Orc Warband Development

Hey all, more planning-stage chatter from me. I was thinking of also putting together a Savage orc warband after getting a look at that plastic kit. I wrote up a hilarious and deadly 17 model starting warband with 5 goblins with short bows, 5 squigs, 3 boyz with halberds (no dual wielding for henchmen in this campaign), and all four heroes with clubs.

Originally I thought phasing out the weedy ones and going for an eventual 19 orcs and a troll would be good, just cramming T4 down people's throat. After a few proxy games, having the little runts that count as half for route tests was really good, though...

So where's the happy medium? At max size with a hired sword, you're looking at 12(!) goblins or 6 orcs before routing. Sticking with 10 seems like it might be sacrificing too much hitty power. Then again losing 10 models and telling your opponent you don't need to take a route test would be pure gold. My gut says the 6-8 range for goblins might be good, including an archer screen, and a fanatic or two eventually. Maybe a couple squigs left for giggles. Anybody have ideas or experience?

You seem so tickled by the possibility I am sort of loathe to comment lest I bring you down...  But I hardly ever let that stop me.  

--I am assuming that you are using the standard Da Mob list for a warband rather than a Savage Orc list.

--A couple of things.  One you only have four heroes.  Starting a warband with heavy numbers of goblins and squigs means you are pretty likely to continue to have four heroes unless you are pretty lucky.  Starting out with high numbers means you start with a low income unless you get some nice perks from scenarios and WIN.  And you can not lose any heroes.

Two.  You only have four heroes.  Starting out with large numbers of animosity prone henchmen means your enemy doesn't have to kill them, they will kill each other.  Although you may be particularly lucky.

Three. You only have four heroes.  Starting out with large numbers of henchmen who can not become heroes is a waste of time and money.  It might be fun though and if you are a lucky guy, those three orcs might get you a couple of heroes right away.

A few years ago a new player joined our group.  He had brought a Mob list using a bunch of goblins and squigs, 4 heroes and maybe the troll, maybe a few orcs.  Anyway my pirates saw this as a gift.  My heroes shot squigs.  They got experience.  My heroes got the goblins that didn't kill each other.  My heroes got experience.  The orcs had hung back for some reason.  When his goblins and squigs were gone he said, "I don't even have to take a rout test!"

I have to say I didn't understand why he was happy about that.  He had lost a good half of his warband by then and I was down maybe a henchman or two.  He wasn't lucky.  One of his heroes took a crossbow bolt in a sensitive spot and went down and the orcs lost.  He had to roll A LOT of injuries and lost a few models. He didn't make much money, so he couldn't replace his losses... 

I had never tried that kind of list and his experience put me off of making the attempt.  I go with mostly orcs and a troll.  You seem to have had a different experience in your test games, so maybe it will work out for you.  Good luck!

Da Mob Rulez warband list like its 5th edition orc and goblin army it was based from can be devastating, to either you or your opponent. It's a managed disaster that is great fun.

For me its slow to start and as Von Kurst says you must protect those heroes to generate the income in order to grow. But have fun with it. Slamming a ball and chain fanatic into an enemy is great fun. I have yet to use squigs but have a few to paint now and look forward to seeing them in action.

The small guys are great for screening but I have never offered them up just as targets for the opponents heroes to get experience from. Screening, hiding, line of sight to get the orcs stuck in. Scenario and terrain placement are HUGE when dealing with a shooty opponent. Our group would defer to preset terrain layouts at times for convenience but this can remove an important mechanic of the game.

Well I'll admit I was concentrated more on winning at first, as opposed to trying to fill out the heroes. Still, I think you're overselling the henchmen killing eachother. Killing somebody with one attack is hard enough, but they have to roll snake eyes first to get that animosity result.

Still, I might explore taking out all 5 squigs and 2 goblins for another 3 boyz, as only being able to start with 4 heroes is kinda rough.

Over the course of a campaign I saw 1 gobbo go OOA from animosity. Extra charges or just a hiccup in movement was the norm IF you failed the test.

Trolls are expensive at first but they are very worth it. Vomit attacks are nasty, and the troll will always be around provided you feed him. Keep them near the boss for stupidity tests.

Spoonie wrote:

Still, I think you're overselling the henchmen killing each other. Killing somebody with one attack is hard enough, but they have to roll snake eyes first to get that animosity result.

Probably. I keep forgetting your rules. My ladz seem to hate each other, I regularly lose at least one model a fight to animosity with dual wielding.

Well yeah the one attack helps. I also only had one boy freak out in 3 or 4 games. Had another that would have, but I had him on the other side of a wall so he just stood there and brooded.

Also, yeah some games the boyz just can't wait till the other side of the table.

Any opinion on 'final' roster? Sounds like you'd be in favor of my initial impression of taking almost all boyz.

For myself I always start with a troll, which slows down the LGT hunt a bit.

I try to buy a new boy almost every game if I can.

Otherwise I'd recommend starting with only orcs. I generally don't get goblins and squigs until later in the campaign to use as entertainment.

Aah. I'll have to try out a game or two with a Troll in a starting band. I think I might like the idea of a ton of greenskins too much, but still, worth checking out.

I have to agree with Von Kurst here. You'll need the boyz early on to get that Lad's, which in the long run will win you more games and have your Heroes advance even faster. The Troll is great to begin with, especially since it's a fearful henchman that is completely expendable! No matter how much it dies, it'll rise up again. The 15gc pr. game is well worth it!

The Goblins & Squigs are for lolz later on. You can go with 1 Goblin to start with though, since that will count as a member for rout tests (depending on what number you're on).
Example: 4 Heroes, 1 Goblin, 3 Orcs & 1 Troll will have you rout on 1 dead Goblin, 1 dead Orc and 1 dead Troll (as opposed to having 4 Heroes, 4 Orcs & 1 Troll, which would make you rout on 2 dead Orcs and a dead Troll. Here you can 'throw' a Goblin out, if you wish to rout instead of an Orc).

P.S. if the Animosity is a problem - your henchmen taking each other OOA - remember that "if the nearest friendly model is an Orc Hero, the warrior behaves as if a 2-5 had been rolled on this chart".

Good call on the animosity, it's worded kind of akwardly, but you're right, they ignore that entire big list of stuff if the closest model to them is a hero.

For the starting band, the try I had last night went with 6 boyz, 2 goblins, 1 squig, and the heroes of course. Could do 2 of the boyz with bows just for variety, but same cost either way.

As for the troll start, you're at 400 with just the naked heroes and troll. That's 2 boyz and some equipment, maybe 3 naked boyz if I wanted to be extra spartan. Or four, I suppose, but then nobody would have anything but their dagger, which might be a bit much. I'll have to play at least a game and see how obnoxious he is to deal with, but it seems like the lack of boyz and money problems would be even worse.

Spoonie wrote:

Good call on the animosity, it's worded kind of akwardly, but you're right, they ignore that entire big list of stuff if the closest model to them is a hero.

Yeah, we missed that the first couple of games until an Orc Boy was killed by another Orc Boy detecting him from the other side of a Troll, then we took a look at it again and found, that it actually wouldn't have happened, since a Hero was closer to both. Quite the difference!

Spoonie wrote:

For the starting band, the try I had last night went with 6 boyz, 2 goblins, 1 squig, and the heroes of course. Could do 2 of the boyz with bows just for variety, but same cost either way.

What spell did you get? Led'z Go! makes for an entirely different setup.

Spoonie wrote:

As for the troll start, you're at 400 with just the naked heroes and troll. That's 2 boyz and some equipment, maybe 3 naked boyz if I wanted to be extra spartan. Or four, I suppose, but then nobody would have anything but their dagger, which might be a bit much. I'll have to play at least a game and see how obnoxious he is to deal with, but it seems like the lack of boyz and money problems would be even worse.

Aye, you start out weak, but then again, not really. The Troll can really put in a punch, and it's completely expendable, which makes it even more dangerous. You can either take down the easy-to-kill Dagger wielding Orcs, or the Troll who's taking one of your men OOA each round for sure. Having a number of 9 might make the difference.

Then again, you might also save up for the Troll later on, as your Heroes get better and your Leader's Leadership increases. Might even get a War Horn for that important Stupidity test.

The Troll is great for intimidation and very dangerous in a starting warband (not that it gets less dangerous, it just gets easier to kill), but a lot of Boyz might also be the way to go, especially if you get Led'z Go!

Aipha wrote:

P.S. if the Animosity is a problem - your henchmen taking each other OOA - remember that "if the nearest friendly model is an Orc Hero, the warrior behaves as if a 2-5 had been rolled on this chart".

That works out at the start if you have low numbers, but scenarios, terrain and those pesky 2-5 results will send that plan awry.

With the troll I try to go with 8 on the theory that if the troll hasn't won me the game by the time he falls, then its time to leave.

Von Kurst wrote:

That works out at the start if you have low numbers, but scenarios, terrain and those pesky 2-5 results will send that plan awry.

Usually my Shaman stays a bit behind, so he has the job of taking care of the kids, but you're right, it is hard to maintain the line having low numbers definitely helps!

Von Kurst wrote:

With the troll I try to go with 8 on the theory that if the troll hasn't won me the game by the time he falls, then its time to leave.

That's a valid point. I find 8 in the beginning better as well, since it's better to have your Heroes survive and leave early, than stay a round more and have the chance of losing one of them - especially if it's your boss. The Troll is great for taking out enemy leaders as well if you feel like winning the campaign and making your best friends your greatest enemies!  

Btw., I'd like to add a bit to Von Kurst's explaination as to why one should pick Boyz instead of Gobbos/Squigs in the beginning of a campaign:

1. You'll have to lose twice as many Goblins as Orcs before you rout. With equipment - let's say 10gc pr. model, that's 25gc for a Gobbo and 35gc for an Orc. Each time you could have lost an Orc, you now have to lose 2 Goblins - that's 50gc instead of 35gc you have the potential of losing (multiplied by your rout number!), when already losing a game.

2. Goblins have a short life span.
First of all: They have T3. Orcs have T4. They have a max of 6+ Armour Save. Orcs have a max of 5+ Armour Save. They have access to a Helmet, but a Helmet is better on a warrior with higher Toughness and higher Armour Save aka Orcs.
Second: If you roll a 10-12 as an increase, he's eaten. Gone, byebye all equipment. Same roll on an Orc will grant you a new Hero! Quite some difference. Goblin's chance to reach 14 exp is slim.

On Squigs:

1. You need Goblins to field them, and as we just noted, Goblins are bad to begin with.

Again, I'm not saying you shouldn't bring any Goblins - hell, it's much more fun with them and the Squigs, so if you're not playing to win, by all means, go with them! However, if you want to win, go with the Boyz.

I'm a big fan of giving as many Orcs as I can a crossbow as soon as I can afford them (but I don't start the warband with any ranged weapons generally).

I do like Lord 0's advice, from this old thread:

https://boringmordheimforum.forumieren.com/t4112-shooty-orcs-no-or-go#top

Lord 0 wrote:

This is how I run my orc warband:

I have the leader as a leader/support shooter so he has Da Cunning Plan, Nimble, Trick Shot, etc. He has a Holy Relic of Mork'n'Gork, crossbow, rope and hook, etc.

The two TLGT heroes I kit out as snipers so they get the Speed, Shooting, and Orc skills. One I make a blackpowder specialist so he gets Hunter, Nimble, Trickshot, etc and is armed with a sniper rifle when I get one, but a crossbow until he does. He will get a handgun if I come across one. The other is a bow specialist so he gets Quickshot, Eagle Eye, Trick Shot, etc. He has a longbow with hunting arrows and will upgrade to an elven bow. An elven bow with hunting arrows is more likely to take out a dwarf out of action than a crossbow. These two hang out in the back because as TLGT heroes they are the hardest to replace.

My two Big'Uns I make close-support shooters. One specialises in pistols so gets pistoleer, trick shot, eagle eye, etc, but also things like strike to injure, pit fighter, etc. He starts out with crossbow pistols and will eventually upgrade to Warplock pistols if there are Skaven in the campaign or just Dueling Pistols if not. The other is a knife fighter, but has a crossbow pistol for when charged.

The shaman is mostly close combat with Strongman, Mighty Blow, etc.

WarbossKurgan wrote:

I'm a big fan of giving as many Orcs as I can a crossbow as soon as I can afford them (but I don't start the warband with any ranged weapons generally).

I agree, Crossbows are the way to go with Orcs. I start with the Boss and sometimes the Big 'Uns, but usually just the Boss due to his BS4 and him staying out of dying distance. I usually don't go with a Troll then, since the Boss will have to babysit it.

Lord 0 wrote:

An elven bow with hunting arrows is more likely to take out a dwarf out of action than a crossbow.

I had to investigate the claim made by Lord 0 and found the following: It is correct, as I assumed, that the Elf Bow is better to take Dwarves OOA - when the Dwarves have a Toughness value of 4 and 1 Wound. However, a Dwarf with Toughness 5 should be shot down by a Crossbow. If you start using Dark Venom, the Elf Bow is better, but if the Dwarf has a Venom Ring, go back to the Crossbow. Going shooty against a Dwarf warband might not be the best idea anyway, unless you crit them hard and can gain some higher ground.

Yeah, the bow guy carries a crossbow as a backup weapon for those circumstances, but mostly the black-powder guy is the one shooting at the T5 dwarfs. Against dwarfs the the bow guy is mostly used for clearing out henchmen and heroes that have not yet got that handy T increase.

We have a houserule that makes Handguns and sniper rifles roll two injury dice for each wound (must pick highest) so that, combined with the A, generally makes them better than crossbows against dwarfs also.

Lord 0 wrote:

Yeah, the bow guy carries a crossbow as a backup weapon for those circumstances, but mostly the black-powder guy is the one shooting at the T5 dwarfs. Against dwarfs the the bow guy is mostly used for clearing out henchmen and heroes that have not yet got that handy T increase.

Then it makes sense

Lord 0 wrote:

We have a houserule that makes Handguns and sniper rifles roll two injury dice for each wound (must pick highest) so that, combined with the A, generally makes them better than crossbows against dwarfs also.

Alright. That might be the house rule I remember - do you have to pick the highest? ^_^ but yeah, definitely! How do you handle a Master Shot then - 4 Injuries?

Yup, you *have* to pick the highest. Granted, that is almost always what one picks anyway, but there is no using handguns or sniper rifles as stun-guns to just knock someone down or stun them if the scenario requires it :-).

For Master Shot we just go step-by-step RAW for each thing. Assuming the target had one wound then there would be one roll to hit, one roll to wound (the crit) and then the first injury roll with two dice and the second injury roll with two dice. In practice we would use different colour dice so all four would be rolled at once, but there would be, say, two red dice for the first wound and two black dice for the second. If the target had two wounds then the first would just be lost as per normal and the second would be rolled with two injury dice as per the weapon.

How come you use different colours for the dice in that situation? Only one of them will apply anyway :-P

Stun Guns - New Mordheim Weapon, yay!

We use different colour dice so we can roll them all at the same time. Just makes things a little quicker. We do it for the same reason you use different colour dice when rolling multiple attacks - you can roll all the dice at the same time instead of going 'roll, evaluate, roll, evaluate' (e.g. red is the axe, white is the dagger). Granted, it doesn't shave of *that* much from the time, but over the course of a whole game it adds up.

And yes, I realise *you* weren't seriously asking, but the explanation should help someone that searches this and doesn't immediately get it .

Nono, it was a serious question! But I realize that I'm sometimes hard to read over the internet, due to my excessive use of smilies!

About the 'rolling all at once' - I get that, we do the same; my question goes to whether there's any reason to roll differently coloured dice. As I see it, usually you roll two dice with the same colour (or different, doesn't matter), but in this case there's an extra set of dice. However, since only the highest will be applied anyway (since you're not really allowed to *pick* the highest dice), I don't see the reason to have them differently coloured in this case. Usually we use different colours when there's different models attacking, different models attacked or one to symbolize the offhand attack and the others the mainhand, but in this case it is the the same model who shoots a single enemy, so the dice could be the same colour without any problems

... Not that it makes any difference, if you really want to distinguish between the separate injuries!

Another question though: Have you noticed any changes with the implementation of this house rule? I realize it might be old, so you might have some before/after experience.

The reason I ask is that I ran the numbers and according to my calculations this makes the Handgun 20% better than the Crossbow without the disadvantage of only shooting once when moving (since it already only shoots once). Do you use the optional misfire rules? If so, I see the balance, otherwise, I'd definitely go Reiklanders and Handgun away in your games!

Oh, I see what you mean. The reason for the different coloured dice is for re-rolls. We use Rabbit's feet and one of the things you can do with it is reroll an injury roll. Well, originally the RAW was that you could reroll any one *dice* but that made it a bit powerful for rolls that used two dice (rout tests, casting tests, LD tests, etc) so we decided that what it meant was that if you used the re-roll you had to reroll *both* dice, not just the one you wanted.

We do not use the missfire rules, but the handgun still has not completely replaced the crossbow, but now the handgun is actually taken from time-to-time whereas before it was instantly sold for the cash.

There are pros and cons to each so each is taken when it would make the most sense.
For Henchmen:
The crossbow is on more equipment lists, so can be taken at all (not many henchmen can even *take* a handgun).
Crossbow is cheaper.
Crossbow can shoot each turn.
Crossbow has the longer range (and therefore the longer *short* range).
Handgun punches through more armour.
Handgun is more likely to cause a casualty if it hits.

For Heroes:
Crossbow is cheaper.
Crossbow probably doesn't need a skill to take.
Crossbow can shoot 2 separate targets if you stay still.
Handgun punches through more armour.
Handgun is more likely to cause a casualty if it hits.

Basically, before the introduction of the rule there was really only one LR specialist weapon path. You would take the crossbow until you got either the elf bow or the sniper rifle. Now, if your final destination is the sniper rifle, it is viable to take the handgun either first or second to the crossbow, before getting the sniper rifle. Sometimes, a handgun will even be given to a henchmen if there is no pressing need for cash and there is a growing amount of armour on the table, but it is still fairly rare. Late-game, when there is a *lot* of armour on the table, it is not uncommon to see a henchman or two to have a handgun.