Da mob rules

Hey guys,
One of my players in our campaign group is thinking about creating an orc warband, and as I've never played the warband or against it, I have no idea of how the animosity works.

After reading the rules it seems that the control of the henchmen is limited to rolling 6... in rolls of 2-5 renders the unit useless and on a roll of 1, they beat each other up.

Do the warriors have to take this test every turn or pass a leadership test or be subject to animosity?

I just fail to see the power in this warband besides of the heroes if the odds of having completely useless henchmen on a roll of 1-5 that's a 16,5 % chance of having a useful unit subject to animosity every single turn...

if the dice gods are against you, chances is that the henchmen push your warband towards a rout test within the first turns...

Every turn, every non-hero rolls a d6. On a 1, you are in trouble.
Roll another d6. On a 1, attack a friendly model
2-5, model is useless
6, the model charges forward

I once saw an orc leader die (as in, die after the game), when a henchman shot an arrow into his back. The greenskin player was not pleased.

Then again, it can still be a strong warband. A different player ran a warband with a troll (the damned things can't die!), and he ran his warboss behind it. The troll shielded the warboss, and the warboss gave the troll Ld8. It was sick. And he maxed out on squigs. Those little bastiches can do some damage.

ok it confirmed my fears about the warband. How about the rolls of 6. does this mean that if no enemy warrior is within sight they may move again as they please?

I am confused as to what in the above explanation confirmed your fears?

Some folks seem to get caught up in reading the table and not the rules for WHEN to use the table. As mentioned above you only roll on the table if you roll a 1 for a henchman during recovery.

Also the example of the orc leader being shot is another example of not reading the rules as written but skimming and applying the worst outcome. (Athough I'd rather play with the folks who apply worst outcomes than those that only apply best outcomes.) The rules clearly state that henchmen will only attack other Henchmen or Hired Swords. If an orc hero is the closest target the henchman applies the rules for a roll of 2-5 instead of making any kind of attack.

I supose that Da Mob is an aquired taste, but I rather enjoy playing them, even if they occasionally attack each other.

Quote :

How about the rolls of 6. does this mean that if no enemy warrior is within sight they may move again as they please?

Yes, this question is clearly answered in the rule paragraph.

My god, you're right. Well, good thing it was the orc player who did that, and not me making him. Otherwise, I'd feel even worse about the loss of his leader.

Von Kurst wrote:

I am confused as to what in the above explanation confirmed your fears?

Some folks seem to get caught up in reading the table and not the rules for WHEN to use the table. As mentioned above you only roll on the table if you roll a 1 for a henchman during recovery

ahh I see I must have misinterpreted the "if you roll 1.." as being the result of the table - as an explanation if you will. But thanks for the clarification! This changes matters.

My fear was in regards to having to roll the table every turn, hence to my question on this forum, because I couldn't believe that you had to roll the table every turn, where the fact is you fail the TEST on a one. No offence to players of this warband intended.

Ok, just to be perfectly clear about the animosity outcome when rolling 6 on the table.

If I understand it correctly, the warrior must move directly towards the nearest enemy IF the enemy is within sight (two times move?). Otherwise the henchmen may make two moves freely without the restriction on moving towards the nearest model, unless the first mov place the henchmen within charge range.

Or have I misunderstood anything?

As I understand it 'within sight' simply means if the model has LOS (line of sight). Therefore, if any enemy is within LOS then he must move directly towards the closest enemy - even if the closest enemy is *not* within LOS.

I don't remember if this is a house-rule or not, but in my group hidden warriors do not count for LOS purposes in this case. As loathe as we are to use RAI, in this case we thought it clear that the intent of the Hidden rule is to take the dynamically posed model out of sight.

Aside from the 'within sight' definition, your understanding seems correct .

You seem to have rephrased text from the warband article. Peculiar choice of wording in your last post Zero, but Lord 0 has acknowledged you have the gist of it.

My impression has been that the original description supplied by Mark is crystal clear. It certainly doesn't cut any corners.

No offence to greenskin scum... err players... who know their sh!t (ie, snotling dung smells way worse than boar faeces) but each time I have encountered a grobi captain he has zero understanding of animosity; forgetting to test, misunderstanding points from the rules details, or worst of all cannot be bothered to read the generous body of text available so asks another player what happens instead!

We ran an introduction game last night for the new player in our Marienburg campaign using his goblins!



I was asked by both players - "So what about this animosity, it is bad right?"

Not really, as most of the time nothing happens or a henchman skips a turn. For their price this seems like a brilliant deal. Off set that against trolls which can never die and you've got a recipe for mischief.

We had a narrow victory for the Amazons defeating the Goblins in a bar brawl. Both warbands miraculously passed 3 rout checks to hang in there! Finally the gobbos fled while they had the upper hand! There were two Amazon warriors left facing two goblins and a river troll... Yeh I'm permitting this mushroom-lover to use the Forest Goblins warband list (with the gigantic spider being substituted for river trolls!)

It is a scurvy crew of Goblin Swamp Pirates pillaging down polluted deltas off the River Reik after all. Yaargh!!

He he he. Yep, no grasp of rules or literature (yet). But it was a fun game (otherwise it wouldn't be called a game).

Also, just look how colourful that troll vomit looks like...

Joao

werekin wrote:

You seem to have rephrased text from the warband article. Peculiar choice of wording in your last post Zero, but Lord 0 has acknowledged you have the gist of it.

My impression has been that the original description supplied by Mark is crystal clear. It certainly doesn't cut any corners.

Yes, I rephrased it so my own autistic mind could get a grasp of the rulings

As a campaign leader I feel it's my responsibility to be one step ahead in rulings and the like, so I always strive to have impenetrable arguments in regards to rules.

So I just wanted to be crystal clear of the rules

Nice intro for the newbloods, you must have had I blast! Magnificant job on the troll, I'd love to field such a model on my gameboards

Thanks I think I have the big idea of the warband and it's animosity rule. As werekin mentioned, the downside isn't so bad considering the awesome stats and quirks the orcs has to offer

Another point with the leader being taken OOA by the henchmen archer.
From my understanding of Animosity is that the model when they fail and roll a 1 or 6 must charge and that means no shooting but just scrapen.
Am I mistaken?

1 “I ’Erd Dat!”
The warrior decides that the nearest friendly Orc or Goblin Henchman has insulted his lineage or personalhygiene and must pay the price! If there is a friendly Orc or Goblin Henchman or Hired Sword within charge reach (if there are multiple targets within reach, choose the onenearest to the mad model), the offended warrior willimmediately charge and fight a round of hand-to-handcombat against the source of his ire. At the end of this roundof combat, the models will immediately move 1" apart and nolonger count as being in close combat (unless one of themfails another Animosity test and rolls this result again). If there are no friendly Orc or Goblin Henchmen or HiredSwords within charge reach, and the warrior is armed with amissile weapon, he immediately takes a shot at the nearestfriendly Orc or Goblin Henchman or Hired Sword. If none of the above applies, or if the nearest friendly model is an OrcHero, the warrior behaves as if a 2-5 had been rolled on thischart. In any case, the warrior in question may take no other action this turn, though he may defend himself if attacked inhand-to-hand combat.
2-5 “Wud Yoo Say?”
The warrior is fairly certain he heard anoffensive sound from the nearest friendly Orc or Goblin, buthe’s not quite sure. He spends the turn hurling insults at hismate. He may do nothing else this turn, though he may defend himself if attacked in hand-to-hand combat.
6. “I’ll Show Yer!”
The warrior imagines that his mates arelaughing about him behind his back and calling him silly names. To show them up he decides that he’ll be the first oneto the scrap! This model must move as quickly as possibletowards the nearest enemy model, charging into combat if possible. If there are no enemy models within sight, the Orc or Goblin warrior may make a normal move immediately. Thismove is in addition to his regular move in the Movementphase, so he may therefore move twice in a single turn if you wish. If the extra move takes the Orc or Goblin warrior withincharge reach of an enemy model, the warrior must chargeinto close combat during his regular movement.

Just because I happen to have the pdf and the actual wording might be helpful.

The friendly attack is a charge if there's someone in charge range, if not and the model has a bow then they shoot. Technically, the henchman would never attack a hero, however it seems like the Orc player chose to do so.

Also, the other important thing to keep in mind is that you don't roll the initial roll for any henchmen that are already in hand to hand combat before the recovery phase.

Ah thx. I forgot about the bow part of it. That would explain why in the above situation some one shot there hero. I don't play O&G enough to be on top of there rules.

Quote :

For their price this seems like a brilliant deal.

True
My two questions:
When 6 is rolled:

Quote :

model must move as quickly as possible towards the nearest enemy model

1.I understand that he moves in a straight line, not zigzaging to take cover or going around buildings because it's "safer" or more convinient? Wording on some rules is awfully imprecise and this one is such a rule. What if orc is standing on the balcony and rolls 6? Does he have to jump (quickest way) or go down the stairs, out of the building and then "move towards the nearest enemy model"? I say he has to.
2. We had an argument about animosity "1" result when henchman attacks other henchmen. What's sure is when they fight a round of hth so they attack each other - not one sided attacking. Point of argument was weapon's selection. Orc player argues that he can choose his orc to use ONLY dagger, even if he carries great weapon and a club. Is he right?
I don't like when orc players who have very good stated and cheap warriors are trying to "water down" animosity... what say you folks?

1: He's jumping down and then going to run... it's the fastest way. Though if he is lucky enough to have a ramp/ladder/stairs in said straight line then good for him other wise too bad. This also goes for the going up IMHO so he has to stop at the base of a building.

2: My take is he is pissed off and going to use the best combo to do the damage he needs to thus no dagger/fist combo (or even double fist) unless that's all he has. Great weapon or 2 chapas is the way to go even if your using house rules that limit the effects of dual wealding and thus I guess you could say it works in his advantage.

Quote :

My take is he is pissed off and going to use the best combo to do the damage he needs to thus no dagger/fist combo (or even double fist) unless that's all he has. Great weapon or 2 chapas is the way to go even if your using house rules that limit the effects of dual wealding and thus I guess you could say it works in his advantage.

Nah, no house rules for dual wielding. That's also my point of view but my fellow player insists (we have campaign this winter), that he can choose dagger because he has right to do so. For me it's unfair cause it makes animosity (made to balance ridiculously cheap orcs) less dangerous for orc player who can take advantage of stupid inprecise wording.

counter justification: He did not chose to have said orc (or gobo) charge his comrad and thus has lost control of said orc.
All rules for Annimosity are are out of the players choice as well. He does not chose "who" he charges but rather the closest friend or foe (based on roll) and also does not chose what reaction (or even if they suffer Annimosity) to Annimosity they have.
So logicly also with the orcs temper flairing he would not say "hold on there a moment he's my friend I can't use my big axe on him even though he called my mom something nasty, I got to be nice to him and just put it back on my belt and charge him in a blind rage with this dagger."

In the end it's your groups choice as to how to play the rules but before the campaign starts you guys need to be clear on how it goes... and if there are disagreements (as there is) get every one together to talk it over or via e-mail/chat.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks these rules needs some kind of explanation. I agree with your interpretation about the reckless direct route if elevated. In regards of the second question I would rule that the orc or gobbo use their best and most deadly weapon they have. I dont believe that they will show any remorse for their insulters whether it's a fellow warband member or foe...

I've never realised that Animosity rules could cause so much er, Animosity! LoL

Nothing indicates how the execute the attack. On one had this suggests that the player can choose how to assault his fellow warriors. ie, dagger to the throat, fist to the face, double-handed mace to the cranium

On the other hand there are no such tactical decisions to weigh up on the Warhammer battlefield in a miltary engagement. Could be best and quickest to resolve the argument based on delivering the most deadly blow possible to the rival warrior!

If you want to avoid confrontation altogether, hire a Black Orc Overseer and stick the Hired Sword in the centre of the trouble. So long as he stays within 6" of warriors subject to infighting then no rolls will need to be made!

werekin wrote:

I've never realised that Animosity rules could cause so much er, Animosity! LoL

Nothing indicates how the execute the attack. On one had this suggests that the player can choose how to assault his fellow warriors. ie, dagger to the throat, fist to the face, double-handed mace to the cranium

On the other hand there are no such tactical decisions to weigh up on the Warhammer battlefield in a miltary engagement. Could be best and quickest to resolve the argument based on delivering the most deadly blow possible to the rival warrior!

Agreed!

Another question related to tha mob rulez..

The shaman spell " Led’z go " :

rules article wrote:

Any Orc or Goblin within 4" of the Shaman will automatically strike first in hand-to-hand combat regardless of other circumstances. The spell only lasts until the caster is knocked down, stunned or taken out of action.

Is it possible to negate the 2-handed weapon penalty of always hitting last in cc?

yes

'regardless of other circumstances' applies to everything.


the only issue would be if an Orc warband is against another Orc warband, both with the spell affecting models in CC. roll off would fix that, i say.