OnG LAB - Community Input on Goblin Monsters (Gogyags)

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

  • OnG LAB - Community Input on Goblin Monsters (Gogyags)

    Polls on page 3

    Hey All,

    @Baldin

    The OnG TT is looking for some input on how goblin creatures are represented in the OnG LAB. Specifically how much the names and rules are tailored to represent specific creatures or not. The OnG background introduces "gogyag" which is a generic term for large goblin monsters, it also mentions a bunch of creatures not seen in the OnG slim book, from memory centipedes, skunks, crabs etc..

    The question to you guys is would you prefer more generic entries that allow you to more easily represent different creatures? Or would you like the names and rules to represent fairly similar creatures to the slim? Of course T9A is model agnostic so you'd still be welcome to use whatever miniatures you like in the second case too.

    To be a bit more concrete:


    Option A - Specific:
    • Colossa gogyag -> gargantula with very spidery rules
    • Demi gogyag mounts -> two versions one explicitly named as a gnasher, one named as a spider, both with rules reflexing their name
    • Gnasher wrecking team -> gnashery rules



    Option B - Generic:
    • Colossal Gogyag -> generic monster possibly with some option to make it a bit "spidery" - note this would likely be less than option A due to having to split complexity over two versions.
    • Demi gogyag mount/s -> generic large cavalry mount, possibly with an option to make it a spider similar to the Colossal gogyag
    • Wrecking team -> random moving destructive "thing" might not even be a monster, so could be a scrap wagon variant, giant madgit who's taken a size increasing potion etc,
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Questions:

    1. Do you prefer options A or options B? Note one choice doesn't have to be picked for all entries, if you have different feelings for each.
    2. What are your feelings on unit entries names? Any names you prefer?
    3. If you prefer option B is there anything that you feel is missing here?
    4. EDIT: have your read “here come the warborn”?

    I may set up polls if its looking like this will be helpful.

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Gingersmali ().

  • Option B
    Especially if we will have constructor like KoE Falk Hero.
    So it needs many (at least 5) optional upgrades.

    So we could buy 3 upgrades for Gogyag: Poison + super attack + Strider
    And it become Gargantula.

    Take just super attack + Strider and it become Crab.
    And so on...

    Gingersmali wrote:

    What are your feelings on unit entries names? Any names you prefer?
    Gogyag sounds not very good. Maybe change it a little bit? Even Goyag sounds better.
  • Gerfaks wrote:

    Option B
    Especially if we will have constructor like KoE Falk Hero.
    So it needs many (at least 5) optional upgrades
    This likely isn't an option due to the number of units in the OnG book. For sure it'll be no where near the Folk Hero level of customisation. Hard to say anything for definite at this stage, but if going the generic route options will likely be very simple and very limited.
  • Gingersmali wrote:

    This likely isn't an option due to the number of units in the OnG book.
    Why? There are many units in OnG book which can be merged together in one unit with some optional upgrades.

    Gingersmali wrote:

    but if going the generic route options will likely be very simple and very limited
    It sound really bad. The main purpose of generic units is to give freedom of both models and their gameplay.
    And it may be balanced like WDG or DL marks.
  • Options:
    I would prefer option A. Specific monsters, and not some where gear and abilities can be toyed around a lot.
    (in my opinion a nightmare to balance and get right properly, and chances are high that it fails in the design phase and a lot of time is wasted to fix these things in alpha and beta).

    I don´t think having super wide costumization options make the book better. In contrary i think that having 5 possibilities just makes problems to get them all to somewhat equal strength and usage. Most of the time one will be clearly the best version...like the 7 sins in warrior book. And after each patch there will be another one the to go route.
    I prefer to have entries that are somewhat defined by rules, name and appearance.

    Names:
    I have no clue what a gogyag could be. No native english speaker, and I can´t even fing something in google to check it. So seems to be some kind of artificial name. Don´t like it. I would prefer names that can be linked to a model. (nothing wrong with having a giant spider, it is basically the source of it in the book). Giant crab could be something the idol represents if this entry stays undefined.


    If somebody wants to represent his gargantula spider with a crab or a huge Troll model....go for it. But I don´t think the spider entry should be watered down because there could be other models that can represent it.

    Note: This is my personal opionion.
    Change as little as possible to the slim. O&G is a nice and rather balanced army.
  • Gerfaks wrote:

    Gingersmali wrote:

    This likely isn't an option due to the number of units in the OnG book.
    Why? There are many units in OnG book which can be merged together in one unit with some optional upgrades.

    Gingersmali wrote:

    but if going the generic route options will likely be very simple and very limited
    It sound really bad. The main purpose of generic units is to give freedom of both models and their gameplay.And it may be balanced like WDG or DL marks.
    There is a whole discussion on where to spend complexity in the LAB book, or what is a good limit, which I don't want to get into here. Happy to discuss further in another thread though.

    I'm just trying to manage expectations, more options likely mean each option is simpler, and option A is a single choice.
  • It sound really bad. The main purpose of generic units is to give freedom of both models and their gameplay.
    And it may be balanced like WDG or DL marks.
    Having 7 marks and this huge amount of demonic abilities tied to them is in my opinion one of the worst things done in the creation of the book. A nightmare to balance. And at least in our group the DL book is one of the most hated ones because of all these generic entries that can be upgraded so that nobody not playing with or against demons regulary knows what the units are capable off because it all depends on the "silly names upgrades" that can be costumized.

    Short: Marks and demonic upgrades are not balanced. The sheer amount of them is a hindrance to have fun playing the book. (with the army or against it). Way worse in demon book than in warrior book, because of a more limited access and less inpact on the units abilities.
  • Not that anyone asking for my suggestions but for monster names I can come up with LISTS!!

    Gogyag?! I tried saying it very orcish and it doesn't make sense.

    8 Eyes!, Beasties! , Venom Legs, Venom Fangs, Sluggas, Webmobiles!, Crawlers, Stalkers, Big Stalkers, Elf Killers etc... making up names like gogyag sounds like you are trying to keep up with AoS random name generators lol
    ChiHammer Fantasy Battles

    ETC 2016 - Team USA Orcs and Goblins
    2017-2019 Team MEXICO Captain Orcs and Goblins (c) :orcpirat:
    2017 - Buckeye Battles Best Overall Champion
    2017 - Hogfest GT Best Overall Champion
    2022 - Team Mexico Captain [Orcs and Goblins] :orclaugh:
  • Warboss Tooth wrote:

    Not that anyone asking for my suggestions but for monster names I can come up with LISTS!!

    Gogyag?! I tried saying it very orcish and it doesn't make sense.

    8 Eyes!, Beasties! , Venom Legs, Venom Fangs, Sluggas, Webmobiles!, Crawlers, Stalkers, Big Stalkers, Elf Killers etc... making up names like gogyag sounds like you are trying to keep up with AoS random name generators lol
    Chihammer?! hope your family stuff is going okay and thanks for your opinion! glad you're back :)
  • Personally I would prefer option A, I love a spider, I love a big gnasher and as others have said better that me, I do think overcustomisation becomes a hindrance to playing a game fun and quick without having to explain what every option does 4 times. In terms of immersion, I also feel that having a definite spider or gnasher is better than a generic big boy which can be customised to anything. In terms of modelling, the way I see it spiders come in very different forms and sizes and gnashers are... a bit more of an abstract concept in terms of looks :love: This is but a personal view and I'm sure whatever you guys come up with will be solid :)
  • Gingersmali wrote:

    Warboss Tooth wrote:

    Not that anyone asking for my suggestions but for monster names I can come up with LISTS!!

    Gogyag?! I tried saying it very orcish and it doesn't make sense.

    8 Eyes!, Beasties! , Venom Legs, Venom Fangs, Sluggas, Webmobiles!, Crawlers, Stalkers, Big Stalkers, Elf Killers etc... making up names like gogyag sounds like you are trying to keep up with AoS random name generators lol
    Chihammer?! hope your family stuff is going okay and thanks for your opinion! glad you're back :)
    that's me
    ChiHammer Fantasy Battles

    ETC 2016 - Team USA Orcs and Goblins
    2017-2019 Team MEXICO Captain Orcs and Goblins (c) :orcpirat:
    2017 - Buckeye Battles Best Overall Champion
    2017 - Hogfest GT Best Overall Champion
    2022 - Team Mexico Captain [Orcs and Goblins] :orclaugh:
  • Option A:

    I don't like the thought of the same basic entry being too customizable. "Didn't your Gogyag have Poison and Strider last time?", "No today I took the armour/crush attack crab option".

    Essentially we get a little bit more customization at the cost of added complexity and options getting just a little more bland


    Also the name "Gogyag" isn't doing Option B any favors. My 7-year nephew is getting into the game (in the way 7-years can ofc). I can explain to him what a big spider is. I can even explain to him what Gnashers are. I can't really explain terms that are too generic, and that makes the concept lame in my eyes
  • 1. I prefer option B. I like when the entries are a bit more non-specific to encourage creativity in modeling and army theme, especially since OnG are suposed to be super diverse.
    2. Naming things are always difficult since you generally have to "get used to" names before they feel right. I dont mind Gogyag but would prefer more traditionally greenskin names such as Big Stompa, Many Tooth, Spikey-Slashy etc.
    3. While Im a big fan of the new KoE character customizations and a "make your own gribbly" for OnG would be neat I get the complexity budget has to be respected. I'd settle for 2-3 variants of Colossal Gogyag where one is the old Gargantula.