• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About g1ul10

  • Rank
  • Birthday 01/30/1969

Profile Information

  • Location
  1. BattleLore 2nd edition plays very differently from the 1st. It still has command cards and lore cards. You still play a command cards to order units based on type or section and possibly a lore card to enhance your action, but similarities end here. In 2nd edition you have: strongly asymmetric armies: each faction has specific units with specific traits and powers, victory points are not based on eliminated units but rather by fulfilling scenario specific conditions, armies are freely designed by players using a cost point system, simplified lore management, but faction specific lore cards. If you can grab the base box at a reasonable price I'd suggest to try it.
  2. I suggest to add a stripe between two maps that fills the half hexes to obtain a largest play area. I uploaded the file I used on BGG and you can find it here: https://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/141851/connecting-stripes
  3. Haha that's nice Garret :-) But also if the game is NOT discontinued, one can always choose NOT to buy the expansions, right?
  4. Well on Bleeding you might be right. I don't have a strong opinion. It is true that some conditions seem stronger than others. I think it must be tested a bit. On bone blast, attacking BEFORE advancing sounds generally weaker than attacking AFTER advancing as it reduces the likelihood of advancing a second time, and then attacking a third time. And I can anticipate rules issue: if the Grotesques attack an adjacent unit in hex 1 with the melee attack and they are able to advance but before that they decide to attack a second adjacent unit in hex 2 with the range attack and they roll a flag.... where do they advance? In hex 1 or in hex 2?
  5. To summarize, my initial proposal (amended after interaction with Garret) was: Bone Blast: Instead or after advancing, this unit may perform... This modification addresses the main concern I have with Grotesques, that is the fact that they have to give up the advance to use Bone Blast. Incidentally, I tend to think that 3 dices are enough and that the bleeding condition is not particularly weak. Removing one dice does not only reduce the number of hits, but also the number of flags, the expected amount of lore gained and the probability to activate a special ability. So, in my opinion, this modification already solve the main issue of the Grotesques. But reading your posts I had the feeling that you think that they are still weak. Thus, I came up with version two: Bone Blast: Instead of advancing, this unit may move one hex and perform... This is really strong. Now on a flag result in the initial melee attack, the Grotesques can do a lot of different things. As I wrote, I suspect that with this modification they become often more useful than the other elite Uthuk unit. I would like to test both modifications and see if the second is really overpowered. In case you want to test them, remember the possibility of MULTIPLE range attacks that both modifications make more likely and also nasty tactics specific of the second modification, like jumping out from a wood, attack in melee with 3 dice, score a flag then move back in the wood and perform a range attack with 2 dice on the same target without counter-attack. And you end up still protected in the wood. And if you test them, of course I would like to hear your opinion. Edit: Ah, the grammar!
  6. I would not recommend to introduce a "stackable condition" with multiple Bleeding tokens. This would be a totally new concept and it is prone to create confusion. I would rather leave the Bleeding condition as it is but change the Bone Blast text to read "Instead of advancing, this unit may move one hex and perform...". This modification is stronger than the one I originally suggested. It opens up very interesting tactical possibilities. Remember that a unit is NOT constrained to a single advance. With this modification, I think the Grotesques become more desirable than the Obscenes in a number of situations.
  7. Yes this is the way I play it: double heroic poisons and inflicts one damage to a previously not poisoned unit. I think the advantage of this modification is that it does not change the way the Vipers work and it's easy to remember (plus, they tend to roll a lot of double heroic in my games :-) ). This is not trivial. For instance, in one of my campaigns, in order to boost a bit the Vipers, I added the rule that poisoned units should roll a die at the beginning of their turn and take one hit on a heroic roll. This is nice because it mimics the effect that one normally associates to how poison works. The problem with this rule is that it introduces a kind of new mechanic, involving the rolling of dice before the play of the command card, which is new for players. As a consequence, people might easily forget it. It's ok for a campaign, in which you are in any case aware of the presence of "special" rules, but I would not recommend it as a generic boost in regular, scenario cards games.
  8. I think "less specialized" is an important component of "better all around". @phalgast: If I understood well, your point is that the information of what unit is better "all around" is useless, because at the end your are playing a specific scenario. It is of course true that you are playing a specific scenario, but it is also true that a large part of the thinking around the game, at least for me, abstract from a specific scenario. I'm thinking to questions like: what are the synergies of the different units? How their traits and powers interact with the cards? Which unit is good to keep the banner? Which unit is good to contest it? But if you think this analysis is sterile, I suggest an alternative. Propose a specific combination of scenario cards that you repute interesting and let's see how the Obscenes fare in that specific case.
  9. As Garrett was saying.. It's a gedankenexperiment, I'm not suggesting to do it in real games.
  10. The case in which the Grotesque is already on the banner... it should not have attacked at all :-) In any case, I would keep the range attack conditional upon forcing the enemy to retreat. So if you really want to add this possibility, I would say "After or instead of advancing...". On the Viper, this bring the probability to hit a poisoned target to 1/2. Not bad. I would think twice to leave a poisoned unit in the range of the vipers. And imagine if they attack with the Fury of Ylan....
  11. My suggestions below. The idea is to try to fix the units with the minimal modification of the rules. Viper Legions: I tried and tested several alternative for the vipers. Now I think a good choice would be: [Heroic] Poison the target and if already poisoned inflict one hit. Grotesque: This is untested, but hardly overpowered. Bone Blast: Replace "Instead advancing" with "After advancing" Blood Sisters: This is untested, but again not a game changer. It trasforms the sisters from a sink to a source of magic, which is also thematically more appealing. [Lore]: If Blood Magic is used, in addition to cause 1 damage to the target unit, it also grants 2 Lore tokens to the Uthuk player. More importantly: I'm available to test all these variants on Vassal  :-)
  12. Me neither, to say the truth. But imagine you have to chose the army BEFORE the scenario card is revealed. This is a good exercice to see which units one considers "generally" useful, and not only useful in some circumstances. That's the point of the "all purpose". I'm curious to know what would be your choice.
  13. I agree with everything you said. My personal experience with them is not particularly exciting. In theory they are a very useful unit, especially if appropriately placed to challenge the control of hot spots from the first turn. Consider, however, that in the Uthuk army the key deployment hex one/two hex away from the VP is typically occupied by the Chaos Lord. In practice, they tend to deliver less than I expect. The problem can of course be with my expectations. The don't find a place in my generic "all purpose" Uthuk army chaos lord + doom bringer + flesh rippers x 2 + blood harvester* x 6 + 3 LP + command tent * replace some blood harvesters with berserkers if wood hexes abound or are key positions
  14. Dear all, while we are waiting for the official document, I decided to prepare an unofficial collections of replies by FFG to players questions. The document is hosted on BGG and it's available here https://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/136459/errata-and-faq Do not hesitate to suggest additions or correct mistakes. Enjoy! G. P.S.: This post was initially mistakenly posted on the BattleLore 1st edition forum
  15. ****! The typos are many I suspect... I was unable to print the document and read it on paper :-) If you can just point out the bad entries I can try to fix them.