wasn't bad. I don't remember much now, but he had a Wood Elf in his warband, along with Peasants, a couple of Reiksgard, crossbowmen and some Halberdiers.

Balance was always an issue with the Chaos warbands. I found though, that most of those issues could be overcome by a good GM and understanding players. I recall one campaign where one of the guys had so many Beastmen in his warband that he had something approaching 40 figures on the table. One of the other players had crappy roles and bad luck on the battlefield and went into one encounter with his Champion and perhaps half a dozen followers. The outlook didn't look good, so the GM decided that the player with the massive warband had one of his units defect to the other Champions banner, the result was an even game that we all enjoyed.

Cheers.