Not 'sold' on it either. TheRealVeon brought it up though and I was thinking along the lines (as I explained in my last post) of having one 'extra' Locus
that we could incidentally use to make Another positive incentive for mono-god armies. But it's up to TheRealVeon whether or not we look further into that as far as I'm concerned.
Another option is to look at the Skullthrone (when we revise it) - and possibly the Behemoth - and perhaps create an 'area effect' for these units but we'll have to get down to this in due process.
Ok, other than that I'd say we should go back and wrap up the revision to the Magic Lores that we were tinkering with as the new official book hit the shelves. We got Pavane, Glean Magic, and (possibly) Bolt of Change as still outstanding issues
in that section.
Beyond this I'm ready to push forward whenever you guys feel up to it. Right now it's only natural that a lot of our focus goes toward trying out and examining the official Army Book. So we're in no hurry of course.EDIT
I've made the edits now. I would recomend that you check page 1 to Review the additions/Changes I've made. These are all colored GREEN
so should be easy enough to spot if you just scroll quickly down the first post on page 1.
- I added the 'Daemon of X' special rule above the unit-entries.
- I added 'title-headers' for new units (Plague Drones in Rare, Skullcannon in Rare, and also added the new mount-options for the Herald of Khorne (Skullthrone) and Herald of Nurgle (Plague Drone).*
* I assume we're going to allow the Herald of Nurgle to ride a Plague Drone.
- I also added wording on the Glean Magic spell to the effect we discussed earlier, the wording may not be 100% but at least it's there for when TheRealVeon updates the final version of the PDF.
- Also added the optional upgrades discussed earlier for Furies. You'll have to double-check the Point-COSTs for these 'Marks' as I simply Went on gut-feeling there. (Oh, btw, I added costs for the added new units as well, for example 200pts for the Skullcannon - but these are just numbers to start off from of course!)
Well, scroll down through my first post on page 1 and anything colored GREEN is new, basically.
- I wanted to update the Pavane of Slaanesh too but wasn't sure what we should do there. The permanent ld-penalty for "any surviving model" - should this be for both the nominal and boosted verison, or only the boosted version. Also, while I am at it, what should the new casting value be?
I've also done a bit of a face-lift to page 1 (particularly the opening section) so as to bring it more up-to-date with current events. I've cut away a lot of stuff that I concidered superflous in order to make the first post on Page 1 less cluttered. I hope you guys like the new look.EDIT 3
I really want to wrap up the revision to the Magic Lores
so now I'm gonna go ahead an suggest what we're going to do with Pavane of Slaanesh.
This is what it looks like *now* on page 1:6 - Pavane of SlaaneshDirect Damage, Single Enemy model (per Sniper Special Rule)12+ ToCast
= Range 12", Target model rolls 3D6, for every digit by which this roll exceeds the target's unmodified Leadership value it takes a wound on the roll of 2+. Wounds caused by the Pavane of Slaanesh allow no armour saves. The wizard may boost the range of this spell to 24", if doing so the casting cost is 15+.
And here is what I am suggesting:6 - Pavane of SlaaneshDirect Damage, Single Enemy model (per Sniper Special Rule)12+ ToCast
= Range 12", Target model rolls 3D6, for every digit by which this roll exceeds the target's unmodified Leadership value it takes a wound on the roll of 2+. Wounds caused by the Pavane of Slaanesh allow no armour saves. The wizard may boost the range of this spell to 24", if doing so the casting cost is 20+. Any model that survives the effects of a boosted Pavane of Slaanesh suffers a -D3 reduction to its Leadership (to a minimum of 1) for the rest of the game.
So in my suggestion it's only the Boosted version that confers the penalty to Leadership in addition to the 'normal' spell-effect. Is this too wierd?? Should it be the nominal version as well?
Secondly, as you've no doubt noticed I made this penalty (for the boosted version) -D3 instead of just -1 as we originally discussed - and this is purely because I wanted to motivate the raising of the Boosted Casting value to 20+ (so that it's at least on par with Phantasmagoria).
Again - perhaps this is just backwards thinking..EDIT 4
Another crazy idea I've been thinking about lately:
So as all know Matt Ward added some 'new' mechanics to Instability
Snake-Eyes = regain lost wounds from that combat phase (+ no insane courage and a general screw-up of how to actually resolve all this..)
Box-cars = Unit goes 'pop'.
Now, as I asked earlier how you guys felt about this mechanic. Personally I'm not particularly keen on it to be honest. However, here's Another way one could make the extreme rolls on Instability a bit more interesting, concider this:
Snake-Eyes = Insane Courage! + the unit recieves a +1 to its Wardsave until the end of the next Close-Combat phase (or the end of the Turn).
Box-cars = Resolve the result as normal, + the unit recieves a -1 penalty to its Wardsave until the end of the next Close-combat phase (or the end of the Turn?).
Ok so again this is just a 'random idea' but Think about (!).. Isn't it kind of neat? It's a bit of a nod toward 2 of the results from the Reign of Chaos table in the official book, and at the same time it adds a bit more 'volatility' to extreme Instability Results. I must say I kinda like this idea.. So I just thought I'd bring it up.EDIT 5
Another thing on Page 1 that I 'fixed' while I was it was the issue of Bloodcrushers
The minimum unit-size has been increased to 3+.
The Jugger has got 3 attacks but the Brass Behemoth rule only gives a +2 to Armour Save.
These are basically the bits from the 'official' book that I Think we should implement, where-as reducing the Bloodletter's attacks is something we should stay away from.
Cost can probably remain unchanged, right? I know technically +1S5 is Worth more than losing a digit of Armour Save, but with this unit I'd personally rather have kept the better armour-save so I don't Think a Point-increase is called for.
Then with the battle-hardened upgrade we'll be looking at a Bloodcrusher with the following profile:
3 S5 Attacks, 2 S6 KB attacks, 3+AS/5+Ws, 3 wounds.
Or should we revise the cost?EDIT 6
Doing some further work by my lonesome on page 1. This time it's an initial revision to the Skullcannon
. You'll find it at the bottom of the Rare Section. I've set the cost to 190pts/model, and beyond this simply clearified that it's 'the same as in the official book' with the exception for the "Daemon of Khorne" Special Rule having different properties (i.e. our Bloodletters/Juggernauts are still Strength 5 but get no temporary boost when completing a Charge).
I'm personally inclined to feel that we should having the 'same' Bloodletters in the Skullcannon as those that ride on our Juggernauts. This would mean they'd get 2 Attacks each and Strength 6 instead of 5.
Naturally this would knock the per-model cost of the Skullthrone well above 200pts. With the [beautifull] background-story that TheRealVeon created for Bloodcrushers it's not really necessary to make the stats on the Skullthrone consistant with those of Crusher-riders - but still, I wanted to air the idea anyway.
Secondly, I'm concidering the 'Mark Upgrades' for the SoulGrinder
- first of all I Think we'll agree that these Mark-options should be 'optional' rather than mandatory - in line with the rest of 'Mark-Upgrades' in this Project.
The 'basics' of these Marks would of course be 'our version' of the "Daemon of X" Special Rule (MR1, AP, Poison A, Flaming A - and hatred of opposed god's minions) - but for a model this big (unlike with Furies) I imagine you'll agree that *something more* should be added to these Marks.
The 'most consistant' solution is to make these Marks mechanically identical to the Marks that the Daemon Prince can pick (with the exception of course that the SoulGrinder doesn't have a Gift Allowance).
Khorne = Hatred
Slaanesh = ASF
Nurgle = Regeneration
Tzeentch = 4+ Wardsave
... or we do something more creative, which immediately breaks with 'concistency' but maybe it's Worth it in order to make the SoulGrinder's options more interesting(?).
I'm really on the fence about making such a break with consistency.. But for example with 'Khorne' perhaps Killing Blow is more interesting than Hatred... For 'Slaanesh' perhaps Swiftstride is more interesting than ASF.. Perhaps 'Cloud of Flies' for Nurgle... Re-roll one's for Wardsaves for Tzeentch(??)..
Like I said: The break with concistency makes all of this Walking on 'thin ice' from a design-perspective.. So the 'gain' in added Dynamics for the unit really has to be conciderable for it to be 'Worth it'.edit 8 Concidering these Marks for the SoulGrinder a bit more, it's really the Khorne-Mark that bothers me. The Nurgle/Slaanesh/Tzeentch (Regen/ASF/4++) Marks are rather appropriate, in their own way - but Hatred somehow doesn't appear to have 'a purpose' with a model like the SoulGrinder.. Then again it would be a break with the concistency of our Marks to not have Hatred so yeah - I'm on the fence..EDIT 7
Ok so HERE
is a linky to a certain thread at Warseer where I took the opportunity to just have an open-end discussion about the pricing of the Skullcannon and the Exalted Seeker Chariot with who-ever felt like having an opinion. It was just open-end, I didn't mention this Project as such, but it could be interested reference-reading.EDIT 9
With respect to the Exalted Seeker Chariot I'd roughly agree that we still have a ~20pts 'void' to fill on that model. So basically here's the options we're looking at afaic:
- Drop it further down to ~180pts.
- Double the impact hits from 2d6+1 to 4d6+2.
- Add our revised 'Soulscent' Special Rule and the 'Whirling Blades' Special Rule. (actually, having lended out my copy of the official book I thought this unit actually had
the SoulScent-rule already...)EDIT 10
Thinking about the Skullcannon we could concider getting 'creative' on that unit-entry perhaps changing it from being a 'standard cannon' to something more fluffy.. Like a big Khorne-zapper that excels at targetting enemy wizards or some such thing.. (?)
Just a Quick idea. Figured it was Worth mentioning.EDIT 11
Can't help noticing this thread is getting a fair number of views these Days. I guess that makes sense given that activity in general on this Board has gone up sharply with the release of the official book.
Don't know if people are browsing the edits on page 1, or if they're Reading here on the last page; But I would like to remind anyone Reading that he/she should not be afraid to leave a comment (in case anything springs to mind, of course).
Wow this post is getting lengthy at this Point. It would be a real shame if Ward's book just flat out kills this Project. Now that the thread is even pinned I mean.
Then again, if I'm really the only a-hole who'll actually be using these rules I guess there's a limit to the extent to which other people will indulge me. This post has been edited by DaemonReign on Mar 22 2013, 03:36 PM