Loflar wrote:Edit: OK, I just realized, that then you could not test the armour on a beginning warband ;-)
Oh, a bright one.
I've just done some more thinking.
Under the new armour rules, you could get this:
- Heavy armour (5+).
Shield (3+/4+ CC/shooting).
25 gc, -1M penalty. - Light armour (6+).
Shield (4+/5+).
SDC (3+/3+) at 35 gc.
50 gc, no penalty.
It doesn't seem right to me that we should get just one extra point AS against shooting only, yet pay double the price. I wouldn't object to paying 35 gc total, but 50 gc seems a bit steep.
Now, the new armour rules have divided the price of light, heavy anf full armour by two. Why would we not divide the price of the sdc (50 gc, not the new one), by two as well? In addition, remember we removed a point of AS from the SDC, so I don't think stackability should be payed for (-10 gc for the point lost, +10 gc for stackability). Therefore, logically, the SDC should be priced at 25 gc. I would be prepared to go up to 30 gc, but still, I think 25 should be the price.
However, in the event that the experimental armour rules don't make it (which I very, very seriously doubt given how solid they are), we'd have:
- Heavy armour (5+).
Shield (4+).
55 gc, -1M penalty. - Light armour (6+).
Shield (5+).
SDC (4+/3+ CC/shooting) at 35 gc.
50 gc, no penalty.
Yet our save would still be better than the empire save.
Now, the question is, why would we get a better save and no movement penalty for less? It seems absurd, doesn't it? A 30 gc DSC at least makes it so we that we pay the same price. Unfortunately, we can't have a section in the rules saying "NB: if the new armour rules are used, drop the SDC price!" Cue this racial rule:
Lithe (working name)
Elves are graceful, agile creatures, but they are not endowed with the same constitution as humans, dwarfs or other, more sturdy creatures. Dark elves may never wear any armour other than Sea Dragon Cloaks, Light Armour and Ithilmar armour (in addition to shields and bucklers).
It makes sense for the same reason that we dropped the Strength skill table, solves the price issue (basically disallowing us from having heavy armour, a shield and an sdc to get the equivalent of a gromril armour save for half as much). I like this. I'm thinking of putting it in Alpha 4.
Unfortunately, that still leaves the problem of price. Especially with this rule, under the new armour rules, we're paying way too much for the sdc.
- Heavy armour (5+).
Shield (3+/4+ CC/shooting).
25 gc, -1M penalty. - Light armour (6+).
Shield (4+/5+).
SDC (3+/3+) at 30 gc.
45 gc, no penalty.
That means we pay 20 gc for +1AS against shooting and no movement penalty, yet we cannot wear any "heavy" armour types. Under the old rules, we get this:
- Heavy armour (5+).
Shield (4+).
55 gc, -1M penalty. - Light armour (6+).
Shield (5+).
SDC (4+/3+ CC/shooting) at 30 gc.
55 gc, no penalty.
Which is exactly the right price (no penalty and +1AS against shooting is balance by the fact that we can't wear anything offering more protection), if you ask me.
So we're still stuck with the price issue. Under the new rules, we're hideously overpriced; under the old rules, we're the right price.
But we have an easy way out!
This list is still in internal PTing (synonym for "not much"
). I have a very simple rule of thumb for us to adopt (which only works if
Lithe is in, so I'll kill anyone who disagrees with it):
In games where the old (current) armour rules are used, the SDC is priced at 30 gc starting, 30+2d6 later.
In games where the new (experimental) armour rules are used, the SDC is priced at half that, 15 gc starting and 15+d6 later.
Right, that's sorted out; moving on, now.
Darksteel weapons. +15 gc is a tad expensive for a sword; +10 gc sounds reasonable. I would certainly pay +15 gc for a heavy weapon, though...
...so there's this. Instead of a fixed amount of gold payed per weapon, I suggest we take example on the current rules for ithilmar/gromril weapons.
Gromril weapons: 4 * the price of the weapon.
Ithilmar weapons: 3 * the price of the weapon.
It's a simple bound from thereon to Darksteel weapons: 2 * the price of the weapon.
I have one fear, though: it would be possible to buy a darksteel dagger at 4 gc (just as you may buy a gromril or ithilmar dagger at 8 or 6 gc). That means that for 4 gc, you get a weapon that, yes, gives your enemy an additional +1 to his AS (under the new armour rules, the following balances out fine; under the old ones no one takes armour so it doesn't), but will OOA an enemy on a 4+, stun him on a 2-3 and knock him down only on a 1.
I have no problem with that, inherently. Unfortunately, what I foresee happening is that the darksteel dagger becomes an automatic purchase and leads to general cheesiness.
There are two solutions to this problem. Either we go back to a fixed price (10 gc is what I advise), in which case with the new one it's 2 * price for most things except axes (overpriced) and great weapons (underpriced, but no one buys them anyway), and to buy a darksteel dagger you have to pay 12 gc (cheesiness issue solved); or else, we edit the darksteel rule to mention that this special metal and forging technique can only be implemented with blades above a certain length, and so you may not have darksteel daggers. That is, of course, only in the case that I'm not the only one who feels that 4 gc daggers with that power are cheesy.
Moving on to the RXB.
The RXB is essentially a bow that shoots twice, but shoots twice with a penalty on the second shot. A bow is 10 gc. Does it not make sense that an RXB would be 20 gc at the greatest maximum? I don't think it should be worth more than a crossbow - even though our BS is higher, that's still your average shots at long range [b]or[/] having moved (so -1), which is 4+ to hit, and the second one at 5+ to hit. Indeed, I don't even think it should be worth the same as a crossbow.
This is especially true under the new armour rules - two S3 shots won't be doing much, and whoever buys an S4 shot for the same price has an undeniable advantage against the multitude of armoured opponents bound to show up.
Now, we can either accept the fact that our RXB is useless against armoured opponents, just like in WFB, or we can drop it 5 gc. This means that it's now double the price of a bow for double the shots, featuring a somewhat less prohibitive cost.
One last note: bows on heroes and corsairs.
You'll notice I removed them from the list in Alpha 4. Shades still have access to them, but heroes and corsairs can no longer get bows.
Why did I do this? Well, Geoprhim's report in (I believe) the A3.5 thread showed that bows were a tad too effective. Combined to the RXB's 25 gc price, this meant that it was much, much more intelligent to buy a bow for every BS4 model in your warband than get RXBs on a few models for 2.5 times a bow's price.
In addition to this, from a fluff point of view, it makes sense. Corsairs might have some inkling of how to use a bow, but since this is the majority, I can say this: it's much harder to use a draw-aim-loose weapon in an enclosed, close quarters battle environment like a ship/ark's holds than it is to use a point-pull trigger which shoots-pull lever to reload in that same environment. It makes more sense that corsairs should use RXBs than bows.
Nobles and Lordlings are (mostly for the second type, always for the first) a part of the nobility. As such, they would have been well taken care of. It might be logical that their weapons master would have trained them to use a bow in the eventuality of the case in which an RXB wasn't available, but these are elves (and dark elves) we talk about: incredible pride and arrogance. The Druchii being a military race, I imagine its leaders (noble-borns) would always consider the product of Druchii ingenuosity (RXB) of a much greater value that crude bows, to the point of snobbing the latter. In short, "it's not a Druchii weapon" does indeed work as an argument for Heroes.
Shades, however, are tribal people living isolated deep within the mountains of Naggaroth. It's illogical to assume they would train with an RXB all the time: RXBs are complicated, require a lot more maintenance, are no where near as damage-enduring as a regular bow. They probably only see RXBs when they join the army: they're mass-produced then, and so the shades - commando units - can easily be prioritised to get them. Perhaps those shades that survive and come back can keep their standard-issue stuff. The shades, being nomadic savages et al, also hunt for a living rather than trading. Since they only have very few RXBs available (as demonstrated just now), and bows are much easier to make and maintain with conventional means, they most likely use bows for hunting and such. That means there's precedent for shades having access to both RXBs (military and show and tell by the veterans) as well as bows (the weapon they probably use to train their marksmanship skills starting at a very young age).
Anyway, rather long-winded post. I need opinions on everything except the bow issue, as that was me trying to reach a compromise between the people who wanted them and those who didn't as well as being truer to fluff and promote (in addition with the 5 gc price reduction) the use of RXBs.
