Hunting Grounds
Welcome to our rundown of Hunting Grounds. Make sure you catch our podcast coverage of the release. For everything out with this release window, follow these links:
More release rundowns! >> 18 warbands + 2 decks = 20 rundowns!
Thanks go to GW for providing a review copy to make this content possible.
Introduction
[D]AVY, [P]HIL, [B]RIAN, [S]KYLER & [Z]ACH
It’s hunting season in the underworlds, but we don’t want to go too far from home… How will Hunting Grounds allow us to lure our prey into advantageous situations so we can go for the kill?
Objectives
Z: With how much of the game takes place in and around neutral territory I could see this card being alright. I could also see this gumming up your hand in a lot of games due to positioning or bad dice rolls.
S: Yeah, it's the type of card you may want to tempt with an Aqua Ghyranis token or a tasty dangle bro.
Z: Against elites and big guy warbands I feel like this card would score at some point in most games I've played. Against hordes this is a tougher ask since those fighters tend to just die instead of hanging around with damage. At 1 glory, I think it probably just stays at home most of the time.
S: Indeed. And in the case of hordes, it's difficult to justify delaying their death for 1-Glory by taking a fighter from 2-Health down to 1 when you likely could have just gone for 2-Damage, collected the glory instantly, and started working on reducing their overall board presence.
Z: Sort of the inverse of Unassailable. This seems like it'll be as reliable as that one can be frustrating.
S: Feature token is such a nice term to see here and picks up Aqua Ghyranis feature tokens too.
Z: With how much this deck wants you to be in friendly territory, I'm guessing you'll be in a position to score this pretty often, just need your opponent to miss.
S: The trick is going to be making sure there is enough incentive to invite your opponent INTO your territory, otherwise they may just stay at home and laugh at you.
Z: Any warband that wants to get a lot of work out of their leader or has a leader with a ranged attack will like this. Doubly so for 2-glory.
S: Well said.
Z: Certain warbands will love this, others won't even consider it. Hidden Aid and Mobbed help score this too, because those were definitely cards that needed a boost.
S: Ha, and there's a copy of Hidden Aid in the deck to boot. The one other thing I want to highlight is simply that this card does not require a successful attack, only that the attack attempted was considered Flanked and/or Surrounded - so that's real good!
Z: As far as kill surges go, I don't mind this. Doesn't matter what kind of fighter was slain or did the slaying, just where the slaying happened.
S: Yeah, my only worry is this deck does a lot to disincentivize your opponent from coming into your territory, so you'll have to make sure that whatever you pair into this deck brings enough reason to force their hand a bit.
Z: This seems rather simple for a 3 glory card. You'll want to put a feature token or two next to edge hexes in your territory to entice your opponent to be in a spot for you to score this.
S: Say even an Aqua Ghyranis token!
Z: I first read this as each of those enemy fighters in friendly territory instead of all enemy fighters. It was iffy anyway, but it's right out now.
S: This card reads like a sushi restaurant dumpster smells on a hot day.
Z: For one glory I'm going to assume the easier reading of this where it's at least two fighters and two or more warbands are represented among those fighters. The other reading says you need 2 fighters each from 2 warbands, which would be real bad. Don't hate it for leaders that can survive and want to be in the scrum.
S: Yeah, I lean that first reading as well. I would go as far as to say the alternative reading requires a bit of a stretch to get there. And I too don't hate it. I think you'll know if you want it.
Z: Hordes with movement tricks will like this. I don't think I even consider it otherwise with how much invade there is in the game right now.
S: I'll offer a counter opinion. Although I don't disagree with you in general, I think this card may be uniquely positioned within this deck to offer you a sneaky 1-Glory option as most other cards within the deck discourage enemy presence in your territory.
Z: I think the only way to score this right now is to overrun. I don't much like relying on that to score a card.
S: Yeah, this wording is either future-proofing or a missed opportunity to simply say "performed an overrun onto a feature token". I think you entertain it if you have any fighters that are throwing 4-dice reliably, but when that's not true, probably sitting as a seventh surge and not making the cut.
Gambits
Z: By my count there are 7 (non-legend) warbands that have a leader with melee weapon with a damage characteristic of 1 on their fighter card. I think those warbands mostly take this. There's an additional 7 that either need to gain one via inspire or lose one via inspire or are Gardner's and will occasionally have one. Those warbands will probably at least consider this. Everyone else should probably leave this at home.
S: Yeah, an excellent card if you meet the qualifier. But give your leader a second look and ask yourself if they'll be alive to use it when you draw into it. If yes, awesome. If not, maybe forego it for something with broader application.
Z: Territory limited plus dice ploy that also allows you're opponent to react. I still think this goes in almost every deck. Worth noting that if you can make multiple attacks in a turn this will apply to all of them (looking at you Exiled Dead).
S: That last part is huge. It would even benefit Audacious Denial in the Power Step. And my favorite part is that we'll see this "in the next turn" window across multiple cards within this deck.
Z: The quality of this card will vary wildly depending on how many tokens end up in friendly territory. The underdog condition opens it up a lot, and minus dice effects are generally good enough that this may still make the cut.
S: How many other fighters can activate in the chosen fighters stead really impacts the value of this one. Given that I think the use case is probably too narrow for me to include it majority of the time.
Z: This seems pretty good. All of those big damage attacks that are limited to range 1 can now be range 2 for a turn. At least the max 2 is there, so Gorehulk's arms can't extend any further.
S: Cries in trauma. Thanks Zach!
Z: A two hex distraction? Yes, please! Needing to end in a different territory is a bit of a limiter, but the utility of pulling any enemy fighter out of scoring position on a token is more than worth it.
S: Love. Can help set up Pinned! or Back Off! too.
Z: Switch Things Up already has a hard time making it into decks, and that doesn't care what territory the tokens are in.
S: This deck offers no reason for the use of such an effect. What a waste of a card slot.
Z: This seems very good. Straight up, you can't attack this fighter. Underdog will score all of those hold a treasure token in enemy territory after opponent’s activation cards.
S: This is my favorite card in the whole deck. And we juuuust recorded the episode and I totally forgot to highlight it. Sobs in missed opportunity.
Z: I like this more than the minus dice one. Handing out a move token can be quite rude.
S: Quite rude indeed!
Z: Multi-staggers are usually worth a look. I'm not sure this makes the cut if pillage remains as prevalent. The location restriction means this is likely better rounds 2-3 than it is early.
S: Agreed, and as stated, still worth a look. The type of card that sits in the maybe pile on my first pass through when building a fresh deck.
Z: A classic. You know it, you love it, you put it in every deck.
S: Every time.
Upgrades
Z: ~42% chance to see a sword on 3 dice. Could be alright as a deterrent on a big guy, but I'm not taking this expecting multiple damage.
S: Never tell me the odds! Haha. I don't know Zach. I mean I hear you, but I certainly still take this and give it a go. I think the "What if?" can be quite discouraging. You do need to make sure it's going on someone healthy enough to take a few hits though, as it will break and not trigger when slain.
Z: I'm sure there have been times that it would've been good to stop fighter running by, but I can't say I've paid attention to it. I'll have to try this out to get a good gauge on it.
S: Yeah, it's an odd one. I'll commit to doing the same. And I encourage you dear reader to give it a try as well! The three of us may all find we rather like it.
Z: If you've got a difficult or random inspire, I could see running this to get earlier access to those stats. If you put it out going into your opponents turn, you can get access to inspired defense and still be inspired going into your turn.
S: Solid points. Yeah, I like this one quite a bit. Not for everyone, but a stellar trick for those that do like it.
Z: As noted earlier, handing out a move token can be quite rude. I don't know that it's worth running a 2-glory, 1-damage weapon upgrade to get access to it. At least the attack doesn't need to be successful.
S: Did not expect to see any measure of indecision here. This card is insane to me. To the point where I question if GW missed that the move token is not tied to success during final review. I would pay 2-bounty for an upgrade that places a Move token on a fighter within 2 as an action even if it didn't have an attack tied to it.
Z: Guess I'd just rather the target of my attacks be dead. I guess I can worry about that later as they sit there, unable to charge.
Z: Extra defense is almost always worth a slot in the deck, and this one doesn't cap at 2. Be careful not to accidently remove this as your ploys will get rid of it, too.
S: Yeah, solid card. And I shudder to see it on the Blood of the Bull!
Z: Another classic. The power ceiling isn't super high, but 0-glory cost means I'm rarely upset to see this.
S: Same. I like to think of it as a +1 Move Ploy that sticks around after my initial need for it. When I frame it that way, it's almost like I'm able to skew the 10/10 ploy/upgrade picture more towards ploys.
Z: I actually hadn't realized this was in the deck when I looked at No Business Here. This card has been an auto-include in Blazing Assault. I expect no difference here
S: Yeah, for 1-Glory you're never not taking this when it's available.
Z: Accurate attack for (conditional) 2 damage. I'd certainly take this if I've got fighters that don't get a 2 damage attack.
S: I like creative weapons, so I'm in agreement!
Z: I like that we keep getting great strength with a caveat for one cheaper. Sometimes you won't need this, but it should make it in. If you can pack some pings, this gets more appealing to set up.
S: I share your sentiment. Happy to see it.
Z: I'm torn on this. The effect seems really good, but the setup feels bad. If it worked on the leader too, it might be too good, but that would certainly justify the price.
S: Yeah, I'm torn on it as well. I wish one of the caveats had a little bit of give to it. Why limit it to a leader? As an opponent, you can still drive back the fighter with this defensive boon so it's not quite as good as guard and you always have the option to just target the leader and drive them away from the effect-granting position as well. It's alright and will have its moments, but I think it would have been interesting to let more fighters deliver this effect.
Summary
With a handful of gnarly tools, the hunting can commence if you can get enemy fighters into position. I think that makes for a bit of a big if. I think the deck will need to have a good pairing to be able to score without leaving friendly territory or else your opponent might be able to ignore you. I’d love to be wrong, but I think this might make Hunting Grounds a bit of an inconsistent deck.