Ogre Bodyguard Rating

Hey All,

Does an ogre bodyguard add +25 to a warband rating plus experience or +45 plus experience since it is a large target?

We have a battle this round between where the warband with the Ogre Bodyguard has the higher warband rating and the difference is currently 50 exactly which grants no underdog bonus but the stronger warband has not included +20 for the Ogre Bodyguard being a large target.

I think that it adds +20 for being a large target in addition to adding +25 but others in my gaming group disagree. This has now become a crucial issue that needs to be decided and as we usually do we are falling back to this forum.

Thanks!

That should be clear.

Ogre Bodyguard adds +25 for itself and his abilities and + 20 for being a large creature.

In total he adds + 45 to the Rating of the gang.

At least this is how we play it in our groop.

Regards
Claus

Where is the rule about +20 for being a large target? I think I missed that one! If it is in the rules review, then they probably came up with it for consistency's sake - since trolls, rat ogres, minotaurs etc. are in the same league with ogres, but in the original rules had no associated cost bump.

Claus, compare the beastman minotaur to the ogre bodyguard. The former has better WS (4 to 3), better BS (3 to 2, but not generally relevant), better initiative (4 to 3), and an additional attack (3 to 2)... so why on earth should the ogre increase a warband's rating by more than twice the amount of the superior minotaur?

@mweaver

The minotaur is a henchmen choice for the Beastmen and counts towards the maxium limit of the Gang. He can´t get skills and he cost a lot more then the Ogre Bodyguard. You can only take 1 per Gang. (same valid for the O&G Troll and Skaven Rat Ogre)

The Ogre Bodyguard does not count towards the limit, he is a hired sword, hes is cheaper (not in the long turn) and can get additional skills !! You can hire 2 or 3 of them for your Gang if you have enough Gold available.


Maybe I´m (our playing group) is wrong by doing so and we are intepreting the rules text not the right way.

In RB on page 106 it is stated.....

An Ogre Bodyguard increases the warband’s
rating by +25 points, plus 1 point for each
Experience point he has

In RB on page 77 is stated following.....

Each warband has a warband rating– the
higher the rating the better the warband. The
warband rating is simply the number of warriors in it
multiplied by 5, plus their accumulated experience.

Large creatures such as Rat Ogres are worth 20 points
plus the number of Experience points they have accumulated....


This are the reasons why we decided to count it as 45 Exp for gang rating terms.

It does not mean we are on the right way how we handle it but it´s how we do it.

Regards
Claus

Thanks, Claus - if I ever read the rule about +20 for large creatures, I long ago forgot it (although it certainly makes sense).

You can only have one of each type of hired sword - the rule is given in the general intro to hired swords in the rulebook (sorry - don't have access to the rulebook at the moment for an exact page reference). So, only one ogre merc.

The ogre merc and the minotaur warband member advance in the same way (as henchmen): the receive bumps at the same time and as frequently. Yes, the ogre has access to skills - but every skill he rolls displaces a stat bump the minotaur receives. I agree with you that the possibility of skills is a plus forthe ogre merc. On the other hand you have a lot more flexibility kitting out the minotaur - giving him light armor and a shield, for example - whereas with the ogre merc you have almost no choice of equipment (two one-handed weapons or one great weapon - those are the only choices).

I think it only takes about six games before you have paid as much for your ogre merc as you paid for the minotaur. (Again, sorry, don't have the rules handy). So in a campaign, barring fatalities, ultimately the minotaur will probably cost you less.

The rules are ambiguous, it seems, so I don't think it is a question of this is the right way, and you are wrong! My interpretation is that the +20 for large critters rule is intended for warband members (the rule you quote supports this idea), and that hired swords are not warband members, per se (they don't affect the amount you receive for selling shards, and - more tellingly - they don't count against the maximum number of warriors in the band).

So, to summarize: the ogre is in no way twice as good as the minotaur, so for game balance purposes should not increase a warband's rating by twice the amount a minotaur does; and the +20 for large warriors rule does not apply to ogre mercs anyway since they are not members of the warband.

P.S. Not meaning to ignore trolls and rat ogres - just don't have much experience with them.

I have to agree with mweaver on this one... We (my gaming group) have allways played him as 25 rating only.

But claus point is also good - the ogre gives rating like a member (5) and a big guy (20) and none for his abilitys. The pit fighter f. ex. gives 5 for being a member and 17 for his abilitys. My point is I think the ogres 25 rating is to low, but then again 45 is to much. Ofc this is just my take on it. Again I think the official rule is 25 rating for a ogre.

-Skavenslayer

OK, it's only my opinion but...
The 5 or 20 exp. for each warband member does not include hired swords.
So, if you have access to an ogre in your roster as a warband member then he counts for the 20 exp. just for being a member.
Hired swords are not true members of your warband, they are just on loan. You just count their experience, not 5 or 20 more.

On that same note, although hired swords count towards your warband size when it comes to rout tests, the hired swords don't count towards your warband size when cashing in your wierdstone. Your upkeep fee to them takes care of that.

The +20 rule was added later. It was meant for Rat Ogres, NOT the Ogre.

Rat Ogre adds +20 and +5 = +25
Ogre Bodyguard adds +25 flat.

Edit: Coreheim takes care of this.

Thanks guys. I guess I stand corrected and we will only use the base rating for hired swords plus experience unless Da Bank steps in to say otherwise. This means that Ogre Bodyguard, Freelance Knight, Roadwarden, Highwayman and any other large HS all do not give the additional +20 for being a large targets.

@shotguncoffee... thanks for your comments as much as anyone else but I don't care about Coreheim as that is a different game.

To shotguncoffee, sorry but...

Quote :

The +20 rule was added later. It was meant for Rat Ogres, NOT the Ogre.

No, it was not added later.
It was in the first printing and not just for Rat Ogres
(although that was all that fell under the large creature rules at the time).

"Large creatues such as Rat Ogres are worth 20 points plus the number of Experience points they have accumulated"

An example would be the Pit Fighter warband's Ogre.

Yup, it was there all along, I had just long ago forgotten it (never used it). I think (again the wording is vague) that the rat ogre is worth 20, not 25. That is, he is worth 20, not the 5 everyone else is worth. But if most people are going with 25, that's what I will do.

We play that a large henchman adds +25.

I did like the comparison that shotguncoffee used for the Rat Ogre and Ogre Bodyguard. I thought that it showed things nicely how the ratings were calculated and used it in my email to my gaming group.

While I'm not sure it was the author's intent, from reading that section, I do agree that 20 + 5 for large models is probably the safer interpretation of the rules as written.

Claus wrote:

In RB on page 106 it is stated.....

An Ogre Bodyguard increases the warband’s
rating by +25 points, plus 1 point for each
Experience point he has

In RB on page 77 is stated following.....

Each warband has a warband rating– the
higher the rating the better the warband. The
warband rating is simply the number of warriors in it
multiplied by 5, plus their accumulated experience.

Large creatures such as Rat Ogres are worth 20 points
plus the number of Experience points they have accumulated....

Interesting.  I always read this as "The rating is five points for each normal-sized member, plus 20 points for each large member.  Then add all their experience points to the rating.For instance, assuming an 11 member skaven warband with one rat ogre, the total rating would be (10x5 + normal member experience) + (20 + rat ogre experience).And hired swords are generally 'leveled up' before they're hired, hence the extra value.  That is, a warlock starts with two spells, a freelancer starts with higher stats and skills, a pitfighter starts with extra skills, and so on.  Presumably, then, the ogre just starts off better than a "base" ogre.
It's always interesting to see this kind of discussion... it would never have occurred to me to question my interpretation otherwise. 

carik has it right

I think that is how most people seem to be playing it, and I'll go that way too.

I have allways read it as member + large target - making the rat ogre 25 rating, maby its wrong. I think this has been disscused severel times before on the old SG forum.

My point about the ogre giving to little rating for his
is abilitys is still valid. Then its just 20 for large target 5 for his abilitys, and the pit fighter still gives 17 for his. Dont really seem even, 12 rating (17 minus 5) equels better equipment and minus 2 movement and 2 wound. But the ogre is still twice the upkeep.

-Skavenslayer

Some of the hired swords are just better deals than others. I like the ogre bodyguard, but in a campaign last year I hired one early on, for a change (running Marienburgers), and overall I noticed my warband was steadily falling behind the others in terms of upgrading kit. The upkeep cost every game adds up. But they are handy.

On the other hand, there is no question the Tilean marksman is well worth his upkeep, and more. That guy's really dangerous.

I've played it as 5 pts for "warrior" plus 20 points for "large creature" I didn't know until tonight that that wasn't the way everyone in the local group was playing it. (Got ear full from Playtable earlier.) Oh well. I'll stick with +25 and take my lumps.

That (25) does seem to be what the majority of people here have been doing - and there is nothing specific that clearly supports my supposition that the intent may have been 20 for large creatures instead of 5. In the solo campaign I am running (six opposed warbands) after reading this thread the minotaur is adding 25 + experience to the rating.

Regarting the ogre, his biggest minus is the upkeep, but a guy in my group got that covered - he plays middenhiemers, got lots of rabbit foots, some times the elf (for the +1/-1) and almost every game goes for the ´666´ on the exploratine - free ogre every turn, but no upgrades.

-Skavenslayer

The following might be of interest:

Quote :

[size=9][size=9]
Q: Rat Ogres and other large creatures are worth 20 points on a warband's rating.
To calculate this same rating, the formula is 5x the number of models in the
warband. Does this mean large creatures are, in effect, worth more on the rating?
A: No, they only count as 20 (plus XP if any). [Games Workshop Official Mordheim's
FAQ]
[/size][/size]

It's from a little collection of FAQ's posted by DaBank over at the SG forum. (http://www.sg.tacticalwargames.net/forum/index.php?topic=1039.0)

A large creature adds 20+xp to the rating, a normal warrior 5+xp.

IMO, hired swords do not count as normal warriors, and so do not add 5+xp, but rather the initial rating bonus plus any accumulated xp.

Tilean marksman is well worth his cost. I have watched him take-out a warband all by himself.

It was my understanding that hire swords were calculated seperate from the rest of your warband, that they would add their base amount +exp, and in that base amount that would include their +5 if they are normal sized, or +20 if they are large. I think that there was also a misprint with the Rat Ogre, and he should have been higher.

Ah, so my original suspicion that they meant for large critters to count as 20 instead of 5 (as opposed to in addition to 5) is correct, according to the FAQ. It would have been soooo easy to make that clear from the start! To be fair, though, this sort of ambiguity is more the fault of the editors, not the authors - when you know what you meant, you are far less likely to recognize ambiguities in your phrasing - that's the sort of thing editors are supposed to catch.

Skavenslayer, we allow a warband that rolls a 666 to keep an existing hired sword w/o paying the upkeep that game. I think that would have to count as a houserule though, more than an interpretation of the rules as written.

In my experience, the Tilean marksman is not only the best HS for his cost, he is simply the best (there are hired swords I have never seen played, though).

mweaver: I think you missunderstood, the player fires the ogre and hires a new one with 666, thats what I meant with no upgrades/levels.
So its not a houserule, just a "loophole"

-Skaenslayer