Advice on how to run a successful Mordheim campaign?

Good day, fellow Mordheim enthusiasts,

It has been awhile since I've played, but through Facebook, I've found people interested in learning to play/doing a campaign. So far, there are 3 other players that are interested (one new, two that haven't played in awhile), and it's a matter of setting up our schedules to align with each other.

The plan is for us to do a few one-off games to re-acquaint ourselves with the "feel" of the game, and relearn everything before we do a campaign. After this, the plan is to use the Expanded Campaign rules from Fanatic Magazine. (Territory control, each player gets 2 warbands, first player to take over 50% of the campaign map wins).

Unless we discuss further, we would only be using core & annual (barring Shadow Warriors). The only hired swords allowed are from the core, annual, and Fortune Hunters. Other stuff may be added in on a trial basis (but stuff like Nemesis Crown, etc won't be).

Questions/Advice for the following?

-We have a lot of modelling to do. Some of us are chipping in models for newer players, but there's also a lot of conversionwork/etc to work on.

-Terrain is at a premium. We need some way to inventory it (plus, certain custom territories (ex: The Pit/Sigmar's Rock) don't have their own terrain just yet. A good way to inventory/track pieces would be awesome too. I have a lot of sprue/plasticard on hand that could be easily put to good use.

-I'm thinking of using Google Docs to track player progressions. Are there better ways to ensure everyone is on the same page

-In the base Expanded Campaign Rules, some territories give a bonus if you control "At Least One" but don't give subsequent bonuses after (Example: Owning at least 1 Stables gives +2 to rare item rolls to find mounts), while others give cumulative bonuses (Example: Each Inn owned grants a roll to see if you gain an extra Campaign Action). I'm interested in converting some of the former to the latter (As an example: Each Stables lets a Warband use two additional Mounts; enable Henchmen mounts). Does that sound like a viable idea?

-The campaign uses a map, and the player has 2 warbands. My question is, Should the player be forced to have both of his warbands as the same (Ex: Two Reiklander Warbands), or could he do "Reasonable alliances"? (Ex: A player having a Reiklander and a Witch Hunter warband, but not a Witch Hunter & a Middenheimer pair due to the classic Ulric vs Sigmar rivalry?). Where would it leave the Orcs as far as alliances go?

Welcome to the forums! It sounds like you've got a pretty good plan in place in terms of easing into a campaign. Your restrictions on rules sources also looks pretty reasonable. In response to your queries:

- Try to organize a day for everyone to get together and built models. The experienced folks can help out and teach the newer players, everyone can swap bits, and that sort of thing usually helps light fires under people. Starting is often the hardest part! If each person grabs one Warhammer box the possibilities for kit-bashing are quite impressive.

- One of my buddies runs a tournament and organizes his terrain in plastic tote bins sorted by terrain type. Each type is identified with a small round colored sticker of the sort used for garage sales. A corresponding sticker goes on the bottom of each terrain piece to show what bin it needs to end up back in. And, as with models, having a day for everyone to get together and work on terrain is a good way to get more stuff done. It's surprising how much you can get done in an afternoon (in 2 4-5 hour sessions at such gatherings I managed to complete an entire board's worth of darklands terrain as well as paint up a GW building kit)

- Google Docs spreadsheet seems like probably the best way to do it. Alternatively if you all game at the same space you could do a bulletin board type thing there, including a map with pushpins to show territory control.

- I'd probably stick with the rules as written for your first campaign and then work from there. No harm in making some changes if you feel strongly about it though.

- Reasonable alliances sounds pretty good. Do all the players know enough of the fluff for them to understand what makes an alliance reasonable though? Orcs and Skaven would be tough to find alliances for, but if you think of them as mercenaries it might open more possibilities. Reiklanders are more likely to hire dubious muscle than Sisters of Sigmar, but you should be able to figure something out.

Welcome to the forum!

Noisy has some great advice. +1.

I'm just wondering, if there are four of you, why have each player run 2 warbands? Especially if it causes questions about campaign play. My experience is that one warband is plenty for newer players to get a handle on.

(Or is the each player has two warbands thing part of the map campaign? If so... have you considered a simpler campaign?)

Thanks for the welcomes! Two of the players are mordheim/fantasy vets, the new guy is a 40k vet that I'm not sure his knowledge of Fantasy fluff yet.

The "Two warbands on a map" is from the Expanded Campaign rules in Fanatic Issue #88, so on the specialist arms website.

Regarding Sisters of Sigmar and fluff, considering that Lady Magritta was raised in their order prior to being a contender for the Imperial Throne, that would be an amusing alliance of convenience.