Introductory Games

I have basically written what follows here about half a dozen times already in replies to questions in various Kings of War Facebook posts over the last few years, so I figured it might be a good idea to finally post something more substantial here, so that either I can refer back to it myself, or point people towards this for more info when similar questions pop up in the future. I am not a Kings of War authority, but I did run a number of these smaller "learner" games in 2nd (some of them detailed in Battle Reports here!), so hopefully I learned some things and can impart some wisdom here to folks trying to bring this wonderful game to others.

So, you are here because you to run some introductory games! Huzzah! My biggest single piece of advice is to not treat these as normal games. It doesn't matter if you play a flawless game here; it doesn't matter if you win. The two goals here are to teach the game and to have fun, as this is still a game. Everything you do should be in support of these goals. 

LIST PREPARATION

If you are building all the lists, then remember that the meta is yours to dictate! You don't need to consider including anti-flyer tech or add in spellcasters if you don't want to run them. If Flying or Nimble or Shambling units make your head hurt, minimize their appearance in the lists or leave them at home if you need to. I would suggest that you build these learner lists casually and don't be afraid to run "bad" units! Evaluating units is part of the game after all and discussing the lackluster performance of a particular unit with your opponent can lead to a good conversation and engagement. (Was the unit just used incorrectly? Was this a bad match-up for the unit? Would it work better as a larger or smaller unit size? These kinds of discussions can get folks more interested in the game.)

I was using Easy Army for all of my list documentation, and so my lists were always legal for unlocks, but I gave a preference for running Regiments, as they were more likely to stick around in combat for a turn or two. Usually each list had some Troops slots also, to showcase unit sizes and to open discussions on chaff units and the like. While legal to run, I quickly came to avoid all hordes (even for Ogres) and to avoid most magic items in my learner lists. With the former, hordes were just too powerful and led to grindy games which were not only not much fun, but they also didn't showcase the game well. The latter really only got exceptions for the Inspiring Talisman on an Undead Necromancer or Abyssal Efreet, as those were such staples in those lists/collections at the time that I wanted them in my learner games too. If your collection dictates that a list still needs a magic item, write it down on a card, and let your opponent decide where it goes, placing the card with the unit.  (If you want, you can even curate a few options, to let them pick both the item and then the receiving unit.) Having the physical card means one of you is more likely to actually remember the item in-game, and even if the choice of unit seems obvious, having a newbie actively make that decision does help them start to understand list building more.

Often at least one unit was usually repeated (two regiments of Shield Wall or something), as this repetition helped players understand things quicker, and built in a little redundancy to the lists. Monsters were used sparingly, as like hordes, many were either too expensive or too powerful to effectively run in a balanced learner game, though monsters around 100-125 points should be fine. Each list usually only got a single inspiring hero, so the focus could be on the units.

I ran my games at 750 points, and would probably continue at that level in 3rd Edition. Games at this size gave me around 4-7 units and a hero per army, and the games are quick. An hour and a half was often about enough time for two games, but an hour per game is still doable if there is a lot of discussion going on. Discussion is good, so don't be afraid to pursue it in lieu of a second game. Lastly for lists, remember to bring list printouts to the game!

TABLE PREPARATION

If you can, set up the board and terrain beforehand as this saves time. Setting up symmetrically (so negating a side advantage) can also help speed things up. With 750 points, space is good, but you do not need a full table. I've run games these size on 4' x 4' and even 3' by 3' tables. If you are running this on a smaller-than-usual size, reduce the depth of the deployment zones and preserve the 2' buffer in the midfield whenever possible. I've found that preserving that buffer maintains a more usual "pace" to the game, so no one is taken aback by very early charges by fliers or cavalry.

Terrain rules can get confusing, so I would recommend picking a few (maybe 3 max) types or terrain and repeating them on the table, and running more of the same terrain types (multiple mountains, multiple fences, etc) rather than a wide variety of types. Terrain really livens things up for wargames, but learning terrain rules alongside of a brand new game can be overwhelming for new players. Having say, some impassable houses, some fence obstacles and some forests scattered about is enough to make the battlefield believable. If you are playing at home or using your own terrain, don't be afraid to use terrain sparingly in these games. Terrain is also a collection that takes time to build up no matter the wargame. Do what you can and try to keep things simple.

Lastly, I try to have a set of colored dice and measuring device for each player now. I have tried using just one set before, passing them back and forth to emphasize the I-go-U-go rules Kings of War has, and really mark whose turn it was, but it was really awkward in practice. 

GAME SET UP

For learner games, I take some unusual moves. If you focus on just one section of this post, focus on this. I skip the deployment phase entirely. It saves a ton of time and removes all the potential "feels bad" moments than could arise with you forcing these  game-defining decisions on someone who has never played before. I definitely appreciate the strategy and the mind games that can happen during this phase, but this has no place in an learner game for me.

I will pick a very simple list for myself, often Kingdoms of Men. Since those units are historical, they are easier for opponents to intuit. ("Archers eh? I should probably find a way to charge those and shut them down." or "Knights eh? I should probably find a way to not get charged by those... hey, how do spears work in this game anyways?") Running a simple list for me also reduces the number of complex decisions I need to make in a game, meaning I can spend more time discussing and teaching instead of pondering my next moves. 

Once my opponent arrives, we decide on sides, and get down to it, I show them my list and plop down my army, pointing out my units and showing the different stats. My deployment doesn't really matter, but I often go with a "traditional" approach: cavalry on the wings for a pincer; back and turtled to protect a war machine; or a refused flank to try and roll up a board edge. Overall, just plop your army down, and don't do much thinking. Any "goofy" deployments on your part can be fodder for discussions with your opponent. Once you have set up and explained your list, then your opponent gets to deploy. This order of setting things up lets them immediately start putting their new game knowledge to use, placing their units down to try and counter your plans if they want to. 

Lastly, I'd often cede first turn to my opponent. You'll need to walk them through the turn, but having them go first keeps them engaged and also avoids potential "feels bad" moments if your list has some shooting components. Setting up and immediately getting blasted is a bummer. So let them deploy and then keep the ball rolling, letting them go first, and working through that first turn together.

RUNNING THE GAME

I'd recommend "Kill" for a learner game, as it is easy for new players to grasp. The game has a lot of fighting-specific stats and abilities, and ball-parking combat math is important in all scenarios, so pending some time to reinforce a newbies combat knowledge is generally a good thing.

Even on a rerack, I'd suggest replaying "Kill". While I do very much like the scenarios Kings of War offers, I like to use any rerack to just introduce the deployment phase, and save scenarios for future games. Keeping the objective the same in the rerack also helps reinforce everything they've learned that day, since they're still striving for the same goal. 

HANDLING MULTIPLE PLAYERS

I like lists at 750 points as the 1v1 games were very quick, and the few times that extra players showed up it was easy to incorporate them without the games dragging or becoming too messy. 

With four players, each grabbing a 750 list and running a 2v2 can be a very nice way to get some comradery and discussions going. Four different armies are on display, and a variety of interaction is possible so different players will see different things.

What about 3 players though? 

If all you have is two armies, I would advise that you step aside, and let them fight it out while you teach them both the game. This goes back to the goal of these games being to teach the game and have fun. Sure, that hour may be a little less fun for you, but you still get to share this with them.

If you have a multitude of army lists at 750, I would still suggest you step back. Running two different armies is going to drain anyone. A newcomer won't effectively be able to do this, and you're already teaching the game. Taking on teaching and running twice as much as anyone else at the table in inadvisable. 

If you can boost one army list up from 750 to 1500 (you planned ahead bringing the same army with a different list, or are playing at home), you can obviously bump one side up to 1500, and run two smaller lists against it. A 2v1 like this is definitely possible. In this situation then, it seems like you, as the experienced player, should take the larger army. As above, I would advise against this. Again, in these games, you are likely the only one to have read the rulebook at all. You are already trying to teach the game, and you do not need to add in this extra mental work running a larger army to things. Offer up the larger list to one of the new players. This not only eases the mental efforts on you, it also gets both new players engaged for the entire duration of the intro game.

So, that's the gist of my experiences and general advice. Simplify things wherever you can, and remember that the two goals for these games is to teach the basics, and of course, have fun. Good luck!


Edit/Addition:

I missed this. Mantic has a free version of the 3rd Edition Ruleset available for download from their website. If you want to try the game, it is hard to beat "free" for an entry fee.

Hobby Update: Orc "Army"

This year I mostly hobbied on various warbands rather than expand greatly upon any existing army. Both my free time and my hobby space were greatly diminished over the year, so this was a nice way to still have some fun building and painting without worrying about matching up with an old scheme or thinking up a new one.

These orcs stared out a long while ago as D&D stand-ins, and in 2021 I decided I wanted to expand them a bit into a larger warband. Things got out of hand, and I soon realized that I had a small army in the works! I didn't want to do a full new army though, so decided to split the difference between a number things, and ended up with what follows.

Whoops! Ended up with about 3x more than I wanted, but it all works out.
This was a fun distraction for a few weeks over the summer.

I really just wanted a warband, but won too many bids with way too many minis and decided I was too lazy to repackage and resell. So I decided to make this a loaner/intro army, but using round bases and movement trays. Doing so could show the new player that existing things could be ported over into Kings of War without much effort. Multi-basing is fun, but not something they needed to do to try out the game. 

Two-piece tray. I'll have a better post coming about these at some point. For here, each Regimental tray can fit 10 dudes on 32mm round bases, allowing for pretty slick conversions from other game systems.

The movement trays came in two pieces. This was a little awkward, but I'll admit I did not give any thought to how they made these. A little school glue (Elmer's Glue, or PVA glue) and holding it in place seemed to work out fine. I decided naked MDF wasn't appealing, so I tried to spread just a tiny pit of texture paste on, and paint up some browns and greys for a pretty neutral coloring. The drybrushing was pretty bad (very streaky on the left of this pic; way too much paint), but I didn't care enough to redo.  This will be a base beneath individual round bases after all.

A regiment of Greatax

I had started this expansion project with just a sprue of 5 GW 'ardboys. The original warband had a few, but those were picked up from bits shops years ago, and that was very confusing as some of the weapons I bought didn't fit with the bodies. Working on the new ones, I realized that the sprue/box is actually split between different poses (a "command" pose, two allowing for arms at the sides, and two for arms overhead - the only pose allowing for great weapons). This strikes me as weird. I don't have the books, but surely these were two distinct weapon options back then, so I'm not sure how an orc player felt getting only half a box outfitted for great weapons. Maybe I am missing something though.

A Regiment of Morax

As I won some (what I thought were) long-shot bids, I took inventory, and realized that with the split in bodies, if I picked up a new box of 'ardboys, I could get 10 with great weapons and 10 with paired weapons, and decided to do it. All of the 'ardboys were pretty fun to hobby up. The orcs get a surprising amount of weapons! I tried to mix things up to give them a more varied look, but pairing the correct weapons does look pretty cool.

A Regiment of Young Ax

These were the first of two "long-shot" bids the pushed me into making this,. Something like a used lot of 18, to build on my original 4 from the old "easy build" box, or whatever it was called at the time. 

A second Regiment of Young Ax.

I am not familiar with the Orc list, and decided to run these as Youngax for the stats and "why you see is what you get" reasons. Morax and Greatax have Def 4 in big plate armor, so I didn't want these ruffians out-shining the elites. These are Def 4 too, though that feels better since they carry the shields in lieu of armor. Def 5 is pretty strong, so I think normal Ax for me would be 'ardboys with shields, which is not something I am ready to do yet.

A Regiment of Skulks.

The archers were the second long-shot bid that pushed me over. I won 16 accidentally. Not knowing what to do I found and bought 4 more to get an even 20. In the end I painted 10 up. The other 10 join a musician and bannerman from the "Youngax" lot "in reserve" in my apartment's storage unit.

Misc. Both the orcs not carrying the banner have already been shown previously! The banner will eventually need a symbol and some touch-ups for the skulls and such though. 

I had an Ogre Chieftain from Reaper Mini lying about and decided to paint them up as a Troll Bruiser. It looked more that part than anything else, and I always just loved the door as a shield. 

I was basically out of minis, so decided to lean into the modularity that using individual models provided. The "champions" of the Moreax and Greatax can be subbed out out if I need a Krudger or Krusher, replaced by the Flagger. Otherwise, I have a Flagger and a Troll Bruiser, which should be enough options. A hero and a monster is usually enough for a learner game. The round bases could be tricky in-game, , but I have a ton of 25mm squares, and should be able to remember to bring them as needed for measuring things out.

All this gave me five regiments, a Troll Bruiser monster and 1 variable hero. Running a Flagger or Krusher, I think I'm at 935 points or thereabouts. With a Krudger though, I'd be at 980, really close to 1000 points and that flat numbers is easily achievable with some Skull Poles or magic items. I don't know how viable it would be, but that's not a serious concern for a learner army.

The blues were an unusual color, but the variation especially gives a little more vibrant result to what could easily be a very drab army. I'm pleased with how this project ended up, and it should work very nicely for any small, casual game, any skirmish style game, or piecemeal as D&D encounters.

Hobby Update: More Misc. Undead

In addition to the Undead Adventurers, I hobbied on a number of other undead over the last year. I already have about 4k of Undead for Kings of War, and with very little hobby space still over the summer, I just wanted to continue hobbying on random stuff and small groups.

First up in the update here are some necromancers. Undead don't tend to raise themselves in most settings after all! One is from the GW Mortis Engine kit. I liked his look but he doesn't really fit neatly on an infantry base so I used some pink foam wall insulation to carve out a little roughly-hewn perch for him. I opted not to add any brickwork to it to make it look more privative. I really like the blindfold and the dangling keys, and I think he'll make a fun boss necromancer guy in a Dungeons and Dragons game some day.

The other two minis are WhizKids Pathfinder minis I picked up from a FLGS while running errands early in the summer. I like many of these style minis (both the Pathfinder and D&D lines), but I have not kept up with any promotions or release schedule, so these tend to be impulse buys as I see them. The bone armor reminded me of Diablo II a bit and yeah, I just had to pick this box up! 

Mr. Diablo got a very basic aged bone scheme with a nice black cloak, and I tried a wet-blended icy blue flame with a lighting effect that I am moderately happy with. The spell effects on these minis are just weird and I usually end up just breaking them off. I did this with the spirit... wall... thing from the last necromancer here. She was the partner in the little box. There is nothing inherently evil about her, and I had just finished watching Netflix's Castlevania series at the time, so decided to give her a more colorful cloak similar to Sypha. I really like the "stop it" hand gesture she's got going on too. Without the spirit wall she doesn't look too spooky, so she may end up just as a normal caster down the line in a D&D game or whatever.

Necromancers!

Hobbying on all of these got me thinking about minis agnostic games. This was about the time Reign in Hell launched, and a good chunk of my free time over the summer was spent reading and musing. I think I can't be the only one with random undead minis sitting around. Everyone picks up a box or two at some point, right? Maybe there's some fun to be had with necromancers vying for power in a casual skirmish-style game. Nothing is remotely presentable, even testable yet, but we'll see what the future brings on this front. I've been trying for years to create something, but production is always way beyond me. A rulebook or PDF seems like it could be doable if I can actually blend the game design ideas I have kicking around in my noggin. We'll see.

I continued to pick up a few sprues here and there for fun. I had picked up some Grave Guard bits way back during the End Times for some kit bashes (I think just a torso or two from a bits shop), but this was my first outing with their full sprue. I actually liked them a lot. They look really cool and come with a lot of options.

An assortment of Grave Guard! I went for a mix of weapons, since I wasn't hobbying on a unit.

The great weapons assembled a little awkwardly, as they often do with GW kits where you need to get hand sockets and shoulder sockets to line up with little arms, but with the pauldrons I was able to fudge a decent connection as I encountered issues. Overall, I gotta say I really like these models. They just look really cool and imposing. Some of the helmets (mostly just the Champion one) are a little much, but overall they look cool and ornate, like an ancient honor guard.

I also picked up a sprue of Crypt Ghouls, which comes out to 10 minis. As mentioned before in other posts, picking up a new box is almost certainly better cost-wise than picking up sprues, but the difference is usually only a dollar or two, and I was willing to pay that premium since I was looking to get some interesting minis to play around with rather than dozens and dozens more minis. 

With the Ghouls here I wanted to play around more with creepy skin tones. I really liked how the Zombies my girlfriend painted up had a variety of tones, and wanted to explore those more myself. I had three shades/washes I wanted to play around with and a few paint pots of skin colors, so I split the models into three groups of three (and one King) and just experimented.

Group 1: Kislev Flesh base, Pallid Wych Flesh layer. Left to Right, Green, Blue, and Flesh shades.

Group 1 turned out really nice, though I did prime everything in black like a fool again. The base color took several passes for a roughly consistent result before "highlighting" the raised parts with the Pallid Wych layer. The washes set nice and distinctly. 

Group 2: Cadian base, Kislev layer. Left to Right, Green, Blue, and Flesh shades.

Group 2 had a darker skin base, but still needed a few passes to get good coverage. This combination (Cadian then Kislev) is how I tended to approach skin for the Regnum when I need more definition, otherwise it is one or the other color plus a flesh shade. These turned out ok. The darker flesh tones beneath muted the washes slightly in person, but the end results weren't drastically different.

Group 3: Pallid Wych base, Kislev layer. Left to Right, Green, Blue, and Flesh shades.

With Group 3 I tried playing around more, doing the more-white Pallid Wych color as the base with a more gently applied highlight of Kislev. I wanted to see how a lighter base coat would interact with the washes. Fine I guess? They look just a little "off" and as could be expected these appear "brighter" in person than the rest, given the lighter base color, but honestly not as drastic as I was expecting. 

Overall, I think Group 1 turned out the best. Kislev + Pallid Wych + Flesh Shade has a real pale and creepy result that I am really digging. The full blue wash looks the worst in each group I think. Going forward I think I would either use this sparingly, either in like 1/10 minis, or use this only on parts of a body to discolor it more. 

One mini comes with a really awkward skeletal... backpack? I don't get it. But that mini was going to be the King. My idea was to pick a favorite and then paint the King in that method to get some more practice with that approach. However, I painted all these up at the same time though... so that timeline wasn't possible. Silly me. So he got a little bit of everything as I went.

He also got a crown. I tried to make it look bad, like they maybe crafted it themselves, but the angles are so bad on the plastic card that it draws a little too much attention to it. Oh well.

Last up for my undead hobbying sojourns was a box of "Legio Mortum" miniatures. I picked these up on a whim in 2020 via Noble Knight Games since they looked like undead Romans. I had to backtrack now to get good links for them, and well, they kinda are. They come from a game called Godslayer, which has a Roman Legionary-themed faction, of which these are failed legion raised up again to serve the empire. Pretty rad stuff overall.

Undead Legion! 

These were primed over the summer, along with a lot of other stuff I haven't gotten to yet. I found myself with a free afternoon around Thanksgiving, so these were painted up late November while watching the first few episodes of Wheel of Time. I actually read that whole dang series a few years back. The show is different, but I'm enjoying it so far. 

These look neat, but I will warn you that these are metal miniatures, which did cause me a lot of trouble. The shields arms were a pain, as the shields are also metal, and weighty, so most of them were glued also to a leg or other bit of the model for extra "stability." The legs has a stand which was way sturdier than the legs. I almost bent a few legs sticking them into the bases, so take care. I also lost their original stands, which I think were a little bigger. These sit on old GW-style slottas now, and a few are a little wobblily. 

Hobbied up in late November, I hadn't painted anything in a month or two at this point, and so I opted so mess around with some simple ideas and go for a "washed out" look for these, like they had crawled out of piles of ash or something and had lost some color. Over the black primer I did several layers of progressively lighter gray, building up a gradient with the dry brushing and giving a nice statue look to them all. I was going for a subdued look so instead of full layer of metallics, I tried a dry brush of silver over the mini, which you can see best in the shield of the leader.

To continue on with the subdued color idea, I diluted green for the shield, brown for the straps and boots, tan for the bone, and a bronzy color for the sword hilts. All watered down, they give the hints of color without being too vibrant. 

I then wanted to try a glowy effect for the eyes, which ended up being just messy red around the eyes and a more controlled pink in/around the sockets. Unfortunately, these minis are sculpted in various states of decay, some with completely empty skeletal sockets and some with raised (presumably rotting) ocular bits inside. I couldn't get a brush (nor even a toothpick) cleanly in the sockets to paint white, so after a few failed attempts and some repaints, I left these as-is for now. This gives their memey laser eyes a bit more subdued effect as well, which I am ok with. I like the way these turned out. I could have painted up a few more things (the hem on the mail skirts, and maybe a bit more color on the edges of the leather straps) but this is fine for now.

These were all fun hobbying diversions over the last year. I learned a few things, and with these small groups (and all the other warbands) I got to play around with some schemes and ideas I probably would not have tried. Good times. If you are in a hobby rut or just want a break from your army, hit up ebay, grab a sprue and churn out a few minis. It's fun!

Blabbering: More Halfling Thoughts

I had written previously about the gutting of my halfling force from 2nd to 3rd Edition and then also on the coming renaissance for them. As usual, I am very late to the party. Mantic's halflings arrived a while ago, so let's take another look.

At the conversion to 3rd Edition, the League's halflings only had Knights and Archers and Braves and Sergeants. They had dropped a lot of entries, meaning I could only run about 1k of the 2k+ collection amassed in 2nd Edition. I recently sat down with EasyArmy and my old hobbying spreadsheets, and redid the math revolving around my collection. 

The League looks to have gotten some slight updates to unit stats, but no new halfling units. The Archers and Knights are still generic, and not further revised up to Poachers or Wild Lancers. Three units still doesn't make an army, especially when Thunderous Charge 1 is the only real damage improver. While I think these could still do work in a League list, I think my halflings are going to need to secede.

The new Halfling Master List gives me back my spear blocks (Spearspikes) mounted scouts (Wild Runners) and Volley Guns with the Halfling keyword, all super things! The Archers and Knights of the League are promoted into Poachers and Wild Lancers, gaining a bunch of key words and special rules, making them better, if a little more expensive. From the old collection I'm really only missing out on three things: the Iron Beast (it's there, but now needs a Titan-sized base, and I don't think my old one will will look good rebased); the ASB's; and the old windy mounted Sorcerers I had. Now I can field about 1700 points of the army or so without characters, which from around 2k in 2nd, isn't bad at all!

At a glance, the newest Halflings look to remain basically in-line with the Beta list, at least for the units I am interested in. They are still pretty speedy, which I'm still not entirely thrilled with. I'm also still not quite sold on the steampunk / aeronautics aspects (the Tinker subfaction), but it does give them something pretty unique for Mantic to go in on for modeling, so I can definitely forgive that so long as I have some generic units to run in my learner lists. 

Overall, my collection is in a much, much better place now. I am even scouting around now for  potential replacements for my Iron Beast, so I gotta say I'm pretty happy with the update. I got some leads on running some learner games over the last few months too, but have just not had the time to nail play dates down. Hopefully some games will be coming with the new year!

Hobby Update: Bob Ridolfi's Undead Adventuring Warband

I've been a fan of Reaper Miniatures for a long long time. Their offerings are amazing and sprawling and usually very easy on the wallet. Back when I regularly visited my FLGS for Warhammer Fantasy, I'd often pick up a half dozen minis or more at a time on a whim, as these were perfect for my D&D campaigns.

Such is the case with these. Sometime in the past, I picked up these undead adventurers, and finally got around to painting them up over the summer. Originally there were to be used for D&D, as I thought an opposing undead party would be a neat thing to overcome. That didn't come to pass. Last year I set them aside to eventually hobby up while I was exploring Fistful of Lead by Wiley Games. Their varied look, gear.. well, their varied everything would make them ideal for that kind of game where you are pushing around a select few, very individualistic models. But that also didn't happen. So these were hobbied up this year, mostly just for fun.

Undead are always fun to hobby on.

The central fighter-guy is multi-piece metal, the halfling is one-piece of metal and the rest are the bendy, softer Reaper mono-pose plastic, so no conversion work was done at all for this warband. I am quite cool with that. These had a nice variety of flesh, bones and scraps of armor and cloth and were fun to do. The dwarf having beard remnants and the elf having hair remnants were both nice touches on their respective miniatures. Kudos to the sculptor, Bob Ridolfi, who, as I went back to cite... turns out he sculpted all of these. Very cool.

These were done for fun; no real adventurous hobby testing performed. I am, however, getting away from my old more orangey wood (Deathclaw Brown), and into more natural-looking browns and tans. You can see some of that here with the axe handles and bow. These tones look much nicer, and I'll likely make them the standard going forward.

Hobby Update: Beastmen Warband

My second fantasy warband was hobbied up late June and early July, and saw me dipping into some Beastmen. I still had 30ish Beastmen minis sitting around, and I wanted to play around with some more pale skin tones. I picked up some un-Gor and a Shaman from ebay to round things out, and dipped into my pile of shame to get the rest, opting to hobby up all my remaining Bestigor. I chipped away a bit at my pile of remaining beastmen, but not nearly enough. I've still got around two dozen minis left.

The gang.

I was going for a bit on an apocalypse feel for these, like this warband were marauders and just scouring the wastes. I copied the boring base from the Apocolypse Orks for the Grimdark Future game, just browns and some gray dry brushed rocks. The bases look a little too sparse here though; I'll likely add some grass or tufts in the future if I can find a suitably subdued color. 

I primed in black, which was probably a mistake. I was going for pale skin, so black was not doing myself any favors. The "Pallid Wych Flesh" took about a half dozen layers before it looked good on anything, so I wasted a fair bit of time stemming from the wrong primer color. Priming in a gray or white or even zenithal scheme would have been much smarter. Even doing a gray base coat to kick off the painting part would have been smarter too. 

The hounds turned out pretty darn nice!

The pale skin was basically off-white. I needed a wash, but wasn't sure what. I had a half-spoiled pot of Death World Forest, to which I added some water to get a bit of a sickly green wash. After a test model, I ended up applying this to all the models in the warband, though this turned out best on the hounds I think. I don't know why. Exposed skin was an issue on the other minis, but it just worked on the hounds and the scorpion tails look poisonous in person.

Next best were the Bestigor.

The Bestigor had limited exposed skin, so things turned out pretty nicely with them; just a nice, slightly greenish tint. I think I could have done more, maybe with a rust effect or something though. Grass and rust... ok, two things I can fix down the road.

The shaman was a great model, though I could not get the skin tone to play nice with him. Even in person that left leg looks gnarly, and not in a good apocalypse way. The ungor were similarly bad. Watery flesh layers just didn't seem to work out and the wash turned out a bit yucky. The normal gor seemed to turn out ok though, so I just don't know what the deal is.

The ungor look a little too inky. It works, and I am likely not going to repaint anytime soon, but I am a little disappointed. Not sure what the issue was.

The warband is mostly all "out of the box." The only conversion work in the warband was on the "boss," a bestigor body and head with axes from the champions of both a gor and bestigor. He's got two large axes, so he's gotta be in charge, right? I certainly thought so, but it didn't quite differentiate him enough, so I gave him a cape, I think from the GW Chaos Marauder kit.

Yeah, the cape sells it a bit more. Nice, simple solution.

The leader also got a piece of bark for his base, making him a little higher and hopefully having him stand out just a little more on the table. I have heard that bark > cork board for more natural rocks so I wanted to give it a try. During the pandemic, I went on a lot of walks. There was a fair amount of bark around, so I grabbed some, took it home and baked it (to kill bacteria and dry it out), and then threw it in an old takeout container to store it. 

This was the first attempt at using it. I sanded down part of it so there would be a pretty flat join to the base. I then covered it with a layer of Elmers glue (as its known here, also known as PVA glue, or white glue, or school glue I am told). I figured this would "seal" in the bark a bit, and protect it from moisture, etc. I let that sit for a day because what do I know about drying times, then spray painted it black and then painted it.

Sanding the bark down is a pain. If you have a legit sanding power tool... maybe that's better, but I'd worry about fingers getting sanded. Sawing to get the flat join is also possible, but it depends on the piece - you could be trying to saw through an inch or more of bark, which might be frustrating with just a hobby saw. 

Posing a mini on the bark can also be difficult. The wide stance of the leader worked well for me, but could easily have backfired. The barked looks good and worked well and I'll be trying it more, but the more rugged basing requires a little more planning (or more sanding to get footholds where you want to place the model).

Overall, this ended up being a nice warband. Despite some hurdles, the pale skin worked well enough more often than not, and overall the warband looks nice and unified colors-wise. It was a fine hobbying diversion!

Hobby Update: Lizardfolk Warband

Still catching up on some non-Kings of War hobbying posts. This summer I got into some semi-random hobbying on a variety of warbands, instead of Kings of War things. It was nice to paint up a few minis each week and just explore a few ideas in very limited ways rather than batch paint a unit, or worry about a full army scheme.

A lot of these summer warbands coincided with my rediscovery of ebay, and the ability to buy sprues instead of full, new boxes. This is great for this kind of circumscribed hobbying, though price-wise, you are almost always better to buy the full box. New-on-Sprue tends to come with a bit of a premium.

The first individual sprue I snagged this summer was in June, from an old Lizardmen kit. I think just an iteration of the old, basic Saurus Warriors. I expanded the little warband I had done up the previous year in the Wiley Games post, and with some reinforcements, they look a little more menacing now! 

The static grass continue to shed... you can see a few fuzzies in the box. 

The sprue had four lizards, which I modeled up into two spears, and then did some very light conversion work swapping in hand weapon heads instead of spear-tips to make two polearm-wielding lizardfolk. This seems like a nice little warband now. 

There is a fantasy-themed game from One Page Rules. I think these port reasonable well into that, but honestly, just did these up for fun; all the fantasy warbands to come were pretty lackadaisical. I don't know what they will be used for... honestly these will probably just be lizardfolk and kobolds in D&D.

Orange was the big hobby experiment here, which worked out a little better this time. It was Army Painter paint, and still took a few coats, but it seemed to go better than last time. It could just be I understood I needed a few coats to get the coverage I wanted. 

The second hobby experiment was pressing on with basing and grass. I added a lot of static grass and tufts here, trying to get a more overgrown jungle look to these. Without huge bushes or trees, the overgrown effect falls a bit short, but I was happy with my groundcover effect overall, though the grass continues to shed a bit. I'm experimenting with some solutions for that, and should have a Hobby Basics post covering my experience with grass soon.

Yeah, not much more to say on these. They were a fun little experiment.

Hobby Update: Grimdark Future Warbands

As mentioned in basically every post over the last year and a half, the pandemic hasn't been great for my hobbying. To beat that dead horse, working from home really constrained my overall space in the apartment, and a tiny plot about the dimensions of a legal-sized sheet of paper is about all I could regularly muster for my intermittent hobbying.

One thing I haven't mentioned much though, is that the pandemic hasn't been great for my pile of shame. I rediscovered ebay last year, and picked up more than I probably should have since. One neat thing I discovered on ebay though, was the ability to get just a sprue of dudes, as opposed to a whole box. Often, this isn't economical (it's often at least few dollars cheaper to get the box, if able), but this was great for some small hobbying projects throughout the summer.

With an ample Kings of War collection spread over half a dozen armies or so, I decided to just hobby on various warbands this summer instead of more dedicated Kings of War stuff. I did not do updates at the time, but figured I may as well add these in to the blog history.

Most of these were hobbied on just because, but I eventually skewed towards building them for Grimdark Future: Firefight from One Page Rules. My girlfriend's little brother (who had gotten into 40k, then dropped out) had been coming over, and I figured a skirmish game like this could be a nice, nerdy activity for us (with some tweaking to make it multiplayer). Alas, it has not happened, but at least now I have some warbands, and learned a few new hobbying skills.

Space Regnum Warband

I had a small band of these going when messing around with Wiley Games and Fistful of Lead; taking some 40k stuff and adding my purple and white to it. One of my 2020 pandemic purchases was a used collection of old metal Cadian special weapon minis, so over the summer here I decided to ditch the marines and buff up the guardsmen. My intention was to run these more as some "Human Defense Force" for One Page Rules. 

No conversion work here, actually. All basic stuff.

While I built with the game in mind, I just built what I thought was cool, so I have no idea how effective the "list" would be, or hoe many of these would even make it in a typical list. I only used (looks like) 4 minis from the box, so I have room to expand later. Unfortunately, this box was bought a while before the new sprue was added. Alas.

Here, I wanted to play around a bit with my Regnum scheme, and try to improve on the basing a bit. I didn't come to any big conclusions, other than obvious one the paste is much easier to work with when you don't need to dance around the feet of the miniature... well, go figure.

Muunilinst Warband

I picked up a box of Clone Troopers and ARC Troopers from the Star Wars Legion game sometime in the last year or two. I was a huge Star Wars kid growing up, reading books nonstop, and I really liked the animated shorts by Genndy Tartakovsky leading up to Episode 3. It was one of the few DVDs I had back in the day. The series is packed with action, but I remember being floored as a kid when these troopers hit the screen for the first time. 

Not bad! I think the band around the helmet is supposed to be black.. but that's fiddly stuff I did not want to attempt. These are good.

The minis are mostly out of the box, with some very light conversion work to get the guy with the chaingun blaster thing. With all the white armor, I experimented with a zenithal highlight, spraying gray all over and then white from above. It definitely helped add a nice gradient, though I don't know how useful it would be in a more colorful army.  I shudder to think how long I looped the Jedi Temple March while painting these guys up. I tried to dirty up the bases without being oily or greasy, and that sort of worked, and went with a few thin layers of various grays and tans and yellows. I think that worked out to get a little bit of a grungy look without the grime.

I don't have a game to use these in (OPR didn't have the Clones added in when I did these up, and I don't know if there are plans to even do so) but they were fun to paint up nonetheless. 

Black Templar Warband

I really liked the Judiciar mini, and snagged that over the summer. I also liked the Easy Build kits from GW, and I have picked up a handful over the years. I had a spare Reiver sitting around from one, as well as some Intercessors, so I decided to paint these up for a warband too. I had just finished reading a book about the Great Siege of Malta, and figured some space templar would be fun to play around with.

Very light conversions. A few shields and head swaps. Gave the Retributor Armor paint a go, and I think it looks pretty striking on the sword guy.

For this warband, I wanted to play around with a few painting things. The first was black armor, and I went with a black primer, black undercoat, and then tried some edge highlights and dry brushing with brighter and brighter grays. It all worked well enough? It's not amazing, but it passable in real life and breaks up the dark forms just enough on the table. Secondly, I tried to keep a desert-like barren base, but played around more with rocks and dry brushing layers of brighter sandy colors more; typically my colors were wet to get a variation going. This dry brushing worked well enough too. Thirdly, I tried to reinforce some layering basics, by adding layer upon layer of white. This was likely a mistake.. I think I should have done w gray or a cream base coat for a few layers, and then transitioned into white layers. Lesson learned. These are just about done... I have some cross decals, but misplaced them. When I find them again, I'll add them on.

Apocalypse Orks Warband

The last sci-fi warband I did up was Orks. My girlfriend had heard some 40k lore, and thought the orks sounded pretty fun. About that time, I was getting into ebay again, and I found a few Orks and Warboss for about $30, and then bought a box of Lootas/Burnas to help bulk them out. I think a few are still on sprue? Otherwise I did pretty good working through these. Not a lot of shame buildup in the pile.

Nothing to crazy with these either. Mostly I wanted to just paint new things, rather than dive into a bunch of conversion work. I was trying to keep things simple as I got back to some hobbying in June.

For these, I just wanted to paint stuff and reinforce to some hobbying basics. I played with some browns and tans for basing, including a sepia-toned wash for the first time. For the skin I went with a subdued green, and honestly, I'm quite happy with how subdued these look overall. Nice and grim and gritty.

With the exception of the Clones, the rest of these are passible skirmish groups for Grimdark Future. If I ever do get a game in, I'll do my darndest to write up a report.

Blabbering: Some Retrospective Wargaming Thoughts

Recently, I recommended another neat youtube channel I had been enjoying, with a gaming angle instead of a hobbying one. Watching Turin's videos over the summer and while writing the post though, I thought entered my head, and that thought was that the Total War iteration of Warhammer came across as a better version of Warhammer Fantasy than the tabletop game.

A lot of the video vs tabletop comparison in my head can be distilled down to a typical digital vs analogue debate, and are pretty bland observations (the video game is designed centrally (and not updated in static physical books), leading to better inter and intra-army balance and the ability to easily make balance changes to the game; combat math is all done by the computer, etc). I think many wargamers like their games due to the physicality of them; I know I find painting minis therapeutic to a degree. So I don't think these ideas in particular are all that interesting in exploring. There more "typical" thoughts did lead to some other thoughts I thought would be worth exploring a bit, and those are legendary lords, matchmaking, and builds, when it comes to wargaming

Legendary Lords

Warhammer Fantasy was full of named lords. The world's story continued on, edition after edition, and most generic lords (what what I saw in my armies, though I only played two) had at least one exemplary, or legendary version. With the exception of a massive End Times special scenario, I never fielded named lords. And I think that was to my detriment.

My Empire army hailed from Ostermark, a poor, agrarian province on the edge of the Empire. I liked that idea, and ran with it, choosing to field more units over flashy characters every time. When I switched to Warriors of Chaos, my Daemon Prince or various champion was always generic. The game had a big story, but I wanted to carve out my own narrative, and was jarred a bit when every Elven army, no matter the size of the army, had Teclis at the head, so I tried to balance that out in the lists I brought to the shop.

In Total War, most leaders end up being the named characters. Thinking on it, I think I missed the boat, and utilizing the named and legendary leaders was how Warhammer 8th may have been intended to be played too. Not running any, that may be a reason (I was still a pretty bad general) my Empire continually fell short against all those Teclis-led armies.

I picked up a Lady Ilona model, and was embracing legendary units and formations near the end of 2nd Edition. Kings of War continues to be different, and is balanced far better, but actually using unique, legendary units should be something I should be more open to I think.

Matchmaking

In Total War, for setup, you match with an opponent online, then select your faction, and build your army quick. Then you play the game. The digital setup runs contrary to typical physical wargaming, where you pick your faction and build your army/list, and then find an opponent, say at League Night at your Friendly Local Gaming Shop.

This "backwards" approach leads to match-up dependent choices and you are highly encouraged to field different lists for different games. (Generalizing some examples: spears are great against monsters and cavalry, so hey, maybe don't bring them against dwarves; handgunners pack a punch, but are outranged by bows, so don't bring them against elves...) Sure the matchups trend to optimal choices too, but that is for just that match-up; you the player are encouraged to try out new choices as you encounter different opponents and different armies. Coming from tabletop wargaming, that's a wild approach.

One of the replays I saw from Turin early on was Bretonnia vs the Empire. There wasn't a local Bret player back in the day, but I knew they were cavalry-based, and in the replay, the Bret player ditched the knights; deciding to "go wide" against the Empire, doubling and tripling down on masses of usually undesirable peasant infantry and archers to fight the swarming State Troops. I don't remember who won, but that "meta-dependent" decision led to a sprawling slugfest and was intriguing.

I don't think the "backwards" approach is sustainable for games at the FLGS, as people still need to bring collections around. But it is making me rethink the idea of list tailoring. In a game like Kings of War, where the intra-army balance is way better than Warhammer Fantasy, more tailored lists could produce some neat games I think.

Builds

I most often think of "builds" when I think of real time strategy games; how to navigate the precious opening minutes of a game. But a build can be more general, and thought of as "how do I best allocate limited resources?" The resources could be real time, in-game resources, or points. Points efficiency would definitely apply to wargaming, though usually comes up on a unit-by-unit basis (this unit is better than that unit, for the points paid), and not how a list fits together as a whole (am I allocating enough points to anvils over hammer units, etc).

Builds are likely not news to most experienced wargamers, but this thought did catch me off guard. I am not a competitive player, and even when I was getting regular, weekly games in during Eighth Edition, I was mostly learning (my units, enemy lists, various scenarios...) and was never making big strategic decisions with my lists. While I felt I grasped the mechanical basics of Kings of War better, I feel like I was still always just experimenting and running what I wanted to run, rather than any deep strategic insight.

For Total War, the various builds generally flow from the lord choice. Is the leader mounted? Flying? Can they cast spells? Are they a decent fighter? Can they heal? Whatever you pick, some things are omitted, and your future choices start stemming from that lord choice. If your lord is fighty and mobile, you need defensive infantry to hold so the lord can hammer away; if the lord can't heal, you better take a life wizard; and so-on and so-on. This was not how I built my Warhammer armies... but again, maybe it should have been.

Build consideration is also not how I've built for Kings of War... The balance is better here, but you can go pretty "all-in" with lords riding dragons, or gunlines or cavalry. I got into some list-centric thoughts before, and will probably return to them again at some point. I know nothing about the scenarios nor the metas for 3rd Edition to pontificate much on this, and as always, am not a competitive player, so my musings aren't terribly worthwhile to any serious wargamer, but build-thinking was a bit of a paradigm shift for me; crystalizing an approach to list building that had not really happened before.



I don't think any of these are terribly original ideas, but things did *click* for me on the above in a way I was not expecting, so figured they would be worth highlighting here in a post. More hobbying to come soon, I swear!

Recommendation: Turin (youtuber)

My hobbying has been scatterbrained this summer, so while I continue to chip away at things and not post, I wanted to point you fine folks towards a youtube channel I have been enjoying very much over the summer: Turin. He largely plays and casts the Warhammer Total War games, which as a Warhammer Refugee into Kings of War now, I have very much enjoyed, and thought some of you might enjoy as well.

While I was aware of the existence of the various Total War games, and have obviously played Warhammer Fantasy, I have never played anything from the Total War franchise. Thankfully, Turin's commentary during his casts is quite insightful, and he is very good at  distilling games. He explains everything from basic game mechanics to general army tips, to the meta strategies for each match up. His meme-game is pretty strong too, which adds to the entertainment. He's been doing the youtube thing for years, and has a deep catalogue of Warriors of Chaos and Empire games, which helped draw me in as those were my armies back in the Warhammer days. Check him out!

New Halflings (Beta)

Like many things, I am very late to the party here, but for those unaware, Mantic is launching some Halflings! This is a welcome addition to some of the more robust halfling miniatures offered up in recent years, kicked off by the Halfling Militia box from Wargames Atlantic. The models on-offer from Mantic, as well as a Beta version of the new army list can found online at their store. Additionally, you can play around with the list in EasyArmy's editor, though I believe you need to be a paying member, since this is a Beta offering. Check it all out! It's a good time to start a halfling army! 

In 2nd Edition, the Halflings were a very robust sub-faction of the League of Rhordia, with the halflings broadly taking over the specialist and war machine duties, as well as filling the roles of cheap alternatives to every basic army choice (heroes to fight, inspire, or cast spells; infantry in all stripes, and lighter cavalry options both with lances and with bows). I really liked the concept, and I built up a dopy halfling-only list that I was pretty fond of. It used very cheap historical scale (1/72) miniatures with some greenstuff to get the hairy feet effect. Each miniature was dirt cheap, and it was a really fun list for me to run in smaller or learner games. 

Unfortunately, that army did not fare well in the transition to 3rd Edition and the introduction of keywords to the game. All of the war machines of the League were "humanized", and most of the halfling units were outright done away with. I was left with one "combat" hero choice, and one choice each for underpowered melee infantry, knights, and archer units. All in all... not a lot to work with for a full army even in tiny games...

Fortunately, the new list is very deep! Choices abound, though I must assume some final tweaks are coming before the list actually launches.

Abilities and Keywords

As noted in the Beta download from Mantic, the halfling army has two special rules. 

The first is Relentless, which you can buy for units, and gives an attacking unit some (3) one-time rerolls to damage rolls in melee. The upgrade is cheap, but seems odd and messy, design-wise. Upping it to 3 here is exploring some design space, but odd. Why not reroll all or something? I would imaging this is them playing around with design stuffs, and this might get tweaked prior to launch. (UPDATE: Not having played 3rd Edition, I was unfamiliar with things like the Ogres "Crocodog" option, which does a similar "3 rerolls for hits" thing. Relentless is still playing around with some design space, similar to the Elite and Vicious special rules, and is actually building on some stuff already in game.)

The second special rule is Spellward, which gives all spells to hit the unit (from both friendly and enemy units!) a -1 modifier to hit. I really like this rule, and some "magic resist" is some neat design space to explore in the game. It also opens up a neat little space for them, as they are dealing more with Auras as an army rather than spells. I like it. y

Oddly enough, the new halflings seem to have lost their previous rule gimmick, "Stealthy", which was on all of their infantry-type units. I think this is ok. Though the "Steady-Aim" and "Potshot" rules help shooting in 3rd, ranged combat is still not the focus of this game, so Stealthy may have been too powerful for the majority of an army to have.

"Ravenous" is an army keyword being put to use, and it interacts with their "Sauceror" hero, which is a bit of a mouthful to try and pronounce, but to me seems to be a play on words between "Sauce" and "Sorcerer"? Anyways, the Sauceror generates auras (with up to +3 effects) to benefit units with the keyword, and has a nice fluffy association here, though giving Ravenous units Relentless has some dark connotations? Part of me wishes this was dialed way up; cannibal halflings or something.

"Tinker" is another army keyword, and really expands on the specialist and war machine roles the League had them doing. The Engineer interacts with this keyword, providing some buffs to the mechanical units in the army, like the war machines and newly imagined Iron Beast. 

I like that there is a split in the army, though am not super-sold on the Tinkering sub-faction as-is. I don't really want trolls in my halfling list, that's why I'm running halflings. And am so-so on them wielding multiple flying contraptions and jetpacks and having numerous gunpower units since it goes so contrary to the traditional, serene and simple version of the halfling. I would have liked to have seen their tinkering innovations dialed back a bit, or channeled elsewhere.

Units and Fluff

As mentioned above, the army has a great variety of units, which are largely split between the more "normal" (Ravenous) halflings and the more mechanically-inclined (Tinkering) units, which leads to an odd mix of traditional country-style halflings with robust steampunk elements creeping in. It's a weird mix for an army, but I feel like Mantic is trying to do something unique here, and so we get jetpacks and troll-riding dudes and mechanical beasts with Gatling guns alongside the folksy rabble. 

The War Wagon could have been a neat, rustic-inspired concept to build on? They could be chariot-units; Halfling farmers taking armored wagons in groups for protection. Give the chariots high defense, and let them be kitted out to provide rallying or auras, or platforms for small-arms groups or for mounting war machines... let the tinkering be done on wagons instead of with jetpacks.

Stats

I think most of the Beta changes are going to be stats and points shifts. Right now everything has the normal speed values (5 for infantry), which doesn't jive with the previous iteration of Halflings in 2nd, nor the League's Halflings still in 3rd, all of whom have little legs and move at 4 Speed. Previously, their mounted units had Speed 7, but 3rd edition looks to have bumped that up to 8.

Additionally, the halflings are presented as very competent fighters, which I would think would be tweaked before print. For instance, special rules aside, their new Cavalry hits on 3+ like and has 5+ Defense, just like normal human-style knights.  This goes against the 4+ Me / 4+ De on the League's version. We'll see what the stats and points end up being, but I would think with the League already published, the army would be spun down a bit to match those stats. We'll see.

Final Takes

I'm not much for the forest trolls and steampunk units, but I do like the rabble-aspect, and the basic Ravenous units in the army looks like they will translate nicely and reinvigorate my old one, so I've been pretty happy with Mantic's announcement here. We'll see how the army list looks at the official launch, but I think I will have a go-to teacher army again!

Hobby Update: More KoM Pikes

My painting has never been amazing, so I tend to eschew expensive centerpiece units, and run wide lists more often than not. With this approach... it is hard for me to say "no" when hobbying on an army. If a unit is good enough to run, why not hobby up three or four or five and give yourself some real good flexibility with list building?

Last year, I did up a regiment of Pikes for my Kingdoms of Men army, and I then immediately wanted another for the reasons above. Unfortunately, the lances were hard to come by. After scoping out bits sites in vain for a year, I relented and through ebay, acquired more lances-with-arm bits from a box of Fireforge Teutonic Knights. Expensive lances, but the Teutonic sculps and ascetic are cool and iconic, and I will find uses for them eventually.

Hobby space is still at a ridiculous premium for me, but I was able to do up a second regiment of pikes at long last! It's been over a year, but the hobby process should the same as the previous regiment, and all my thoughts on the unit expressed in that previous post should still hold true today. 

The pikes make it hard to get a good camera shot from the front.
So I think that means I did a good job with them?

I actually ran out of pristine square shields, so had to substitute battle damaged shields from the Veterans kit to finish these off. I decided they would go in the front, as that made sense to me. This will be a second regiment, so that difference should "sell" each regiment being a bit unique, though they still look fine all ranked up as a (potential) horde. While I believe the meta these days says that the best way to run these is as a horde, I still want to give the multiple small units approach a go whenever I can, so these will probably be run as separate units on the table. I mean, meta doesn't matter to me since I don't play competitively (well, I don't play at all right now), so might as well run goofy things.

A horde of pointy things.

My basing has changed a bit over the years. The Regnum here has primarily gotten paste, and while the paste name has stayed the same, the consistency has varied a little between the three bottles I have purchased. I don't know if I didn't mix them up consistently enough or what, but the stands are looking pretty pronounced in this new unit. That is a dilemma for another day though. For now, my army is still homogenous enough on the techniques and aesthetics that I am not going to bother with any touch-ups yet. 

So yeah, another Regiment of Pikes ready to go! Space is still at an extreme premium in the apartment, and unfortunately time is too. But hobbying has been relieving stress, and I've got some prep work in on some of the new Fireforge Byzantines, so more to come soon!