Rating LoTR Orcs

I have been slowly working on LoTR armies and have been working on relevant lists. I have been waffling about the rating of standard Orc units. My initial inclination is to rate them as FL Warbands 4/4 C. But I am thinking perhaps that they should be FP instead of FL. The FL allows the Orcs to move through disordering terrain without effect (since I am imagining them to be more mobs than organized units.) On the other hand, the FP designation would represent the density of the units and make them slightly more resilient against other troop types. Any thoughts?

As an aside, I was planning to use a unit characteristic called "Coward" for all Orc units. The effect of Coward is that if the unit is in melee and does not win the round it must take a DT and if it fails it takes another VBU loss. Makes Orc units even more fragile than other units and shows them attrition faster when things are not going their way.

Firstly I don't think you can have a single universal troop type of 'orcs' anymore than you can for 'men' or 'elves'.

Some orcs are clearly more FL style - raiders in the north and Cardolan for instance. The white hand hunting party that nabs the hobbits seem more FL than FP as well.

At Isengard, Pelennor and the Black Gate though they look more like FP. with accompanying T. Don't see much evidence of any SK though, but then that's true of all (and often in history as well).

'Coward' is interesting, although I'm not sure that I see them as particularly fragile - the army yes but not unit by unit. I would see them more as being very hard to tip over (the effect of the Master's Fear) but once you were past a threshold they faded faster. So maybe they get some artificial 'Shadow' VBU that you have to chew through before they hit real losses, at which point they disintegrate faster than normal.

And of course there are greater and lesser orcs, uruks and uruk hai, etc And all the debate that goes with that


But this sort of thing is playing around the edges. You need a solid concept of how you're characterising the base troop types and that largely depends on how you're characterising the enemy (men and elves) which in turn means where are you drawing your inspiration: books, books and supporting material or films?

The books for instance are set in the equivalent of somewhere between the Fall of Rome and the turn of the millenium. The films somewhere in the 15thC.

You'll never get public consensus on which is right but you need to be clear on what you're representing. If Gondor is in full plate with longbows galore, the orcs will need to be FP just to have a chance to make contact.

Thanks Zippee for your serious response. Maybe my initial query was a bit naive. There are some basic assumptions that need clarifying before anyone could give me helpful advice.  

A few clarifying points.

1. I am imagine Tolkien’s world as closer to the 6th century than the 13th century. So I am using late Roman Empire/early Byzantine Empire as my basic analogy. But of course, it is not quite that simple (the Dwarves seem closer to warband armies of the 9-11th century.) There is a strong feudal overlay over Middle Earth as well that complicates matters. So Gondor isn’t quite the Byzantine Empire of Justinian and Rohan not quite the Goths of this era.

2. Since I am attempting to create large scale battles with Impetus I do not see small unit events like the capture of Merry and Pippen as necessarily  determinative. How did the Orcs fight at Pelannor Field or at Fornost or even the Battle of the Five Armies is what I am trying to model.  

3. I agree that there may be various options for Orcs like there are in the Gaul list for warbands.

4. I am focussing my attention first on basic Orc units, not the greater Orcs like the uruk-hai.

5. I have used Luke Ueda-Sarson’s LoTR lists for DBM as my starting point. I don’t play DBM so I don’t understand all the intricacies of the various unit type ratings (I have played DBA in the past) but the overview comments and the supporting army notes are very well researched and thought out.

http://lukeuedasarson.com/MiddleEarthintro.html

5. Some of my basic ratings would be.
Gondor Infantry 5/4 C long spear with upgrades to 5/4 B long spear for a certain proportion.
  Gondor Heavy Cavalry 6/3 B (equivalent to basic Kataphracts.)
Rohan 6/4 C CP2 Impetuous (equivalent to Gothic cavalry with a bit more ferocity.)

6. I was thinking that the analogy for Orcs would be the basic warband (ie. 4/4 C.) Perhaps with no upgrades that make them sufficiently weak but I was thinking that overall they should perform worse than typical human equivalents (so the “Coward” characteristic.) Any mechanism has to be very simple so while the idea of “shadow” VBU is an interesting one I am not sure how easy it would be play with it.

7. And yes, I agree totally that there is unlikely ever to be consensus on rating LoTR units simply because we all read the accounts differently (I will completely ignore the movies for their depiction of unit types since they departed greatly from the books.)    

Again, with that said, I really appreciate any feedback that you have or from anyone else for that matter.

HI GC,
Luke's stuff is very good (especially his Hellenistic discussions but I digress).

I think one of the main issues from a DB* perspective was classification as warband with all the impetuous behaviour that involved. Orcs really don't appear to be the aggressive hard charging gallic warband of yesteryear (not sure we really think the gauls are anymore either )

Impetus cuts impetuosity from troop classification so that's not so much of an issue. As such warband is a good starting position as its effectively a mob with contact weapons and large unit would seem appropriate for orcs.

if we're only looking at 'big battle' performance for the bulk of orcs and great orcs then I'd go FP rather than FL and leave that role to the lesser orcs if you think there's sufficient evidence.

6th C is an interesting choice - I think it's supposed to be set in the mythical age that 11-13C saxons would look back on, so the trappings of one era draped over that of another and mythologised.

If you really think that orcs should be weaker unit by unit in combat then fine but I don't really agree. I think discipline should be worse, initiative and reaction woeful and I think the army should be fragile and subject to wholesale collapse.

I'd look at tweaking the fresh-worn-exhausted spiral for orcs and such, looking to make them tougher to halt initially but then likely to fade fast. Glass jaws the lot of 'em but with a hefty punch! Hence 'shadow VBU' like temporary HP, you just have to chew through some ablative 'courage' but once that's done then they go home fast.

Maybe take a look at the TFL mechanisms for fervour v shock in Infamy it seems like a nice method for handling barbarian v regular which is perhaps teh heart of the issue.

Thanks again Zippee. Always something to chew on.

The historical location of Middle Earth in the LoTR is complicated. This is from the Tolkien Gateway for Rohan

Several aspects of Rohan's culture and history seem to be inspired by both Goths, Scandinavians and the medieval Anglo-Saxons.

Just like the Germanic Ostrogoths, Rohirric culture was a mounted culture. It had separated from the Northmen, moved south, and had settled in close proximity with a civilization. In the Goths' case it was the Byzantine Empire and in the case of the Rohirrim, it was Gondor.

Especially Hervarar saga, with its Mirkwood, Gothic horsemen and shieldmaidens, appears to have inspired Tolkien when creating the Rohirrim, although he exchanged the Gothic tongue with the Anglo-Saxon.

The antipathy between the Rohirrim and the Dunlendings resembles the historical tension between the Anglo-Saxon settlers of Britain and the native Celts.


As you can see much (but not all) of the historical analogy in this analysis is earlier than the 11th century. Again, ME is probably a mash up of several periods.

I don't disagree with your overall observations so the question is coming up with easy mechanisms to account for it. I have thought about creating a Discipline Rating "D" for Orc units or perhaps not allowing orc units to have command rally. Also, making it more difficult to wheel these units by requiring a DT first. That might provide a better overall effect than "Coward." One of the challenges of Impetus is the large jumps in quality because each step up is very large in consequences. So to go from VBU 4 to 5 substantially changes the unit quality. It is too bad there isn't a half step in the CT between them.

No worries,
yeah, it's easy to see the broad strokes - Gondor as Byzantium, Arnor as fallen rome, Rohirrim as 'gothic' haradrim as 'arabic' the east as well the eats but drilling down on that gets tricky because as you say its a bit of a mash up. That's why I look at it as mythological 11thC looking back on its own mythology and interpreting it. In the same way we get anachronistic images in our historical record. I see it no differently than Excalibur putting Arthur in full plate - contextually wrong under any historical analysis but not from an artistic one ...

It's hard, you want clumsy but tough, scary but not overwhelming, hard hitting but fragile. And we haven't even looked at army command. Really teh armies of shadow operate under a different system than normal armies. They are empowered by fear, kept in place by their masters and lose heart in a flash and display no initiative (unless its plainly self-serving).

Large unit warband give them staying power. High IMP gives them a cutting edge when things go well. When things go badly they should go very badly. Requiring leader intervention to rally a unit sort of reflects that. I'd also suggest that they can't 'charge' unless rallied - they'll fight if they have to but it takes direct intervention to drive them back in once pushed back. That's probably best managed as an additional consequence of CT failure rather than disorder as such.

Leaders are another issue - do you have lots of low level ones that whip the boys into a frenzy or a few uber leaders with magical and monsters/ How does Terror interact with the command and initiative system? Probably needs to be an alternative to Charismatic?

All food for thought

Good ideas. The challenge is staying within the Impetus system. So I am not keen to introduce new game mechanics. I would like to see if disorder could do most of what you are suggesting without introducing a new game concept.

My plan was to have more heroes/champions not attached to commands circulating in the game. So I think having some low level champions in the Orc armies within a Poor army command motivating units could be the answer. For commanders like the Witch King I was thinking they would have a larger command radius than the army command to reflect their "spiritual" power over troops.

If the typical small Orc unit is 4/4 C that would make them difficult to rally or react. At a VBU of 4 they are fairly weak and will melt away quickly but still have a reasonably strong punch with the high impetus on first contact. Making Orc units unable to be "forced rally" by a commander would make attaching leaders/champions important in the initial rally attempt. Perhaps disordered Orcs (even single units) need to pass a frenzy test when charging to be able to move at all. Leaders like the Witch King would be able to drive them with fear into battle. Beyond bonuses for frenzy perhaps when rolling for bonus charge distance the orc units rolls two or three dice and picks the highest when under this influence.

One further element could be that Orcs are not impetuous so don't get the benefits of impetuosity/aggressiveness in charge or pursuit even though they are defacto warbands.

I see no justification with orcs for the sort of hairy aggressive charge that impetuosity usually implies. That said impetuosity in the rules is not what it once was. I would think pursuing the target a very orc like thing.

Maybe they ONLY pursue the defeated though, their impetuosity doesn't extend to engaging fresh targets - cutting down the fleeing and wounded is good fun, rushing into a fresh and dangerous enemy is not, and should require a shadow master to force them forward again.

This is an interesting discussion as I've recently come into a large collection of 80s Middle Earth figures. An Orcish army will probably be the first off the block.

I see 'the main core' of an Orcish army as more a 'mob' than any kind of organised body. In the book fear of the 'overlord' took up a large part of the average Orc brain heh heh .... and the whip.

Once more we're talking about the main body here, not the more motivated Uruk, Warg rider or scout for example.

Under Impetus 'warband' is probably the closest troop type I agree ...VBU and Impetus bonus could be adjusted up or down depending on 'tribe' ...think the existing point system does a good job of dealing with this.

The most important thing (well for me anyway) is how to deal with the thuggish, mob, gang, cowardly 'strength in numbers' attitude that Orcs like to operate under.

Maybe there needs to be an encouragement through the rules to keep them in Large Groups as mush as possible ? +++ for having a friends next door and more minuses when they become isolated on the battlefield ?
Casualties on the fringe, melting away of the edges ?....yeah going to happen. As long as they keep going forward with the big cheese at their back to make sure.

Thinking about various options based on the conversations so far. Again we are talking about the main body of orcs troops as Tarty mentions.

Here is another proposal. Appreciate feedback.

FP 5/4 C Impetuous
Special Characteristic
Permanent Disorder (ie. they can never rally to good order.)

This would make them sluggish to react, vulnerable to harassing fire and fragile but still formidable enough in melee. Permanent disorder would make them feel like more of a mob than a normal warband unit.

It would also make them very slow which increases the threat of missile fire.

You'd need to try it in practice but with a steady loss of 1 pint for every shot and combat I think they'd get chewed up very rapidly, I'm assuming the rear rank would be 4/4?

Yes, rear unit would be 4/4.

I agree it needs to be play tested. They would be very cheap (10/6=16 points for both?) I am near finishing 20 stands or 10 large units. Enough units and they could overwhelm an enemy although they are meant to be the fodder for the main attack.

What I was thinking was that "fear" could be the driver that speeds them up. So if an orc unit is under the influence of the Witch King or an Orc Leader the Orc mob/warband might be able to make an extra move based the fear rating of the special character, even disordered.

I would even consider having the option to field them as pike blocks (3 deep) but without the depth bonus of course. Do like the idea of that whole 'safety in numbers' theme for Orcs....would look good on the table . Like Pike armies it would make the flanks vulnerable which seems to have the right feel for an Orcish army to me? I agree the Witch King or an Orc Leader should have some kind of ability to help drive the mob forward.
Some 'Middle Earth' specific cards would go a long way here also for sure.

That is an interesting idea Tarty, deep units of three stands. That would also allow them to take a lot of punishment before breaking. The VD could be 2/1/1. They would get the depth bonus of warband but not for LS/Pike.

but they are pike at Helm's Deep

oddly deep pike are kind of resistant to flank attacks due to the way front is calculated but if they go a big hole appears which sounds right for orcs.

hadn't thought of cards 'cause don't really use them. But yes that's the mechanic to add LotR flavour without changing rules per se.

Zippee wrote:but they are pike at Helm's Deep

Heh heh... yes Peter Jackson's Helms Deep and his Isengard Orcs in general weren't exactly how I imagined them

Going off the book I can imagine an Orc army being similar to a large clumsy pike army though, with massed war band instead of pike in the centre and a mish mash of varying troop types operating on the flanks. Perhaps a few trolls (elephants) sprinkled here and there to help things along ? Would make for an interesting army I think, certainly fun to use.

Want to say that my conversations with you Zippee and Tarty have been very helpful.

Yes, there is a lot about the Peter Jackson movies that I don't find particularly compelling in modelling Middle Earth. His depiction of Helm's Deep and the way the Orcs are presented is not how I imagined it from the books either. So no Orc pike units in my list!

I think for me Tarty you have it right. Big moving mob orc blocks with various other troop types on the fringe and perhaps with the some large orc blocks providing the hammer or perhaps in reserve ready to exploit an opening.  

A couple of bigger points. I thinking that an orc army (perhaps any army directly commanded by Sauron or an agent of Sauron) has no command structure. All units are out of command. For the Orc bands below this really has no consequence. For other kinds of orc units it might have an impact. I thinking that Fear from Commanders and Special characters would take the place of a command structure but in a less predictable and more unit specific manner.

So here is my proposal Small Orc Units for play testing

Front unit  FP 5/4 C 2 Impetuous mob
Back units FP 4/4/ C 1 Impetuous mob (1 or 2 stands)

Mob units are permanently disordered.

Multiple moves through Fear. I am thinking perhaps that when Fear is used to motivate an orc unit it takes a 1VBU loss. What do others think?

As an aside, I am not a fan of the tactical cards so I am not eager to use them in depicting Middle Earth.

Have you come up with a 'proposed' final draft for a Mordor army yet Gaius ? Would love to see it

This is one of the projects I'd like to attempt soon myself hopefully. Rebasing mostly.

Here is what I have so far Tarty. I haven't had a chance to playtest this yet. My gaming partners are less than enthusiastic to game historical versus fantasy. Perhaps I can beg someone to give me a game.

Like the look of all that GC. Definitely a good solid starting point for an Orc army for sure.

Might give this run when I get the chance also

Interesting you're fielding Trolls as FL's .... my first thoughts originally were to run them like elephants with similar strengths and weaknesses. Play testing is the only way to figure out this sort of thing I guess?

Great...thanks for sharing.

Hey Tarty, rating fictitious creatures like Trolls is even trickier than historical troops types. What is the historical reference for Trolls. I thought about the analogy of Trolls/Elephants but I wanted to create a distinct unit type. It seems to me that Trolls should be able to easily manage moving through difficult terrain something that only FL (and S) can manage. Trolls are large and FL makes them reasonably vulnerable to missile fire. They don't disorder or lose their impetus quickly but are not overpowering at VBU6. The fear test gives them an extra weapon of sorts. So a tough unit but with limited staying power and especially vulnerable to missile armed troops. They need to be used carefully or their impact on the battle will be squandered.

Yes think the Troll/Elephant analogy is fairly normal. Probably goes back to the old WRG 5th and 6th edition ancients days where they had a fantasy variant in the back of the book. 'Elephants' was a lazy way of portraying many monsters if I recall.