Hi I just want to post my idea and gets some usefull feedback for the use of War Hounds in Battle companies.

I have read the earlier post at http://www.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=18838&hilit=Hounds

My idea is to allow war hounds into your battle company.

These are different from Hunting dogs currently in Battle companies because They have a handler and attack as a pack effectively.

They have some particular rules however.

The first three hounds don't count toward your maximum warrior count in your company.

You can only have a maximum of six hounds in any company.

Each set of three hounds or part therof must have one handler

Hounds remain in base contact with their handler until released to attack. The target must be announced when released.

Should the handler be lost during the battle the pack will remain where it is unless attacked

A handlers hounds are a pack.

All hounds in thier pack always attack the same target.

Hounds have two special attack types:
Bail up: Hounds may surround and bark and intimidate the target
A bailing up attack can be made by 1 to 3 hounds. It is undertaken using the equivalent of a shielding rules.
A bailed up unit is considered to be in contact or in a fight even though the bases are not in contact for courage testing.

Maul: Hounds may attack the target with intent to bring the target down on to the ground. Knocking the target to the ground.
A maul can be undertaken by 1 to 3 hounds on a target. A successful individual attack results in bringing the target to the ground.
The attack can be resisted by spending Might Fate or will to change the result in the usual way against each individual attack.
Also you can resist the knock down by using a jump test straight after each individual attack. Untill such time as the target warrior or hero is bought down. Then no more jump result test can be taken until their next move phase.

Special rules:
Immediate attack.
A target unit mauled to the ground by a prior maul attack of a pack hound can be immediately attacked normally instead of mauled. The target knocked to the ground takes the attack as if trapped.

Nimble of feet.
Hounds knocked to the ground or picked up and thrown add a +2 to their jump tests to recover.

Lethal attack.
If a target unit is trapped and attacked by three hounds and the target is killed/knocked out. That killed warrior/hero roles their warrior injury table result at a -2 to their D6 or their Hero recovery table result at a -2 to their 2D6

Hounds are spooked by spooks.
Hounds must pass a courage test to attack a spirit.
Hounds cannot attack a spirit but may bail it up only.

Hounds need redirection
Hounds that have won their fight stay at that location until their handler makes base contact with them.
Or
An enemy soldier makes a charge or moves closer than 1" to them at which instance the pack will attack that unit instinctively.

Boy and his hound
The hounds have been reared and trained by their handler if the handler dies his pack is removed entirely from the battle company unless there is another handler that has less than 3 hounds in which case the remaining handler may choose which hound to adopt and the others are set loose.

Panic steed
The panic steed magic affects hounds

Natures wrath
The natures wrath spell will scatter all the hounds that fail a courage test. They are removed from play as casualties.

Flyers
Hounds cannot trap flyers unless they are a single flyer model and are bought to the ground. Swarm flyers cannot be trapped. Dogs cannot knock Monstrous mounts to the ground.

Notes on rules:
The intention is to use hounds much like how we do in real life when hunting pigs or other game. The hounds naturally work as a team so must remain together on one target.

Priority is important when you release the hounds so you ensure you can get all three hounds onto one target where they work best.

If you loose priority or your opposition splits your hounds up into single combats or worse a 2 enemy onto one hound combat things wont go well for the hound.

The intention is that the hound pack is a destructible assassin against one target. Thus the lethal attack special rule. Doubly so if you set two packs onto one target and trap with six hounds.

Hounds are nimble and can regain their attack very fast. Even better when the rest of the pack are hindering the opponent. Thus the nimble special rule.

Limiting the number of packs to two ensures a balance. Thus you could only ever have six hounds and 12 warriors in a standard company. 2 of those warriors would be handlers.

Further thinking on hounds

I'm thinking it should be an option to remove from your starting company any two warriors of the same type e.g archer, warrior with shield or warrior with spear and replace them with a handler. The handler takes on the warriors statistics but has only a hand weapon to start with. One handler has no hounds.
Once your handlers are dead you get no more hounds.

What I think is needed is to have a hero as a handler to allow a heroic charge to be issued by the handler. allowing quick pack attack and charge.

As for XP I think each hound should get a maximum of 20 xp and the options for improvement can be limited to :
+1 attack "The mongrel fights",
+1 fight (maximum of F5?),
+1" movement "The whippet in him",
+1 Defence (once only representing shaggy coat or some kind of war collar or harness?),
+1 Courage (only once representing "The bullhound in him"

Hound 6pts (moves 8" and counts as armed with handweapon)
F S D A W C
3 3 3 1 1 2

There would be no promotion for hounds... except perhaps a pack leader which could include the courage buff and a standfast off of him?

Reinforcements:
I did think of something that says that whenever a company that includes a hound pack of less than three hounds rolls a 1 or "no reinforcements" result on the reinforcements table they instead receive one War Hounds.

Any suggestions?

_________________
Ninth Ruling Steward of Gondor. Dior was born in 2328. He was the son of the Steward Barahir

This is definitely a compelling idea, Dior.

Very thorough indeed, worth contemplating. (Especially for house-ruling GMs like myself)

I am not exactly on board with the idea of upgrading the dogs, since they are technically only "Wargear".

You could technically have the same effect with only 1 dog, this would also help lessen any possible "shenanigans" that people could pull with the dogs in the sense of non-mauling trapping due to sheer number of bases at hand. (only takes 4 bases to trap someone, so handler + 3 dogs means instant trap.)

An alternative to this, despite how beautiful the idea is, is that you make the attack dog a wargear option that is "Carried on the model" (or have placed on the base of the owner.) Then, you modify the rules to fit this new restriction.

And, as always, there is the entire scrap where the dog is but a wargear option that gives its owner an extra S3 attack in combat. (For those who want a dog, period)


-As you can see, the counter-proposals get more and more side-tracked from your idea as they go. It is not an attack on your wonderful rules, but just some food for thought (or compromise).

_________________
- Wild
Battle Companies Developer

(CE) Battle Companies 2016 Edition

Commissariat, thanks for your ideas.

I understand that in the battle companies rules you do take a "Hunting dog" as an optional extra piece of wargear.
But its use is a bit limited in my view because it is only one dog.

Maybe if you had one dog that had some buffs for detection or something then I would understand the one dog use in the current rules. If the dog could de-buff elven cloaks or even change the sentries rules on scenarios then that would be great...

But I'm thinking of not just having a hero who has "öld Yella"at his side .. but a dedicated dog handler and pack of "war hounds".

In essence they are no different to a giant spider in my view and we all know giant spiders are never played right... people don't use them in mass because of their cost and they just aren't tough enough by themselves.. they need to pounce and poison... so in my mind the same quasi nerfing of the hunting dog would be undone if a dedicated war hound pack could be used.

Sure they may seem rather scary but you can still shoot them bits on the charge. And they would fail against too many numbers.

What would it take for you to not think of them as wargear... give them a name.. give them XP?

If they were wargear... then how easily could you realistically replace them? If easy then I would agree wargear... if it took years like a good warhorse.. then not so much wargear?

A war hound carried by a warrior seems a an awe full heavy thing to carry about.

I think a single dog might stay at your side and bite the heels of any foe your fighting.. the extra 3 attacks would work fine.. how about 3 x 3 extra attacks and some kind of mauling or bailing then..?

When we go pig hunting we typically have three bailing dogs and two ball latching dogs.. these together allow me to flip the boar or pig on its back and finish it off with long knife under its ribs or down its collar bone... I'm trying to bring this type of attack into the story.

Maybe a good thing is to ask ourselves how exactly are warhounds used. Individually? In packs? To intimidate? to isolate? to pick off and subdue enemies?

I think that is what I'm, trying to achieve with warhounds.... if you want one dog attached to a warrior or hero then the existing hunting dog weargear works fine for me.

Imagine my rules versus a single hero on horse... how cool would that work?

What do you think of the way the pack stays with its target? They don't roam around the battle field thinking like cunning wargs... wargs are way more intelligent than war hounds IMO.

One thing I haven't really thought about is how a warhounds treats the wound table. Should they be more resilient.. or more brittle? If a hound had a front leg wound what could it not do that would be similar to not being able to carry a shield? Perhaps not be nimble anymore? Would that mean that hound would sooner rather than later become a casualty?


here is the Battle companies "Hunting dog" for comparison.. copied fromthe 2013 version. (Question.. why good heroes only? (Do bad heroes only get a small white persian cat with two different colored eyes?))

Hunting Dog -- 3 Gold (5 points) -- Good Heroes Only
Many Heroes have trained companion animals that accompany
them on their campaigns. A hunting dog is considered part of the
Hero’s wargear, does not count against the Battle Company’s
roster limit, and cannot gain experience or be promoted.
However, it must roll on the Warrior Injury Table as normal.
Heroes may only have one Hunting Dog. Hunting Dogs use the
following profile:
Hunting Dog (8” Move) F3/- S3 D3 A1 W1 C2

_________________
Ninth Ruling Steward of Gondor. Dior was born in 2328. He was the son of the Steward Barahir

Actually while re-reading I just imagined a hero handler on horse back with a lance nad three hounds.. classic medieval pig hunter... would be awesome. I thought three models trapped? but a model knocked to ground is trapped anyway?

Anyhow... I'm liking the options here?

_________________
Ninth Ruling Steward of Gondor. Dior was born in 2328. He was the son of the Steward Barahir

Okay, so using the "Hunting Dog" profile in regards to who can take it, it balances the warhounds. This additional unit-proposal seems like it is best fit for heroes to hang out with, especially since these dogs would have the best synergy with them anyways.

On the 4=trapped versus knocking prone ability; what is the point of the knocking prone ability when each dog can contribute 2 s3 attacks alongside their handler's attacks just by skipping the rule and going for a full-surround instead?
If I had 3 dogs (which is enough to trap by themselves) I'd rely on using the dogs as walls in combat to trap people and give free "trappings".

I like your idea of forcing the dogs to camp on the target zone.

Maybe if the handler-hero dies in battle, the dogs are controlled by whoever has priority for that game.

Have you considered the rules of Farmer Maggot's Hounds? This would create the same effect, without any "special rules" or "traits" that would make the hounds more complex than the game itself.
By using Maggot's dogs as the translated rules of your warhounds, you would end up getting about the same effect. The 3 dogs would be able to surround for you (as is their job for Shirefolk) and they would only be available to heroes. (3 each).
To translate into your rules, you could force these three dogs to remain in coherency (maybe 3") of the hero. OR you use your "aim and fire" / target zone rules which are very reasonable.

Side note for the "wargear" path:
Your idea to give them D3 x 3 attacks (if they become simple wargear) is way too strong as well, unless their points cost is monstrously expensive.
Though, I do not like the wargear path myself.


-----------------------------------------
I agree with you on the logic of "Who gets hunting dogs?", however I think the only realistic and culturally sound route is to allow only Human (except Mahud, since they'd eat them) and Hobbit armies to take any form of Dog-pet.
-Orcs prefer Wargs, wargs would eat the dogs
-Elves are too.... not human. Elves with hunting dogs just doesn't quite seem fitting.
-Goblins (same as orcs)
-Spectres.... obvious
-Black Numenoreans would be suitable, but I do not think these guys would trifle with dogs at all. They seem more like silent walking killers than people.

_________________
- Wild
Battle Companies Developer

(CE) Battle Companies 2016 Edition

Been thinking about my idea and I need to change the "bail up" and "maul" rules so that people that don't like new rules can't get upset about it... and because I missed similarities with existing rules.

The Bail Up rule needs only be described as that the Hounds can shield although they have no physical shield.

The Maul rule needs to be described as the Hounds having the "Bash"special strike and that the Hound strikes as if it is a two handed weapon but does not have a -1 modifier to the duel role. And I'm considering perhaps a +1 modifier on the charge.

The immediate attack still allows you to change a Bash attack to a normal attack if the previous hound has already knocked the target to the ground.

And the jump test for the target model is gone because the bash rule includes a strength test as an equivalent.

Of course the proposed promotion table will include a strength stat increase early on to make the "Maul" attack more effective. Although I am still unsure what is more important as a first stat promotion.. movement distance or strength?

Oh I have ditched the idea of having XP stat advancement on a Hound. Because the Hound is never a hero and roles on the warrior injury table ... so I use a set of promotions for Hounds. Besides you cant have hounds using up your hero limit of five heroes. I think it would be enough to have the handler as a hero allowing heroic charge or heroic fight. Especially on horese back.


Post that idea later.

_________________
Ninth Ruling Steward of Gondor. Dior was born in 2328. He was the son of the Steward Barahir

I have changed the Maul attack... I think this makes better sense now.

Maul: Hounds may attack the target with intent to bring the target down on to the ground. Knocking the target to the ground.
A Hound can be declared to make a special attack called a "Bash". A bash is undertaken as if it is a 2 handed Maul weapon attack.
A hound is considered to be "Burly" on a charge attack, only for a duel role of a "Bash" special attack, having no -1 penalty to it's duel role for a two handed weapon attack.
The attack can be resisted by spending Might Fate or will to change the result in the usual way against each individual attack from a pack.

Here a Pack of Hounds (say three ) could be released by a handler and charge a model. Say they have enough movement to surround the model.
The first attack is a "Bash" special attack. It is on the charge move and is considered "Burly" so roles a duel role with no -1 modifier for being considered a two handed maul attack.
The hound wins the duel role and then adds +1 to its strength for the strength test against the model. It wins this and the enemy model is "knocked prone" and moves 1" away if possible. In this case not due to being surrounded or trapped.
Second attack from hound #2. Using the Immediate attack special rule the Hound can now make a normal attack instead of special attack if the target model has already been knocked to the ground. The target model if it wins this attack may stand up, or if it looses and is trapped will receive 2 attacks for being trapped and at +1 to wound for the backstabbers rule.
Lets say both strikes fail to wound. Then the third hound attacks and repeats Hound #2's attack option.

Does this sound right or is the Backstabbers rule just too much? I'm trying to show that the animal does ferociously attack when it has the target down.

I've added the Burly rule to show the impetus of a charging hound only. I think this is subtle and not over the top. Besides it's only applicable to a Bash attack. This would encourage the pack to bring the gazelle down ... which offers multiple defence vectors being the strength test on the bash and any subsequent attack if knocked prone where a wining target can regain their feet.

I was thinking also that Handlers may start with a club or staff weapon. Which if added to a combat could work really really well when it reduces the fight value to 1 of the target especially if a prone target.

_________________
Ninth Ruling Steward of Gondor. Dior was born in 2328. He was the son of the Steward Barahir

I was considering that what would happen is the counter-charges that would occour against a pack of hounds released against a target model, would result in a trapment being really quite hard to make happen in reality. So consider the hounds attacking primarily in groups of two and hardly ever with the handler who is always a couple of turns late to the combat. Buy which time he can gather the pack and release them on to anew target. However one Hound which is a big dog needs the ability to pounce (not like spider) on the target and drop him to the ground and maul him. And if there is another Hound then that gives a bonus to attacking in a pack.





I think this would be very hard to achieve in a game. I think the "Bail up" or shielding attack can do that very nicely... allowing the pack to heard or push a model into a trap.



Yeah I really wanted to capture the Dumb missile approach to warhounds... and make the Handler have to keep up with them and reset the Hounds.

I think the warhounds will be a one -off patch to a Battle company. Not a company in it's own right nor a wargear set... like an expensive set of Knights.. but once the Handlers have deceased or retired the pack is gone. It makes it hard because you have to use them but you could loose them too. They might be arrow attractants too... which could also be usefull if there not promoted Hounds.

Hey Thanks for your comments and ideas... they help me think in other directions.

_________________
Ninth Ruling Steward of Gondor. Dior was born in 2328. He was the son of the Steward Barahir

Well, despite them being units in their own way, I do not think I like the idea of them promoting.

I think the key thing is, the dogs/hounds are unnecessarily over-complicated.

In my opinion I would keep the following things:
-Statlines
-Target zone locking
-Dogs can choose to use the "bash" special attack.

This would keep the essence of what you are going for, but still keep it simple enough to be practical.



No problem mate.

_________________
- Wild
Battle Companies Developer

(CE) Battle Companies 2016 Edition

Yup looked through my idea and considered "dumbing"them down but realised the whole idea we play house rules on Battle companies is because we arn't interested in dumbed down rules. I mean BC is complicated by 300% on the standard GW rules.

So I'm going to keep the Shielding, Bash, Handlers and all the other rules except the backstabbers rule.

_________________
Ninth Ruling Steward of Gondor. Dior was born in 2328. He was the son of the Steward Barahir