499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

A place to tell the world about your games of Darklands
Arthur
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:16 am

499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Arthur » Sat Jun 16, 2018 2:55 pm

We sat down to our second game last night. Geoff had done great work to understand the engagement process better and this helped us get further.

We all have our own preferences when learning a system, I find reading a rulebook dry with no games under my belt always a chore. Just seeing the game play through gives me something to hang the rules reading onto.

I must have been enjoying myself as I didn't take so many pictures! Geoff took notes so hopefully he'll take up the narrative.

Image

Image

Image
User avatar
Brightblade
Posts: 923
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:57 pm

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Brightblade » Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:23 pm

Looks really good...

We are playing Apprentice Rules with some Journeyman and Master Rules thrown in but have yet to use Order Tokens of Exault / Continuous effect tokens, we are working up to that...

Have been beaten twice so far by an all Troll Norse army, with Atalantans and Fomoraic, the latter got destroyed by Thunder and Panic reactions... Sunday I am staging the third battle against the Trolls.. with my Anglecynn army, and this time I have a cunning plan....
Devlin Brightblade, Lord of Saxon Hammerwich, Slayer of Trolls, Tamer of Manticores, Petter of Flint Flang the Kill Thing from the Infernal Pits..

As you slide down the Bannister of Life, may the Splinters be kind...
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2730
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Rob Lane » Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:21 pm

Great stuff chaps! Loving the Attack Orders and Frenzied tokens...

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Geoff
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:12 am

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Geoff » Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:09 pm

First off, more photo's. It was a nice evening and the sun was shining just right on the table for some lovely shots...


Image

Image

Image

Image

Unfortunately Brugg got totally smegged by the Tarvax, but that's what you get for a being a bleedin' show-off mate!


Indeed, Rob. Those home-made markers really do look professional. Arthur's got some serious kit but more so, he is really talented with it all and has created some truly excellent accessories, including terrain and buildings.

--------------------------------------------------

As for the game we played, we were able to play further in and see how more rules work (and most likely butchered them). We counted the session as successful as it raised more questions than we had before, which was the point of the exercise. We're certainly not playing it properly yet but for a second game we went for it and saw our units do some cool stuff. Arthur was very pleased (a little too much for my liking) at Brugg's total destruction. I was diligent enough to make copious notes of who went when, which unit did what, etc., all through the evening. And am buggered if I can find em anywhere today...

The big deal, and possibly the biggest error of rules, of the night was the riposte action - my unit of Ax-Drunes indirectly engaging his Tarvax after they'd beaten Brugg. The Ax-Drunes activated immediatley afterwards and I wanted to get in a rear attack on at least one of them. We were mainly unsure whether I could actually target a single warrior or had to fight the unit as a whole. This highlighted the BIG ??? we had at many points - units vs individual warriors - who could attacked/be attacked, had we understood that a unit bound with a Commander who had the fearless trait was not fearless themselves, but COULD use the leaders FORT when making various tests instead of their own. We felt we got it OK in the main but it is a simple though fundamental principle (the delineation of a unit and a warrior within said unit), that affects loads of stuff, which caused us the most pauses umming and arring.

Anyway, was this a legal move? I hope the diagram provides enough info for one to see what's happening...

The unit makes an indirect engage move to surround the nearest enemy warrior (as opposed to unit, but belonging to the nearest unit). Though they are on ATTACK ORDERS, because this is my General's unit they can perform this as if under a MOVE order.

My guys rolled and passed their VALOUR TEST using the Commanders FORTitude.

Maybe the Tarvax could have counter-engaged us but we were trying to keep to the simplest rules and they just Held and Braced.

We brought him down but any 'splash' damage was NOT applied to the remaining Tarvax as it was obvious we were just beating on one of them and any further damage was forfeit.

The Tarvax then Reflexed Attack back, didn't kill anyone, we added/removed blood tokens etc, and resolved the Attack Action to its conclusion. THEN our heads exploded with the built-up pressure of the preceding hours' concentration!

Image


The evening was really enjoyable and the more we play, the more amazing the game is. Neither of us can wait until we can unlock the whole crazy thing. I better not lose any of my notes from next week!

PS - The game received a great deal of interest from other folks at the club. People are becoming very curious. Hopefully its due to the miniatures and the size of the rulebook than the sighs and cries of 'I don't know, what friggin page is THAT on?!' I think it is.
Last edited by Geoff on Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Brightblade
Posts: 923
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:57 pm

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Brightblade » Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:24 pm

Brilliant Pictures Geoff, we are discovering new bits of rules every time we play, so it's a constant discovery all the time..
Devlin Brightblade, Lord of Saxon Hammerwich, Slayer of Trolls, Tamer of Manticores, Petter of Flint Flang the Kill Thing from the Infernal Pits..

As you slide down the Bannister of Life, may the Splinters be kind...
User avatar
Geoff
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:12 am

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Geoff » Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:30 pm

Brightblade wrote:Brilliant Pictures Geoff, we are discovering new bits of rules every time we play, so it's a constant discovery all the time..


Thanks buddy! Indeed, with the all the various reactions there is little 'down-time', for when it is your opponents initiative your guys are likely going to be doing something too. Exactly WHAT they'll do is a constant surprise!

Sorry I can't help with your own rules queries at the moment but I'm sure we'll be helping each other soon enough! Bear in mind, everytime you post a query yourself a dozen eager eyes are also waiting on the answer, so keep asking away - it's helping everyone :)
Dan Pratt
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 3:57 pm
Location: Kent, OH, USA

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Dan Pratt » Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:23 pm

Keep playing! We need more players across the globe. I hope to post a 1500 gold battle report here soon.
User avatar
Brightblade
Posts: 923
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:57 pm

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Brightblade » Sun Jun 17, 2018 9:07 pm

I lost to the Troll army again today, third time now... ggrr..

Back to the drawing board...
Devlin Brightblade, Lord of Saxon Hammerwich, Slayer of Trolls, Tamer of Manticores, Petter of Flint Flang the Kill Thing from the Infernal Pits..

As you slide down the Bannister of Life, may the Splinters be kind...
Arthur
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:16 am

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Arthur » Mon Jun 18, 2018 8:45 am

Good stuff Geoff, glad you took some great pictures. When the action hotted up I was too much with my nose in the book!

I deny any association with having any talent - although when bulk charging with Tarvax I do a bloody cracking impersonation of Austin Powers with my 'Do I make you horny baby?!' Tarvax battle cry. Brugg got the horn alright.

I need to sit with the book in a quiet time now and work through some of the scenarios we got into.

Yeah loving it!
User avatar
Geoff
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:12 am

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Geoff » Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:36 am

Hey bud.

I'm happy to say I believe we got most things correct and did not miss anything. We got the initiative sorted, movement right, Kernuors' Invocation off correctly (though because it was a learning session and we wanted to do as many different things as possible, I spared you the ignominy of doing it twice again in the same activation), you got the charge off, etc etc. Other than the various questions that all fell under the umbrella of warrior vs unit, I think we did right well chummer!

Now we know how the game flows and how the various actions lead to reactions the book is becoming quite understandable. I read through it last night with far more comprehension due to our games - and we've only done a couple. I reckon you'll have the same new insight and another bout will see us right.
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2730
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:43 am

Geoff wrote:The big deal, and possibly the biggest error of rules, of the night was the riposte action - my unit of Ax-Drunes indirectly engaging his Tarvax after they'd beaten Brugg. The Ax-Drunes activated immediatley afterwards and I wanted to get in a rear attack on at least one of them. We were mainly unsure whether I could actually target a single warrior or had to fight the unit as a whole.


It's kind of moot, in many ways... (see below regarding what you call "splash damage" but I call "remaining wounds" - you should get into the habit of that because splash damage is to do with the Throw action) but mostly advantageous to get as many of your warriors into combat as possible. What I mean by that is, you don't want to miss out on your warriors' Attacks, simply because you need to cause as much damage as possible.

These rules were purposely designed to make things brutal; war is brutal, as I'm sure you're aware, and I can't stand rules that allow people to hang back or stand off a combat. In short, the best course of action - pretty much at any time in Darklands - is to get stuck in. That's why, if you're under ATTACK orders, you must Run towards an enemy unit - there's no fannying about!

Again though, contacting one warrior matters not, because your remaining wounds will extend into the other Tarvax.

Geoff wrote: This highlighted the BIG ??? we had at many points - units vs individual warriors - who could attacked/be attacked, had we understood that a unit bound with a Commander who had the fearless trait was not fearless themselves, but COULD use the leaders FORT when making various tests instead of their own. We felt we got it OK in the main but it is a simple though fundamental principle (the delineation of a unit and a warrior within said unit), that affects loads of stuff, which caused us the most pauses umming and arring.


Once you get used to the golden rule regarding unit majority (see p31, 2.3.1.4) and Traits/Abilities (p45 "Mixed units" and p47 "Mixed units) it will become very natural. Simply put, whoever has the highest strength in the unit (noble or warriors) will dominate the proceedings in many ways.

Geoff wrote:Anyway, was this a legal move? I hope the diagram provides enough info for one to see what's happening...

The unit makes an indirect engage move to surround the nearest enemy warrior (as opposed to unit, but belonging to the nearest unit). Though they are on ATTACK ORDERS, because this is my General's unit they can perform this as if under a MOVE order.


That's fine.

Geoff wrote:My guys rolled and passed their VALOUR TEST using the Commanders FORTitude.


Cool.

Geoff wrote:Maybe the Tarvax could have counter-engaged us but we were trying to keep to the simplest rules and they just Held and Braced.


There's no could - they must. Counter-Engaging is compulsory for frenzied warriors, as long as they're not tied down already of course ;o)

Geoff wrote:We brought him down but any 'splash' damage was NOT applied to the remaining Tarvax as it was obvious we were just beating on one of them and any further damage was forfeit.


Incorrect. Unless this Tarvax was a noble, or had a different profile, the rest of the Tarvax would be affected by the "splash" damage (call this remaining wounds, you'll see why when you get to the Throw action) regardless of which one the Ax-Drunes attacked (see p204, 6.20.6.3 - APPLY ATTACK DAMAGE). As long as there's enough remaining wounds, of course, if you kill the first Tarvax. Also see p61, 2.7.3.6 - The Wounded Warrior.

This effectively signifies the combat being a melee, and stops the conga line "tactic" employed by scumbags and cheats. An old Warhammer pet peeve of mine...! However, it's also natural to think of the Ax-Drunes powering forward, cutting other Tarvax down in their way.

Geoff wrote:The Tarvax then Reflexed Attack back, didn't kill anyone, we added/removed blood tokens etc, and resolved the Attack Action to its conclusion. THEN our heads exploded with the built-up pressure of the preceding hours' concentration!


Haha yes I can believe that ;o) Joanna's head exploded after our first hour of the full rules!

Geoff wrote:The evening was really enjoyable and the more we play, the more amazing the game is. Neither of us can wait until we can unlock the whole crazy thing. I better not lose any of my notes from next week!


I'm very glad to hear that... I know Darklands is complicated, but the depth is worth the effort, believe me. I wouldn't have wrote it like this if I didn't believe in depth, and Darklands has it in spades!

Geoff wrote:PS - The game received a great deal of interest from other folks at the club. People are becoming very curious. Hopefully its due to the miniatures and the size of the rulebook than the sighs and cries of 'I don't know, what friggin page is THAT on?!' I think it is.


Ooooh....

Cheers
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2730
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:47 am

I meant to add, as well, that you couldn't get your Ax-Drunes into the blind arc of the first Tarvax unless you'd either a) filled up the sight arcs of the other Tarvax or b) didn't have enough Attack Move to get into the sight arcs of the other Tarvax. See p161, Engage into Arcs... and ...unless there is no other choice.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Geoff
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:12 am

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Geoff » Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:18 am

Hi Rob, thanks for the feedback.


There's no could - they must. Counter-Engaging is compulsory for frenzied warriors, as long as they're not tied down already of course ;o)


Now I come to think of it, I believe we DID actually do this - yes, we missed it at first and went through the resolution steps with tokens and determining the victorious/defeated unit THEN once we'd finished Arthur realised he should have gotten an attack reaction so we went back and did that. He went for my Commander and failed to score many wounds and berated himself for not aiming the blows at the weaker Ax-Drune.

What we did not do, as we were trying our best to avoid Journeyman and Master rules, was allow the Tarvax to counter-engage the incoming Ax-Drunes immediately after they'd felled Brugg, as they were at that time unengaged.

what you call "splash damage" but I call "remaining wounds" - you should get into the habit of that because splash damage is to do with the Throw action


Will do!


I meant to add, as well, that you couldn't get your Ax-Drunes into the blind arc of the first Tarvax unless you'd either a) filled up the sight arcs of the other Tarvax or b) didn't have enough Attack Move to get into the sight arcs of the other Tarvax. See p161, Engage into Arcs... and ...unless there is no other choice.

Cheers
Rob


That's the nub of the diagram and question. So, one CANNOT 'single out' one warrior, even if there is space to do so, until the ENTIRE enemy UNIT has their sight arcs filled - that answers loads of other queries. OK, GOT IT!

This effectively signifies the combat being a melee, and stops the conga line "tactic" employed by scumbags and cheats. An old Warhammer pet peeve of mine...


Having not played other wargames I didn't realise I that was effectively performing what is considered a scummy move. This does not sit well. Though the Ysians are truly depraved and more beast than men, they do have some honour (when played by myself) and will not partake in Warhammer games, no, I mean, cowardly acts of scumbagging and cheating. The Ysian's abide, dude.

Cheers for the feedback *thumbs up*
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 2730
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:34 am

Geoff wrote:That's the nub of the diagram and question. So, one CANNOT 'single out' one warrior, even if there is space to do so, until the ENTIRE enemy UNIT has their sight arcs filled - that answers loads of other queries. OK, GOT IT!


Not quite... they can single him out if they wish, but they can't get into his blind arc unless they've filled up the sight arc of all the enemy warriors in range. A couple of Ax-Drunes can engage that one warrior if they want, as their Acuity is Drilled or Veteran, but I wouldn't recommend that too much as you need to kill the Tarvax!

Geoff wrote:Having not played other wargames I didn't realise I that was effectively performing what is considered a scummy move. This does not sit well. Though the Ysians are truly depraved and more beast than men, they do have some honour (when played by myself) and will not partake in Warhammer games, no, I mean, cowardly acts of scumbagging and cheating. The Ysian's abide, dude.

Cheers for the feedback *thumbs up*


Haha... no this is aimed at the Tarvax... I'm saying the remaining wounds mechanic ensures the Tarvax' conga line tactic doesn't work. So Arthur was doing a scummy move ;o)

I'm only kidding - what I'm saying is that sometimes this occurs naturally of course, as has happened in your case, but people have been known to purposely turn their unit into a conga line in other games so that their unit can't die when hit by a big nasty or big unit on one warrior.

Cheers
Rob
Arthur
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:16 am

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Arthur » Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:47 am

Thanks Rob for the clarifications.

Rob wrote:
There's no could - they must. Counter-Engaging is compulsory for frenzied warriors, as long as they're not tied down already of course ;o)

Geoff wrote:Now I come to think of it, I believe we DID actually do this - yes, we missed it at first and went through the resolution steps with tokens and determining the victorious/defeated unit THEN once we'd finished Arthur realised he should have gotten an attack reaction so we went back and did that. He went for my Commander and failed to score many wounds and berated himself for not aiming the blows at the weaker Ax-Drune.

What we did not do, as we were trying our best to avoid Journeyman and Master rules, was allow the Tarvax to counter-engage the incoming Ax-Drunes immediately after they'd felled Brugg, as they were at that time unengaged.



The encounter between Brugg and Bellowing Tarvax is the one we are going to run into the most. So the engage and counter engage between two Frenzied units is the bit I am trying to get right.

I am trying to stick to the apprentice rules so the most obvious MUST responses for frenzied units are not open to us.


My thinking about how to play it out was:
I couldn't see a valid apprentice counter engagement so my guys were stationary for the attack rather than rushing in to meet the charging squishy ones.

We eventually worked out I'd attack back.

(Edited some questions out from here, 10 minutes of calm contemplation with the rule book and I found the answers very easily. Feral units cannot BRACE and BRACE ACTION is journeyman anyway).
Currently working through 7.10 Engagement Reactions to work out what a Feral/Frenzied unit can do to react to an engagement.)

Cheers
Last edited by Arthur on Mon Jun 18, 2018 7:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Arthur
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:16 am

Re: 499pts Arthur vs Geoff Second game

Postby Arthur » Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:54 am

Rob wrote:Haha... no this is aimed at the Tarvax... I'm saying the remaining wounds mechanic ensures the Tarvax' conga line tactic doesn't work. So Arthur was doing a scummy move ;o)


Wotch u sayin 'bout the herd?!

Ha ha, well my guys were where they were because they were stood over the butchered remains of Brugg. I assume using Master rules I'd have counter charged the squishy ones and not been in the conga line as you call it (I play SAGA so I know about that).

Geoff was trying to get advantage on my guys being strung out and facing the wrong way. I read it that my guys could at least turn to face and in that way Geoffs plan to put his guys in the rear of my Tarvax was foiled!

Return to “Battle Reports”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest