Skip to toolbar

Warlords of Erehwon or SAGA Age of Magic

Home Forums Fantasy Tabletop Game Discussions Warlords of Erehwon or SAGA Age of Magic

Supported by (Turn Off)

Related Games:

This topic contains 24 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by  torros 1 month, 4 weeks ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 25 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1390322

    amachan
    Participant
    11657xp

    I have an issue, I’d like to get into a more generic fantasy game and am thinking of either getting into Warlords of Erehwon or SAGA Age of Magic. The best choice would be get into both, but I can’t afford that right now. So I have to make a choice.

    As far as I know SAGA Age of Magic is easier to get random armies me and my friends have in, but I feel like Warlords of Erehwon has got deeper more involved gameplay. Both are important to me. Can anyone voice their opinions on the 2 games, their choice and why?

    #1390343

    avernos
    Participant
    12975xp

    ah so that’s how you found my video.

    AoM, okay there are a few things about list building. There are 6 factions to choose from, these are coupled to lists, so even though you may play the same board as your opponent the build of your list will define how you play. A chaos list could be based on Great Kingdoms, this will play differently than a gun heavy Empire army also based on Great Kingdoms. Each faction also has the option to pick from 2 different spell lists. On top of these each faction has 2 unique lists at the end that change up how you build your force. Each unit costs 1 point, regardless of options or equipment used, so building a list for an 8 point game is incredibly simple.

    Play can be divided into two phases, Battleboard and tabletop. As you learn your battleboard and what works best this can be time consuming and has the most drag time, the activations and gameplay on the tabletop moving much faster once you’ve decided on your plan. While your opponent can interrupt or counter your activations and abilities with their own boards it’s very much an IGO-UGO game. It can be picked up quickly but takes time to master. It will be the most expensive to get into even if you don’t bother with the dice and cards, you’ll need the rules, universe book and I would recommend the battle book as well for the scenarios and additional terrain rules.

    WoE,  so list building for Rick’s game you have, currently, a choice of 11 factions to pick from with a 12th that I’ll discuss at the end. Regardless of the faction you choose there is a greater degree of granularity, with individual points for additional unit members and weapon options. Depending on the faction you may find there are differing restrictions on some choices. So the 11 factions are an unusual set including gnolls in among the usual suspects like elves and dwarfs. Rick has said that he will do some more, in fact Samurai is finished but not released yet, but he has made it clear he may never get to some armies and made it clear that this was never the plan and for people to adapt their own lists. This brings me to the 12th list which is monsters, he didn’t want to include it but dropped it in at the end. He has stated that it’s not a game written for monsters  but for warbands of infantry and cav. So don’t be surprised if the monsters are unbalanced to the rest of the game.

    Play wise it works off the dice draw mechanic so random pulls from the bag determine who will activate next, the system itself is d10 based so it has a better spread than Bolt Action to account for racial variations. There have been complaints that because it uses a system designed for bolt action, shooting is broken you may find house rules are needed to fix that if it becomes an issue. I personally suspect that less open Battlefields and scenarios would deal with that. The rules themselves are self contained, barring any future army lists that will be free downloads, other wise you have the rules, spells, scenarios, and lists in one hardback book.

    In summary, I like Saga: AoM because it’s mostly about the getting in and fighting, magic and shooting are good but not game breakers. Most importantly because I play two other eras of it it means I’m used to the rules as are my opponents and I don’t have to worry about learning a new set of rules from scratch. The game is best played with 8 points which means between 30 and 96 minis, and most lists will be at the lower end of that scale once you start including monsters and wizards.

    WoE plays best at around 1000 points, so ~90 minis it can scale up larger but the dice draw mechanic will slow you down although there are options online for large BA games, so they can be used to make it viable.

    They’re both very different feels of games and I’m torn, however as an easy game to get a lot of people into I would suggest WoE over AoM. One copy of the book is all you need and you’re good to go. WoE may require some more work and houserules but Rick never wrote it to be a tournament game and it shouldn’t be viewed as such.

    #1390345

    sundancer
    Participant
    10416xp

    Now there is a surprise… I would have thought it would be “Saga… don’t ask, saga” from @avernos 😉

    #1390354

    avernos
    Participant
    12975xp

    I like to keep people on their toes

    #1390355

    sundancer
    Participant
    10416xp

    But I ain’t no ballet dancer!

    #1390397

    amachan
    Participant
    11657xp

    @avernos thanks for the detailed explanation, it’s really helpful. At the moment SAGA Age of Magic is taking the lead, but I’m not sure yet. I hope there are other people who will also voice their opinions on this matter. Different points of view can help me decide easier.

    For Warlords of Erehwon I’m most likely going to have to build our own factions or alter existing ones, which I feel for SAGA Age of Magic I don’t have to. I’m often not a fan of making a ton of house rules, for the simple fact that if you play with someone else outside of the regular group, those house rules may not be in effect and you’re used to them, so the game is different.

    • This reply was modified 2 months, 1 week ago by  amachan.
    #1390400

    sundancer
    Participant
    10416xp

    Question: will you play it or just paint it? If you are getting into either for gaming maybe consider the amount of player for each system that is available to you. The best game gets dull fast if you play by yourself.

    #1390418

    amachan
    Participant
    11657xp

    @sundancer If I were to just paint it, it wouldn’t really matter what game I’d get. So yes, it’s to play. I play with a small group of friends that live around here almost every week. Currently it’s mostly 40k and I’m not a fan of how it looks like Games Workshop is moving things in the future. One of these games will give me a generic fantasy army that I may be able to use in different games and give me more freedom to also make a more fun painting and hobby project. So it’s kind of both.

    Since my local hobby store has closed down it also eases up the pressure for my friends to need to play 40k or Age of Sigmar, so I’m trying to take advantage of that to get into different games and actually being able to play them.

    #1390424

    robert
    Participant
    6777xp

    @amachan another game you might consider, is Of Gods and Mortals published by Osprey.  It’s a small, relatively cheap rulebook and is again agnostic in terms of what minis you use.  The rulebook only has 4 army lists, Celtic, Greeks, Norse and Egyptian but it does have a guide to how to build your own force so wouldn’t be as easy to play straight out of the box, so to speak.

    #1390442

    amachan
    Participant
    11657xp

    @robert That may be a good option, but for now I’m focussing on just choosing one of these 2. I’m dealing with people wanting to use their existing models and they are really more fantasy, I can’t fit them into an historical game easily.

    #1390484

    mkultra99
    Participant
    483xp

    “Warlords has deeper more involved gameplay..” Nope. And, its broken. “Aura of Timidity” is like a Napalm strike in Bolt Action… if there was one.. but there isn’t, because.. it would be broken… like “Aura of Timidity”. And taking a wizard is a must.. taking a level 3 wizard is a really really good idea. I have played SAGA for an eon and a fair bit of WoE (with many years of BA and BtGoA). It really boils down to the type of game that will work for you and your mates. WoE, was written for a group of old guys sittin around in their basement sipping beer and getting all nostalgic while they push old poorly sculpted metal models around and roll some dice. It’s very clear that some of the lists got a lot of love, presumably because those are the armies Ricks fellow old guy sippin beer mates had on the shelf from 1983 and wanted to see them on the table again to relive the “glory days”. Other lists.. are half assed. The ‘catch all’ lists are Knights and Beastmen. The lists are broken and not balanced, the spells are broken and not balanced.. which to be fair, is not what its designed to be. So, if you have that kind of ‘old mates with ugly metal models reliving a rose tinted past’ group, then WoE is specifically for you. On the other hand, if you want something with well balanced lists and tournament playtested rules with gameplay that has lots of important decisions to make.. SAGA:AoM is your game.

    #1390493

    amachan
    Participant
    11657xp

    @mkultra99 thanks for your input. Me and my friends are not tournament players and we play for fun and narrative, so a couple of broken things wouldn’t be too much of an issue. But balance is somewhat important to have fun narrative games as well in my opinion.

    #1390497

    mkultra99
    Participant
    483xp

    If your group is the type to modify a ruleset and play staged ‘narrative’ games, especially multi-player scenarios.. then WoE is much better suited than SAGA. I may have been too harsh with WoE.. but the way armylists were handled and terrible imbalance were very disappointing to me… however, it does have its place… just not with my group. Dragon Rampant is worth a mention also. Great game, very open to whatever kind of army you may want to field and solid gameplay.

    #1390550

    amachan
    Participant
    11657xp

    @mkultra99 We only modify rulesets if we really have to, but prefer not to. I will have a look at Dragon Rampant for something in the future maybe.

    #1393225

    horati0nosebl0wer
    Participant
    5407xp

    @amachan Definitely a good post to throw out there as I was wondering about the same thing between games. I’m not much of an army gamer as the model count has been my main concern since I do tend to move quite a bit. Thinking about the painting has made me a little skiddish as well but I’m now set up for something like this. Bright and eye catching color is the way to go for something like this.

    @avernos Thanks for the heads up for model counts between the systems. It puts the 15mm conversion you were doing with for the Crusades into perspective. I’ll be putting my airbrush to work now as it really should be used at the 28mm scale.

    @sundancer You’re right that any game would get dull fast without play so building/painting the army to show off as well would be best. Fine German pragmatism at its best… though for a hobby where large sums are put out for finely crafted sculpture of “tiny fighting men”. Pragmatic, not practical.

    @robert Do you have numbers on the relative model counts?

    @mkultra99 Broken rules are a pain and are definitely something to keep in mind.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 25 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Supported by (Turn Off)