Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

<<With some of the recent talk I've been hearing about Fantasy Warrior,
I was wondering how easy it would be to take an existing historical
list to play against a fantasy list opponent? Could you simply take a
historical list essentially as is, and add/substitute some leaders
(generals,heroes, and mages) and/or creatures? Would this be
unbalanced for either side?>>

We have found that - so far - you can do this straight up. Meaning, for
example, that since a mage costs 100 points, if you have an historical list and
your opponent has a fantasy list with a mage, you have 100 more points of
troops and therefore it should be balanced as long as we got the cost of a mage
right given its power in the game. If we found that a list with 1600 points
of conventional troops always lost to a list with 1500 points of troops with
a mage then we obviously got the points wrong. That is what playtesting is
all about. Same with Creatures, Large Creatures, Behemoths, fighting mounts,
flyers, magic items, etc.

<<As an example, could you play something like the Italian Condotta,
with leaders put in, against an army of orcs?>>

Yes, and we have. In fact, FanWar will include all the 'myth' lists as it
does now for Arab mythology. For example, there will be a medieval mythos
list where you take from a set of feudal/medieval lists and add to it
creatures/mages, etc. appropriate to that mythos. I am working on the Aztec
myth list
now - where you take a base list from NWW and get to add in such things as
quezocoatl and dark priests....

<< And if so, shouldn't
FanWar include some guidelines for how to go about doing this?>>

I will include a blurb that says points v points you can play a FanWar list
vs any 'normal' list as well...

Jon




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

With some of the recent talk I've been hearing about Fantasy Warrior,
I was wondering how easy it would be to take an existing historical
list to play against a fantasy list opponent? Could you simply take a
historical list essentially as is, and add/substitute some leaders
(generals,heroes, and mages) and/or creatures? Would this be
unbalanced for either side?

As an example, could you play something like the Italian Condotta,
with leaders put in, against an army of orcs? And if so, shouldn't
FanWar include some guidelines for how to go about doing this?

I have begun talking to my own club about using FanWar instead of Warhammer
Fantasy Battles. Most of us have a Warhammer army of some kind that could be
used. The problems faced in converting from Warhammer to FanWar, have allot
of crossover with the problems of using Historicals vs. a Fantasy opponent.

Basing is the main stumbling block. We would have to use the 30mm basing
scheme, but I can't see anyone wanting to remove figures off their
individual bases and in so doing, be unable to use them in a Warhammer
tourney.

There are 2 sizes of warhammer base. The small size is 20mm wide, so 4 on an
80mm frontage works quite well as what we call a close order formation.
Unfortunately, the slightly larger base is 25mm wide. 3 of these together
make a good approximation of Loose Order formation, however, they don't
quite make an 80mm frontage. What to do?

The solution I see, is to create Unit Trays that assume an 80mm frontage,
and allow 3 of the 25mm bases to occupy the correct amount of space. This
also allows the player to correct for depth. Three of these figures are now
sitting on an 80mm x 30mm stand even though they are all based individually.
If metal trays are used, you can magnetize the bases so they stick better.

To tie this in to the original thread, My Chinese army, based for 25mm, can
also be placed on unit trays that make up the additional frontage. Add a few
Chinese Dragons, some sorcerers, and a battery of Rocket Launchers, and I
think you have a very good Mythical Chinese army.

My other Fantasy Army is Wood Elves and I am looking forward to trying them
out with the Fantasy Warrior system later this year. I have some painting to
complete first.

Hope this inspires someone.

Allan


----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2005 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Fantasy/Historical Warrior Crossover Rules?


>
>
> <<With some of the recent talk I've been hearing about Fantasy Warrior,
> I was wondering how easy it would be to take an existing historical
> list to play against a fantasy list opponent? Could you simply take a
> historical list essentially as is, and add/substitute some leaders
> (generals,heroes, and mages) and/or creatures? Would this be
> unbalanced for either side?>>
>
> We have found that - so far - you can do this straight up. Meaning, for
> example, that since a mage costs 100 points, if you have an historical
> list and
> your opponent has a fantasy list with a mage, you have 100 more points of
> troops and therefore it should be balanced as long as we got the cost of
> a mage
> right given its power in the game. If we found that a list with 1600
> points
> of conventional troops always lost to a list with 1500 points of troops
> with
> a mage then we obviously got the points wrong. That is what playtesting
> is
> all about. Same with Creatures, Large Creatures, Behemoths, fighting
> mounts,
> flyers, magic items, etc.
>
> <<As an example, could you play something like the Italian Condotta,
> with leaders put in, against an army of orcs?>>
>
> Yes, and we have. In fact, FanWar will include all the 'myth' lists as
> it
> does now for Arab mythology. For example, there will be a medieval
> mythos
> list where you take from a set of feudal/medieval lists and add to it
> creatures/mages, etc. appropriate to that mythos. I am working on the
> Aztec myth list
> now - where you take a base list from NWW and get to add in such things
> as
> quezocoatl and dark priests....
>
> << And if so, shouldn't
> FanWar include some guidelines for how to go about doing this?>>
>
> I will include a blurb that says points v points you can play a FanWar
> list
> vs any 'normal' list as well...
>
> Jon
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Charles Yaw]

To solve the basing problem of converting Warhammer to FanWar, I have done
both the following here in KC. 1. Some of my Warhammer models have medal
squares attached to the GW bases so I can put them on magnetic movement
trays. Just make the appropriate size bases and put the models on. You can
use strip magnets or business card magnets (available at most office supply
stores) for this. 2. For models without medal bases I have used sticky
tack. Just stick some on the bottom of the model and stick it to the new
base. When you want to convert back to Warhammer just remove the tack.

Charles

> Basing is the main stumbling block. We would have to use the 30mm basing
> scheme, but I can't see anyone wanting to remove figures off their
> individual bases and in so doing, be unable to use them in a Warhammer
> tourney.
>
> There are 2 sizes of warhammer base. The small size is 20mm wide, so 4 on
an
> 80mm frontage works quite well as what we call a close order formation.
> Unfortunately, the slightly larger base is 25mm wide. 3 of these together
> make a good approximation of Loose Order formation, however, they don't
> quite make an 80mm frontage. What to do?
>
> The solution I see, is to create Unit Trays that assume an 80mm frontage,
> and allow 3 of the 25mm bases to occupy the correct amount of space. This
> also allows the player to correct for depth. Three of these figures are
now
> sitting on an 80mm x 30mm stand even though they are all based
individually.
> If metal trays are used, you can magnetize the bases so they stick better.
>
> To tie this in to the original thread, My Chinese army, based for 25mm,
can
> also be placed on unit trays that make up the additional frontage. Add a
few
> Chinese Dragons, some sorcerers, and a battery of Rocket Launchers, and I
> think you have a very good Mythical Chinese army.
>
> My other Fantasy Army is Wood Elves and I am looking forward to trying
them
> out with the Fantasy Warrior system later this year. I have some painting
to
> complete first.
>
> Hope this inspires someone.
>
> Allan
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <JonCleaves@...>
> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2005 11:00 AM
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Fantasy/Historical Warrior Crossover Rules?
>
>
> >
> >
> > <<With some of the recent talk I've been hearing about Fantasy Warrior,
> > I was wondering how easy it would be to take an existing historical
> > list to play against a fantasy list opponent? Could you simply take a
> > historical list essentially as is, and add/substitute some leaders
> > (generals,heroes, and mages) and/or creatures? Would this be
> > unbalanced for either side?>>
> >
> > We have found that - so far - you can do this straight up. Meaning,
for
> > example, that since a mage costs 100 points, if you have an historical
> > list and
> > your opponent has a fantasy list with a mage, you have 100 more points
of
> > troops and therefore it should be balanced as long as we got the cost
of
> > a mage
> > right given its power in the game. If we found that a list with 1600
> > points
> > of conventional troops always lost to a list with 1500 points of troops
> > with
> > a mage then we obviously got the points wrong. That is what
playtesting
> > is
> > all about. Same with Creatures, Large Creatures, Behemoths, fighting
> > mounts,
> > flyers, magic items, etc.
> >
> > <<As an example, could you play something like the Italian Condotta,
> > with leaders put in, against an army of orcs?>>
> >
> > Yes, and we have. In fact, FanWar will include all the 'myth' lists as
> > it
> > does now for Arab mythology. For example, there will be a medieval
> > mythos
> > list where you take from a set of feudal/medieval lists and add to it
> > creatures/mages, etc. appropriate to that mythos. I am working on the
> > Aztec myth list
> > now - where you take a base list from NWW and get to add in such things
> > as
> > quezocoatl and dark priests....
> >
> > << And if so, shouldn't
> > FanWar include some guidelines for how to go about doing this?>>
> >
> > I will include a blurb that says points v points you can play a FanWar
> > list
> > vs any 'normal' list as well...
> >
> > Jon
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Sticky tack is a nice idea!

Thanks Charles

Allan

[joncleaves]

There are 2 sizes of warhammer base. The small size is 20mm wide, so 4 on an
80mm frontage works quite well as what we call a close order formation.
Unfortunately, the slightly larger base is 25mm wide. 3 of these together
make a good approximation of Loose Order formation, however, they don't
quite make an 80mm frontage. What to do?>>

Renaissance Ink and Wargames Accessories sell pre-made bases that are 80mm wide
and 30, 40, 60, 80mm deep.

For me personally, all my Warhammer and Middle earth figs are magnetized on the
bottom and I buy metal bases and just arrange the figs on them and use them as
elements straight up. Charles has already mentioned sticky tac as another
alternative.

We have played a 30mm tourney and no-one had to rebase anything to play.

Jon

Doesn't anyone play FanWar in 25/28mm simply based the same as
conventional Warrior? This would be what you would need to do,wouldn't
it, in order to play against opponents existing Historical armies?

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
> Renaissance Ink and Wargames Accessories sell pre-made bases that
are 80mm wide and 30, 40, 60, 80mm deep.
>
> For me personally, all my Warhammer and Middle earth figs are
magnetized on the bottom and I buy metal bases and just arrange the
figs on them and use them as elements straight up. Charles has
already mentioned sticky tac as another alternative.
>
> We have played a 30mm tourney and no-one had to rebase anything to play.
>
> Jon