Improving Orc's Bane

[Farwatcher]

I like the simplicity of changing it to "roll 4 dice when attacking [orcs/greenskins/etc]", but I wonder how much of a power jump that gives it when combined with Heroic Brew or other effects that give a second attack. As written, "you may attack twice" effects wouldn't stack, but the new orc's bane + heroic brew looks like it would.

(Jumping over the Slippery Slope trap of Heroic Brew...) I wonder how the numbers crunch if orc's bane worked like a potion of battle instead:
"When using this magical shortsword, you roll 2 combat dice to attack.
You may re-roll your attack dice once if attacking an orc.
May [or may not] be used by the Wizard."

It somewhat makes sense with the original wording -- "if attacking AN orc", not "if attacking orcS". Still not a super powerful artifact, though.

[InSpectreRetro]

With the ruling that, like polar warbear attacking heroes, heroes attacking the same monster twice CANNOT defend more than 1 attack per attacker.

So Orc's Bane vs an Orc is better than a Battle axe vs an Orc.

Heroic Brew with a Battle Axe however, vs any monster, would be better than Orc' Bane, even with Heroic Brew.

But, imagine the Rogue Heir, using Orc's Bane and a Dagger, vs Ulag, drinking a Heroic Brew.

Attack with 3/2/2/1, and you can do the 3 as a later attack, so you'd have 6 undefendable attack dice.

Orc Bosses are toast.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

We seem to be having parallel discussions on separate topics, for the sake of my sanity, can I suggest that we keep this topic to Orcs' Bane and carry on the specific spin off discussion around Two attacks instead of one on that thread (and if we ever resolve that then we can return to this one!)

[Anderas]

When using this magical shortsword, you may roll two combat dice to attack.
You may roll four combat dice when attacking Greenskins.
May be used by Wizard.

I like that variant.
A 2x2 dice attack is slightly less strong than a 1x4 attack because the Orc may defend twice, which is twice as many defend dice he has than against 1x4. But given that Orcs defend on black shields, that difference is barely visible.

I would, on the other hand, not use "Greenskins" anymore after I had some discussion about which class of Monster belongst to which of the colors - Beastmen, are there brown monsters that belong together? But Beastmen are grey, right?

So I would go for this text if I would choose your variant:

When using this magical shortsword, you may roll two combat dice to attack.
You may roll four combat dice when attacking Orcs or Goblins.
May be used by Wizard.

But still... I feel that the "attack twice" gives me a second attack, if necessary against a second Orc or Goblin. This is what is better about attacking twice (even if there are just two dice to roll each time). In practice, this second attack is difficult to place against a second Orc - or if yes, you have to stand with your figure between to enemies, which may be a deadly place to be if your plan doesn't work out as you would like.
So I go for that wording that doesn't allow an extra move, doesn't allow to attack other-colored monster but allows to attack a second Orc if the first one was dying fast enough.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

Anderas,

I have introduced a labelling system so that a label, in the form of an icon, can be used on cards, weapons, armour, potions, monsters and so on and the attributes of that label are covered in the rulebook rather than on the card in order to reduce the amount of card text, repetition, duplication and keep things consistent (for example items that require both hands to use have a ‘both hands’ icon, items that can only be used by spellcasters have a ‘spellcaster’ icon, weapons and armour that can be used by all Heroes including the Wizard have a ‘basic’ icon and so on)

I have also introduced an expanded range of monsters, so the ‘Greenskin’ label is associated with Goblins, Goblins Scouts, Orcs, Orc Henchman, Trolls, Shaman, Orc Chieftain making it easier to work out which monsters are affected by what (same with ‘Undead’ for the Spirit Blade, Sacred Water and so on)

I appreciate that everyone may not have or want this system, but that is why I have the term ‘Greenskin’ on this artefact (and ‘Undead’ on the Spirit Blade)

That admin point aside I note a subtle difference between your updated version and the original, which may be intentional or otherwise, emphasis is mine.

You may roll four combat dice when attacking Orcs or Goblins.

Original (US)

You may attack twice if attacking an Orc

It is the singular use of the word ‘Orc’ which is why I think that the attack an Orc then attack another Orc interpretation (‘Orcs’) interpretation is a misinterpretation.

Also whilst I accept that being able to attack two different Orcs (without an intervening move) is an advantage in certain scenarios, you’ve got to consider the situations in which that would be advantageous, you need to move to or be in a square with two Orcs adjacent to you, you need to be armed with Orcs’ Bane and your first attack needs to kill the target Orc outright (otherwise there is no advantage in your second attack being against a different target), and as you say deliberately putting yourself into this situation may be a disadvantage if things don’t go your way. Given the circumstances that seems like an awfully specific scenario for the designers to have considered if this really was their intention with the artefact!

[Anderas]

I introduced a symbol system myself. Then I found out that I have to explain more, not less, and I depublished it again. That two hand symbol was one, the No-Wizard symbol was one... Maybe I exaggerated a bit with it, too.

I totally agree that my card text and the original text do not say the same thing. Naturally, I prefer mine

It is exactly as far down the slippery slope as I want it to be and formulated in a way that it doesn't represent a slippery slope itself anymore.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

I totally agree that my card text and the original text do not say the same thing. Naturally, I prefer mine

Of course, don't we all , and this is an improvement topic so changes are to be expected but I wanted to clarify in the version when you have pluralised the word 'Orc' to 'Orcs' - the addition of Goblin(s) I understand - wouldn't keeping that singular be more clear on both yours and my versions, as below

When using this magical shortsword, you may roll two combat dice to attack.
You may roll four combat dice when attacking an Orc or Goblin / a Greenskin.
May be used by Wizard.

Or have I misunderstood and the addition of the 's' is intended to convey the ability to attack a second suitable monster, as part of your attack action and therefore without any intervening movement, if so that is a lot of meaning in a single letter, or do you have your own preferred variant?

[Bareheaded Warrior]

Latest thoughts available on Defending against the Orc's Bane