NOTE: This first post is continually updated. Last update 05/03/2017



Hello everyone, welcome to my project called, Hinterlands.

Hinterlands is a Skirmish Campaign system for Age of Sigmar. It is similar in scope to Mordheim or Frostgrave, but tries to stay as true as possible to everything we love about Age of Sigmar.

Version 1 was released in October 2016, and since then I have been very honoured with the positive response. It has become the #1 downloaded file on TGA and more excitingly, games of Hinterlands have been happening all over the globe!

The rules are free to download, and what you'll find are:

- Clear concise rules (the core rules are no more than 4 pages) for playing skirmish style campaigns and RPG style campaigns.
- Professional presentation (I have tried to make this look like the real deal!)
- Full modularity of the rules (so you can tweak/add/remove whatever you fancy without causing headaches for yourself with a long list of knock-on effects)
- You can download the latest version from the following link:

Hinterlands: Skirmish Campaigns in the Mortal Realms - by Sam James <- Download Link

Here are some screenshots of what to expect:



Hinterlands Version 2.0

NEWS: January 2017 sees the first update to Hinterlands!



Version 2.0 FAQ

I've had lots of great feedback from players about the rules for version 2 and a few grey areas have been pointed out (like Hanskrampf's comment!). I have decided to keep a living FAQ to answer these grey areas rather than constantly update the file. You can see it below and it will be included in the first post of this thread from now on:



UPDATE: 05/03/2017 VERSION 2.1



I am thrilled and honoured with the community response to Hinterlands and would like to thank all the players who have downloaded the rules and tried them out on the battlefield! :-) This started out as a personal project and a challenge to myself to make something that looked like the "real-deal", the Games Workshop logo on the front cover is a relic of that humble beginning as I really never expected the rules to receive this much attention. I have decided to remove the logo to make sure everyone knows this is 100% unofficial and to make sure that no ill-intent is perceived by any party.

As I had to update the version to do that, I took the opportunity to incorporate all the FAQ clarifications into the rules . The rules do not play any differently to version 2.0, but I would recommend downloading the latest version so you do not have to consult the FAQ.

I do not plan regular updates like this, instead you can look forward to a big update (version 3) coming later in the year! Happy gaming in the meantime!


Future Updates and Involving the Wider Community

With version 2.1 I think the rules are now a solid foundation. Gaming groups can tinker with any part of the rules and adapt/add/delete as they see fit. This makes customising Hinterlands super easy.

So why should I have all the fun?

I want to open up Hinterlands now to the wider community, so if you have a neat idea for some add-ons or would like to take these rules and make something even better out of them, DO IT! But even better, why not share it with the wider community too? If you are happy to do so I would love to start updating this first post with extras other forum members have made. So let's see what you can do



- bottle (Sam James)

If you'd like to follow me, or this project, I always recommend my blog here on DakkaDakka: Link

Awesome - I have been wanting to do something like this since AoS started. Congrats on actually getting it done!

Just preparing for a frostgrave campaign sorting out terrain etc (just got that game, looks nice). Have to have a look at what you have.

Cool nice work. Very well laid out. Well done.

Definitely looks like the real deal. I'll be sure to give it a good read over.

I know what I'm going to doing tonight. Reading through this! Looks great on a quick glance through.

Thanks so much for your positive feedback guys :-)

If you get a chance to read through or even play with the rules I would love to hear feedback and crits. I would imagine there are a few rules each of you would want to change here and there as well, be it down to them not quite working or from personal preference. I would love to hear that too.

The next step is to add a hobby section with example warbands for each type of campaign and then a roster sheet to record your warbands on too. The latter is proving a little tricky due to needing to fit lots of information on the page.

I just came onto Dakka to post an 'I wonder if GW will ever do a version of Mordheim/WFRP for Age of Sigmar?' post, when I saw that you've beaten them to it! Looks great, I'll definitely take a look at this.

So, this looks amazing. I'll definitely be trying it out with my friends. My plan is to print out a half dozen copies and spread them around at my game night on Friday. We've been trying a narrative war band campaign I put together, but it's imploding pretty quickly.

Quick question though...

Are the Rules of One in effect from the GHB? My guess is no, but it's not specifically mentioned. The GHB is so entrenched in so many communities that if you're not using some of its core rules, you need to say so. It seems like with a little luck you could get a Hero with a 1+ save, to hit or to wound.

Hey Kriswall, didn't see your question here. Firstly, thank you and good luck! Let me know how you get on with the rules if you have the chance to play them. To answer your question the answer is as you guessed - the rules of one (or any additional GHB rules (unless otherwise stated) are not in effect. I don't think it would make too much difference either way as you're not likely to have 2 Wizards in a starting Warband (as that would sink 2/3s of your starting gold). You might want to consider the rules of one however, because you could be prone to models generating more attacks being very good. I am considering in adding a "house rules" page to the first update and including many of the additions people are coming up with. Adding in the Rules of One could be one of those. Another house rule might be to ban summoned scenery. I think a Balewind Vortex would be grossly overpowered in a game like this.

 Bottle wrote:
Hey Kriswall, didn't see your question here. Firstly, thank you and good luck! Let me know how you get on with the rules if you have the chance to play them. To answer your question the answer is as you guessed - the rules of one (or any additional GHB rules (unless otherwise stated) are not in effect. I don't think it would make too much difference either way as you're not likely to have 2 Wizards in a starting Warband (as that would sink 2/3s of your starting gold). You might want to consider the rules of one however, because you could be prone to models generating more attacks being very good. I am considering in adding a "house rules" page to the first update and including many of the additions people are coming up with. Adding in the Rules of One could be one of those. Another house rule might be to ban summoned scenery. I think a Balewind Vortex would be grossly overpowered in a game like this.

The Balewind Vortex seems like it would be absolutely game breaking. Then again, most Wizards also have the Hero Keyword, so they're starting at 3 wounds. It also means that the Wizard must remain immobile. If faced with such an opponent, I'd just scramble to get the treasure and then declare a rout. Sure, he'd kill some models, but I don't think he'd have any real fun. You have to play to the scenario.

I was actually looking at a Moonclan Warband. As I understand your rules, Moonclan Grot Shamans would only cost 30 gold to recruit (60 GHB points divided by 2). My plan is to take two of them. You know what they say... one is a target while two is a threat. It's nice to know that I can cast Arcane Bolt twice. Mystic Shield seems mostly useless for something like a Grot army as it would only impact a single model. 60 gold for two Grot Shamans would allow me 90 gold for the rest of my Warband. That goes a long way with Grots.

So I have a question:

If I am thinking of getting into AoS (with no prior purchases) at a skirmish level with you Hinterlands supplement, what is the base level of 'official' material I need to purchase?

I have enough of a collection of Orcs and Skaven for a pair of skirmish forces there, and was already building a small mixed warband of Stormcast for another skirmish game (Lord Relictor, a single Prosecutor, and a box of Liberators with a mix of their weapons).

Can I just buy the Generals Handbook, download the free warscrolls for the Skaven, Orcs, and the freebies for the Stormcast I have, and then download the Hinterlands material to be good to go?

Absolutely you would only need the General's handbook and the free rules/warscrolls! Let me know how you get on. :-)

Kriswall, did you manage to put together your Moonclan Grot Warband? They sound potent with such cheap shamans. You should even be able to fit in something big like a River Troll too as a basic Grot is only 6 gold coins.

Can you please upload this anywhere else, where I don't need to create an account for downloading?

 Bottle wrote:
Absolutely you would only need the General's handbook and the free rules/warscrolls! Let me know how you get on. :-)

Kriswall, did you manage to put together your Moonclan Grot Warband? They sound potent with such cheap shamans. You should even be able to fit in something big like a River Troll too as a basic Grot is only 6 gold coins.

I decided to go with a Clan Skyre list using some models I already owned. I haven't used the list yet, but will be doing so on Saturday. I'll post my experience. My fear is that the Stormfiend is a terrible idea in a kill team scenario. His weapon just does 2d3 mortal wounds, so he's overkill against 1 wound models. His mission will be to hunt down and kill the enemy General or whatever bulky "bodyguard model" the General might have.

The fluff idea is that the list represents a Warlock Engineer, his two 'enhanced' brothers and his lab assistants out in the wild collecting ingredients for the next experiment.

Warlock Engineer (50g/100pts) - General
Rat Ogor with whatever their missile option is called - (60g)
Stormfiend equipped with Warpfire Throwers - (100g)
6x Clanrats - (36g)

4g leftover

My god Bottle that looks awesome. How did you do this?

Hanskrampf wrote:Can you please upload this anywhere else, where I don't need to create an account for downloading?

That is what I was going to say. Can't you upload this to dakka and we can download it from here? I don't really want to make a new account on another forum. I already have a hard enough time to scour the threads here on Dakka and The Tyranid Hive without going to another forum.

Well, looks like you beat me too it! I was working on mixing the path to glory campaign structure with the regiemnts of renown event rules, but this seems better than anything i could have come up with!

I'm considering taking a Hinterlands war band consisting of two Ironjawz Orruk Gore-gruntas and a single Moonclan Grot Shaman. That works out to 150g for the three models. The goal would be for the Gore-gruntas to rush forward and either attack key enemies or claim treasure tokens. With 5 wounds and a 4+ save, they're pretty durable. The Shaman would be there for support via Mystic Shield or to snipe enemies with Arcane Bolt if possible.

Thoughts?

Unless you're wanting to do Destruction, I feel like Gore Gruntas are a little too durable. They pay for their points in durability and I'm thinking that they might not be able to cover enough ground by themselves. I feel like some Chaos Knights and a Chaos Sorcerer would be able to do the same job, and be able to cover more ground. CK are tough enough at 3 wounds, 4+, and you won't be overkilling anything you come across. Overkill is of course bad in skirmish games like this one as them points you paid for them are dealing unnecessary wounds.

 Kriswall wrote:
I'm considering taking a Hinterlands war band consisting of two Ironjawz Orruk Gore-gruntas and a single Moonclan Grot Shaman. That works out to 150g for the three models. The goal would be for the Gore-gruntas to rush forward and either attack key enemies or claim treasure tokens. With 5 wounds and a 4+ save, they're pretty durable. The Shaman would be there for support via Mystic Shield or to snipe enemies with Arcane Bolt if possible.

Thoughts?

I feel like on issue you might have is that if your opponent has a warband of 10 or so models you might simply find yourself playing catch up, especially if your enemy scatters their models and you have to spend ages traipsing across the board from one model to another while the models you can't engage with are busy claiming objectives.

In a skirmish game with individual models, the gore grunta is at a disadvantage because you could possibly charge and overkill one model because its the only one in range, then your turn is done then the rest of your enemies can move in for the kill.

aquietfrog wrote:
In a skirmish game with individual models, the gore grunta is at a disadvantage because you could possibly charge and overkill one model because its the only one in range, then your turn is done then the rest of your enemies can move in for the kill.

It seems like that would be an ideal situation for the Gore-grunta. Multiple enemies charge in, one attacks and then I get to attack back and split my attacks among everyone in range before the second enemy attacks. With even a little luck, I could take out multiple 1 wound models. I think a good opponent would try to bait me with one model at a time, but the Gore-gruntas are really just hunting down heroes and anyone who holds a treasure token.

I think i wouldn't necessarily try to counter-charge so much as having my back up models 2.5" away from the bait model. So the GG charges and the supports are out of your 1" range and they wait to pile in until after you attack

Whoops, just looked up gore grunta profie. You can have a weapon with 2" reach. So as long as you took that you would be safe against someone trying my plan. I guess in a skirmish game that 2" reach is actually pretty useful. Cool!

Volund wrote:
I think i wouldn't necessarily try to counter-charge so much as having my back up models 2.5" away from the bait model. So the GG charges and the supports are out of your 1" range and they wait to pile in until after you attack

Whoops, just looked up gore grunta profie. You can have a weapon with 2" reach. So as long as you took that you would be safe against someone trying my plan. I guess in a skirmish game that 2" reach is actually pretty useful. Cool!

I'm not sure how that would work. If I charged you, I'd be able to position to have as many models as possible within melee weapon range while trying to keep the rest more than 3" away. Remember that I don't have to charge directly towards the closest model... I just have to finish the charge withink 1/2" of A model. If you charged me, you'd need each model/unit to finish it's charge move within 1/2" of my Gore-grunta, which works for me. Otherwise, they'd have to be at least 3" away and wouldn't be in combat.

In either scenario, I'll attack either first or second and likely attack multiple of your units that haven't attacked yet. I really think it would work.

It's more like a screen of guys with backup guys 2 inches away. The more front guys you come into contact, the more supporting models you pull in. Also, splitting attacks between multiple targets is a disadvantage unless you can efficiently allocate one attack per wound your enemy has. Otherwise some attacks will be overkill that wont spill over to the next model.

aquietfrog wrote:
It's more like a screen of guys with backup guys 2 inches away. The more front guys you come into contact, the more supporting models you pull in. Also, splitting attacks between multiple targets is a disadvantage unless you can efficiently allocate one attack per wound your enemy has. Otherwise some attacks will be overkill that wont spill over to the next model.

Fair... but realistically, in the context of a rule set that has a max of 15 models, how often are you really going to be able to pull off a proper screen with a second rank of support dudes behind? If you try that out, I'll just spend a turn going around your screen... or ignoring that blob altogether and going after treasure tokens or outlying models... basically play the mission. I'm probably going to have the mobility advantage versus any blob of infantry that could pull off a screening maneuver. I'd be stupid to charge a screen.

Question for Bottle: are we allowed to bring formations? If i can bring one model from each of the appropriate units, is there a way to work out the price of a formation? I personally vote for 1/5 of the formation's points cost (that way i can exactly fit a dispossessed clan throng within 150gp )

 Kriswall wrote:

aquietfrog wrote:
It's more like a screen of guys with backup guys 2 inches away. The more front guys you come into contact, the more supporting models you pull in. Also, splitting attacks between multiple targets is a disadvantage unless you can efficiently allocate one attack per wound your enemy has. Otherwise some attacks will be overkill that wont spill over to the next model.

Fair... but realistically, in the context of a rule set that has a max of 15 models, how often are you really going to be able to pull off a proper screen with a second rank of support dudes behind? If you try that out, I'll just spend a turn going around your screen... or ignoring that blob altogether and going after treasure tokens or outlying models... basically play the mission. I'm probably going to have the mobility advantage versus any blob of infantry that could pull off a screening maneuver. I'd be stupid to charge a screen.

It's true the gore gruntas are gonna be brutal against anything that comes within melee range of it. However, with dense terrain, there will probably be several choke points that a single model would be enough to screen (the screening guy will probably be very dead). Also with d3+3 objectives, you have 3 guys who are running around grabbing objectives, while your opponent can have up to 15 running for them. I imagine this would play a lot like one side is playing blood bowl (with d3+3 balls but no throwing) while you are playing whack-a-mole .

Yeah, gore-gruntas are potentially better than hero characters. There are already better than most heroes with similar cost (for this supplement), as they start out with +2 wounds than any hero, and they have 5 levels to gain to reach catch up with any abilities or number of attacks. But having a lot less models to work with can be a problem.

I would probably field something like this:

2x Goblin Warbosses on giant wolves (60)
2x Grot Wolf Riders or spider riders (40)
10x Grots (50)

The warboss will act as screeners for the wolf riders who are the main loot grabbers.
The grots are there mostly as speed bumps, battleshock fodder and extra wounds for the warboss if they are near enough. If they are free, then can also be objective grabbers.

That said, with the quality of the troops i'm bringing, only the warboss has a decent chance of actually killing your gore grunta. every one else is just there to swarm up and hold them down for a while.

Hanskrampf wrote:Can you please upload this anywhere else, where I don't need to create an account for downloading?

Davor wrote:My god Bottle that looks awesome. How did you do this?

Hanskrampf wrote:Can you please upload this anywhere else, where I don't need to create an account for downloading?

That is what I was going to say. Can't you upload this to dakka and we can download it from here? I don't really want to make a new account on another forum. I already have a hard enough time to scour the threads here on Dakka and The Tyranid Hive without going to another forum.

Thanks Davor, if you're interested I made this on Photoshop. The miniature photos are all of my own figures, the artwork has been sourced from the web (the lower image on the front cover is from FFG WHQ CCG for example).

I'm going to keep it on TGA. To be honest if you like AoS then you need to have an account there. It is the best AoS forum on the net and even a few of the game designers have accounts there as well as the big podcasters and the entire independent tournament scene is located there (US and UK).

Volund wrote:Question for Bottle: are we allowed to bring formations? If i can bring one model from each of the appropriate units, is there a way to work out the price of a formation? I personally vote for 1/5 of the formation's points cost (that way i can exactly fit a dispossessed clan throng within 150gp )

Hey man, battalions are not allowed as per the rules. But I sort of added that in without even thinking people would question that. I am interested in hearing what filthy combo you have planned if battlalion bonuses were allowed! I am also compiling a list of "house rules" to add in as optional tweaks as I come across them. For example some people have suggested a "Fleshwound/Down/Out of Action" roll for when models are reduced to one wound, which could be fun (as it is in Necromunda/Mordhiem).

I am also loving to read these combos you guys are all coming up with. Let me know if something really breaks the game. My play testing has been with "balanced" warbands of 5 odd grunts and a couple of heroes. Over January I plan to give the campaign a real rigorous play and release an updated version (with Warband rosters and a "hobby section").

I'm sure there will be some way to break the game, but by most part you've elimimated most problems. I'm still working out a way to make Stormcast work, but being such an elite army I can't have enough of a punch before running out of gold.

Look at that, the "restrictions" do specifically say no battalions. Apparently I read the first 4 and then skipped to the "designer note" because I got excited by the word "Gyrocopter."

No filthy combo planned, the dwarf battalion just lets me re-roll 1s to hit, so I always keep it in mind when building a list. I noticed my Hinterlands Lists were looking familiar so I checked to see if I could actually fit the points for one.

Bottle, I suggest the "elite" units such as the gore-gruntas start out as higher levels. This could be as simple as 1 level per wound in excess of 2, or per 10 points over 20.

I'll have to give things a look, I just signed up for the forum. As I said before, I have enough Skaven and Orcs for so e skirmish warbands I was going to play with other rulesets (either Song of Blades and Heroes or Gangfight Skirmish), and a box of Liberators coming soon, as the mix of available wargear in the box makes a nice mix for skirmishing (although I am adding at least a single Judicator for ranged support, and a Prosecutor for a flanker.)

I don't have the Generals Handbook yet, how many Stormcast would typically be able to fit in a standard Hinterlands warband?

You can fit 5 liberators and a lord-celestant hero for exactly 150 gold

The problem being Liberators don't really pack much of a punch at all. They can take hits to an extent sure, but they can't deal much out. 2 Liberators = 1 Protector, so maybe 2 Libs, 1 Greatsword Lib and 1 Protector for 150G?

Not that big a deal, in any of my prospective games, anyway. They will be up against a far less intense meta. For example in my house with the buddy or my wife, they will be pitted against a Skaven warband that is mainly a core of Stormvermin with a Warlord or Grey Seer, with a couple of other things for flavor. Orks are mainly oldschool, with things like standard Boyz, Arrer Boyz for support, a Shaman, and the like.=

First, I want to say thank you bottle for all your hard work. Second, I have a question. How do you handle fractions? For example, a single Jezzail would come out to 46.667.

My first impressions? As a Skaven player it really has me thinking about battle shock and its effect on the campaign. With the model cap and potential for additional losses to be gained for each casualty, it seems to favor ranged or multi wound units. Preferably both. Just running through lists in my head. For example, a handmaiden of the ever queen and 4 sisters of Averlorn with a high sister upgrade. 18 inch range, 14 shots if nothing is too close, hitting and wounding on 3's, re-rolling 1's to hit on the Sisters. That should be about 7 wounds a round as long as nothing gets too close, plus they can try and cap something that charges them. Potential to down several 1 wound models a turn, and cause further losses due to battle shock. The counter would be mti wound Calvary that can cover the distance and get the charge off. It does have me thinking though.

Thanks for the comments everyone :-)

Volund wrote:Look at that, the "restrictions" do specifically say no battalions. Apparently I read the first 4 and then skipped to the "designer note" because I got excited by the word "Gyrocopter."

No filthy combo planned, the dwarf battalion just lets me re-roll 1s to hit, so I always keep it in mind when building a list. I noticed my Hinterlands Lists were looking familiar so I checked to see if I could actually fit the points for one.

It's an interesting idea but I think it's going to require a lot of rules to make it work. Adjusting the price and the requirements as well as the way bonuses interact. One of the big things for me was trying to keep it all to 4 pages and trying to make as few changes to the core AoS rules as possible.

aquietfrog wrote:Bottle, I suggest the "elite" units such as the gore-gruntas start out as higher levels. This could be as simple as 1 level per wound in excess of 2, or per 10 points over 20.

That could work, I would like to do more rigorous testing of min/maxed warbands first. My gut feeling is that although elite units look great on paper as a slain model has a 1/6 chance of being killed permanently over the course of a campaign they are not going to be optimal as you run the risk of being crippled early on.

Bonzai wrote:First, I want to say thank you bottle for all your hard work. Second, I have a question. How do you handle fractions? For example, a single Jezzail would come out to 46.667.

My first impressions? As a Skaven player it really has me thinking about battle shock and its effect on the campaign. With the model cap and potential for additional losses to be gained for each casualty, it seems to favor ranged or multi wound units. Preferably both. Just running through lists in my head. For example, a handmaiden of the ever queen and 4 sisters of Averlorn with a high sister upgrade. 18 inch range, 14 shots if nothing is too close, hitting and wounding on 3's, re-rolling 1's to hit on the Sisters. That should be about 7 wounds a round as long as nothing gets too close, plus they can try and cap something that charges them. Potential to down several 1 wound models a turn, and cause further losses due to battle shock. The counter would be mti wound Calvary that can cover the distance and get the charge off. It does have me thinking though.

Oh, interesting. I didn't realise that any came to decimals. I might need to change the wording to include "rounding up". For Jezzails though they are artillery and so are not allowed in my proposed rules.

As for shooting, I haven't found it to be much of an issue. I have put in lots of rules to negate the impact of shooting where I can, so firstly you have the ban of artillery. I really wanted to keep Warband selection as open as possible (my issue with the Warhammer World skirmish rules is that I can't get inspired about my Warband when my choices are so limited), but I felt that allowing artillery would lead to less exciting games overall (and that behemoths were too powerful for individual models to deal with). Secondly, terrain is meant to be double what you would expect on a standard AoS board, and lastly the modifiers to hit have been reintroduced. This means that you should be able to keep your Warband either out of LoS or at least in cover with a -1 or -2 to hit. I am not sure how many people will take this last rule on board though because it is one of the biggest deviations from the AoS rules of area terrain and the +1 save it grants.

I'll be making a Skaven Warband in the new year to run it through its paces, the Chaos Battletrait may need some tweaking too.

After a couple of quick test games using this list:

1 Skaven Warlord (50)
1 Skaven Warlock (50)
8 Clanrats (48)

against these lists:

Moulder warband:
1 packmaster (30)
2 rat ogors (120)

Stormcast Warband:
Lord-Celestant (50)
Retributor (44)
Prosecutor with Javelin (27)
Liberator (20)

Results:

Both following battleplan 1, the Skaven player can place their tokens 18" away and position a loot grabber 6" directly in front of it. The plan is to move the grabber into base contact with the loot token, then use its d6 run to fall back. Other clanrats move forward to form a screen. Warlord will skulk behind the battleline ready to ambush anyone that gets too close, charging in to attack and scurry away to safety.

The real threat is the Warlock, with the boosted warp lightning spell, a successful cast means a d6 roll that can potentially remove most models without mortal wound protection, making any multiwound model afraid to stop anywhere within range of the warlock.

The clanrats make good disposable meatshields, Any badly injured ones are quickly replaced by fresh ones.

This build can quickly bulk itself up to 15 models with clanrats, if the gold piles up, replacements can be better models such as stormvermin or new heroes, probably more warlocks.

I did a game using scenario 1 on saturday and one change we did was to make it so that taking a loot token ended your movement. We thought it was fun because it required more tactics than just sending something fast. We were worred that going second and getting a double turn with two good run rolls would make the game to short. It seemed to work out well and we both ended up with 3 (there were 6 total)

Has anyone else had a hard time signing up for the forums that host the Hinterlands rules? I've requested a confirmation email several times, and emailed the support address, but with no result or response?

aquietfrog wrote:
After a couple of quick test games using this list:

1 Skaven Warlord (50)
1 Skaven Warlock (50)
8 Clanrats (48)

against these lists:

Moulder warband:
1 packmaster (30)
2 rat ogors (120)

Stormcast Warband:
Lord-Celestant (50)
Retributor (44)
Prosecutor with Javelin (27)
Liberator (20)

Results:

Both following battleplan 1, the Skaven player can place their tokens 18" away and position a loot grabber 6" directly in front of it. The plan is to move the grabber into base contact with the loot token, then use its d6 run to fall back. Other clanrats move forward to form a screen. Warlord will skulk behind the battleline ready to ambush anyone that gets too close, charging in to attack and scurry away to safety.

The real threat is the Warlock, with the boosted warp lightning spell, a successful cast means a d6 roll that can potentially remove most models without mortal wound protection, making any multiwound model afraid to stop anywhere within range of the warlock.

The clanrats make good disposable meatshields, Any badly injured ones are quickly replaced by fresh ones.

This build can quickly bulk itself up to 15 models with clanrats, if the gold piles up, replacements can be better models such as stormvermin or new heroes, probably more warlocks.

How did you find Battle shock with the clan rats? The ranged list I was looking at could theoretically kill 5 clan rats in a round, which with average rolls would mean you would lose the other 3. Thanks a concern. Conversely, one warp lighting could take out both rat ogres. At such small number of units, battle shock seems like it could be devastating

In those first test games, I always had battleshock tests, but my losses were low enough that I only lost one clanrat per test.

However I had another test game where I got overconfident with my positioning and had my clanrats and heroes far forward because the opponent had more loot near him. The khorne bloodbound got a double turn, which let the skullcrusher charge from behind and kill my warlock on the charge. Then in combat, the warlord suffered 2 wounds before he could attack and failed to scurry away and got finished off along with a couple of other meatshields. A high roll on battleshock later cleared out the rest of the clanrats.

Edit*

Note that as these were just test games, they were played as one-offs without any levelling up.

The khorne bloodbound had these:
Mighty Lord of Khorne (70)
Mighty Skullcrusher (54)
Blood Warrior (20)
Blood Reaver (6)

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Has anyone else had a hard time signing up for the forums that host the Hinterlands rules? I've requested a confirmation email several times, and emailed the support address, but with no result or response?

Yeah, I had trouble getting in for about three days straight. I'd love it if the document was instead kept in a DropBox folder or something similar.

I signed up yesterday to download the file. Received the confirmation mail instantly.
If Bottle is okay with it, I could share it via Dropbox.

 Hanskrampf wrote:
I signed up yesterday to download the file. Received the confirmation mail instantly.
If Bottle is okay with it, I could share it via Dropbox.

Yeah go for it

Honestly, I would prefer the download from TGA, as next time I apply for a GW job this will be one of the strongest parts of my portfolio - but I am already super happy with the reception it has got (it is by far the most downloaded file on TGA and on track to reach double the downloads of #2).

But if you guys are having trouble accessing the forums, sure go for it! (I am honoured that you would want to go through the trouble.)

When I add updates to the file, I will be doing so on TGA, but I will mention so here so it can be rehosted on Dropbox too. And as a small request, if you share it on any forums you frequent if you could post links to both TGA and Dropbox it would be greatly appreciated by me.

 Bottle wrote:

 Hanskrampf wrote:
I signed up yesterday to download the file. Received the confirmation mail instantly.
If Bottle is okay with it, I could share it via Dropbox.

Yeah go for it

Honestly, I would prefer the download from TGA, as next time I apply for a GW job this will be one of the strongest parts of my portfolio - but I am already super happy with the reception it has got (it is by far the most downloaded file on TGA and on track to reach double the downloads of #2).

But if you guys are having trouble accessing the forums, sure go for it! (I am honoured that you would want to go through the trouble.)

When I add updates to the file, I will be doing so on TGA, but I will mention so here so it can be rehosted on Dropbox too. And as a small request, if you share it on any forums you frequent if you could post links to both TGA and Dropbox it would be greatly appreciated by me.

Will do

Here's the dropbox link for anyone having trouble with TGA or unwilling to sign up: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mr488dwdhpofuc9/AACzO1MYmGMsqGOpcTrp4uOEa?dl=0

Bottle that looks sweet, great job looking into it. Good luck and hope you get your wish about getting into Games Workshop.

Just don't forget about us if you ever do.

Alrighty, I had been procrastinating on reading this but finally got to it! Looks like a really good system you have here that keeps within the AoS ideal of simple-but-deep rules, excellent job there!

One thing that really stuck out to me is heroes being set to 3 wounds at the start, why is this? It also seems like it creates some significant imbalance, for example a grot hero (loses 1 wound) vs an ogor tyrant (loses 5 wounds). Perhaps half rounded up would be better than a flat 3?

Another is the part with each model being an individual unit in regards to spells/abilities that target every unit within range (of which there are a decent number). It seems like such are extremely overpowered in this system because they hit every model. In a similar vein, splitting up warscrolls like Nurglings or Putrid Blightkings into one-model units makes them quite powerful.

I want to reiterate though that this is a great system, especially for a first draft as it were. I am certainly going to have to get my buds to take a look at this!

Thanks Ninth, I was hoping you would add your input! :-)

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

One thing that really stuck out to me is heroes being set to 3 wounds at the start, why is this? It also seems like it creates some significant imbalance, for example a grot hero (loses 1 wound) vs an ogor tyrant (loses 5 wounds). Perhaps half rounded up would be better than a flat 3?

The first consideration for me when putting together these rules was that people would feel inspired by them to create all kinds of possible warbands. In that sense I tried to put as little restrictions on Warband choices as possible. It was really important for me to allow heroes to be options, because I find that one of the most stifling things about the Warhammer World Skirimish rules. (Although I should say the original draft of these rules predates those by quite some time).

These games are essentially 150 point games, but with the way AoS works, any heroes would either suck up all the points or not even be allowed. I wanted warbands to be of 8-10 models to begin with, with a couple of heroes to add flavour to the games.

So when it came to balancing, I wanted heroes to be options but to not overpower the game (a 5+ wound model would be very difficult to kill at this level, especially if you have any healing). So the idea was to cap hero wounds at 3 to keep them in the realm of killability and also to justify halfing the point cost of them (which needed to be done to allow them to fit).

You're right it does mean that bigger heroes lose more wounds, but they also see a bigger reduction in points cost, a Grot Warboss is 40 points cheaper whereas a Tyrant is 80 points cheaper. I think even with halving as you suggest it will make some characters too tanky at the start of the campaign. I am instead considering rolling out the 3 wound cap to all models at the start of the campaign.

Further play testing is probably required, so I will keep an eye on this and if you have any feedback after playing some games let me know. I tend to forget that as I am not a fan of the Ogor range at all, they are often not in the front of my mind when considering these rules. A tough elite army always causes problems when creating skirmish rules too.

Another is the part with each model being an individual unit in regards to spells/abilities that target every unit within range (of which there are a decent number). It seems like such are extremely overpowered in this system because they hit every model. In a similar vein, splitting up warscrolls like Nurglings or Putrid Blightkings into one-model units makes them quite powerful.

Yep, there might be some nasty combos hidden in there. I guess you are thinking of things like the Knight Azyros doing D3 Mortal Wounds to all units within 8". It might be something we have to look at, but so far I have found your models are spread out enough to not overly worry about this. Wording a paragraph to limit this without leaving tons of ambiguities will also be a challenge but could be doable. It would need to be water-tight. Let me know if you have any ideas on the wording.

Thanks once again :-)

I thought this was a leak for a Games Workshop supplement.

EXCELLENT job here.

Would you mind uploading it somewhere I don't have to sign up to download, though?

Happy to help Bottle! I see what you mean about the characters and that makes sense. In regards to wording multi-target spells perhaps it would be worth going the route of "a given spell or ability that targets multiple units can only hit a model from a given warscroll once per use. For example: a Knight Azyros unleashes his lantern to affect all enemy units within 8", of which there are three clanrats, two stormvermin, and a grey seer. Only one clanrats, one stormvermin, and the grey seer would be affected. The player controlling the 'casting' model chooses which targets are affected. Models with the HERO keyword are exempt; if there were two grey seers in the previous example both would be hit."

That could probably be cleaned up a little wording wise but you get the idea.

Wow looks like you put a lot of work into this, will have to check it out.

Shub-Nullgurath wrote:I thought this was a leak for a Games Workshop supplement.

EXCELLENT job here.

Would you mind uploading it somewhere I don't have to sign up to download, though?

Thank you! And it's already been done:

Hanskrampf wrote:

Will do

Here's the dropbox link for anyone having trouble with TGA or unwilling to sign up: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mr488dwdhpofuc9/AACzO1MYmGMsqGOpcTrp4uOEa?dl=0

NinthMusketeer wrote:Happy to help Bottle! I see what you mean about the characters and that makes sense. In regards to wording multi-target spells perhaps it would be worth going the route of "a given spell or ability that targets multiple units can only hit a model from a given warscroll once per use. For example: a Knight Azyros unleashes his lantern to affect all enemy units within 8", of which there are three clanrats, two stormvermin, and a grey seer. Only one clanrats, one stormvermin, and the grey seer would be affected. The player controlling the 'casting' model chooses which targets are affected. Models with the HERO keyword are exempt; if there were two grey seers in the previous example both would be hit."

That could probably be cleaned up a little wording wise but you get the idea.

Thanks for this Ninth, I might see if I can get this into the next update! Although the it would be pretty epic to set the lantern off in the middle of a packed board. Imagine the carnage!!

motski wrote:Wow looks like you put a lot of work into this, will have to check it out.

Thanks! Let me know what you think of it all :-)

Bottle,

THIS is by far one of the best write ups, and a great way to get people into the setting by not hitting them in the face with a sledge hammer. Great looking spread, professionally put together, and well written and presented, Great job you have going there. Way to go.

I for one like this approach more then rolling all in and buying into a game system that I can't honestly get behind yet, because of funding and GW's pricing me out of the market. Thank you for the effort, and the excellent addition.

Do you mind if I send other people to this site, and drop this off with my local community?

 Grot 6 wrote:
Bottle,

THIS is by far one of the best write ups, and a great way to get people into the setting by not hitting them in the face with a sledge hammer. Great looking spread, professionally put together, and well written and presented, Great job you have going there. Way to go.

I for one like this approach more then rolling all in and buying into a game system that I can't honestly get behind yet, because of funding and GW's pricing me out of the market. Thank you for the effort, and the excellent addition.

Do you mind if I send other people to this site, and drop this off with my local community?

Hey man, sorry I didn't see your comment before. The answer is no, I don't mind at all. In fact I would be honoured if your local community was to pick this up

Bottle this is awesome!

I go away for a few months because I'm playing/reading 30k and I come back and this is now a thing.

I'm never leaving Dakka again.

Hey Bottle. I would like to share you link to my gaming group. Would it be ok if I shared your link to my groups Facebook page?

I just like to make sure how you would like a group using this.

Kommissar Waaaghrick wrote:Bottle this is awesome!

I go away for a few months because I'm playing/reading 30k and I come back and this is now a thing.

I'm never leaving Dakka again.

Davor wrote:Hey Bottle. I would like to share you link to my gaming group. Would it be ok if I shared your link to my groups Facebook page?

I just like to make sure how you would like a group using this.

Thanks both of you! I am of course very happy (over the moon in fact) that you would consider playing with the rules. It seems to be picking up traction which is amazing.

Just a quick heads up that a massive update is coming out this week, so you might want to hold fire and check back in a week or so. If you pop over to TGA or follow me on Twitter I have posted some snippets of the update, I can say it's going to be awesome. It's nothing too radical, the game will stay the same for the most part but the rules get polished, new opportunities open up (you will be able to play any Battleplan with the Hinterlands rules) and some useful things like Warband Rosters are added. I will of course be posting the update here too for everyone on Dakkadakka. A lot of the feedback from this thread and my plog has been involved so it will be changes everyone has been asking for.

So please check back in a week or so and I'll have the new version up and ready, and then share as much as you want! Cheers everyone!

Will do Bottle. I can't follow you on Twitter because I don't know how to Twit.

But yes I will come back and looking forward to your update.

It's coming guys I hope everyone is excited!

omg omg omg omg. I'm doing the Garden of Morr scenario this weekend - you'd better expand on that!

And you have used the correct way of using the dates. I am sure the Americans are confused by this.

Looking forward to your work Bottle.

Davor wrote:
And you have used the correct way of using the dates. I am sure the Americans are confused by this.

Looking forward to your work Bottle.

I assure you a good share of us are more confused by our own dating system at this point; we're used to online resources that aren't formatted with stupid!

Also looking forward to this, great work on the teaser image Bottle! It looks very GW-esque.

In some parts of the World it's the 28th already. HOW COME WE DON'T HAVE HINTERLANDS 2nd ED!?!?! I NEEEED IIIIIIIIIIT.

(Thanks for all your support guys! I am honoured!)

VERSION 2.0 is here



Download Link: http://www.tga.community/files/file/19-hinterlands-skirmish-campaigns-in-the-mortal-realms-by-sam-james/

Hey everyone, version 2 is now live. Hopefully you'll love all the new content!

Changelog:

- I have tweaked the core rules based on all the amazing feedback. This ranges from small changes like Heroes wounds being havled-rounded-up rather than capped to 3, to some bigger changes such as the 'Rule Of Three' designed to curtail some powerful AoE abilities (looking at you, Knight Azyros).

- 5 new battleplans including rules for adapting any other Battleplan. No more treasure system. No both sides get awarded gold coins and the winner gets a unique Triumph!

- Warband Roster! Record every detail on this 2 page sheet, it also has some nifty counters like a 'Kill Count' etc.

- Underdog Gambits - this is a new mechanic to give the weaker side a little boost in the game. The page is set out like a Allegiance Ability so it will feel familiar.

- Command Traits! The old Allegiance Abilities of version 1 have been replaced. Each Grand Alliance now has 2 command traits to choose from - one will make your general a force multiplier (buffing nearby units) the other a killing machine. IT WILL BE A TOUGH CHOICE

Huzzah! Sigmar bless your glorious work!

SerIously though, thanks for all the work you've put into this. I keep recommending your campaign to people interested in AoS or veterans who need a way to welcome new players but are unfamiliar with AoS themselves.

Keep up the awesome work.

Baron Klatz wrote:Huzzah! Sigmar bless your glorious work!

SerIously though, thanks for all the work you've put into this. I keep recommending your campaign to people interested in AoS or veterans who need a way to welcome new players but are unfamiliar with AoS themselves.

Keep up the awesome work.

Thank you so much! recommending these rules is the highest compliment for me. I think this new version plays for a much much better game too, so if you gave the first a shot and didn't quite like it, I think you'll be much happier with the new version. I will try and go through in detail some of the changes later in this thread (I am having mammoth computer issues today which is sucking up all my time though haha!).

NinthMusketeer wrote:

Davor wrote:
And you have used the correct way of using the dates. I am sure the Americans are confused by this.

Looking forward to your work Bottle.

I assure you a good share of us are more confused by our own dating system at this point; we're used to online resources that aren't formatted with stupid!

Also looking forward to this, great work on the teaser image Bottle! It looks very GW-esque.

Cheers Ninth! I hope you like this new version. Your feedback all got in there, for example Heroes are now half wounds rounded up rather than capped at 3, and the new Rule Of Three is put in to curtail pesky Knight Azyros from lantern bombing the other warband, (it's a rule that a model can only target up to 3 enemy models with a weapon or ability in a single phase).

CoreCommander wrote:omg omg omg omg. I'm doing the Garden of Morr scenario this weekend - you'd better expand on that!

Oh, let me know how it goes! I almost never hear feedback on the Realm Master side and the Skirmish Campaign takes the spotlight. This update doesn't include any new Realm Master content, but don't be sad. It will get its own book with pages of fun content to use in RPG style games, coming soon! (Well, soonish..)

 Bottle wrote:

Oh, let me know how it goes! I almost never hear feedback on the Realm Master side and the Skirmish Campaign takes the spotlight. This update doesn't include any new Realm Master content, but don't be sad. It will get its own book with pages of fun content to use in RPG style games, coming soon! (Well, soonish..)

I will

When's the book release

I'll be sure to give it a read over (and maybe even a test game!). I love your work on the Hinterlands Bottle and it is great to see it becoming even better!

This is so cool! I'm going to try to get a league going at my flgs using this. Keep up the good work Bottle!

Bottle this looks great. Thank you for sharing this beautiful work with us. You are a big inspiration.

Has the new version been put on dropbox for those who don't want to create accounts on another forum?

Also, thank you for doing this, Bottle. Very cool stuff!

Cool. Good stuff. The community needs more producers of work like this, and more acceptance of non-official stuff like this.

Thank you so much for the positive feedback everyone. Like I said before the rules changes were almost all brought about by feedback people gave either here on Dakkadakka, on TGA or on Twitter. Version 2 has had about 250 downloads over the weekend which is mind-blowing for me, and the total for Hinterlands is currently at 792!

There are some exciting plans for Hinterlands in the near future. I can't wait to share with you some of the things in the pipeline! In the meantime if you do get to play with the rules, post feedback here or PM me and it will be at the forefront of the revisions for version 3.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 privateer4hire wrote:
Has the new version been put on dropbox for those who don't want to create accounts on another forum?

Also, thank you for doing this, Bottle. Very cool stuff!

I don't think anyone has done it yet, but if anyone wants to please feel free to do so :-)

I played a realm master's game with two guys from my rpg group using the default scenario(Curse of Bryor Ghyul). There is much to tell so I'll just highlight the most important points.

1. They had such a great time that they said they were wanted to play the game again next monday. Full stop. I'm not sure If I had a say in this matter at all...

2. Managing 5 models is much less straining than 5 full units and allows for new players to better learn and grow accustomed with the rules. Yes, this is an issue (as I've said before) - you and I, and everyone else on this forum, has been a wargamer for some time and on top of that we've got a natural aptitude for big books full of complex rules. Not everyone is like this. Even AoS can be hard to introduce and every little bit helps.

3. The scenario works very well for an introductory game. It simultaneously introduces a game clock, 3 objectives and the need to choose where and if to spread around (which is a basic decision for any match). I felt that game turn + d6 >= 10 could be a bit slow though especially if the heroes are faster than the average. It's 4 turns before you have a chance to find the objective at all and then you have to escape through it. Yeah you can roll the ones and deduce that the third one is the entry to the tunnel, but it can still drag on.

4. When you have single models to command you concentrate more on where to put them as there is more space to maneuver. With that comes the possibility to interact with terrain and other additional stuff not in the rules - I heartily recommend such additional rules. Without them the game on this scale doesn't feel full of life. For example one player wanted to storm through a fence - I let him stomp it (on a dice with the possibility of damage) and just let the fence stay down. We had pillars from the arcane ruins set that the players could push, a flamer that could be "mind controlled" by Tzeentch's herald sorcerers, a mindless screamer that started in the DM's part of the board and roamed randomly, trying to charge anything that was in 7" (to help out the players a bit in the beginning and serve as a possible threat towards the end) and many more.
Stuff like this is not everyone's cup of tea though, but for me is one of the ways I want to play the game especially if I'm going to DM more and bigger games (classic 1 on 1 warhammer with an umpire/DM)

There was much more, but I'm tired and want to go to bed. I applaud the inclusion of the Realm Master rules in the Hinterlands - this type of game comes naturally to RPG players as pitched battles come to strategy ones. Alternatively you can play them like the thing they look most like - a Descent/Imperial Assault/Warhammer Quest dungeon crawling cooperative game - it would work just as well.

Wow CC! Thanks for the feedback and most importantly I am overjoyed to hear they had fun. I'll look into the game clock on that scenario a little bit more and see what the optimal number is! :-)

I hadn't thought about players thinking out the box - that's my wargamers head firmly stuck on (just like in last month's White Dwarf where Mel suddenly decided to "kill" the objective as it was a toad, and Dan hadn't expected it lol!) - I will probably add in some guidelines for the GM creating these sorts of rules on the fly like you did.

The rules I had been working on for the mode had all revolved around post battle events rather than in game rules. I am writing rules for visiting different settlements from Duardin strongholds to Sylvaneth groves - which open up access to recruiting different henchmen and other possibilities (from special equipment to being able to "fast travel" around the world). I think after reading your comments I will work on the battle mechanics a bit more too and might do a series of Battleplans to play through.

Thanks so much for the response!

As I'm penning our summer campaign, and we have skirmish raids that give resource points, I may lift your scenario(s) for that (and put credit).

Looking good, bottle!

Dropbox link for anyone having problems with TGA: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yytyhpga67h5rjk/Hinterlands%202.0%20-%20By%20Sam%20James.pdf?dl=0

auticus wrote:As I'm penning our summer campaign, and we have skirmish raids that give resource points, I may lift your scenario(s) for that (and put credit).

Sure, lift away! 2 are already lifted from traditional AoS scenarios, and 'Assassinate' is based on Necromunda's 'The Hit'. :-)

Hanskrampf wrote:Looking good, bottle!

Dropbox link for anyone having problems with TGA: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yytyhpga67h5rjk/Hinterlands%202.0%20-%20By%20Sam%20James.pdf?dl=0

Nice one! And I hope you like this version Hans, I saw elsewhere you were looking for a versatile skirmish rule set for fantasy.

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Looking good, bottle!

Dropbox link for anyone having problems with TGA: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yytyhpga67h5rjk/Hinterlands%202.0%20-%20By%20Sam%20James.pdf?dl=0

Thanks for the dropbox link.

A question, as I don't have much material yet. Does the General's Compendium have any points for the old legacy armies from the waarscrolls from the Old World on the GW site?

Yep, all the compendium units have points costs in the GHB, although some have been updated and you will have to look in the new factions to find them. For example you can find points for Empire Knights, and Ludwig Schwarzhelm etc in the Empire list but the Huntsmen are now called "Freeguild Archers" and you can find them in the Freeguild list.

 Bottle wrote:

Hanskrampf wrote:Looking good, bottle!

Dropbox link for anyone having problems with TGA: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yytyhpga67h5rjk/Hinterlands%202.0%20-%20By%20Sam%20James.pdf?dl=0

Nice one! And I hope you like this version Hans, I saw elsewhere you were looking for a versatile skirmish rule set for fantasy.

You're right, bottle, I am. And your ruleset was just lying there, skimmed through once. So I finally read it (partly) in this new version. And I quite like it. A lot actually. Having just played Mordheim on PC, this feels very similiar and I'm sure your intention was to capture this feel of the original Mordheim (which I never played). You did great.
However, this limits me to GW models with AoS profiles and point costs. So while not fitting right now for my gaming urges, I will try to push it into our group sometime in summer, when my hobby cellar room is ready

Two critique points, though:
- minor: pg 4, middle column, last paragraph: the example should be 25 experience points, not 30.
- major: I either skipped it or it just isn't there: a paragraph to advance your war party and recruit new models. The iontention is pretty clear to me, but I can see new players having trouble.

 Hanskrampf wrote:

 Bottle wrote:

Hanskrampf wrote:Looking good, bottle!

Dropbox link for anyone having problems with TGA: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yytyhpga67h5rjk/Hinterlands%202.0%20-%20By%20Sam%20James.pdf?dl=0

Nice one! And I hope you like this version Hans, I saw elsewhere you were looking for a versatile skirmish rule set for fantasy.

You're right, bottle, I am. And your ruleset was just lying there, skimmed through once. So I finally read it (partly) in this new version. And I quite like it. A lot actually. Having just played Mordheim on PC, this feels very similiar and I'm sure your intention was to capture this feel of the original Mordheim (which I never played). You did great.
However, this limits me to GW models with AoS profiles and point costs. So while not fitting right now for my gaming urges, I will try to push it into our group sometime in summer, when my hobby cellar room is ready

Two critique points, though:
- minor: pg 4, middle column, last paragraph: the example should be 25 experience points, not 30.
- major: I either skipped it or it just isn't there: a paragraph to advance your war party and recruit new models. The iontention is pretty clear to me, but I can see new players having trouble.

Thanks for the critiques! You're not the first to point out the first one but the 30 comes from model (5) + hero (10) + monster (15). Perhaps I could make it clearer. For the second, you're right. I'll add a line to the first paragraph on page 4 to state clearly models can be purchased mid campaign too :-)

AoS does have a large model range of generic fantasy tropes, so I think it's quite versatile even for fights not in the mortal realms, however YMMV as AoS rules are very characterful and may feel too "warhammer" even if you play it out in another setting! Thanks for commenting and for hosting.

EDIT: 09/02/2017

Lots of great feedback from players about the rules for version 2 and a few grey areas have been pointed out (like Hanskrampf's comment!). I have decided to keep a living FAQ to answer these grey areas rather than constantly update the file. You can see it below and it will be included in the first post of this thread from now on:



Thanks for all the feedback! We hit 1280 downloads today which is crazy considering it was on 500 not even 2 weeks ago!

I downloaded the rules last week and have been planning warbands ever since.

The only thing I've had an issue with is the 150 points for a starting warband feels a little low. Maybe that's intentional, but I've had trouble getting even like 8-10 models in a warband regard less of the faction I'm building.

So I was curious if this was a balance issue or if upping it to 200 would allow for more flexibility without making some factions a little overpowered.

Just downloading it now
Might be tempted to try these rules out with my undead

 Starfarer wrote:
I downloaded the rules last week and have been planning warbands ever since.

The only thing I've had an issue with is the 150 points for a starting warband feels a little low. Maybe that's intentional, but I've had trouble getting even like 8-10 models in a warband regard less of the faction I'm building.

So I was curious if this was a balance issue or if upping it to 200 would allow for more flexibility without making some factions a little overpowered.

It's more than okay to up it to 200 gold coins if your group are keen to do so! The 150 was chosen as a happy medium for high and low cost factions, as everything from Grots to Ogors needs to be taken into account. More elite factions like Stormcast will start with 6 or so models, where as Skaven can easily fill up all 15 slots straight away with 150 gold coins. Still, if your group is playing with more of the elite factions then upping to 200 is a good idea!

I hope you have fun with the rules

Well I'm starting with Nurgle Rotbringers, Bloodbound and Stormcasts as that's what I already have handy. And considering my Bloodbound has a Lord on Juggernaught, their all low model count forces at 150.

I've actually not yet convince my group to play, but we're all big Necromunda players so I figure this is the perfect avenue to get them into AOS.

P.S. You should join instagram to share your stuff. There's a big Inq28 community there and a good number of them have begun starting AOS28 groups thanks to these rules and Bruticus sharing his stuff there and on his website.

This is excellent, I like it a lot

First of all I must say this is very good work. I've downloaded it few days ago and check with my friend. I was happy, he I must say less

I'm wondering about balance with shooting unit.

My team was, two guys from warhammer quest: Excelsior Priest, Questor Knight plus some High Elfs from Spire of Dawn: Reaver and Spireguard guy.

He took Khorne band, lots of cheap marauders, some bloodreaver and some Deathbringer from Gorechosen.

I was a little scared, when I saw the numbers, but my Reaver did extremely well. His ability to move before or after shootin, and makes 3 attacks rather than two, when no one is nearby was a killar. I just shoot him out and keep the distance. He was not able to complete any objectives.

And I like the idea about interact more. Do not pickup an objective just moving across it - we are thinking about home rule: If you are within 1 inch from objective, roll a dice 1-3 nothing, 4-6 you got the objective.

And I have some ideas about scenarios, can share if you want

winterdyne wrote:This is excellent, I like it a lot

Thanks! I am a massive fan of your painting so this is nice to hear from you. If you get any games with your children let me know!

W1ntermute wrote:First of all I must say this is very good work. I've downloaded it few days ago and check with my friend. I was happy, he I must say less

I'm wondering about balance with shooting unit.

My team was, two guys from warhammer quest: Excelsior Priest, Questor Knight plus some High Elfs from Spire of Dawn: Reaver and Spireguard guy.

He took Khorne band, lots of cheap marauders, some bloodreaver and some Deathbringer from Gorechosen.

I was a little scared, when I saw the numbers, but my Reaver did extremely well. His ability to move before or after shootin, and makes 3 attacks rather than two, when no one is nearby was a killar. I just shoot him out and keep the distance. He was not able to complete any objectives.

And I like the idea about interact more. Do not pickup an objective just moving across it - we are thinking about home rule: If you are within 1 inch from objective, roll a dice 1-3 nothing, 4-6 you got the objective.

And I have some ideas about scenarios, can share if you want

Thanks for the feedback! Shooting is always going to be powerful in skirmish games like this, and the only real compensater is going to be more terrain! In the Hinterlands book I recommend double. But that should be the minimum. I would recommend some LOS blocking pieces like solid buildings and such. As the units move on their own, hiding behind something is much more practical than in standard AoS.

As for scenerios! Sure, I would love to hear them. If you put them into a little pack for download on TGA I would be happy to link them in my thread too

Starfarer wrote:Well I'm starting with Nurgle Rotbringers, Bloodbound and Stormcasts as that's what I already have handy. And considering my Bloodbound has a Lord on Juggernaught, their all low model count forces at 150.

I've actually not yet convince my group to play, but we're all big Necromunda players so I figure this is the perfect avenue to get them into AOS.

P.S. You should join instagram to share your stuff. There's a big Inq28 community there and a good number of them have begun starting AOS28 groups thanks to these rules and Bruticus sharing his stuff there and on his website.

Thanks! I have kept almost all my hobby social media on Twitter so far (I really love Twitter), but I am trying to get to grips with Facebook for hobby and Instagram for hobby too. Bruticus has done an amazing job of launching the AoS28 scene and I am so happy Hinterlands has been given a recommendation with it.

UPDATE: 05/03/2017 VERSION 2.1



I am thrilled and honoured with the community response to Hinterlands and would like to thank all the players who have downloaded the rules and tried them out on the battlefield! :-) This started out as a personal project and a challenge to myself to make something that looked like the "real-deal", the Games Workshop logo on the front cover is a relic of that humble beginning as I really never expected the rules to receive this much attention. I have decided to remove the logo to make sure everyone knows this is 100% unofficial and to make sure that no ill-intent is perceived by any party.

As I had to update the version to do that, I took the opportunity to incorporate all the FAQ clarifications into the rules . The rules do not play any differently to version 2.0, but I would recommend downloading the latest version so you do not have to consult the FAQ.

I do not plan regular updates like this, instead you can look forward to a big update (version 3) coming later in the year! Happy gaming in the meantime!

- bottle (Sam James)

DOWNLOAD LINK - HINTERLANDS 2.1

Thanks Bottle for all the effort you put into this, have any GW personnel contacted you yet? I bet you could sort out a bunch of the rules writers they have there.

UPDATE - VERSION 2.2 IS NOW LIVE DOWNLOAD LINK - CLICK HERE



Hey everyone, I have released version 2.2 today and it is intended as a balance update to some of the issues that have cropped up recently. I am really grateful for the feedback everyone is giving and wanted to share my reasons for the exact changes, and hopefully you will agree they are for the best! (If not, just house rule it as you see fit).

CHANGES IN VERSION 2.2

1. ADDITIONAL RULE OF THREE, LIMITING MORTAL WOUNDS TO 3 A TURN

This is the big one. So let me talk to you how the change works, and hopefully you'll like it. Lifted from the PDF, the rule is as follows:

Quote:
The 2nd Rule of Three: In a single turn a player may only inflict up to three Mortal Wounds onto enemy models. Any additional abilities or attacks which generate further Mortal Wounds instead inflict a normal wound with a rend characteristic of ‘-’ and a damage value of 1.

This change is more impactful than it first seems, so I want to talk to you how this will affect warbands:

How will this affect a Warband running a single Wizard and no other ways to generate Mortal Wounds?

In no way at all. 

This was really important to me as having access to a few Mortal Wounds a turn isn't problematic and is in fact a great tool for dealing with some of the toughest Heroes you will face in Hinterlands.

How will this affect a Warband with access to lots of Mortal Wounds?

Greatly.

I want to talk you through how this ability works. (Everything here is also explained in a new FAQ which is added as page 17 to the file.)

1. The player doesn't get to choose which abilities are Mortal Wound causing and which aren't. You generate them until you have inflicted 3 and then they are replaced with standard wounds (which can be saved against). For example if a player is running both a Lord Celestant and a Knight-Heraldor, the Knight Heraldor's Thunderblast cannot be used until the Shooting Phase. This means the 3 Mortal Wounds would almost always be used up by the Lord Celestant in the Hero Phase.

The only way to save Mortal Wounds for later in the turn is to not use those earlier abilities. As the early ones trigger before the movement phase this is powerful in terms of being able to position yourself to  use the later abilities for best effect. (Want to move the Knight-Heraldor into a spot to snipe an enemy with Thunderblast? You're going to have to give up using the Sigmarite Warcloak for the turn).

2. If an ability generates multiple Mortal Wounds (for example D3) and you attack a single wound model, you still see how many are generated and it still counts towards your cap. For example if you used Thunderblast on a terrain piece that had 3 one wound models, you would roll the D3 Mortal Wounds for the first, and if you roll a 5 or a 6 that would be them all used up and the later attacks would be regular wounds.

Do Mortal Wounds need further nerfing? 

Maybe.

But I am strongly in favour of small changes rather than something drastic like removing them completely or altering how they work mechanically.

2. THE STARTING LEVEL OF MULTI-WOUND MODELS IS NOW HIGHER

Models that aren't heroes now start on the level equal to their wounds characteristic (one wound, start Level 1, 2 wounds, start level 2) etc. This means that multi-wound models level slower over a campaign than single wound models. In the FAQ it is also clarified that they do not gain advancements for these starting levels.

3. SINISTER TERRAIN ONLY BENEFITS MELEE WEAPONS

This was a nice suggestion by a player. I am always keen to give melee a little boost, and this seemed like a great place to do it.

4. DEATH PLAYERS CAN SUMMON BACK TOMB GUARD

This was overlooked by me originally and pointed out live on-air by when I guested on Fjordhammer.  Sorry guys! :-P

5. FAQ IS ADDED TO THE BACK

If you can think of any more questions, let me know! I'll post the current one here. You'll see I preempted lots of questions about the new Mortal Wounds rule and also added a long clarification to why spell lores aren't part of Hinterlands (but could be).



This update is to try and make the game tighter balance wise because I think a good narrative system should also be able to hold its weight in a competitive environment too.

Let me know your thoughts and I'll keep seeking to improve the ruleset!

Cheers,

Bottle


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 WarbossDakka wrote:
Thanks Bottle for all the effort you put into this, have any GW personnel contacted you yet? I bet you could sort out a bunch of the rules writers they have there.

Oh no worries, this is a pet project of mine that I love, and I would be making things like this even if no-one played with them

Of course I have sent through the rules to GW on a few occasions. I would love to work for the GW design team and continue to apply for each role as it comes up. Maybe one day I will be lucky enough to be given the chance, but if not I will still have fun making these sorts of supplements!

Great work, Bottle!


Dropbox Link for Hinterlands 2.2

Thanks for the Dropbox link as always!

You say that Sinister terrain only affects melee weapons but I'm pretty sure you meant Mystical.

In Hinterlands, fear from sinister terrain gives you -1 rend :-)

Ah missed that detail!

Super quick update - page 3 (the first rules page) got an update to clarify exploding mortal wounds when you have ran out - you can just resolve the attack normally rather than being subject to rend '-'.