5 hours ago, Budgernaut said:

And just to clarify this, when you say "one wound's worth," it means that one accuracy lets you assign up to 4 hits damage to the Front Line Rune Golem figure because that is how much damage it takes to cause it to suffer a wound. So if you managed to get two accuracy results and 8 damage, you could take it out in one attack. Correct?

this is correct. that one wounds worth could be a single mortal strike, or 4 damage. so with 2 accuracy and either 2 mortal strikes or 1 mortal strike 4 damage, or 8 damage will kill a front line rune golem in one attack

8 minutes ago, maxam said:

I struggled at first to see the difference between what you were saying and what I said...

I think you're making the distinction that it is to a normally untargetable model.

In that case I totally understand that - I didn't make it explicit because my explanation was a direct reply to Budgernaughts query regarding allocating accuracy tokens to a Rune Golem in a unit.

the difference is that you said accuracy acts like a mortal strike, which it does not. accuracy does no damage. if you roll 2 accuracy and nothing else, you deal no wounds to anyone. if you assign an accuracy to a front line rune golem (or model upgrade) it then allows you to assign other damage you roll to that figure even though you normally cant.

20 minutes ago, Klaxas said:

the difference is that you said accuracy acts like a mortal strike, which it does not. accuracy does no damage. if you roll 2 accuracy and nothing else, you deal no wounds to anyone. if you assign an accuracy to a front line rune golem (or model upgrade) it then allows you to assign other damage you roll to that figure even though you normally cant.

Awesome - thanks for the clarification!

7 minutes ago, maxam said:

Awesome - thanks for the clarification!

anytime glad to help.

11 hours ago, Taki said:

Where the game has fallen flat for me so far is the lack of granularity in the infantry, the meaninglessness of armor on the models, and the lack of innovation on the objectives.

Two things, I agree on the lack of innovation on the objectives, and this could be based on my opinion with out playing the game and trying the objectives out but they do seem a bit mehtastic, however I am hopeful from seeing the heroes' boxes coming with objectives and deployments. that is a cool concept to me and it means we will start to see hopefully more interesting scenarios very soon. In regards to the meaningless of armor are you just talking about aesthetically the Daqaan infantry look like they have more armor on the mini but their rating is the same as the archers?

1 minute ago, jek said:

Two things, I agree on the lack of innovation on the objectives, and this could be based on my opinion with out playing the game and trying the objectives out but they do seem a bit mehtastic, however I am hopeful from seeing the heroes' boxes coming with objectives and deployments. that is a cool concept to me and it means we will start to see hopefully more interesting scenarios very soon. In regards to the meaningless of armor are you just talking about aesthetically the Daqaan infantry look like they have more armor on the mini but their rating is the same as the archers?

Onthe other hand, you would need to buy both heroes to get both objective and terrain options. Seems contrary to what most people want as far as buying a single faction.

2 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

Onthe other hand, you would need to buy both heroes to get both objective and terrain options. Seems contrary to what most people want as far as buying a single faction.

I am hoping that the objectives/terrain options play to the specific armies or are even faction specific objectives, I mean Waiqar and Daqaan may go into battle with very different goals so I will hope that these objectives are in that vein...

2 minutes ago, jek said:

I am hoping that the objectives/terrain options play to the specific armies or are even faction specific objectives, I mean Waiqar and Daqaan may go into battle with very different goals so I will hope that these objectives are in that vein...

Akaur Maro does come with blighted something-or-other as a terrain piece, so perhaps you are right. They may even be faction-specific!

5 hours ago, Klaxas said:

this is correct. that one wounds worth could be a single mortal strike, or 4 damage. so with 2 accuracy and either 2 mortal strikes or 1 mortal strike 4 damage, or 8 damage will kill a front line rune golem in one attack

I struggled to find the answer to this: The way I came away from the books was that a single accuracy allows you to assign one hit to the front line model...which seemed useless against models with 3 or 4 Armor. You'd need to roll 3 Accuracy PLUS 3 strikes in order to deal a wound. The problem I had was that Accuracy says you can assign Strikes or Mortal Wounds to front line figures, and that each Accuracy face allows you to do this once. It wasn't exactly clear to me, but the way I'm seeing it discussed here makes far more sense than the way I came away from the books.

7 hours ago, Taki said:

I play IA as well, though I came to it late and there isn't a scene for it in my area so I just play with friends at home. I don't think it's pricing that made IA a tough sell. I would propose that it's the format in which it was released, that is to say that the skirmish game came as part of a dungeon crawler. I didn't give it any credit as a miniatures game when I first got it, and never bothered to play the skirmish game until very recently. I was really really pleasantly surprised by how well it played and captured the feel of a star wars skirmish from the shows or movies. The reason I never gave it a try was simply because in my mind it wasn't a mini's game. I didn't have to build terrain for it, or have a lot of space. It was simply a nice add on that FFG gave me for buying their Dungeon Crawler. I think they would have done very very well with it if they also had a skirmish starter instead of just needing to buy the base game to get the tiles and figures (as it's price point is high for a skirmish game, and it wasn't billed as such from the onset); maybe a box with a rebel leader and a squad of troopers vs stormies and a few imperial officers and a set of like eight to ten tiles from the base game and a basic mission. I certainly would have tried the skirmish game sooner if that was the case.

What we figured out from the poll is that an overwhelming number of people originally bought IA for the campaign, results in the spoiler below, with either no or very little intent on giving the skirmish a serious go. So yes as you said it was an incredibly well done skirmish game hidden inside of a dungeon crawler. It isn't a traditional mini war game in that it has individual units on a grid board versus an open playing field. The problem with the game is that to come into it at this point you need to buy the core and either every single expansion box or three roll out maps to show up to a legal tournament. We've done this math before but basically for the cost of a competitive list in X-Wing that is tournament ready (or soon a 100 point list in RuneWars for $25 more ), you can have the mats to play IA. Not even the core or any other figures, just the mats. Now that is a serious problem.

RuneWars is nowhere close to having that problem, which is great. IA was built as a campaign game first, skirmish second. In a developer interview a while back the original developers admitted they had to beg to skirmish included and it was last minute. So I applaud them for having the guts and taking the 'risk', and that is why I can understand how the model seems so out of place or poorly designed, it was adapted to the existing product. But for RuneWars being that it is a skirmish game first and only I expect them to get it right and they have a good chance to learn from any X-Wing mistakes and absolutely nail this.. and I think from points we've already discussed they are on their way down that road.

Anyway I think I've taken this thread sideways enough, I've drawn more than enough comparisons to IA and I think everyone gets my points by now. Good to see that Adepticon was a success and I appreciate all the information that came out of it.

Poll results:

We came away from Adepticon with 2 sets. I had gotten the Premium bag with my badge, but in an effort to save a little money did not get one for my son. We were able to upgrade his normal badge on Sunday morning while they still had some copies left. We didn't get a full bag, although the 7 G&G brushes they included to replace the Privateer Press rulebook made me happy.

We ran the demo with Tall Tony...he was great, and so is the game. We wanted to be able to run 200 point battles right from the start. The figures are great...not amazing, although the Revenants are pretty cool, as are the two monsters in game. I think the core set is a great launch product, but FFG really needs to get some diversity out quickly or games are going to get pretty boring fast. ("I charge my Cavalry into your undead troops....AGAIN...we know how this is going to turn out....")

I haven't cracked open my upgrade cards yet, but I'm hoping that the set comes with enough good cards that you'll be able to make 2 or 3 different versions of each unit.

15 minutes ago, kingbobb said:

I think the core set is a great launch product, but FFG really needs to get some diversity out quickly or games are going to get pretty boring fast. ("I charge my Cavalry into your undead troops....AGAIN...we know how this is going to turn out....")

I haven't cracked open my upgrade cards yet, but I'm hoping that the set comes with enough good cards that you'll be able to make 2 or 3 different versions of each unit.

I think that's one of the ways your games would get boring fast, you haven't cracked open the upgrade cards yet. The upgrades will open up a lot more diversity, but I agree that more types of units will be needed sooner than later. Good write up

1 minute ago, blkdymnd said:

I think that's one of the ways your games would get boring fast, you haven't cracked open the upgrade cards yet. The upgrades will open up a lot more diversity, but I agree that more types of units will be needed sooner than later. Good write up

Thanks...I'm getting to things, slowly. Recovering from the 'Con is a big deal!

I've played Flight Path games before, so I know how much even a single Upgrade can change a unit. What I see in RMG is a big evolutionary step forward for the Flight Path system. I'm not sure all of the changes would apply to every setting, but for a rank and file fantasy system, I'm fairly in love with this one. I think the expansion of the Command Dial to 2 dials, and then combining movement and actions on the same dial is genius. I also very much like the terrain rules, and how a unit can occupy the terrain.

4 minutes ago, blkdymnd said:

I think that's one of the ways your games would get boring fast, you haven't cracked open the upgrade cards yet. The upgrades will open up a lot more diversity, but I agree that more types of units will be needed sooner than later. Good write up

I think the command and new heroes will shake things up the most! I can't wait to see more about those and learn about the new scenarios and upgrades they offer, I want to throw a necromancer in the mix and see the crazy things they can do...so excited 4/13 can't get here fast enough...

4 minutes ago, jek said:

I think the command and new heroes will shake things up the most! I can't wait to see more about those and learn about the new scenarios and upgrades they offer, I want to throw a necromancer in the mix and see the crazy things they can do...so excited 4/13 can't get here fast enough...

Yes the infantry upgrade expansion has me most intrigued right now, also how the upgrade system works. How they are going to keep specific upgrades for each faction, or make them universal and just include doubles to keep us from having to buy cross faction.

@FrogTrigger

Well Battletech is also not played on a open field and I would call it a traditional mini wargame.

Btw. is the IA skirmish really that good? Alsways wanted to buy the game, yes more because of the campaign but I also liked the idea to have a skirmish game included, but I never did it.

Just now, Iceeagle85 said:

@FrogTrigger

Well Battletech is also not played on a open field and I would call it a traditional mini wargame.

Btw. is the IA skirmish really that good? Alsways wanted to buy the game, yes more because of the campaign but I also liked the idea to have a skirmish game included, but I never did it.

Yes, it is that good. Very few people who I've talked to that have tried it don't like it. The list building is a lot of fun, command cards add a lot of variability and the dice system is very well designed. I look at it this way, it's an expensive Skirmish to get into, no doubt about it, and the map system makes it difficult to keep pace if you just want to build say one faction. But on the flip side of it, you get multiple full campaigns as you go. And the campaign is very well designed with a ton of depth and great story, Like a RPG lite on a grid. On top of that the App is looming that will take the job of the Imperial (the same as Descent's app taking the job of the Overlord) and allow the game to be played fully co-op.

I would just do a little research in your local area first to make sure you have an active play group. It seems to definitely be growing in popularity, but I do know there are some areas of the world that are still lacking. The vassal community is also active, they just did a tournament that had a high level of participation (including the World Champ among other Regional/National Winners).

4 minutes ago, Iceeagle85 said:

@FrogTrigger

Well Battletech is also not played on a open field and I would call it a traditional mini wargame.

Btw. is the IA skirmish really that good? Alsways wanted to buy the game, yes more because of the campaign but I also liked the idea to have a skirmish game included, but I never did it.

We enjoy IA skirmish much more than the campaign

2 hours ago, jek said:

Two things, I agree on the lack of innovation on the objectives, and this could be based on my opinion with out playing the game and trying the objectives out but they do seem a bit mehtastic, however I am hopeful from seeing the heroes' boxes coming with objectives and deployments. that is a cool concept to me and it means we will start to see hopefully more interesting scenarios very soon. In regards to the meaningless of armor are you just talking about aesthetically the Daqaan infantry look like they have more armor on the mini but their rating is the same as the archers?

I agree with your hopes on objectives getting better with the heroes, though again, the price point is tough on those, and if those objectives are going to be mandatory for tournament play, I'm going to be very disappointed.

Yes, the meaninglessness of armor I was referring to was the Daqan inf having the same defense as the archers. I'm ok light infantry, even in combat roles, but I think that if it's billed as heavy infantry (both in background and aesthetic) then it should damned well act like it. This is in fact one of the best things about Imperial Assault, the defense dice for armor and evasion are excellent, here it's lackluster.

22 minutes ago, Iceeagle85 said:

Btw. is the IA skirmish really that good? Alsways wanted to buy the game, yes more because of the campaign but I also liked the idea to have a skirmish game included

As skirmish games go, it's one of the best I've played, and really captures the setting. Honestly, I think it would have been a great stand alone product. As has been stated above, the bad part with it is needing to own all the expansions to go to tournaments.

Just to add as of right now the current map rotation has 2 maps using core tiles only, and 1 map using tiles found in the Bespin Gambit. So to show up to a tournament you would need your core, Bespin Gambit and the Obi-Wan, Bantha Rider and Agent Blaise blister packs for the map building document. That is for an official, I am 100% within the rules tournaments. But most LGS' aren't going to enforce this to a T. For my tournaments I picked the two maps in the current rotation that require core tiles only and we went with those. I brought my map building leaflets and we as a group just build the maps before each round. This allows people who don't own everything like I do to still come out, compete and have fun. If there are say 8 of us, well only 4 people need to bring their stuff (dice, tiles, tokens etc..). So depending on your local community this may or may not be much of an issue. But if you want to play a Regional to Worlds scale then yes you will need to step up your purchases as at that point people start taking it more serious (understandably), but for just getting into the game I think you are fine picking out the specific individual packs you need. Ahem, there is also this.. ermm.. resource for maps as well that many people use:

http://www.ibrahimshaath.co.uk/imperialassault/

Once again, sorry for the derailment, now I am done

Thanks guys for all the information about IA skirmish mode, well seems there is another game I might have to pick up

1 hour ago, Taki said:

I agree with your hopes on objectives getting better with the heroes, though again, the price point is tough on those, and if those objectives are going to be mandatory for tournament play, I'm going to be very disappointed.

Yes, the meaninglessness of armor I was referring to was the Daqan inf having the same defense as the archers. I'm ok light infantry, even in combat roles, but I think that if it's billed as heavy infantry (both in background and aesthetic) then it should damned well act like it. This is in fact one of the best things about Imperial Assault, the defense dice for armor and evasion are excellent, here it's lackluster.

As skirmish games go, it's one of the best I've played, and really captures the setting. Honestly, I think it would have been a great stand alone product. As has been stated above, the bad part with it is needing to own all the expansions to go to tournaments.

I believe their tankiness is represented by their widely applicable +1 Defense modifier. Apparently they don't know how to keep their shields between them and the enemy unless they're really thinking about it

10 minutes ago, Waywardpaladin said:

I believe their tankiness is represented by their widely applicable +1 Defense modifier. Apparently they don't know how to keep their shields between them and the enemy unless they're really thinking about it

Honestly I would have been ok with it if the def icon was white, but as it is it still falls flat for me.

On 3/27/2017 at 7:24 AM, kingbobb said:

We came away from Adepticon with 2 sets. I had gotten the Premium bag with my badge, but in an effort to save a little money did not get one for my son. We were able to upgrade his normal badge on Sunday morning while they still had some copies left. We didn't get a full bag, although the 7 G&G brushes they included to replace the Privateer Press rulebook made me happy.

We ran the demo with Tall Tony...he was great, and so is the game. We wanted to be able to run 200 point battles right from the start. The figures are great...not amazing, although the Revenants are pretty cool, as are the two monsters in game. I think the core set is a great launch product, but FFG really needs to get some diversity out quickly or games are going to get pretty boring fast. ("I charge my Cavalry into your undead troops....AGAIN...we know how this is going to turn out....")

I haven't cracked open my upgrade cards yet, but I'm hoping that the set comes with enough good cards that you'll be able to make 2 or 3 different versions of each unit.

I'm glad Kingbobb you were able to get a second set, I truly am, but the fact that they let you do that Sunday morning pisses me off. This is because I asked Adepticon staff at the desk politely if this was a possibility on Saturday afternoon and they rudely dismissed me and spoke for the company, saying, "Fantasy Flight Games is just sending them all back."

So I went scouting, and I managed to buy Rune Wars off a premium badge holder guy on Saturday who didn't want his. Paid more for it than his swag bag and could have really used a second affordably to get the community here going. At least I got one, however. I understand many of you who couldn't attend Adepticon are chomping at the bit. I hope the people who immediately decided they didn't want their free core sets get them into the hands of gamers who feel strongly about building a scene.

But I've posted on the Facebook group some cool pics and comments about game play. The FFG Staff were amazing and knew the rules well. They needed more demo team members -- at times the gentlemen who helped me was doing great juggling 4 new players at once!

Totally grateful I was able to play 2 short matches. It was a blast.

I was able to upgrade my badge on Thursday, and get a copy. I had a friend try and do the same thing on Friday, but he was shot down. Stinks that they weren't able to keep track throughout the weekend, but maybe they didn't have a real idea of what no-show numbers would look like until Sunday morning?