I'm planning on making my own "generic fantasy" ruleset, using SBG rules, but do-it-yourself profiles. So starting from a WoMT profile, what do you think would be appropriate increases/decreases for an increase/decrease by 1 of the following stats:

Move - I think 2 pts?
Fight - Half a point?
Shoot - 1?
Strength - 1?
Defense - 1?
Courage - 1?

Might - 2?
Will - 1?
Fate - 3?

Any help would be very much appreciated, as I'm not that at home in SBG points values and relative strength of stats.

_________________
"... Telchar wrought it in the deeps of time."
-On Andùril, The Lord of the Rings

I thought that M, W and F are generally priced at 5 pts?
Eg. Witch king and budget wraiths.

warriors
mvt free for 6" -1 point for 5", -2 for 4", +1 for 8", +2 for 10", +3 for 12"
F1 if 4 or under, 2if 5over
sh2 per improvement
S1
D1
A3
W5
C1ptmax
Special rules, 0points for circumstancial rules such as poisoned weapons, cave dwellers, 1 point for constant effect rules such as burly this applies to movement benefits such as spiders, cave drakes woodland creatures, benefits of lineofsight cost 5 points such as stalk unseen

And as far as heroes go
if a hero only has A1 and W1 they count as warriors see above. also M/W/F will always be 5pts each

Things change when a hero has more than 1 of eith A or W
then it follows
F,sh, S,D,C M/W/F 5pts each
Mvt goes 8" +5, 10"+10,12" +15
And special rules like above in the warriors except a constant and movement rules benefit will be 5points, and elven cloak style rules with be 10
eg:bane of kings cost 5points
pretenatural agility is 10 poitns
whilst never being unarmed would cost 5 points
bear in mind certain rules such as mighty hero(aragorn) cost arround the 50point mark
I think fly is either 15(warriors) or 20(heroes/monsters) points
So those are some of the mechanics of the game

_________________
http://grungehog.blogspot.co.uk/

The points value system used to be pretty solid, and most values were calculated by some rules. Nowadays, with all those new profiles, it seems to me that they've loosened up their rules a bit.
Anyway, it used to be something like this:

Base (5 points) 6" movement
3/4+ 3 3 1 1 3
Hand weapon

Per +1 for Fight Value/Strength/Defence: +1 p.
+1 for Courage and -1 for Shooting Value were not always taking into account (something like half a point).
Movement was often not taking into account.
Special Rules were often 0 to 2 points, depending on the rule.

For Heroes with a total of Attacks + Wounds of 3 or more, the following applied:

Base (40 points) 6" movement
4/4+ 4 4 2 2 4 2/1/1
Hand weapon

Per +1 for Fight Value/Strength/Defence/Courage/Might/Will/Fate: +5 p.
Per +1 for Attacks/Wounds: +10 p.
-1 for Shooting Value and Movement were often not taking into account.
Special Rules were often 5 or 10 points, depending on the rule.

I think this system used to work pretty well. They used it pretty strictly until the One Ring Rulebook, and over time used it less and less (later models are often too cheap if you calculate their points from the rules above). This is, I think, partially a reason why new armies were often at an advantage (not just because they were new and no-one was used to play against them).

Note that all these rules were deduced from those old profiles, and so there might be mistakes. I've used many, many profiles to figure it out though, and checked it with more profiles (and yes, the point values pretty much always added up).

Well I cross referenced both with rotk era profiles and the new format and it adds up, bar watchers of karna of course but there does seem to be a strong relation between passive special rules and courage rarely being taken into account for points these days
but excluding the special rules compare the watcher of karna with a feral uruk

stat wise the feral uruk has 3 more stat points and same base equipment and happens to be exactly 3 points more than the watcher

putting the special rules back into context however and one will see that the watcher has 3(passive) special rules one of which you need to buy a bow to be able use
the other two make them ok at dealing with wraiths basically resistant to magic and steely nerve do not aid him in killing anything it just helps keep them fighting as opposed to motionless

I supose If you want to make your own profile you must take into account that named heroes get perks, that the one you made up with the same rules and stats would be more expensive for.

Also I would like to add that originally the game was not intended for point match tournaments style play; It is at the core a scenario based game and alot of the profiles are designed to represent this whilst an army doesn't need loads of special rules to work it does add flavour to the game.

I used to make a lot of profiles and they were balanced, I also tried to undertake a whole fan supplement and making profiles that work but still stand out is tricky.

I would happy lend a hand double checking your profiles if you want to post any.

_________________
http://grungehog.blogspot.co.uk/

Thanks for all the good advice. Just one question though - Why do you rate Fight so highly? IME it only rarely matters at all, and then one point more or less is unlikely to make a big difference.

_________________
"... Telchar wrought it in the deeps of time."
-On Andùril, The Lord of the Rings

Fight is not necessarily less important than the other statistics. For example, Rohan vs Isengard. Isengard dominate the field even after their formation is partly broken, mostly, or at least old their position for a few turns. Why? Because they have 1pt higher fight value, which means that they win draws and are undefeatable when they roll a 6 to win combat.
IMO, fight is as valid a characteristic as any other in the game.

Fight has become less important with heroic strike, but before I simply never won a fight against gilgalad ever bar using sauron or the balrog.

I am quite lucky with my dice, I roll a lot of sixes, and often, If i have a better fight value and defence i will usually be very hard to stop

_________________
http://grungehog.blogspot.co.uk/

@ LordElrond: I beg to differ, as my Isengard dominates the field against Elves as well. It's the high Strength and Defense for a low(ish) price that make the difference, not the extra point of fight.

@ Grungehog: I've had a Moria Goblin beat an ent once, and have seen elves losing to haradrim. IME, it's mainly luck, I mean, there's just a 6/36 chance that Fight will come in to play at all.

_________________
"... Telchar wrought it in the deeps of time."
-On Andùril, The Lord of the Rings

It's a bit more than that, because a 6 is an auto-win. Also, the odds change considerably once you add in spear support or other sources of dice (banners, attacks, etc).

Fight score is probably the most difficult to cost out because it's so contextual.

The "auto-win" scenario still doesn't really account for higher Fight score unless the opponent rolls a 6 as well, though. Technically, if I have a higher Fight score and roll a 6, and my opponent rolls a 5, my higher Fight score had nothing to do with me winning. Telchar is correct, in that in a one-on-one fight with only one attack per side, Fight score only matters in 1:6 possible outcomes.

The side with the higher Fight score does increase its chances of "auto-winning" with more dice, though, regardless of how many dice the opponent is rolling, because that increases the chances of rolling a 6. For example Aragorn has a pretty good shot at winning a fight no matter how many opponents he's facing, because with 3 attacks there's a fair chance of rolling at least one 6, which his opponents will be unable to beat (assuming lower Fight score). For him, Fight is very important. So the importance of having a higher Fight score, and the ability to "auto-win", changes a lot depending on how many dice are being rolled on each side of the combat.


Exactly! This is what I was trying to illustrate with the following lengthy post, which I was in the process of typing up while you posted. I'll go ahead and post it anyways, but it's just illustrating the same point in more detail:


This is a somewhat simplified view, as it only applies to a scenario in which both sides are only rolling a single die (something which I find rarely happens in our games). A higher Fight score becomes more and more valuable the more attack dice you're rolling.

So yes, one-on-one an elf vs. an orc will only take into account the Fight score 1:6 times, but suppose I have two elves against two orcs (assume either a spear on both sides or a spear on one side and two combatants on the other)? Now any combination of ties between any two dice on either side will result in a win for the elves, which is closer to 1:5 or 1:4 possible outcomes (someone better at stats can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it works out to 0.224 probability).

Suppose I have one elf and one man against two uruk-hai, even though the man's Fight score is lower than the uruk-hai's my odds of winning are the same as if I had two elves. In that scenario obviously the elf's Fight score is valuable because it is applied to all dice on his side of the combat, not just those dice that he individually contributes, thus eliminating the uruk-hai's advantage over the man.

If I see elves lose it's practically always due to being outnumbered, not because their higher Fight score wasn't helpful.

That said, there are certain Fight scores that are, IMO, more significant than others. Fight scores of 3 and 4 are the most significant, in that the "baseline" is a 3, and therefore being equal to or one higher than most other models makes a big difference without having a huge impact on point cost. An elf's high Fight value certainly comes into play, but whether he's fighting an orc or a goblin makes no difference to him, he's higher than both (how much higher is irrelevant). The only boost he gets is against the occasional F4 opponent. Would an elf be more efficient, in his points:utility ratio, if his Fight score was one lower and he was a bit cheaper? Maybe, but you'd sure miss that higher Fight score when you ran into an uruk-hai army.

Keeping in mind of course that these are generalities, applied to the basic warriors for the aforementioned factions, and of course heroes or elite troops can present different cases.

_________________
Well, that's my 2 cents.

We can stop discussing Fight values, because it's one of the few things I've decided to change .

Of course my math (limited as it is) only applies to 1 on 1 melee's, that's the normal measure for how good any one unit is (I think?).

_________________
"... Telchar wrought it in the deeps of time."
-On Andùril, The Lord of the Rings