As I was doing a more thorough read through of the Olympus rules, I ran into a couple issues. Under Unusual Allies, it suggests a Demigod of Apollo being joined by Satyrs. That sounds fine, but the Reinforcement Tables don't have a mechanism to reach the Mythic Creatures table to accomplish that. There is no direct link, with the only other tables addressed being for different city-states and characters. Those tables only allow access to the Specialist Tables, which only address new characters.

The City-states Table skips many of the restrictions from the Warband rules. For example: Amazons, outside the famous restriction for Cretan Pirates, are only disallowed units from Corinth. So they can't get new units from the people who'll deal with anyone for money, but can happily add misogynistic Spartans.

The Titan Reinforcement Table shows only allowed units, though technically, there's no way to get to the table. It adds additional questions when compared to the Specialist Tables. The Specialist Tables continue most of the unit listings' limits, though, oddly, not all. The monsters from the Titan Reinforcement Table don't address the issue at all. Is a Titan Warband supposed to be able to get multiple Hydras, Chimera's, or Harpy units?

I had also noted the same issues from my more detailed read through. My take on this would be

1) Mythical Creatures reinforcements. This looks like a glitch in the table at the bottom of page 278. My solution would be to roll a d12 instead of a d10 when using that table. A roll of 11 would direct you to the Mythic Creatures reinforcement table on page 279. A roll of 12 would be "Players Choice".

2) City State restrictions. This also looks a glitch in the City-States table on page 279 to me as well. I would suggest the restrictions elsewhere in the City State sections override this - so no Spartans, Athenians or Mycenaeans as Amazon reinforcements in your example.

3) Titans. I think Titan warbands go direct to the Titans reinforcements table. The text elsewhere seems to give the idea that there are multiple Harpies, Hydra and Chimera at large, and while multiples cannot be selected in basic warband design it is possible that multiples can arise via reinforcement. This raises a practical point about whether you want to collect and paint multiple versions of these figures for this unlikely, but no means impossible scenario. Personally I would rather have a house rule here along the lines of you can't have multiple Harpies, Hydra or Chimera until you have at least one of each - and perhaps inviting the Titan player to design some additional mutant monster along the lines of those on page 323, rather than repeating on the existing three options.

All the above is just my opinion however.

1)Using a d12 for page 278's chart causes two issues: A) It requires an extra die type that does nothing else in the game, B) It significantly changes the odds for what should be units that are more rare. Simply adding mythical creatures on an eleven, and then adding a free choice on a twelve, immediately changes the odds for mythical creatures to one chance in six, or around seventeen percent. It gives the same odds for characters from other city-states and chariots. That's a huge shift in odds. Rather than add either issue, I'd been considering tacking mythical creatures as an option for the player's choice for a character from another city-state. That would add mythical creatures one percent of the time. I'd thought about using the player's choice option from the Specialist Tables, but that would give Amazons twice the chance of anyone else. If the City-states Table were restricted to eliminate questionable entries, for Amazons or anyone else, it could still require a roll of a ten to go to the Mythical Creatures table, and keep the odds the same. 2) The City-states Table is odd because it draws from various times of both history and myth, and then applies both strictures to characters and units equally. There was an Amazon Argonaut, and Herakles had an affair with an Amazon queen. Athens and Sparta fought, except when were allied. Trojans were on an allied trade mission when Helen was spirited away. Since the game is set before the end of the Trojan War, it's an easy table for groups to decide to tweak, especially for characters. Heroes tended to be more flexible. In general, I prefer to build within initial creation ally constraints. 3) Titans going straight to the Titans Reinforcement Table really bothers me. Fifty percent of the time, it generates a 'character' worth 100(10%) or 150(40%) points. Few human characters will come close. Only half the time would a unit be generated. I thought about plugging options into the standard Reinforcement Table, but I couldn't find a mix I liked. In the end, I'm leaning towards: 1-6 Titan Slaves, 7 Harpies, 8-9 Titan Master, 10 either choice or a 1-5/6-10 roll for a Chimera or Hydra. I'm leaning more to a choice between Chimeras or Hydras to balance humans having so many build options. That would give human and Titan forces the same chance to add characters, standard units, or special maneuver units. I'd also apply the same 'mustering' rule to all units. Otherwise, the Amazons have issues (as they're specified as not being Hoplites), and some units could never be purchased (ex: Centaurs or Chariot units) outside initial creation until massive amounts of Renown were earned. Mustering would still apply only to units.

Thanks for the reply. Hey, a debate on the Wargods Forum !!! Let's do it

In general I would say the whole campaign rules in the book can be regarded as a starting point, and therefore are much more up to the individual player or group to use or amend as they see fit. I believe it is the intention of the designers to allow more offbeat warbands to develop in campaigns.

1) Mythic Creatures. Of course it is true what you say about using a D12, this was only my idea for a quick fix. I did think about amending the main D10 table for reinforcements on page 278, but I couldn't find anything simple that I liked. There are something like 30 pages of rules on Mythic Followers, most of which are quite situational: If you don't have a Demigod of Dionysus or Cretan Pirates in your campaign, you ain't going to see the Maenads or Minotaurs - unless you allow a more liberal sprinkling of Mythic Followers through reinforcements. I am not so sure it dramatically unbalances a campaign, and anyway we presumably want to see the Mythic element clearly and not just have armies of hoplites facing off.

2) Allied City States. The more I think about it, the less I like this table, and it has a good too many constraints for my taste. For example, I could totally imagine a Corinthian Hoplite unit in an Amazon warband in a campaign scenario. Maybe the Amazons paid them. Or maybe the Amazons are holding the son of a leading Corinthian hostage and require the services of a Corinthian unit for the current campaigning season. Or maybe the Captain of the Corinthian unit is under some spell and is under the power of the Amazon Demigod. I would perhaps limit it to one unit plus a character in campaigns only, and require the player to come up with some convincing back story, but I would not rule it out. This is anyway a fantasy setting, the various warbands cover a period of around a thousand years from the Siege of Troy to the Peloponnesian War. Alliances were constantly changing, and many units seem to owe loyalty more to their captain than to a nation state.

3) Titans. The basic problem here is that there are so few choices. Apart from the Titan slaves and master, there are the three monsters and that's it. I don't really see any of the human factions joining a Titan warband, maybe I could stretch to a rogue Minotaur or Cyclopes, but that's about it. What would help here would some rules to bring Xerxes into play, which might open the door to more collaborators with the Titans. I think with your proposal you might end up with too many Slaves. I might rather go with 1-5 Slaves, 6-8 Master, 9-10 Monster (players choice, but you can't take a second one until you have a least one of each). The player could also come up with their own monster.

1) I thought it would be good to make mythics no more common than characters from other city-states, but some groups will want more of them. I add them in with monster hunt scenarios. Each player brings a small unit of archers (five models), a small unit of hoplites (six models), a hero, a champion, and their demigod. Monsters from the mythics and Titan lists spawn at noted points on the table. Once the set of monsters is done, a Titan Master that was recruiting the monsters shows up. I've only used individual monsters so far, but I'm working on a unit of harpies now. 2) Groups could play with the city-states table quite a bit, and not break the game. Units are priced based on their capabilities, instead of arbitrarily. I like the flavor ideas it gives, but prefer it tie more with the initial flavor constraints. That's my opinion, so I won't get upset with people who want something different. 3) I suggested the roll options I did because it would mirror the the spread for human forces. Slaves would match hoplites, harpies would match chariots, Masters would match same city-state characters, and individual monsters would match other city-state characters. I agree the Titan list doesn't have as many options, but the options it has are powerful. I don't know that more options would make much sense.