Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Just noticed this on the Brigade website:

Limited Time Offer: Purchase the main Frostgrave rule book from us and get $5 off your order of Frostgrave Miniatures over $25. Mention Rulebook coupon in your order comments section. We have to make this adjustment after your order is placed. Limited time offer.

Frostgrave Rule book only orders will get a coupon code emailed for use in a future order of Frostgrave miniatures over $25. Mention Rulebook coupon in your order comments section.

Basically puts the rule book about the same price as ordering it on Amazon, when you order some figures.

Now that I have the Fristgrave Soldiers box in hand, I can confirm they are great figures. Lots of options, nicely sculpted, and it will only get better when we have the cultists to mix bits with.

Just got my Nickstarter stuff arrived on Monday picked it up from the sorting office this morning. They are nice indeed!

 Llamahead wrote:
Just got my Nickstarter stuff arrived on Monday picked it up from the sorting office this morning. They are nice indeed!

Nice

Can you post a scale pic when you get a chance?

Anyone know if brigade or North Star might do a Black Friday sale?

Has Brigade even shipped yet?

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Has Brigade even shipped yet?

15 minutes ago on FB they posted that they are waiting on their shipment to arrive and will ship the Nickstarters out as soon as they have them. Should be any day now I gather.

Makes sense I'm on the same side of the Atlantic as the factory which always helps with distribution.
Here's the General Scale shot you asked for Kid Kyoto

Malifaux Multi-Part kit, Militia Crossbowman, Cultist, GW Arbitrator, AoW Corruptor of the Apocalypse
I'll also do a more in depth review in this P&M Blog http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/270/231101.page

Thanks, so a bit smaller than GW? would GW limbs work on them?

Actually they work fine a bit thinner base is all.

Is the game and it's mechanics hugely dependent on the frozen city setting? Or would it work in other fantasy settings?

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Thanks, so a bit smaller than GW? would GW limbs work on them?

I've used GW's Empire Militia heads, arms and weapons on my Frostgrave minis, and they were fine.
The potential of these minis (and of the Cultist minis which I'm buying tomorrow) is huge. My kids love them too and make up their own games.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Is the game and it's mechanics hugely dependent on the frozen city setting? Or would it work in other fantasy settings?

I wouldn't say hugely dependent at all. The game assumes a lot of terrain, both ruined buildings to be climbed up and entered into and scatter to block LoS. The scenarios are written about things like temples, wells, libraries etc that you'd find in a ruined city, but there's no reason you couldn't adapt this stuff to a different setting. I don't think the 'frozen' aspect has come up in any of the games I've played.

And I've just assembled and undercoated my Cultists this weekend, they are really nice and it's a lot of fun to play about with what's on the sprue to make a warband of unique guys.

So I just played my first full game of Frostgrave. Not impressed.

The mechanics strike me as deeply flawed: A single good roll kills anyone. If you take cover, range can still just one-shot you since it does nothing to detatch 'high hit roll results also in high damage'.
The wizards, while neat, are still disappointing: You fail your spells half the time of worse, and they're just not that interesting.
Having played MANY skirmish games, I'm not entirely sure why this one has gotten so much particular attention when it's in reality, generally devoid of flavor :(

I may be overly critical, but I was looking forward to it and had picked up the book and everything. But just in practice, it's bland. Your minions have no differentiation from each other, as the little stat modifiers do next to nothing. 'Magic Weapon +2' is the least cool way to possibly describe the stuff you could find in a fantasy setting. And the core scenario of hauling off treasure is a good idea, but it just doesn't work out in practice as interesting. It's almost non-interactive to do it best, and the rewards for fighting are minimal at best except for your wizard, who's encouraged to take the one or two powerful attack spells.

I figured the lack of flavour was actually the point. While they're creating a range of models for it, making everything generic lets anyone jump in with any range of miniatures they have.

That's not going to be a draw for everyone, but there's lots of old timers out there with piles and piles of Fantasy models that never get pulled off the shelf. This games lets you easily use that stuff.

But, only having cursory knowledge of the game, I might be way off.

The Wizard is your character. The soldiers that follow him around are faceless minions.

The stat lines for soldiers are within a few points of each other, That however makes it the opposite of meaningless. Those little differences make this 10% better at melee, that guy harder to kill, and only a few of them have ranged attacks, so just the different equipement makes a huge difference in what they accomplish.

When I read through the game the first time I thought everything was too similar to be meaningfull, but it's not the case. The differences are nuanced and while playing not as obvious as they may be in other games.

Yes, if you roll a 20 while fighting an unarmored foe, they tend to go down, but that's kind of the point. You got the most perfect shot possible in. An Arrow in the eye tends to put people down. It makes, almost, every combat potentially lethal.

As for spell casting, I'm curious what you didn't find interesting about it ? 80 spells covering most of the staples allow for a huge amount of diversity amongst casters.

You mentioned failing 50% or more. That's part spell selection and part that you were likely playing a starting level wizard. They get easier to cast when you level them up.

I do admit that Frostgrave's strength is campaign and scenario play. Playing one off games with starting warbands would be like showing up to play D&D with 1st level characters every week.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Thanks, so a bit smaller than GW? would GW limbs work on them?

I don't have any in hand, but imagine how they would look if the GW Empire guy was to stand up straight like the Frostgrave guy, I don't think they are compatible at all.

Look at the scale comparison from http://therenaissancetroll.blogspot.de/2015/06/frostgrave-soldiers-size-comparison-shot.html

Spoilered image due to size


The Frostgrave soldiers are to the left and right of the 25mm GW LOTR guy, and look to be about the same size/scale.

This may be a bit long, I'm sorry. But my game design senses just got tingling and I saw a lot of issues.

 adamsouza wrote:
The Wizard is your character. The soldiers that follow him around are faceless minions.

That's fine. It's a neat concept in fact, if it works out.

The stat lines for soldiers are within a few points of each other, That however makes it the opposite of meaningless. Those little differences make this 10% better at melee, that guy harder to kill, and only a few of them have ranged attacks, so just the different equipement makes a huge difference in what they accomplish.

It's absolutely meaningless. Most soldiers are +1 or +2 off each other in their stats, which, when it comes to it doesn't actually add up to anything. Why? Because an 'accurate hit' (ie, a single good roll on d20) is far superior to any stat improvement.
Let's look at 3 cases: One, Attacker Misses, Two, Attacker grazes target for 2-3 points, three, Attacker hits target for 9+ damage and kills them instantly.

The instant any random, poorly aimed shot (such as from my incompetent archer, firing while moving, at a target that's through woods, a bad storm, and hiding flush against rock) rolls a 19, I'm not only unlikely to dodge it (less than 20% for most units), but then the hit's will do 8-11 damage to any unit it hits, which is enough to kill nearly anyone. There's no way to mitigate this sort of thing.

Or perhaps my Thug (armor 11, +3 fight) is engaged by a superior enemy, a thug with a magic weapon! It... doesn't actually change anything. A 5-10% difference is all one can really get in the game, and it doesn't mean anything when the most meaningful rolls are those sorts of runaway successes. Because of this, there's no strategy. You throw dice without care for quality, and the sheer number of attempts will eventually get crushing hits.

When I read through the game the first time I thought everything was too similar to be meaningfull, but it's not the case. The differences are nuanced and while playing not as obvious as they may be in other games.

It's not only not as obvious, but also not as existant. The game does not have hidden depths of complexity, you're extremely restricted in what you can do.

Yes, if you roll a 20 while fighting an unarmored foe, they tend to go down, but that's kind of the point. You got the most perfect shot possible in. An Arrow in the eye tends to put people down. It makes, almost, every combat potentially lethal.

The lowest armor is 10. The highest armor is 13. Rolling an unmodified 20 is going to deal 14 damage against even these armor 13 guys, which is enough to kill anyone in one shot.

As for spell casting, I'm curious what you didn't find interesting about it ? 80 spells covering most of the staples allow for a huge amount of diversity amongst casters.

You only can cast once per turn, and generally have difficulties between 10-14 for the most part after accounting for cross-school. There's a lot of garbage spells. 'Curse' reduces a target's roll stats by 1 per casting... or I could just kill them dead with a poison dart or elemental bolt. Or use slow or other debuffs. Likewise for numerically insignificant buffs, like Alertness. Other spells, like Invisibility or Elemental Bolt, are absurdly powerful meanwhile.

You mentioned failing 50% or more. That's part spell selection and part that you were likely playing a starting level wizard. They get easier to cast when you level them up.

The game really should be fun at every level. The rules also don't really seem to allow you to become better by much: Each 'level' only gives +1 to casting a single very, specific spell. If you forgo other benefits. This is increeeddibly slow progression.

I do admit that Frostgrave's strength is campaign and scenario play. Playing one off games with starting warbands would be like showing up to play D&D with 1st level characters every week.

I must disagree after giving the game a chance. It's just not as interesting as similar campaign/scenario games, as it fails to tell a story. I can just go and buy ancient artifacts on e-bay, or the extremely descriptive '+1 sword'. Many of the campaign elements don't even do much of anything, such as the 'base' selection and improvement.

Sorry if it sounds scathing, but I must be critical of flawed mechanics. It may be to some people's tastes which is absolutely fine. But there's certainly elements that mathematically don't do much of anything. It's incredibly swingy, and both weak and average rolls do nothing, but great rolls just get everything done. We had no attack in the course of two games do anything but 'hit someone for 1/10th of their health' or 'kill dead in one stroke'.

I'm fine with you not liking the game. I just find your complaints about it to be hyperbolic.

You throw dice without care for quality, and the sheer number of attempts will eventually get crushing hits.

That just about sums up any and all tabetop wargames. If you throw enough dice at something, it will die.

Also, the only way your doing 14 damage to an armor 13 guy is with a modified attack roll of 27. (Which requires a successfully cast Elemental Bolt getting an attack roll of 19+, or severely outnumbering someone in melee)

It's just not as interesting as similar campaign/scenario games, as it fails to tell a story

I'm genuinely interested in what games you are refereing to, please elaborate.

Killioniaire,

Thanks for giving my game a try, I'm sorry it hasn't worked out for you. It was designed to be somewhat generic, expressly so players could use any miniatures they wanted. Actually, to be completely accurate, it was designed that way so 'I' could use any miniatures I wanted! There are definitely some people that find combat in the game to 'swingy'. I think a detailed look at the mathematics shows this isn't actually as great as most people think (i.e. a thug cannot one-shot a knight, unless you are using the optional critical hit rule), but regardless, it is a matter of personal preference. I like combat to be dangerous, and the outcome hard to predict. Yes, the knight will usually beat the thug, but you can't count on it.

Anyway, all I can ask is that people give the game a fair shot. It sounds like you did, but it wasn't for you. That's cool. If we all agreed on what made a good game, we would only need one! Thankfully, there are lots of great minis games on the market, so we can hunt for the one that suits us best!

In practice, the high-end fighters (knight, templar, and barbarian, in particular) are unlikely or impossible to kill with one shot, which is a large part of what makes them so worthwhile.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think it could do with some minor rules tweaks for balance -- be nice to have more spells to start with, but for some of them to have to be utility rather than direct-damage, for example, and I think some of the soldiers need a small stat tweak or two. It definitely doesn't feel as thoroughly playtested as A Song of Blades and Heroes, for example (but very few games do). It's still a lot of fun.

For those who are wondering how Frostgrave is doing and what is coming next, you might want to read my latest blog: http://therenaissancetroll.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/frostgrave-state-of-play-and-spoilers.html

joe5mc wrote:
For those who are wondering how Frostgrave is doing and what is coming next, you might want to read my latest blog: http://therenaissancetroll.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/frostgrave-state-of-play-and-spoilers.html

Joe, you ninja'd me.

I already started a thread about it in the misc games section here: Frostgrave: State of Play

So, which other Dakka-ites are heading over to Frostgrave Day in Nottingham on Saturday? I will be there, with my son. Come over and say hello if you spot me (usually, I am the only one with dreadlocks and tattoos, but who knows, this time?).

Those cultists need laspistols.

Just saying.

I have a couple of mine who will be magnetised to have autopistols available in one hand. When I get around to it.

Planning to use some of the spare heads to change my many, many Dark Vengeance/Execution Force cultists about a bit, too.

joe5mc wrote:
Killioniaire,

Thanks for giving my game a try, I'm sorry it hasn't worked out for you. It was designed to be somewhat generic, expressly so players could use any miniatures they wanted. Actually, to be completely accurate, it was designed that way so 'I' could use any miniatures I wanted! There are definitely some people that find combat in the game to 'swingy'. I think a detailed look at the mathematics shows this isn't actually as great as most people think (i.e. a thug cannot one-shot a knight, unless you are using the optional critical hit rule), but regardless, it is a matter of personal preference. I like combat to be dangerous, and the outcome hard to predict. Yes, the knight will usually beat the thug, but you can't count on it.

Anyway, all I can ask is that people give the game a fair shot. It sounds like you did, but it wasn't for you. That's cool. If we all agreed on what made a good game, we would only need one! Thankfully, there are lots of great minis games on the market, so we can hunt for the one that suits us best!

Thank you for making a game, nonetheless. I'm well aware that not everything is for everyone, and I don't begrudge anyone for liking what they do.

Generic mini friendly is of course a great draw. We all have huge piles of random models. However, we never over the course of the last 4-player game for example, saw a single model get taken down by attritional damage. It was either meaningless pokes, or full 10+ point hits and kills. Hell, the first shot of the game decapitated one of the wizards with a natural 20. Nor did 'taking cover' do anything really, as a natural roll of 18+ probably is fatal or near fatal, no matter how much cover one takes against ranged fire. That also rankled the group, as it seemed that the most apparent defensive action against missile fire (taking cover) actually does little to stop the real danger (natural high rolls that also do naturally high damage)

I wish the best of luck for your game of course. We're in a new golden age for minis wargaming, and especially skirmish games.

I kinda agree with all Killionaire is saying and in addition the campaign system isn't great. I still play it as it is barrel of laughs and going into I you have to realise it is not in anyway shape or a serious tactical game in the likes of Infinity or campaign structure of Necromunda/Mordheim! I love playing it as it is quite funny and will be demoing it to new players as just that.

 Killionaire wrote:

However, we never over the course of the last 4-player game for example, saw a single model get taken down by attritional damage. It was either meaningless pokes, or full 10+ point hits and kills.

I really suspect you are not determining damage properly.

The cheapest Thug has an armor value of 10. Not only would you have to fail the opposed toll to get hit, but that modified roll would have to be 20 or higher to take him out in a single hit. You subtract the armor values from the modified attack roll. Most soldiers in the game are rocking a whole +2 to that roll, and armor values of 10+. Which would mean that the cheapest human soldier is injured on a 11-17, and taken out on a 18-20 .

Hell, the first shot of the game decapitated one of the wizards with a natural 20.

Wizards start with 14 hits and an armor of 10. That natural 20 would still need a +4 modifier to take out an uninjured level 1 wizard, who wasn't protected by any magic. At range, that would require 1 of the 2 most deadly spells in the game.

Nor did 'taking cover' do anything really, as a natural roll of 18+ probably is fatal or near fatal, no matter how much cover one takes against ranged fire. That also rankled the group, as it seemed that the most apparent defensive action against missile fire (taking cover) actually does little to stop the real danger (natural high rolls that also do naturally high damage)

Partial cover makes you harder to hit, reducing the chance that you are even taking damage at all. That's frequently how cover works in games. Off of the top of my head the only game I can think of where cover doesn't work that way is 40K, which doesn't use penalties to hit as a mechanic, at all.

But yes, Frostgrave's combat in general has about a 5-15% chance of dispatching unarmored foes, who failed their opposed combat roll. Combat is an oppossed roll. They only take damage, if they effectively failed their armor save, and if the attack roll is higher than their armor rating.

Actually, it comes from the D20. Since the variation is greater than a D6, obviously results are much more random. It's the same for Infinity because of that. And 1st level characters in D&D know perfectly how it is dangerous to fight.

Let's just say Mordheim and Necromunda, games that are famed in a certain way by players, aren't that great as a skirmish game system, actually. They have a lot of flaws - but people don't care because of the campaign system and all the good memories they have from their games.

So going generic is actually a good idea for Frostgrave - that gives a lot more freedom to "forge the narrative", which is a core key in these kinds of games after all. Like in RPG.

Plus, it's easy to learn and play. I still have nightmares from my time with Infinity and its special rules for litteraly each miniature/weapon system....was a great pain to remember everything when you are someone who plays many different games!

Received my goodies from North Star this morning! Lovely stuff!

those cultists seem to be lovely