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

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.