Sorry to raise an old thread, bit has there been news on the rumoured Goblin wolf riders kit? Seemed to recall them saying that after the Dwarf heavy infantry we'd see the Goblins second kit soon.
I'm wanting to see how the range develops before I invest... mainly interested in the Elves at the moment.
The 3 Ups of the wolves were shown at Salute. The sculptor was there on the day working on the riders. It has been quiet but I suspect once the plastic femalewizards are out, they we might hear a bit more about these.
Plastic Elf Light Infantry is "out" now, sold as frames only, single sprue £5, or £25 for 6 sprues. Really well priced with the current pound-to-USD conversion rate, I broke down and bought some even though I REALLY shouldn't be spending money right now
This Saturday of course was going to be Salute in London. North Star's 'launch at Salute' figure set was going to be the plastic Elf Light Infantry for Oathmark.
That's all off due to the coronavirus, which has also held up the box for the new Elves and the metal characters we were doing to compliment them.
The one thing the virus didn't hold up was the plastic manufacturer Renedra. They have delivered the frames of the Elves.
So what we've decided to do is to make the frames available to buy on Saturday. You'll be able to buy 1, or as many as you want.
We will do another launch, with army deals etc, when the world starts getting back to normal, but if you want to start cracking on now, come to the North Star website on Saturday.
http://www.northstarfigures.com/list.php?man=257&page=1
Huginn wrote: On the elf, the chest armour just looks like a complete afterthought, really poorly done. There are much better plastic elves around - either GWLotR or Warhammer will serve well.
Does it? I thought it looked quite a lot like the kind of pectoral reinforcements you see on a lot of warriors of antiquity, like for example these iberian warriors:
Spoiler:
It puts me in mind of Victor Ambrus' illustrations of elves for the Tolkien Bestiary, which I assume takes inspiration from the same historical references, and which I don't mind one bit.
I don't mind the scale, either. I'm going to get these mainly for LotR gaming, and not necessarily GW's version of LotR gaming. I've been half-wishing for this range for a while: elves, dwarves and orcs based on Tolkien's apparent dark ages influence: not elves loaded down with plate and robes and three strings per bow; not ball-shaped dwarfs with cow horns stuck to their heads; not orcs that look like the Incredible Hulk with a pituitary condition. It might seem counter to the concept of 'fantasy', and those latter versions of fantasy races are alright in their place (currently waiting for those new lumineth aelves to go on sale) but I've always had a soft spot for fantasy with real-world considerations and even limitations. Makes the 'mundane' parts more believable and the fantastic parts more fantastic. (GW's smaller-scale range of New Line LotR minis are very nice, particularly with the Perrys sculpting, but still a bit overdesigned to look 'special', for my tastes.)
So if these are scaled so that I can mix them with the increasing number of dark ages and ancients plastic sets, so much the better. I'm already considering kitbashing the orcs with Warlord's titchy romans to make Isengard uruk-hai.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I guess then, by the transitive property, I got to see some scale shots of their elves next to non-Oathmark minis. Thanks!
Automatically Appended Next Post: How do they scale next to Frostgrave minis?
They should scale pretty well. They better, I also got some of the Frostgrave plastic wizards to make elven wizard conversion. Here is a review and comparison of the older armored elf set (not my review), spoilered image of the elves next to Frostgrave and Fireforge plastics
Spoiler:
Personally, I like this new set a LOT more than the first set. I got a box of the armored elves and they are good plastics, but the design choice of the weird breastplate with celtic swirlies never sat well with me, it's a little TOO medieval earth for my taste. The helmets are a little too human for my taste too, but that's a much easier fix than the chestplate, especially for massed infantry
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I guess then, by the transitive property, I got to see some scale shots of their elves next to non-Oathmark minis. Thanks!
Automatically Appended Next Post: How do they scale next to Frostgrave minis?
They should scale pretty well. They bvetter, I also got some of the Frostgrave plastic wizards to make elven wizard conversion. Here is a review and comparison of the older armored elf set, spoilered image of the elves next to Frostgrave and Fireforge plastics
Spoiler:
Personally, I like this new set a LOT more than the first set. I got a box of the armored elves and they are good plastics, but the design choice of the weird breastplate with celtic swirlies never sat well with me, it's a little TOO medieval earth for my taste. The helmets are a little too human for my taste too, but that's a much easier fix than the chestplate, especially for massed infantry
Thanks for the pic and review. Frost grave has added so many useful kits to the "28mm Anemic" scale that I'm finding myself drawn in despite my reservations. Those Elves look much more attractive next to the frost grave minis and historical "torso reserve for kitbashing" kits.
I just had a crazy idea. Can anyone please get me a photo of an Oathmark elf head next to a Mantic elf or Asterian Marionette? Maybe Affordable Aeldar are on the table...
Waiting for some battle report. In his simplicity this game looks great but I fear the dice-fest-like-frostgrave effect. Really like minis and general feeling, also then kingdom building rules look cool.
I didn't know they released wolves. Had to google them...and I think I love those chonksters. Has anyone bought any? Are the goblins separate or attached to the wolves?
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I didn't know they released wolves. Had to google them...and I think I love those chonksters. Has anyone bought any? Are the goblins separate or attached to the wolves?
Johanxp wrote: Waiting for some battle report. In his simplicity this game looks great but I fear the dice-fest-like-frostgrave effect. Really like minis and general feeling, also then kingdom building rules look cool.
I take it the wolves are by Bob Naismith, like about half of recent non-GW plastic kits? There's inevitably going to be some look of 90s GW about them.
I could just about consider them as outsized wargs rather than real wolves, but... yeah. There's some weird folding and sagging around the elbow joints that doesn't help the overfed look. They need Cesar Milan in to wag his finger at mealtimes. Or a dremel and a bit of fur-texture patchover.
They look like a mix between some kinds of shepherd and Corgis—Shorgis! Makes me wonder what would happen if a Corgi was bitten by a werewolf...Worgies!
This has caught my interest. The Dwarfs look alright, but can you do multibasing or no? I read in one of the development blogs that you can do movement trays, is this functionally the same or no?
On the official play through video the author demonstrates combat. Casualties are removed individually as in individual models are pulled from a unit as it is damaged. So unit wounds are tracked that way ala warhammer fantasy. Figure removal is the only thing I really don’t care for about the rules that have been previewed. .
The rules do look good. Doubt anyone in my area would play however. I'm sure you'll buy it and add it to the collection of unplayed games.
Those light Elves are wonderful, just a shame there is no spear option on the sprue. Oh well, nothing a bit of kitbashing and converting can't remedy.
I think 3 boxes of their armoured Elves and 2 of their unarmoured Elves will provide enough bodies and weapon options for a nice varied Elf army for Kings of War.
Individual removal kills it for me, I have my fantasy stuff multibased for Kings of War. Also a bit thin on the racial diversity if rules only cover what North Star produces.
I do really like the campaign approach with mixed race kingdom building.
lord_blackfang wrote: Individual removal kills it for me, I have my fantasy stuff multibased for Kings of War. Also a bit thin on the racial diversity if rules only cover what North Star produces.
I do really like the campaign approach with mixed race kingdom building.
When we were introduced to war hammer fantasy (2nd edition) the guy providing the armies had them all multi based. He used toothpicks to mark off wounded models. Even KoW had those wound trackers. It shouldn’t be a game killer.
Plus I’m sure they will add more races over time, or people will write house rules.
Indeed, they've started with four races so far but two supplements are in the works:
I believe Battlesworn includes Orcs and Oathbreakers include Undead. The kingdom building rules also allows you to include things like Trolls, Dragons and various esoteric monsters into your forces.
In fact, the Kingdom building element is the biggest draw for me. The fact you build and recruit from your kingdom between games.
I'm interested by this. They seem to have carved out a very specific aesthetic with the low fantasy dark age look and feel. It's very much the Middle Earth of the books, with no plate armor or crossbows. I'm also a fan of the retro fantasy models.
Still waiting on my rulebook too. If I play, it'll be with wound tokens. My multibased units won't change "size" as they should in the actual game (as units roll dice based on width and depth), so I'll have to figure out how that works and if it's easy to track with tokens or whatnot.
Still interested, even if it just sits on my shelf.
Yeah. A unit of 20 infantry is currently the maximum size. Cavalry are maxed out at 10 models. So far infantry are sold in boxes of 30 and cavalry in boxes of 15 so maximum unit size is supported from single box buys. So you will get at least two units from each box.
Looks interesting to me as well. I really like the idea of the kingdoms and the campaign element.
Also really like the aesthetic, reaching back to basic sword and sorcery that could be set in a dark ages/medieval world. I have a set of the Dwarf Command (King, Wizard, Musician) - great sculpts. Will definitely be getting Elves and Dwarves for our skirmish/Old World/Mordheim gaming. The size is great.
With re: to multi-basing. I find that in most games, even if made for single model removal, it doesn't matter if both players are playing the same way. That way unit size or footprint is at least consistent. I've run Battlegroup games with my multibased FOW stuff, and run games of Hail Caesar/Black Powder with single models grouped up to the footprint on movement trays. It made zero difference.
Yes. He, being a philologist, considered it a copout. He always was of the opinion if that we were still to talk about dwarves regularly, it would be dwarrow.
Shadow Walker wrote: I am most curious about their Undead faction. I hope they are not some Tomb Kings/egyptian theme.
I sincerely doubt they’ll go for a tomb kings type force. The four races so far have a very classic fantasy look. I excpect undead to be similar. Zombies and skeletons as units with wights and wraiths as leaders, etc
This review (almost page by page) alows to see most of the book, and especially gives a good look at what units are available for all the races. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obeba1EEx3c
I'm suddenly oddly looking forward to the ruleset, I wasn't planning on that. Single model removal stinks, but I love the emphasis on 10 man units base with 20 max, base unit size being so large always put me off of Kings of War. I do love D10 systems AND alternating activation systems. Also, looks like 25mm squares are standard base for all himan size infantry, which is a mild problem for old 20mm based WHFB humans/elvesdwarves but is useful for existing stuff mounted on 25mm round bases. Should be easy enough to make some armies out of my LotR stuff
I'd been eyeballing SAGA: Age of Magic, but the rulebooks are so darn expensive AND need to be shipped from Europe, looks like Miniature Market has Oathmark rulebook on pre-order for $25 USD and digitally it's on Amazon Kindle for $14
Shadow Walker wrote: I am most curious about their Undead faction. I hope they are not some Tomb Kings/egyptian theme.
I sincerely doubt they’ll go for a tomb kings type force. The four races so far have a very classic fantasy look. I excpect undead to be similar. Zombies and skeletons as units with wights and wraiths as leaders, etc
I hope that they will release the skeletons box as the first one. Even for people who do not want to play mass combat it will be a cheap way to make variously armed skellies that could be used for Frostgrave, Rangers of Shadow Deep, Sellswords and Spellslingers etc. Also Frostgrave plastic wizards box can be a great source to make a plastic spellcasters for humans/undead factions, and a cultists box will for sure be a very useful upgrade for the undead characters.
For those still on the fence about Oathmark, I've got a new channel dedicated to the game and its miniatures as I've fallen heavily in love with the system. Here's the video where I look at the Dwarf infantry box set. For me, a veteran gamer who started with 3rd Edition Warhammer Fantasy Battles, this ticks off all my fantasy gaming needs:
1. hardback rulebook (don't ask me why - I just love me a good hardback book; same with novels).
2. classic fantasy races/tropes - elves, humans, goblins and Dwarves, with more classic Undead on the way in a future expansion
3. focus on narrative games
4. old school 80's/90's aesthetic for art and model design
5. any miniatures can be used; not just the official line (which are awesome, btw).
That the gameplay/system is fast, keeps everyone involved as it is alternate activation and both side fight in combat no matter who started the ruckus is also an added bonus. (today's video will look at that in more detail).
I highly recommend you give it a try.
Look for JP's Hobby Channel on YouTube (I'll post a link when I've contributed a bit more here).
It is strange they are doing plastic undead as there are already very nice plastic skeletons from Wargames Atlantic, Warlord Games, and even Mantic if their style is to your taste.
Either way, I wish them well.
Point 5 follows on from point 2, and applies to virtually any non-GW fantasy system. Point 3 is down to the players involved, though it does sound like the author is into this bit. Point 4 doesn't appeal to me, but yeah, point 1 is good, we probably all like a nice hard one.
@JonathanPeace: really liked the combat video, very clearly explainded rules. More like this please!
(Minor thing-the music intro on the beginning of your videos is a bit too loud-at least to my ears .)
Gallahad wrote: It is strange they are doing plastic undead as there are already very nice plastic skeletons from Wargames Atlantic, Warlord Games, and even Mantic if their style is to your taste.
Either way, I wish them well.
Personally I'm more concerned why so many smaller outfits pump out Death Korps proxies, but hey ho.
From my PoV, I want to see skeletons that aren't bound by that ancient greek, Harryhausen-Argonauts thing. Yes, yes, it's a classic, you watched it on the telly around school holidays and Christmas, in between episodes of Blake's 7 and The Professionals... but there's a whooole lot of other periods and settings to pull poor dead blokes from.
It's not so bad when you can easily do a shield swap on the Warlord and Atlantic skellies, when the bows and spears can be seen as generic enough, but still. Mantic skellies are nice, and fit into their world, but do they need a bit of work if you don't want them looking like dead basileans?
I know all that is nitpicking, and bear in mind they're an improvement on GW's skellies inasmuch as they're not covered in coffins and bat wings.
From Oathmark: can't remember if previews were shown here, apologies for my faulty short-term memory, but given the oldschool dark ages theme so far, I'd expect or hope for a few more hand weapons - swords and axes; round wooden shields; scraps of old mail, shirts, trousers, gambesons. Those hints of clothing in particular could cover a range of historical influences, from romano-british (earlier?) to maybe even kitbashing with Perry WotR.
But we'll see. I'll stop before I go too wishlisty.
So are the Oathmark minis a bit on the small side, like Frostgrave? Those were a bit too tiny for my tastes, they looked OK alongside my old 25mm Grenadier models...!
They are apparently very close to Frostgrave minis size from the videos I've seen. I ordered a box of goblin infantry and wolf riders that came in today.
I compared them to a couple of 40k minis and even some non GW stuff and Oathmark is very definitely 25mm. They're nice models and you get 30 infantry for $35-ish with lots of options; you can build all 30 models as archers, hand weapon & shield, spearmen or any combo of those as they provide enough arms for essentially 90 models.
pancakeonions wrote: So are the Oathmark minis a bit on the small side, like Frostgrave? Those were a bit too tiny for my tastes, they looked OK alongside my old 25mm Grenadier models...!
My impression is that they are even a bit smaller than frostgrave, which I don't enjoy much for the same reason you stated. But I don't have any of the Oathmark kits to know for certain.
pancakeonions wrote: So are the Oathmark minis a bit on the small side, like Frostgrave? Those were a bit too tiny for my tastes, they looked OK alongside my old 25mm Grenadier models...!
My impression is that they are even a bit smaller than frostgrave, which I don't enjoy much for the same reason you stated. But I don't have any of the Oathmark kits to know for certain.
Yes. The Oathmark humans are slightly shorter than the Frostgrave Barbarian and the Rangers of Shadow Deep Ranger that I have. Height wise the humans fit in fine with Gripping Beast plastics and GWLotR but they are a little chunkier but still more true scale than heroic scale, heads hands and weapons are much closer to historicals and LotR than old WHFB (Empire militia bits were too heroic for Oathmark humans IMHO when I tried it). The Oathmark goblins fit in nicely with LotR orcs and the new light infantry elves are a bit taller and slender than the humans so fit in nicely with LotR humans and elves. The Oathmark dwarves are in my closet of shame pile so I don’t have them handy for a comparison. I was able to build a lot of the LotR dwarf profiles from the two types Oathmark has out. I can try to take pics later if that would help.
privateer4hire wrote: They are apparently very close to Frostgrave minis size from the videos I've seen. I ordered a box of goblin infantry and wolf riders that came in today.
I compared them to a couple of 40k minis and even some non GW stuff and Oathmark is very definitely 25mm. They're nice models and you get 30 infantry for $35-ish with lots of options; you can build all 30 models as archers, hand weapon & shield, spearmen or any combo of those as they provide enough arms for essentially 90 models.
They mix well with Fireforge, Mantic, Perry, Frostgrave, Wargames Atlantic and Warlord Games fantasy and historical ranges. They also don't look silly mixed with a lot of the available metal ranges.
With GW it depends on the faction I suppose. A lot of the newer stuff is 32mm but called heroic 28mm to avoid confronting the scale creep.
What everyone else has said is correct. They're a bit smaller than Frostgrave, but to a degree that it's not very noticeable unless you're really looking for it.
All the parts mix well too. Base size also will play a part. I should have video up this weekend showing the dwarf sizes off for those that are curious.
highlord tamburlaine wrote: What everyone else has said is correct. They're a bit smaller than Frostgrave, but to a degree that it's not very noticeable unless you're really looking for it.
All the parts mix well too. Base size also will play a part. I should have video up this weekend showing the dwarf sizes off for those that are curious.
just FYI they do not mix well with SBG as GW's Middle-earth minis are significantly closer to realistic proportions. For example, the Oathmark dwarf heads are about 200% the volume of a LOTR dwarf head (which still makes them smaller than a Warhammer dwarf head). If you think of them as being a more-proportionate Warhammer 6th edition style, you are on the mark.
Oathmark are sculpted as 28mm to eye for humans (27mm for elves)I. Chaosbunker has a nice review but for some reason didn't actually place the models so the bottom of the feet start at zero (they start somewhere around the -3mm mark).
The Oathmark fantasy miniatures fit with WHFB Oldhammer figures pretty well. Here is a comparison pick snapped quickly:
Left to right: Frostgrave Soldier, Dark Elf Spear, LOTR Numenor, Perry War of the Roses, LOTR Dwarf, Oathmark Heavy Armor Dwarf, Oathmark Elf, Empire Spear, Crom the Conquerer.
I tried to get them even at the foot level.
Let me know if you want any other comparisons, I might have the minis lying around.
Edit: Oops, you were asking about Frostgrave - added to comparison
I notice the link to the first painted pic is titled 'strange and catastrophic'.
I feel a bit more sympathetic because I think I can see what they were trying for: a crocodile morphed into into a dragon.
Spoiler:
There's the big jaw muscle, the rows of keeled scutes on the back (either that or baby Godzilla fins), the rounder scales on the sides, the flat feet and arragement of toes... but all of these bits and others seem to be crudely exaggerated (including the old, old fantasy miniature trope that round scales = completely random polygons) and don't mesh together. The mystery sculptor just seems out of their depth.
I'll say that the tongue is nicely painted and the photography setup is pretty lush. The dwarfs look good despite having Sainsbury's beef sausages for lips.
A supplement for Oathmark: Battles of the Lost Age, giving players rules for creating elite units of warriors known as battlesworn and charting their progress from battle-to-battle.
In the horror and chaos of battle, the outcome can often hang on the briefest of moments. It is at these times that the actions of one unit can make the difference between victory and defeat. Wise kings know this, and realize that it is often prudent to hold their best units back until they can make the greatest difference. These elite units, called the "battlesworn," are more than just powerful combatants, they are symbols of the glory and honor of a kingdom. All young warriors hope to one-day join their ranks and add their oathmarks beside those legendary fighters.
This supplement for Oathmark: Battles of the Lost Age, contains rules for adding elite units to your armies and charting the progress of those units from battle-to-battle. Will they grow even more powerful as they gain renown, or will they die to the last man in heroic defense, perhaps someday to rise again in time of the kingdom's greatest need? Also included is a campaign, featuring all-new scenarios, that will give your battlesworn the chance to lead their kingdom to new heights of power and prestige.
Oathbreakers — Nov 24
The second supplement for Oathmark: Battles of the Lost Age, bringing rules for undead forces, character development, and a completely new campaign for players to experience.
Dark necromancers have laid claim to forsaken kingdoms and summoned forth the souls of those who defiled their oathmarks. The dead, once again, march to war. As armies of wraiths and skeletal warriors bring destruction to their lands, the small kingdoms of the Marches also turn to the spirits of the dead. Gathering the most ancient and powerful of oathmarks, they recall the spectral forms of those that died in loyal battle to once again come forth in defence of their kingdoms. With these ethereal warriors joining their ranks, the kings of the Marches may yet stand.
This supplement for Oathmark: Battles of the Lost Age introduces the forces of the dead to the game. Some armies will use dark magic to summon the souls and corpses of traitors from the past, while others will recall the spirits of loyal warriors that gave their lives and willingly fight again. This book also includes expanded rules for characters, which allow you to chart their progress from battle-to-battle, and watch as they grow in rank, responsibility, and power. All of these rules are then incorporated into a campaign featuring new scenarios that together tell of an epic war for survival.
IMO they should first realese the Oathbreakers. I think more people (including myself) are interesting in fielding undead army/allies rather than with rules for special units that will probably be only useful in campaigns.
A supplement for Oathmark: Battles of the Lost Age, giving players rules for creating elite units of warriors known as battlesworn and charting their progress from battle-to-battle.
In the horror and chaos of battle, the outcome can often hang on the briefest of moments. It is at these times that the actions of one unit can make the difference between victory and defeat. Wise kings know this, and realize that it is often prudent to hold their best units back until they can make the greatest difference. These elite units, called the "battlesworn," are more than just powerful combatants, they are symbols of the glory and honor of a kingdom. All young warriors hope to one-day join their ranks and add their oathmarks beside those legendary fighters.
This supplement for Oathmark: Battles of the Lost Age, contains rules for adding elite units to your armies and charting the progress of those units from battle-to-battle. Will they grow even more powerful as they gain renown, or will they die to the last man in heroic defense, perhaps someday to rise again in time of the kingdom's greatest need? Also included is a campaign, featuring all-new scenarios, that will give your battlesworn the chance to lead their kingdom to new heights of power and prestige.
Oathbreakers — Nov 24
The second supplement for Oathmark: Battles of the Lost Age, bringing rules for undead forces, character development, and a completely new campaign for players to experience.
Dark necromancers have laid claim to forsaken kingdoms and summoned forth the souls of those who defiled their oathmarks. The dead, once again, march to war. As armies of wraiths and skeletal warriors bring destruction to their lands, the small kingdoms of the Marches also turn to the spirits of the dead. Gathering the most ancient and powerful of oathmarks, they recall the spectral forms of those that died in loyal battle to once again come forth in defence of their kingdoms. With these ethereal warriors joining their ranks, the kings of the Marches may yet stand.
This supplement for Oathmark: Battles of the Lost Age introduces the forces of the dead to the game. Some armies will use dark magic to summon the souls and corpses of traitors from the past, while others will recall the spirits of loyal warriors that gave their lives and willingly fight again. This book also includes expanded rules for characters, which allow you to chart their progress from battle-to-battle, and watch as they grow in rank, responsibility, and power. All of these rules are then incorporated into a campaign featuring new scenarios that together tell of an epic war for survival.
For the last month or so, I've been adding Oathmark to my North Star cart, then backing out before buying.
From a person who wanted to play this game, it's release and rules has become a problem before even buying it.
25mm x 25mm for everything when a vast majority of fantasy models are on 20mm bases. I'm not sure why this size was chosen. Unless it was for the AoS fantasy rounds on 25mm - but then I would assume a majority of GW players wouldn't touch something non GW anyway. That or for the 25mm Frostgrave models.
Only 4 races in the main rulebook.
As an undead player, by the time a list is put out for an army, it's half a year or more since the game's release. Not only that, but I'll be needing to carry a rulebook, and 2 supplements to a game.
I just wonder the reasons behind why we only have 4 races in the main rules when other rules like Warlords of Erehwon and Kings of War can have many many more - I know those rulebooks are big, but the army pages only take up half a dozen (or less) for each army. I understand the argument that those 4 may be the only races in the Oathmark world, yet here we are getting 2 supplements already, and adding one new army in.
For the last month or so, I've been adding Oathmark to my North Star cart, then backing out before buying. From a person who wanted to play this game, it's release and rules has become a problem before even buying it.
25mm x 25mm for everything when a vast majority of fantasy models are on 20mm bases. I'm not sure why this size was chosen. Unless it was for the AoS fantasy rounds on 25mm - but then I would assume a majority of GW players wouldn't touch something non GW anyway. That or for the 25mm Frostgrave models.
Only 4 races in the main rulebook.
As an undead player, by the time a list is put out for an army, it's half a year or more since the game's release. Not only that, but I'll be needing to carry a rulebook, and 2 supplements to a game.
I just wonder the reasons behind why we only have 4 races in the main rules when other rules like Warlords of Erehwon and Kings of War can have many many more - I know those rulebooks are big, but the army pages only take up half a dozen (or less) for each army. I understand the argument that those 4 may be the only races in the Oathmark world, yet here we are getting 2 supplements alread, andy adding one new army in.
All units can be a maximum of 5 wide and 4 deep for a total of 20 models. So, as long as you make the movement tray big enough to meet a 125mm frontage, it won't cause a problem with the rules.
As for the rest, the Oathmark book is about the same size (width and length) as the frostgrave book with more pages so I suspect the supplements will probably be the same. The Warlords book is way bigger and substantially thicker (see below). I can't comment on Undead or why they didn't add them to the initial release but it's probably due to time and the desire to at least get the product out.
lord_blackfang wrote: So this is trying to ape GW in nickel and diming us for playable content then? The first book is literally Kill Team: Elites?
Yeah, no. If they would there would be all sorts of instructions on how you must, must use official Oathmark models from Northstar. This more akin to how they've handled Frostgrave - optional expansions.
Yeah, no. If they would there would be all sorts of instructions on how you must, must use official Oathmark models from Northstar. This more akin to how they've handled Frostgrave - optional expansions.
Yeah, no.
A book for fielding elites and tracking their campaign growth.
A book for a fifth race that everybody can field, and for tracking character campaign growth.
This sounds like one game being sold piecemeal, not a complete game with optional addons.
Expansion 3: Warmachines and their campaign growth?
A book for fielding elites and tracking their campaign growth.
A book for a fifth race that everybody can field, and for tracking character campaign growth.
This sounds like one game being sold piecemeal, not a complete game with optional addons.
Expansion 3: Warmachines and their campaign growth?
Again, not seeing it. This isn't like a codex release cycle but then again I suppose it isn't like Warlords "fire and forget" model either.
The book is complete in that you can play with the 4 races until the cows come home. So, I think we can expect additional books in future probably to cover additional fantasy races like Gnolls, Lizards, etc but not at a pace or with the requirements of GW. Plus, you're not tied into their models either.
I'm tempted to pick up the rule book (if only to add to my list of games that never get played), but would rather have all the rules in one book. I am still annoyed that Mantic released 3rd edition with a hefty tomb of a book, and then released a book with additional lists, I'd have rather they did one big book with everything in there. Hopefully Oathmark does do a big book later on, not a fan of having to buy several books to play one game.
Anyway, those Light Elf metal characters are lovely. When I get around to collecting Elves, I'll most certainly be picking up some of them.
With Kings of War isn't it that the main rulebook has all the armies they actually sell, and the other book has all the WFB armies they don't do models for? I think that's a pretty reasonable way to split them.
I'm not worried by the way Oathmark is releasing. I've been very happy with everything I've got for Frostgrave and RoSD, so I'm happy to get multiple books.
pgmason wrote: With Kings of War isn't it that the main rulebook has all the armies they actually sell, and the other book has all the WFB armies they don't do models for? I think that's a pretty reasonable way to split them.
I'm not worried by the way Oathmark is releasing. I've been very happy with everything I've got for Frostgrave and RoSD, so I'm happy to get multiple books.
Yeah, that's about right for KoW.
I've been very happy with Frostgrave too. Outside a few new soldier types (and the XP table fix in MoM) the expansions are self-contained storylines. You're not missing out on half the game without them. From what we've seen, Oathmark is more like Necromunda than Frostgrave.
This is a 1st for North Star. DON'T buy any Oathmark this weekend.
WHAAAT? you reply.
From Monday, every order in June for £25 (inc VAT) or more of Oathmark products will get this model of an Elf Huntress included in their order, free!!
(The model was made by Mark Copplestone. He made it as a thank you to everyone who has supported North Star (and by association him of course) as customers through this difficult period.)
This is a 1st for North Star. DON'T buy any Oathmark this weekend.
WHAAAT? you reply.
From Monday, every order in June for £25 (inc VAT) or more of Oathmark products will get this model of an Elf Huntress included in their order, free!!
(The model was made by Mark Copplestone. He made it as a thank you to everyone who has supported North Star (and by association him of course) as customers through this difficult period.)
If Osprey didn’t release supplement books, people would be on here complaining that the game was not supported/dead. People who actually buy Oathmark will be pretty likely to also buy supplements. People who say they won’t buy Oathmark because it has supplements were never likely to have bought it anyway.
What’s next for Oathmark? I feel like we’ve hardly started. Joseph McCullough has already written supplement 1 which introduces the Undead into the Oathmark world, and he’s planned to carry on with that. In regard to the figure range, we began 3 years ago on this project and have a release schedule that stretches on years ahead. In essence, there will be a plastic box set supported by metal characters for every troop type in the book. I don’t know if we’ll achieve it, but that is the plan. There are two box sets planned for the Undead, and the other sets on the work bench are Human Cavalry, Dwarf Light Infantry, Elf Cavalry, Orc Infantry and Goblin Light Infantry.
Manchu wrote: If Osprey didn’t release supplement books, people would be on here complaining that the game was not supported/dead. People who actually buy Oathmark will be pretty likely to also buy supplements. People who say they won’t buy Oathmark because it has supplements were never likely to have bought it anyway.
What’s next for Oathmark? I feel like we’ve hardly started. Joseph McCullough has already written supplement 1 which introduces the Undead into the Oathmark world, and he’s planned to carry on with that. In regard to the figure range, we began 3 years ago on this project and have a release schedule that stretches on years ahead. In essence, there will be a plastic box set supported by metal characters for every troop type in the book. I don’t know if we’ll achieve it, but that is the plan. There are two box sets planned for the Undead, and the other sets on the work bench are Human Cavalry, Dwarf Light Infantry, Elf Cavalry, Orc Infantry and Goblin Light Infantry.
They say that undead are supplement 1 but Oathbreakers are said to come on November after Battlesworn. Weird. Anyway, 2 boxes for undead are very welcome. I hope these are skellies and zombies like soldiers/spearmen/archers skellies and warriors/linebreakers zombies or similar. It would allow for a strong core of the army, backed by some characters made from plastic Frostgrave line.
I have quite a few Osprey game books, from the thin blue paperback type to the hardbacks like Scrappers and Frostgrave.
One problem I've always had was the lousy page layouts. Like rules sections starting halfway down a page (after a different section) and needing a final paragraph on the next page making bits seem spread across pages. Or references to diagrams where you have to turn pages to see. I don't know if it's just me that notices this of course with my ocd.
How does the Oathmark book look in this regard?
I have quite a few Osprey game books, from the thin blue paperback type to the hardbacks like Scrappers and Frostgrave.
One problem I've always had was the lousy page layouts. Like rules sections starting halfway down a page (after a different section) and needing a final paragraph on the next page making bits seem spread across pages. Or references to diagrams where you have to turn pages to see. I don't know if it's just me that notices this of course with my ocd.
How does the Oathmark book look in this regard?
I got the digital version of Oathmark when it released in April. Unfortunately, it has no set formatting, so the issue with images and tables being on different pages is even worse (no matter what formatting I use, I always get pages with half a sentence on it, skips a page, than has a full page image that was obviously intended to be inline). I was actually planning on picking up the hardback to get better formatting.
But I've never had a problem with most Osprey books. I've noticed it, but it has never been a deal breaker. The print-on-demand Rangers of Shadowdeep was way worse (I'm actually curious if the Modiphius edition fixes this).
Keep in mind that Osprey has a unique layout requirement for their wargames range. I.e. the rules must fit within their standard 68 page layout (unless you have an arrangement for something like Frostgrave, etc.). So this may be a reason behind some layout issues if you've encountered any.
They used to have a website detailing the requirements for submitting a wargame to them, etc.
Elbows wrote: Keep in mind that Osprey has a unique layout requirement for their wargames range. I.e. the rules must fit within their standard 68 page layout (unless you have an arrangement for something like Frostgrave, etc.). So this may be a reason behind some layout issues if you've encountered any.
They used to have a website detailing the requirements for submitting a wargame to them, etc.
Makes sense. I must be honest, the Frostgrave size hardback is the perfect size for a rulebook. From the pics I'd seen, I thought the Oathmark one was more like the new KoW book (except for thickness ofc).
I was going to pick up the pdf to check it out but it's £3 dearer than the hardback on Amazon. I just wish Osprey would do something like 'buy the physical rulebook at full price and get the pdf free'.
Also, Oathmark hardback and the supplements seem to have jumped up in price from similar offerings.
I mean, they don't insist you play with their models, but it's not like GW can make you do that either. But they effectively have the same situation, because they insist on waiting until they release models for something before they release the rules for it, which means you'll have to keep buying the new books as they come out because they wouldn't include all the factions in the rule book.
Do most folks here see a strong need to go with the Oathmark required 25mm base size?
As Gimgamgoo notes above, many standard humanoid minis are based on 20mm bases (I'm a KoW guy, and maybe 25-50% of my models are multibased, but I still have lots of figures solo on mostly 20mm bases)
So if you field a 5-man wide base that's 100mm wide, while your opponent fields a 5-man wide base that's 125mm - do you really think this will make that much of a difference?
And if everyone has the same 20mm base size (except the darn KoW orcs, which are all on 25mm!!), then everyone's bases are just that much smaller.
No real problem, right? Is it aesthetics? Or do you anticipate some real problems if everyone is using smaller bases?
Very curious. I've always played rather loosey-goosey with base size (and movement sometimes too), so I've never quite understood the importance of getting the base size right.
pancakeonions wrote: Do most folks here see a strong need to go with the Oathmark required 25mm base size?
As Gimgamgoo notes above, many standard humanoid minis are based on 20mm bases (I'm a KoW guy, and maybe 25-50% of my models are multibased, but I still have lots of figures solo on mostly 20mm bases)
So if you field a 5-man wide base that's 100mm wide, while your opponent fields a 5-man wide base that's 125mm - do you really think this will make that much of a difference?
And if everyone has the same 20mm base size (except the darn KoW orcs, which are all on 25mm!!), then everyone's bases are just that much smaller.
No real problem, right? Is it aesthetics? Or do you anticipate some real problems if everyone is using smaller bases?
Very curious. I've always played rather loosey-goosey with base size (and movement sometimes too), so I've never quite understood the importance of getting the base size right.
Enlighten me!
Basing to use your models in various game systems is awkward. As you say if you decide between you and your friend to go for a standard size (be that 20 or 25mm) it's fine. but as soon as someone new joins who has gone the other way you have problems, not just of frontage when engaging but also manoeuvring which I think is even more important. Personally I'd always give my opponent the benefit of the doubt but not everyone will be the same.
During this current pandemic me and my gaming group have talked (wistfully) about playing most systems and I also find myself trying to get the most out of my models, as such they're currently being prepped (potentially) for AoS, classic Warhammer, Warlords of Erehown, KoW and now Oathmark and probably one or two more that have yet to be created .
What I have decided is to use certain units as crossover between certain systems. Skeletons on 20mm bases can be used across most systems, but my elites (such as grave guard) go on 25mm bases which can then be used as standard infantry in the systems that use 25mm.
Alternatively I'm toying with the idea that my next batch of minis will go on the smallest base size, and then add spacers to the bases when needed for other systems, haven't tried this yet so no idea if it's feasible.
It's not perfect but I don't like my models being constrained to systems just because of base size.
pgmason wrote: With Kings of War isn't it that the main rulebook has all the armies they actually sell, and the other book has all the WFB armies they don't do models for? I think that's a pretty reasonable way to split them.
I'm not worried by the way Oathmark is releasing. I've been very happy with everything I've got for Frostgrave and RoSD, so I'm happy to get multiple books.
Not quite. The Uncharted Empires has rules for Salamanders, Ratkin, and The Herd. Currently Mantic sell models for the Salamanders faction, and have shown their upcoming models for the other two. Also a good number of the lists in the book use a main army book list as a base to work from... so again, use a lot of Mantic models.
pancakeonions wrote: Do most folks here see a strong need to go with the Oathmark required 25mm base size?
As Gimgamgoo notes above, many standard humanoid minis are based on 20mm bases (I'm a KoW guy, and maybe 25-50% of my models are multibased, but I still have lots of figures solo on mostly 20mm bases)
So if you field a 5-man wide base that's 100mm wide, while your opponent fields a 5-man wide base that's 125mm - do you really think this will make that much of a difference?
And if everyone has the same 20mm base size (except the darn KoW orcs, which are all on 25mm!!), then everyone's bases are just that much smaller.
No real problem, right? Is it aesthetics? Or do you anticipate some real problems if everyone is using smaller bases?
Very curious. I've always played rather loosey-goosey with base size (and movement sometimes too), so I've never quite understood the importance of getting the base size right.
Enlighten me!
Most of my stuff is on 20mm bases, what I may end up doing is just use bigger movement trays. I will admit to thinking that the 25mm bases do offer a better visual, and make it easier to rank up models. I think that 20mm base has been the norm for so long that it is now entrenched.
Edit, the same is true for the D6, a D10 offers a bigger scale to play around with for stats, a D6 is just so old that it has become the go to... I will admit to finding a supply of just D10 at a reasonable price is actually difficult.
RaptorusRex wrote: The suggestion given in the rulebook is to build movement trays with the correct footprint.
I saw some .stl files online for oathmark movement trays. Looked like they would fit 20mm bases. Just got a 3D printer, so that is an option if you know someone with one.
Well, I had a bit of a gripe and some concerns earlier. I bought the book and I'm really impressed with it. No really messy rules split across the place. Nicely set out rules, especially the stats section.
Except for a few orcs, nearly all my models are on 20mm (troops) or 40mm (monsters). I might give it bash at that scale of bases. The only pain will be the cavalry which are on GWs bizarre 24mm x 50mm.
I'm really hoping that Oathmark and Northstar bring us a plastic undead light cavalry box set with plain skeletal horses. The hobby could use a new version of the old GW skeletal horde horses that they finally retired along with the Tomb Kings.
Psychopomp wrote: I'm really hoping that Oathmark and Northstar bring us a plastic undead light cavalry box set with plain skeletal horses. The hobby could use a new version of the old GW skeletal horde horses that they finally retired along with the Tomb Kings.
Yeah, one similar to Goblin Wolf Riders box would be sweet. I am not a fan of the chubby wolves but I really appreciate that this kit allows not only for a 3 different units to be made, but that the wolves are separate from their riders.
privateer4hire wrote: Are undead included with this release or are they a separate book? Anyone know?
Next expansion. “Oathbreakers” has the undead and is set for late Nov. (according to Amazon). Battlesworn is apparently focused on heroes you can level up and a new campaign.
Video about the Battlesworn. Many great things in the book but it is very dissapointing seeing how many pictures from the core rulebook were reused. I know that it is a way to cut the costs but I would rather have only the few new ones rather than this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFY9MRnlm2g
I.e. these (not sure which of the two specifically the message referred to):
Well, that would be marvellous. Many of the Oathmark plastics I thought were largely nice yet just not quite up there, but if those plastic ogres match the above well, that could be an amazing set. And if not, I'll at least get that one on the right at some point anyway, terrific sculpt that.
I.e. these (not sure which of the two specifically the message referred to):
Well, that would be marvellous. Many of the Oathmark plastics I thought were largely nice yet just not quite up there, but if those plastic ogres match the above well, that could be an amazing set. And if not, I'll at least get that one on the right at some point anyway, terrific sculpt that.
The one on the right style would be sweet, but anyway Ogres in plastic is a fantastic news!
I don't know if it was posted here already, but there is also third expansion coming up 24 jun 2021: Bane of Kings
"Time is the bane of all kings. Always does it march forward, bringing change and challenges, wars and disasters, invaders and internal rebellion. This supplement for Oathmark: Battles of the Lost Age, focuses on the passage of time and its effect on a players kingdom. While wars and battle still determine their ultimate fate, many other events can affect the armies of a kingdom. Plagues and blights can reduce access to soldiers from specific territories. Attempted coups can cost a king some of his best generals. On the other hand, unexpected alliances might give a kingdom access to unusual troops, or the birth of a new heir might bring wondrous presents.
Along with the rules for the passing of years, this book also presents the option to train your units to fight in special formations, such as phalanxes, shield walls, and skirmish lines. These will allow players to use their existing armies to try out new strategies and tactics to swing their battle in their favour. This book also includes several new military expeditions, including numerous scenarios, to once again challenge a player's generalship."
I wonder when will we see the sculpts for the undead? The other minis were released before there was even a rulebook available so hopefully they will show something before the november, when the Oathbreakers supplement is supposed to be ready.
"I've shown off the two new Osprey books, Frostgrave: The Red King and Oathmark: Oathbreakers today. The great news is we'll be releasing plastic box sets with each one. With Frostgrave we'll be releasing The Demon Army, and with Oathmark Skeleton Warriors. I think you'll love both of them. Pictures to follow very soon."
And they stated that skeletons will look like the ones from Oathbreakers cover: "Actually, the cover of the book is what the Skeletons look like."
"I've shown off the two new Osprey books, Frostgrave: The Red King and Oathmark: Oathbreakers today. The great news is we'll be releasing plastic box sets with each one. With Frostgrave we'll be releasing The Demon Army, and with Oathmark Skeleton Warriors. I think you'll love both of them. Pictures to follow very soon."
And they stated that skeletons will look like the ones from Oathbreakers cover: "Actually, the cover of the book is what the Skeletons look like."
Big thanks for the info! Amazing news to hear for any skellies fans, I am so happy!
I have to admit I wasn’t the biggest fan of their chosen scale or style...but after getting ahold of some of the Oathmark dwarfs, I am sold on Oathmark as a range. I’ll be getting some of those demons, and maybe some of the elves I had previously derided. I found the kits to be that enjoyable to assemble.
I still gotta get the light infantry for the elves- those are the cooler ones with the hooded cloaks.
I'm going to want to see how the skeletons compare to Mantic's and Wargames Atlantic. These could end up being the most bang for the buck considering how well stocked with parts the Oathmark kits have been.
highlord tamburlaine wrote: I still gotta get the light infantry for the elves- those are the cooler ones with the hooded cloaks.
I'm going to want to see how the skeletons compare to Mantic's and Wargames Atlantic. These could end up being the most bang for the buck considering how well stocked with parts the Oathmark kits have been.
I too need to get these elf light infantry kit. I think it is the best one from the Oathmark range so far. Also these elves could easly pass for a human rangers/guard, making them usable in many games. As to skellies, I never liked the look of the Mantic ones, and the WA ones have weird proportions, and they are ancient times rather than dark ages/medieval I would have prefer. Oathmark kit would be very usable for bigger games as well as ones like Frostgrave, Sellswords and Spellslingers etc., having the options for bows, spears and hand weapons combined with shields, and the champion upgrade.
There's quite a lot of bronze (and some iron) age Celts about them, but I don't see that as a bad thing. Gives them a nice "ancient times" vibe without standing out as much as a Corinthian hoplite helmet would have done. Good stuff. Very nice poses for the archers too. From the art, I wasn't sure about the pectoral plates (can't stand them on the armoured Elves), but for these they do help break up the continuous bones a bit.
Not that I exactly need them, but having more variety among my skeletons - and for relatively cheap - is always nice to have. Looking forward to when these hit my FLGS!
dyndraig wrote: They look nice, but the integral bases damps my enthusiasm.
Not a fan of integrated bases but it takes about thirty seconds a miniature to be rid of them.
Pretty much my take on the situation. I've got 180 of the warlord games skeletons and 40 of the old GW ones. While I enjoy the fact they don't have integral bases a bit more contact with the base wouldn't go a miss.
zedmeister wrote:So many uses for those skeletons. And, knowing Northstart, they'll be cheap.
I already have plans to use a bunch in Frostgrave and Rangers of Shadow Deep...
I'm hoping it'll be 30 for £25 which is what their other kits are currently at. I'll be getting a few boxes as this has once again peaked my curiosity for undead options.
Oh, wow. I love them. Time for a bunch MORE skeletons for the horde.
There's even enough unhelmeted skulls for all five bodies! I wonder how well the arms scale with the Wargames Atlantic skeletons? I prefer my skeleton archers unarmored...
Gosh am I glad I haven't pulled the trigger on any of the other affordable skeletons kits, not because there's anything wrong with them, these just nail the aesthetic I'm after almost exactly.
highlord tamburlaine wrote: Skeletons are one of the time I really don't mind having the integral bases. Keeps them stable. Plus they aren't hard to cut off.
If anything, Skeletons are extra bad for integral bases IMO, as spindly skeletons legs has a bigger tendency to bend when you cut of the base.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Is it that shameful to glue the attached bases on top of a base and hide it with putty, static grass or flock?
I do that all the time with historicals, it lifts them up a bit to hide the size difference when mixed into a fantasy system. I still prefer models without an integrated base, it gives more options without additional work.
Those metals look pretty snazzy too - think I might en up going in for the whole range at some point, I continue to like them more every time I see 'em!
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Is it that shameful to glue the attached bases on top of a base and hide it with putty, static grass or flock?
It's just a minor annoyance really, but for my KoW multibasing I have more and more started using Welberg scenery mats. They are really nice for multibasing, but they dont really work with miniatures on integral bases unfortunately.
The only metal one I like is the necromancer with the skull staff and the book. No matter, as I will use plastic models from Frostgrave range for a characters anyway.
howie wrote: While not being massively blown away by the metal characters I think they're cool enough. I too like the necromancer the most.
Do we know if the chariots or heavy Infantry are also going to be in plastic?
Infantry (heavy/light) so far was plastic for all races so I doubt that they would change it for undead. As to chariots, they could as well be metal or resin being larger minis, as the dragon was resin. Still they could suprise us and make chariots in plastic which would be awesome.
Heafstaag wrote: Any idea when these awesome skeletons will be released?
Think they go on pre-order sometime around Halloween. Getting released sometime in November.
This is the only Oathmark kit I've not really needed, as I've brought loads of the warlord games ones and I've a few of the newer standard skeletons from GW which I was going to use as heavy armour (the grave guard ones are stupidly over priced). But I've brought at least two of every oathmark kit so far, and I really like the armour on these ones. That box art is fantastic too. I'll have to get at least one, even if most end up as conversion material for champions etc to mix in with my others.
I had hoped that the metal characters would have been slightly more unique, but they are about what I'd actually expected from this release and they are still really good.
I sadly didn't get enough of my dwarf or goblin armies painted in time for this release, as had been the plan. I did pretty well but the pandemic totally buggered up my final year of uni so now I'm swamped to try and get everything done in time, so painting has had to take a backseat, but I did get a good amount of my undead painted in time for this is release, which was main goal. Can't wait for this book, hoping it included the chariot rules this time, but I don't think it does I think that will be Bane of Kings next year.
Oathmark continues to inspire me which each and ever release. I'm hoping that next year we see a lot of the kits that are meant to be coming that don't have other, easy alternatives. (Before I get distracted too much by StarGrave too!)
Great art on this skellies box. Hopefully the Oathbreakers will be packed with new and awesome art too, unlike Battlesworn which had only like 4 new and therest was from the rulebook.
From the comments of @brennon from the Beasts of War it looks like there are no zombies in the undead list or (depending on interpretation of bellow qouted text) at least there are no zombies as basic troops:
''Skeletons, Ghouls and Revenants – so you’ve got your standard click-clack skeletons, flesh-eating ghouls and then Revenants who are more like Draugr or the Men Of Dunharrow from LotR – a little more intelligent and not tied to the whims of a wizard.
There’s nothing to stop you using zombies to represent the standard elements of your army though.''
Well, Oathmark draws more from pre-film Tolkien than Warhammer so it's maybe not so odd. Besides, depending on what the ghouls are armed with, zombies might be perfectly decent stand-ins.
Theophony wrote: Well, that sucks, I was planning on making a zombie horde using my Zombicide Black Plague and green horde models as the core .
I'm not really sure how Revnants are different visually from zombies so go for it.
This is art for Revanant warrior:
Looks like a zombie to me!
He's no slow, braindead thing though, but still seemingly quite capable of using weaponry as he presumably did in life. Hence more of a draugr than a traditional zombie. (Although what exactly constitutes a zombie differs between depictions of course.)
Feels a bit odd if the more recently dead are armed in the same bronze age gear as the skellieboys though, if the rest of the setting is supposed to be further advanced than that. Makes for a cohesive army look I suppose, but still. I think I'd rather focus either on centuries-old legions of skeletons, or the more recently dead draugr, with ghouls chasing after their recently mobile snacks. Any art for the ghouls out there that anyone is aware of?
Mine will all be dressed in tattered 20th century clothes anyway, mysteriously teleported from the Zombicide and Walking Dead universe to my OathMark mythical battlefield
pancakeonions wrote: Mine will all be dressed in tattered 20th century clothes anyway, mysteriously teleported from the Zombicide and Walking Dead universe to my OathMark mythical battlefield
I can't remember of zombies in Lotr universe that is based on Norrean mythology. And Oathmark in based on Lotr universe. Zombies belong to different cultures so I am not surprised they are not present. Honestly I do not miss them!
I do not like the look of the Revenant. Would prefer more modern armor/weapons. I would also like ''traditional'' zombies there. Well, at least skellies are awesome and hopefully cavalry means skellies not revenant.
Not sure how the Oathmark book's going to explain the no zombies thing. Apparently everything is raised from the ground. I guess the necromancer has to check there's no meat on them bones first.
Gimgamgoo wrote: Not sure how the Oathmark book's going to explain the no zombies thing. Apparently everything is raised from the ground. I guess the necromancer has to check there's no meat on them bones first.
Maybe like so:
"Dead people is dead people is dead people. No mind undeads are all more or less the same"
I don't know, zombies are not exactly old, as folklore goes, ans many many cultures seem to have managed without them. As far as I remember, didn't they say as much already, that you could use zombies and skeletons more or less at will?
Miniatures wise, I assume it is a combination of sprue count, setting assumptions and aesthetics reasons.
Gimgamgoo wrote: Not sure how the Oathmark book's going to explain the no zombies thing. Apparently everything is raised from the ground. I guess the necromancer has to check there's no meat on them bones first.
It could be explained as recent corpses being unable to be raised as the spirit is still too closely connected to the body or something.
Only when enough time has passed can a body be reanimated, and by that time the flesh has rotted away.
No idea if they plan to adress it as all, or how. But that would be one way of doing it
This seems like a suboptimal use of limited tooling capacity in a world where Archon makes 8 different HIPS dragons and Reaper Bones exists.
Just because other companies make something does not mean that we cannot have more variety. There were already skellies kits out there so by that logic Northstar should not make new ones. Also not everyone would buy from Archon/Prodos.
lord_blackfang wrote: Plastic ogres that aren't a literal embodiment of digestion jokes would be pretty damn sweet too.
Travelling tribes of philosopher warrior monks who carry around their vast sellection of scrolls and kick ass. More of library section jokes than the indigestion ones.
This seems like a suboptimal use of limited tooling capacity in a world where Archon makes 8 different HIPS dragons and Reaper Bones exists.
Just because other companies make something does not mean that we cannot have more variety. There were already skellies kits out there so by that logic Northstar should not make new ones. Also not everyone would buy from Archon/Prodos.
I'm with Lord Blackfang on this one.
HIPS from small companies should be used for infantry and cavalry in my opinion. Characters and monsters should be in a different medium.
Hey I'm all for plastic monsters, just not ones that are going to have major competition. Like, make Oathmark all about manticores and make a plastic modular manticore with bits for each faction. Probably a better seller than adding one new dragon to a market full of them.
So the list is like that:
Revenants: King, Prince, General, Captain, Champion, Warriors, Linebreakers, Cavalry, Chariot.
Skeletons: Champion, Spearmen, Soldiers, Archers, Catapult, Ballista.
Other: Necromancer, Ghouls, Wraith, Vampire, Corpse Fire, Burrow Worm.
We know that the next box are Revenant Warriors/Linebreakers. I wonder if they will release chariot in plastic so the necromacer can ride in style? It would be nice to have plastic skellies artillery too but as other races have nothing like that I guess that it is not planned in the near future.
Order 3 boxes of dwarf's 1 heavy 2 norms.
I have a high elf war hammer faction to proxy. Do you think they are going to add units such as elf and human cavalry, Bolt throws/catapults? I don't mind using what I have but high elf cavalry is very pricey on ebay at the moment.
According to North Star they planned to do more or less everything they put in the book. Human cavalry then Elven cavalry should be released soon (no release date anyway).
Does anyone have or has seen a pic of the Oathmark skellies next to the GW ones? I've got 60 of the latter from my old Vampire Counts turned Kings of War army, and I was wondering how well Oathmark spear skellingtons would fit in next to GW sword n' board skellingtons.
I have something that could help - there is a size comparison made by Wargames Atlantic which shows their skellie next to GW one and Oathmark human, and because Oathmark skellies are similar in size to the humans from their line you can see more or less how would they look next to the GW ones.
For those that still hesitate about the Oathmark, here is the cool presentation of the kingdom built choosing units from many different terrain types (uses Oathbreakers too) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLoPSg7Zxis
Nice video about the Oathmark skellies. There are both plastic and metal ones. Also you can see them next to the Wargames Atlantic ones. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvhHoU5_HmQ
To quote Northstar: ''Oathmark. We will have a regular release schedule for plastic Oathmark figures this year, including: Human Cavalry, Dwarf Light Infantry, Revenants, Orcs and Goblin Lt Infantry.''
BobtheInquisitor wrote: They look comical to me. Not bad, but like they were designed to be comical.
Also, what is happening on the fronts of those horses? Looks like neck all the way to their elbows.
A lof of the historical miniatures out on the market are designed to look like the figures from "Foundry Miniatures" - a company that is basically a sister company to Games Workshop that just focused on historical miniatures and was very dominant in that realm until 10 or 15 years when other companies really started to step it up.
Even so, those other companies copied the foundry aesthetics, which why there are so many historical figures that look more cartoonish then they need to.
Looks like somebody tried to copy the most atrocious GW style muscle shading circa plastic Bullgor release, without even having any sculpted muscle to work with.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: They look comical to me. Not bad, but like they were designed to be comical.
Also, what is happening on the fronts of those horses? Looks like neck all the way to their elbows.
A lof of the historical miniatures out on the market are designed to look like the figures from "Foundry Miniatures" - a company that is basically a sister company to Games Workshop that just focused on historical miniatures and was very dominant in that realm until 10 or 15 years when other companies really started to step it up.
Even so, those other companies copied the foundry aesthetics, which why there are so many historical figures that look more cartoonish then they need to.
Foundry is to blame for the look of Warlord, Gripping Beast, Northstar, and all the other dumpy miniature lines? I can only imagine how the Fireforge Mongols would have turned out in a world where Foundry wasn’t so influential.
Foundry offices 35 years ago two men in tweed jackets:
"Yeah, but what if their heads were like...huge? Wouldn't that be something? And their hands.. Can't have dainty little hands now can we? Sausage fingers it is then!"
If anyone wonder if the Conquest Jotnar would be a good candidate for a giant in Oathmark here you have scale comparison (Please note that it is in a process of conversion - originally he had a tree in his right hand). Personally, although I love the model, I think he is too big for Oathmark scale but he cartainly fits on the 50x100 base.
Just picked up the Oathmark rulebook. There seems to be a printing error on pg 44... the picture at the bottom covers the last sentence about combat against units in defensive works. Can anyone tell me ending to "You must also move any other......" ?
Wehrkind wrote: Just picked up the Oathmark rulebook. There seems to be a printing error on pg 44... the picture at the bottom covers the last sentence about combat against units in defensive works. Can anyone tell me ending to "You must also move any other......" ?
It should be ''You must also move any other units that are in the way, just as with regular combat.''
Yeah, since you first mentioned that they have basically a neck and then legs I am not so keen to buy them anymore. That and the duck legs infantry means that I will rather not make human army from the Oathmark minis.
It’s a shame because I finally came around on their dwarfs and elves. Even their current human kit isn’t too bad (although it’s fairly vanilla, and the selection of heads means towards the doltish).
Perhaps the horses can be saved with a shield bit glued to their chest fronts.
Albino Squirrel wrote: Those are just not very good. Especially the horses, though the riders are pretty weak too. But you have to have 1/3 of your horses falling down.
I hadn’t noticed that, but now I’m chortling.
Looks like a bunch of Artaxes in search of some mud.
Hmmm..
I have plenty of spare horse head bits leftover, some mud-textured paint, and some spare cavalry bases. GB’s heavy Arab cavalry come with spare torsos heads and arms... I think I just found a way to really stretch that cavalry box value.
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: Liking the look of those Revenants though. Those Oathmark undead are shaping up to be rather a great range.
Except, if they are similar in size to the skeletons, they are small as hell.
It kind of stands to reason, though: people usually have those things inside themselves, plus some other stuff
Right, but if they are not in scale with other manufacturers then everything looks odd. Especially with those of us who have decade spanning collections.
yea, I was a little bummed to find this line runs a little on the small side. Not that interested in picking up too much - I have to mount them on 5mm bases, the poor fellas!
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: Liking the look of those Revenants though. Those Oathmark undead are shaping up to be rather a great range.
Except, if they are similar in size to the skeletons, they are small as hell.
It kind of stands to reason, though: people usually have those things inside themselves, plus some other stuff
Right, but if they are not in scale with other manufacturers then everything looks odd. Especially with those of us who have decade spanning collections.
If you have a collection spanning decades and various manufacturers, odds are you're having scale issues already! Oh, how often I wish there was an actual 28mm standard...
For the undead specifically, I don't really know what project they'd be part of however, so I can find something suitable. Given their bronze age Celtic look, they might work well opposing ordinary living Celts, so might look into some of the smaller historical ranges. Or simply have them fight the famously tiny Early Imperial Romans from Warlord Games; got a good few of those lying around. That might be perfect actually, hmm...
It might seem counter to the concept of 'fantasy', and those latter versions of fantasy races are alright in their place (currently waiting for those new lumineth aelves to go on sale) but I've always had a soft spot for fantasy with real-world considerations and even limitations. Makes the 'mundane' parts more believable and the fantastic parts more fantastic. (
.
.
