PDA

View Full Version : separate the orcs from the gobbos!



mattieice
20-01-2008, 15:32
I proposed this awhile ago, but after reading the High Elf book I was reminded of it. The High elf book has way more pages than the O&G book and because of it, it has way more art and history. The Orc and Goblin book shorter with way more troop choices so there's barely any background or art. If they separate the two races, they'll have the opportunity to flesh out the goblins more, especially forest goblins, but still allow the two armies to swap choices. The book is way too stuffed at the moment. I'd like to see more goblin armies and the return of forest goblins. Any thoughts?

Odin
20-01-2008, 16:11
I proposed this awhile ago, but after reading the High Elf book I was reminded of it. The High elf book has way more pages than the O&G book and because of it, it has way more art and history. The Orc and Goblin book shorter with way more troop choices so there's barely any background or art. If they separate the two races, they'll have the opportunity to flesh out the goblins more, especially forest goblins, but still allow the two armies to swap choices. The book is way too stuffed at the moment. I'd like to see more goblin armies and the return of forest goblins. Any thoughts?

No, Orcs and Goblins are far more integrated than (for example) Daemons and Beastmen. Doesn't make sense to me.

Breakpain
20-01-2008, 16:27
I know, what you have in your mind. Itīs sad, but if they had separate it, there would occur many problems. It should stay in one book, but it could have more pages ...

Felworth
20-01-2008, 17:12
Surely there are better ways for you to get your background fix that doesn't involve me having to purchase two books that have so easily been placed into one.

Plus, the guy that wrote the latest OnG book had little interest in the Greenskins to begin with so I can't imagine he would have done a more comprehensive job if forced to writer two books.

Gorbad Ironclaw
20-01-2008, 17:37
That would be saying there should be two Empire books, one for Knights and one for State Troopers.

Arnizipal
20-01-2008, 17:46
The High elf book has way more pages than the O&G book and because of it, it has way more art and history. This is the main problem. Back in the days of 6th edition all armybooks (except Hordes of Chaos) were 80 pages long. Compare that to the armybooks of 4th and 5th edition who would often go over the 100 page mark.

I feel GW made a good move with the bigger High Elf armybook. I hope they'll add extra pages to the other armybooks as well when they get an update.

Anardakil
20-01-2008, 17:57
Or they could just add more pages :P

mattieice
20-01-2008, 18:17
well, the goblin choices really arent choices. the goblins are underdeveloped and theres almost no reason to get common goblins. why not give them the attention they deserve?

Arnizipal
20-01-2008, 18:25
That can be fixed by giving them some sort of special rule.
No need to have an all separate Goblin armybook for that.

Felworth
20-01-2008, 18:31
That can be fixed by giving them some sort of special rule.


I would suggest ASF.

Seems to be a really popular special rule right now.


Background explanation could be... uh, training. Like, lots of it.

Shamfrit
20-01-2008, 20:14
well, the goblin choices really arent choices. the goblins are underdeveloped and theres almost no reason to get common goblins. why not give them the attention they deserve?

:wtf:


They have the attention they deserve, making them stronger or 'buffing dem' up' would make them, if anything entirely not goblin like at all! It only seems to prove a point, you either want strength over tactics and speed (, which is the Goblin plus point) or you simply want a no brainer force of basha orcs, without having to pull elaborate and tricksy traps to lull your opponent into being stabbed and massacred by goblins from all sides!

zak
20-01-2008, 20:30
I kind of see where the OP is coming from. However, the O+G book seems to be going in a cycle with Orcs then Gobbo's in dominance. I would hope that next time round they put someone who gives a **** about O+G in charge so that they can atleast get some semblance of balance in the army. It is very Orc orientated although the boar riders got royally shafted! I would still not like to see separate books, just one GOOD one!

memitchell747
21-01-2008, 02:52
The O&G book has plenty of background. The history of 5 or 6 Waaghs, each ending in utter failure. You guys talk like those were a cut-and-paste from previous books, or something. Oh, and lots of dead Special Characters.

Shimmergloom
21-01-2008, 02:58
This is ridiculous. The orc and goblin book doesn't lack fluff cause they goblins and orcs are together.

It lacks fluff because 22 of the 80 pages are a glorified catalog, while the high elves get over 100pgs with only about 14pgs for the catalog.

So HE have a 90pg book, while O&G have a 58pg book.

The problem lies with them trying to sell you models instead of giving you fluff.

Even if the book wasn't just a glorified catalog, you can't seperate them like chaos and then make goblins special choices in an orc army, that would be ridiculous.

dabiggrotsboss
21-01-2008, 03:00
I would say no as well. I like playing the separate armies, but like being able to integrate.

Over 10,000pts of O&G goodness, they work well together and apart.

Braad
21-01-2008, 08:44
Add more pages!

Reminds me of the spam I often get in my e-mail: "add more inches!", which in fact could be very handy in Warhammer...

But anyway, a few more pages would be nice. I don't mind pages with nicely painted orcs and gobbo's, I sure don't want the two to be seperated. But 6th ed book had way more stories&stuff to read. Removing those sure is not a fix... I can imagine why they would reduce some rules (though arguably this wasn't always for the best) but there was no reason to reduce the entire amount of text.

By the way, for people asking for more forest gobbo's, IIRC the stats for spider gobbo's are exactly the same as for wolf gobbo's, so it would be quite logically that on foot forest gobbo's would have just the same stats as normal gobbo's. Just add feathers.

Ward.
21-01-2008, 12:36
Less seperation, more devotion. Gw should have learned from the DE debacle that putting someone that doesn't care about the army in charge of writing the book results a slightly off key product.

Pilgrim
21-01-2008, 13:19
Then again, they should remember from the super-powered horror of the 3rd edition Codex: Chaos, or the infamous Warhammer Armies: Skaven by Alessio Cavatore that putting someone who's too enthusiastic in charge (as in, being a huuuge fan of the race/army they're writing about) is just as much of a problem, in the vast majority of cases leading to rampant 'codex creep' and ridiculously hyperbolic fiction, among other things.

Adrian

Nephilim of Sin
21-01-2008, 13:56
This is ridiculous. The orc and goblin book doesn't lack fluff cause they goblins and orcs are together.

It lacks fluff because 22 of the 80 pages are a glorified catalog, while the high elves get over 100pgs with only about 14pgs for the catalog.

So HE have a 90pg book, while O&G have a 58pg book.

The problem lies with them trying to sell you models instead of giving you fluff.

Even if the book wasn't just a glorified catalog, you can't seperate them like chaos and then make goblins special choices in an orc army, that would be ridiculous.

I see what you mean with this, but one thing I would like to add. I myself am falling victim to the 'advertisement and catalogue' hate, more now then ever. Then I remembered something; before Warseer (and the occassional Portant visit), this was all I had to get ideas. Yeah, I could wait (hopefully) for the White Dwarf to feature the army, but if I wanted to see something painted, different color schemes, painting guides, etc, all I had to do was flip to the book. The more references the better. Of course, that has all changed now, but then it was crucial.

I do agree, we need a throwback to the old editions, in more ways then one. The army books were great, full of stories, and made you want to play the army because of the fluff, not the models (and looking at some 5th Edition models, you can see why!). After all, look at what they did with 40k third; we went from these beautiful, huge books to an overpriced underpaged set of rules with no fluff whatsoever. At least Tau changed that somewhat.

Dominatrix
21-01-2008, 14:15
Then again, they should remember from the super-powered horror of the 3rd edition Codex: Chaos, or the infamous Warhammer Armies: Skaven by Alessio Cavatore that putting someone who's too enthusiastic in charge (as in, being a huuuge fan of the race/army they're writing about) is just as much of a problem, in the vast majority of cases leading to rampant 'codex creep' and ridiculously hyperbolic fiction, among other things.

Adrian

If only even a token amount of decent playtesting was done before any given codex/ army book was released, no such problems would even exist. And it is a million times better any book is written by a huge fan of a race than to be written by someone who has never played that race or even worse hates it.

Cap'n Facebeard
21-01-2008, 14:51
That would be saying there should be two Empire books, one for Knights and one for State Troopers.

Or an Ogre Kingdoms book, and a Gnoblars book.

Urgat
21-01-2008, 15:15
The O&G book has plenty of background. The history of 5 or 6 Waaghs, each ending in utter failure. You guys talk like those were a cut-and-paste from previous books, or something.

Well yeah, that's exactly what the history about the waaaghs are, cut&paste? They were all in 5th edition book already, save Grimgor.
Anyway, back to topic, orcs and gobs shold not be separated (not really an issue anyway, it will never happen, so :p), most greenskin armies feature both. It's not like beastmen and deamons and chaos mortals who -tend- to ally, it's really the opposite in fact, sometimes gobs -tend- to want to get rid of rocs and vice-versa. But most often they're together, they're the same army.
As for more goblin love, yeah, I'd like that too, of course. But forest goblins, well, as much as I like them, it's pointless to bring them back as they used to be, since they were just common gobs that couldn't take armor. Not so shady, honestly. They could use a stat swap like common and night gobelins have (better I for night gobs, better Ld for common gobs, so, dunno, better BS for forest gobs?), or different weapon choices at least (javelins? Nobody seem to use that, I wonder why they're even in the BRB).
As for common gobs being useless? Well, I'd be overjoyed if they got toys like the nightgobs (netters, fanatics), so yeah, I used to think of them as the poor man (gob?)'s choice not so long ago, but I've changed my mind. Ok, save for Ld, what's their main difference with night gobs? Well, they can get down to 4+ save. Nothng incredible, most armies can do that, sure; but not most gobs. It's gobs that can actually take a beating. Like gob tanks, to speak in MMO terms. So I've tryed that, a gobbo unit with shields and hand weapons. Since it's here to survive charges, I make it wide (7 wide) because I don't care if it's not too mobile: it's a large unit, hard to avoid, and 7 wide means some gobs might fight back (that's a bonus :p). Well it works well, in fact. They've survived charges from ogres and made them flee, they've stood up to a unit of chaos warriors with a tooled up general for several turns (there's some luck in that, granted), well, they work nicely. If you manage to get netters at the same enemy they're in contact with, they become nigh hard to kill be about anything. And that's golden :)

Cap'n Facebeard
21-01-2008, 15:27
Well, they can get down to 4+ save. Nothng incredible, most armies can do that, sure; but not most gobs. It's gobs that can actually take a beating.

True. In my Chaos army my Marauders have survived terrifying enemy charges just through having full ranks and a 4+ save. IMO, the lower WS of gobbo's wouldn't make that much of a diff (esp for me, as I usually vs Undead).

classicmullet
21-01-2008, 15:36
I proposed this awhile ago, but after reading the High Elf book I was reminded of it. The High elf book has way more pages than the O&G book and because of it, it has way more art and history. The Orc and Goblin book shorter with way more troop choices so there's barely any background or art. If they separate the two races, they'll have the opportunity to flesh out the goblins more, especially forest goblins, but still allow the two armies to swap choices. The book is way too stuffed at the moment. I'd like to see more goblin armies and the return of forest goblins. Any thoughts?


why do you care anyways , making these kind of remarks shows me you have no love for OnG .

Lordsaradain
21-01-2008, 20:40
Rename the armybook: Greenskins

It's not just gobbos and orcs, there's snotlings too! ;)

I love them all and would hate tp see them seperated from each other.
Besides, if they were, who would my orcs kick/throw about when they're bored? ;(

Braad
21-01-2008, 21:13
javelins? Nobody seem to use that, I wonder why they're even in the BRB.

Skinks have javelins as an option instead of blowpipes. A friend of mine has a unit with those.


Then I remembered something; before Warseer (and the occassional Portant visit), this was all I had to get ideas. Yeah, I could wait (hopefully) for the White Dwarf to feature the army, but if I wanted to see something painted, different color schemes, painting guides, etc, all I had to do was flip to the book. The more references the better. Of course, that has all changed now, but then it was crucial.

Exactly! Never forget were you came from!
But then again, if you don't, also remember that we had more army books then just the current one. The 6th edition is full of cool stories and fluff. Maybe not always still applicable, but fun to read anyway and might take away a bit of the pain.
I'm actually thinking about buying the 5th edition book from ebay or something, just to see it sometime.

Urgat
22-01-2008, 14:56
It's nice. If you're a greenskin fan, I also recommand the 5th edition... HE army book :p
It got a whole story retracing Grom's ransacking of Ulthuan, very nice story too.

Shimmergloom
23-01-2008, 06:50
I see what you mean with this, but one thing I would like to add. I myself am falling victim to the 'advertisement and catalogue' hate, more now then ever. Then I remembered something; before Warseer (and the occassional Portant visit), this was all I had to get ideas. Yeah, I could wait (hopefully) for the White Dwarf to feature the army, but if I wanted to see something painted, different color schemes, painting guides, etc, all I had to do was flip to the book. The more references the better. Of course, that has all changed now, but then it was crucial.

I know that this is important, but come on. There's 5 giant pictures. Including a full page pictures. That's just flat out 'buy this model!'. There's no ideas there.

I'm not saying you can't have pictures, but the old books had pictures with articles for painting and hobby and conversions.

This is nothing of the sort. This is a 'buy it!' catalog plain and simple and lazy.

You can show pictures of the models and do proper articles together. You have an 80pg book for the army next to chaos(and DoW, but they have no book) that has the most troop choices in the game. Empire is around 3rd and got 96pgs. HE gets 104. O&G should have easily had at least 96. Then take about 8 of those catalog pages and convert them to hobby pages(to go with the 2 pages that are the closest thing the current book has to hobby pages). Add 4 pages for tactics. 8 more pages of fluff. 2-4 more pages to complete the rules, which are woefully incomplete(this means just correct and clear up the rules and include rules that are left out and have to be or are yet to be errata'd. The fact that the rules and points values are horrid are a seperate issue). And any leftover pages showing greenskins fighting different races with model pics.

Nephilim of Sin
23-01-2008, 07:39
@Shimmergloom

Sorry if I did not elaborate enough in my post; I agree that the books need to be expanded, we need the history, etc. I agree that the books don't have the same 'awe' factor that they used to. I was just trying to address why such articles are important, since they have been getting a lot of flack recently, especially from myself. The vast diversity, coupled with the humor, is what drew me to O&G in the first place; it is just not being properly reflected in the book you only buy once (or every five years...). We really need more content, but even just pictures coupled with a few painting articles need to be included, so long as other areas are being addressed properly.

Braad
23-01-2008, 08:28
I believe I read somewhere that the guy in charge of the new O&G book doesn't even care that much for them and doesn't have an army or special interest for them...

Well, to be honest I think that this is a very good ingredient to get the wrong (green) soup.

But I had the same feeling indeed, that there was a "thing" about the 6th edition book which was very orcy, which the 7th edition book just lacked.

Urgat
23-01-2008, 10:42
I believe I read somewhere that the guy in charge of the new O&G book doesn't even care that much for them and doesn't have an army or special interest for them...

He never even PLAYED them. Texto from White Dwarf. Best guy for the job, I suppose?

Arnizipal
23-01-2008, 14:06
On the other hand one must be careful whenh putting a true fan of the army in charge of the project (as Pilgrim already pointed out (http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2280612#post2280612) in this very thread).

Jake Thornton did a good job on the 6th editon book.
Matthew Ward's version is rather lacking in character, even though the rules were tightened a fair deal.

Avian
23-01-2008, 14:21
Matthew Ward's version is rather lacking in character, even though the rules were tightened a fair deal.
Where exactly are they tightened? I can find lots of places where rules have been shortened, but that has mostly caused them to become unclear as important bits have been left out.
:confused:

Arnizipal
23-01-2008, 14:55
The choppa rule is more effective (maybe a bit too much), the Animosity rules have been simplified and Netter rules are less of a hassle.

Chadjabdoul
23-01-2008, 15:16
The O&G have not had a decent army book since rick priestley's 4th-5th edition. The other problem apart from the lack of background is the lack of freedom in choices. (i don't mean unit types, i mean equipment choices)
Also magic banners. If they simply gave you an allowance of points (eg. 10% of total army points) to spend on magic banners which could be given to any unit, then all those goblins only banners would have made sense. Now it's completely ridiculous since no goblin unit can carry a magic banner.
And to answer the original question, no, the two races should stay together but the book should give you the freedom to create themed armies (which it kind of does though not well enough).
Finally, I find ridiculous that there are more giants than ogres in O&G armies these days. Giants (like dragons) should be rare creatures that never appear in armies smaller than (at least) 3000 pts. But GW main motivation is making money these days and not taking care of the fantasy world we all love.

Shimmergloom
23-01-2008, 18:51
The choppa rule is more effective (maybe a bit too much), the Animosity rules have been simplified and Netter rules are less of a hassle.

The animosity rules are not as clear as it seems. Especially since you'll constantly run into people who think that squig hoppers and herds are somehow immune to animosity.

And the chart is suppose to be more simple and make animosity take less time to test for, however, if you have black orcs in your unit and fail, it will take just as long for you to work out the damage that they do than ever. And they do much more damage to your units than what would happen in 6th edition when two units charged each other. Which was honestly a very rare occurence. While black orcs are basically going to kill troops every game.

Warlord Ghazak Gazhkull
23-01-2008, 18:59
Well I don't want seperate books for OnG but I would like a bigger book with more content and hobby articles. And more fluff would be cool or a new character or bring back wurrzag.

Greetz
G

Wolfmother
23-01-2008, 19:01
i quite like the preposistion as long as they could still go together like chaos it would leve room for differnt types of goblins and stuff!

Shimmergloom
23-01-2008, 19:15
The O&G have not had a decent army book since rick priestley's 4th-5th edition. The other problem apart from the lack of background is the lack of freedom in choices. (i don't mean unit types, i mean equipment choices)
Also magic banners. If they simply gave you an allowance of points (eg. 10% of total army points) to spend on magic banners which could be given to any unit, then all those goblins only banners would have made sense. Now it's completely ridiculous since no goblin unit can carry a magic banner.
And to answer the original question, no, the two races should stay together but the book should give you the freedom to create themed armies (which it kind of does though not well enough).
Finally, I find ridiculous that there are more giants than ogres in O&G armies these days. Giants (like dragons) should be rare creatures that never appear in armies smaller than (at least) 3000 pts. But GW main motivation is making money these days and not taking care of the fantasy world we all love.

As for the banners, they just needed a simple rule that if your general was a goblin, then one unit of goblins get a magic banner up to 50pts.

It doesn't need to be anymore complex than that.

As for the ogre deal, I agree mostly. Giants though have to be allowed under 3k or you'll never see them. So leave giants alone.

But ogres and greenskins should be closer to like how the chaos books work. They are natural allies as much as the two races could be allies.

Now I don't think for a minute there should be an ally rule like kislev has. I don't think that would be realistic. Nor should there be free choice like chaos has.

But you can link the two races closer in a logical way. Which could be done in a white dwarf article or in the next OK book).

To start ogres already have 3 gnoblar units and their own version of giants. And greenskins can take 4 OK DoW units. So the link is there in a primitive way already. In addition to the fact that ogres were part of the greenskin army until 6th edition.

The way I would strengthen it would be to say any orc and goblin army that takes an ogre DoW unit from the OK book as a rare can take gnoblar fighters as core(but not counting toward the minimum) and trappers and scraplaunchers as special.

This would represent an ogre band joining a waaagh! to reap destruction on dwarfs and humies.

On the ogre end they already have some greenskin units. I would strengthen it by saying Ogres could take common goblins as core(but not toward their minimum) and orcs and black orcs as special. Maybe wolfriders as special. That might go too far though. This would represent small greenskin tribes joining powerful ogre bands.

A few rules added to say that gnoblars now use the greenskin animosity table, however if a waaagh! is called they add 0 for ranks and can only ever have goblin characters in their units.

Ogres would now also ignore goblin, squig and snotling panic.

Cause in the end it's not orcs and goblins who should ever be seperated. What really happened is that ogres and greenskins were seperated in 6th and years and years of being allies was just forgotten. So that history should be strengthened.

Braad
23-01-2008, 19:58
The choppa rule is more effective (maybe a bit too much), the Animosity rules have been simplified and Netter rules are less of a hassle.

Indeed, choppa made the cheap boyz very good. And the not so good gobbo's get an increase in price. Both can be considered okay, but not when compared to each other. Orcs are such a better choice now. I've played with the new book quite often now, and indeed, I use my gobbo's less frequently, usually just as a filler if I need a bit more core. That's a shame, since I consider them both as an important part of the army...

The never-used gobbo banners, I noticed that too. You really need a goblin BSB, but I never used one yet. It's a shame, cause theres quite a few of them.

Same goes for other magic items. The expensive ones are orc-only, the cheap ones are gobbo-only. It makes it a bit difficult to give gobbo's a really nice big axe, and its often not possible, especially in larger games, to fully equip all my characters to my liking. There are too few cheap items for orcs to fill that last bit of points.
And I still miss Drog's dead 'ard armoud. At least the general had some good protection, those days...

Shimmergloom
23-01-2008, 20:41
The main problem with drog's was that it was such a no brainer.

Maybe if it was a 2+ armor save for 30pts it would be less of a no brainer. And if the +1T armor was also heavy armor or reduced to 40pts then both would be seen.

The one thing I do love is the new magic item selection and how so many of them are clearly looted items. I love that.

I'd still add about 3 magic armor choices and a bit better arcane items. Waagh! paint is neat sounding, but it would be better as a enchanted item that added +1 to your animosity and waaagh! roll(1's still always fail).

Chadjabdoul
24-01-2008, 01:46
The main reason I have a problem with ogres no longer being part of o&g armies while giants stayed is suspension of disbelief.
Call me fluffy but in order to enjoy a game of warhammer I need to see two fantasy armies clashing and not a bunch of minis getting moved on a table.
I understand the need to have armies distinct (something that I believe had to do with Chaos dwarves dissappearing since they had too many o&g units) but for years we've known ogres to be roaming the old world in small numbers, while relatively recently we got to know that they are the dominant race on the mountains of mourn.
Fair enough, but one would think that the ones wandering about the old world are still more numerous than giants, therefore more likely to be seen in an o&g army.
As for the forest goblins dissappearing blame the idiot mr Ward for forcing light armour on all common goblins. (f. goblins= common goblins living in a forest)

Arnizipal
24-01-2008, 14:48
It's not like Orc armies are all that common in the Old World. WFB is a battle game and focusses on warfare, but armies the size of a 2000 points battle would only be seen once every decade or so. Most 'battles' between humans and greenskins would be Mordheim/Warhammer Skirmish sized raids and purges.

So I don't think the rareness of Giants destroys the suspension of disbelief when compared to Ogres. When you put things in perspective of a decade I'm sure an Orc Warlord could track down and bargain with a Giant.

mattieice
24-01-2008, 14:59
i quite like the preposistion as long as they could still go together like chaos it would leve room for differnt types of goblins and stuff!

Finally some support!

Gazak Blacktoof
24-01-2008, 15:14
And greenskins can take 4 OK DoW units. So the link is there in a primitive way already.

They can???

I've never seen this mentioned before I'd be interested to know where the rules for this are. I've got both the greenskin and ogre books.

Chadjabdoul
24-01-2008, 15:49
It's not like Orc armies are all that common in the Old World. WFB is a battle game and focusses on warfare, but armies the size of a 2000 points battle would only be seen once every decade or so. Most 'battles' between humans and greenskins would be Mordheim/Warhammer Skirmish sized raids and purges.



You think so? If you look at the number of models in a 2k army it's really not a big army at all. When a waaagh is described as a huge sea of greenskins then a serious greenskin invasion (happenning admittedly rarely) would probably be at least 5000 pts. A 2k army (10-20 mounted warriors and around 100 foot soldiers) is surely not a serious threat to a defended city.
Maybe it's just my point of view, created back when i got into the hobby (around 1992) when building an army would not cost you a fortune, and most players would have around 5-6k points of models in total and pick and mix from those to create a different army every time.
I suspect white dwarf is also an influence (back then a standard battle report would be 3000 pts with the occasional 10k plus mega battle here and there)

Braad
24-01-2008, 16:34
The main problem with drog's was that it was such a no brainer.

Maybe if it was a 2+ armor save for 30pts it would be less of a no brainer. And if the +1T armor was also heavy armor or reduced to 40pts then both would be seen.

But it was something! Now we have nearly nothing. Though the +1T armour is quite good, but it is only really usefull for warbosses, because it leaves no room for anything else on a big boss.
Main problem I have is this: If I charge a fully equiped enemy lord, he often has a high AS and Ward Save, we both have a chance of winning.
If he charges me, I will most probably lose, because I have nothing else then a good T to keep me from dying. That's not enough against anything smart enough to carry a great weapon.

Firebreather
24-01-2008, 19:19
I'm a new greenskin player, so I suppose I don't have much to add to this thread. I do, however, own the 4th/5th and 6th editions Orc and Goblin army books, so I'm lucky in that I don't have much of a lack of background.

At this point, I don't see the O&G's current army book as all that bad,certainly not to the point where there are some units I'd never consider taking. It's true that Orcs got the better end of the deal this time around, and that's fine I suppose, as I still find uses for gobbos.

Not to say there arent some things I'd like to see different, and I'm sure that list will grow as I continue playing them.

As for splitting O&G into two separate army books? I think not!

Braad
24-01-2008, 22:06
Its just the old veterans complaining about lost times. Same as granddad saying ol' times were so good.

Its part of human nature to try to keep what we have and only accept improvements.

Shimmergloom
24-01-2008, 23:15
They can???

I've never seen this mentioned before I'd be interested to know where the rules for this are. I've got both the greenskin and ogre books.

the OK book lets everyone take bulls, ironguts, leadbelchers as rare DoW and maneaters as 2 rare DoW.

My idea would be to just expand on the already there DoW concept of the those 4 ogre DoW units and the 3 greenskin gnoblar units in the Ogre army(plus their slavegiant) and ally the ogres and greenskins a bit closer together.

So while there's nothing stopping you from taking ogre bulls as rares in your greenskin army now, it's not exactly the same as when ogres were part of the greenskin list. Or even when ogres were part of the empire list.

Gazak Blacktoof
25-01-2008, 00:25
Ah, I see.

I thought there might already be a rule that allowed you to take 4 and I had inadvertantly missed it.. I didn't realise you were making a rule suggestion.