Guide: Dwarf Treasure Hunters Warband Starting Roster

Our opinions are always biased. That's what makes them opinions.

To weigh in, I started my current campagne with three beardlings. Two died, one just retired at 14xp, and I was lucky enough that my two Lads heroes were both Thunderers that I brought in later.

I don't play with pendulums or tarot cards (just the items in the book), so I'm not quite rolling in dough, but I like the thunderers/clansmen just because they get to racial maxima faster. I have a few heroes who are close to max WS and BS, which is great if they keep rolling 7 on advancement, but the poor beardlings would be at a big disadvantage at that game if they got talent.

I must admit, on first reading this my thoughts were that it was madness not to take all four heroes , especially given the stated goal was to earn cash early on. Also, why keep the gromril armour in stash? I know your answer already, but i still think it's a mistake. Having said that, it's nice to see some different ideas to break up the standard accepted blueprint.

A couple of points to add:

- Minimal protective equipment early on. Dwarfs are tough as they are, so against early campaign warbands armour is largely unnecessary. As you invest more in your heroes and they gain experience, and as other warbands get stronger, that's the time to suit up.

- Aipha, with regards to the crossbow on the engineer: Yes he only has BS3, and on a standard table with terrain you won't hit much, but he isn't there to kill, it's more a tactical thing. Get him in a decent position and the threat of a S4 crossbow bolt helps you control the enemy's movment. If you have no ranged support your opponent can move across open areas with impunity. With your opponent already likely to have superior maneuverability you don't want to gift him that freedom as well.

Odin: "I must admit, on first reading this my thoughts were that it was madness not to take all four heroes..."

Also my first thought, and second thought, and well, my continuous thinking. Always take you max heroes. Always.

I have experimented with a variety of Dwarf builds, and overall find the minimal-armor max clansmen option the most effective overall.

Odin's point about the crossbow affecting the game even when it isn't firin' is a good one. I don't any of my builds have left my engineer crossbowless.

All sound advice. I have not played dwarfs personally, but I'd lean towards the 3rd list. I certainly understand the logic between giving sacrificial models no weapons in the first game, but I personally always prefer to give them at least a hammer so they are reasonably effective in combat.

For the sacrificial models - I take it you choose Clansmen over Beardlings due to the possibility of advancement? I've mulled over starting dwarf lists and using Beardlings for the sacrificial henchmen - saving the 15 crowns a piece - but I could see it backfiring if they become a hero and you're stuck with a less-than-optimal hero. I guess it comes down to whether that 15 crowns per henchmen savings is worth potentially losing out on a better hero. Have most found that the more expensive option is worth it for that reason?

I'm also curious about starting with equipment in the stash (gromril armor, in this case). I have always played that you can't buy equipment and put it in the stash when creating a warband - it has to be equipped on a model in the first game, and can only be stashed afterwards. But looking at the rules, there's basically no ruling either way, so I understand doing it the other way, and may consider changing how our group does that. I'm not sure I personally like being able to buy 3 suits of gromril armor when only two models can even purchase it starting out, though the rules don't explicitly disallow it.

Does anyone else play the way I do (have to equip items when starting out) or is it just me? I am wondering what the common practice is and if I just learned it the wrong way back in the day, and if I've continued doing it on habit. It certainly wouldn't be the first time!

Caledore: "...I take it you choose Clansmen over Beardlings due to the possibility of advancement?"

Yes, although even for a henchie +1 WS, +1 BS, and +1 Ld is a steal for 15 gold. For a beardling to match those stats, he would have to earn 9 experience.

I guess part of it for me is that I am primarily a role-player, and I want all my gang to live and be awesome arse-prodders. The idea of building a warband with members intended to be sacrificial just doesn't appeal (unless running skaven or undead, of course).

It depends on the band for me, but that is why I don't like ever having a model with just a dagger, even if they are fodder. I want to give them a fighting chance at least! 'Sacrificial' is probably not the best word, more like what I find acceptable losses - I don't generally sacrifice models just so I can rout. With dwarf bands being so small initially, it seems risky to have your cheapest lost at 40 crowns (43 with a hammer). But I can see how the benefit outweighs the risk of loss.

Bands I've played like Undead and Orcs I never minded having cannon fodder, nor will I with my new Possessed. On the other hand I didn't like to use them as Marienburg or Witch Hunters.

Wardogs are probably one of the best sacrificial units with the cheap cost, but I could never use them like that...too much of a dog lover in real life I suppose. I care more about fictional dogs than some actual people!

Saluksic wrote:

To weigh in, I started my current campagne with three beardlings. Two died, one just retired at 14xp, and I was lucky enough that my two Lads heroes were both Thunderers that I brought in later.

Luck plays a huge part in the Lad's corner, so gz on that I really dislike taking Heroes that I need to change out later; just seems like a waste.

Saluksic wrote:

I don't play with pendulums or tarot cards (just the items in the book), so I'm not quite rolling in dough, but I like the thunderers/clansmen just because they get to racial maxima faster. I have a few heroes who are close to max WS and BS, which is great if they keep rolling 7 on advancement, but the poor beardlings would be at a big disadvantage at that game if they got talent.

Well, they are official, so you may use them if you want
Yes, exactly my point. They do indeed go faster to the top. You want optimal Heroes; the best of the best. Unless you don't want that, then Beardlings are just fine. But usually I think of Heroes as 'Heroes', not just a random lad from the pub

Odin Morgrimmsson wrote:

I must admit, on first reading this my thoughts were that it was madness not to take all four heroes , especially given the stated goal was to earn cash early on. Also, why keep the gromril armour in stash? I know your answer already, but i still think it's a mistake. Having said that, it's nice to see some different ideas to break up the standard accepted blueprint.

Madness indeed
It's all about working around the numbers for earning cash:
If you start with 4 Heroes, you can save 225gc by buying Gromril Armours, which you will need at some point (probably after 3 - 4 games).
If you start with 4 Heroes, and your Clansman dies, you will sell Wyrdstone Shards at 1 - 3 warband members. Though it is of course optimal if he does not die!
If you start with 4 Heroes, you'll only lose max 1 model, which has a 1/3 chance to die. Compare it to a 9 man warband, where 3 models will have to die. Even if it's Beardlings, it's still a potential loss of 75gc, or more correct: A likely loss of 25gc. It will of course increase your Lad's chance, but then again, we don't like Beardling Heroes!
If you start with 4 Heroes, you'll end up (if you play right), with 3 - 4 Wyrdstones (usually 4, but you can of course be unlucky!). This nets you 2 Clansmen for your next game. You're already on the roll, sitting with 2 Gromrils in the bank. Usually you have underdog due to your low number of units, allowing you already a chance of a Lad's Hero. If you can get underdog once again, perfect, then you can get your other Slayers, since your first will hopefully have gotten either Toughness, Extra Tough, Resilient, Wound or Step Aside. If not, both WS, S & A will also be great.

Odin Morgrimmsson wrote:

A couple of points to add:

- Minimal protective equipment early on. Dwarfs are tough as they are, so against early campaign warbands armour is largely unnecessary. As you invest more in your heroes and they gain experience, and as other warbands get stronger, that's the time to suit up.

And when the time indeed comes to suit up, you will do so. With your Gromril Armours in the stash, where they've been safely stored. The only reason your Noble has his armour is that you cannot buy a new one, meaning that it's worth it to protect him against that lucky shot, where you had positioned him wrongly on the board.

Odin Morgrimmsson wrote:

- Aipha, with regards to the crossbow on the engineer: Yes he only has BS3, and on a standard table with terrain you won't hit much, but he isn't there to kill, it's more a tactical thing. Get him in a decent position and the threat of a S4 crossbow bolt helps you control the enemy's movment. If you have no ranged support your opponent can move across open areas with impunity. With your opponent already likely to have superior maneuverability you don't want to gift him that freedom as well.

While I agree that Crossbows are great for those sort of things, a single one on a Dwarf with a M of 3 is simply not enough. You always have something cheap to put up in front to get shot, and otherwise you'll find another way, where he won't be able to see you. When you have 2 - 3 Crossbows we can start talking.

Caledore wrote:

All sound advice. I have not played dwarfs personally, but I'd lean towards the 3rd list. I certainly understand the logic between giving sacrificial models no weapons in the first game, but I personally always prefer to give them at least a hammer so they are reasonably effective in combat.

Can understand that. I usually do that with spare cash after the first game. If they survive, they earn their weapon!

Caledore wrote:

For the sacrificial models - I take it you choose Clansmen over Beardlings due to the possibility of advancement? I've mulled over starting dwarf lists and using Beardlings for the sacrificial henchmen - saving the 15 crowns a piece - but I could see it backfiring if they become a hero and you're stuck with a less-than-optimal hero. I guess it comes down to whether that 15 crowns per henchmen savings is worth potentially losing out on a better hero. Have most found that the more expensive option is worth it for that reason?

That is exactly why. I believe 5gc pr. increase (especially since they're BS2, and I like Shooting Dwarves) is very much worth it!

Caledore wrote:

I'm also curious about starting with equipment in the stash (gromril armor, in this case). I have always played that you can't buy equipment and put it in the stash when creating a warband - it has to be equipped on a model in the first game, and can only be stashed afterwards. But looking at the rules, there's basically no ruling either way, so I understand doing it the other way, and may consider changing how our group does that. I'm not sure I personally like being able to buy 3 suits of gromril armor when only two models can even purchase it starting out, though the rules don't explicitly disallow it.

Well, it says you may buy Armour at that price; nothing about quantity. There's no limit on other equipment either, even if you only have 10 models, you can still buy Maces for 15. Also, I don't see why Dwarves wouldn't stash up on Armour & Beer!

I try to always take maximum heroes. However, we have a house rule that allows heroes to be retired when a henchman is promoted so it does allow a swap to occur. I feel that the money earned from the heroes outweighs the money lost from needing to dismiss the hero later. This is especially true for a Dwarf warband that only starts with four heroes meaning that it is necessary to get THREE henchmen promoted before the two open hero slots are filled and it is necessary to replace a hero.

Obviously if we were playing by the official rules then once all of the hero slots are filled then it would need to be a conscious decision to dismiss a hero in the hope of some day later getting a promoted henchman. This would be the one exception to my rule of always taking the maximum heroes but would only occur later in the game when all of the available hero slots are filled.

We also play with the house rule where you can dismiss a hero if you are at max, if you roll a promotion. My impression is that this HR is one of the more widely-used ones.

In my last game I had three lads get talent. Even with the rule that you can instantly dismiss heroes to make room for a promotion, I only filled the empty slot, and kept everyone else. Now I have six heroes, which is sweet, but I need Gromril to protect my "irreplaceable" lad with talent (ie, a replacement can't be bought outright like in the case like an engineer dying).