Mordheim Musings: Flawed Warband Design Part 4

Mordheim Musings: Flawed Warband Design Part 4

This is a long overdue wrap-up to my series of articles on flawed warband design in the Nemesis Crown supplement, and what I would do to fix it. If you haven't read the other three articles, you can check out part 1 (Gunnery School of Nuln) here, part 2 (Imperial Outriders) here, and part 3 (Hochland Bandits) here. You can also check out some of my other Mordheim articles here, here, and here. 

In this post, I'm going to cover the final four warbands from Nemesis Crown: the Dwarf Rangers, Forest Goblins, Black Orcs, and Horned Hunters. Compared to the other three I went over, these are pretty tame in terms of design flaws, so I think it's a safe bet to get them all in one post. Without further ado, I'll jump on into it with...

Dwarf Rangers

I'll admit up front that I'm a sucker for dwarfs. They were my first Warhammer Fantasy army, my first D&D character race, and have held a special place in my heart for a long time. Having said that, I don't think there's much wrong with the Dwarf Rangers warband, so chalk that up to bias if you disagree.

The Dwarf Rangers are essentially Dwarf Treasure Hunters, with a few notable changes: first, they are led by a Runesmith instead of a Noble; second, their secondary hero is an Apprentice instead of an Engineer; third, they field Crossbowmen instead of Thunderers; and fourth, they can hire a handful of elite Longbeards in addition to the Clansmen and Beardlings available to the standard Treasure Hunters. Instead of going through a thorough deep dive, I'd like to focus on these aspects specifically and my thoughts on them, since essentially every other element of the warband is identical to the Dwarf Treasure Hunters.

First up is the Runesmith, who is a carbon copy of the Dwarf Noble, with one exception: the ability to use Runes. These aren't the Dwarf Army Book Runes, however: there are only six of them, and they only last one battle. That might seem strange to those familiar with Dwarfs in Warhammer Fantasy, where Runes are permanent and varied, and one could be forgiven for making this comparison and seeing the Rangers' Runes as out of flavour. I actually really like the Rune system, but I would probably be against it if I weren't familiar with WFRP 2nd edition, where Runes can be inscribed temporarily and a Runesmith's capacity for learning and inscribing them was explored in detail. What I do take issue with is this ability coming for free. A baseline Runesmith is hands-down better than a Dwarf Noble, with the same profile and price, but an added ability. 

Wizards generally cost about 10 gc more than heroes with the same profile, but the Runesmith's magic is a bit more limited in scope: where a wizard might reasonably be expected to cast a spell once every turn or two, a Runesmith gets a maximum of two Runes per battle. I would value Runes at about 5 gc, half the value of spells, and the typical cost of a single characteristic increase on a starting hero. That would mean raising the price of the Runesmith to 90 gc, but I would prefer dropping their WS from 5 to 4 instead and keeping the price the same. The 85 gc price makes the warband more directly parallel to the base Dwarf Treasure Hunters (a small but important aesthetic detail: it's pleasing to the eye to see the same price on both leaders, and a player looking at both warbands might gravitate towards the Treasure Hunters naturally if the Runesmith costs more than the Noble). Decreasing the Runesmith's WS is also more in line with the Dwarfs army: the Noble could be seen as an analog to the army's Thane, who has WS 6, while the Runesmith in the army has WS 5. A difference of one WS point therefore has a mechanical justification, and flavour-wise an academic Runesmith would likely not be as formidable a warrior as a Noble. 

Next, the Apprentice, who has the profile of a Beardling but allows the Runesmith to inscribe one additional Rune per battle. The price of 40 gc might be considered a little high: a beardling costs 25 gc, so this breaks down to a roughly 5 gc increase for being a hero, and 10 gc for the special rule. 5 gc for hero status is consistent with many other warbands (for example, Mercenaries, whose Champions cost the same as a hero of their profile plus 5 gc), but is 10 gc a bit high for such a seemingly small special rule? Possibly, as you might see this as being equivalent to a second Runesmith. It's not exactly equal, though, since this second Rune is drawn from the Runesmith's repertoire. While this might be seen as a limiting quality, I think it justifies the 10 gc price, as it means the Apprentice is less of a liability: where a second Runesmith's death would require the warband to pay their full cost to re-hire them, and start from square one with no advances (therefore requiring the Runesmith to re-learn all their previous knowledge), a lost Apprentice doubles the Runesmith's effectiveness regardless of advances. To put this whole paragraph in brief, the Apprentice is fine; nothing to see here.

Crossbowmen aren't worth much mention: they're basically Thunderers who can't take handguns. No great loss here, as the relative lack of versatility is made up for by the warband's other distinguishing features, and is justified by their flavour (these are traditionalist dwarfs who have little respect for newfangled firearms). One of those distinguishing features is the Longbeard, another warrior that will be familiar to anyone who knows the dwarfs from large-scale Warhammer. I think this is an appropriate inclusion, given the traditionalist character of this warband: Longbeards are no-nonsense veterans who constantly lament the decline of dwarf society and the lack of moral fibre in younger generations of their race. In the game, Longbeards are Clansmen with an extra point of WS and Initiative, and the ability to re-roll Leadership tests, all for a 10 gc markup. Re-rolling Leadership tests is an interesting ability, and arguably should have a cost associated with it, but dwarfs already have high Ld and Leadership tests for warriors are fairly infrequent. 

What does confuse me is the decision to give Longbeards an Initiative increase, rather than Strength: I checked the second- and third-last editions of the Dwarfs army book (which would have been contemporary with the release of Nemesis Crown), and in both books Longbeards have WS 5, S 4, and I 2. It might be a bit nitpicky, but I do think that consistency like this is important. While Warhammer Fantasy is pretty much a thing of the past, someone familiar with dwarfs from the larger-scale game should feel a sense of familiarity moving over to Mordheim, and small details like this help create less confusion overall. 

In summary, I would only make two changes to the Dwarf Rangers:

- Change the Runesmith's WS from 5 to 4.

- Change Longbeards' Strength from 3 to 4, and Initiative from 3 to 2.

Both of these are based in the rationale that Mordheim warbands should draw parallels to their Warhammer Fantasy army counterparts, and I think they achieve this goal without undermining the warband's flavour or playability.

Forest Goblins

In the interest of full disclosure, I am writing this portion of the article more than eight months after the previous one. I began this series during the winter holiday, but once I returned to my regular day-to-day and the stresses of teaching, it went to the back burner. I've always intended to finish this series, however, and look forward to writing more Mordheim Musings in the future!

 

But enough context, on to what you came here for.

Off the bat, I wasn't a big fan of the Forest Goblins as a warband going into this. I thought of them solely as spider riders, and had assumed that any warband that wasn't centred on mounted combat would be an incorrect approach. Like with the Dwarf Rangers, however, I did a bit of digging through older versions of the Orcs and Goblins army book, and they gave me a valuable point of reference when approaching the Forest Goblins. I can confidently say I respect them more now.

As usual, I'll go top to bottom, starting with the warband's special rules: Natives allows them to move unhindered through forests, which is fitting, and they also have the ever-present greenskin Animosity. Nothing  worthy of extensive comments here; I think these are fitting.

Moving on to special equipment, the warband has a number of options. First off, the Boss Pole negates Animosity within 6" and acts as a spear. Items and rules that negate detrimental special rules seem like a popular option, as this same item is featured in several other goblin-themed warbands, though it is notably absent from the original Orc Mob. I think it's a fine option, but would prefer it be limited to a Leader only item; if not, it's easy to imagine Animosity becoming a thing of the past, where this should really provide a strategic bubble to shelter a few key warriors from its effects. 

 

Next up is the blowpipe, which is not a signature weapon of goblins in any sense, but is rather exclusive to lizardmen skinks. I don't think it belongs here from a flavour standpoint, despite the Forest Goblins' affinity for poisoned weapons. Poisoned arrows are more than suitable. 

 

That brings me to the next option, 'poisoned weapon', which grants a permanent +1 to a chosen weapon's Injury rolls. I'm not against this in theory, as it's a small (arguably marginal) benefit for a fair price. The fluff, however, speficically states that this poison comes from giant spiders, and giant spider venom is already established in Blazing Saddles to work identically to Dark Venom, providing a +1 Strength bonus. I support reworking this item to Spider Venom, with the same effect, and upping the cost to 30 gc. This leaves it cheaper than standard Dark Venom and keeps it Common, which is a pretty solid bonus in itself.

 

Magic Gubbinz provide a casting re-roll on a 4+, which seems fine, and Red Toof Tribal Jewellery grants frenzy at the price of 40 gc, a fair price point (but a thematic issue for me that I'll get into later). 

 

Finally, the Giant Spider Mount is confusing to me because it ignores the existing mount of the same name from Blazing Saddles. The developers were familiar with Blazing Saddles, referencing it in the Imperial Outriders warband, but for some reason don't bother referencing it here, instead giving a short blurb on how the spiders work that doesn't have any link to existing mounted combat rules. I would change this entry to simply allow the Forest Goblins to purchase Giant Spiders at half price (50 gc), with no Rarity reduction. This is comparable to the bonus for Hung Marauders in Border Town Burning, who gain the same benefit applied to Warhorses. I believe this is a more palatable benefit, as the Giant Spider is a very solid mount and shouldn't be available willy-nilly, but the Forest Goblins should still have some sort of affinity with them.

Moving on, I don't have many comments on the hero section. It's pretty standard for a goblin/skaven/halfling warband, with six heroes: one leader, four champions, and a specialist (in this case a shaman). Animosity should be from Braves, as it specifically only affects henchmen, and the cost of a Chaman should be upped by 10 gc as is standard for wizards. The Chieftain, however, could be safely lowered to 45 gc to slightly offset this: his profile is on par with that of the Night Goblin Boss in the most recent such warband on Broheim, which is where I usually get my benchmarks.

In the Henchmen section, we start with the bog standard Forest Goblin, which is more or less your average goblin henchman. They do have 6 Leadership compared to a standard goblin's 5, and arguably should either have 5 Ld or cost 5gc more. I would lean more towards Ld 5, since this puts them in line with the average goblin and forest goblins don't have any Ld advantage in WHFB.

I'm going to skip the next entry for the moment and go straight to the Sluggas, who are forest goblins that are good at throwing. Kudos to the designers for finding another henchman choice, since all the army books I've gone through don't offer any more than standard forest goblins and spider riders in this faction. Sluggas essentially come with the Knife Fighter skill for 5 points more than a regular goblin. I would drop their Ld to 5, like the average goblin, but I'm on the fence about whether 5gc is a fair price for Knife Fighter. In this case, I'm inclined to say it is: throwing weapons are a high-risk option, since you have to get within charge range of your target before you can use them, and with BS and Strength 3 the Sluggas aren't exactly crack shots. 

 

The following entry is a Gigantic Spider, which is a flavourful replacement for the usual Troll in a greenskin warband. Maybe I'm a sucker for WHFB though, but I think that the designers could have leaned more heavily on existing rules from the mass battle game rather than try to cook up something from scratch. In particular, stupidity and Ld 4 don't feel right, and the venom doesn't work the same way as Mordheim spider venom has been established to. Gigantic Spiders have precedents in almost every edition of the Orcs & Goblins army book (with the exception of 6th edition, which doesn't include any Forest Goblins for whatever reason), and I think the profile from 7th edition is the closest to what feels appropriate. In a nutshell, this means M7, WS3, BS0, S4, T4, W3, I4, A3, Ld7. Add in fear, large, animal (can't gain Exp), poisoned attack (+1 Strength to attacks, which doesn't affect armour saves) and wall walk from the giant spider, and keeping the rule that the chieftain can ride it (but removing the unnecessary detail, simply referencing Blazing Saddles for the mounted combat rules), I think this fits much better both with existing core rules and with the rest of the warband. Compared to a Troll, this version of the Gigantic Spider is more mobile, quicker, and has higher Ld, but lacks the Troll's vomit attack, stupidity, and functional immortality. It's a bit of an overhaul, and I'll let you be the judge as to whether this is really necessary or just a personal crusade.

Finally, we have my biggest and most arbitrary point of contention, the Red Toof Goblins. No lore source I looked at mentioned a "Red Toof" tribe of forest goblins, HOWEVER, I want to preface this section by saying that I may be mistaken, and should Red Toof goblins be canon you can ignore me. Assuming they aren't, I don't like the inclusion. The only references to a Red Toof tribe I could find were in this specific Nemesis Crown document, community posts that refer to it, and a 'Red Tooth' gang of goblin bandits that appear in the Bugman's Lament campaign, but are decidedly not Forest Goblins (they ride wolves). It feels like a band-aid solution to Forest Goblins lacking a Fanatic-equivalent, and while not mechanically unsound, I feel that they're a flavour fail. Obviously, it isn't necessary that everything in a Mordheim warband be canon, but in my opinion leaning on canon is a great way to enhance a warband's feel. In this case too, the supplement was explicitly tied into the main Warhammer Fantasy narrative, and shouldn't be pulling much out of a hat. All that said, I don't dislike the henchman itself, but would prefer it be relabelled as 'Forest Goblin Berserkers' or something along those lines. As for the Red Toof Tribal Jewellery, something like 'Hallucinogenic Spider Venom' would both be in flavour (shamans use it in the canon) and functionally appropriate as a reskin.

In hindsight, the Forest Goblins could have had their own (albeit short) article, but I've written it here and I'd prefer not to go back, so here are the notes in brief before moving on:

 

- Change the Boss Pole to be Leader Only

- Remove the blowpipe

- Change Poisoned Weapons to Spider Venom, functioning as Common Dark Venom for 30gc

- Rename Red Toof Tribal Jewellery to Hallucinogenic Spider Venom

- Replace the current Giant Spider Mount entry with a rule that Giant Spiders always cost 50gc (referring to Blazing Saddles for the rules)

- Decrease Chieftain's cost to 45gc

- Remove Animosity from Braves

- Increase Shaman's cost to 30gc

- Reduce Forest Goblins' and Sluggas' Ld to 5

- Rename Red Toof Goblins to Forest Goblin Berserkers

- Rework Gigantic Spider (see above)

Black Orcs

This one should be much shorter, as I have fewer gripes. 

Jumping right into the Black Orcs warband, the Special Rules section outlines three: the ubiquitous greenskin Animosity (fitting); Let the Goons do the Work, which bars Black Orcs from riding mounts; and Da Boss is Dead!, which stipulates that only Black Orcs may lead the warband. Of the three, I'd keep the first and third, but drop Let the Goons do the Work. I get that most Black Orc models are on foot, but Black Orc bosses and warbosses in WHFB have the option to ride boars, which contradicts the assertion that they 'do not ride mounts of any kind'. Furthermore, this rule blocks the Black Orcs from having almost any mounted heroes, a significant disadvantage in settings where mounts are not limited (as they are within the city of Mordheim). I don't think mounted Black Orc heroes are any more of a threat than any other powerful mounted hero, at least not so much that they deserve to be locked out.

Hopping down to the Heroes section, the warband can take a Boss to lead it. Compared to the Boss from the Orc Mob, he has an identical profile, costs 10gc more, gains an inherent +1 armour save from the Black Orc special rule, and has a second rule, Oi Behave!, to smack nearby henchmen around and quell their Animosity. Reading through several editions of the Orcs & Goblins army book, I can't find any support for giving Black Orcs an inherent save bonus. I almost reommended dropping this rule, but realized last minute that it's a reference to the Well 'Ard Skill from the Orc Mob. In that case, it can stay.

The Black Orcs themselves are a 0-2 Hero choice, who are essentially 60gc Orc Big'Uns with 1 extra Strength and the Black Orc special rule. For reference, a Big'Un costs 40gc, making Black Orcs seriously overcosted. I would lower the cost of Black Orcs to 50gc, as a single point of Strength and armour save should only result in a 5gc markup each. 

 

They are followed by the Young'uns, with a Mercenary Youngblood profile, less 1 Initiative and plus 1 Toughness. A 1-for-1 exchange like this shouldn't result in any change in cost, but Young'Uns are still 5gc more expensive. On top of that, a single Young'un can be upgraded to a Black Orc Young'un for 10gc, which grants no mechanical benefit besides the chance to take the 'Proven Warrior' skill. What does this skill do, you may ask? Well, it can only be taken by a Black Orc Young'un with 25 experience, giving them the Black Orc special rule and access to the Black Orc equipment list. If that seems like a lot of steps, that's because it is. I think this is needlessly complicated, and really underscores the fact that while this is ostensibly a Black Orc warband, it has a complicated relationship with Black Orcs. Assuming one doesn't want to shell out 10gc for the potential opportunity for a Young'un to eventually gain a token armour save increase and a handful of extra equipment options, a Black Orc warband might only contain three actual Black Orcs. 

 

That doesn't sit quite right with me. 

 

Not that I need a warband full of elite warriors, but if I'm playing Black Orcs, I'd like to play Black Orcs. I'm fine with them only being available as heroes (they are, after all, uncommon and powerful), but at least make the Young'uns Black Orcs by default lore-wise but without the Black Orc rule. While we're at it, I would overhaul Proven Warrior to be available to any hero other than Black Orcs and the Black Orc Boss. The benefit it grants would be identical, but the 25 experience barrier would be removed, or at least reduced to 10 experience. 25 experience is a serious hurdle, and a long time to wait for a small advance. 10 is still a fair amount, but easily enough to call a warrior 'proven'. Furthermore, dropping the limitation that it be taken by a Young'un allows for promoted warriors to become peers in the eyes of the more powerful Black Orcs.

Moving on to the henchmen, Orc Boyz are familiar from the Orc Mob, and Shootaz are a nice touch to bring a 'Ruglud's Armoured Orcs' feel to the warband. I was on the fence about Nuttaz in a similar fashion to Red Toof Goblins, but they have a precedent in 40k Orks at least, which is good enough for me. In terms of profile, Nuttaz are fairly statted and costed, and can be seen as a parallel to the Witch Hunters' Flagellant: they have the same cost of 40gc, they auto-pass Leadership tests, and they cannot become the warband's leader. Nuttaz have 1 less Strength and Initiative, but they also effectively have frenzy, so it balances out in cost.

Finally, we have the classic Troll, effectively cut-and-pasted from the Orc Mob. One important alteration comes in the Always Hungry rule, which normally has Orcs pay a 15gc upkeep or feed a couple of goblins or squigs to the troll to keep it from wandering off. In the Black Orc warband, the Troll has a 20gc upkeep, and there are no goblins or squigs to feed; instead, the Troll can eat extra rations, taking the place of an extra member but dropping the upkeep to 5gc. I would drop the upkeep back to 15gc, as it's not clear why this Troll eats more than the average, but I do like the mechanism for offsetting it. The warband's size is effectively reduced to 11 members, but the powerful and functionally immortal troll sticks around. It's a solid early-campaign option for warbands that won't be able to fill out the full 12 members anyway.

That's about it for the Black Orcs. In a nutshell:

- Remove Let the Goons do the Work

- Adjust Proven Warrior to be available to Young'uns and promoted warriors, and reduce the experience prerequisite from 25 to 10

- Reduce Black Orcs' cost from 60gc to 50gc

- Reduce Young'uns' cost from 25gc to 20gc, and remove the Black Orc Blood special rule

- Reduce the Troll's upkeep cost from 20gc to 15gc

Horned Hunters

Well, I saved the best (in my opinion) for last. The Horned Hunters are about the most flawless warband in Nemesis Crown. Based on the robust shell of the Witch Hunter warband, the Horned Hunters twist the concept enough to be interesting, while being solidly rooted in existing lore. Unlike the other entries in this series, I'm mostly going to talk about things I like here (what a relief!).

Starting with the warband special rule, Woodcraft allows Horned Hunters to move unhindered through difficult terrain. As Taal-aligned bandit hunters, this feels right. They should be able to navigate the very underbrush that hides their sworn foes with ease.

The warband's special skills are also oozing with flavour, and while I won't discuss each in detail, I'll give an overview and highlights. Master Trapper buffs trip wires, an iconic piece of trap wargear for the warband; Infiltration does what it says on the tin; Foul Odor makes the hero harder to hit in melee, but also flammable (!); Animal Friendship stops animals from attacking the hero and allows them to keep two wardogs over the normal warband limit (though arguably shouls either prevent the hero from attacking animals in kind, or remove their immunity once they have); Pathfinder grants an additional Exploration die, with a limit of one per warband; and Hide in Shadows makes a hidden hero harder to see. Nothing here feels out of place, tying in very comfortably with the warband's flavour.

The Horned Hunters have two pieces of special equipment: the Blessed Stag Hide, which allows the wearer to re-roll one failed Initiative test per turn, and the Trip Wire, which allows them to set a trap instead of moving that can nail an unlucky warrior with a S4 hit. The Stag Hide feels like a niche choice without being useless, and its utility is highly dependent on one's typical campaign setup: if your group has a lot of ladders or your terrain collection doesn't have much verticality, your 40gc might be better spent elsewhere, but in a setting where a lot of climbing and jumping happens this could be a godsend (and combined with the Acrobat skill could allow a hero to plummet 12" at a time with little risk!). Trip wires have a more general utility, and can help the warband make up for its limited numbers by trapping key chokepoints or objectives.

The Hero options are more or less on par with Witch Hunters. The Horned Hunter leader is essentially a Witch Hunter Captain, the Priest of Taal is a Warrior-Priest, and Initiates are Witch Hunters. There are a few distinctions worth noting, however. First off, Horned Hunters swap the hatred of wizards for a hatred of bandits, which is a bit specific but will likely result in about the same benefit provided there is at least one bandit warband in your campaign. For what he offers, the Priest of Taal is a tad overcosted (coming in at 5gc more than a Warrior-Priest with 1 less WS and Ld), but since he's carried over from the Ostlander warband I'll reserve judgement. Finally, Initiates cost 15gc more than Witch Hunters, but come with the ability to Infiltrate, a powerful and well-costed tradeoff. They also can't wear armour, but very few players choose to equip it anyway.

Last, but not least, the henchmen section. Zealots and Warhounds are identical to their Witch Hunter equivalents, and therefore not worth commenting upon. Instead of Flagellants, the Horned Hunters have Drunken Gang, who still auto-pass Leadership tests, are 10gc cheaper, and have 1 less Strength and Toughness compared to their Witch Hunter counterparts. They also have 3 less Ld, not that it matters, and are permitted to become the warband's leader. This is really the only point I feel to be a significant oversight in the warband's design, and is a quick fix by simply adding that caveat; without it, it would be theoretically possible for a Horned Hunter warband to get a leader who can never Rout involuntarily, a pretty powerful bonus.

To sum up, here is my note for the Horned Hunters:

- Restrict Drunken Gang from becoming the warband's leader.

Overall, the Horned Hunters are a model of great warband design: take one of the base warbands and tweak it until you have what you want, making reasonable adjustments up and down. This formula is repeated time and again across the most well-regarded of community warbands, and highlights the important tenet of warband creation that your rules don't have to turn the entire system on its head, just shake it up enough to be interesting.

Afterword

I didn't expect this series to take me eight months to conclude, but here we are. I suppose it didn't really: all told I spent about a week writing these articles, but it dragged on much longer than I had hoped. Now that this one has been wrapped up, however, I'm looking forward to the future of Mordheim Musings! There are several subjects I'd like to tackle, including weapon choices, armour, Hired Sword analysis, and sharing more of my own designs, but those will come when they come. If you haven't read the other parts of this series on warband design, I'd highly encourage you to do so! If you have, I hope you've found my take on the Nemesis Crown warbands interesting, even if you don't agree. Be sure to check me out on Instagram, where I share my hobby projects and all my blog posts, and feel free to leave any thoughts you may have on this article or the series in general!