Playing Crusade with fixed Rosters?

[Valkyrion]

Would it drastically affect the campaign were we to discard half of the bookkeeping? Sounds obvious that it would, but we're thinking of creating our rosters at the outset to a fixed limit (150 PL) and using only those units for the duration, ignoring Supply, Requisition and Crusade Points. (which would obviously mean no warlord traits or relics)

 

We'd still use the Agendas, XP, Damage system.

 

So rather than representing an escalating crusade where your force can grow, it more represents the sum total of that factions forces in any given arena.

 

We're thinking of only playing Combat Patrol, Incursion and Strike Force size games, so 150pl gives you a pool of units to choose from, but those units themselves cannot be changed. 

 

Flicking through the rules, and having not played much Crusade, I can't see where we're unduly handicapping ourselves, but there might be something I've missed.

[MARK0SIAN]

It’s a narrative game so play it however works best for you guys :)

 

I would say though that I think totally fixing the roster with no opportunity to change it might be a mistake. For example you’re kind of gambling that the list you’ve made will work. Now if it doesn’t, normally that’s only an issue for a match but if you’re fixing it you could find yourself being forced to play with an ineffective list for several games and that will kill your motivation.

 

At the very least I’d build in at least one or two opportunities where players can change the loadouts of a unit or swap one unit for another providing you keep within your points limit.

[Valkyrion]

You make a decent point about the list being a mistake, but that's kinda what we want. 

There's four of us thrashing out the details - marines, tyranids, guard and a chaos of yet to be determined origins - so if the marine player tailors his list to fight tyranids then he will have a harder time against chaos, for example.

We think the cushion of having 50PL more than the max game size allows a degree of flexibility when picking your army for any particular game.

 

On the plus side, if five or six games in we decide we do need to change it then I guess we can through in supply run type missions where the winner can change X things or whatever. 

[Halandaar]

I would say though that I think totally fixing the roster with no opportunity to change it might be a mistake. For example you’re kind of gambling that the list you’ve made will work. Now if it doesn’t, normally that’s only an issue for a match but if you’re fixing it you could find yourself being forced to play with an ineffective list for several games and that will kill your motivation.

 

Agree with this; if you play a one-off game and find you have units that don't work how you want or don't pull their weight, it's only an issue for that one game and you can amend your list next time.

 

The idea of having a 50PL "cushion" and selecting units from the pool from each game initially feels like a nice compromise, but even then you could potentially end up with one (or more than one) dud unit on your roster for the entire campaign, which reduces your number of "real" options for each game. I think it's a very sensible idea to allow changes to the roster at a later date, even if it's only that you have to sacrifice something to bring something new in (i.e. the overall size of the roster never grows).

 

On the plus side, if five or six games in we decide we do need to change it then I guess we can through in supply run type missions where the winner can change X things or whatever. 

 

I'd be wary of linking the ability to change your roster to winning specific games, because the factions who are at an initial disadvantage (and therefore most in need of making changes) then have an uphill struggle to actually do it. It will compound the problem if you give stronger rosters a monopoly over making changes. 

 

Maybe just allow everybody to make changes to their roster every 3 or 4 games, up to a certain limit (how about no more than 25PL worth of changes at a time or something like that).

[BluejayJunior]

I would give everyone a set number of RP to use at the start as well. That way to you could still use them to upgrade units, give characters relics/WL traits, and recover from battle scars. 

[ThePenitentOne]

I agree with BlujayJunior, but I'd go even further: I'd keep requisition points, but just remove the "Increase Supply Limit" requisition.

 

Requisition points are an important part of the reward system in Crusade Missions, and buying those pregame strats is one of my favourite uses for them. Being able to give WL traits to non-HQ characters is also one of the things I love about Crusade. If your group is cool playing without those things, power to you, but I think eliminating RP entirely kills the most interesting part of Crusade.

 

I do like the fixed roster idea though.

 

In our campaign, we're using multiple systems. Cult Factions (Slaanesh, GSC) have to perform specific battlefield or campaign actions to add models to their Roster, but they have to increase supply limit to field them. They recruit cultists a model at a time, so their rosters also have to grow enough that they can field minimum sized units.

 

Large Imperial Factions (Sisters and Guard) have set rosters broken into detachments in order to defend territories. There are battlefield and campaign actions that can unlock additional detachments for them, and allied detachments as well. But they still have to use supply limit to determine how much of the roster they can field in a single battle.

Edited February 23, 2021 by ThePenitentOne