Kindred Musters Update III

A place to read and talk about our official updates, errata and addenda for Darklands. Please post all rules queries here!
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:04 pm

Everyone,

Please note that all of the kindred musters have been updated to reflect the new muster rules and to fix a few errors here and there. Some of the errors already reported have been fixed, but the files haven't updated.

Go here to download them: http://mierce-miniatures.com/index.php?act=drm

Feel free to note any errors or typos in these updates by replying to this post.

Cheers
Rob
Rick_Boer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rick_Boer » Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:21 pm

The Muster Rules themselves don't have the kinsman special rule. It was there in the document you listed on the KS-page, but somehow it's missing from the one on the website even though they're both version 2.11

Also, are Werwulf Gesith supposed to be Hearthguard aswell?
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:42 pm

Rick_Boer wrote:The Muster Rules themselves don't have the kinsman special rule. It was there in the document you listed on the KS-page, but somehow it's missing from the one on the website even though they're both version 2.11


Weird. I've updated it - let me know if you can see it...

Rick_Boer wrote:Also, are Werwulf Gesith supposed to be Hearthguard aswell?


Yes they are, good spot.

Cheers
Rob
Rick_Boer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rick_Boer » Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:55 pm

It's there now
Rick_Boer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rick_Boer » Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:44 pm

Vras don't have their Effective size listed
User avatar
Skull king
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:26 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Skull king » Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:22 pm

In the Fomoraic muster, the Walvax unit is listed as only being 'Baalor' for Realm, where as the Tain is Both Baalor & Conad. The Kraaken is listed as Conad only where as (IIRC) they were for both realms prior, similar to the Dainoch.
James Balmer
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 8:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby James Balmer » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:26 pm

Rob,

Anglecynn: There's no entry for the Werbera in the muster. I can appreciate if this is because there is no unit for them as of yet, but there are entries for other such units like the freabera which also (to the best of my knowledge) do not have a model produced or in production.

Also regarding the Anglecynn; with the growing number of none-Mierce units would it be possible to expand on the invocations list to affect some of the other beast units? Particularly since the Beornica have a Forwiglere model on the way at some point.

James
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:17 am

I may be misunderstanding the wording of Overlord in the muster rules but I think there's currently a bit of an issue with the fomoraic muster sheet.

So the overlord rule as it now stands allows scions to take units within their own command from either fomoraic realm. Unfortunately they can't compel anything themselves so they can't currently create a legal command. The 'son of' rule used to allow you to get around this by reducing the number of required mainstay units by 1 but this has now been removed.

Does the overlord rule also allow commanders under a scion to count as if they are from any realm and thus take units from both realms without doubling their authority?

If not I don't believe that the kraacken or the crancull can legally be taken in a command. Their authority is 49 which means that to be taken within the command of a commander of the realm baalor they count as authority 98 which exceeds the authority of any current warlord or warchief of baalor. They could be included in the command of a scion but the scions don't appear to be able to create a legal command as they don't have any natural mainstay units. The only warchief that is dually of the realms of baalor and conand is the walvax tain who's only mainstay unit is the walvax and taking them doesn't leave the walvax tain sufficient remaining authority to take either the kraacken or the crancull in his command.

So two points:
Does overlord mean that all commanders under the overlord can take units from both realms?
What do scions do for mainstay units?

Thanks in advance for any clarification you can provide.

Cheers
H
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:46 am

Rick_Boer wrote:Vras don't have their Effective size listed


Whoops... I'll sort.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:49 am

Skull king wrote:In the Fomoraic muster, the Walvax unit is listed as only being 'Baalor' for Realm, where as the Tain is Both Baalor & Conad. The Kraaken is listed as Conad only where as (IIRC) they were for both realms prior, similar to the Dainoch.


Yeah they should be Baalor and Conand. Will sort.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:51 am

VALPHAOMEGAV wrote:Rob,

Anglecynn: There's no entry for the Werbera in the muster. I can appreciate if this is because there is no unit for them as of yet, but there are entries for other such units like the freabera which also (to the best of my knowledge) do not have a model produced or in production.


That's a mistake, the Freabera shouldn't be there. But I'll add the Werbera to the next incarnation.

VALPHAOMEGAV wrote:Also regarding the Anglecynn; with the growing number of none-Mierce units would it be possible to expand on the invocations list to affect some of the other beast units? Particularly since the Beornica have a Forwiglere model on the way at some point.


Absolutely... at some point!

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:57 am

HughB wrote:I may be misunderstanding the wording of Overlord in the muster rules but I think there's currently a bit of an issue with the fomoraic muster sheet.

So the overlord rule as it now stands allows scions to take units within their own command from either fomoraic realm. Unfortunately they can't compel anything themselves so they can't currently create a legal command. The 'son of' rule used to allow you to get around this by reducing the number of required mainstay units by 1 but this has now been removed.


Good spot, I'd forgotten to add Compel (Warrior of Baalor, Ograx of Baalor) to his ability list.

HughB wrote:Does the overlord rule also allow commanders under a scion to count as if they are from any realm and thus take units from both realms without doubling their authority?


Well, yes. Thanks to the passage "Units that are not from the general's realm but are from the general's kindred may be included in his host as if they were from the general's realm", commanders from other Fomoraic realms count as if they are from the Scion's realm. As the Overlord rules makes him every Fomoraic realm, units can be included in his host as if they are from every Fomoraic realm.

Cheers
Rob
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:05 pm

Thanks for the clarification on that Rob. The hard work and fast responses are, as always, very much appreciated.
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Thu Nov 23, 2017 9:49 am

No worries. 'Tis, literally, my job!

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
demyse
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2016 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby demyse » Thu Nov 23, 2017 12:06 pm

Sellswords
Rikkard can be the commander of a Jute or Anglecynn host - what realm would he be for these so he could take mainstay? or would he have to become an overlord

Alix has the ability to be a commander in a Ysian host, but now that Ax Drunes are common she doesn't have mainstay to have in a command

also if she is a 'goad master' and Ysian should she not have the same ability to make drune hounds wild instead of feral if she wishes to take them as her bound unit? just a thought
100 mini 2018 - 103 mierce (68 other)
100 mini 2019 - 25 mierce (51 other)
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Thu Nov 23, 2017 1:34 pm

demyse wrote:Sellswords
Rikkard can be the commander of a Jute or Anglecynn host - what realm would he be for these so he could take mainstay? or would he have to become an overlord


He can take two common units.

demyse wrote:Alix has the ability to be a commander in a Ysian host, but now that Ax Drunes are common she doesn't have mainstay to have in a command


She can take two common units.

demyse wrote:also if she is a 'goad master' and Ysian should she not have the same ability to make drune hounds wild instead of feral if she wishes to take them as her bound unit? just a thought


No, she's a generic beast-master, not a hound-master.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
demyse
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2016 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby demyse » Thu Nov 23, 2017 1:51 pm

I thought that only worked for influenced units, is now across the board or just for these guys?
100 mini 2018 - 103 mierce (68 other)
100 mini 2019 - 25 mierce (51 other)
Rick_Boer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rick_Boer » Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:26 pm

It's 2 common, influenced or not. And that is for everyone, not just for these sellswords
Rick_Boer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rick_Boer » Thu Nov 23, 2017 3:18 pm

What is the point of the Krokodarch and the Krokodarchon having Compel (Krokodar) when they're mainstay?
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:56 pm

Rick_Boer wrote:What is the point of the Krokodarch and the Krokodarchon having Compel (Krokodar) when they're mainstay?


A bloody good point! Erm... none ;o)

Cheers
Rob
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Thu Nov 23, 2017 5:41 pm

Rick_Boer wrote:It's 2 common, influenced or not. And that is for everyone, not just for these sellswords


I was pretty sure thats not what it says in the mustering rules. Thats why there is the problem with fomoraic units and the scions not being able to take main stays. In fact isn't there is an example in the mustering section that states that ysian bow drunes can't count towards minimum ubiquity for the very reason that they aren't influenced by any of the ysian commanders?

PS not trying to be aggressive or a smart arse on this honest - email doesn't convey tone well.
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Thu Nov 23, 2017 5:46 pm

Rick_Boer wrote:What is the point of the Krokodarch and the Krokodarchon having Compel (Krokodar) when they're mainstay?



My guess is maybe it was intended to do the same thing to them as has happened with ysian ax-drunes - they have been downgraded from generic mainstay to common and compelled by ax/war drunes. Presumably this has been done so that the ax drunes can't be used as generic mainstays under inappropriate commanders eg death melusines, death brutes etc.

So krokodar were supposed to have been moved down to common with compel korkodarch/krokodarchon (other way around but you know what I mean?) but Rob forgot to do that?

Right I'm definitely taking my smart arse hat off and backing away from the discussion now ;-)
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
Rick_Boer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rick_Boer » Thu Nov 23, 2017 5:48 pm

From Rob's comments about a week ago:
"You need one command Mainstay unit, which can be either: 1 Mainstay unit 2 Common units How those units become Mainstay or Common is immaterial."
Rick_Boer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rick_Boer » Thu Nov 23, 2017 5:53 pm

And regarding the Krokodar, I thought the same thing. But from what I remember the Krokodar were never actually listed as Mainstay units before this new update ( I might be remembering it wrong). And Rob did look at the compel and influence listing of the Krokodarch(on) as the Krokokh were actually listed wrong at Influence (2), which should be just your regular Influence.

We might see trained Krokodar that might be compelled though, who knows ;)
Crazyguy501
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Crazyguy501 » Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:37 pm

Hi, I have a few questions mainly around Atalantes today.

Firstly the Technomantis has the Bind ability ( Bull of Bronze, Ogros of Bronze etc ), I’ve read the muster sheet to the best of my understanding, is it possible for a noble to bind units to him without having to have a mainstay unit in his command, or when binding is that considered a form of mustering? Therefore would have to still muster the mainstay unit.
Secondly after trying to craft some lists I really struggled to get a Ogros of Bronze in a muster, the only way I could figure out getting him in a command is binding it to the Technomantis, yes his ability when trying muster him normally knocks his authority in half (to 40) however when trying to influence the two units he can influence (or apparently any other common apparently from reading the above comments?) it’s always over his authority. Is the Ogros purposively designed to be a bind beast that can only be fielded by a tecknomantis?
The Stratekollosus has influence Toxokollosus and Pyrokollosus, would these need to be removed because the Stratekollosus couldn’t muster two units with his Authoirty 50?
That’s it for today, I don’t intend to come across as picky/smartass just would like know I’m playing the game properly, I must say I think I might prefer this form of mustering compared to the new one.
Many thanks!
Crazyguy501
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Crazyguy501 » Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:40 pm

*last sentence should say ‘prefer this form of mustering compared to the previous one’ sorry
Rick_Boer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rick_Boer » Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:03 pm

Atalantes is one of the very few kindreds I don't actually collect, so keep that in mind with these answers but I'll see what I can answer:
1) You would still need to bring a mainstay unit (or 2 commons) whether you bind monsters to him or not. What you could do is have him in a Host's command under your General's Command, which lets you bind your Ogros without having to get your minimum units.
2) The Strategos has a high enough authority to muster both a Oplite unit and an Ogros, so you do have more options even though they are very limited mustering a monster with 70 Authority itself (can't say I have seen that in the kindreds I collect ;))
3) You aren't bound to just these 2 units to make up your 2 common slots, so you could do with the lowly humans with their Authority of 15, which should fit them in?
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:46 pm

Crazyguy501 wrote:Hi, I have a few questions mainly around Atalantes today.

Firstly the Technomantis has the Bind ability ( Bull of Bronze, Ogros of Bronze etc ), I’ve read the muster sheet to the best of my understanding, is it possible for a noble to bind units to him without having to have a mainstay unit in his command, or when binding is that considered a form of mustering? Therefore would have to still muster the mainstay unit.


No, you still have to have a Mainstay unit. Binding to a non-Mainstay unit doesn't count - not sure why you'd think it would to be honest!

Crazyguy501 wrote:Secondly after trying to craft some lists I really struggled to get a Ogros of Bronze in a muster, the only way I could figure out getting him in a command is binding it to the Technomantis, yes his ability when trying muster him normally knocks his authority in half (to 40) however when trying to influence the two units he can influence (or apparently any other common apparently from reading the above comments?) it’s always over his authority. Is the Ogros purposively designed to be a bind beast that can only be fielded by a tecknomantis?


Purposely designed; Binding means the Ogros' AUTHORITY is negated and the Tekhnomántis has to wander about the battlefield with the Ogros. But of course he'll have to have a Mainstay unit, so it's not like he'll be on his own. I wanted to counter-act people holding back with the Tekhnomántis, basically. Doesn't work for everything, but does for the larger stuff.

Having said that, remember that he can simply be a noble without a command in the general's host command.

Crazyguy501 wrote:The Stratekollosus has influence Toxokollosus and Pyrokollosus, would these need to be removed because the Stratekollosus couldn’t muster two units with his Authoirty 50?


The Toxo/Pyro can be Bound to a unit of Mesokolossos of course; and you're right, that's something that should be removed. There's always going to be something I've missed! Especially in the Atalantes.

Crazyguy501 wrote:That’s it for today, I don’t intend to come across as picky/smartass just would like know I’m playing the game properly, I must say I think I might prefer this form of mustering compared to the new one.
Many thanks!


Don't be daft, I welcome all questions. The rules and musters need to be tight and I can't think of everything!

Keep 'em coming!

Cheers
Rob
Crazyguy501
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Crazyguy501 » Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:49 pm

Rick_Boer wrote:Atalantes is one of the very few kindreds I don't actually collect, so keep that in mind with these answers but I'll see what I can answer:
1) You would still need to bring a mainstay unit (or 2 commons) whether you bind monsters to him or not. What you could do is have him in a Host's command under your General's Command, which lets you bind your Ogros without having to get your minimum units.


That’s a good point there thanks!
Rick_Boer wrote:2) The Strategos has a high enough authority to muster both a Oplite unit and an Ogros, so you do have more options even though they are very limited mustering a monster with 70 Authority itself (can't say I have seen that in the kindreds I collect ;))


Unfortunately the Ogros Of Bronze is Authority 80 not authority 70, I think your possibly thinking of the Kollosus of Bronze but good to know I could field that one with a Strategos :D

Rick_Boer wrote:3) You aren't bound to just these 2 units to make up your 2 common slots, so you could do with the lowly humans with their Authority of 15, which should fit them in?


I suppose as you say I could take 2 human units, however the Stratekollosus is Authority 50, and he can influence Toxokollosus or Pyrokollosus which are Authority 40, but would still not have enough left over to Influence a small human unit whose authority 15. But thanks for you’re input here much appreciated ;) I’m going to read the muster again I was under the impression that the units that are common are only made as mainstay if you had Influence X that doesn’t seem to be the case, grabbing any common unit to add to that will really open the options up. Many thanks!
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Thu Nov 23, 2017 9:59 pm

Rick_Boer wrote:From Rob's comments about a week ago:
"You need one command Mainstay unit, which can be either: 1 Mainstay unit 2 Common units How those units become Mainstay or Common is immaterial."


Well yeah but from the muster rules document:

Any two Influenced units (see the 1·1·8·1·2: Influence (x) muster ability for details) of effective size within his command may become command Common units, and these two units count as one command Mainstay unit for mustering purposes. Both of the command Common units gain free unit command warriors. Nobles cannot be command Common units. EXAMPLE Two Bow-Drune units, which are Common ubiquity, could not become command Mainstay unit because they have not been influenced by their Commander - and because there's already a command Mainstay unit in the War-Drune's command.
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:52 pm

HughB wrote:
Rick_Boer wrote:From Rob's comments about a week ago:
"You need one command Mainstay unit, which can be either: 1 Mainstay unit 2 Common units How those units become Mainstay or Common is immaterial."


Well yeah but from the muster rules document:

Any two Influenced units (see the 1·1·8·1·2: Influence (x) muster ability for details) of effective size within his command may become command Common units, and these two units count as one command Mainstay unit for mustering purposes. Both of the command Common units gain free unit command warriors. Nobles cannot be command Common units. EXAMPLE Two Bow-Drune units, which are Common ubiquity, could not become command Mainstay unit because they have not been influenced by their Commander - and because there's already a command Mainstay unit in the War-Drune's command.


Dammit I'd totally forgotten about that. I did that to stop people taking too many bowmen and forgot I'd done it, but that means I need to revise all the nobles.

Sigh.

Right - ignore me for now; treat Common units as if two can be taken to form a Mainstay, and in the background I'm either going to remove that clause entirely or make sure the nobles change their influencing (or introduce Mainstays as normal units again).

Apologies Hugh - I'm an idiot. Bear with me for now, but if anybody feels like going through the musters to work out which nobles are finding the above clause a problem for them, please list them. I'm looking at you Hugh, as you identified the issue ;o)

Cheers
Rob
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:17 am

Well thanks Rob, I guess this is what I get for being a smart arse eh ;-D

In fairness, I don't really see that this is a problem with/for the nobles. With the rules as they're stated in the muster sheets, only common units that are influenced (or only units that are influenced to become common units) can be a command mainstay unit. With the rules as you state them - that all common units can be paired up to become command mainstay units - that actually solves a few issues that me and Paul have already mentioned with the scions of Baalor and with Alix and the other sell swords for example. Now the Scions special rules don't need to be rewritten if you don't want them to be, as they could just take two units of gabrax or reivers to count as their mainstay command unit cos they won't need to compel units to form a command. Alix could take two units of ax drunes etc etc.

As you say about the bow drunes however, what it does do is create a situation whereby you may get command mainstay units that you might not deem appropriate. Off the top of my head, ranged units and chaff units being the main culprits. So for the ysians, you could have a command mainstay unit that consisted of two units of bow drunes, two units of shadow drunes (yes please Mr Rob - oh please oh please) or two units of drune hounds. Two units of drune hounds are pretty cheap in terms of points and authority and would allow you plenty of space for a big gribbly in a command but I don't think this is quite what you wanted to achieve with the shake up in mustering rules.

Personally I think keeping the rules as you've written them would be a better idea and then altering the rules for the few nobles who don't currently influence or compel anything that perhaps need to do so. Do you want a list of these nobles perhaps instead? Ones that don't influence or compel anything and so can't currently form a legal command? Just glancing at the ysian muster sheet as an example for the muster sheets generally, that's going to give you the odd special case like Alix and quite a lot of sorcerer type models.
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
Crazyguy501
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Crazyguy501 » Fri Nov 24, 2017 8:58 am

Rob Lane wrote:
Don't be daft, I welcome all questions. The rules and musters need to be tight and I can't think of everything!

Keep 'em coming!

Cheers
Rob


No worries! Thanks for the answers, will have a further dig and mention anything I find in the Kindreds I collect (Atalantes, Kthones and Formoriac)
Many thanks
User avatar
demyse
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2016 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby demyse » Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:09 am

So if now 2 common (disregarding Influence) gill the mainstay slot, does it have to be 2 of the same thing?
100 mini 2018 - 103 mierce (68 other)
100 mini 2019 - 25 mierce (51 other)
User avatar
demyse
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2016 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby demyse » Sat Nov 25, 2017 6:35 pm

Ok. As far as I can see these are the miniatures (apart from sell swords) that are warlords or war chiefs that can no longer form commands
Rose of ker-ys
Augur drune
Seer drune
Harvest drune
Kynigos
Thaumaturios (crap spelling, mage dude)
, dreaguth deathbringer,
Wiglaca (if wiht)
100 mini 2018 - 103 mierce (68 other)
100 mini 2019 - 25 mierce (51 other)
User avatar
JediCat
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2016 4:10 am

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby JediCat » Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:51 pm

If Penda is leading Woden's Hunt, can he still have a host command? Honestly not sure how to interpret the rules here, since Penda would be leading both commands, making them his commands, and Woden's Hunt says "...may not include any other unit in his command that is not a Wulf Unit..."

I can see it both ways, but wanted to check. It's not exactly a typo, so I wasn't sure where to ask.
"Be as brutal and as sneaky and as nasty with your list as you wish - Darklands is not pink fluffy communist Warhammer" ~Rob Lane, May 17th, 2017
Rick_Boer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rick_Boer » Sun Nov 26, 2017 8:31 am

That is only if you increase the maximum size of any of the wulf units.
And even if you did that, you could still have a Host's command. You'd just have to use werwulf / wælwulf warchiefs and /or werwulf gesith (as they are Hearthguard)
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Sun Nov 26, 2017 11:44 pm

I'm not seeing a way that the grymdraig can be taken in a brythoniaid list (this could well be because I'm being dense though so please do point it out).

Their realm is gwaelod only and their authority is 55. So nobles not from gwaelod can't take them as it would double their authority to 110.

There are two nobles from gwaelod at present - the dewindraig with authority 48 and the prifdyndraig with authority 78. So the dewindraig can't take him cos his authority is lower than that of the grymdraig. The prifdyndraig has two options for mainstay units - the dyndraig of his own realm (authority 26) or a unit of rhyfelwr (authority 12). Unfortunately, as the rhyfelwr don't come from gwaelod, their authority would need to be doubled to be taken by the prifdyndraig. Taking the authority of the grymdraig away from that of the prifdyndraig leaves you with 23 - not quite enough for either the rhyfelwr or the dyndraig so no one can currently take the grymdraig.

Can someone point out what/if I'm doing something wrong to come to this conclusion please?

Thanks, H
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:57 am

HughB wrote:Well thanks Rob, I guess this is what I get for being a smart arse eh ;-D


Indeed ;o)

HughB wrote:In fairness, I don't really see that this is a problem with/for the nobles. With the rules as they're stated in the muster sheets, only common units that are influenced (or only units that are influenced to become common units) can be a command mainstay unit. With the rules as you state them - that all common units can be paired up to become command mainstay units - that actually solves a few issues that me and Paul have already mentioned with the scions of Baalor and with Alix and the other sell swords for example. Now the Scions special rules don't need to be rewritten if you don't want them to be, as they could just take two units of gabrax or reivers to count as their mainstay command unit cos they won't need to compel units to form a command. Alix could take two units of ax drunes etc etc.


It does, but having thought about it over the weekend, it's the bowmen that worry me - and I don't want to make them Uncommon.

HughB wrote:As you say about the bow drunes however, what it does do is create a situation whereby you may get command mainstay units that you might not deem appropriate. Off the top of my head, ranged units and chaff units being the main culprits. So for the ysians, you could have a command mainstay unit that consisted of two units of bow drunes, two units of shadow drunes (yes please Mr Rob - oh please oh please) or two units of drune hounds. Two units of drune hounds are pretty cheap in terms of points and authority and would allow you plenty of space for a big gribbly in a command but I don't think this is quite what you wanted to achieve with the shake up in mustering rules.


That's exactly it. I don't want to achieve that...!

HughB wrote:Personally I think keeping the rules as you've written them would be a better idea and then altering the rules for the few nobles who don't currently influence or compel anything that perhaps need to do so. Do you want a list of these nobles perhaps instead? Ones that don't influence or compel anything and so can't currently form a legal command? Just glancing at the ysian muster sheet as an example for the muster sheets generally, that's going to give you the odd special case like Alix and quite a lot of sorcerer type models.


I think Influenced Common units is a bit too restrictive. I need to think about it more. I'll get back to you...

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:59 am

demyse wrote:So if now 2 common (disregarding Influence) gill the mainstay slot, does it have to be 2 of the same thing?


It doesn't, no.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:00 am

JediCat wrote:If Penda is leading Woden's Hunt, can he still have a host command? Honestly not sure how to interpret the rules here, since Penda would be leading both commands, making them his commands, and Woden's Hunt says "...may not include any other unit in his command that is not a Wulf Unit..."

I can see it both ways, but wanted to check. It's not exactly a typo, so I wasn't sure where to ask.


A good point, I'll clarify it. Strictly speaking, only his command should be Wulf units, but I'll make sure he can have a host's command.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:05 am

HughB wrote:I'm not seeing a way that the grymdraig can be taken in a brythoniaid list (this could well be because I'm being dense though so please do point it out).

Their realm is gwaelod only and their authority is 55. So nobles not from gwaelod can't take them as it would double their authority to 110.

There are two nobles from gwaelod at present - the dewindraig with authority 48 and the prifdyndraig with authority 78. So the dewindraig can't take him cos his authority is lower than that of the grymdraig. The prifdyndraig has two options for mainstay units - the dyndraig of his own realm (authority 26) or a unit of rhyfelwr (authority 12). Unfortunately, as the rhyfelwr don't come from gwaelod, their authority would need to be doubled to be taken by the prifdyndraig. Taking the authority of the grymdraig away from that of the prifdyndraig leaves you with 23 - not quite enough for either the rhyfelwr or the dyndraig so no one can currently take the grymdraig.

Can someone point out what/if I'm doing something wrong to come to this conclusion please?

Thanks, H


No, that's correct - there's always going to be something like this somewhere, I just need to adjust a few things. I'll up the Prifdyndraig's AUTHORITY to 82.

If you spot anything else like this, please tell me!!

Cheers
Rob
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:05 pm

Coolio. Second request in that case is are you ok to increase the authority of the Uchelwr cos at present his authority is exactly one point greater than that of the prifdyndraig so that he can be a general in a force with a prifdyndraig commander in it. If you increase the prifdyndraigs authority and not the uchelwrs then he would be the general and the uchelwr would be demoted to commander.

I don't have a problem with that as I'm not speciesist but you know how these toy soldier humans get uppity about their rights and expectations around ability to command dragon men and the preeminence of humans (I'm beginning to think shaaroc has a point) etc etc.

Cheers

Hugh
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Mon Nov 27, 2017 1:23 pm

Sorry I just thought of something else. The wiglacas barrow lantern. It increases the might and skill of units within the wiglacas command range. As the wiglacas authority has taken a bit of a beating, his command range is much reduced and so the effectiveness of the barrow lantern has taken something of a hit. Does that warrant a points reduction or is that just being greedy? :-)

EDIT - same applies to the deathbringer
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:43 pm

HughB wrote:Coolio. Second request in that case is are you ok to increase the authority of the Uchelwr cos at present his authority is exactly one point greater than that of the prifdyndraig so that he can be a general in a force with a prifdyndraig commander in it. If you increase the prifdyndraigs authority and not the uchelwrs then he would be the general and the uchelwr would be demoted to commander.

I don't have a problem with that as I'm not speciesist but you know how these toy soldier humans get uppity about their rights and expectations around ability to command dragon men and the preeminence of humans (I'm beginning to think shaaroc has a point) etc etc.


Yeah I'll sort him...

HughB wrote:Sorry I just thought of something else. The wiglacas barrow lantern. It increases the might and skill of units within the wiglacas command range. As the wiglacas authority has taken a bit of a beating, his command range is much reduced and so the effectiveness of the barrow lantern has taken something of a hit. Does that warrant a points reduction or is that just being greedy? :-)

EDIT - same applies to the deathbringer


You're being greedy ;o)

Cheers
Rob
James Balmer
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 8:34 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby James Balmer » Wed Nov 29, 2017 7:33 pm

In the Fomoraic muster both the Ograx and Ograx Reiver Untain have 1d10 Wound+ on their paired weapons profile, said profile also doesn’t have a cost associated with it.

Also, how will khelones fit in with the other khthones kindreds, as currently the only feasible way to field the khelon is with a Gorgon or Gorgor due to their overlord ability.

Byzantii: The Demiurion has the option for segmentata and also scutum remnants, but I don't think the C+A with segmentata is 78 as stated, should it not be 69 as the segmentata replaces the hamata completely for an improvement of 4 (difference between hamata Armour+ and segmentata Armour+) rather than being additional for an improvement of 13?

Erainn: Fir Bholg, Hurlers and Throwers have Bound (Tuanagh, Fiannagh, Fir Bholg), however the Fiannagh have no Bind (Fir Bholg (any variety)) and Tuanagh only have Bind (Fir Bholg, Fir Bholg Hurlers) with the additional caveat of the Tuanagh needing to be of the Connacht realm as well. Are these rules holdovers from the previous revision of the muster or are Fiannagh intentionally exempt from the realm caveat?

James
antoine
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:00 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby antoine » Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:23 pm

Hi everyone,
Concerning the 2-influenced-or-common-units-to-form-a-mainstay question:
when I read in the new muster rules « Each command must include at least one Mainstay unit of effective size within it - effectively the commander's household warriors - and this is called the command Mainstay unit», I find it perfect, both il terms of Darklands lore and in terms of game mechanics.
The rule of "2 influenced units = a command Mainstay unit" is in the same spirit, and a very good idea to allow variations while keeping coherence. But 2 random common units = mainstay... I really don't see the point...
So I think the muster rules are great as they're writen now, and only adjustements on who compels/influences who are required.
Antoine
Byzantii V
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:38 am

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Byzantii V » Tue Dec 05, 2017 10:43 am

If it makes a difference, I think it is actually two compelled Commons equals a Mainstay, as opposed to two influenced commons.
HughB
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:27 pm

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby HughB » Tue Dec 05, 2017 10:59 am

No mate (Byzantii V) as a compelled common is a mainstay already. Two influenced commons can currently be taken instead of one mainstay unit to fulfill minimum requirements. That may be changing to two of any common unit can be taken insteady of two of any influenced commons but thats currently uncertain. For what its worth (nothing) I agree with Antoines point.
painting challenge 2019 - 37/100

All absolute statements are false
Byzantii V
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:38 am

Re: Kindred Musters Update III

Postby Byzantii V » Tue Dec 05, 2017 5:28 pm

Okay thank you both. I need to go back and re-read the rules!

Return to “Darklands Rules and Musters - Updates, Errata and Addenda”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest