Rules for Common Orcs ?

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!

  • Rules for Common Orcs ?

    So, since we all understood by now that our three orc « races » actually mean to represent three stages of orc development (young, middle-aged, mature), I was wondering how we could design our new unit of « Common » orcs ?

    Feral orcs are the young ones, born in the wilderness, who learn to fend for themselves in the wild and only later join an orc tribe when they stumble upon it (or never make it, thus creating a 100 % Feral Tribe).

    Iron orcs are older experienced and mature orcs who know how to fight, can maintain their equipment and armour themselves, have a strong discipline and can act to deter other orcs from panicking.

    Now what would the middle-age guys be ?

    They are less « hot-blooded » than the young (feral) ones, so don't have frenzy.
    They have access to better equipment, including crossbows and heavy armour, for some.

    All in all, since people have also been talking about removing the Eadbashers since they don't fit in the way we understand orcs, i was thinking if we should not just merge Common orcs and Eadbashers into one profile, so, no special rule other than Born to Fight, but a significantly increased profile.
    So that there would no more « common » orcs, only good, experienced, orc fighters.

    Your other suggestions ? :)

    Russian Translation Coordinator

    Translation-Team FR

    Public Relations

    Linguistic Team

    GHAÂAÂAÂARN ! — The Black Goat of the Woods with a Thousand Young
    First T9A player in West Africa
    1. @Fontetas suggested that common orcs have a similar profile to common 'eadbashers (probably removing 'eadbashers themselves).
    2. @Gingersmali (I believe?) suggested they have access to halberds, while feral orcs have no weapon option, just a custom feral weapon.
    3. I suggested common orcs gain battle focus, since I think that can fit (if we consider that battle focus means they are conscious of what battle can mean to them as well as to the enemy).

    Goblin Lunatic

    Translation - ES

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Arturiki: better formatting. ().

  • I would strongly suggest not changing too much, I think you could keep common and feral about the same as now.

    Changes to common orcs I would suggest (assuming ferals stay the same).

    • Improve the OS by +1 (if you gave IO -1 ds this gives a nice 3/2->4/3->5/4, but this could easily be 3/3->4/4->5/5 instead)
    • allow heavy armour without xbow
    • allow xbow without heavy armour
    • add option for halberds (this option, when combined with the improved os/ds would replace eadbashers, however this would mean no FOEB which are a popular choice)
    • Priced to be as competitive as ferals (if ferals were still taken a lot you could reduce ferals discipline by 1. Giving disp 6->7->8, I like this nerf to ferals as it makes it harder to run the shaman general, which as I have explained in another post, is part of why I think ferals are so great and ubiquitous. Once you have disp 9 other options like common orcs and goblins are a lot more tempting, and you move away from the feral spam, which is what I see as the most competitive build atm).

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

  • I don't like giving common orcs battle focus, this would certainly confused people if it was moved from ferals to common orcs and I don't see what issue with the current book this is trying to fix. Common orcs could easily be made popular with their current rules just by changing their price, relative to ferals. I also don't think this makes sense with the aging thing, is it a representing a midlife crisis :P
  • Gingersmali wrote:

    I would strongly suggest not changing too much, I think you could keep common and feral about the same as now.

    Changes to common orcs I would suggest (assuming ferals stay the same).

    • Improve the OS by +1 (if you gave IO -1 ds this gives a nice 3/2->4/3->5/4, but this could easily be 3/3->4/4->5/5 instead)
    • allow heavy armour without xbow
    • allow xbow without heavy armour
    • add option for halberds (this option, when combined with the improved os/ds would replace eadbashers, however this would mean no FOEB which are a popular choice)
    • Priced to be as competitive as ferals (if ferals were still taken a lot you could reduce ferals discipline by 1. Giving disp 6->7->8, I like this nerf to ferals as it makes it harder to run the shaman general, which as I have explained in another post, is part of why I think ferals are so great and ubiquitous. Once you have disp 9 other options like common orcs and goblins are a lot more tempting, and you move away from the feral spam, which is what I see as the most competitive build atm).

    This looks like a lot of fun, seriously. What does FOEB mean, though? Feral Orc 'EadBashers?

    Gingersmali wrote:

    I don't like giving common orcs battle focus, this would certainly confused people if it was moved from ferals to common orcs and I don't see what issue with the current book this is trying to fix. Common orcs could easily be made popular with their current rules just by changing their price, relative to ferals. I also don't think this makes sense with the aging thing, is it a representing a midlife crisis :P
    It was just a thought. Feral have tons of rules and once they end up becoming a common orc, magically everything disappears. That I find (even now) strange. Your option is also very viable.

    Goblin Lunatic

    Translation - ES

  • Arturiki wrote:

    Gingersmali wrote:

    I would strongly suggest not changing too much, I think you could keep common and feral about the same as now.

    Changes to common orcs I would suggest (assuming ferals stay the same).

    • Improve the OS by +1 (if you gave IO -1 ds this gives a nice 3/2->4/3->5/4, but this could easily be 3/3->4/4->5/5 instead)
    • allow heavy armour without xbow
    • allow xbow without heavy armour
    • add option for halberds (this option, when combined with the improved os/ds would replace eadbashers, however this would mean no FOEB which are a popular choice)
    • Priced to be as competitive as ferals (if ferals were still taken a lot you could reduce ferals discipline by 1. Giving disp 6->7->8, I like this nerf to ferals as it makes it harder to run the shaman general, which as I have explained in another post, is part of why I think ferals are so great and ubiquitous. Once you have disp 9 other options like common orcs and goblins are a lot more tempting, and you move away from the feral spam, which is what I see as the most competitive build atm).

    This looks like a lot of fun, seriously. What does FOEB mean, though? Feral Orc 'EadBashers? yup :)

    Gingersmali wrote:

    I don't like giving common orcs battle focus, this would certainly confused people if it was moved from ferals to common orcs and I don't see what issue with the current book this is trying to fix. Common orcs could easily be made popular with their current rules just by changing their price, relative to ferals. I also don't think this makes sense with the aging thing, is it a representing a midlife crisis :P
    It was just a thought. Feral have tons of rules and once they end up becoming a common orc, magically everything disappears. That I find (even now) strange. Your option is also very viable. yer there a quite a few units in the different books with fearless, frenzy and battlefocus (mino, plague rats, etc), so at least in my eyes it reduces mental load by keeping them together.
  • First: Merging Eadbasher into Orcs. ...this means MERGE, it doesn't mean delete common orc and use Eadbasher rules. So it's about making a unit that is viable middle tear infantry, not elite infantry.

    Born to Fight changed to +1 Off Skill, +1 AP.
    This means Strength 4 is base stat for Orcs. The +1 off synergizes a bit better with weapon options.

    Common Orc
    GlobalAdvMarDisModel Rules
    4"8"7Scoring
    DefensiveHPDefResArm
    1340Light Armour
    Offensive AttOffStrAPAgi
    13402Born to Fight

    They get all the weapon options they get now.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Young(Feral) Orcs
    GlobalAdvMarDisModel Rules
    4"8"7Scoring, Fearless, Frenzy,
    DefensiveHPDefResArm
    1240
    Offensive AttOffStrAPAgi
    13402Born to Fight, Battle Focus, Bone Smashas

    Bone Smasha are a close combat weapon that give +1 Strength, +1 Agility.
    They can take a Mammoth Stabba and Full command. No other weapon options.



    The Design goal is to give both Common Orcs and Feral Orcs a role that doesn't compete with each other. Ferals have better matchups against tougher things. They only get 1 weapon option because they aren't smart enough to have learned how to use the more sophisticated weapons effectively in a group yet. An Auxiliary book can have a wider scope of options for a Feral Orc army including stuff like warpaint, weapon master ferals, etc....

    For me, a goal is to have hordes or at least multiple units for Common and Feral, so I'd rather have more bodies with few extras that just increase the cost. That's the biggest reason to remove Aegis 6+ on the ferals. Design wise I'm expecting FIER banner to be used on ferals.

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

    Iron Orcs
    GlobalAdvMarDisModel Rules
    4"8"8Scoring, BodyGuard(Iron Orc Warlord, Iron Orc Chief), Fearless
    DefensiveHPDefResArm
    1440Plate Armour, Shield
    Offensive AttOffStrAPAgi
    15512Born to Fight, WeaponMaster, Paired Weapons, Great Weapon

    Same options as now.
    They get the extra strength of course. And I reduced the Def skill by 1 to compensate for the +1 off skill given by Born to Fight. Now this shifts them to be more offensive which I feel totally fits fluff wise. This also incentivizes actually using weaponmaster instead of just always using the Great weapon because with lower defense you might actually want to use HW&shield to get a parry. You might want to used Paired Weapons to get to Off 7!
    And since Iron Orcs are typically smaller unit sizes they might not always be getting B2F bonus, so that base strength 5 really helps.

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


    I know some people might not like these changes because they just use feral orc eadbashers all the time due to them being strong power wise. And change is scary.
    I honestly feel these stats reflect how a orcs could be a viable core unit without being an elite core unit.

    Edit: just a note on Feral Orcs Fearless, Frenzy, Battlfocus: - Fearless is not purely a benefit. It prevents you from fleeing which can be a big deal. Ferals "magically" forget how to be Fearless, Frenzy, BFocus because they learned how to use other weapons that do other stuff instead of just swinging wildly with their Bone Smashas, and they've learned when it's better to flee from a bad charge and when it's more optimal to charge.

    I do feel common orcs should have better discipline than Ferals due to the above thinking. Maybe Common goes up to 8 Discipline?

    The post was edited 5 times, last by Peacemaker ().

  • Also, I was wondering if there was a way to provide some incentive for Leaders to be part of the squads rather than always just mounted and running around.
    They give an extra pip of Discipline but that isn't really worth it. And we don't really want to increase that stat more.

    Maybe if joined to a unit, Orc Leaders May re-roll a discipline test and lose D3 models from the unit?
    Feral Orc Leader it's D3+1 models removed.
    Common Orc Leader it's D3 models removed
    Iron Orc Leader it's D3-1 models removed.

    lol, the more I think of this, it sounds kinda fun. It's more of a fluffy rule for sure but it provides a little bit of outside BSB range ability.


    Or maybe it can be something like this:
    Roll a D3 and subtract that from your discipline roll. Remove that many models from the unit(feral +1, Iron -1). Must have at least 5 rank and file models available.


    And keep in mind that Orcs don't really have alot of the "Random O&G rules" because goblins got most of them. So it would be nice to add a bit of random back into the orc stuff.

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

  • Ghiznuk wrote:

    I'd put it more as « X hits with the Strength of the Character », so it's more understandable that it's him hitting everyone
    I just did the abstract D3 remove models just to save time for rolling. Actual hits, wound, and saves, would be more thematic.

    I would put the rules for this onto the characters profile. Then it's clear that the character is doing it.

    I really like this rule. It feels like a way better and functional version of the old animosity. You can use this on panic, fear, terror, etc... but you'll be bleeding models. It's a great Timmy rule with the added benefit of providing some mitigation from orcs having bad discipline.
    And if you roll really high like Box cars, its not going to work so it doesn't totally negate the basic mechanics of Discipline checks.
  • If 'eadbashers exist, ferals are more elite with a drawback of frenzy and common orcs getting a bit better armor.

    If 'eadbashers don't exist what is the desired difference? Ferals more blendery (battlefocus)? Better at being independent from THE bubble (fearless) so like outriders? When I imagine young violent vitality versus experienced aggression it almost makes me think Feral-hatred and Common-battlefocus. But that's not really a suggestion I'm making.

    This was the set of questions I was asking myself cause I don't really know. I like cheap s3r4 orcs, I like occasionally having s4r4 orcs preferably on boars.
  • Ghiznuk wrote:

    What is FOEB ?
    Feral orc 'eadbasher. Strange. I prefer the newly coined 3Fbasher. :P

    Peacemaker wrote:

    First: Merging Eadbasher into Orcs. ...this means MERGE, it doesn't mean delete common orc and use Eadbasher rules. So it's about making a unit that is viable middle tear infantry, not elite infantry.
    Born to Fight changed to +1 Off Skill, +1 AP.
    This means Strength 4 is base stat for Orcs. The +1 off synergizes a bit better with weapon options.
    Common Orc
    Display Spoiler
    [b][/b]
    [b][/b]
    GlobalAdvMarDisModel Rules
    4"8"7Scoring
    DefensiveHPDefResArm
    1340Light Armour
    Offensive AttOffStrAPAgi
    13402Born to Fight

    They get all the weapon options they get now.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Young(Feral) Orcs[b]
    [/b]
    Display Spoiler

    GlobalAdvMarDisModel Rules
    4"8"7Scoring, Fearless, Frenzy,
    DefensiveHPDefResArm
    1240
    Offensive AttOffStrAPAgi
    13402Born to Fight, Battle Focus, Bone Smashas

    Bone Smasha are a close combat weapon that give +1 Strength, +1 Agility.
    They can take a Mammoth Stabba and Full command. No other weapon options.
    The Design goal is to give both Common Orcs and Feral Orcs a role that doesn't compete with each other. Ferals have better matchups against tougher things. They only get 1 weapon option because they aren't smart enough to have learned how to use the more sophisticated weapons effectively in a group yet. An Auxiliary book can have a wider scope of options for a Feral Orc army including stuff like warpaint, weapon master ferals, etc....
    For me, a goal is to have hordes or at least multiple units for Common and Feral, so I'd rather have more bodies with few extras that just increase the cost. That's the biggest reason to remove Aegis 6+ on the ferals. Design wise I'm expecting FIER banner to be used on ferals.

    --------------------------------------------------
    Iron Orcs[b]
    [/b]
    Display Spoiler

    GlobalAdvMarDisModel Rules
    4"8"8Scoring, BodyGuard(Iron Orc Warlord, Iron Orc Chief), Fearless
    DefensiveHPDefResArm
    1440Plate Armour, Shield
    Offensive AttOffStrAPAgi
    15512Born to Fight, WeaponMaster, Paired Weapons, Great Weapon

    Same options as now.
    They get the extra strength of course. And I reduced the Def skill by 1 to compensate for the +1 off skill given by Born to Fight. Now this shifts them to be more offensive which I feel totally fits fluff wise. This also incentivizes actually using weaponmaster instead of just always using the Great weapon because with lower defense you might actually want to use HW&shield to get a parry. You might want to used Paired Weapons to get to Off 7!
    And since Iron Orcs are typically smaller unit sizes they might not always be getting B2F bonus, so that base strength 5 really helps.

    -------------------------------
    Display Spoiler
    I know some people might not like these changes because they just use feral orc eadbashers all the time due to them being strong power wise. And change is scary.
    I honestly feel these stats reflect how a orcs could be a viable core unit without being an elite core unit.
    Edit: just a note on Feral Orcs Fearless, Frenzy, Battlfocus: - Fearless is not purely a benefit. It prevents you from fleeing which can be a big deal. Ferals "magically" forget how to be Fearless, Frenzy, BFocus because they learned how to use other weapons that do other stuff instead of just swinging wildly with their Bone Smashas, and they've learned when it's better to flee from a bad charge and when it's more optimal to charge.
    I do feel common orcs should have better discipline than Ferals due to the above thinking. Maybe Common goes up to 8 Discipline?

    Firstly, let me say this is a great way of discussing the orc unit. Giving all the alternatives and potential profiles, you get to see how they balance each other, instead of focusing on one particular "branch" without taking into account the others.

    Born to fight: Do you have a reason to change it to offensive skill instead of strength? I think strength is a bit more decisive, so giving the orcs base 4 strength could be undesirable. If the idea is to compensate for 'eadbashers, then I have no objections. I will comment my thoughts considering the strength 4 is compensating 'eadbashers.

    Feral orcs:
    • Stats: Fair enough.
    • Armour/Save: Currently no background supports aegis, and I wouldn't miss it.
    • Weaponry: i like the customised weapon instead of so many weapon options. However, I don't think they are stupid enough not to know about bows or shields. But I am fine without them; they might just disregard wasting time throwing darts and blocking when they can be hitting. The custom weapon would make them strength 5 and agility 4, so hitting before other orcs, and hitting heavy blows. I guess, as you say, it would go against tough units.

    Common orcs:
    • Stats: Fair enough. I wouldn't increase discipline to 8. That would match iron orcs', and you don't want iron orcs to already be at the 3/4 of the die roll. Also, easier to remember if it's same for feral and common?
    • Armour/Save: Fair enough. Would you consider access to heavy armour without crossbows?
    • Weaponry: Fair enough. You might consider giving access to halberd, as someone suggested, but not necessary. Maybe invest in iron orcs if you want 2-handed weapons. I am still unsure whether the access to "all" weapons can compete with the higher strength and agility of feral orcs. I am not very experienced, so I would gladly have someone explain this to me.
    Iron orcs:
    • Stats: Fair enough. You dropped one and added one. I like the connotation of lower defensive skill (but still better than other orcs) into making you really think what weapon does make sense to use. Discipline 8 here makes sense to me.
    • Armour/Save: Fair enough.
    • Weaponry: See "Stats". Being able to get offensive 7 could be slightly too high... But as an iron orc lover, I won't be complaining too much! :GobboYes:
    Display Spoiler

    @WhammeWhamme or @Ghiznuk, could you tell me whether this is a good (permitted) idea? I would like to generate a mockup orc profile with the above values using the official access I have to the army book template to have a visual idea on how complex that would look like and compare it easily to the original. Since it could be seen as abusing/exploiting privileges, I want to ask before anything else. Basically I would like to compare and say "this looks less/same/more complex as before.

    Goblin Lunatic

    Translation - ES

  • Arturiki wrote:

    Display Spoiler

    @WhammeWhamme or @Ghiznuk, could you tell me whether this is a good (permitted) idea? I would like to generate a mockup orc profile with the above values using the official access I have to the army book template to have a visual idea on how complex that would look like and compare it easily to the original. Since it could be seen as abusing/exploiting privileges, I want to ask before anything else. Basically I would like to compare and say "this looks less/same/more complex as before.


    I don't see how that would be an abuse (our layout is not an arcane secret) but I'm not in a position to make calls on what would be an abuse.

    Personally, I'd be more worried this would get you press-ganged into the layout team if I were you. ;)



    Just a note for the thread: Personally, one of the few changes I would make for the O&G book is that I would move the Heavy Armour + Crossbow "Common Orcs" to Iron Orc status. Like the current Iron Orc unit, those guys have better gear than average, and I think it makes sense that not all old Orcs got there by being the biggest meanest bruiser around.

    (Bonus: Allows for an "all Iron Orc" army)

    Background Team

  • Arturiki wrote:

    Do you have a reason to change it to offensive skill instead of strength? I think strength is a bit more decisive, so giving the orcs base 4 strength could be undesirable. If the idea is to compensate for 'eadbashers, then I have no objections. I will comment my thoughts considering the strength 4 is compensating 'eadbashers.
    Main reason is the compensation for Eadbashers.
    A smaller secondary reason is that it helps give the orcs a role that the goblins can't do. Strength, Resilience, AP are what I calls Hard stats in that they come into effect alot more. While Weapon skill, agility, everything else are Soft Stats that don't come into effect as often. Goblins can take 60models with spears, with FIER banner, with 20mm bases for their footprint. Orcs in higher numbers get a huge footprint, the 25mm base has them lose attacks against certain enemies. So having them as Strength 3 is too close to Goblins. The old Born to Fight compensated for this of course. But then again, everyone took Eadbashers anyway.

    Arturiki wrote:

    Weaponry: i like the customised weapon instead of so many weapon options. However, I don't think they are stupid enough not to know about bows or shields. But I am fine without them; they might just disregard wasting time throwing darts and blocking when they can be hitting. The custom weapon would make them strength 5 and agility 4, so hitting before other orcs, and hitting heavy blows. I guess, as you say, it would go against tough units.
    The "stupid" thing was just a quick explanation. It's better to view it a bit more abstractly. Like the Ferals haven't had time to really hone their skills to use specific weapons effectively. Like the bows and darts just aren't hitting anything. They aren't standing in formation for spears to take effect. They aren't using paired weapons in a way that gets around parry.
    So everything a young orc picks up is used for Smashin'!
    Later on they learn that some things are good for Choppin'! Some things are good for Stabbin'! and others are used for Shootin'! :orclaugh:



    Arturiki wrote:

    Armour/Save: Fair enough. Would you consider access to heavy armour without crossbows?
    I think there are over all T9A guildelines against 4+ save infantry in core except for specific armies.
    And internally, it would conflict with Iron orcs.

    But for say an Iron Tribe Auxiliary book I think common Orcs could get heavy armour and perhaps even a Halberd option! And the book could have Iron Goblins with plate.


    Arturiki wrote:

    Weaponry: Fair enough. You might consider giving access to halberd, as someone suggested, but not necessary. Maybe invest in iron orcs if you want 2-handed weapons. I am still unsure whether the access to "all" weapons can compete with the higher strength and agility of feral orcs. I am not very experienced, so I would gladly have someone explain this to me.
    I did consider Halberd. But stat wise and role wise I am happy with how it looks. The Strength and AP difference between Common/Feral/Iron seem well balanced in my suggestion.
    And T9A guideline rule for models options say that there should(must?) be 2-3 model choices from manufacturers when considering new units and options. And heavy armour would be considered a "hidden" upgrade if used with all the combat weapons.

    ....maybe a Heavy Armour + Crossbow/or Halberd option?
  • Well, I see now we are talking business, my fellow brutes!!
    Display Spoiler

    Peacemaker wrote:

    Also, I was wondering if there was a way to provide some incentive for Leaders to be part of the squads rather than always just mounted and running around.
    They give an extra pip of Discipline but that isn't really worth it. And we don't really want to increase that stat more.
    Maybe if joined to a unit, Orc Leaders May re-roll a discipline test and lose D3 models from the unit?
    Feral Orc Leader it's D3+1 models removed.
    Common Orc Leader it's D3 models removed
    Iron Orc Leader it's D3-1 models removed.
    lol, the more I think of this, it sounds kinda fun. It's more of a fluffy rule for sure but it provides a little bit of outside BSB range ability.
    Or maybe it can be something like this:
    Roll a D3 and subtract that from your discipline roll. Remove that many models from the unit(feral +1, Iron -1). Must have at least 5 rank and file models available.
    And keep in mind that Orcs don't really have alot of the "Random O&G rules" because goblins got most of them. So it would be nice to add a bit of random back into the orc stuff.

    Ghiznuk wrote:

    I'd put it more as « X hits with the Strength of the Character », so it's more understandable that it's him hitting everyone

    Peacemaker wrote:

    Ghiznuk wrote:

    I'd put it more as « X hits with the Strength of the Character », so it's more understandable that it's him hitting everyone
    I just did the abstract D3 remove models just to save time for rolling. Actual hits, wound, and saves, would be more thematic.


    I really like this idea. As you mention, it resembles that old animosity without being a totally random effect and actually having a potential benefit. Gathering your ideas and adding some personal spiciness, I got this:
    Orc up, boys! / Who's the boss here? / Fight or die / Try or die / Warborn instinct
    If the model is part of a unit of their own hide [and the unit is not fleeing], you may re-roll a discipline test. If so, the unit suffers D3[/X]{/Y} hits with the model's Strength and Armour Penetration[, where X is the Attack Value of the model]{, where Y is the difference between the failed discipline test and the discipline of the model}. These hits are resolved these hits after re-rolling the discipline test.
    May only be used if the unit has at least 1 Full Rank.
    Explanation:
    Display Spoiler

    • I would love synergies between hides (or whatever they end up being called). You get this bonus if you decide to group a character to an akin unit.
    • Optionally, use only when not fleeing.
    • Hits: First, I don't think there is a need for a modifier to the number of hits, since feral will die more often than common and even more than iron orcs due to their armour equipment already.
      • D3 will on average lead to only 2 hits.
      • X being the attacks of the character makes sense to me. If I am able to beat the crap out of 4, I will.
      • Y being the difference between the minimum passed test and the failed test can lead to a maximum of 5 hits (considering unit is not decimated), but leaves a bit of uncertainty on the exact amount (which I like).
    • The clarification of when to resolve the hits is mostly to avoid becoming decimated and rolling with a lower value than before.
    • Instead of having to "count" [lexicon]models[/lexicon], I would just say that you need a full rank. That's virtually the same as 5 (4 + character), but makes it more ruleful to me.
    Problems:
    Display Spoiler

    • If using X, perhaps the amount of hits it's already too many every time. D3, D6 and difference between minimum passed test and failed test seem fine.
    • If using Y, I mentioned the discipline of the model. But the discipline test could be done using the BSB or general's discipline and leading to a different value, so we could thing of this.
    • Are those attacks made using the base attributes, or are they modified by weapons, special items, spells?
    • This rule would be really funny and interesting, but we have to remember this definitely adds complexity to the book.

    Goblin Lunatic

    Translation - ES

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Arturiki: Add one more name for the orc rule ().