Sylvan Elf LAB Brainstorm/Ideas thread.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is available! You can read all about it in the news.

The brand new army book for Infernal Dwarves is finally available, along with a small surprise! Remember that it is a beta version, and provide us your feedback!

  • There is also the conceptual issue of why "lives in a forest where short ranged weapons are inherently more practical" means "longest ranged small arms in the game"? @DanT (Summon as didn’t insert quote)

    Correct me if I’m wrong but I just assumed that we got the longest range not because we used it day-to-day but because it took a bow with a high pound draw to deliver the necessary force to take down a large buck or forest wyrm (insert magical creature with appropriate carpace). The range was more of a by-product than an intention.
    "The combination of lemon and habenero peppers was confusing to me. I will pay for this tomorrow i think." - Rosanjin Scholar, Iron Chef
  • Fleshbeast wrote:

    There is also the conceptual issue of why "lives in a forest where short ranged weapons are inherently more practical" means "longest ranged small arms in the game"? @DanT (Summon as didn’t insert quote)

    Correct me if I’m wrong but I just assumed that we got the longest range not because we used it day-to-day but because it took a bow with a high pound draw to deliver the necessary force to take down a large buck or forest wyrm (insert magical creature with appropriate carpace). The range was more of a by-product than an intention.
    Dno :/ :S
    Not sure this conversation goes anywhere other than down a rabbit hole about the technicalities of bow construction :P
    (Which I know less than zero about).
    If everyone else thinks it makes sense, I'm not gonna quibble.


    I'd far rather discuss the "how would the army fight a conventional battle" question.
    List repository and links HERE
    Basic beginners tactics HERE
    Empire of Dannstahl HERE
  • Well, most forests (at least around here) have a visibility problem only around the edges where there is a thick underbrush (shrubs and stuff). As soon as you enter a few meters inside the forest the visibility improves drastically. The trees cant be too close together so the idea that the short bow and such is more useful in a forest is not exactly true.
    All in all, limiting bows to short bc of forests has no basis in reality.
  • Forests and range
    Display Spoiler

    Lol :)
    A quick google suggests ranges of 200-400 yards.
    Shooting this far in a field and a forest seem like meaningfully different things to me (although even the word forest is probably wrong for what we mean in a t9a context).
    *shrug*
    But I also don't really care.
    I wish I've never made the comment.



    I'd much rather find out people's answer to this

    DanT wrote:

    I have pondered a few times what I would do with SE.
    I've just put out my EoD mk1 homebrew (see sig), and this thread got me thinking about SE again, and maybe doing an SE homebrew.


    Here is a question for everyone that I feel I've never had satisfactorily answered by all the fluff I've read in more than 20 years:
    I get how SE fight in forests, particularly ambushes and smaller scales.

    How do they fight in a (big) more conventional battle? (I'm thinking fluff/imagination, not mechanics/rules/points)
    What does the army look like?
    What might a typical order of battle be?
    How does it fight?



    (I'm really bad at these things, but, for the sake of conceteness, if you are struggling to imagine why SE might fight a more conventional battle, let's say something was stolen, and the SE sent a force after the (large) army who stole it, and at some point the pursued army turns around and makes a stand, and has reinforcements on the way, so the SE need to destroy their army NOW.)
    List repository and links HERE
    Basic beginners tactics HERE
    Empire of Dannstahl HERE
  • Allright, I'll bite: If possible, a Sylvan army would use guerilla tactics, so trying their very best not to engage in a 'fair fight'. This work best in a forest environment. If the battle is somewhere else I'd imagine a more standard battle line, not engaging soon, but trying to shoot as along as possible. Trickery, harassing, fleeing, re-engaging. Meanwhile the trees act as more standard battle line troops.

    So to me shooting and trees are way more important than glass canons for example. 'The hunt' is not something that screams sylvan elves to me. I'd much rather have more units with bows, hybrids like sea guard. Also the Makhar rule of being able to shoot and flee as a charge reaction is very much sylvan elves to me.

    TL;DR: Slow trees as tanks with elves running circles around them and the enemy.
  • DanT wrote:

    How do they fight in a (big) more conventional battle? (I'm thinking fluff/imagination, not mechanics/rules/points)
    What does the army look like?
    What might a typical order of battle be?
    How does it fight?
    Interesting. I have never seen a reason. In GWs fluff they only went to war when enemies invaded athel loren iirc. So guerilla warfare. For more conventional I think that narrative is wide open for T9A.

    As for what the army would look like and how it would fight, thats kinda at the root (haha) of what I'm getting at. SE doesn't have much in the way of conventional or shall we say battle line options to fight outside of the forests where guerilla warfare would be less desirable.

    So this plays into my concerns. Again iirc, SE is perceived as too fighty, stepping into the realm of DE and maybe HE. If that aspect gets reduced in LAB it would be a shame.


    CariadocThorne wrote:

    @Stygian I think you do have a point about the book being layers of tweaks and bandaids over a legacy design from a different game with different expectations.

    I don't think we can move away from the concept of SE being the more evasive, sneaky, stealthy elves, but perhaps we can change what that means in practise.

    For example, SE could be very maneuverable in the first few turns of the game, but not in the later turns. This would make SE masters of redeploying and outmaneuvering the enemy early in the game to set up the rest of the game in their favour.

    Or we could take a step back towards 5th Ed WFB, when Wood Elf archery had 36" range, and they had the best selection of scouting skirmishers, fast cavalry, flyers etc to harrass the enemy with threatened flank charges, march blocking etc, which was all intended to give the archers as much time as possible to shoot.
    I like your outside the box thinking. In this case I think that first idea is what SE does anyway though. The second I feel is what is getting SE the restrictions treatment.



    Wall of consciousness

    Display Spoiler
    From that perspective, because other factions have significant enough portions of their units that the enemy can 'come to grips with' or lets call these "big battle units", they are allowed to be better. Even at SE's own strengths.
    So maybe SE should be looking at a few more ways/units that can directly engage and a little less avoidance. In return that might result in the units that CAN still play the avoidance game or avoid hits to be better at what they're supposed to do and the big battle units can be better than now. And heres a few examples:

    Sylvan longbows
    Very hot topic over the years very tightly controlled underwent multiple revisions nerfs hotfixes bandaids and duct tape. Now max 55 per army. So 55 sylvan archers is 1315 pts in 2 units or under 30%. If maxing out pathfinders and sentinels with all leftovers in sylvan archers for 55 bows the total is 1835 pts (41%). We can attest to how effect either build actually is. Now HE..

    HBE by comparison have queens bows 30% (1350 pts) plus naval ordnance 15% (675 pts) total 2025 pts. Excellent core spearmen with bows plus superior magic bow, Queensguard and Greywatchers with special arrows with character access to fae miasma and moonlight arrows, and even flying chariot gunboats ALL of which look suspiciously more like SE units by nature to me!
    But now compare their actual shooters to SEs..
    Core elite spears with bows and 12" bubble S&S. 2+ with accurate anti shooting arrows unit, plus another spear unit with 2+ aim S4 30" range! And then the triple reaper war machines. All these types of weapons give the book longevity and represent greater strength in ranged warfare than SE could muster.

    A little deeper..

    Cavalry
    Briar maidens vs dark acolytes
    heath riders vs dark raiders
    wild huntsmen vs knights of ryma and dread knights (yes huntsmen hit like a truck. So do dread knights and rymas but the rest of the package isn't even close)

    SE units are always behind. I feel the desparity is due to SE overload of avoidance potential and lack of big battle units. Well if SE (almost wrote ours lol) has inferior options then whats the alternative? A couple more then I'm done I promise.

    Combat infantry
    Bladedancers are the SE standard, actually THE standard. And damn at least they're still good baby. I'm throwing this one here to keep myself honest. Compare to say dancers of yema though. BDs win it. But dancers of yema are arguably not far off due to 20 ppm cost and always 4++ in combat with every relevant weapon option.

    GW unit
    Lions.. yea. Swordmasters vs rangers. Nope. Dread judges vs rangers? Still not really even close.

    Thats what I'm talking about. The elf wars is real. So if having big battle units as the bulk of entries allows for these armies to get superior units then maybe SE should consider leaning slightly more that direction.
    "When a man lies he murders some part of the world.. These are the pale deaths which men miscall their lives. All this I cannot bear to witness any longer. Cannot the kingdoms of Equitaine take me home" -Merlin/James Hetfield/KOE "To Live is To Die"

    The post was edited 4 times, last by Stygian ().

  • Posted too quickly had to edit a few things and finish some thoughts might need to refresh up there. Feels good to look through the SE book again btw..
    "When a man lies he murders some part of the world.. These are the pale deaths which men miscall their lives. All this I cannot bear to witness any longer. Cannot the kingdoms of Equitaine take me home" -Merlin/James Hetfield/KOE "To Live is To Die"
  • Regarding bow range, the real limiting factor to bow range in a forest is not the trees being too close together, it's that the canopy prevents high arcing shots. In an open field, you can launch arrows high into the air to fall on the enemy. Doing that in a forest results in lots of arrows getting stuck in the canopy or unlucky passing squirrels! That means that shooting within a forest requires a flatter trajectory, which doesn't give us much range.

    A powerful bow will tend to have a longer range, although I believe the length of the arrow and the size of the bow (which is linked, but not neccesarily the same as its power), also influence the potential range.

    That said, while I have actually made a couple of bows in the past, I'm definitely an amateur, not an expert, so there are probably other factors I'm missing.

    DanT wrote:

    I have pondered a few times what I would do with SE.
    I've just put out my EoD mk1 homebrew (see sig), and this thread got me thinking about SE again, and maybe doing an SE homebrew.


    Here is a question for everyone that I feel I've never had satisfactorily answered by all the fluff I've read in more than 20 years:
    I get how SE fight in forests, particularly ambushes and smaller scales.

    How do they fight in a (big) more conventional battle? (I'm thinking fluff/imagination, not mechanics/rules/points)
    What does the army look like?
    What might a typical order of battle be?
    How does it fight?



    (I'm really bad at these things, but, for the sake of conceteness, if you are struggling to imagine why SE might fight a more conventional battle, let's say something was stolen, and the SE sent a force after the (large) army who stole it, and at some point the pursued army turns around and makes a stand, and has reinforcements on the way, so the SE need to destroy their army NOW.)
    This is something I've been very keen on for some time. Enabling SE to play a relatively conventional battle while retaining the unique feel of SE.

    IMO, the SE approach to fighting a conventional battle should involve using rapid redeployent, misdirection and terrain to change the shape of the battle, leaving part of the enemy army out of position. Harrassing elements would then slow the out of position elements and prevent the enemy from effectively redeploying themselves to fight the SE, while FG, FR, BD and forest spirits clash directly with part of the enemy force. Fast, hard hitting units like Kestrel Knights and WH would use zoning to help hold up the out-of-position enemy units, or hammer any which ended up isolated.

    Think of tactics like an advanced denied flank, with harrassing units to prevent the enemy reacting properly, and the active flank pushing forward to crush the enemy before they can reform their lines.

    DanT wrote:

    CariadocThorne wrote:

    Or we could take a step back towards 5th Ed WFB, when Wood Elf archery had 36" range, and they had the best selection of scouting skirmishers, fast cavalry, flyers etc to harrass the enemy with threatened flank charges, march blocking etc, which was all intended to give the archers as much time as possible to shoot.
    I sympathise with this direction. But to make it work probably requires giving up QTF, and possibly other things.I've mooted this before, but I am not sure the SE community will buy it.
    There is also the conceptual issue of why "lives in a forest where short ranged weapons are inherently more practical" means "longest ranged small arms in the game"?

    But, yes, I do think this is a direction worth looking at if people can get over these hurdles.
    I must admit, this is not my preferred direction. I find a more aggressive, mobility focused style to be far more fun and fitting to the character of the army. This direction is also not really supported by the core rules any more, with things like march blocking being much less effective than they were in 5th ed WFB. However, it could be made to work, and would involve the same kind of "tricksy" special rules I am keen to see implemented for SE anyway.
    My SE homebrew (New version 7/6/2020)
  • DanT wrote:


    There is also the conceptual issue of why "lives in a forest where short ranged weapons are inherently more practical" means "longest ranged small arms in the game"?

    But, yes, I do think this is a direction worth looking at if people can get over these hurdles.
    I've thought about this too, especially in terms of Kestral riders - they should have short bows but fire 2x. There is no point to taking ranged kestral riders at the moment, but if they could fire twice it would make more sense. What if all our bows were short bows but certain units could fire 2x, or fire 2x if you didn't move? Something that makes us less avoidence but still provides strong shooting output - rather - put the choices in the hands of the player rather than the rules teams make our choices for us.
    I play SE, EoS, DH, UD, and KoE and use the units I like, not necessarily the best ones

    Battle Reports Video Blog

    Homebrew Campaign Video Blog

    "Be the player people want to play again"
  • Sylvan Elves outside a forrest?
    Well in Lord of the rings the wood elves fight much like regular elves except they jump over dwarves into a horde of Orcs.

    Or they stand behind a wall shoot and holding the ground until cavalry ambush the flank and the tree spirits ambush the rear. :)

    Overall I'd say that Sylvan elf elf army outside a forrest would fight like a mongol steppe army. Very heavy on cavalry archers and feigned flight.

    of course in the fantasy setting with tough tree spirits they can get a little more battleline and not all shoot/flee tactics.

    In fact I'd argue that their cavalry's main role is for fights outside the outside the forrest. I don't care how much strider you give a horse, they just don't go march 18 through all forests with branches a brush everywhere.
    In a forest the cav might be used in the more open patches, but otherwise would mainly be used to rapid deployment useing known trails and then dismount.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Peacemaker ().

  • Ok, so "shooty elves" and tree anvils/tanks seem to be the things so far...


    Next question:
    How elite do people want the tree elements to be?
    How will they work as anvils? (All of them are somehow stubborn? Dryads are lower eliteness to get lots of ranks? Lots of bespoke rules? Something else?)
    List repository and links HERE
    Basic beginners tactics HERE
    Empire of Dannstahl HERE
  • The army needs to be about speed, maneuvers and trickery

    Adv6 on all elves doesnt increase avoidance, but add that little bit of speed and zoning that could allow the elves to dictate the movement game more

    Currently the army needs to close in to do substantial damage, but its all rather RPS as SE is faaaar too vulnerable to damage that bypass to hit rolls. A new unit or new rules for elven cloaks that protects units as they close in is a thing to consider.
  • DanT wrote:

    How do they fight in a (big) more conventional battle? (I'm thinking fluff/imagination, not mechanics/rules/points)
    What does the army look like?
    What might a typical order of battle be?
    How does it fight?

    The 6th edition (?) Wood elf army book was the singular most defining reason I started wargaming. Granted I first read it when I was probably 8 or so, but formative none the less.

    In this book there was a description of how the Asrai went to War, it was like a storm of leaves. One section advancing as another piece retreated, coming from many different directions but with an overall central goal.

    The army composition should reflect the kindred structure of the society. In my eyes, a kindred based society is essentially a tribal society, except instead of being seperate tribes the different kindreds are all collected into one over-arching society. A kindred is distinct from a profession (ala HbE) or a cult (ala DE) because kindreds are miniature societies encapsulated, as opposed to the former occurring within societies. Therefore each 'leaf' in the storm should be a different kindred, coming together to perform role within the greater plan, but they're still distinct groups. Other media examples that fit this in my opinion would be Avatar (the Blue people, traveling to gather the tribes against a common enemy, with each tribe playing a role in the battle in a way consistent with their societal values).

    This would be juxtaposed by the Forest Spirits, who represented a united front, driven forward by the singular wills of the leading spirits. Going back to the concept of Avatar, where the Na'vi where the disparate elf kindreds the forest consciousness itself, which could control the animals of the planet, presented the forest spirit faction. Not caring about personal losses, or glory, just completion of a task.

    If I was to re-make the Sylvan book (Which I'd love to, come rules team! Pluck me out of the sky, I'd love to help :P ) I'd put a fair amount of emphasis on kindred leaders, and really incentivize champions within Elven units somehow. Really picking out that each different aspect of the army is a different band of individuals, with their own societal dynamic. Not sure how I'd do this though.
  • I would really like to see something like feigned flight on our fearless troops.
    All our elite melee units being fearless makes them very independent, which it's great, but from a thematic point of cite it makes no sense that they cannot fall back when being charged.
    Faking attacks and then retreating only to attack again feels very thematic to me.

    It would also emphasize melee builds without enabling shooty avoidance to much.
  • I'd like to imagine elves fighting outside the forest, as mentioned above something like this: Bulk of troops are elves with your spearmen, graet weaponeers and archers and then light cavalry doing the harass. And then the forest spirits arrive as a form of backup as the elves are pushed back near the forest.
    I find it hard to see rambling giants of wood forming up a defensive line in the open. And this maybe can translate into something like giving them hatred if an elven unit broke from combat, or maybe ambush inside a forest piece, or even scout into a forest
    Finnveden
  • DanT wrote:

    I have pondered a few times what I would do with SE.
    I've just put out my EoD mk1 homebrew (see sig), and this thread got me thinking about SE again, and maybe doing an SE homebrew.


    Here is a question for everyone that I feel I've never had satisfactorily answered by all the fluff I've read in more than 20 years:
    I get how SE fight in forests, particularly ambushes and smaller scales.

    How do they fight in a (big) more conventional battle? (I'm thinking fluff/imagination, not mechanics/rules/points)
    What does the army look like?
    What might a typical order of battle be?
    How does it fight?

    I've always imagined the SE style of warfare to be some sort of combination of ancient Gaelic peoples & North American First Nations, with tribal differences emphasizing certain styles/units. Ritualized combat would play a big part in settling disputes between various SE tribes but wouldn't play a role in combat with foreigners. Of course it isn't entirely a one to one comparison since ancient societies didn't have access to angry tree friends & magical beasts.

    If required to fight a battle outside of their territory I imagine the SE would engage in an extended campaign of guerrilla warfare beforehand, raiding supply lines, harrying patrols, & picking off stragglers. They would then do their utmost to force a battle in the most favorable terrain and with ideal weather conditions. They would likely set up numerous ambushes and traps before the battle begins as well as heavily rely on various types of scouting and infiltration so that they could make the most informed decisions. All of this is done due to the fact the SE will likely have fewer bodies in their army when compared to their opponent, each life is precious and must be used accordingly.

    When the battle truly begins the SE army would organize itself into tribal kith-bands, ultimately the army is made up of loosely allied tribes that often compete with each other outside of wartime. Each kith-band would specialize in its own tactics that the army's leaders would include into their strategy, but once battle is joined the SE leaders would have little control over any troops outside of their direct command. The army would still feature a traditional battle line, placed within the most favorable terrain, this would be where you would find the tribes belonging to the Forest Guardian Kindred as well as the majority of the militia and Tree Spirits. The followers of Cenyrn are known for their speed and trickery and if participating in the battle would be used to harry the opponent and bait them into traps. The followers of Cadaron are known for their aggressive temperament and great skill in close combat and would be used as the hammer of the army, breaking foes whose strength has been sapped by the support elements.

    For equipment the army relies on the trinity of spear, sword, & bow. They have access to rudimentary armour and shields, often made from animal hides or wood. The religious sects of the army would forgo suits of armour entirely, relying on the mystical protection they believe is granted to them by their divine tattoos & body paint. I would personally like to see the addition of more throwing weapons to the army, inspired by tales of Gaelic warriors armed with javelins.

    DanT wrote:

    Ok, so "shooty elves" and tree anvils/tanks seem to be the things so far...


    Next question:
    How elite do people want the tree elements to be?
    How will they work as anvils? (All of them are somehow stubborn? Dryads are lower eliteness to get lots of ranks? Lots of bespoke rules? Something else?)

    I've personally found it always strange how the Sylvan Spirits can break from combats they lose, some sort of faction specific Supernal-like rule could better represent the what happens when the spirits lose a combat, I see them as being more grounded to the material world than regular Supernal beings thus requiring some sort of unique interaction with Supernal. I've always pictured the Tree Spirits as having low skill & speed but high strength & resilience, they would rely more on raw stats to do their job over special rules & equipment, with the elven side of the faction being the opposite to them in that regard.

    Personally I would like to see the project expand outside of defining Sylvan Spirits exclusively as tree people, there are loads of myths from various cultures of nature spirits to draw inspiration from. You could have animal spirits tied to Cadaron as well as trickster spirits tied to Cenyrn, each with a flavour different from the current tree-like spirits we have. The current SE book has loads of room to expand into and explore, used smartly it could solve a lot of the issues the faction has suffered from for years.

    Hope this helps,
    Cheers!
    A Sylvan Elves Homebrew Full Army Book - last updated May 28, 2020
  • @funkyfellow views things in exactly the way I'd like to see the book. My heart bounces, selfishly and perhaps in jealousy, at seeing this thinking in the position of Sylvan ACS ;)

    When I get some time post-exams I'll take a look at the Homebrew Full Army book you've got there in the signature, I expect great things! The only thing I disagree with you about is the temperament of the Forest Spirits, as I've always preferred the Forest Spirits to be suggestive of a Hive Mind mentality rather than individual daemons inhabiting trees. It puts me more in the mind of them being an extension of nature itself, rather than simply a different kind of life.

    However I have asked for a more solid understanding of Forest Spirits since a few days after the release of our book, and consistently ever after to no comprehensive answer. I have no idea if forest spirits are unaligned supernals simply inhabiting trees or aligned supernals (to the Elven dieties? Cadaron and Amryl live in Wyscan and are the only Gods to actually inhabit the earth?) living in the trees. But if they're supernals aligned to the Elven Gods, should these supernals not have elf-like qualities, and if so is that a bad design decision to make? Why is the 'biggest' treeman an avatar of 'nature' if he is merely a powerful supernal inhabiting an old tree? Is the concept of nature a tangible force in T9A or not? The only adamant thing I (believe) we've been told is that Wyscan isn't an inherently magical forest, but instead is a forest inhabited by magical things. Which imho is a huge mistake, as I'm a big fan of the 'forest hive-mind' mentality. Think princess mononoke, where the forest god died and the whole forest became corrupted until it was appeased. I think its essentially pointless to brainstorm about the forest spirits until we are presented with *some* kind of basis of fluff to proceed on, because as of now we essentially know nothing.

    @CariadocThorne Any input on this? Sorry to jump off topic, but imho to design the mechanical boundaries for Forest Spirits we need to know, at least in part, the fluff relationship between Sylvan Elves and Sylvan spirits.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Alexwellace ().

  • Alexwellace wrote:

    @funkyfellow views things in exactly the way I'd like to see the book. My heart bounces, selfishly and perhaps in jealousy, at seeing this thinking in the position of Sylvan ACS ;)

    When I get some time post-exams I'll take a look at the Homebrew Full Army book you've got there in the signature, I expect great things! The only thing I disagree with you about is the temperament of the Forest Spirits, as I've always preferred the Forest Spirits to be suggestive of a Hive Mind mentality rather than individual daemons inhabiting trees. It puts me more in the mind of them being an extension of nature itself, rather than simply a different kind of life.

    However I have asked for a more solid understanding of Forest Spirits since a few days after the release of our book, and consistently ever after to no comprehensive answer. I have no idea if forest spirits are unaligned supernals simply inhabiting trees or aligned supernals (to the Elven dieties? Cadaron and Amryl live in Wyscan and are the only Gods to actually inhabit the earth?) living in the trees. But if they're supernals aligned to the Elven Gods, should these supernals not have elf-like qualities, and if so is that a bad design decision to make? Why is the 'biggest' treeman an avatar of 'nature' if he is merely a powerful supernal inhabiting an old tree? Is the concept of nature a tangible force in T9A or not? The only adamant thing I (believe) we've been told is that Wyscan isn't an inherently magical forest, but instead is a forest inhabited by magical things. Which imho is a huge mistake, as I'm a big fan of the 'forest hive-mind' mentality. Think princess mononoke, where the forest god died and the whole forest became corrupted until it was appeased. I think its essentially pointless to brainstorm about the forest spirits until we are presented with *some* kind of basis of fluff to proceed on, because as of now we essentially know nothing.

    @CariadocThorne Any input on this? Sorry to jump off topic, but imho to design the mechanical boundaries for Forest Spirits we need to know, at least in part, the fluff relationship between Sylvan Elves and Sylvan spirits.
    I also envisioned the idea of a hive mind mentality for the spirits, I added a nod to this in my personal homebrew where the Tree Spirits can only benefit from Commanding Presence from other Tree Spirits. The homebrew experiments with leadership mechanics a fair bit and places a greater emphasis on which model you choose to use as a general.

    I plan on further exploring the hive mind concept in a Sylvan Spirit focused Auxiliary Army homebrew that I will eventually get around to finishing.
    A Sylvan Elves Homebrew Full Army Book - last updated May 28, 2020
  • DanT wrote:

    I have pondered a few times what I would do with SE.
    I've just put out my EoD mk1 homebrew (see sig), and this thread got me thinking about SE again, and maybe doing an SE homebrew.


    Here is a question for everyone that I feel I've never had satisfactorily answered by all the fluff I've read in more than 20 years:
    I get how SE fight in forests, particularly ambushes and smaller scales.

    How do they fight in a (big) more conventional battle? (I'm thinking fluff/imagination, not mechanics/rules/points)
    What does the army look like?
    What might a typical order of battle be?
    How does it fight?



    (I'm really bad at these things, but, for the sake of conceteness, if you are struggling to imagine why SE might fight a more conventional battle, let's say something was stolen, and the SE sent a force after the (large) army who stole it, and at some point the pursued army turns around and makes a stand, and has reinforcements on the way, so the SE need to destroy their army NOW.)


    CariadocThorne wrote:

    Or we could take a step back towards 5th Ed WFB, when Wood Elf archery had 36" range, and they had the best selection of scouting skirmishers, fast cavalry, flyers etc to harrass the enemy with threatened flank charges, march blocking etc, which was all intended to give the archers as much time as possible to shoot.
    I sympathise with this direction. But to make it work probably requires giving up QTF, and possibly other things.I've mooted this before, but I am not sure the SE community will buy it.
    There is also the conceptual issue of why "lives in a forest where short ranged weapons are inherently more practical" means "longest ranged small arms in the game"?

    But, yes, I do think this is a direction worth looking at if people can get over these hurdles.
    I'm not sure I understand why the battle line question is hard. I mean, SE do have blocks of battle line troops Forest Guard, Dryads, Heath Lancers, and even Rangers and Sylvan Archers fit into this category, so they can fight a set piece, rank and flank, hammer and anvil style battle, just more fluidly than others.

    In my mind, the main difference is that SE would never or almost never stop and settle down to have that battle the next morning after a formal declaration of pleasantries and demands for terms. If they fight a set battle, it's still going to be a meeting engagement on first contact where their speed and ferocity is going to be a fundamental advantage to catch their enemy off guard, striking at weak points faster than their enemies can react. Even if their enemy is already set for a battle, the SE are always going to be moving, and moving in ways their enemy will find it hard to predict, striking from unexpected directions etc.

    Like maybe in the situation you describe they'd bypass the hunkered down enemy, destroy their reinforcements and cut off their supplies and wait for them to move, then ambush them. Or maybe they'd just be on them faster than they could imagine, in a daring moonlight assault on a flank already compromised by infiltrating scouts and fast raiders.

    The only thing I can see this largely precluding them from is setting sieges, which is probably why they don't have siege engines. I just can't imagine them being too interested in that. And if someone had something they really wanted locked up in a walled up city, that sounds like a perfect mission for a small band of intrepid adventurers, which SE do not lack.

    Lastly, I think Longbows have a pretty good pedigree as a hunting or ambush weapon in forests (perhaps as cariadoc suggested, more because of their power and draw speed rather than their maximum range - though even then perhaps the wood elves preternatural accuracy is an adaption suited to being able to find the gaps in natural cover). Robin Hood didn't have one for nothing. And beyond that, it's more a fundamental reference to source (eg Tolkien) than an anchor from Games Workshop IMHO. The archetypal Wood Elf is an elf in a green hooded cloak with a longbow and there's no taking that away. It's important to remember where your roots are.

    Data Analysis

    The post was edited 7 times, last by Hachiman Taro ().