Treasure Hunt

A few ambiguities in the basic "Treasure Hunt" scenario. If you find the chest in the last building automatically, does the hero still gain the +2 experience? Likewise, do you have to spend a turn searching the last building or does the treasure token automatically pop up there?

And while I'm on the subject, how do you handle routing and treasure chests? Does the warband carrying the treasure still get it if the opponent routes before they can reach the board edge?

The way we play it, the treasure has to be searched for in the last building, but is found automatically of course, if a search is declared. Hero gains +2.
And warbands keeps the treasure they possess if the opponents rout. Otherwise, it might be too tempting for said opponents to rout voluntarily, just to "pee on your opponent's leg", as we say over here.

To be honest, I have never considered either of those points ambiguous.

I am not sure where you are seeing the ambiguity in the first point. It says you get the xp if you a) are a hero and b) if you find the treasure. The hero will have to roll to find the treasure if it is not the last building left and you find it automatically if it *is* the last building left. I can't find anything that even implies you don't get the xp so long as you are a hero that finds the treasure. I could be wrong though - it would hardly be the first time I have missed rules. The only scenarios I can think of where you would get the treasure, but not the xp is a) a henchman finds the treasure or b) your warband gains the treasure by your opponent routing rather then exploring a building.

Mordheim Rulebook, Scenario 7: Treasure Hunt wrote:

After finding the treasure chest, the warrior must then take it to safety via his own table edge.

Mordheim Rulebook, Scenario 7: Treasure Hunt wrote:

ending the game

When one warband gets the treasure to safety, or a warband fails a Rout test, the game ends. The victorious warband then gains the treasure chest.

It would be nice if *all* their rules were as clear-cut . Granted, the definition of 'to safety' is a little ambiguous, but given the description of the rest of the scenario we have interpreted 'safety' to mean 'off the table edge' and I don't think we are alone there.

I agree with your assessment in every particular. However, my opponent did not. His argument was that you don't get XP for "finding" the treasure if it's in the building automatically. His thought was that rolling boxcars is a big deal, but auto-finding is not. Of course, it was the player's first game of Mordheim, only game 1 of the campaign, his Troll remained Stupid the entire time, and his Boss was killed, prompting a retired warband. I didn't feel like arguing the point with him.

Fair enough . Given the circumstances, I probably would have let it slide also.

Sorry to take this thread a little off topic, but I think your questions were answered.

First off, I believe it's the "Hidden Treasure" scenario being discussed.

When my group plays this scenario, the chances of getting the chest in any of the buildings before the last are so slim, that we don't even try to get it via rolling. We usually leave the building closest to our deployment unsearched and leave it to be searched last, providing an easy treasure/victory. This makes for a not so fun game, however.

To remedy this, we've thought of finding the treasure on a lower roll, likely a 11+ (1 in 12) rather than 12 (1 in 36! who has ~36 buildings outside deployment zones?!?!). With the increased odds, chances are the treasure will be found before the last building, which actually gives an incentive to search buildings quickly.

Anyone else had troubles with the way this scenario is written and come up with similar or other fixes?

(Edit: embarrassingly messed up my dice probabilities)

True, Treasure Hunt is a Multi-player scenario from Blood On the Streets article, I get the 2 confused all the time.

As for better ways to play the scenario there are several. We discussed them recently but I'm not sure if it was in an appropriately titled thread or off topic. A summation--StyrofoamKing has a nice variant in the Sartosa supplement titled X Marks the Spot. I've switched all Hidden Treasure scenarios in my various location tables to this. Instead of rolling you are looking for a randomly determined counter that must be actually located by moving unto the various counters placed in searchable locations.

mweaver has an interesting variant based on the game Clue which sounds fun as well.

I often had issue with this scenario just because it seems silly to step just inside the first floor door of a two, three, or even four story building and 'search' it instantly. I was going to implement a house rule where you searched each floor instead. However, I realized that would slow the scenario down, and we already had all but one treasure hunt scenario end with routs anyway. The only time we had a treasure hunt scenario end with chest leaving the map was when my Skaven actually rollled a '12' in their very first building. The other side decided not to try to dash into my side of the map (where my Skaven would have been waiting on rooftops with slings at the ready ) and I simply walked it off the map with no opposition at all.

Most of the time each side knows if you let the opposing warband search all but one building near thier start zone, you will lose. So everyone rushes to get the other teams closer buildings searched. This, of course, means the warbands have to cross each other, and one or both warbands are usually testing for rout before you even get the treasure on the map.

I guess what I'm saying is to me this scenario, while trying to do something different, really just puts a time stamp on your 'Skirmish.' Though it does solve the problem of both warbands wanting to sit back and let the other come to them. If you do that in Treasure Hunt, you will lose. If you play FPS games, think of it as a 'no camping' clause. Or I guess 'no turtling' clause for RTS games.

Eagle5 wrote:

Most of the time each side knows if you let the opposing warband search all but one building near thier start zone, you will lose. So everyone rushes to get the other teams closer buildings searched. This, of course, means the warbands have to cross each other, and one or both warbands are usually testing for rout before you even get the treasure on the map.

This is how things almost *always* go and we simply find it *enormous* fun . Generally there will be *at least* one warband taking rout tests by the end and the treasure chest will often change hands at least once.

The times we played "Hidden Treasure" wasn't fun at all. First time, 12 was rolled in the very first building the way Eagle5 described - no fun for anyone but the lucky guy. The other times, a building was left unsearched, the way Identity described. The chances for the treasure to turn up there are just too big. I thought of ruling an 11+ to find (which is 1/12 btw, 10+ is 1/6), but the procedure Von Kurst describes sounds promising as well. Might try that next time, even if it is still no solution for being lucky and the other warbands not standing a chance sometimes.