Beastmaster in Mordheim

Discuss and participate in the development of the Mordheim Druchii warband here.

Moderators: Loflar, The Dread Knights

Post Reply
Jymset
Trainee Warrior
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:35 pm

Beastmaster in Mordheim

Post by Jymset »

Well, as I have said several times, there is no place in (official) Dark Elf literature, both old and new, to suggest that the Beastmaster is any sort of rare entity in the Dark Elf society. At any rate, any sort of Sorceress will be more scarce. And the projected warband will have the option of a Sorceress!

So, why not a Beastmaster? It would not be unusual to include him to handle more exotic threats on any sort of expeditionary mission, even into the relatively harmless Empire. And in the thread where we had the poll for the Druchii command group, almost 70 % of the votes wanted to see a Beastmaster included!

Basically the problem is that he needs to be different to other characters while not being overly complicated. I am copying and pasting some of the stuff from Alpha2 here:

0-1 Beastmaster
45 Gold Crowns to hire (This may have to be changed as we proceed)
Whereas the High Elves have a great affinity with Dragons and Griffons and other noble creatures their malevolent kin have infamous Beastmasters, Dark Elves of particularly cruel renown who breed many vicious beasts and lead them into combat. Unlike the High Elves who treat their beasts as companions, the Dark Elf Beastmasters are very spiteful masters.

Profile M WS BS S T W I A Ld
5 3 3 3 3 1 5 1 8

(I have changed the WS to "3" - I explained this in the Alpha2 thread, and people seemed to like it --> the Beastmaster is not a dedicated fighting machine)

Weapons/Armour A Beastmaster may be armed with weapons and armour chosen from the Druchii equipment list.

Another important change would be to change the available SKILL LISTS to STRENGTH, speed and special. Once again, the Beastmaster is NOT a dedicated fighting machine, so no close combat skills. However, he will be steeled while he trains his quarries to do his bidding. Which means his muscles will probably bulk out. If you have a look, there is only one other Warband with a Beastmaster-type character: the Kislevites. Well, the Beartamer is the ONLY character in that warband who has S4 to start with! S4 as a starting characteristic in an Elf would be ludicrous - but giving him access to the Strength section would be viable.

Also an important change is the starting experience: it should be 4. This is in line with the Averlander Hunter and appropriate for a character who is plain inferior to the other combat characters in this list!



Now, for the most problematic part of this character:

Special Rules

There are two parts to the problem:

A) How do we make the rules for the Beastmaster special so as to show off his real skills?

B) which beasts do we allow him to bring into the warband?

Now, to address these:

A) Once again, the only other warband to feature a Beastmaster are the Kislevites with their Beartamer. The only special skills that involve him are the fact that you can only take a Bear with a tamer and that the Bear gives the Tamer a small measure of protection when the latter is take out of action. Nothing particularly beasty.

Now, of course, the Dark Elf Beastmaster is somewhat more universally trained. Which means that not only can he bring some beasts into the warband, but he is also very skilled at handling animal enemies. We have to represent that while keeping the rules VERY SIMPLE!

One thing that has been discussed and is universally liked is some sort of edge against animals. The most simple rule would be:

Beast-Scourge (or something): follows the rules of "Strike to Injure" against enemies with the label "animal". StI is a combat skill, which is not available to the Beastmaster. It is also not a full skill (being severely limited by the factor animal) meaning that it is valid to be a built-in skill.

Now, some discussion has been centered on a Beastmaster taking control over enemy beasts. It has been decided, and I fully agree with it, that this would be way too difficult to implement. After all, even in Warhammer, only Rakarth has that skill!

I think, seeing as the rules for mounted animals are fully official these days, the Beastmaster should come with the Beast Handler skill of whatever beast we can choose - this makes sense, is powerful and means that we don't have to write volumes of new rules but can rather refer to other already official articles!

One thing that I have discussed with some of my buddies is that the Beastmaster could be awarded Exp for the kills that his animals perform. Now, I'm undecided on that one. It could be potentially way too powerful, depending on the beast. But it is a neat idea that ties the BM into his herd.


B) Which animals?

The Alpha2 list currently includes Chaos Hounds. I personally love it! Back in Warhammer 3rd edition, Beastmasters already existed (they disappeared for 4th & 5th ed). They were hero-types (including an XBow) and led either unmounted Cold Ones or Chaos Hounds. Really, wild, mutated hounds would be quite common even in Naggaroth.

The stats 7 4 0 3 3 1 3 1 5 are really quite weak. Probably not worth 25 gc, more like 20 (keeping in mind that the Witchhunters get Warhounds with these stats: 6 4 0 4 3 1 4 1 5 for 15 gc). With the Beast Handling skill of the BM, they could use his Ld within 6", as well as the Leader's Ld, because they are not stupid. They would be unique to this warband (favouring swiftness over the Witchhunters' hounds strength, as befitting of Druchii) and can easily be represented with the existing Chaos Hound models! 0-3 sounds right, too.

Now, there has been discussion about the Cold Ones. Cold One Hounds? No models. The Super-Cold Ones from the Lustria encounter table? That would essentially be including a new obscure animal, not all that wonderful. The standard Cold One? Well, really, that can be traded for normally, these days (with the mounted rules now being official). HOWEVER - let's look at that again. It is a rare 11 beast - how many times are you going to try and roll for that?! It costs 100 gc! And then it takes more skills for the characters to use it properly!

So, question again: What about including it in the list anyway (after all, the Warhounds used by the Witch Hunters can be traded for, too!)? As an unridden monster (that could be a small special rule - can never be used as a mount for a character). Which means that we would have to change the scaly skin rule to make it a 6+ save for the CO itself. The creature would then look like:

Cold One
7 3 0 4 4 1 3 1 3
Special rules: stupidity, causes fear, scaly skin 6+ save, untrained (may never be used as a mount), animal (does not gain experience)

It would be something like 0-2. 100 gc would be way too much for such a relatively insignificant trooper. It should probably be somewhere in the 60-90 gc range (it does still cause fear).

There is one other possibility, which ties in more of the current edition of Warhammer: a Young Hydra from the Monster Hunt scenario (I think somewhere in Town Cryer 10-15). It only has S & T 4, but does have 4 or 5 wounds. Yes, this would be a monster in Troll category. It could be represented by the Warmaster Hydra. Can someone look up the rules on that one? I don't have them with me right now, in fact, I'll only be able to access them in about 3 weeks' time, so I'm relying on someone else!

Sorry, this has been a long post. You can tell that I am putting a lot of thoughts and enthusiasm into this. I really think we can do something with it. As it stands, it is already more original than the Kislev Bear Tamer. And very, very different to all other characters in the list, while also allowing the addition of something other than elves and more elves!
User avatar
Loflar
Warband Noble
Warband Noble
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:06 am
Location: Praag

Re: Beastmaster in Mordheim

Post by Loflar »

jymset wrote:Another important change would be to change the available SKILL LISTS to STRENGTH, speed and special.

Unusual, but it makes sense.

jymset wrote:I think, seeing as the rules for mounted animals are fully official these days, the Beastmaster should come with the Beast Handler skill of whatever beast we can choose - this makes sense, is powerful and means that we don't have to write volumes of new rules but can rather refer to other already official articles!

Good idea. But I have a feeling that it is a bit weak. And it effectively limits range of the animals. Of course, I may be mistaken. In that case just assure me that I am wrong ;-)

jymset wrote:One thing that I have discussed with some of my buddies is that the Beastmaster could be awarded Exp for the kills that his animals perform. Now, I'm undecided on that one. It could be potentially way too powerful, depending on the beast. But it is a neat idea that ties the BM into his herd.

I also think that it would be too strong. And that it is nice ;-)

jymset wrote:The Alpha2 list currently includes Chaos Hounds. I personally love it!

I personally dislike anything of Chaos, as I find GW idea of Chaos a bit ... let's call it strange.

jymset wrote:Really, wild, mutated hounds would be quite common even in Naggaroth.

Yes, and several other canine races as well. But it is just a negligible name issue.

jymset wrote:The stats 7 4 0 3 3 1 3 1 5 are really quite weak. Probably not worth 25 gc, more like 20 (keeping in mind that the Witchhunters get Warhounds with these stats: 6 4 0 4 3 1 4 1 5 for 15 gc).

Again. Why not to make them stronger? Why do they have to be Chaos Hounds of Chaos Armybook? I suggest, to make it clear that they are trained and (or) ferocious. Possible ways (of course, only one of them should be chosen):
1) Raise WS to 5
2) Raise A to 2
3) Give them hatred (renamed to, say, ferocity) - reroll attack on charge
4) Let them fight in a pack - if more then one is in BtB contact with the same enemy,
a) enemy WS counts as being 1 less (he is distracted), or
b) one of dogs always strikes first (while the other distracts enemy)
5) Let them jump at enemy - on a roll of 6 on a charge, enemy is knocked down automatically

Any of those changes will make them clearly better that witch hunters' wardogs, which you can buy anyway.

My preferences are in order 4a, 3, 5 (but isn't it too strong?), 1, 2, 4b (too weak)

jymset wrote:Cold One
7 3 0 4 4 1 3 1 3
Special rules: stupidity, causes fear, scaly skin 6+ save, untrained (may never be used as a mount), animal (does not gain experience)

But how will they sneak into a city deep inside Empire with big stupid and hardly controllable animal? The same applies to hydra (except of the stupidity, of course ;-)
User avatar
Ansob.
Follower of Malal
Posts: 2726
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 6:37 pm
Location: Colchester, Essex (UK).

Post by Ansob. »

Just a quick note: we can't include the cold one (the proper thing, i.e. what our knights ride) as animals for the BM because they're going to be officialised as Druchii mounts. So, no regular COs as pets. :)
General Kala wrote:
Cenyu wrote:Hail to the King, baby.
All my eloquence fails to express it as well as this.
Jymset
Trainee Warrior
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:35 pm

Post by Jymset »

@ Ansob - I didn't realise that they were mutually exclusive - after all, the rules would be changed ever so slightly (6+ AS instead of increasing the rider's)....

@ Loflar - well, Ansob has kinda taken the wind out of my sail. BECAUSE: I would be very much against A) an animal with too many new special rules and B) against a creation of our own. The Warhammer World is full of already existing beasts with their own stats. It would make us more believable if we used those!

Chaos Hounds (let's call them what they are) have added bonus of being swifter than the War Hounds already existing. It fits in with the Elves' mentality of speed over power. If we needed higher S, we could opt for great weapons or something.

Does anyone currently have access to the Young Hydra rules which are included with the Monster Hunt scenario? It is a long shot, but it would be a way of taking the BM into an entirely different direction (yes, Loflar, a Hydra would be even more difficult to secretly bring into the Empire, but....)


Apart from that: I am pretty glad that noone seems to have major objections to the Beastmaster itself, as I presented it above.

Some more thoughts on the STRENGTH skill list. A) of course, if we gave the Beastmaster access to it, we would not include the POWERFUL BUILD skill in the Dark Elf list. B) Having a character with access to STRENGTH in the warband means that any warrior who advances to be a character (which, with the long-lived rule will take a while) could be tooled up to be an executioner - with a great weapon an that strength skill which allows it to be used in order of initiative! ;) so guys, have I sold you on that one?
User avatar
Loflar
Warband Noble
Warband Noble
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:06 am
Location: Praag

Post by Loflar »

jymset wrote:I would be very much against A) an animal with too many new special rules

I.e. more then 0?

jymset wrote:and B) against a creation of our own. The Warhammer World is full of already existing beasts with their own stats. It would make us more believable if we used those!

We will probably not reach an agreement on this. I think that stats are just numbers and name just a word. We make the rules. We can always change such things if the given values are not OK. As long as the resultant list will not be unreasonably strong, I don't see any problem. And, finally, I think that having special rule on every hero and henchman in DE warband would be very stylish - they are not strong in their stats, but there is always some hidden strength...
Jymset
Trainee Warrior
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:35 pm

Post by Jymset »

Loflar wrote:I.e. more then 0?


Well, sorta. Those beasts clearly have to be inferior to any other troops. They are there more for flavour than for anything else. Unless we have a look at that Hydra.... ANYONE? ONE OF THE TOWN CRYERS 10-15?!?!

We will probably not reach an agreement on this. I think that stats are just numbers and name just a word. We make the rules. We can always change such things if the given values are not OK. As long as the resultant list will not be unreasonably strong, I don't see any problem. And, finally, I think that having special rule on every hero and henchman in DE warband would be very stylish - they are not strong in their stats, but there is always some hidden strength...


Ok we are probably defending extremes here. I personally think a special rule on everyone is kinda supermessy. However, we are talking about Elves, so they already have the special rules Kindred Hatred, Excellent Sight, Disdain (for heros and henchmen in case they turn hero) and Long Lived (for henchmen). It would be a very nice change to have something with less....

But ok, I'll go along. I totally disagree with changing the stats. Yes, we are creating this on our own. But if we introduce something totally new, we really shouldn't tinker too much - the Chaos Hound should be supported by its official stats.

As far as your special rules are concerned. Well, to tell you the truth, the only one I like is no. 5. But I like it a lot!

Considering that the Chaos Hound is not very strong stats-wise, that rule would not make it too powerful. To rephrase it:

Ferocious charge. On the turn of a charge, the Chaos Hound will automatically knock its foe over on the to-hit roll of a "6".

As it is, that isn't very powerful at all. It depends what we add to that rule:

If successful, do not roll to wound.

This would really make it an interesting special rule. Making the Warhound more of a living support weapon. At that rate, I would probably finally drop its cost to 15gc. It would never be very good at killing anything. On the other hand:

Roll to-wound normally.

Would make it more powerful. It would still have to wound its quarry, that's a 4+ against humans or Elves to kill it. That would probably raise its price to, oh, about 30 gc? Funny how much of a difference a little phrase is. What do you think?


On another note, what does everyone think of the basic Beastmaster? Really, 15 people voted for it. Noone has said anything negative about the rules as presented here? Unless there is some more constructive criticism, I would love to present to you, Ansob, the Beastmaster for Alpha3:

0-1 Beastmaster

Has access to the STRENGTH, SPEED and SPECIAL skill tables.
Starts with 4 experience.

40 Gold Crowns to hire
Whereas the High Elves have a great affinity with Dragons and Griffons and other noble creatures their malevolent kin have infamous Beastmasters, Dark Elves of particularly cruel renown who breed many vicious beasts and lead them into combat. Unlike the High Elves who treat their beasts as companions, the Dark Elf Beastmasters are very spiteful masters. As many of their creatures are of dark and evil origins, this is often repaid in kind. (I would add that - it should be enough of an explanation for the Chaos Hounds, right?)

Profile M WS BS S T W I A Ld
5 3 3 3 3 1 5 1 8

Weapons/Armour A Beastmaster may be armed with weapons and armour chosen from the Druchii (Corsair? Whatever - see other post) equipment list.

Special Rules
Beast-Scourge: follows the rules of "Strike to Injure" against enemies that are labelled "animal" in their description (including ie giant rats and squigs).
Beast Handler: when the Warband includes a Beastmaster, it may include up to 0-3 Chaos Hounds. Beastmaster and Hounds follow the rules for Beast Handler as presented in the Mounted Rules. Should the Beastmaster ever be killed after a battle, remove the Chaos Hounds from the roster, unless recruiting a new Beastmaster straight away. They are such fierce creatures that only Elves trained in the ways of the wild can keep them tame. Should the Beastmaster miss a game, the Chaos Hounds will too.


@ Loflar - the Beast Handler rule isn't a problem, because Chaos Hounds are not stupid. It means that they can ALSO use the Ld of the Beastmaster, when within 6". It would be totally different with something like Cold Ones, as they are stupid. That means the COs would rely on the BM's Ld (they couldn't even use the Leader's) to remain useful.
User avatar
Mielkith
Assassin
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 5:46 pm
Location: Coriana 6, where we won the shadow war
Contact:

Post by Mielkith »

Stay clear of anything like a young hydra. The monsers the Druchii use are far too big for Mordheim and we must use the current model range.

Voting no for strength skills on the firm belief that elves should not have them. The point you made about a new hero having access to them inforces my resolve.

I am still not happy with the beastmasters inclusion in the list, but I do like this "If a 6 is rolled on the turn it charges" so I will let it go for now.

Noone has said anything negative about the rules as presented here?

Give everyone a chance to get there veiw in. Check the names here against the project members. You have done alot in a few days, some don't have the luxury of constant internet access.

From that pesky thorn in your side Mielkith ;)

Note: play tests have ceased on my end due to a severe lack of opponants. We can all see why thats a problem.
Jymset
Trainee Warrior
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:35 pm

Post by Jymset »

:shock:

I can't believe it! For the first time, Druchii.net has "swallowed" one of my replies.

Ok, reproduction, in short:

Sure, Hydra is probably too powerful. Would you care to post up the rules, just for comparison purposes? It could be represented by the Warmaster Hydra. But I, too, prefer the Chaos Hounds.

And I have totally warmed up to Loflar's idea, too. So what do you think, should the Hound be able to attack after it managed to knock its foe down? Probably, as a 6 is rare enough, it would be depressing if it robbed the hound of the chance to put the enemy out of action....

The S section is an integral part in making the Beastmaster different. The possibility of making a Henchman who is advancing into an Executioner just makes the case stronger. Keep in mind that:

A) there are 6 lists for the guy to choose from. The S skills aren't the most powerful, as such it would probably only ever be chosen if the player wanted to create an Executioner.

B) Especially for Elves, great weapons in Mordheim are only an option with the S skill table. No S, no Executioner.

C) Executioners in Warhammer 4th & 5th ed had S4

D) Look, the way the warband is coming along now, there will only ever be one Henchman advancing, and that very slowly with "Long-Lived". Should that one chance ever crop up, there is a very real possiblity of him not ending up with S. Ok, should the Leader die, all sorts of other problems would arise, but....

E) I forget. But I promise, I had another good point! ;)


PS - I know I'm charging ahead. But I realised last weekend that J.Johnson gave his okay last November! It sure has been a while…. Do you think it would be worth a try going ahead in leaps and bounds from now on? Is it possible to alert the other team members? See, now I’m being pesky! ;)
User avatar
Loflar
Warband Noble
Warband Noble
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:06 am
Location: Praag

Post by Loflar »

Mielkith wrote:Voting no for strength skills on the firm belief that elves should not have them. The point you made about a new hero having access to them inforces my resolve.

But when you go through strength skills, they really make sense for beastmaster. What about just disallowing them for talented lads?

jymset wrote:Hydra is probably too powerful. Would you care to post up the rules, just for comparison purposes?

I used Google. This is HTML version of Chaos on the Streets.

jymset wrote:should the Hound be able to attack after it managed to knock its foe down?

No. See LRB, page 21. You can always opt to send more of them. If one knocks the enemy down, others can finish him (which is actually the way packs work).

jymset wrote:Do you think it would be worth a try going ahead in leaps and bounds from now on? Is it possible to alert the other team members?

Well, this is a leisure activity, people have real lives of their own... I think that waiting a little will not hurt us.
Jymset
Trainee Warrior
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:35 pm

Post by Jymset »

Loflar wrote:But when you go through strength skills, they really make sense for beastmaster. What about just disallowing them for talented lads?


Yes, they are very suited to the Beastmaster. And as for the talented lads - once again, we'll only ever see one of him, and it will be an extremely tough choice to make (no 4+ dodges, for instance). Basically only for the few who want to go through the sacrifices involved in order to use an Executioner model!

No. See LRB, page 21. You can always opt to send more of them. If one knocks the enemy down, others can finish him (which is actually the way packs work).


Ah, I wanted to rebut straight away: page 21 concerns the norm. We are talking about a special rule. But damn man! Then you preemtively give a great argument against another attack!

Yes, thank you for pointing that one out. The rule will be perfect, it'll force some sort of pack mentality on these dogs!

Considering all that, 20 gc should really do the trick. So, is the following a good base to work off?




0-2 (or 0-3?) Chaos Hounds (only if Beastmaster is in Warband)
20 Gold Crowns to hire

These mutaded beasts hound the wilderness of the whole Warhammer World. Trained in Naggaroth in supressing these spawns of Chaos, a Beastmaster is an expert at breaking the will of any specimen found in the Empire's darkest places. (Will this work as fluff?)

Profile M WS BS S T W I A Ld
7 4 0 3 3 1 3 1 5

Weapons/Armour - none (Claws, Jaws)

Special Rules

Ferocious charge. On the turn of a charge, the Chaos Hound will automatically knock its foe over on the to-hit roll of a "6". If successful, do not roll to wound.

Very feral Animal. Never gains experience

Not an Elf (duh!). Does not follow the special rules for the Dark Elf Warband as given above



PS: Thanks for forwarding those rules. Amazing that all these things are actually found on the net..... Now, the Hydra really ain't that bad. It would mean that the Dark Elves had a big monster amongst them. Certainly no worse than a Troll or Rat Oger (it only has S4 and T4 and looses attacks over the game). I personally would prefer the Hounds, seeing as a basic Elf is already way expensive. The fluff, all things considering, also makes most sense for the Chaos Hounds (see above). Bringing in a Hydra from Naggaroth, even a very young one, would be extremely difficult.
User avatar
Ansob.
Follower of Malal
Posts: 2726
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 6:37 pm
Location: Colchester, Essex (UK).

Post by Ansob. »

On the hounds issue -
they were already Chaos warhounds, as explained somewhere (but don't ask me where). Their profile is taken ad hoc from the HoC Army Book.

Alpha² wrote:0-3 Warhounds
25 Gold Crowns to hire
The Dark Elves capture and breed many exotic creatures to fight for them, and fights between pets are often staged as a form of entertainment amongst the Dark Elves. Myriad of such animals can be discovered in the Chaos Wastes. Among them is the Warhound, a fierce breed of attack hounds that resemble wolves more than dogs. The Dark Elves capture and train these creatures to fight in battles all over the Warhammer World.

Code: Select all

M WS BS S T W I A Ld
7  4  0 3 3 1 3 1 5


Weapons/Armour Warhounds are animals and do not need any weapons, save their claws and massive jaws.

Special Rules
Animals Warhounds are animals, and all animal rules apply to them. They never gain experience.

Beastmaster Warhounds are vicious creatures that are barely kept under control. If the Beastmaster dies the beasts will immediately escape from the warband - remove them from the warband roster. If the Beastmaster is unable to participate in a battle, then neither will the beasts.

Trained Warhounds may use the basic Leadership of the Beastmaster if they are within 6" of him. They may never use the Leadership of the warband leader, but they may benefit from the Beastmaster’s increased Leadership if he is within 6" of the leader.

Ferocious Charge On the turn of a charge, a Warhound will automatically knock its foe down on a To Hit roll of a "6." In this case, the Hound may not attack this close combat phase.


And this is that.
I agree on the price being a bit too high, but factor in that M7 is huge for Mordheim, and coupled with WS4 is no disadvantage. Changes I suggest:
- S4 and I4 ("savage and swift");
- Feriocious Charge must be included, if you want my opinion. It's a very good skill. Just one modification to the text that I would suggest: have it read "On the turn of a charge, a Chaos Warhound will automatically knock its foe down on a To Hit roll of a "6." In this case, the Hound may not attack this close combat phase."

Edit: being an animal, the hound already counts as having the no XP and doesn't follow warband rules bits, so no need to include them.
Edit²: I'm rereading the Alpha² thread, recompiling the stuff, and this just popped up: people's main disagreement with hounds was the fact that not being stupid anymore, they didn't need the BM's presence. Since this is Mordheim and we're allowed a certain amount of freedom, I'm going to do this: give them stupidity and a price cost of 20GC in the third Alpha (to be discusses after, of course). This solves the "BM not needed" issue. The rule can be implemented on the basis that they're not exactly the most obedient of creatures, and will sometimes ignore orders. In addition to the stat upgrades and the Ferocious Charge rule, I think this is nice for 20GC.
General Kala wrote:
Cenyu wrote:Hail to the King, baby.
All my eloquence fails to express it as well as this.
User avatar
Loflar
Warband Noble
Warband Noble
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:06 am
Location: Praag

Post by Loflar »

A neutral shade of black. wrote:Edit²: I'm rereading the Alpha² thread, recompiling the stuff, and this just popped up: people's main disagreement with hounds was the fact that not being stupid anymore, they didn't need the BM's presence. Since this is Mordheim and we're allowed a certain amount of freedom, I'm going to do this: give them stupidity and a price cost of 20GC in the third Alpha (to be discusses after, of course). This solves the "BM not needed" issue.


What?

IMHO the actual problem was, that you need a hero to get access to dogs, which are weaker then standard dogs. And they were dependent on BM in a way which was not justified as they were not stupid. To solve the issue, we tried to make them a bit stronger (to make them an attractive choice) and to make BM somewhat special (so he would become attractive choice as well).

Now if you make them stupid, you degrade them again. Making them "savage and swift" might compensate for the degradation - hopefully. But I suggest, that if you want to touch their psychology, you make them rather impetuous (or, say, bloodrthirsty) - they charge automatically, unless stopped by successfull Ld roll; may use BM Ld if he is not more that 6" away.
User avatar
Ansob.
Follower of Malal
Posts: 2726
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 6:37 pm
Location: Colchester, Essex (UK).

Post by Ansob. »

Loflar wrote:What?


Go read the Alpha² thread - one of the reasons we had for ditching the BM was that he was useless on the basis that his pets no longer needed him being nearby, not being stupid (the other reasons were also that he was useless, but on a different basis).

Loflar wrote:IMHO the actual problem was, that you need a hero to get access to dogs, which are weaker then standard dogs. And they were dependent on BM in a way which was not justified as they were not stupid. To solve the issue, we tried to make them a bit stronger (to make them an attractive choice) and to make BM somewhat special (so he would become attractive choice as well).

Now if you make them stupid, you degrade them again. Making them "savage and swift" might compensate for the degradation - hopefully. But I suggest, that if you want to touch their psychology, you make them rather impetuous (or, say, bloodrthirsty) - they charge automatically, unless stopped by successfull Ld roll; may use BM Ld if he is not more that 6" away.


The I4 and S4 are going in right now - I wonder, should they have A2?
(Those who play Tau will notice that, M value aside, this is lending towards looking like a Kroot hound... It already does, except for attacks [after the S and I edit]). Still pricing them at 20gc.

Does anyone else have anything to say on this? Arq? Mielkith? Anyone? Stupidity, or not? I'd really rather we sorted the easy part (i.e. the hounds) out before we tackle the BM himself.
General Kala wrote:
Cenyu wrote:Hail to the King, baby.
All my eloquence fails to express it as well as this.
Jymset
Trainee Warrior
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:35 pm

Post by Jymset »

Well, I was the one to champion the Beastmaster back into validity. So, I was going to comment on him.

But, Ansob, if you want the dogs sorted first, I'm all for it!

Now, I was originally against changing the stats of a creature already preexisting in the Warhammer World. However, your point about the dependency of the Hounds is a good one. If they go stupid, they really need to have better stats (or cost something like 10 gc! :shock: ). The problem about that 2nd attack is: Should they really manage to knock someone over on the charge, it would actually be a drawback! Seriously, WS4, S4, 2A would be an extremely strong offensive capability, where one actually then wants a chance to pot the enemy OOA. Loflar pointed out that the way the rule should work was to make the Hounds into a pack. Well, they wouldn't be, if we had stats like that!

On the other hand, if there really is a parallel to the Kroot-Hound, a change to A2 may be prudent (I don't play 40K at all). Something like 25gc would be in order, though.

A counter-suggestion: What about giving them the original weedy stats? 7 4 0 3 3 1 3 1 5? This would require the following changes:
Availability: 0-4
Cost: 10-15 gc
New special rule: Scavenger. Self-sufficient before the Druchii Beastmaster captured and broke them, Chaos (War) Hounds are very good at feeding themselves on the battlefield. Thus they are the only members of the warband who leave combat better fed than they were before! Either one of the following rules: 2 Chaos Hounds count as a single warband member for the purpose of its maximum size. OR Chaos Hounds do not count towards the maximum warband size.

Meaning that they

A) are weedy, just an extra spice to liven up the board
B) really do get the most of their special rule
C) Combine existing stats with their corresponding existing model


Anyways! The above is just a little detail. What I really have to add is: Good, all for stupidity. That very same rule makes it MUCH MORE EASY to phrase the rules for the special ability. In fact, the whole Dog-Elf relationship would boil down to this:

Beastmaster. Special rule: Beast-Handler: Chaos Hound

Chaos Hound. Special rule: Stupidity

What am I talking about? Well, the Mounted Rules are official. Have a look at them! If the beast is stupid then

A) it uses the Handler's leadership if within 6"
B) it may NEVER use the warband leader's ld!!!

Ansob, I really, really like that. Like the fact that we only have to list preexisting rules and get our very own special relationship going in the warband.

So really, it is an already-existing rule, it works, it really limits the use of the Hounds, bringing the focus back to the Elves involved.

Which is also why I'm in favour of bringing the stats back to their crappy origin (look at my above suggestion - I'm turning circles here....).

Oh, and I cannot wait to start the discussion of the actual BM!!
Jymset
Trainee Warrior
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:35 pm

Post by Jymset »

On an entirely different note, the name of the beast.

I would tentatively suggest changing the name of it to Chaos Hound. Once again, I'll give you a list of factors of why I think so:

A) Chaos Hounds are, literally, everywhere. In Naggaroth, in the Empire, everywhere.
B) the name Chaos Hound is really an Empire name (which is the point of view on this warband, right?) for all the Dog-like creatures that are unnaturally big and fierce and which roam the wild - certainly all things caused by the forces of Chaos!
C) It really tells people who end up playing this Warband (ie, interested Mordheim gamers who have never visited this board) without a trace of a doubt which models they should have in mind and also which part of the in-game-universe we are building off
D) I had found it really lame, on previous occasions, where we got a new warband and recycled models. Ie, it would be kinda unsatisfactory to use Chaos Hound models but then try to tell everyone else that really, these dogs are something entirely new! This one is important and the root of my worries!
E) It ties back to the early roots of the Dark Elves - ie. Warhammer 3rd edition and Warhammer Quest!
F) There would not be a shadow of a doubt as to where the balance of power lies: It would NOT be a case of "Ah, Chaos is invading yet another race". No, it would be very clear that the Dark Elves are the superior race, capable of subduing any other force out there.

I realise that the above list is probably way over the top, but..... I think it would be a great idea if we could come up with a list that is unique, fun and balanced, yet very streamlined - in terms of rules (see the post before this one) and in terms of models!
User avatar
Ansob.
Follower of Malal
Posts: 2726
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 6:37 pm
Location: Colchester, Essex (UK).

Post by Ansob. »

jymset wrote:D) I had found it really lame, on previous occasions, where we got a new warband and recycled models. Ie, it would be kinda unsatisfactory to use Chaos Hound models but then try to tell everyone else that really, these dogs are something entirely new! This one is important and the root of my worries!


Disregarding the other ones for now (lack of time, sorry - don't take it personally), but this: Shakespeare's rose quote applies, here. Reread the fluff for those hounds in the Alpha, will you? ;)
For the slow of mind or the lazy ones: they're big, fierce, savage hounds captured in the Chaos wastes. A rose by any other name would still be a rose.
General Kala wrote:
Cenyu wrote:Hail to the King, baby.
All my eloquence fails to express it as well as this.
Jymset
Trainee Warrior
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:35 pm

Post by Jymset »

Ok, sure - but what about changing the name to simply "hounds"? Warhounds give me the false impression that they are an animal bred and trained for war by the Dark Elves. When really they are just a force of nature (or of the opposite of nature) that is captured and let loose on the enemy!

Any opinion on my suggestions for the game terms?
Post Reply