PDA

View Full Version : Should the O&G book be split?



Lord Malorne
22-01-2009, 09:54
Please Read Before Posting!

Now, while still a playable army that attracts many players (NG's for me) O&G's have, IMO, always suffered from having a single army book, a quick mention, Chaos has three (now thats out of the way).

So could an army book called Orcs be any good? or one called Goblins? What units could be added to bulk out the options? should each book have one or two units from its counterpart to remain a mixed horde?

Goblins (of all varieties) have enough options that in some cases, outnumber those of other army books, as do Orcs, yet they are crammed into one book with an unimpressive list and a rather small selection of magic items.

They have the units, the special characters and a few units can easily be added (Dust goblins, troglagobs....NG bat riders!) and each force has many options to keep them a full force.

For me its odd, to see an orc lead a goblin army, or an entire all Orc army with one unit of fanatic packed NG's :wtf:. The battle force is a mixed lot of units and I think the majority of O&G players swing towards one side over the other (though mixed forces do exist).

Wouldn't it be good to have an army book each? With unique units aswell as unique magic/items/special rules?

Here are a few units I would add to all Goblin list: NG bat riders, NG cave beasts (like yhetees), Goblin beserkers (Goblins with frenzy and great weapons), Chariots with different optiona (like spiders, wolves, cockatrices and other crazy stuff) More forest goblin presence, hill goblins, Dust goblins (and other Goblins from that WD). And basic Orcs from the Orc book (Boys, arrer boys and so on)

Orc:All current options (They have a lot ;)). Orc beastmasters? Orc clans (like LM spawnings?) Orc trackers? Orcs jannisaries from...cathay? (I know, dodgy) aswell as none specialised units from the Goblin book (basic Goblins, NG's and so on)
And it would add so much more room for background in each book aswell as nifty magic items and abilities.

I know, I know, its all wishful thinking, but come on, what would you add?

Quetzl
22-01-2009, 09:57
I'd back them being split but they'd need to be able to be used together. If GW said you can't intergrate the two books then I'd start to cry... :D

Anton
22-01-2009, 10:00
Actually, I think it would be quite cool. I think a lot of people wish they could make an all-goblin or all-orc army without feeling like they handicap themselves. I voted yes.

Lord Malorne
22-01-2009, 10:00
No using the other book, but as I said, each book would have several options from the other book in its pages.

the_picto
22-01-2009, 10:01
I vote no. What they need is an all goblin list to be a viable choice.

grahknar
22-01-2009, 10:06
I wouldn't mind, as long as you could still mix the two into one army. In my opinion though they should concentrate more on releasing new models, those goblins are terribly dated and the wolves have been around for god knows how long.

Braad
22-01-2009, 10:08
Simple no. I didn't spend over 4.5 years of hard work to see things messed up. When they split up, I think it would be highly probable that the books would not have the option for interaction, as the current course of GW shows that they wish to ban any connection between books. They don't seem to like the problems that arose when changing one book would also automatically mean you need to either change or FAQ another because of any links between them. IIRC I read some stuff on this by GW people actually saying so. All books should be standalone.

Examples: DOW entry removed from all books to get all their rules in one list and allow changes without the need to update all other armybooks, and of course the chaos books are now all seperate.

I'd rather have one bigger book than several smaller.
Ofcourse, as an O&G player I got a highly biassed opinion, but since I'm probably the major source of income (:p) for GW regarding this army, I should be entitled to such an opinion.

Lord Malorne
22-01-2009, 10:11
As I said, they will be stand alone, but will have the other more basic units in their books.

(Gonna get rid of that stupid poll)

Noserenda
22-01-2009, 10:23
Nope, i was annoyed when my undead army got split and marginally ticked off that my ancient Chaos army is now shattered too. The Last thing the Greenskins need is to be separated.

Lord Malorne
22-01-2009, 10:26
Why though? Your not losing anything.

W0lf
22-01-2009, 10:29
I could see it happening and wouldnt be bothered (i dont play them so thats moot).

However if they do/did it orcs should be ORCS and goblins should be GOBLINS. No combining and no cross-overs. Otherwise why the hell split them?

Whitehorn
22-01-2009, 10:35
Simple no. I didn't spend over 4.5 years of hard work to see things messed up.

Try saying that to a Chaos and Undead player of 20 years. My books have been split a dozen times :/

Urgat
22-01-2009, 10:52
Mmh, well, nope. In the absolute, yeah, that would be nice for me since I play mostly 100% gobs, but, the thing is, greenskins armies are usually mixed orcs/gobs. That's a fluff thing, much deeper than, say, chaos warriors and beastmen. 100% gobs or 100% orcs armies are more the exception than the rule, fluffwise, I believe.
And it's pretty clear GW is steering away from any interbook interaction (to the exception of ogres, of course), so there would be no possibility of mixing the two, that's not their strategy anymore.

Condottiere
22-01-2009, 10:55
I don't see a future for a standalone Goblin army book, because the first question I'd ask myself i, where are the real hard-hitting units they need to remain viable.

W0lf
22-01-2009, 11:02
Pure goblin armies work atm (to some degree)

My friends Goblin army scares me :P

Urgat
22-01-2009, 11:03
I don't see a future for a standalone Goblin army book, because the first question I'd ask myself i, where are the real hard-hitting units they need to remain viable.


Trolls, squigs, giants and charriots, that's really not the problem. They can also make up new units like cave squigs riders (kindda like bloodletters in jugg), stuff like that. Making a viable gob army really sin't the problem (I'm successful enough with my gobs as they stand anyway), the problem is that orcs and gobs are indisociable.

Lord Malorne
22-01-2009, 11:17
So as I listed in my first post, what would people add (besides, nope, never, comments).

Just play along and have fun, be creative and make up a new unit, I know it won't happen (I play WoC so know the crappy GW policy) so get over that and add what would be cool.

Guardian_A
22-01-2009, 11:27
I would love to see a larger/more detailed army book involving both Orcs and Goblins, but I wouldnt want to see it broke into two books. By breaking them down like that you would be throwing out the "Bigger is Better" theme! :evilgrin:

Mireadur
22-01-2009, 11:42
i hope not!

Btw for some reason i couldnt vote omg.

Condottiere
22-01-2009, 11:51
And once you've removed the goblins from an orc army, who would man the war-machines? Since all the monsters are now in another list, would you be just left with a bunch of Orcs, Savage, Black or otherwise?

Mireadur
22-01-2009, 12:02
Lets split ungors from gors too plz.. I believe they dont get along well.

Duke Georgal
22-01-2009, 12:19
I say no, but for a different reason!

My wife constantly reminds me (nags) about the number of armies I own, I have 16 now! Anyway, if they split O&G into two armies, that would bring me to 17 without even buying a single more figure. That would not be fair.

If I am going to endure matrimonial retribution for additional armies, I better get a couple hundred new figures out of it!

Bretonnia
Orcs & Goblins
Vampire Counts
Empire
Dwarfs
Beastmen
High Elves
Dark Elves (monster list)
Wood Elves (tribal feral females)
Tomb Kings (fallen cleric list)
Chaos Space Marines
Eldar
Orks
Soviet FOW
British FOW
German FOW

Urgat
22-01-2009, 12:27
So as I listed in my first post, what would people add (besides, nope, never, comments).

Just play along and have fun, be creative and make up a new unit, I know it won't happen (I play WoC so know the crappy GW policy) so get over that and add what would be cool.

ok, so you just want a wishlist? Fair enough, I'll make one, but just for gobs.
Obviously, you keep everything that already exists, plus the non greenskin units (giants, trolls) and the snots. Then I'd add the following:

forest goblins: same profile as common gobs, no armour, skirmishers, 10-20, no need for poisoned attacks, really.

Hill gobs: common gobs with WS 3 and access to heavy armour, shields, maybe +1 Ld (but then again, maybe not). No need for anything else.

Squig hoppers moved to core if the general is a night gob, but doesn't count in minimum number of units.

Also: global changes:
I'll replace the fear elves rule with something else like "look, nasty elves!": Gobs fear (to keep the "it's fluffy" people happy) AND hate elf units they don't outnumber two to one. Gives more chances to get that 6.

Also: common gobs can take shields AND bows at the same time. it's rather fluffy since common gobs bands are supposed to be raiders, and makes them a bit more interesting compared to the other gobs.

There, each goblin gets a core infantry, a core cavalry (ok, hoppers are not really cavalry, but they look like they are :p), plus a new, not OTT gob kind.

Special:
the night gobs have the herders, the common gobs have the charriots, therefore it makes sense that forest gobs need something. Let's take a gigantic spider, put a howda of some sort on it, plus some gobs on top of it all. No need for fancy rules, gigantic spiders plus a few gob attacks as a special choice ain't bad at all.
For the artillery choices, common gobs have the rock lobber and the spear chukka, they're fine.
Forest gobs don't strike me as being a species using artillery, so nothing for them there.
Night gobs, kindda the same as forest gobs, in fact. Instead, I'd give them something like salamanders. To save time, let's steal the gaz spitting squig from WAR, 3 squigs for two herders, skirmish, D6 S2 shots that ignore save per squig, something like that. Limited to two or three teams per choice.

rares:
Well there's nothing logical about rares in most species anyway, so we can get crazy in there.
So alongside the giants, trolls, snot pump wagons, doomdivers, let's add some fun stuff.

night gobs:
Cave squig hoppers: you take the current cave squig (hero mount), you put a regular night gob champion on it, you mix the two statlines, and you get the gob equivalent of a bloodcrusher, all with the inherent randomness of goblin troops (M:3D6, etc).
That should cover the night gobs.

Doomdivers, imho, cover the common gob choices, but if you really want to give them something, let's just remove the crew from a wolf charriot, and put a spear chukka on it. Sounds like something gobs would do, speeding through the battlefield while keeping some distance and shooting big sharp stuff.

Forest gobs... hem... spider swarms.

For characters, only need to add forest gob characters, give more differences between each kind (maybe bring back the old rules, like the free shrooms, the forest gob miscast bonus, and... well, dunno, make common gob shamans more survible some way or another), and that should be quite enough.
Edit: ah, no, I'd also give regular spider mounts to forest gob characters, not just the silly gigantic kind. really seems like they just forgot about it in the current army book, if you ask me.

Gazak Blacktoof
22-01-2009, 12:36
Splitting the army runs counter to the establish background which tells us that greenskins of all varieties flock to the banners of powerful warlords, spoiling for a fight.


Splitting chaos was bad, splitting greenskins would be worse.



I voted "No", just in case that wasn't clear.

EDIT: Well I would have if the poll wasn't closed.

Lord Malorne
22-01-2009, 12:46
Good ideas Urgat.

(I wish people would read the first post :cries:)

Harwammer
22-01-2009, 13:56
I think night goblins would make a good stand alone army; they seem to live in places where there are fewer orcs and have their own culture. They currently have all sorts of cool units and monsters, and I feel this could be expanded on further. Orcs would be left with the common goblins.

Although I feel night goblins could make a decent stand alone list, being a chaos and undead collector as well as a orc & goblin collector, I don't want to go through the aches of a split army again, so I don't think the split should be done.

Braad
22-01-2009, 17:17
I don't think this army needs anything new. Just some balancing, and maybe a more extended magic item list. Other than that, doing things like splitting is probably going to do more bad than good.

Thing is, where do you draw the line? What should we split, what shouldn't? We could split up empire in all its provinces...

Fluffwise, orcs and goblins are one army. Ofcourse, every now and then things fall apart a bit, but that happens anywhere.

Kahadras
22-01-2009, 17:37
Personaly I don't think they should be split as they should be able to work perfectly well together in a single armies book. I think that the O&G armies book is a hard one to balance in order to give people the option of playing various styles without suffering too many drawbacks. While spliting the book is one way to fix the problem at the end of the day I just think GW needs to just do a good job on the next O&G armies book.

Kahadras

RossS
22-01-2009, 17:43
No. Never. I would be positively heartbroken.

I hate to sound all Burkean, but they need to remain together for tradition's sake. Tearing them apart would require a drastic recasting of fluff, Warhammer convention and (here I go again) GW's own tradition. Orcs and Gobbos have always been partners, unlike the various Chaos forces whose degree of cooperation seems to vascillate between various editions. There would not really be (as far as I am aware) a precedent for seperate Orc and Goblins forces.

The problems that hobble the army at this point have nothing to do with the fact that Orcs and Goblins are "crammed" together. Tactically, Orcs and Goblins do work better when they work together. And the comparative brevity of fluff in the new edition can be dealt with by simply making the book a wee bit longer.

Col. Tartleton
22-01-2009, 22:52
Just give them a novel thick codex. 200+ pages should allow for a larger variety of stuff and multiple lists.

Solved.

Regular Orcs and Goblins
'Ard Boy Orcs
Night Goblins
Forest Goblins
Gnoblar and Hill Goblins
Savage Orcs
...

etc.

Condottiere
22-01-2009, 23:38
That would be a hardcover size; one problem would be if the softcover binding fell apart, and there seems to be a good chance it would, you can play 200 page pickup.

Dranthar
23-01-2009, 00:33
I think you make a very good case for splitting the O&G book. I'd personally like it, if only because I take a pure goblin army and would love to see more goblin madness. :D

The main concern however, would be making sure that they are different enough to other armies to make it worth while. If you're not careful, goblins could turn into a pseudo-skaven army, while orcs could become Pseudo-Chaos Mortals. I know it's not as simple as that, but it's something to be aware of.

The other thing is how integrated the two lists would remain. While you could possibly make both books similar to the Chaos Hordes of last edition, GW isn't really in the habit of doing that these days and there's also the consideration of keeping such list-mixing balanced without nerfing both armies.

Guardian_A
23-01-2009, 00:38
Just give them a novel thick codex. 200+ pages should allow for a larger variety of stuff and multiple lists.

Solved.

Regular Orcs and Goblins
'Ard Boy Orcs
Night Goblins
Forest Goblins
Gnoblar and Hill Goblins
Savage Orcs
...

etc.


Sounds great! Sign me up.

PS: You missed the following:
Black Orc
Troglagob
Fire Kobold
Dust Goblin

I figure the first three would have a lot of possibilities.

TheOneWithNoName
23-01-2009, 00:41
Splitting chaos was bad, splitting greenskins would be worse.


Agreed. It wasn't a good idea for Chaos, certainly not a good idea for Orcs/Goblins.

Chadjabdoul
23-01-2009, 00:52
It's better to have the freedom of going all orc, all goblin, or a mixture of the two, than being forced to choose one.
There is a lot of room for creativity with one big book.

Splitting this book would be just as bad as the chaos and (to a lesser extent) the undead split

Guardian_A
23-01-2009, 01:09
It's better to have the freedom of going all orc, all goblin, or a mixture of the two, than being forced to choose one.
There is a lot of room for creativity with one big book.

Splitting this book would be just as bad as the chaos and (to a lesser extent) the undead split

Well said!

ChaosVC
23-01-2009, 01:09
I say no...I am too use to the idea that Orc and goblins are one big family, who would orc get to bully if the goblin are gone? The snotling will become orphaned if papa orc and mama goblin(only because they are smaller) become split!!! Orcs will become the samest and the samest and not the Biggest and greenest!

Nope not liking that idea.

Stuffburger
23-01-2009, 01:54
I personally would hate to see a split- O&G is all about strange combinations of units. A can easily see a lone orc taking control of a goblin tribe, a cunning goblin taking over a bunch of orcs, or strange combination of orcs, giants, trolls, snots, grots... whatever. Everything besides the worst of powergamed O&G lists (if such a thing is possible) just works, imho.

What I would like to see next armybook is more tourney-legal armylists, like the southlands list for LM. A goblin- dominated force with scant orcs and maybe one unique unit GW could make as a special edition (bat riders sound cool), or an all orc force (which sounds painfully boring to me :() which gets a better WAAAGH or something.

edit: Or maybe a system like the old chaos- Pick one race as core, the other is special and the rares are still rare.

I personally feel GW should be moving towards giving all armies the varied and characterful troop selection O&G now enjoys instead of splitting it into infinitesimally smaller bits. It's the reason I got into O&G in the first place and I suspect it is for many other O&G players as well. Re-merging Chaos would be a good start, then rolling out new units for the armies that are currently lacking in choices.

Gazak Blacktoof
23-01-2009, 08:32
(I wish people would read the first post :cries:)


I did, twice, I still think its a bad idea.

I agree that Urgat's ideas are good (better than those in the initial post) but they can be added to any greenskin book.

Lewis
23-01-2009, 09:12
I don't think I agree because you are still capable of running all orc and all goblin lists from the current book with enough variety to sustain you. One of the strong moves that GW have made over the last few years is to allow you to build armies that are strongly themed around a central rule set (look at how the White Scars are intergrated into the marine codex.) rather than fracturing everything out with millions of books with extra rules for each subsect of the game.

Condottiere
23-01-2009, 09:29
There are two aspects to view:

1. Commercial: will the move help the bottomline? I'd say no, since a pure goblin army would be more of a niche.

2. Gameplay: will it bring more variety to the game? Maybe, but you'd have to flesh out two books, and even if you could substitute the role goblins play in O&G, you probably end up with a rather lacklustre list.

Embalmed
23-01-2009, 09:54
Yeah I think it's a decent idea. Some types of Orcs and Goblins just don't fit together and you end up taking an Orc Warboss just because of his Ld when fluff would require a Goblin (I'm thinking a NG army led by an orc for instance).

Maybe NGs should get a book of their own, they sort of stand apart anyway.

I think there would be a precedent for allowing Goblins in a Orc army even if the books were split up, like CSM get daemons, you could get a generic 'Goblin warriors' while the Goblin book has more specific gobbos.

Urgat
23-01-2009, 10:44
I did, twice, I still think its a bad idea.

I agree that Urgat's ideas are good (better than those in the initial post) but they can be added to any greenskin book.

Well, out of all that, the only thing I think the book needs is a skirmish unit (a normal one I mean, not hoppers :p), and I think forest goblins fit well for the role.
The rest is just because the OP asked for it (and I got to admit I like doing stuff like that :p).
I'll still say that they should never be separated. Not that it's going to happen anyway, so there's no real need to worry about it.
That being said...:

I don't think I agree because you are still capable of running all orc and all goblin lists from the current book with enough variety to sustain you. One of the strong moves that GW have made over the last few years is to allow you to build armies that are strongly themed around a central rule set (look at how the White Scars are intergrated into the marine codex.) rather than fracturing everything out with millions of books with extra rules for each subsect of the game.
Nah, for the sake of gob/orc army balance, the all gob army has taken a severe nerf with the latest book. I'm not complaining anymore since I still manage more or less, but when I compare my armies between 6th and 7th edition, it's like 1/3 smaller, and that's kindda sad, coz back then I could pull victories, now I mostly get draws or losses. The new lists are just too nasty.

RossS
23-01-2009, 17:06
Yeah I think it's a decent idea. Some types of Orcs and Goblins just don't fit together and you end up taking an Orc Warboss just because of his Ld when fluff would require a Goblin (I'm thinking a NG army led by an orc for instance).

I actually consider this to be perfectly acceptable given the fluff.

smokemeakipper
23-01-2009, 17:53
i think some kind of expansion on themed lists such as forest goblins to allow competitive armies would be great. i have always liked playing goblin armies without orcs but usually suffer for it!

Ironbreaker
23-01-2009, 20:36
I would hate for Orcs and Goblins to be split.
It's such a varied army with a lot of cool units.

I'd far rather see more options, such as the return of Forest Goblins.
They could be used to flesh out an all-Goblin army or a Savage Orc one.

loveless
23-01-2009, 21:02
Let's just change it to Warhammer Armies: Greenskins and be done with it :p

Count de Monet
23-01-2009, 23:23
I think the current all in one pot approach is fine, though some extra variety and a little rebalancing could be welcome.

If they do split them, instead of just splitting Orcs to one book and Gobbos to another, I'd rather they split more 'culturally'.

*Southlands army with Savage Orcs, Forest Goblins and such
*Night Goblin army with Night Goblins and squigs galore
*"Regular" O&G with Orcs, Black Orcs, common gobbos.

Allow some crossover, like common->special, special->rare. Would likely have some similar rares like Giants and Trolls as well. Probably the same magic lores, but some different magic items.

Genrazn
24-01-2009, 02:26
Dont forget, there are the lovable long nosed Gnoblars or Hill Goblins.

but its highly Viable. There are 3 different known subspecies to us so far and could easily introduce more along the way.

For it to work. I think it should use a 'trait' system. Giving the base stat line of a normal gobbo and +1-3 points depending on what kind of goblin it is. To even orc. Then for Specials give each a race specific special like. Spider Riders, Squig Herders, Ogre Bully :P Then a form of Common gobbo special. Then do the same for Rares.

Goblins, Hill goblins Forest Goblins Night Goblins and your good old Common Goblin.

Gnoblars would gain sharp stuff (Pack rat thieving fools) (Even a Ogre Bully here would be fun)
Hill goblins would have Poison attacks
Night Goblins gain nets and fanatics

For Orcs I think there are. Savage Orcs, Black Orcs (Maybe one more but I dont recall.)

For Orcs wouldnt be so simple I suppose. But Definately Black Orcs would take over War Machine usage being the more commanding and generally smarter ones I think they are.

Savage Orcs being your more unruly and generally nut bat crazy bunch. Have there ward saves and such. (Perhaps giving them a 5+ ward save would best be advisable imo

Now, its true that ors arent as 'distinctive in flair' as Goblins. But thne with a little imagination nothing can go wrong.

But essentially I think it would be relatively cooler that they were seperated and could interchange as DoW like OK

Warboss Antoni
24-01-2009, 04:08
If they cant come up with a decent O+G book, then why just make 2 ****** books?

505
24-01-2009, 05:36
no.

it wouldn't get them more coverage. (just 2 wins in the white dwarf)

face it if your not Empire, dwarves, or chaos your just filler

LaughinGremlin
24-01-2009, 12:27
Let me get this straight...
You think it is odd to see goblins fighting alongside a few other orcs (fellow greenskins), but not odd to see goblins fighting alongside a few Yhetees?! :wtf:

:DTo each, their own, I guess.

Gillburg
24-01-2009, 17:51
should orges split from gnoblars? should saurus split from skinks? :D

ohh wait:rolleyes:

wingedserpant
24-01-2009, 21:09
I remembe rthe Grimgor's ard boyz list being terrible.

A system where taking characters of a certain type or a certain type being the general offering advantages to a unit of the same type would be a great system that encourages you to take entire armies of one kind of goblin aswell as mixing the advantages to deadly effect.

But at the end of the day Orcs can only really hit things and Goblins can't hit things unless using a crazy goblin unit. This means that single armies of each are never going to be as effective as mixed. Goblins need Orcs to win combats and Orcs need goblins for protecting the flanks, shooting things and for their fast caverly.

O&G'sRule
24-01-2009, 21:43
No. No. No. No. a thousand times no. worst idea I've seen on here so far.