• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

The Saga Thread

RSDean

Registered User
Validated User
Why 3/4"?

The built-in bases on my figures are a bit large for 3/4".
Mine were a mix of old Foundry, Gripping Beast, and Old Glory (mostly), and I also had 400 figures in 8s on 80mm by 60mm mass army bases. I think the idea was to allow the individual figures to be grouped on magnet bases with the same frontages as the mass figures, for Warhammer Ancient Battles. However, I’ve since sold the mass armies, and the skirmish games figures soldier on. I don’t recall having too many that overhung the 3/4” bases, but I guess I would have trimmed them and lived with it. If I were starting fresh again, 1” bases are more stable in skirmish game play. The 3/4”s were a compromise, although they do also have the benefit of packing a lot of figures into my magnetic storage boxes.
 

enoto

E, not O.
Validated User
Thanks for those reviews!

I've reserved my copy at the FLGS, but they don't know when they're coming in....
I ended up ordering through Brigade Games. The US distribution on this game is just bafflingly obscure.
 

Anopheles

I draw bugs
Validated User
My FLGS put in their orders months ago, but apparently demand outstripped production, so my group will have to wait a few more weeks. One player at my store got his copy at Salute, so we've at least been able to peruse the rules and plan out armies. He also nicely left his book at the store for anyone to use until we get our own copies. I'll be bringing a couple armies for players to try out next week.
 

Ogrob

Registered User
Validated User
Got my books yesterday, preordered from Gripping Beast so was lucky enough to get sent right away.

Spent some time looking over factions and subfactions, and really like the visual of the eight monster Horde legendary list. Silly, but might be fun...
 

Cessna

Gritty AF
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Funny you should mention it... because I have about 200 Foundry Vikings and the ones I have mounted are also on 20mm square bases.

So far I've decided to stick with the square bases, but I'm feeling the pull...
If you lived closer we could get in a game of WAB/Shieldwall.

Alas, WAB is completely dead in my area.
 

Aesthete

A for Aeffort
Validated User
If you lived closer we could get in a game of WAB/Shieldwall.

Alas, WAB is completely dead in my area.
I would like that.

Tell you what, I'll attempt to get a force battle ready within the next decade and if I do I'll reach out to you and we can try to arrange a game. I'm pretty sure that basing, painting, and otherwise getting a solid WAB/ Shieldwall force ready is going to be a significantly greater undertaking for me than coming down to Colorado for a game one time... so if I manage the first, the second should be pretty manageable.
 

Cessna

Gritty AF
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Tell you what, I'll attempt to get a force battle ready within the next decade and if I do I'll reach out to you and we can try to arrange a game.
Whoa, no need to rush me!

;)
 

Anopheles

I draw bugs
Validated User
One of the members of my group managed to get a copy of Age of Magic and we got in a game Sunday. I used my Orcs as the Horde, while my usual opponent used his Late Romans as Great Kingdoms. The Romans guarding Hadrian's Wall faced a new brand of Scottish 'Ooligans or something. We played a basic Clash of Warlord scenario, to keep it simple while we tried it out.

There were teething problems, as expected from trying out the new rules. We both found the battle boards a bit generic, with fewer tricksy abilities or strange mechanics. I assume it is to allow as much variety as possible of potential armies under the archetypes. The Horde could stand in for an Orc incursion, the worshippers of Chaos, or even a peasant uprising, so you can't have an ability that reads as too 'Orc-y'.

The Horde were a Warlord, 6 Hearthguard (the Black Orcs), 16 Warriors (Orc Boyz), 12 bow Levy (Goblins), 3 Creatures (the Brutes), a Sorcerer (Shaman), and a Titan (the Mega-Boss).

Great Kingdoms were a mounted Warlord, a mounted Paladin (the Cataphract), 32 Warriors (Roman regulars), 6 bow Levy (Auxiliaries), a War Machine (the Bolt Thrower), 6 Hearthguard (Roman Veterans), and a Sorcerer (the Legionnaire with the horn).



The Horde advances, pulling off a pair of first-turn charges with the combination of a bonus-movement spell and an ability for bonus charge distances. The Romans form a nice defensible position.



The Romans hold the line. The Bolt Thrower and Sorcerer (the guy with the horn) laid down some ranged fire. The Brutes press the left flank after killing the Roman archers.



Some Orc Warriors and a Titan. He proved to be too slow and barely did anything in the battle. He and the Roman Paladin exchanged some wounds but nothing more came of it.



After killing the Roman Sorcerer, the Orc Warlord is taken down by the Bolt Thrower.



The Brutes get run down by the Roman Warlord, but manage to bring him down as well.
 

Gideon

Registered User
Validated User
There were teething problems, as expected from trying out the new rules. We both found the battle boards a bit generic, with fewer tricksy abilities or strange mechanics. I assume it is to allow as much variety as possible of potential armies under the archetypes. The Horde could stand in for an Orc incursion, the worshippers of Chaos, or even a peasant uprising, so you can't have an ability that reads as too 'Orc-y'.
Thanks for the report.

Yeah, the boards do seem a bit like that. I've been playing a lot of Kingdoms vs Hordes and Kingdoms vs Otherworld (and even some Otherword vs Hordes) and all the boards present a similar sort of all-roundedness. The charge range buff seems to be the main difference with the Hordes, but that sort of charging advantage would probably have manifest in 4 different interacting abilities on a historical BB.

It's kinda like the exact opposite of the historical BBs where you end up with massive differences in the way the boards play based on more subtle perceived differences in how they may have fought. (Although, I haven't played the Undead yet; this one looks like playing quite different.)

When I first read the rules, I really liked the way they managed to get lots of potential armies into 6 basic concepts, but the flavour is definitely coming from the lists and not the BBs. Now I'm wondering whether they should have taken a different tack, and gone with very specific BBs for very specific armies. That would of course been a lot more work and a lot more products. I'm wondering whether it might be possible to just take a historical BB off the shelf and use it with a fantasy army list/magic. Might be interesting.

Still, the product is still massively useful and playable, and I feel like this will be my favorite game for some time to come. Still have to paint my Undead while working out a decent theme for a Wilds army.
 

VicenteC

Member
RPGnet Member
Validated User
I got the basic rules and Age of Magic based on this thread, and I'm very impressed by it. The rules seem super tight, and the game reads like a lot of fun. Is there anybody in WA reading this thread? I don't have an army (I'm going to build Forest Lords or Great Kingdom for Age of Magic little by little, but it will take a while), but I would love to try a game (Age of Magic or historical, don't care).
 
Top Bottom