Community Brainstorm - Goblin Design Principles for LAB

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 here! You can read all about it in the news.

Our beta phase is finally over. Download The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles, 2nd Edition now!

  • Ok, seems to be a very controverse topic. I fear we will not come to a conclusion, that convinces the majority of our community. We can summarise that parts of the community want to keep differentiation between Goblin types/tribes, while other parts would prefer free combinatority without limitations. Let's see what background team is doing. We as a community probably only can agree to disagree in this point. Would a poll be of help here?


    Maybe we should move a bit further to another question that bogs me since a while. In many fantasy game settings Goblins are fast and agile. In GW (and therefore still in 9th age) setting Goblins have same Mov value as a regular human and even lower Agi. Not sure why this was done originally by GW, but it sticked. However, in the future full redesigned book, this does not have to be the case.

    What about Goblin baseline stats with higher move and higher agility than Orcs? I think about move 5 and Agi 3, which does not sound overly excessive to me. What do you think? Would such statline better represent the intended feel of Goblins?
  • arwaker wrote:

    What about Goblin baseline stats with higher move and higher agility than Orcs? I think about move 5 and Agi 3, which does not sound overly excessive to me. What do you think? Would such statline better represent the intended feel of Goblins?
    I agree that higher base agility probably makes sense as they can be a bit more nimble.

    I am not convinced by greater movement. They are less powerful than orcs so no reason in my head at least to be faster at running, and they are not unnaturally quick like elves.
  • All too detailed, stage one is more about the concept than the implementation. We need to have clear conceptual wishes and give freedom to the FAB team.

    So without stating a move stat, a concept would be fast.

    And what is sneaky? Sneaky should mean that goblins can actually hide nasty surprises.
  • I would say that goblins are weak but numerous, cowards but full of courage if they see a good chance to win or the enemy is in a negative position, normal speed, fast if they see that they can attack at a weak spot. Treacherous. Normal agility. Evil and mean. They have intelligence to use primitive techniques of war hunting (nets, poison). They adapt well to all climates. Each tribe has known how to exploit the advantages of their ecosystems with tactics. Vicious (mushrooms and strange potions) like to capture wild beasts to protect them. Under the effects of narcotics they lose the sense of conservation. Looters and thieves. They can build or use enemy equipment such as weapons, armor or war machines, possibly the smartest can understand the mechanisms and copy them into new prototypes.
  • I am fine with M4, more than that wouldn’t fit. I would just give them Swiftstride when charging a unit in the flank/rear.

    I personally think it would be better to have a unique goblin profile, and a lot of options to customize from there. It makes the book easier and it gives us more options. Keeping the old structure from GW makes no sense anymore.

    And please, make bows 1p per model.
  • arwaker wrote:

    Maybe we should move a bit further to another question that bogs me since a while. In many fantasy game settings Goblins are fast and agile. In GW (and therefore still in 9th age) setting Goblins have same Mov value as a regular human and even lower Agi. Not sure why this was done originally by GW, but it sticked. However, in the future full redesigned book, this does not have to be the case.

    What about Goblin baseline stats with higher move and higher agility than Orcs? I think about move 5 and Agi 3, which does not sound overly excessive to me. What do you think? Would such statline better represent the intended feel of Goblins?
    Yes i do agree . It was always strange to me that goblins had same initiative/agility as orcs do ( cave goblins has more agility than other goblins by the way)So it seems legit than all goblins have more agility than orcs

    About the movement: goblins should be little faster than orcs and even just an higher marching rate could be reasonable

    @Little Joe: what does mean sneaky ? ;)
    I believe everything it is not conventional : using nets to trap enemies , hide and release mad gits to smash foe with chained balls , hide shady gits to try to assassin enemy's heroes and champions, to use poisoned weapons .
  • St2 base, remove widespread access to Parry.

    Common Goblins
    -wear the most armour (light armour)
    -the only type that can Parry
    -wolves of various types (giant wolf mount would be nice)

    Cave Goblins
    -Gnashas of various types

    Forest Goblins
    -have access to Poison
    -Spider Mounts of various types (spider chariot would be nice)

    All Goblins
    -can use Mad Gits, Sneaky Gits and Nets
    -wield Spears where possible in preference to everything else
    -higher agility than orcs
    -bad discipline levels, maybe give them a rule like strength in numbers where outnumbering an enemy/flanking them gives a discipline bonus, while being outnumbered/flanked gives a discipline reduction

    Mounts now have to be stronger to compensate for the St2 base, which is no bad thing.
    You rely on weight of attacks to do damage, along with additional things like Nets, Mad Gits and Shady Gits.
    You need support to win combats as well, you can't just tarpit with your goblins and hope to win that way.


    That's my take on what I'de like to see.
  • cyrus wrote:

    ...

    @Little Joe: what does mean sneaky ? ;)
    I believe everything it is not conventional : using nets to trap enemies , hide and release mad gits to smash foe with chained balls , hide shady gits to try to assassin enemy's heroes and champions, to use poisoned weapons .
    If you need to share lists, you can't rally hide gits right now. You can't bluff them for sure, so we woud want sneaky back. Sneaky can also be a battle tactic (faster if attacking back and rear was mentioned) or generally fight with traps of which gits are a good example.
    Also would it not be more sneaky if the opponent can't see what you might have hidden based on miniatures? Just asking to stoke the discussion. ;)

    theunwantedbeing wrote:

    ...

    Forest Goblins
    -have access to Poison
    -Spider Mounts of various types (spider chariot would be nice)

    ...


    -bad discipline levels, maybe give them a rule like strength in numbers where outnumbering an enemy/flanking them gives a discipline bonus, while being outnumbered/flanked gives a discipline reduction

    ...

    setrius wrote:

    Hi, if we have time check my homebrew Silexian Goblins probably have some interesting ideas or concepts. You can find the link in my signature or here Silexian Goblins, enjoy.

    That is all
    Check out that Goliath idea.

    I want unreliable troops back. I know it was divisive and not popular with many. But an unreliable army was the flavor that made me really enjoy O&G. Something new based on morale, numbers and a tactical counter would be nice in my opinion. The army gets designed from scratch, so bring out the cool concepts.
  • arwaker wrote:

    We can summarise that parts of the community want to keep differentiation between Goblin types/tribes, while other parts would prefer free combinatority without limitations. Let's see what background team is doing. We as a community probably only can agree to disagree in this point. Would a poll be of help here?
    Yer I think this summary is fair, not sure a poll would help, well at least now as it is possibly many months before the information is needed.


    I think the flavour of the the different goblin races is there, I would just like to see the flavour reflected in the rules a little better.
    I also think it would be nice if mono race armies were more viable, or if there was some bonus for running a mono race list. I


    In terms of stats, I think the current cave goblin stat line would be my preference for all non hero goblins. As long as units were correctly costed for it.
  • As my goblins are currently my main-army, I'd really like to see a few things:

    * Huge goblin units in line formation become a thing again. It really bugs me to see the line formation as an efficient formation only on more elite-ish troops, especially, as my cave gobbos are built in a formation 10 models broad. An army with broader units gives more of an chaotic mass-army-impression, than units with countless ranks. Maybe even give goblins something like an "overwhelming numbers" rule, that gives them a bonus, depending on your files. (so it also is something different than VS's "Strength In Numbers")

    * Hidden fanatics. I cry everytime, I have to tell my opponent, where my mad gits are hidden. Let us have our secrets, till they are to be released. I love the stand and shoot-release but a way to mobilise them when already in CC would be a joy.

    * The nets are a very nice contribution to the unit, right now. But if you consider, giving them only S2 in the future, we need more ways to wound, than to hope for poison attacks to work. So maybe nets could decrease the toughness as well. Otherwise these S2 hits will let us devoid CC at any cost and I still want to be able to swamp my enemy, with at least some amount of success aka wounds.

    * My cave gobbo archers are at the moment just a taxi for the mage - which is fine, I guess. But I'd love to see more "feigned flight" in the army, and they would be benefiting quite a lot from it, giving a fire-mage better possibilities to make his fire aura work. (get closer)

    * a goblin king or chief, contributes a lot to a horde of goblins already, but a huge unit makes his leadership bubble, if general, become pretty small. The cavern-crown is already a nice item to make up for this - but if you want to play them mainly for this purpose, it still is not enough, especially if the BSB has better use for the cavern-crown, and the general for the autocracy-crown. Something like the VS-litter.
  • Loghaire wrote:

    As my goblins are currently my main-army, I'd really like to see a few things:

    * Huge goblin units in line formation become a thing again. It really bugs me to see the line formation as an efficient formation only on more elite-ish troops, especially, as my cave gobbos are built in a formation 10 models broad. An army with broader units gives more of an chaotic mass-army-impression, than units with countless ranks. Maybe even give goblins something like an "overwhelming numbers" rule, that gives them a bonus, depending on your files. (so it also is something different than VS's "Strength In Numbers")

    * Hidden fanatics. I cry everytime, I have to tell my opponent, where my mad gits are hidden. Let us have our secrets, till they are to be released. I love the stand and shoot-release but a way to mobilise them when already in CC would be a joy.

    * The nets are a very nice contribution to the unit, right now. But if you consider, giving them only S2 in the future, we need more ways to wound, than to hope for poison attacks to work. So maybe nets could decrease the toughness as well. Otherwise these S2 hits will let us devoid CC at any cost and I still want to be able to swamp my enemy, with at least some amount of success aka wounds.

    * My cave gobbo archers are at the moment just a taxi for the mage - which is fine, I guess. But I'd love to see more "feigned flight" in the army, and they would be benefiting quite a lot from it, giving a fire-mage better possibilities to make his fire aura work. (get closer)

    * a goblin king or chief, contributes a lot to a horde of goblins already, but a huge unit makes his leadership bubble, if general, become pretty small. The cavern-crown is already a nice item to make up for this - but if you want to play them mainly for this purpose, it still is not enough, especially if the BSB has better use for the cavern-crown, and the general for the autocracy-crown. Something like the VS-litter.
    Yeah right, it did not feel normal when I had to make new unit bases because of line formation, it forces all Goblin armies into weird formations. I still use 8 wide archers, but deep blocks of Goblins are a bit weird.

    I must admit that I still hide fanatics because I do not share lists in friendly games, so I never noticed. But for tournaments it should be a nasty surprise and a tactical advantage. I want goblins to be nastier again, possibly with the drawback of internal scheming.
  • arwaker wrote:

    Just interested: Does anyone know a fantasy setting (tabletop, boardgame, pen&paper) containing Orcs and Goblins, where the Goblins are not faster moving than the Orcs? (except GW)
    I know they're the same thing as one another in Middle Earth (at least in the books they are), and in Dungeons and Dragons you have goblins actually moving slower than Orcs.

    arwaker wrote:

    Make range of commanding presence longer when general is a large unit?
    What about goblins with commanding presence drawing it from the unit instead of the model?
    That basically adds 122 cm2 of CP area per rank and file of the unit after the first - even more when mounted - and doesn't detract from the value of a TP general since there's no platforms to worry about.
  • Even if not part of this thread, such a rule (measuring commanding presence from the edge of the unit) would also make sense for Orcs.
    Imho even more than VS, OnG should be THE army with really large units. Rules should support such playstyle. I like.

    To the statline question: Seems like the majority could agree on Goblins having higher Agi value than Orcs, but not higher move. However, I read several times ideas about a rule providing some kind of bonus when attacking opponent's flank or rear. How exactly could such a rule look like? (brainstom):
    - Reroll charge (rerolls reduce luck, I don't like this much)
    - Maximized charge roll (same luck reduction)
    - Static Bonus to charge range, maybe +2. (slightly better)
    - Random Bonus to charge range, maybe d3. (I like)
    - Also some kind of combat bonus? (would be attractive for Wolf Raiders imho)

    Your thoughts?

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


  • arwaker wrote:

    Even if not part of this thread, such a rule (measuring commanding presence from the edge of the unit) would also make sense for Orcs.
    Imho even more than VS, OnG should be THE army with really large units. Rules should support such playstyle. I like.

    To the statline question: Seems like the majority could agree on Goblins having higher Agi value than Orcs, but not higher move. However, I read several times ideas about a rule providing some kind of bonus when attacking opponent's flank or rear. How exactly could such a rule look like? (brainstom):
    - Reroll charge (rerolls reduce luck, I don't like this much)
    - Maximized charge roll (same luck reduction)
    - Static Bonus to charge range, maybe +2. (slightly better)
    - Random Bonus to charge range, maybe d3. (I like)
    - Also some kind of combat bonus? (would be attractive for Wolf Raiders imho)

    Your thoughts?
    If i rember correctly ID hobgoblins already have rules like these. in fact after taking a look hobgoblins are just slightly better goblins...( with less upgrades but better weapon options and all Agi3 Dis6 with LA)
  • arwaker wrote:

    Just interested: Does anyone know a fantasy setting (tabletop, boardgame, pen&paper) containing Orcs and Goblins, where the Goblins are not faster moving than the Orcs? (except GW)
    I checked it out Kings of War ( another popular fantasy battles game) and orcs and goblins ( which are separate armies in KoW) do have same movement rate .
    It is also true that even dwarfs march 9" in 9thage ;)


    @Little Joe: yes it is true that since you show your list to your opponent both mad gits and shady gits lose some " sneakiness"
    But they both still remain something to think about when your opponent decide to charge /engage your unit containg them.
    ;)