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.

Warhammer: RISK Rules Proposal

My group and I are preparing to run a campagin, byt unsure of how we would like to increase the army size over the course of the game - I have proposed this idea of using RISK rules/concept draft. Curious what you all think about them: like it, hate it, or have any critique to add?

Base Troop/Army Gen
RISK Troop Generation by Number of Territories: 11 Territories = 3 Troops, 14 Territories = 4 Troops, 17 Territories = 5 Troops, +3 Territories = + 1 Troop…Points
WHFB Generation by Number of Tiles: 5 Tiles Controlled = 250 Points, 7 Tiles Controlled = 500 Points, 9 Tiles Controlled = 750 Points, +2 Tiles = +250 Points…

Bonus for Size
RISK Bonus Troops for Continental Control: Continental Borders Defined
WHFB Bonus Troops for Defined Kingdoms Occupied: Kingdoms must be pre-determined...Among the Tiles: 3 Tiles w/ 1 Town, 1 Mine, and 1 empty = 1 Kingdom???

Card Trade-ins for Bonus Troops
RISK Trade in Values: 1st Trade-in = 4 Troops, 2nd Trade-in = 6 Troops, 3rd Trade-in = 8 Troops, 4th Trade-in = 10 Troops, +2 Per…
WHFB Empire Points Trade-ins (3 EP per Trade?): Trade in Values: 1st Trade-in = 500 Points, 2nd Trade-in = 750 Points, 3rd Trade-in = 1,000 Points, 4th Trade-in = 1,250 Points, +250 Per…?

Combat
RISK Combat Attacker 3d6 vs Defender 2d6 with Continuous Assault or Withdrawal. #d6s based on available Troop Count in Attacking Territory (minimum 1 Troop must remain for Defense?)
WHFB Combat Attacker 3x, Defender 2x Increments of 1,000 Points with Continuous Assault by Attacker or Withdrawal. Continuous Assault made possible based upon Points contained on Attacking Tile (minimum 500 or 1,000 Points must be left behind for Defense?)

Consolidation
RISK Consolidation of any # of Troops from one Territory to another allowed after Turn.
WHFB Consolidation of any # of Points from one Tile to another allowed at the end of a Night Session.

I like the idea, I think it has a lot of potential.

Remember that in RISK ties are one by the defender thus giving them a slight advantage in rolling and hence why the attacker gets the benefit of rolling more attack dice.

Therefore, the defender would need to have a similar slight advantage if they were going to be limited to less points.

I have never liked the escalating card trade in version of RISK, it often sees the stronger player holding their cards back because they aren't threatened and the weaker players being forced to trade in for less armies. We usually use a fixed trade in value meaning everyone gets the same benefit.

Not sure I understand how you will make the continuous Assault work on the tabletop.

So.. for each battle roll 3d6 and the defender only rolls 2d6 and wins ties??

Unless this is a different version of Risk than the one from the 1970s

 porkuslime wrote:
So.. for each battle roll 3d6 and the defender only rolls 2d6 and wins ties??

Unless this is a different version of Risk than the one from the 1970s

I have no idea why they use this roll system, but thats how it works. Always seemed ridiculous to me.

It's so the attackers advantage is choosing the highest two out of three rolls. The defender's advantage being tie winners

This is a great idea! You could be onto something really neat here...

I have an idea inspired by yours. 40k with Risk, lol... cuz you know... I play 40k. Ha!

You could do away with the risk cards, maybe use the mission cards to define the winner. It would be like play a turn of Risk, then resolve each fight on the 40k table. The risk pieces could have different points values to set the limit for points in each battle.

just a quick example, 1 risk dude = 100pts, 1 risk cannon = 500pts.

Deserves a good pondering...

 Archer wrote:
I like the idea, I think it has a lot of potential.

Remember that in RISK ties are one by the defender thus giving them a slight advantage in rolling and hence why the attacker gets the benefit of rolling more attack dice.

Therefore, the defender would need to have a similar slight advantage if they were going to be limited to less points.

I have never liked the escalating card trade in version of RISK, it often sees the stronger player holding their cards back because they aren't threatened and the weaker players being forced to trade in for less armies. We usually use a fixed trade in value meaning everyone gets the same benefit.

Not sure I understand how you will make the continuous Assault work on the tabletop.

for the advantage maybe: Defender sets up terrain.

in risk you can attack til your whole army is gone, and it's possible you outnumber the defender by over 10:1, or your 10k army against his 1k army. so in keeping it risky the attacker can only attack with a maximum of what the defender has in the region +33%. then if the defender wins the attacker can keep trying til he wins or gives up.

In big battle you could be looking at a all weekend game trying to capture Siam. or even all day games if you attack 2 or 3 different territories. I think the logistics are going to be the main problem