The Dogs of War Nippon Army Style

Years ago I created a Nippon army list, its fairly crude and I have updated it a few times, but never really play tested it.

Somewhat because of this I starting to formulate a strategy for my own Dogs of War force, but one based on Nippon.

I've been a big fan of the Nippon forces since back in the 3rd Edition Warhammer days and always liked the look of them. Plus I've never really seen a good assembled force or really many at all. It's always been a shame that Games Workshop never released an actual army for them. But no matter, between the old range being available (somewhat) on eBay and these guys from Curteys Miniatures I think I'm going to be OK for the kind of force I want to assemble.

While the GW range was/is nice for 5th/6th edition Dogs of War its never really held my interest. Plus add to the fact that in order to get them now its either crazy prices off of the GW UK website or crazy prices off of eBay. Not willing to do either really. As I mentioned that's where these Mounted Samurai from Curteys come into play: 12 metal minis for $47? Yes please, GW should take note.

One of the coolest artillery sets in Warhammer

 

So with all that as I noted above I'm formulating a plan as most of my Warhammer stuff is packed up in anticipation for a move to a new house. So what I'm doing is seeking out all of the parts that I'm looking for before I start my force. This will be a novel idea for me as I usually acquire minis as I'm painting. Starting off I'm going with the Nippon Rocket Crew from Games Workshop back in the 3rd edition days. and thanks to a few chaps over on Chaos Dwarfs Online I think I'm set with that part. I will be getting the Rocket Launcher and 3 out of the 4 crewmen which is fine with me. Fine because when I run these guys as Dogs of War I plan on using it as a "Count As" Halfling Hot Pot, when used as a "Count As" Empire force I'll use it as a undersized Hellstrom Rocket Battery.

My buddy Baggronor over at Chaos Dwarfs Online (now Chaos Dwarfs Online) also has informed me that he has some 3rd Edition Games Workshop Ninjas as well. After all, even a renegade warband of Nippon mercenaries is going to have some ninjas squirreled away inside of it!

Other ideas include: a mounted Geisha for a wizard along the lines of the PC game Shogun: Total War; a band of mercenary dwarfs, a converted unit or from (Curteys line) of crossbowmen from Cathay. I don't see the Nipponese Samurai or their retainers using crossbows but a mercenary force? Sure in the right hands. This opens up possibilities of a renamed Marksmen or Miragliano renamed as well. Other ideas are a giant, but not as a Eastern giant per se, rather painted up like normal. The reason for this is I want to tie into the Old World as well. This as yet unnamed force has been fighting all over the continent and is made up of various parts. At its core is the Nippon forces yes, but other elements as well. It will be weird painting the giant in such a manner will make him appear unusual because his supporting troops will look so different.

That's it for now. Drop me a line ion the 3rd edition Citadel Oriental line of miniatures or the army in general.

Word of Hashut #11 Released – Update and Future Plans

Well, it was another overly long production cycle on the ezine, but Issue #11 of the Word of Hashut is finally out.

As I note in my editorial inside the issue, the Word of Hashut will be undergoing a "diet" in the future in order to manage to get it out on time. In short it’s about time or more precisely the lack thereof.

I will point out however that issue #12 is slated for release in late March, but with going on vacation I don’t think that is going to be likely. So it’s probably up to the Summer issue in June to get back on track but with moving (hopefully) you know the drill...

(EDIT - 7/7/26- Issue #11 was the last issue I created for the ezine. The crew at Chaos Dwarfs Online at the time soldiered on with Issue #12 which ended up being the last.

Edition Wars Redux: D&D vs. Pathfinder and the Cycle of Schism

VS.

Taking a short break from Warhammer, I wanted to share some thoughts on the current rift brewing between modern Dungeons & Dragons and Pathfinder. Not as a partisan—but as an outsider. I say “outsider” because I’m not really on either side. No one in this fight is on my side, and frankly, I don’t have much skin in the game.

I don’t play either version

Not my cup of tea either...

Pathfinder is, for all intents and purposes, the natural continuation of D&D 3.0/3.5 after Wizards of the Coastpivoted sharply into 4th Edition territory. Paizo wisely stepped in and offered a home for those cast adrift by 4e’s direction. Thanks to the OGL, they could legally build on the previous edition’s bones—a twist of fate that’s nothing short of poetic. And from all accounts, Pathfinder has done very well for itself.

But for many long-time gamers like me, D&D stopped being “our game” long before Pathfinder ever hit the scene. Some folks fell off with the release of 2nd Edition. For me, it was 3rd. I bought the core books, gave them a go, and found them… meh. Then 3.5 dropped not long after. It felt like a video game on paper. Over time, it began to resemble World of Warcraft more than Dungeons & Dragons.

What finally sealed it for me was the creeping prevalence of phrases like “character build” and “optimized path”. If your tabletop RPG revolves around those concepts, you’re either going to attract MMORPG players—or you’re already emulating that structure, consciously or not. That isn’t inherently bad—but it is a far cry from the games many of us grew up with.

Now, this isn’t to say older editions didn’t have powerful characters or min-maxing, but that wasn’t the point. Today, characters are often designed with end-game blueprints in mind. There’s a roadmap to becoming a specific “build.” What you play matters less than what you build. And for me, that’s a shame. Don’t get me started on equipment overload.

Now before anyone places me as an old-school purist; hold up. I’ve played 3.0, 3.5, and enjoyed d20 Star Wars quite a bit (honestly, more than the West End d6 version). I don’t hang out on the Knights & Knaves Alehouse, and I’ve disagreed with my fair share of Dragonsfoot arguments. I’m not anti-WoW or anti-modern gaming. If I had more free time, I’d probably play the hell out of it. I truly believe people should play what they love.

But not everyone feels that way. And that’s where this schism starts to resemble something eerily familiar.

We've Been Here Before...Twice

his whole D&D vs. Pathfinder showdown? It’s basically the 1989 edition rift all over again—but magnified.

Back then, Gary Gygax was forced out of TSR after Lorraine Williams took the reins. When 2nd Edition dropped, it came with the baggage of her reputation. A lot of players rejected it not because of radical rules changes, but because of who was behind it. And to be fair, mechanically, 1st and 2nd Edition aren’t all that different. It was more about the drama behind the scenes than the game it

Sound familiar?

Back then, the fan-base fractured into edition loyalists. Now, we’re seeing a repeat—but this time, it’s companies going head-to-head. Wizards of the Coast vs. Paizo. D&D vs. Pathfinder. And just like last time, lines are being drawn, and sides are being taken.

Except now the stakes are higher. The editions are more divergent. The business models more aggressive. And the player base more fragmented than ever.

Wizards of the Coast pulling a bait and switch?

 

The Market Is Shrinking—and Splintering

Some in the Old School Renaissance like to believe that retro clones and classic games are on the rise. And sure, in a niche sense, they are. But let’s not kid ourselves: the market for any tabletop RPG is smaller than it was in its 1980s heyday. And within that smaller market, we’re seeing further division. Instead of unity, we get micro-communities and echo chambers.

The irony is that D&D, once the 800-pound gorilla of the hobby, now feels more like QuarkXPress circa 2002—slow to adapt, vulnerable to competitors. Could Pathfinder be the InDesign of our hobby, quietly taking over while the original giant stumbles?

It’s possible. Pathfinder is gaining steam. Paizo has momentum. Wizards has the name, but that’s starting to feel like an anchor more than an asset. Worse, Wizards' strategy around “Essentials” and rumored plans for a new edition feel like confusion, not clarity.

If 5th Edition ends up being yet another hard turn from what came before, they risk alienating what's left of their already fractured fan base. And if the goal is just to get people to re-buy books again and again, well… eventually, players notice. 

Same Circus, Different Clowns

At the end of the day, we’ve seen this before. The fan base fractures. The “wars” get fought online. And somewhere in the background, players just want to roll dice and tell stories.

So maybe it’s not a Kid Rock song—but it does feel like déjà vu. Once again, we’re at one of those once-in-a-generation turning points for the hobby. Last time, the split was ideological. This time, it’s corporate. And as usual, the players are caught in the middle. 

As a (mostly) disinterested observer, I’ll keep watching. Neither company is making what I want—but maybe that’s okay. Maybe that’s the lesson here: the industry doesn’t need to serve me anymore. But it does need to decide what kind of game it wants to be—and who it wants to keep around.

Because if things keep splintering like this, there might not be many left.

Nasty Skulkers Minis – Thoughts for Chaos Dwarf Players

Pretty cool name and nice new minis for the Orc and Goblin range, right? Well, yes and no. Yes to the cool new mini part, no to this being good for Chaos Dwarf players. Orc and goblin players should be embarrassed as they now have even more choices for their hordes. Us Dawi Zharr are still on the outside looking in. Normally the closest thing we have to an army book is the Orc and Goblin one because we have a number of units in there that we are able to use. So it is natural for us Chaos Dwarf players to take a peek and see what we can use. Enter the Nasty Skulkers. Goblins who attack the flanks, backstab and retreat, sound like a certain Dawi Zharr unit by any chance?

Look at Nasty Skulkers and it’s obvious for us that Sneaky Gits come to mind and therein lies the problem. The reason why this is an issue is the fact that the two are so closely aligned in look and feel, that I wonder if it is a legitimate question that they did the Orcs and Goblins get one of our cooler units? It’s legitimate to ask as we haven’t had a list in years so why wouldn’t Games Workshop pillage their own works for “new” ideas? The answer is there is nothing to stop them from doing so.

Now from the financial side, no matter how cool the minis are there is no way you are going to assemble a Sneaky Git unit from these guys; it’s just not going to happen from the cost perspective. For a unit of Sneaky Gits you’d need 20 minimum and that means buying at least 7 packs of these guys at $15 for 3: $105 for a unit, not very cost effective no matter the look of the minis; I like the look of them, but not that much.

In any event it’s another nice option for us Chaos Dwarf players and perhaps those that are not confident in their converting/green stuff skills. If the Chaos Dwarfs do get remade I wonder on the cross-over potential otherwise. I’d say low due to the fact that GW has been keeping armies as separate entities since 6th edition and I don’t see this changing.

Games Day 2011 Chicago – Thoughts and a Rant

 

(Sorry this one is a bit of a rant...)

So Games Day 2011 is in Chicago this year and so far I am undecided as to whether or not I will be going. Last year at Baltimore was, to be blunt: disappointing to say the least when clearly GW was holding back. What do I mean by this? To put it bluntly they held back EVERYTHING on the Warhammer side of the house and (apparently?) instructed no one to talk about the upcoming information for Warhammer Forge. There were plenty of rumors going around the net and clearly the Games Workshop staffers who were in the know were clearly choosing their words very carefully. Sorry guys, Games Workshop is not Apple, the secrecy game works for them, you guys? Not so much. It was nice to spend time with my friends and the like and it was cool to get some games of Warhammer in (which is an all too infrequent thing these days for me), but if this was their attempt, I’d almost rather they didn’t, at all. That may sound harsh but I like the new game, its refreshing, its weeded out a lot of the math-hammer, “you missed that charge by 1/16 of an inch” whiney a-holes. All that said, Games Day needs to be better.

Sorry, but another halfhearted attempt again doesn’t make me feel better considering time and distance to travel. Traveling to Chicago is not that much further for me as I can cut through lower Ontario Canada to shave off some considerable time and distance; so its probably a 9 hour drive as opposed to 7 to Baltimore from where I live in Hilton NY. So it’s not the distance that concerns me, but rather it’s the effort. I ask you Games Workshop why should I expend this time and effort for what has become a lack-luster event in general? I like the fact that it’s later this year (July 30th).

I also look forward to see some of my friends in the Mid-West, but it’s largely a wasted effort on the Warhammer side of the house if GW does it half-assed again. GW should note for me its not the money either, its rather the time and effort.

So as I stand here in late January/early February it’s an unsettled and uncertain thing: I want to go, I want Games Workshop to show me something there that will make it worth my time and effort, but sadly I have this sneaking feeling that if there are any big announcements, they will save it for Games Day UK in the Fall and leave Games Day US as a halfhearted attempt again. Note: that’s not that I know of any because usually when I post these things my inbox gets flooded...

As to how this could be better (as I a firm believer rather than complaining offer up constructive criticism) is this: Rather than instructing everyone to talk about nothing or with half speak, how about some open dialogue. I fail to see what Games Workshop gains by being so closed. I’m sorry the consumer is getting smarter and from where I live not everyone is jumping on the latest army anymore; people aren't that free with their money anymore, even the “kids”. So if the fear is that “If we tell you, you’ll just wait until that army comes out…” Guess what Games Workshop? I’ve been doing that for years, I have money I will give you for the product that I want. 

Apparently you don’t want that money, so here I wait.

How about you? What are your thoughts regarding attendance at the closest Games Day to you this year?

Warhammer Forge Releases a STEAM POWERED Chaos Dwarf War Engine???

STEAM POWER for Chaos Dwarfs????

OK you guys on the other side of the pond...what in the name of Hashut is going on over there??? Last Games Day of the year, the one in the UK and the fickle chaos gods finally answered every loyal Dawi Zharr player out there! You know the ones that have been dreaming of Chaos Dwarfs since 4th-5th edition. Well, for those that missed it the world of Chaos Dwarfs was rocked by this: Loki's GamesDay Pics

C'mon Chaps. At this rate my youngest child will have gone through three different editions of the game before they get something Chaos Dwarf related out the door.

Oh and one more thing: STEAM Power for daemonic engines??? STEAM POWER??? This looks cool, it is a great model, running on STEAM POWER???  Not so much.

I don't know about you fellow Dawi Zharr, but as soon as I get my grubby mitts on this bad boy I'm making it daemonic powered like the Hell Cannon.

In the meantime a quick update on Word of Hashut #11: This issue is taking me far longer then I would like, but I am slowly making progress. I can't promise a time but I am getting there.

My Perspective on Dark Elves, 1st and 2nd Edition AD&D – Part II

The source of so much spilled "digital ink."

In a previous post I talked about my personal road and involvement in playing dark elves in Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. I've played one dark elf in 1st edition (around 1986/7) and one in 2nd edition (1997/2000) since 1982; not a bad track record. My dark elf for 1st edition coincided with me purchasing Unearthed Arcana with my own cash which was a huge moment for me. Interestingly enough both coincided with two of the best campaigns I ever played in.

In 1989 the gaming world changed with the introduction of a character by R.A. Salvatore called Drizzt Do’Urden and since then grognards the world over have labeled this event along with Lorraine Williams as the worst things ever to happen to Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (I think it was 3rd and 4th edition that was the worst but that's just me). I fully agree with the Lorraine Williams part, the second, not so much and here's why.

Look at what changed, I mean what really changed. TSR hit a gold mine with what was morphing into a major character that rivaled Spiderman to Marvel Comics. Think about this: at one point in the late 80's there were four Spiderman titles in a month, four! Was he overexposed? Most assuredly, but more to the point Marvel was smart — they were using their most well known property to gain more sales. Smart companies do this and if I was in the same boat I'd probably do the very same thing. So with that realization it was all Drizzt Do’Urden all the time everywhere in the Realms. If this was say for a character from Greyhawk I don't think there would be this much gnashing of teeth this many decades later. Gord anyone?

In a way I don't think anyone can fault TSR for having him appear so much. In this sense Drizzt is no different than Marvel using Spiderman as their poster boy and the parallels are somewhat similar as to why they were so popular:

• Loners (by and large)
• Both misunderstood by the "public at large"
• Both intrinsically good, despite those they protect not understanding them

By and large this probably describes large numbers of teenage boys who probably formed the largest readership of the character. I don't look down on anyone who might make their teenage years easier — one knows they are hard enough as it is.

So with all that said what makes Drizzt whiny and not Peter? I really don't think either are personally but maybe that's me. I think much like Ravenloft, Dragonlance's D1-15 and Drizzt it's a case of people's impression of them that means "this is so" rather than what it might actually be. Look through Dragonlance, some think its "rail-roady", sure it is to a point but that's what happens when you mirror a series of books and vice-versa. Peter could be pretty darn whiny, especially in the early days. Rarely does Drizzt's mask slip, it may have later as I stopped reading the series after Siege of Darkness.

I think the problem that exists for the old time gamers is the fact that it changed the idea of Dark Elves very much from what Gary Gygax imagined them in the Fiend Folio and D1-3 the Drow Series (the companion to the Giant Series G1-3). 

The problem I have with that is that what was Gary imagining from exactly? Traditionally Dark Elves were a Norse idea and I see some direct influence there. If one looks at the literary sources of say Tolkien, his dark elves are those that never beheld the Light of the Trees of Valinor, again something very different. I like Gary's imagining in D3- Vault of the Drow as opposed to say the City of Menzoberranzan boxed set (circa 1992) but both have merits. Newer school players are probably bound to like the latter. Doesn't mean that either is wrong, but in over two decades of gaming archetypes are bound to change. Whether they want to admit it I'm guessing that the people consuming the media and games have changed as well.

Another problem I see with this over-arcing theme of dark elves is that once someone played in or read G1-3, and D1-3 the cat was largely out of the bag anyways. It's not like you can stuff that particular genie back in the bottle again. Then the issue was compounded with the explosion of Salvatore's writing and the Forgotten Realms shifting to the default campaign setting for Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. I think this also speaks to a larger problem as well: the politics of TSR, the ouster of Gary and the fact that second edition was starting to become more and more of a reality to the older generation of Advanced Dungeons and Dragons gamers. This lead to a massive schism that still reverberates today which I won't delve into here.

Expounding on this further then brings to nature of the character Drizzt. Many of the old guard simply label him as a munchkin character that is over the top and breaks the rules of the game. That may be so, but if anything he fits better rules-wise in 1st edition, and after all 1st edition allowed for the playing of dark elves as characters by none other than Gary... It's important to note that while I'm a big fan of Greyhawk in terms of a campaign setting (with all its clunky weirdness that goes hand in hand with it) it's not like the World of Greyhawk is not without its munchkin characters either: Again, Mordenkainen and the Circle of Eight anyone? So when you throw all of this together a rather combustible mix is starting to brew.

So why might that be? I think Drizzt also came about at a certain time (the late 80's/early 90's) that were much different than the 70's and what the gamers then grew up with in terms of reading. Keep in mind reading being the primary mode for the transmission of these ideas or by mail ;) In some cases the older generation of gamers and wargamers grew up with the likes of Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon and such. Harryhausen's movies were also likely to be big in their formative years. For the newer gamers and the ones that straddled that line (like me) we were exposed to a wide variety of things and to us our first introduction to say Conan was through a movie rather than the books. I guess what I'm trying to say here is that the character-type is different than the player. The player identifies with the character, but is the character type tainted by the player type? I wonder if some of the "good" drow syndrome was related to the "Worf syndrome"; surely there had to be some Klingons that weren't rat bastards? right? (Don't look at me I liked the Romulans better, even though Worf may have influenced one of my dark elves...)

If the argument that the character of Drizzt attracts a certain type of player, then I would agree with that and that is where the problem lies. Looking over multiple forums that cater to multiple editions this is the sense I get. It would seem that many old-schoolers are continually beset with new school players wanting to play drow rangers dual wielding scimitars. I doubt that's the case for everyone, but lets go with it for a moment. If that's the case then I count myself lucky as I've never had to deal with that in my group. While this maybe is indeed a problem, I can certainly understand why someone would want that escape. We play this game as a means of escape if only for a little while. What many younger players might want is an escape for any number of reasons where they are victims of their surroundings per say or things that are terrible in their regular everyday lives. Its easy to sit back and disparage kids for wanting to play out some fantasies of not being the victim and the butt kicker, to give it out rather than have to take it. I see nothing wrong with that. Some will counter with: "What about the 40-year guys doing this?" Well is that a problem with the character/stereotype they want to play, or that type of player? I'd say the latter.

So how does one reconcile the imagery of dark elves in this day and age? I'm not sure you can. Because it's reached such a level in the gaming community especially the Dungeons and Dragons community that it's a touch-point for certain factions. I'm not going to worry about Dungeons and Dragons 3.0, 3.5 or 4 because they represent such a departure for what many consider Advanced Dungeons and Dragons that it's largely irrelevant to the people that would be playing the older editions of the game. As I noted on Dragonsfoot the first order of business to reclaim the dark elves (if that is indeed your aim) is at once the easiest and toughest: no Dark Elf PCs. This might cause an uproar in your group depending on the players, but then you don't have to worry about the "Drizzt Syndrome" of certain types of players wanting to play him. 2nd point: return them to being monsters of an unknown quality rather than known the world over; think about it in this sense:

• In the Forgotten Realms - Dark Elves are evil, wicked and downright sadistic. All over the Realms people know they are evil, have heard of them etc. But how is this so for such a "rare" race? Seems like plenty of the common folk have plenty of advanced knowledge of deep underground races. Unless this is of course because they raid so often?
• In the World of Greyhawk Dark Elves are evil, wicked and downright sadistic. People know they are evil, but yet at the same time barely know of them... How can either of these be?

In a pseudo medieval setting most people are going to have extremely limited knowledge of really ancient legends. Dark elves fall in that category. They are going to be worried about farming, winters and "real" monsters like goblins, orcs, hobgoblins and ogres; the ones that they do know of and probably have seen with their own eyes. So how would most folk hate and fear them if they are that rare?

The answer is that the imagery of dark elves is so muddled in Advanced Dungeons and Dragons that you have to separate out just what they are. Or at least separate player expectation. The DM needs to make a decision of how they are presented in his world. Are they mysterious and unknown? If so it stands to reason that most people would have no idea what they are if they saw one and certainly would have no idea of them being the "bogey-man" race that they are presented as. The Forgotten Realms is more guilty of this than Greyhawk per se. In Greyhawk the dark elves are largely unknown and I think the less a DM allows them the better off things will be.

For 3rd edition art, not too bad.

Another benefit of making them unknown is that it eliminates one of the main role-playing reasons why someone might want to play a certain drow ranger clone: if people aren't going to automatically want to kill them on sight it negates the tragic hero angle right off the bat. If the default meme of the last twenty years is gone, what incentive is there for these players to play the same thing they read about? There isn't and there is the beauty of it: they can then be free to play their dark elf as something else, not what they read in a book.

Dark elves do not have to be a touch point like they have been prior, they can be more of what they used to be. It merely takes more effort than it used to.

With all that said, I'm looking forward to writing my first dark elf inspired adventure and for 1st edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons rules no less. It will be a replacement for Q1 - Queen of the Demonweb Pits, it's very much in need of a better ending and hopefully I can deliver. UPDATE: not long after I started it was noted on Dragonsfoot that someone already done the work: Skein of the Deathmother by John A. Turcotte. Well, that saved time!

In closing for my own part I'm fairly neutral in this as I grow older, having played two dark elf characters since 1982 hardly makes me a fan-boy for them as in both cases it was what my inner muse whispered at the time. I guess playing Warhammer also affected how I viewed dark elves as well as the imagery there is a whole 'nother discussion in and of itself.

Oh and one last thing from D3 by none other than Gary Gygax:  

"In the right hand cage there is a dark elf fighter/magic-user of 4th/4th (HP: 24, no armor, 12 strength, 18 intelligence, 9 wisdom, 18 dexterity, 15 constitution, 13 charisma) placed into captivity yesterday and paralyzed by the spider demoness. He is Nilonim, a dissident Drow captured in Erelhei-Cinlu where he led a band of rebels attempting to overthrow noble rule. He is of neutral alignment with a slight tendency towards good deeds."  

Interesting stuff, were the seeds for the explosion of good Drow contained within? I'm not saying Gary intended anything by this, but it had to have been in there for some reason.