Thanks! I think my opinion of them kind of matches the community's opinion...But I figured I'd lay it out there with a full analysis of how I came to my conclusion. Even still, I don't think I can fault anyone for taking a Captain or refusing to take one.
I've had the problems that you specifically pointed out, and to make the captain more appealing, I made a few house rules to make them more appealing, all of which you talked about, to make them better. 1. Captains are Immune to Mind Control. 2. Captains start with Fight +3 and Shoot +2. 3. Captains have two upgrades when they begin. 4. Captains start with three tricks of the trade. 5. Captains use the same level gain as wizards 6. ALL soldiers come equipped with a knife that takes up zero spaces.
I think most of those are all reasonable changes - especially since it will benefit all players (assuming everyone hires one). I'm just curious about your point #5: Use Wizard level gains - do you mean they: 1) Level up when the Wizard levels up? 2) Use the Wizard XP table (1E table would give XP for their specific kills)? 3) They can choose a Stat or a new Trick each level?
@@bricksblocksgaming8017 The rule is that all experience is "warband" experience, and you can spend it on the Wizard/Apprentice OR the captain. If you have enough, you can spend it on both. If I can recall correctly we never had a captain go above level 5 or 6. It made some interesting choices for players. Also, I forgot Rule 4a. Captains have ability slots. Captains can purchase an ability more than once; each slot dedicated to that ability gives the captain one extra use per battle. So if your captain has three slots with the same ability, they can use it three times.
@@jnscott6460 interesting idea to choose to level either the Spellcasters or the Captain with the warband’s XP - kind of like Stargrave where you choose which leader to Level-Up. I like that since I usually end up with a lot of extra XP since Stat and Casting Number improvements are limited to once each per game in 2E. I’m not sure what I think about the Ability Slots - I personally like the idea of forced diversification and the decision making that goes with choosing when to use each Trick.
@@bricksblocksgaming8017 I don’t think there were any players that had more than one trick that had two slots, most of us that had captains liked too many of the tricks to just spam one or two.
I think re-working their experience table (shuffling bonus experience to other parts of the tree and removing the experience gained from killing enemy soldiers) and equipment would go a LONG way in helping them out. Giving them the ability to gain a stat improvement as they level up is also a great idea. Magical items which can only be used by a captain would also add incentive to running them. From a pure gameplay perspective it’s hard to not compare them to the default specialists. I am working on a homebrew book that I’ll be posting in the Frostgrave Facebook group soon that has some spicy tweaks to captains 😉
I hadn't thought about Captain-specific gear - that's a great idea! Having some equipment +2 and fancy rings/cloaks/etc. that only they can use would be fun! I'll have to watch for your FB post.👍
Well said. Since they are so thematically cool, I have to use Captains. However, their payment scheme and performance is not on par. Much of what you propose is reasonable. In fact, not every change would be needed for them to be worth fielding by those who don't want to use them for the thematic coolness. I really like the training fee idea and the expedited leveling. What I would suggest with your nearby xp idea is that it affects models which group activated with the Captain as a trial. If that wasn't enough, expand on it.
Yes! I like the addition of "if they Group Activated with the Captain" - then you don't have to do extra measurements and the Captain is already giving them commands. I definitely wouldn't suggest to use all of my house rules. But I think implementing one or more would really help to balance them out. They are very cool - it's funny how that coolness helps off-set other drawbacks.
Lots of great ideas there. I agree that the shooting captain is the better option. It seems strange that the captain can never fight as well as a normal melee specialist. I usually only consider a captain if I already have a powerful warband with an excess of magic items. To my mind, their ability to have lots of magic items and die less often are their main real advantages. Overall, I hate them due to the ongoing payments. If it wasn't for that, they'd be a cool addition to a warband and worth having. I think, in my next campaign, I'll try to get my friends to use a few of your house rules. Training costs for lvl increases rather than a percentage of everything, give them a level of wizard lvl/2 (rounding down) and allow each stat to be increased by 1 through experience. I'd allow them to be healed like apprentices if badly wounded and not tie gear to them.
@@colinplayswargames thanks for watching! That’s an interesting idea to wait to hire them until you’ve got a few items to give them - generally people like to hire early to start gathering XP, but I like your idea. I think mutually agreed upon house rules like you’re doing is the way to go with Captains.
There was a comment from Joe, I can't remember if it was on Reddit or the Facebook group where he said he recommended changing Badly Wounded to mean the character can fight in the next scenario but at half health
Yeah, I've read a few posts he has made stating he wishes he'd done this. He made that change with Stargrave. I think it's a reasonable House Rule (especially given Joe's comments about it).
Can they put everything in one book and call it 'the ultimate collection' or something. Am really lost on what I want and one book all in would help a lot. Btw 1st edition player talking.
That would be a huge book if it included all the supplements!😄 The author strives for simplicity, and adding all the options would make the game unnecessarily complicated for a 1st time player, as well as raise the price for extra content that not every player would be interested in. 1E is still totally viable (as long as no one in your group bumps to 2E). There’s actually some things I prefer with the original (mainly with leveling-up and having more treasure tokens). I do like the most of the overhauls done with the spells in 2E…except there’s still some OP/auto-take spells that could have used some nerfing.
Great stuff appreciated, guys i dipped my toe into first edition but now looking into second edition just a small query is there something i can track all this information on electronically?
I think there might be, but I always stick with pencil and paper or sometimes a spreadsheet on my computer. Sorry I'm not much help with this. Changes and updates with 2nd Edition makes it a more balanced game. If you are playing 1st Edition I would encourage you to you the XP tables from 2E and also found in the Maaze of Malchior book which shifts the bonuses from killing stuff to collecting treasures and casting spells.
Any campaign I have ran is the first dagger for any figure is a 0 item slot. Spellcaster issue 4 has captains as legendary soldiers, is that negated by 2nd ed?
Spellcaster magazine isn't really discussed in the 2E book - I believe they are kind of "unofficial" optional rules - they were written by Joseph McCullough, but they weren't published by Osprey. Captains would technically fill a Legendary Soldier slot as per the wording of the magazine, however if playing with the downgrades they have in 2E, I would house rule they don't count as Legendary Soldiers anymore.
Captains cost too much gold unless you are doing vampire as they have an ability to make it so you don't have to worry about paying the captain fee or even purchasing the captain as you can get them for free. For non-vampires... Not so much.
Hmm...I just reread the rules for creating a Vampire from the Blood Legacy book - I don't see anywhere that they get a no-cost soldier, just that they are allowed to have 9 soldiers (still restricted to 4 Specialists) in their Warband. So they have to pay for the 9th guy (unless he's a free Thug or Thief).
Thralldom spell. Vampire/8/Out of game spell. You can add one permanent soldier without having to pay for cost at the cost of the unit suffering a -1 to will. Not great mind you and if the unit suffers 0 hit points you get a 50/50 chance of losing it. 1-10 unit leaves/broke free. 11-20 unit stays. Mostly it is a bit of a gamble, but it makes captain cheaper since it removes the gold issue. Though yes I know that is trading a spell for a unit and some people might not think that would be a worthy trade... But without the apprentice as vampire do not allow you to have one... The spell can offset it in exchange for rolling for a captain. Or am I not reading the spell correctly? As I do admit that it is probably better to play a regular wizard to get a free apprentice rather than playing a vampire to roll to see if you can get a captain 'for free'.
@@qwefg3 oh yeah their spells.🙃 I think you would avoid the initial hiring fee, but still have to pay ongoing after-battle %. And yeah, the increased chance of death would be a big gamble.
You do such a thorough job on these reviews!!! You should be on the rules committee:)!!!!! I as usual agree with you totally:)!!!
Thanks man! I'm a moderator for the Frostgrave Facebook group...I guess that's kind of like a rules committee.😂
Yes mate! Quality work as always
Thank you!
Great advice man! wholeheartedly agree
Thanks! I think my opinion of them kind of matches the community's opinion...But I figured I'd lay it out there with a full analysis of how I came to my conclusion. Even still, I don't think I can fault anyone for taking a Captain or refusing to take one.
I've had the problems that you specifically pointed out, and to make the captain more appealing, I made a few house rules to make them more appealing, all of which you talked about, to make them better.
1. Captains are Immune to Mind Control.
2. Captains start with Fight +3 and Shoot +2.
3. Captains have two upgrades when they begin.
4. Captains start with three tricks of the trade.
5. Captains use the same level gain as wizards
6. ALL soldiers come equipped with a knife that takes up zero spaces.
I think most of those are all reasonable changes - especially since it will benefit all players (assuming everyone hires one). I'm just curious about your point #5: Use Wizard level gains - do you mean they:
1) Level up when the Wizard levels up?
2) Use the Wizard XP table (1E table would give XP for their specific kills)?
3) They can choose a Stat or a new Trick each level?
@@bricksblocksgaming8017 The rule is that all experience is "warband" experience, and you can spend it on the Wizard/Apprentice OR the captain. If you have enough, you can spend it on both. If I can recall correctly we never had a captain go above level 5 or 6. It made some interesting choices for players.
Also, I forgot Rule 4a. Captains have ability slots. Captains can purchase an ability more than once; each slot dedicated to that ability gives the captain one extra use per battle. So if your captain has three slots with the same ability, they can use it three times.
@@jnscott6460 interesting idea to choose to level either the Spellcasters or the Captain with the warband’s XP - kind of like Stargrave where you choose which leader to Level-Up. I like that since I usually end up with a lot of extra XP since Stat and Casting Number improvements are limited to once each per game in 2E. I’m not sure what I think about the Ability Slots - I personally like the idea of forced diversification and the decision making that goes with choosing when to use each Trick.
@@bricksblocksgaming8017 I don’t think there were any players that had more than one trick that had two slots, most of us that had captains liked too many of the tricks to just spam one or two.
Nice. I finally started a proper frostgrave campaign with my gaming group. This question has come up so I'm very much interested in this question
Well, I hope this video helps you decide!
@@bricksblocksgaming8017 yeah my decision is that captains aren't worth it 🤣
@@normtrooper4392😂
You are an inspiration and a credit to the community. Thank you for your videos!
Thank you! I'm glad I'm able to contribute with my videos!
I think re-working their experience table (shuffling bonus experience to other parts of the tree and removing the experience gained from killing enemy soldiers) and equipment would go a LONG way in helping them out. Giving them the ability to gain a stat improvement as they level up is also a great idea.
Magical items which can only be used by a captain would also add incentive to running them. From a pure gameplay perspective it’s hard to not compare them to the default specialists.
I am working on a homebrew book that I’ll be posting in the Frostgrave Facebook group soon that has some spicy tweaks to captains 😉
I hadn't thought about Captain-specific gear - that's a great idea! Having some equipment +2 and fancy rings/cloaks/etc. that only they can use would be fun! I'll have to watch for your FB post.👍
Well said. Since they are so thematically cool, I have to use Captains. However, their payment scheme and performance is not on par. Much of what you propose is reasonable. In fact, not every change would be needed for them to be worth fielding by those who don't want to use them for the thematic coolness. I really like the training fee idea and the expedited leveling. What I would suggest with your nearby xp idea is that it affects models which group activated with the Captain as a trial. If that wasn't enough, expand on it.
Yes! I like the addition of "if they Group Activated with the Captain" - then you don't have to do extra measurements and the Captain is already giving them commands.
I definitely wouldn't suggest to use all of my house rules. But I think implementing one or more would really help to balance them out. They are very cool - it's funny how that coolness helps off-set other drawbacks.
2 handed axe, heavy armour, enchanter wizard to boost them. Captain goes bonk.
Making the most of their Item Slots with enchanted equipment is a great way to go with them.
Thanks for the Video. Good to know how moñeyhungry These guys are.
You're welcome! They really do like their gold crowns. I'm not sure what they spend it on though...
Good house rules. I'll probably adopt a couple of these.
Awesome!
Lots of great ideas there.
I agree that the shooting captain is the better option. It seems strange that the captain can never fight as well as a normal melee specialist. I usually only consider a captain if I already have a powerful warband with an excess of magic items. To my mind, their ability to have lots of magic items and die less often are their main real advantages. Overall, I hate them due to the ongoing payments. If it wasn't for that, they'd be a cool addition to a warband and worth having.
I think, in my next campaign, I'll try to get my friends to use a few of your house rules. Training costs for lvl increases rather than a percentage of everything, give them a level of wizard lvl/2 (rounding down) and allow each stat to be increased by 1 through experience. I'd allow them to be healed like apprentices if badly wounded and not tie gear to them.
@@colinplayswargames thanks for watching! That’s an interesting idea to wait to hire them until you’ve got a few items to give them - generally people like to hire early to start gathering XP, but I like your idea.
I think mutually agreed upon house rules like you’re doing is the way to go with Captains.
There was a comment from Joe, I can't remember if it was on Reddit or the Facebook group where he said he recommended changing Badly Wounded to mean the character can fight in the next scenario but at half health
Yeah, I've read a few posts he has made stating he wishes he'd done this. He made that change with Stargrave. I think it's a reasonable House Rule (especially given Joe's comments about it).
Behold, the ice contains... beats untold
👍
They're just cool. I use them.
I like that answer.👍
Can they put everything in one book and call it 'the ultimate collection' or something. Am really lost on what I want and one book all in would help a lot. Btw 1st edition player talking.
That would be a huge book if it included all the supplements!😄 The author strives for simplicity, and adding all the options would make the game unnecessarily complicated for a 1st time player, as well as raise the price for extra content that not every player would be interested in.
1E is still totally viable (as long as no one in your group bumps to 2E). There’s actually some things I prefer with the original (mainly with leveling-up and having more treasure tokens). I do like the most of the overhauls done with the spells in 2E…except there’s still some OP/auto-take spells that could have used some nerfing.
You're probably right. That captains are not worth it in terms of straight gold paid
I really enjoy using them for the narrative possibilities, though
I agree. There's just something fun about them and they create more of an attachment than regular soldiers.
Great stuff appreciated, guys i dipped my toe into first edition but now looking into second edition just a small query is there something i can track all this information on electronically?
I think there might be, but I always stick with pencil and paper or sometimes a spreadsheet on my computer. Sorry I'm not much help with this. Changes and updates with 2nd Edition makes it a more balanced game. If you are playing 1st Edition I would encourage you to you the XP tables from 2E and also found in the Maaze of Malchior book which shifts the bonuses from killing stuff to collecting treasures and casting spells.
Any campaign I have ran is the first dagger for any figure is a 0 item slot.
Spellcaster issue 4 has captains as legendary soldiers, is that negated by 2nd ed?
Spellcaster magazine isn't really discussed in the 2E book - I believe they are kind of "unofficial" optional rules - they were written by Joseph McCullough, but they weren't published by Osprey. Captains would technically fill a Legendary Soldier slot as per the wording of the magazine, however if playing with the downgrades they have in 2E, I would house rule they don't count as Legendary Soldiers anymore.
Captains cost too much gold unless you are doing vampire as they have an ability to make it so you don't have to worry about paying the captain fee or even purchasing the captain as you can get them for free.
For non-vampires... Not so much.
Hmm...I just reread the rules for creating a Vampire from the Blood Legacy book - I don't see anywhere that they get a no-cost soldier, just that they are allowed to have 9 soldiers (still restricted to 4 Specialists) in their Warband. So they have to pay for the 9th guy (unless he's a free Thug or Thief).
Thralldom spell.
Vampire/8/Out of game spell.
You can add one permanent soldier without having to pay for cost at the cost of the unit suffering a -1 to will.
Not great mind you and if the unit suffers 0 hit points you get a 50/50 chance of losing it.
1-10 unit leaves/broke free. 11-20 unit stays.
Mostly it is a bit of a gamble, but it makes captain cheaper since it removes the gold issue.
Though yes I know that is trading a spell for a unit and some people might not think that would be a worthy trade... But without the apprentice as vampire do not allow you to have one... The spell can offset it in exchange for rolling for a captain.
Or am I not reading the spell correctly?
As I do admit that it is probably better to play a regular wizard to get a free apprentice rather than playing a vampire to roll to see if you can get a captain 'for free'.
@@qwefg3 oh yeah their spells.🙃 I think you would avoid the initial hiring fee, but still have to pay ongoing after-battle %. And yeah, the increased chance of death would be a big gamble.
Way way way way to much paper work. not enough reward.
😂Frostgrave does shine in its simplicity!