Page 1 of 1

Behemoths - a new troops type?

Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:01 am
by Malty666
I like the idea of Behemoths as a troop type to explain certain large creatures
in fantasy. It seems these would be best based on elephants.

In the standard game elephants, for their 25 points, get the following
advantages / disadvantages:

+1 to their death roll
Disorder horses
-1 to CT when losing combat to them
2 dice per base in melee (instead of 1)
+ Impact POA vs HF / MF & Mtd
+ Melee POA vs HF / MF & Mtd
Negates Armour advantage POA
Each base = 2 bases for determining hits per base

Limited to 2 bases
Only Average rating allowed
suffer vs shooting (only bows and slings do not work well against them).

All for a bundle of 25 points per base.

I think this works for similar troops (war mammoths, giants, etc). But when you
get to Trolls and minotaurs, they should be classed as infantry.


Minotaurs: MF (they fight in a looser formation) / Undrilled (duh!) / Heavy
Weapon (BFA - Big f*&$ing Axe) / Unprotected (bare, hairy chests) / Average
(they are not really trained soldiers)

This normally costs 6 pts per base (Average Unprotected = 4, Hvy Wpn = 2).

However, to give them a bit more flavour, I would give them: 2 dice per base in
melee (charging an extra 4 points for this) and troops losing to them get an
additional -1 on the CT (as they are scary - for an extra 2 points) for a total
of 12 points per base.

I would limit their BG size to 4, giving them a maximum of 8 dice in melee, but
they would crumble quickly if they lost.

Trolls would be similar. They would be:

Trolls: MF (again, loose formation) / Undrilled (duh! again) / heavy weapon (big
club or stick) / Unprotected (dirty loin cloth) / Average (not trained troops) =
6pts per base (again).

But then I would add 2 dice per base in melee (charging an extra 4 points for
this)and +1 to death roll (regeneration - for the cost of 2 points) for a total
of 12 points.

Similar troop types, but slightly different effects.

What do you all think?

Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 12:34 pm
by SirGarnet
It's interesting, but I like to think how they can be represented with the least disturbance to the rules.

If you don't like elephant classification, having them as well armoured MF or HF should do the trick (armour representing natural toughness, and reducing likely casualties). Two ranks deep gives 2 dice in impact and melee. You can then add the -1 CT to enemy losing as a special rule.

+1 to Death Roll is for only selected tiny BGs- Elephants an example - to help limit the dramatic impact of a loss on a 2-base BG. With armour you will lose less anyway.

Depending on the nature of the trolls, they might be Superior rather than Average.

Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:49 pm
by Malty666
I agree with you in keeping the rules disruptions to a minimum - but surely a new genre is going to require a few bolt-ons and additions.

The problem I have with increasing the armour rating is that it increases POA for superior armour. While big guys like trolls and minotaurs are far stronger than humans, they bleed just the same, and a spear through the gut is still a spear through the gut. Armoured troops are represented by metal protection and a big shield - or all over metal protection - which does not seem to represent a bare chested minotaur. I can see that representing a dragon or other armoured creature - but not a troll or minotaur.

Perhaps it might be better to have Monster as a type, and Large Humanoid as a type - with specific 'elephant' style rules for both.

Also I feel that the +1 Death Roll is to represent the inherent difficulty of killing a large beast like an enraged elephant, rather than to keep the two bases alive longer. Their two base rule just keeps them as they should be - a glass dagger.

I suppose it comes down to how you see these type of creatures. On the scale of FOG - where a 6 base unit is around 1500 men, you are talking about fielding A LOT of trolls or other big guys. Even if they are just 2 bases, there is a still a couple of hundred there - and where did they come from? and how where they trained? and why are they fighting?

It is the answers to these questions that determine the troop type.

I would go with representing them as infantry, but giving them a few combat mechanisms to distinguish them from normal Gallic troops (whose fighting style they greatly emulate in general).

That lets you represent different levels of troops (superior, etc), with just a special race rule (+1 death roll or -1 to enemy CT) to represent unique differences.

As we are dealing with fantasy rules and -oftentimes - magical creatures, such unique 'race rules' will inevitably be common and will be part of the game (just as they are in any fantasy combat system).

What do you think?

Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 11:16 am
by zellak
We normally play it that a Troll/Ogre/Blackscale lizardman represents 3 or 4 normal size miniatures.

Lets say a BG of Blackscales has 6 bases.

We would depict it as 6 miniatures on 3 doubledepth bases.

Lose a base...lose a miniature. So although the miniatures are side by side, they are really one rank in front of the other.

Simple but effective...and no rule changes made :) , just play them as normal trooptypes.

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 10:01 am
by Malty666
That works too.

Although you are using them as 'normal troops'.

I just think it would be nice to have a few flavour rules in there to make it 'feel' fantasy.

I am sure the Napoleonic and Renaissance rules will add changes to the rules, so I don't think we should shy away from doing so, as long as you don't make the game overly complicated.

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 10:26 am
by zellak
Malty666 wrote: I am sure the Napoleonic and Renaissance rules will add changes to the rules, so I don't think we should shy away from doing so, as long as you don't make the game overly complicated.
i agree, but the fantasy ruleset will need a lot more variation than historical periods.

We will need extra rules for so many things , its probably better changing things as needed.

Rules for Flyers, Undead, Gods, Sorcery and who knows what else will take up a lot of space in any supplement.

Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:08 am
by Zephyr40k
Monstrous creatures are a core element of any fantasy genre, and this game should be no exception. Fortunately FoG already has the Elephant mechanic in place and that should be the starting point of any similar units.

Honestly I think any troop type where they walk upright on two legs and wield weapons and possibly strap on armor is considered infantry. So Minotaurs and Trolls would still be infantry, just unusually strong and tough. Perhaps give Trolls elephants' '+1 to survive Death Rolls' ability to represent their regeneration ability.

The elephant-type creatures would be things like Dragons, Hydras, Mammoths, Dinosaurs, and the like. Maybe do things like:
  • Hydras are like Elephants but with +1 attack die per base to represent their multiple heads.
    Triceratops are like elephants except with Armored (to represent their bony head crest)
    Dragons are like elephants except with Drilled (they're smart) and have Impact Foot (to represent their breath weapon). Plus maybe Fly, whatever we decide that does.
Something like that. Then point them out appropriately.

Re: Behemoths - a new troops type?

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:11 am
by MatthewB
I think "Behemoth" should be a troop Attribute, and not a type.

Sort of like things like "Camel/Elephant Resistant", or "Heavy Weapon" is an attribute of a troop.

So too would be "Behemoth".

You could have "Behemoth" Heavy Infantry. These would be troops who occupied a double-wide, and double-deep stand, but for all other respects, they were "HI" (sort of like Ogre Infantry, or something like that).

Same thing with cavalry, Light Horse, Camelry/Light Camelry... These types could be "Behemoth" indicating that they are riding monstrous mounts (think Ogres riding small elephants).

But, otherwise, a "Behemoth" troop type would kinda duplicate an Elephant.

And, what, then, would you do about Super-Large Elephants?

That would be a "Behemoth Behemoth"... Why not just call it an "Elephant" that has a "behemoth" attribute?

Re: Behemoths - a new troops type?

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:54 am
by davekhan
I have played a few games classing Behemoths as elelpants with a added Hvy armoured melee factor .
and used orgers as scythed chariots class ! they are harding in the impact 3 dice but the staying power gets lost as the battle goes on ... slowing down to stand still when they get hungry and stop to eat the dead on the battlefield ,
I think you could use hvy chariots for larger creatures =cant fight in 2ranks hard hitting against most foot but not so great against cav/knights in the impact ..and that way there strenght takes away ANY armoured used on them..

hope this helps
happy gaming.