Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/10 02:16:09


Post by: privateer4hire


A buddy and I played up to about 15th level in Frostgrave on our first quasi-campaign.
I played an elementalist and he had a summoner.

The game was pretty decent fun but we ran into (and also read online) some issues.
Things we noticed (and also read):
-Elementalists can get silly due to their offensive spells. We played with lots of cover and his go-to spell became fog.
-Wizards become comparatively good close combat machines and it's easy to start playing them that way.
-Scenarios, many times, essentially became ignore-each-other contests as each player tried to make off with 1/2 the treasures.

For anyone who's played, what did you think?


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/10 03:44:14


Post by: amazingturtles


I've definitely had that issue with scenarios. I've wondered if toning down the amount of experience gained for escaping with loot might help


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/10 09:59:57


Post by: Orlanth


Frostgrave has a lot of issues.

Combat is a matter of luck over skill, there is too little distinction between a basic combatant like a thug and an elite combatant like a knight. Roll higher you smash them, roll a 20 and you get an autokill if critical hit rules are used.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/11 16:53:29


Post by: Easy E


You can see my thoughts here: https://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2016/12/review-frostgrave-osprey-games.html

and my thoughts on the supplements here:
https://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2017/04/review-frostgrave-supplements-osprey.html

However, my general thought is that it is a campaign system with a game added to support it later.

That doesn't mean I do not like it. I enjoy it with some caveats.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/11 17:09:55


Post by: auticus


I play frostgrave for what it is to me... a campaign system. Its definitely not a deep strategic game nor do I think was it intended to be.

It could use some definite balance tweaks regardless though. Like the elementalist needs toned down a bit. I notice people taking the same type of casters because they are just that much better.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/11 21:03:30


Post by: spect_spidey


I am believe that Frostgrave Ghost Archipelago will eliminate a few things that I did not like about the original. Which was the balance issues between wizards, certain spells, and the apprentice just being an inferior version of your wizard. GA changes to Heritors that each have 5 powers that can be chosen or rolled for randomly. Then each Heritor can have a Warden. There are 5 types of Wardens with each getting 3 spells from their type and then one from another type. They earn XP separately from your Heritor. The warband is also always guaranteed to have 8 crew members to join the Heritor for every game which can be equipped one of 4 or 5 ways. Four of these can then be replaced by specialists that you have to purchase. Replacing a killed specialist requires a costly trip back to the mainland to recruit a new one. It sounds more balanced as far as abilities go. You still will have the randomness that is a D20, but oh well.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/13 23:01:42


Post by: JoshInJapan


I like the gameplay just fine, but the experience system needs a revamp. As it is, wizards get too much of their XP from sniping enemy soldiers and not enough from spellcasting and/or exploration.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/18 19:31:41


Post by: Manchu


A buddy of mine characterized FG as "competitive shopping" and that kind of ruined the mystique for me.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/23 18:35:51


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


Huh. I've won the games I've played by focusing solely on murdering the competition. It seemed to me like the game's big flaw was that any band optimized for anything but killing would inevitably fall under the knives of the killers.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/24 22:28:30


Post by: Killionaire


The game's pretty bad, to be honest.

The way D20 threshholds work mean that it's very dice based. Simply rolling a 19 or 20 utterly kills an enemy regardless of how well they are taking cover, etc... since that roll is also tied to damage. It's silly that cover or defensive windstorms protect you from being nicked by horrible 1-2 point damage plinks from bad rolls, but do literally nothing from a roll of 20 critical.

The spells are by no means balanced, elementalists are too good and generate XP crazy fast.

The minions are horribly balanced, costing 5x more for minute increases in stats in a game about freaking D20s.

The base camp bonuses aren't fun and the items aren't interesting. You're a magical wizard, and we can't have more interesting items that '+1 weapon of magic'?

The campaign is meh because the wizard advances only, and even the apprentice is just a clone of the master but with -2 stats. That's dumb.

All in all, it's the worst of the 'campaign rank-up gang skirmish' games I've played.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/24 23:07:21


Post by: JoshInJapan


Personally, I rather like how deadly the game can be. It fits all the color text about how dangerous and unpredictable Felstadt (sp?) is supposed to be. The OP elementalist is easy to counter if you use enough blocking terrain. I do agree, though, that the experience system needs a lot of work.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/25 00:51:18


Post by: ecurtz


Yeah the XP system needs some house rules, but on the other hand it's trivial to adjust it to fit the style of your group. I disagree with just about everything else Killionaire said.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/25 10:29:01


Post by: spect_spidey


Frostgrave Ghost Archipelago corrects several issues from the original Frostgrave. It comes out this week. People should give it a look. I know that I plan to use it instead of regular Frostgrave from now on.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/25 11:58:12


Post by: YeOldSaltPotato


 Killionaire wrote:

The minions are horribly balanced, costing 5x more for minute increases in stats in a game about freaking D20s.

The base camp bonuses aren't fun and the items aren't interesting. You're a magical wizard, and we can't have more interesting items that '+1 weapon of magic'?

The campaign is meh because the wizard advances only, and even the apprentice is just a clone of the master but with -2 stats. That's dumb.


I was looking for a campaign skirmish game when this came out, these are why I didn't bother with it after taking a good look at it.

Aside from that, for me having a single uber powerful model and hirelings is far less interesting than a warband of relatively even competence with some stand outs. The lot kept me from even starting with it.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/25 18:04:39


Post by: Manchu


Got my copy of FG Ghost Achipelago last night but had no time to get into it.

Lots of sound arguments about why FG is mechanically meh. I think that is actually part of its success. There are a lot of people out there who play minis games for the sheer spectacle of the terrain and the narrative that unfolds. FG is deliberately simple for that reason. Joseph makes the same point explicitly in the intro to Ghost Archipelago, so I am not expecting it to be any more mechanically advanced than FG.

But I guess we will see.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/25 22:45:02


Post by: Killionaire


There's a difference between 'easy mechanics' and 'mechanics that make no sense'. Damage in FG unfortunately falls in the latter.

For example, if my target number is 10 and I roll an 11, and the target's armor is 10, the enemy takes a glancing hit that does effectively nothing, knocking off 1 box of their 10. So basically, zilch.

If I roll a 20, I just did 10 or 20 damage to them, instantly killing them. Okay, that's fine so far.

Let's take cover so that the arrow doesn't hit me. Let's make the target number 13.
Rolling an 11 or 12 misses instead of doing unconsequential damage. That 19 or 20 still kills me.

This really in essence, makes cover largely pointless. Because all you need to do is keep rolling dice with bad, unlikely to hit bow shots, and you'll eventually headshot that wizard even if he's in cover, behind a wind-wall, etc.

It's not even a fun spectacle due to how dry the world is outside of your spell list. I don't know your guy as 'Oh, he found the Cape of Mindspinning so he can do X'. no, your guy is 'Has a +1 sword'. That's boring as all hell, and less narrative than literally every other comparative game around. Not to mention also that half the spells do effectively nothing, or are duplicates.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/26 01:00:36


Post by: JoshInJapan


 Killionaire wrote:
Let's take cover so that the arrow doesn't hit me. Let's make the target number 13.
Rolling an 11 or 12 misses instead of doing unconsequential damage. That 19 or 20 still kills me.


That 19 or 20 does 9 or 10 points of damage, which may or may not kill you depending on how many points of health you started with and/or have left. Lucky shots are lucky shots, no matter what game you are playing.

There are a lot of different spells with a lot of different effects. Direct Damage spells (to use the old WHFB term) are going to seem similar because they are, at least in game terms, the same. There is no reason you have to rely on those instead of different spells from other schools.

None of this means that you aren't entitled to your own opinion, of course. Not everyone likes the same sort of games. For me, though, a lot of what you dislike about FG I find rather appealing, To each their own, I guess.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/26 07:15:19


Post by: Manchu


If cover makes me 10-20% less likely to be shot it hardly seems pointless.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/26 12:20:33


Post by: auticus


Some people want cover to mean that they are effectively immune from being killed.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/26 16:39:20


Post by: ecurtz


If the wizard is "behind a wall" archers don't have LoS and he is in fact immune to their attacks.

What comparable game is it you're playing with more narrative, Mordheim? Frostgrave is pretty much the biggest player in the fantasy skirmish campaign niche right now.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/26 17:48:05


Post by: Manchu


Mordheim definitely has more narrative. But there are other great games that support narrative much, much better than FG: Empire of the Dead, This Is Not A Test, and Strange Aeons to name three non-fantasy genre games.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/26 22:00:37


Post by: Easy E


Pulp Alley as well.

I enjoy playing Frpstgrave, but find the dice mechanics to be lacking. That said, I still enjoy it for what it is.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/27 15:49:46


Post by: NewTruthNeomaxim


I like FG quite a bit, but man... if This is Not a Test, had as consistent a volume of expansion releases, I would never play another miniatures game, in my life. :-p


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/28 02:29:29


Post by: spect_spidey


NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
I like FG quite a bit, but man... if This is Not a Test, had as consistent a volume of expansion releases, I would never play another miniatures game, in my life. :-p


I own the rulebook for This is Not a Test, but I have never played it. I keep thinking that it would make an awesome ruleset for say a Walking Dead type of game.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/28 04:00:50


Post by: Manchu


Mantics TWD game is really great, btw. Rules for developing your characters came out in the Miles Behind Us expansion.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/28 14:11:37


Post by: spect_spidey


 Manchu wrote:
Mantics TWD game is really great, btw. Rules for developing your characters came out in the Miles Behind Us expansion.


I do agree that it is a great game. I demo it in my area. I like the survivor creation and campaign rules, but I think it would be nice to have a little bit of resource management/supply tracking for your band of survivors. It could also use more competitive scenarios. There are currently only two scenarios that I am aware of for competitive play. The one in the main rulebook and the special scenario done for Beasts of War recently.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/30 17:09:07


Post by: Manchu


This morning, I read the campaign rules in Miles Behind Us - just on the page, they seem great. But I won't take this thread any further off-topic.

Bottom line, FG campaign content is actually pretty meh.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/30 22:15:44


Post by: Killionaire


 Manchu wrote:
If cover makes me 10-20% less likely to be shot it hardly seems pointless.

That's not how it works. It provides a 10-20 percent better protection against glancing hits that do like 1 or 2 damage. It provides ZERO protection against any more powerful hit because of the problems with tying the base to-hit roll with the damage roll.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/30 22:24:31


Post by: Manchu


I only said "likely to be shot" - nothing about severity of damage if shot. Cover is a +2 or +4 bonus to the TN. What happens above the TN is a separate matter. It sounds like you want damage mitigation in addition to hit mitigation.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/31 19:04:29


Post by: ecurtz


So basically the 2 worst things about Frostgrave are it's Fantasy rather than Post Apocalyptic and some people don't like the opposed d20 system. There's nothing to do about the setting, but I personally don't think the d20 system is any worse than the standard GW d6 hit, wound, save system they've used for 30 years.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/31 19:07:32


Post by: Killionaire


ecurtz wrote:
So basically the 2 worst things about Frostgrave are it's Fantasy rather than Post Apocalyptic and some people don't like the opposed d20 system. There's nothing to do about the setting, but I personally don't think the d20 system is any worse than the standard GW d6 hit, wound, save system they've used for 30 years.

Not at all. Fantasy's fine, and D20s are a fine die.
However, the problem is like above: The system is not mathematically well designed. The intent of 'taking cover should reduce my chance of being taken out by enemy fire' doesn't matter because all you do is fish for rolls of 17+ as they do tremendous damage, that cannot have the odds mitigated. Hits that plink for 1 or 2 and are inconsequential even if they hit are what stuff like cover stops.

The sheer boringness the game makes fantasy is also a problem. The magical items can be counted on two hands, and most are '+2 weapon'. No differentiation for what a sword is, or a spear, or a mace...

The minions have no gameplay difference in their roles more or less except for being 'Armor 12' or 'armor 10', and so-forth. It's very bland.

Also, most spells are just disappoingly lame in what they do. Are you really going to cast Witchs' Curse and reduce an enemy's rolls by 1, at the risk of having your own wizard hurt themselves or explode, or in place of doing way better spells?


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/31 19:22:58


Post by: ecurtz


You're wrong about the math though - the opposed roll means the defender is more likely to "win" in the case of cover and take no damage independent from how hard they are hit. You can think about them in the opposite order if it helps, the attacker must roll well enough to overcome armor and then the defender gets a roll to see if they avoided the attack - that roll to avoid is helped by the cover whatever the attacker rolled.

Sure the spells are unbalanced but there are a lot of them, and finding interesting combinations is part of the fun. It helps if you change the spell XP rules, which I agree are pretty bad as written.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/10/31 20:59:00


Post by: StygianBeach


Yeah, cover only stops the hits you don't mind taking anyway.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/01 00:32:09


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


ecurtz wrote:
So basically the 2 worst things about Frostgrave are it's Fantasy rather than Post Apocalyptic and some people don't like the opposed d20 system. There's nothing to do about the setting, but I personally don't think the d20 system is any worse than the standard GW d6 hit, wound, save system they've used for 30 years.


Well, if we're talking about the setting... Then I absolutely love the collection of short-short stories they released. At about ten pages each, they were perfect for giving a prospective player a hook into the world and stir the imagination.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/01 00:54:11


Post by: JoshInJapan


Don't forget that cover is additive-- ever piece of cover a ranged attack crosses adds the same modifier. A crowded tabletop, as recommended by the author, makes ranged attacks much less effective.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/01 13:59:40


Post by: Orlanth


The game is greatly reduced to,

1. move towards treasure

2. and roll 20's.

If you roll high enough on one dice it becomes irrelevant what unit you are using, what your target is how resilient it is and the tactical circumstances.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/01 17:12:58


Post by: ecurtz


Here's the chart for a modest +2 cover bonus for the defender.

You're 12.5% less likely to take a serious (6+ damage) wound, 14% less likely to be hurt overall.

[EDIT: Of course I made a mistake after complaining about people ignoring the real numbers]
Armor is an even bigger advantage. +2 armor is a 14% reduction in taking any damage, 22% reduction in average damage per attack.

The numbers do matter. You're less likely to get screwed by a bad roll in Frostgrave than in Mordheim.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/02 20:54:57


Post by: Manchu


ecurtz wrote:
So basically the 2 worst things about Frostgrave are it's Fantasy rather than Post Apocalyptic and some people don't like the opposed d20 system.
Nah, the actual problem is the weak campaign system.
 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
they were perfect for giving a prospective player a hook into the world and stir the imagination
They might have been better served as part of the core book, however.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/02 21:15:47


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


Good point. Wonder why they weren't included.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/02 22:27:16


Post by: Easy E


$$$$$$$$ as an after purchase.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/02 22:35:10


Post by: Manchu


And aren't there multiple volumes now? Guess they wanted to try a fiction line?


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/03 22:31:28


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


 Manchu wrote:
And aren't there multiple volumes now? Guess they wanted to try a fiction line?


Are there? I though Mat Ward was writing a novel for them, but I didn't know they had more short stories.

I'm a sucker for fiction lines.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/03 22:46:19


Post by: ChargerIIC


For me, Frostgrave has the same problem as several other small miniature games. The campaign mode allows early successes to place some players with large gaps between themselves and the losing or newer players. It's one thing to have a slight power difference when you play, its another to know you are going to be steamrolled in each match.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/03 23:58:32


Post by: ecurtz


I obviously really like Frostgrave, so I've been thinking about easy ways of addressing peoples' complaints that could be made into community rules. There are already a lot of modifications to the XP system out there. I know people do expand the rules to give XP to individual soldiers as well, but I haven't seen any specific rules for that which have been tested.

Another thing that both Mordheim and Necromunda have that FG doesn't is mercenaries you can hire for a single game if you're going up against a tough warband or are short handed. That's a good way to put the hurt on somebody who might otherwise be out of your league, or even if you're just looking for some revenge, and rules are as simple as a list of heroes and their costs (some may only work for payment in treasure, magic items, or ???).


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/04 02:05:15


Post by: privateer4hire


Something I used to like in a Judge Dredd minis game from around 2003 or so was that Judges were used as a catch up mechanic. If a gang got too powerful, then they would attract the attention of the Judges.

Seems like something like that could be used in FG. Maybe a doppleganger has designs on transcending so he can replicate the top warband and wizard identically any time a wizard gets X levels, treasures or whatever factor above the others in a campaign.

So if your warband is #1 by whatever factor you've agreed on, another player gets to field an identical warband to yours. If you win, fabulous treasure. If you lose, everything was just an illusion and you're at the same level as the next highest warband.

I'm looking forward to Garchipelago but it's in the queue behind Newcromunda.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/07 16:51:39


Post by: mdauben


Deleted.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/08 08:00:46


Post by: MangoMadness


 privateer4hire wrote:

-Scenarios, many times, essentially became ignore-each-other contests as each player tried to make off with 1/2 the treasures.


Is that because you were just playing 1v1?

I wonder if frostgrave shines more as a 3?(+) player game which would force more interaction between groups rather than some missions becoming treasure splits by mutual agreement.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/08 15:19:29


Post by: privateer4hire


Could be the case, Mango Madness. I also think the lack of an ultimate goal (gold? wizard level? spells attained?) made us both very conservative. Toward the end I was experimenting with things like Leap and what not and that seemed like unusual spells could make the game interesting.

My friend had become convinced that because I had an elementalist (who are admittedly just plain better offensively than other wizards) that didn't stand a chance.

Our strategies revolved around sending a couple of dogs apiece forward to mess with the other guy. An archer or crossbow or two set on any lanes of sight. Mooks running out to snatch treasure and our wizards to come out to be the main combat force on both sides.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/12 20:26:04


Post by: adamsouza


Frostgrave is like a fun lite RPG you play with miniatures.

It's not chess.
Your forces are never equal.
The campaign rewards earlier successes.

I'm fine with that.

You need to play with lots of terrain. Wide open spaces allows direct damage spells to sky rocket in usefulness.

It also helps if you play with a group that aren't TFGs. I played an Elementalist who went through 20+ games without murdering the other wizards. Wizards are supposed to outsmart each other and then brag about, not burn the other guy to a crisp each game. Nothing in the game says you have to be a murder hobo.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/13 00:55:47


Post by: privateer4hire


Yeah, good points. I don't pick stuff for OP-ness because we're an older, for-fun group of 3 players. So when my elementalist wound up being a murder hobo, I backed off and started going with leap, telekinesis, transpose and that sort of thing.

I definitely think this is a fun-focus game and agree with your assessments.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/13 01:36:26


Post by: MangoMadness


 adamsouza wrote:
Nothing in the game says you have to be a murder hobo.


Hahahaha

for some reason I has an image of Dr Claw with an AK47 standing over the blasted body of Inspector Gadget saying 'there wont be a next time Gadget, not anymore'

I think i watch too many kids shows


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/13 22:43:39


Post by: adamsouza


 privateer4hire wrote:
So when my elementalist wound up being a murder hobo, I backed off and started going with leap, telekinesis, transpose and that sort of thing.


Leap and Wall of Stone. I would infuriate other players by leaping a henchman onto a treasure one turn, and then leaping to safety the next turn. Made a habit of stealing at least half the treasures each game. Creating walls in a dungeon was just amazing. Allowed me to redirect and control the flow of monsters and other players.

Pretty much only used Elemental blast to take out monsters that got too close.

There was one Apprentice that tried to Bone Dart my wizard, so he tossed an Elemental Bolt back at him to teach him a lesson. My Wizard rolled a "20", while his apprentice rolled a "1". Genuinely felt bad about that.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/15 00:35:38


Post by: NoIAMDirtyDan


I'd kind of like to expand the discussion by asking if anyone got Ghost Archipelago yet and if they prefer it over Frostgrave?

I literally JUST purchased Frostgrave because GA sounded like it has a bigger focus on lightly armored fighters and more of a pirate setting, whereas Frostgrave allows for heavier armored knights and the like (Which, thematically, is something my brothers and I would enjoy more).


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/15 12:06:28


Post by: spect_spidey


I have yet to play a game of GA. But after reading the book, I think I would prefer GA. It fixes some issues with the first game. I like to think of it as Frostgrave 2.0.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/15 15:26:54


Post by: privateer4hire


spect_spidey wrote:
I have yet to play a game of GA. But after reading the book, I think I would prefer GA. It fixes some issues with the first game. I like to think of it as Frostgrave 2.0.


That sounds good since a buddy of mine and I have our books inbound.
If you have the inclination, can you cover what issues that GA fixes, please?

Thanks either way.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/15 19:04:56


Post by: Manchu


The Wizard/Apprentice mechanic is the center of FG. GA chucks it out in favor of having unrelated main characters, the Heritor and Warden. The Warden is a kind of lesser version of a FG Wizard. But they advance independently, unlike the Apprentices of FG. The main character of your GA warband is the Heritor, who is basically a comic book super hero. Unlike the Wizards of FG, he has powers that he can use many times each turn although each time he uses them, he has a greater chance of taking "blood burn" feedback damage.

If you don't like the mechanics of FG, you will similarly dislike the mechanics of GA - they are basically identical, aside from the Wizard/Apprentice v. Heritor & Warden distinction above.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/15 23:26:28


Post by: spect_spidey


There are a few other changes from Frostgrave to GA. You equip your Heritor and Warden from the General Equipment list for free. You get 8 crewmen for free that can be equipped with a hand weapon, hand weapon/shield, two-handed weapon, or a staff. You will always have these crewmen for every game.

When you start the campaign you get 250 gold that you can use to buy specialists. You can only have up to 4 of them and they replace a normal crewmen in your warband. They have set equipment and stats that do not change and they can carry one item. If they are killed, you cannot just buy a new specialist. You have to pay a fee to represent sailing back to the mainland to hire a new specialist.

One treasure is always set up in the center of the board and each player places two other treasures. Getting the central treasure off the table allows a +2 to the treasure table roll. Having certain equipment and carrying a treasure can cause a model to have a reduction in Fight due to being encumbered.

There are rules for using small boats in some scenarios that can carry up to 6 models. There are rules for balancing a game for crews of differing levels. There are swimming rules. And there are rules for making ability tests outside of just Willpower.

IMHO, I think the changes are for the best.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/16 17:17:45


Post by: Easy E


Yes, but the core mechanics are pretty much the same. That is all window dressing and "chrome" for the most part.

If you hate the d20 mechanics and damage, you will hate Ghost Archipelago too.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/16 19:33:29


Post by: Manchu


Yes, GA is more of a change in tone. I mean, it is even called "Frostgrave: Ghost Archipelago."

EasyE, I have noticed a potential trend with games Osprey publishes towards emphasizing tone (in this same sense) over mechanics. For example, all __ Rampant games, Ronin/En Guarde. FG/GA is just another example. Dracula's America has the same feel: generic rules but a distinctive setting. Have you noticed the same?


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/20 14:35:45


Post by: Easy E


Yes. They put a lot more emphasis on result and feel than they do on process. They are all relatively light on depth, with maybe one or two "tricks" up their sleeve.

I think some of this is a fixture of the space limitations in writing a Blue Book. I believe the max word count is 22,000 words for the Wargame Series, which doesn't leave a lot of room for campaigns, chrome, and fringe-cases. This maybe good or bad depending on your tastes.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/20 17:42:26


Post by: NewTruthNeomaxim


For what its worth I just picked up their Dragon Rampant book, and while I am loathe to "review" a book until I have played it a few times, at a glance, they do A LOT with the very low page-count they have on hand.

I am always a big fan of giving players loads of fairly balanced options, but off-loading unit/monster/hero design to the players own creativity.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/21 09:34:31


Post by: joe5mc


A whole thread devoted to what people don't like about my game? I must have hit the big time!

Hey fair enough. No miniature game is going to appeal to everyone, and I completely understand why Frostgrave really doesn't appeal to some. It is designed to be more of a game about a story unfolding than about nuanced tactical play.

The game does have flaws (It was my first attempt at writing a game after all). Some of those I have fixed in the FAQ. Some I will be addressing in the next supplement, The Maze of Malcor.

That said, many of the elements some people see as flaws are actually deliberate decisions on my part because that's how I like my miniatures games. I like the fact that a thug has a decent shot at taking down a knight (although careful study of the math will reveal that the chance probably isn't as great as most people think).

Anyway, thanks to everyone who has given the game a try. That's all any game designer can really ask. If you don't like it, there are loads of other really good games out there. This is Not a Test is a really good one!


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/21 11:51:53


Post by: JoshInJapan


I, for one, love the game. The rules are simple enough that my eight -year old can play it from memory, but they reward forethought and coordination. The vulnerability of even the strongest models can be a lot of fun as well. Keep making these games, and I will keep playing them.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/21 17:10:49


Post by: NewTruthNeomaxim


Joeseph, I think even the detractors here will agree you should be really proud of yourself. Your game cut through the chaff, and got a degree of mindshare, and brand recognition, in a hobby where most games die on the vine, and go unloved regardless of their merits. You did great, and many of us sincerely enjoy the game as well.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/22 08:16:08


Post by: privateer4hire


joe5mc wrote:
A whole thread devoted to what people don't like about my game? I must have hit the big time!...


Welcome to the big time.

Our group just bought into Garchipelago after buying almost all the expansions for FG so we must like more than we disliike.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/23 09:57:53


Post by: joe5mc


Criticism is part of the business. I can't say I enjoy it (I don't think anyone really does), but I've learned to live with it.

I'm glad that some people are finding a lot of fun with it. But I'm also glad that we don't all agree on what makes a good wargame, as it means there is a huge variety of games out there and new game designers have a chance to make their mark.

'Garchpelago' - I like that.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/23 16:59:06


Post by: privateer4hire


If you like that you should love: Hordesmachine.
Even sounds like WarMachine.
How in the crud Warmahordes got started as a thing...

Back on topic. Anybody got a line on were-elephants? Reaper has one model listed and it's not just old, it's no longer available at all. They're a thing in Ghost Archipelago is why I'm asking.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/24 01:13:41


Post by: ecurtz


There are a bunch in this thread over at Lead Adventure: http://www.lead-adventure.de/index.php?topic=105171.0


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/24 05:23:22


Post by: adamsouza


 privateer4hire wrote:
How in the crud Warmahordes got started as a thing...


Warmachine came first. Hordes was a spin off. When you contracted the two names together, you put the better known one first.

On Topic.

Frostgrave is pretty awesome.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/24 10:11:04


Post by: joe5mc


Also, I am always looking for ways to improve the game, so for those that have any suggestions - I'm listening. I think it is safe to say that I'm not going to change the basic combat mechanic at this point, but smaller changes are always worth considering.

For those that like the Mordeheim campaign system better - why do you like it better? Is it because all figures can improve?

Anyway, I'm always interested in trying to improve it (although we might not agree on what is an improvement!)


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/24 15:23:34


Post by: NewTruthNeomaxim


joe5mc wrote:
Also, I am always looking for ways to improve the game, so for those that have any suggestions - I'm listening. I think it is safe to say that I'm not going to change the basic combat mechanic at this point, but smaller changes are always worth considering.

For those that like the Mordeheim campaign system better - why do you like it better? Is it because all figures can improve?

Anyway, I'm always interested in trying to improve it (although we might not agree on what is an improvement!)


Certainly progression for all is part of it... as then you don't treat hirelings as quite such a disposable good, and instead its a hair more personality.

I also am really, really fond of the between session events as a small, unpredictable narrative device.

Finally, despite being a later bolted on addition, the expanded base rules are cool, and I would love to see Frostgraves base/ship elements expanded. Having a long term money-sink/investment is always another nice feeling of progression, which in turn increases my sense of ownership of a warband/crew/game.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/24 15:24:43


Post by: Stevefamine


 Easy E wrote:
You can see my thoughts here: https://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2016/12/review-frostgrave-osprey-games.html

and my thoughts on the supplements here:
https://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2017/04/review-frostgrave-supplements-osprey.html

However, my general thought is that it is a campaign system with a game added to support it later.

That doesn't mean I do not like it. I enjoy it with some caveats.


100% agree with it

However, it's still a solid 6/10~ game and can be played with old MageKnight figures/junk/reaper bones models on the cheap. Worth grabbing the rulebook and gaming with some friends as a break from Mordheim/D&D/other games


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/24 17:28:06


Post by: privateer4hire


ecurtz wrote:
There are a bunch in this thread over at Lead Adventure: http://www.lead-adventure.de/index.php?topic=105171.0


Thank you. Very useful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
We've only looked through Ulterior Motives but it looks like a move in the right direction. Having missions that the other player doesn't know all the details about (why is he in such a hurry to have that dog run all the way across the board without engaging me?) adds to our fun in other games.

GW published some card decks that give the underdog player a secret edge he can play in a pinch. They also allow alternative ways of winning a scenario that, again, only the underdog player knows about.

Archipelago's modification of treasure, creating a central treasure that's worth more, is a welcome change.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/25 00:30:20


Post by: Easy E


I alos like the crew that are always available, and the new way GArchipelago handles specialists as their loss is a bigger deal. Not just fire and re-hire.

Good changes in my mind.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/25 14:13:47


Post by: spect_spidey


One thing from original Frostgrave that I wished Ghost Archipelago would have kept is Captains. I liked the idea of them , how they advanced, took a cut of the treasure, and learned tricks. Hopefully they will make an appearance in GA.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/25 15:22:16


Post by: privateer4hire


spect_spidey wrote:
One thing from original Frostgrave that I wished Ghost Archipelago would have kept is Captains. I liked the idea of them , how they advanced, took a cut of the treasure, and learned tricks. Hopefully they will make an appearance in GA.


We've never used captains but it seems like most rules in the FG series (two books are a series, you know ) are pretty modular.
If everyone has access to them in a campaign, I wonder if they would be unbalancing.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/26 00:02:16


Post by: adamsouza


It always struck me as odd about the static weapon load outs on the henchmen. I understood the simplicity of them starting with a standard load out, but it always felt a bit off that I couldn't buy them armor or weapons. Not they should have equal access, but it would have been nice if each type had an upgrade option, of some sort.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/26 03:43:03


Post by: dropkick


joe5mc wrote:
A whole thread devoted to what people don't like about my game? I must have hit the big time!



It's a good game. I actually find the game balances out rather well. If you are dumb enough to keep throwing your warband at an assassinator then by all means you deserve what you get.

Ulterior Motives is by far the best expansion for the game. Are you planning on something similar for Ghost Archie?



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/26 10:23:06


Post by: Llamahead


Hellephant from Massive Darkness is a good call for a Were Elephant.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/26 13:14:34


Post by: spect_spidey


 adamsouza wrote:
It always struck me as odd about the static weapon load outs on the henchmen. I understood the simplicity of them starting with a standard load out, but it always felt a bit off that I couldn't buy them armor or weapons. Not they should have equal access, but it would have been nice if each type had an upgrade option, of some sort.


IMHO, several of the more expensive henchmen were just "upgraded" versions of the cheaper options. For several of them there seemed to be a three tier progression. Each level costing a bit more and adding a bit to the load out and stat line.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/26 16:12:38


Post by: privateer4hire


 Llamahead wrote:
Hellephant from Massive Darkness is a good call for a Were Elephant.


Agreed. This guy...
https://boardgamegeek.com/image/3731512/massive-darkness

looks really cool.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/28 07:39:12


Post by: adamsouza


spect_spidey wrote:
 adamsouza wrote:
It always struck me as odd about the static weapon load outs on the henchmen. I understood the simplicity of them starting with a standard load out, but it always felt a bit off that I couldn't buy them armor or weapons. Not they should have equal access, but it would have been nice if each type had an upgrade option, of some sort.


IMHO, several of the more expensive henchmen were just "upgraded" versions of the cheaper options. For several of them there seemed to be a three tier progression. Each level costing a bit more and adding a bit to the load out and stat line.


Mechanically yes, but from a RP or RAW perspective, you had to fire one guy and hire the other guy.

From years of playing D&D, Necormunda, etc.. I just expected to level up, or buy better gear for existing henchmen.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/11/28 11:47:22


Post by: spect_spidey


 dropkick wrote:
joe5mc wrote:
A whole thread devoted to what people don't like about my game? I must have hit the big time!



Ulterior Motives is by far the best expansion for the game. Are you planning on something similar for Ghost Archie?



I second this! I love the idea behind Ulterior Motives. I hope that a similar set makes its way into GA.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/12/03 17:51:03


Post by: AndrewGPaul


 adamsouza wrote:
spect_spidey wrote:
 adamsouza wrote:
It always struck me as odd about the static weapon load outs on the henchmen. I understood the simplicity of them starting with a standard load out, but it always felt a bit off that I couldn't buy them armor or weapons. Not they should have equal access, but it would have been nice if each type had an upgrade option, of some sort.


IMHO, several of the more expensive henchmen were just "upgraded" versions of the cheaper options. For several of them there seemed to be a three tier progression. Each level costing a bit more and adding a bit to the load out and stat line.


Mechanically yes, but from a RP or RAW perspective, you had to fire one guy and hire the other guy.

From years of playing D&D, Necormunda, etc.. I just expected to level up, or buy better gear for existing henchmen.



Yeah, but in Necromunda, you didn't really have henchmen - all your gangers were important. Here, the only character of any note is your wizard. Everyone else is just some hanger-on he recruited in the pub. You could think of the cost of recruiting a Man at Arms in place of a Thug as being that minion negotiating an annual bonus.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/12/04 20:41:58


Post by: Llamahead


Or the cost of buying the new weapons and armour for them


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/12/11 15:22:52


Post by: privateer4hire


Saw an interesting variant on boardgamegeek.

They made 2nd moves the same value as first moves (i.e., you always move a model up to its move stat). Carrying treasure still halves your move, though.

They also changed fight + d20 on both sides to:
Fight + d20 (attacker) vs. Fight + Armor (defender)
For damage you still subtract armor from total attack value.

Seems like it would make defense more reliable.
And movement would be less about doing odd fractions of an inch.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/12/11 22:18:37


Post by: spect_spidey


 privateer4hire wrote:
Saw an interesting variant on boardgamegeek.

They made 2nd moves the same value as first moves (i.e., you always move a model up to its move stat). Carrying treasure still halves your move, though.

They also changed fight + d20 on both sides to:
Fight + d20 (attacker) vs. Fight + Armor (defender)
For damage you still subtract armor from total attack value.

Seems like it would make defense more reliable.
And movement would be less about doing odd fractions of an inch.


The Fight change is interesting. It is similar to how I sorta play shooting. Since damage is only relevant if you beat their armour in shooting, I generally don't roll my defense unless the attacker has beat my armour. The downside to using that in melee is that it almost becomes the same as D&D. An attacker would always be trying to reach the same target number each time they attacked a particular opponent. That could be very bad for some wizards or apprentices as a knight or some similar henchman with +4 Fight would just need a 7 on the dice to wound every time. And if you start adding buffs or magic weapons to the mix, the advantage would be significant IMHO.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/12/29 10:39:04


Post by: Ian Sturrock


I do think that a lot of the "it's unbalanced!?!" people haven't done the maths, unfortunately.

Small differences add up. There's a BIG difference between getting a lucky hit on a Thug (armour 10, health 10), who will get one-shotted, and getting the same lucky hit on a knight (armour 13, health 12), who will keep coming for you and quite possibly kill you on his next hit. That addresses two complaints -- that anyone can die due to one lucky hit, and that there's no point in upgrading your soldiers.

In over two years of regular play with lots of different opponents and between 2 and 5 players at a time, I've seen very few one-shot kills of significant units such as wizards or high-end soldiers. Occasionally you'll get an unlucky apprentice. Most of the time it takes 2-3 hits to kill someone, though, even a lower quality thug. Which means that cover, intervening terrain, etc. is key. Nobody rolls natural 20s all the time.

Of course you do need all the terrain. Thought you had enough there? Add a bit more! Multiple levels help, both as terrain height changes using risers, and as buildings you can get into.

The wizards are surprisingly well-balanced against each other. Elementalists seem OP if you don't have enough terrain, but there are plenty of apparently less useful spells that really come into their own once you start thinking outside the box. Telekinesis is nice but only becomes OP if you don't have enough terrain. Leap... is probably just OP, unfortunately, but it does get balanced out by direct damage spells. Elemental Hammer on a crossbow is devastating. Illusionary Soldier or Transpose can ruin your day. Etc.

There are flaws. The XP system doesn't quite work right, but if you drop XP for killing soldiers etc. it's fine. Treasure Hunters are mathematically advantaged over most other soldier types. Either up the price or take off a point of Fight, probably both. But overall this is a fantastic game, particularly given how quickly you can get it up and running, and how fast the games are. It gives you exciting, narrative moments, as well as rewarding tactical play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Played our first game of Ghost Archipelago last night, incidentally. My initial thoughts, pre-game, can be found here:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/1680/560317.page#9679965

After a game... Yes, this is good. Different to regular FG. A lot of the kinks have been ironed out.

There are probably still some balance issues. The lack of a need for Will, in the current system, should have been caught at the editing or game development stage. I am concerned that one of the Heritor abilities, which just gives you +5 to Will, is strictly inferior to the one that lets you completely ignore any spell. The concern is not really with that weak ability, or even the strong one; it's that this indicates that the game hasn't really been playtested, and that there's a real risk of dominant strategies emerging (are there five strictly best Heritor abilities, mathematically? Probably, yes, and once they're discovered, the game will become less fun and less interesting).


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/12/30 00:01:46


Post by: adamsouza


I used to watch Frostgrave battle reports. It never failed to amaze me how little terrain they used, and how much open space and line of sight it allowed for.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2017/12/31 14:46:39


Post by: nels1031


I tried it and like it, but my limited time and attention span are focused on AoS for the time being.

(Sorry. I got tired of seeing the locked “pedophile judge” as the most recent topic in this subforum. I’ll return to the darkness whence I came now.)


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2018/01/01 20:43:22


Post by: Achilles


 adamsouza wrote:
I used to watch Frostgrave battle reports. It never failed to amaze me how little terrain they used, and how much open space and line of sight it allowed for.



Must not have been watching mine!


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2018/01/02 15:59:56


Post by: Easy E


Yeah, I do not get why you would play Frostgrave without at least 35% table coverage all the way up to 60% table coverage. Wierd.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2018/01/04 06:11:45


Post by: Kossak


Sadly, there doesn't seem to be much competition for Frostrage at the moment. That may explain it's sorry state.
I've really only enjoyed it with Bad Karma's Rule Changes.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2018/01/14 18:44:05


Post by: dropkick


 Ian Sturrock wrote:
Elemental Hammer on a crossbow is devastating.


genius. I wish I thought to use it that way.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2018/02/14 20:26:47


Post by: Hellfury


I like Frostgrave quite a bit. But then again I am the type of gamer who really appreciates interacting with a neat story than finely honed mechanical design. I'd play a good abstract boardgame like YINSH if I were looking for that. As long as people refrain from being TFG, it can be an incredible casual game.

However, I dont have a lot of terrain or models to play the game in the sense that most would ideally think of when referring to games like this. I do have a ton of heroscape though. Both in terrain and models.

So as an experiment, I embarked on converting the game to a hex based format. This was pretty easy to do, using a (One hex = 1.5" ) conversion formula.
For example, a model who has a movement of 7" now has a movement of 5 hexes. For half movement, all measures are rounded down. So a move 7 model would move 5 on first action, and 2 on second action. This gets rid of ridiculous things like being shy by half an inch or whatever.
There was one exception, and that was move 8" creatures. I gave them a move of 5 hexes still, but they got a new "fleet" rule that allowed them to round up on second action movement. This even things out and allows faster creatures to still have that distinction.

But in order to avoid doing math at every stage of play, I had to go through the rulebook, spells and ulterior motive cards and convert them. Some spells took a bit of creativity to justify the conversion, like a circle of protection, or fog and wall. But, I think it is a better game now simply by virtue of removing measuring devices and allowing players to calculate spaces easily at a glance. It makes it more tactical and strategic at the same time.

Using Heroscape certainly isn't a cheap option anymore if you were to buy in as a fresh noob. But if you have a lot of materials already available, it works quite remarkably well.

Here are a few images to illustrate my point.

Two different boards:


This one is a very flat board with very little elevation variations. Basically no higher than height 3. Works very well.


This one has a lot of elevation variation, and the slope of the board on one side goes all the way up to height 9, with a lot of elevation variation between the valley and the peak.
This scenario is a campaign prologue. The Gate of Felstad, a scenario we devised. Just a generic set up. Each player places 3 treasures. Deployment is on opposite corners of the left side of the map where the elevation is lowest. No turn limit.



Here are the two warbands used recently. The first is an elementalist, apprentice, knight, templar, archer, 2 thugs, and a war dog.


And this is a witch, apprentice, assassin, archer, infantryman, treasure hunter, thief, thug, wolf animal companion.


I snapped these right after my opponent's thug picked up a treasure and rolled a 17 for an encounter. A frost giant shows up not five spaces away from his mage. Good thing he had elemental shield up.


But even though that frost giant is on his doorstep, my apprentice is about to have to contend with both the knight and a damned werewolf on my six that crawled up from the road entrance last turn. I chose to shoot the knight with a poison dart. The werewolf made my apprentice wounded, and after game wound up with a nasty injury. A lost eye.


Two ice spiders were about to assault my wolf companion, but I moved him far enough away that they both jumped on his apprentice instead. A she tried to sneak up and steal the treasure, she died for her troubles.

It was a mad rush on both our parts to get the hell out of dodge and be glad for the treasure we were able to carry away before the fauna of frostgrave could devour our bands of greedy looters. Any victory today was pyrrhic.

I'm happy with the results of how well this plays in a hex board environment, even if it is not quite as pretty as a fully painted up frostgrave board.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2018/02/15 16:28:57


Post by: Enkmar


Very cool mash up of Heroscape and Frostgrave, Hellfury. Exalted!


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2018/04/24 21:43:13


Post by: Grand.Master.Raziel


So, Joe, I've just started playing Frostgrave, and introduced it to a bunch of my friends. I enjoy it quite a bit, but I would like to see some tweaks, particularly towards how XP is earned.

I'm currently playing a Thaumaturge, so not so much with the direct damage dealing spells. My go-to spells have been Blinding Light, Heal, and Shield. I'd like to see the system give XP rewards for soldiers making kills, and for keeping soldiers alive through the game, as that's kind of how the Thaumaturge's team tends to roll.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2018/04/25 14:28:46


Post by: Easy E


The new Maze of Malcador (or whatever) supplement will have some rules tweaks according to the author. What the tweaks are is less clear.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2018/04/25 15:20:48


Post by: NewTruthNeomaxim


 Easy E wrote:
The new Maze of Malcador (or whatever) supplement will have some rules tweaks according to the author. What the tweaks are is less clear.


One of them is a reexamination of the XP chart. I imagine it'll incentivise your Wizard being more than just a head-hunter for XP gain. Personally, i'd love to see something like the Captain concept expanded to the entire warband, so they have some progression as well. It would help some of my players use them less as disposable missions, and make for more tactical play. :-p


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/02/10 16:09:33


Post by: Lord Xcapobl


I have recently started to get into Frostgrave. There are things about it I like, there are things about it I don't like.



One thing I find lacking, is the fact that soldiers never improve their stats. This would be a simple matter to solve. Perhaps every soldier could have his own Experience Point total. Gaining XP for things like taking out opposing warband models, or wandering monsters, and for getting treasure off the board, gain enough XP, gain a level. An easier method with far less bookkeeping is, to have one soldier in the warband increase one Stat as soon as the wizard gains a level. We might play test that last suggestion in our next campaign.

Likewise, I would have liked to see soldier stats without 'automatic modifications' for equipment and the likes. Simply give a stat-line, and an equipment table so I could go about and custom equip my soldiers. Custom build my own Man-at-Arms or Infantryman or Archer. Give each soldier one armor slot, two weapon slots (with one being filled by a shield if taken, or both filled by a single two-handed weapon, for example), and one 'free' slot for special items such as treasure or a magic item.
Slightly related, There is leather armor, and mail armor. Assuming this latter to be chainmail. Why no platemail?

Like a lot of people seem to indicate, the XP table for wizards appears to be slightly off. There is quite an emphasis on playing the murder hobo and building a wizard that hunts down and personally destroys the other warbands. Oddly enough, the game (depending on scenario and such) can be played by rushing the treasure tokens, picking them up, and running off again. The biggest hurdle here would be using rules for wandering monsters through the optional Random Encounters. More involved games I saw, simply had a single treasure counter in the middle of the playing area counting as two treasures worth, and then 4 or 6 treasure counters placed by the players in turn. To "win", the players had to make that mad dash to the middle and meet up.

Balance issues. I haven't had an issue here yet, but then again, I play with close personal friends and none of them ever showed any TFG behaviour. Of course, in any game with as many moving parts as a wargame, balance issues will arise. And sometimes, people complain for complaining's sake. If your warband has no magic weapons, the common sense thing to do is to run, when a wraith randomly appears. You have no chance in hell to defeat it as it is immune to non-magical weapons. Why try?
I will admit not all spells will be created (balanced) equal. A spell that heals a Health point from a friendly miniature in base-to-base contact will never be equal to a spell that deals a point of damage to Health at a range of 24", or even 12" or 6 ". The damage dealer is automatically more powerful, assuming equal casting numbers. By tweaking those, during extensing play testing, and after production through errata, the spells will become more balanced in a way. But to what extent? A ranged spell will only need enough movement from the caster to get within that range. A 'touch' spell needing base-to-base contact always needs enough movement to get in touch. As such I think this is a minor point, at least until I play strangers who do show TFG behaviour.



I think the simplicity is parts of the strength of this game. Compared to Warhammer 40K, for example, where you roll to hit, to wound, to save, to damage, and then still to disgustingly resilient... that's a lot of rolls for a single attemp to take out an enemy model. Rolling off seems awfully random, even with a small Fight stat bonus, but let's face it, in the world of minions and mooks there are few sword masters and Robin Hood-like marksmen. With averagely trained soldiers, something like a slippery patch of ground should introduce that random element more than the differences in sheer skill.

I like the background. While some think it is limited in scope ("just the city?") I think it is a strength too. Don't like the city? Build a table that resembles an ancient city park, with a building (ruin) left and right, lots of trees and bushes and high hills to break line of sight. Or don't play the game as if it is set in the city. Of course, the city isn't the entirety of the background. The ten schools of magic are part of it too. The additional 5 schools from the expansions likewise. The monsters and types of hirelings, ever expanding as well, are part of the background. The art is very telling too.

The book is the game (with or wiithout expansions). There is a dedicated line of miniatures, but they are not mandatory. If you have other miniatures, that's fine too. Compare that to some of the draconic rules for tournaments from various Warhammer games. Of course, I have a second box of plastic Frostgrave Soldiers on the way... And some Soldiers II... and Barbarians. Savig up for next month, for cultists and gnolls.

I like the support. Plenty of expansions, miniatures, articles, youtube instructions and battle reports. Not everybody likes the game, but it is clear a lot of people do. And I am one of them.



And then there was Ghost Archipelago...



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/02/16 23:45:00


Post by: Shrapnelsmile


Just picked up the basic rule book. I want to run a campaign for 3 friends who got back in touch. I"d play their adversaries, they run warbands. Is this remotely possible? Please share your experiences.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/02/17 00:30:34


Post by: privateer4hire


Shrapnelsmile,

Yes, you could do that. In fact, the way my regular opponent and I play (there are a total of four of us but really only he and I play semi-regular) I'd almost wish we had a OPFOR band for one of us to run at any time.

We virtually ignore on another because we're, IRL, nice guys and don't want to jam over the other guy during a campaign. Having a That Guy warband that we'd both have to face would be a nice way to be confrontational without being confrotational, maybe.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/02/18 08:14:26


Post by: Lord Xcapobl


@Shrapnelsmile

I do believe adding a third player as a sort of game master, controlling any randomly appearing monsters, could improve the game. It adds even more to the RPG feeling people already described when they saw the campaign options for leveling up their wizards.
Currently, without a game master, the monsters respond according to a set of mechanical rules. This might mean a disproportionate number of them, based on measurement alone, runs off towards one specific warband, not necessarily the strongest, just the closest. A game master might intervene and decide to send a majority at the stronger warband, creating a form of balance in a campaign that a 'cold' set of rules would unlikely reach, without becoming more complicated. It may require some experience and insight, but it may pay off. Also, instead of having every random monster be totally random, a game master may prepare a scenario, and adjust the random tables beforehand. Only undead monsters from a crypt building, only gnolls and barbarians from the edge of the board as they, too, invade the city. Options, options, options.

@privateer4hire

The most basic scenario requires six treasure tokens. Most such games turn out to be a mad dash for three of those, and haul them off the board, while the opponent does the same. During a one-off game this isn't a problem, as winning is defined as having more treasure tokens than the opponent. I see your point about a bunch of non-TFG players just wanting to have fun, and not wanting to totally screwdriver eachother over. Perhaps this can be mitigated by not having an even number of treasure tokens, but an odd one, with one being in the exact middle of the table. In the basic scenario, this 'forces' the warbands to close in on eachother.
Also, a game master like described above might help too. With a slightly higher number of monsters as 'speed bumps' and guardians of the treasure, two or more warbands never have to clash, but they would have an abundance of opponents to fight. And the game master might decide to throw tougher (random) monsters at a warband that is better equipped or has a higher level wizard.

@ any reader

I have the Malcor expansion and the Ghost Archipelago book on the way, expecting them in the snailmail any day now. I wonder what the changes/additions to the Frostgrave rules are with regards to the cold city, and what the differences will be between the cold city and the island versions. I know, lots have been spoiled on the internet already, but I like to read for myself. in so much as I didn't see it already. I know about those inheritors as opposed to wizards, snake-men instead of gnolls, abilities instead of spells. I'll just have to wait and see. Any day now.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/02/18 16:57:26


Post by: Easy E


Malcor does have a treasure system overhaul that puts a big central treasure and a few smaller treasures around it. This promotes some action for the central treasure.

Malcor also has some rules for balancing warbands that involves monsters.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/02/22 13:08:29


Post by: Achilles


 Easy E wrote:
Malcor does have a treasure system overhaul that puts a big central treasure and a few smaller treasures around it. This promotes some action for the central treasure.

Malcor also has some rules for balancing warbands that involves monsters.


The biggest change is the 300xp cap per encounter, one less treasure placed by each treasure and the central treasure being fixed.

Also; there is no longer XP For killing Wizards and Apprentices. That has been shifted to 5xp for killing unaligned monsters. All the focus now is on solving problems by casting spells and getting off with an a-symmetrical number of treasures.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/02/22 20:19:54


Post by: adamsouza


My group managed to play a Long Frostgrave campaign without killing each other's wizards.

We had a few maps made of dungeon tiles where the Wall spell was used to hilarious effect, boxing in opposing forces while their own forces ran off with treasures.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/02/23 10:23:43


Post by: Lord Xcapobl


I received the malcor book, and indeed some of my points below were adressed.

The change to placing treasure tokens is there.
I like the new Experience Table, as it the removes the focus on head-hunting, and makes treasure-hunting and spellcasting more prominent.
Also, I saw that 300 XP cap mentioned by Easy E. As I have seen battle reports where a single wizard potentially would have gained more than 3 levels at once, such a cap, I believe, would slow down the rate at which two warbands grow apart in a campaign.
Interestingly, the campaign section mentions the use of an extra player to control the forces of Malcor. That Game Master concept came through in a way.

Everything optional, of course. But so far I like the fact that the changes are offered. Makes me like the game even more.


On top of that, I now have an electric figure saw, a lot of thin MDF board, and a couple of boxes filled with cheap aquarium plants. Planning on making a lot of jungle scatter terrain for my Warhammer 40K and Age of Sigmar games. But that works for Frostgrave: Ghost Archipelago as well, of course.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/03/01 18:05:04


Post by: Shrapnelsmile


 Lord Xcapobl wrote:
@Shrapnelsmile

I do believe adding a third player as a sort of game master, controlling any randomly appearing monsters, could improve the game. It adds even more to the RPG feeling people already described when they saw the campaign options for leveling up their wizards.
Currently, without a game master, the monsters respond according to a set of mechanical rules. This might mean a disproportionate number of them, based on measurement alone, runs off towards one specific warband, not necessarily the strongest, just the closest. A game master might intervene and decide to send a majority at the stronger warband, creating a form of balance in a campaign that a 'cold' set of rules would unlikely reach, without becoming more complicated. It may require some experience and insight, but it may pay off. Also, instead of having every random monster be totally random, a game master may prepare a scenario, and adjust the random tables beforehand. Only undead monsters from a crypt building, only gnolls and barbarians from the edge of the board as they, too, invade the city. Options, options, options.



Yes I will be a game master of sorts, including tying the sessions together and running the scenarios.

Thanks for the feedback.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/03/02 16:44:20


Post by: privateer4hire


We tried Ghost Archipelago after being blown away by FG and playing several campaign games. Our verdict was that it was a decent game that had some nice fixes/additions (the campaign model where you are collecting the various artifacts IIRC was cool).

In the end, though, it didn't seem worth the trouble of trying to play two very similar games with mechanics just different enough to make you mix up little things. We figured it's just as easy to play FG rules with a jungle terrain board. YMMV.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/03/04 10:37:09


Post by: Lord Xcapobl


I haven't really read the section on the Inheritors yet. Are their abilities too spell-like to not seem different enough from regular FrGr spellcasting?
Or are the Inheritors and Wardens actually why you say "different enough" and "mixing up little things"? I know the basic mechanics are the same overall.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/03/04 11:18:20


Post by: spect_spidey


 Lord Xcapobl wrote:
I haven't really read the section on the Inheritors yet. Are their abilities too spell-like to not seem different enough from regular FrGr spellcasting?
Or are the Inheritors and Wardens actually why you say "different enough" and "mixing up little things"? I know the basic mechanics are the same overall.


Heritors have abilities that are kind of like the Captain's Tricks of the Trade except using them too often causes health loss. Wardens are kind of like Druids. They are basically less powerful Wizards. Their spells don't seem to be as potent as regular Frostgrave Wizard spells.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/03/09 06:50:21


Post by: privateer4hire


 Lord Xcapobl wrote:
I haven't really read the section on the Inheritors yet. Are their abilities too spell-like to not seem different enough from regular FrGr spellcasting?
Or are the Inheritors and Wardens actually why you say "different enough" and "mixing up little things"? I know the basic mechanics are the same overall.


I honestly don't remember all the specifics but it just seemed like FG in a new setting with a couple of twists (heritors and their nature magic guys).
The story was very cool and I liked the setting but ultimately we would have been happier if it had just been a setting/campaign that used stock FG.
The heritor/nature mages thing was a nice change but just didn't grab us conceptually, I guess, as playing an FG warband.

If we had played Archipelago first, there's every chance we would have had the same reaction to FG.
"Why would we play wizards and apprentices? They're just different ways of playing heritors/nature wardens"

Both games are fine but, to us, it was similar to playing current 40k and AoS on different nights.
They're close enough to almost be the same game and the one rule you mess up is the one that's X in this game and Y in the other.
If you like 'em both and don't confuse the bits, both are a blast to have in your rotation.



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/03/09 07:54:00


Post by: Lord Xcapobl


@ privateer4hire
Except for the minor (or even major) changes you briefly mention (X changing in Y from one book to the next) we have already wondered why one would not be able to play a Wizard's Warband on some jungle island? Or a Heritor in a cold city or its environs? Heck, what about transposing the entire FG game system to a desert setting, searching the shifting sands for magic lamps and powerful genies?

Aside from stuff like the type of treasure found (scrolls and grimoires opposed to maps and the likes), and the differences between wizards and heritors, the basic system is similar. We would have to compare the two books in depth to see what moving parts should be adapted, but we also believe adaptation is possible. The simplest solution to the treasure type problem would be to have a Heritor Warband player roll his random treasures on the FG;GA tables, while a Wizard Warband rolls on the regular FG treasure tables. Lots of playtesting would have to show if there are considerable differences in power level between wizards and heritors when both types of warband leaders are mixed (and captains, wardens, soldiers, crewmen, etc).
Interesting problem with that last part, crewmen and their cost (or lack thereof). Another one of those moving parts different between 'setting' books. Some different parts don't really affect the game at all, unless they very specifically pop up. For example, FG;GA archers have a Quiver in their equipment list, FG archers don't. Neither game ceases functioning due to this difference... unless one finds a way to destroy equipment such as the quiver. Simple solution? assume all FG archers and crossbowmen to also have a quiver if you mix and match both FG and FG;GA. Nothing wrong there. As long as you consider the quiver to be part of the standard, or starting equipment, and have one open item slot for the FG archer despite adding the quiver, all should be fine.
Another interesting point comes from the XP tables. Different strokes for different blokes and all that.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/03/09 13:16:58


Post by: spect_spidey


Overall, I don't think that playing a heritor against a wizard is a good idea. The wizard's ability to cast spells every round makes it more powerful than the heritor. Heritor abilities can only be used at certain times and they only start with 5 different ones. I could however see swapping character types out as long as both players take the same kind of characters. For example, playing wizards with wardens or heritors with apprentices. Maybe even playing a heritor with a wizard in place of the warden. Or use a heritor to replace a captain. I definitely think the warband construction of GA helps to keep a warband from following behind in a campaign.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/03/10 03:01:28


Post by: privateer4hire


 Lord Xcapobl wrote:
@ privateer4hire
Except for the minor (or even major) changes you briefly mention (X changing in Y from one book to the next) we have already wondered why one would not be able to play a Wizard's Warband on some jungle island? Or a Heritor in a cold city or its environs? Heck, what about transposing the entire FG game system to a desert setting, searching the shifting sands for magic lamps and powerful genies?...


Same with us. Really you don't have to do much, if any, adaptation to move FG to another environment.
It could be the Lost Empire of the Ancients, lost in the thick, magic forests and jungles of the Verdwilde or the Al-Xandree desert that swallowed the kingdoms of legend...
My point is that both games are absolutely great but, for our group, not different enough to have two core books to keep straight.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/03/11 14:41:35


Post by: Easy E


I have some more detailed thought on Maze of Malcor here: https://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2019/03/review-maze-of-malcor-frostgrave.html



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/09/07 17:19:37


Post by: Shrapnelsmile


Thanks to everyone above who provided feedback long ago. I've started a 1-on-1 campaign with my bud, and it has been a blast. We're looking forward to the subtle changes in the new edition as well.
I could see it getting a bit stale, but a little creativity with the campaign aspect will mitigate that. Could never be my only minis game, but I'm really glad it is in my rotation.

One beef is Wizards hiding behind a hill or obstacle, casting that spell that allows a 180 degree line of site for spells, and causing me more than a bit of headache some matches. But I've got options, as you all know.

cheers.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/11/04 16:34:53


Post by: Easy E


For those following Frostgrave, there has been a lot of talk about Frostgrave 2.0 Despite that, I put together some thoughts on another supplement to Frostgrave- Ulterior Motives hereL

https://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2019/11/review-ulterior-motives-frostgrave.html



Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/11/04 21:26:50


Post by: Ian Sturrock


Nice review, Easy E.

I think I would use Ulterior Motives in any FG game these days, unless I was introducing the game to new players for the first time. They just add so much fun, and so many new tactical elements, that for me they take the quick, high quality gaming experience that is FG, to a significantly higher level still, without adding much complexity at all.


Frostgrave - What Do You Think About It @ 2019/11/08 04:22:37


Post by: KingmanHighborn


Honestly I like the opposed d20 system, cause I hate mathhammer this unit does x% this, and this unit does x% this, so this is useless and this is meta, etc. etc.

I also like how it's super simple, and allows me to use whatever race and minis I want. Especially Gnolls as gnolls are one of my favorite fantasy races. (though I wish their official models had tails, easy fix though so again no biggie)