Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

Hi chaps,
With the zealotry of the (re)converted, I am looking at getting stuff to go
with Warrior. I already have the WRG lists and the Hutchby and Clark lists.
I've looked at the amendments on the Warrior site to the WRG lists but I'm
thinking of trying to get the Books of Hosts for the Classical and Imperial
periods to keep me going until the Warrior lists come out. Question is, are
they a waste of time and/or money? The Hutchby and Clark lists have so many
inaccuracies in the notes and some rules aspects, I don't have much regard
for the lists themselves. Are the Hosts books more of the same?
TIA
Swampster

[scott holder]

With the zealotry of the (re)converted, I am looking at getting stuff to go
with Warrior. I already have the WRG lists and the Hutchby and Clark lists.
I've looked at the amendments on the Warrior site to the WRG lists but I'm
thinking of trying to get the Books of Hosts for the Classical and Imperial
periods to keep me going until the Warrior lists come out. Question is, are
they a waste of time and/or money? The Hutchby and Clark lists have so many
inaccuracies in the notes and some rules aspects, I don't have much regard
for the lists themselves. Are the Hosts books more of the same?

>Okay, don't hold me to this but, at least as far as Classical stuff goes,
anything you do from old WRG/NASAMW revisions and BOH is gonna be mostly
applicable to most anything in Classical Warrior. Again, things will most
likely be different around the margins but if you're wanting to play Seleucids,
ain't much gonna change in there.

>Imperial, that's a different story and dependent entirely on what lists you
intend to use. The Imperial Roman lists (Marians and Patricians will fall into
this category) will be based off of the NASAMW lists so start there and work on
the core troop types.

>FWIW, as List Ho, I've generally liked the BOH's interprative ideas *much*
better than Huckleberry/Clark who, while they usually get the general concepts
or troop types in print, oftentimes go off on ungodly tangents with the material
that I just don't feel is terribly well supported.

Scott
List Ho

----- Original Message -----
From: Holder, Scott
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: RE: [WarriorRules] Book of Hosts

>Okay, don't hold me to this but, at least as far as Classical stuff goes,
anything you do from old WRG/NASAMW revisions and BOH is gonna be mostly
applicable to most anything in Classical Warrior. Again, things will most
likely be different around the margins but if you're wanting to play
Seleucids, ain't much gonna change in there.

Its the 4thC BC to 1st AD which interests me. I like historical match-ups,
but don't much want to try to recreate actual battles. My main 'bag' is
Pontus - the notes in Huck/Clark are so bad that it put me off the book.
Anyone know what the BOH take is on Mithridates the Great? Any changes
comapred to WRG/NASAMW?

>FWIW, as List Ho, I've generally liked the BOH's interprative ideas *much*
better than Huckleberry/Clark who, while they usually get the general
concepts or troop types in print, oftentimes go off on ungodly tangents with
the material that I just don't feel is terribly well supported.

I agree. While the sources for the period are often so vague, offering every
potential possibility in a list doesn't appeal. I am keen to respond to new
research, and have changed things in the past in response to new ideas, but
I think H and C were sometimes trying to be different for the sake of it.

Swampster

[Kelly Wilkinson]

As I recalled, the BOH Pontic list gives more effective options and definitely
more chariots! Kelly

Peter Kershaw <Theswamp@...> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: Holder, Scott
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: RE: [WarriorRules] Book of Hosts

>Okay, don't hold me to this but, at least as far as Classical stuff goes,
anything you do from old WRG/NASAMW revisions and BOH is gonna be mostly
applicable to most anything in Classical Warrior. Again, things will most
likely be different around the margins but if you're wanting to play
Seleucids, ain't much gonna change in there.

Its the 4thC BC to 1st AD which interests me. I like historical match-ups,
but don't much want to try to recreate actual battles. My main 'bag' is
Pontus - the notes in Huck/Clark are so bad that it put me off the book.
Anyone know what the BOH take is on Mithridates the Great? Any changes
comapred to WRG/NASAMW?

>FWIW, as List Ho, I've generally liked the BOH's interprative ideas *much*
better than Huckleberry/Clark who, while they usually get the general
concepts or troop types in print, oftentimes go off on ungodly tangents with
the material that I just don't feel is terribly well supported.

I agree. While the sources for the period are often so vague, offering every
potential possibility in a list doesn't appeal. I am keen to respond to new
research, and have changed things in the past in response to new ideas, but
I think H and C were sometimes trying to be different for the sake of it.

Swampster



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Now I'm even more interested!
Trouble is, the UK supplier is out of stock, so now I have to wait! Can
anyone list the differences to whet my appetite?
Swampster
----- Original Message -----
From: kelly wilkinson
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 10:49 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Book of Hosts


As I recalled, the BOH Pontic list gives more effective options and
definitely more chariots! Kelly