KoE community suggestions for rewritten army book, first draft

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is available! You can read all about it in the news.

    The brand new army book for Infernal Dwarves is finally available, along with a small surprise! Remember that it is a beta version, and provide us your feedback!

    • KoE community suggestions for rewritten army book, first draft

      Dear all,

      In the winter 2017-18 dozens of people provided ideas and suggestions for how a rewritten Army book for KoE could look like. I was impressed by the level of commitment and willingness to critical revise both strengths and weaknesses of the army with the understanding that simply buffing things wouldn't work. We would need to look at it with fresh eyes and drive development by how we wanted the the army to play and not by specific stat lines or rules. To name a few of the main drivers: @Klexe, @Caledoriv @Marcos24 @Duke Niemar, @Discoqing, @Sir_Sully, @Diablo_DF, @Kratos, @logick, @Jurid, @tulmir @Archeron, @WhammeWhamme and to all the many others .

      Importantly. This is a suggestion for a rewrite which means that it has to be created de-novo. We did the suggestions based on what we would like to see if starting from scratch not by modifying what exists.

      The book has now been updated into a reasonable looking version with a selection of the units and special rules that would fit together to provide the intended play styles without over complicating the book.

      Beta version of the book (edit by Calisson) Last update of the book

      Survey for feedback on overall qualities, point costs and balance.

      I would appreciate all comments and help to make this into the product it deserves. :)

      All the best,

      The discussions:
      Rethinking: KoE Characters, Vows, Virtues, potentially command group upgrades
      Task: Rethinking the supernatural elements of KoE
      Task: Ancestor spirit/ ghost knights
      Task: rethinking the role of peasants in KoE
      Task: rethinking role of specialized Knights (Quest, Grail, Pegasi and Hippogrif, forlorn)
      Task: Rethinking Knight Formations and Tactics
      Rethinking: KoE Characters, Vows, Virtues, potentially command group upgrades
      Task: KoE play styles, what do we mean by them and why are they fun to us and our opponents?
      How should a KoE army look, feel and play and why?

      The summary thread

      Windelov wrote:

      Community suggestion for the KoE army book

      The aim is for the KoE community to collaborate in an open and transparent manner on creating a suggestion for rewritten army book as a very tangible and elaborate source of inspiration for the ADT and RT.

      How should a KoE army look, feel and play and why?
      summary in spoiler
      Display Spoiler

      Windelov wrote:

      Identiy of KoE, Knight army able to deliver the main punch through cavalry. Very distinct stats and roles of peasants and knights. All peasants elements is to support knights not to form an independent leg of the army.

      • Considering a fantasy inspired medieval feudal society, what are the main military components ?
        • Cavalry supported by peasants and fantasy components
        • Ranged support should be limited, and never drive the strategy.
        • Heroic Characters, only humans with fair chance of slaying mighty beasts single handed
      • What are the main weaknesses ?
        • No access to gunpowder,
        • No new technology, industrialization (plate armor, advanced warmachines)
        • Honorable (no avoidance or hidden, protect the weak), always accept challenges
        • No long range weapons against heavy armor and monsters, all are to be handled in CC.
        • No collective training, each knight trains on there own with their horses (no EoS style orders)

      • What strengths can be utilized to cover those weaknesses ?
        • Fighting with horses as one (synergies 1+1=3),
        • Magical protection through the lady, divine support when fighting evil in all its forms
        • Flying fantasy mounts for knights (not only characters)
        • Synergies with peasants, incl. not affected by casualties of peasants in joint combat. Knights may win while peasants looses.
        • Magic to deal with gunpowder, or help knights to move protected
        • Enough knights to win melee if chosen well AND to make multiple treats (able to field vastly more knights than other factions)
      • What tactical doctrines will this result in ?
        • Concentration of force(lance), choosing your enemy, maneuvering, surgical strikes
        • Cycle charges: suffering a penalty (damage or other sacrifice) knights should be able to disengage from combat.
        • Flanking by speed and number of threats, not per avoidance or ambush
        • Only army able to perform anvil/grind functions on horses while giving up ranks for breaking steadfast
        • Focused and tactical positioning and battle field tactics. They can wait and suffer while setting the trap. (Should NOT be avoidance SE style as per weakness)
      Other notable comments on composition:
      @jackstreicher: Knights need squires/peasants, nobles needs knights. Potential new organisation tree instead of standard % per group.

      @Duke Niemar: Strengths in Knights = main force with mistresses, for honor and does not fear, knights are the deceive battle element, peasants as support/meat shield/missile blockers but no fighting value. No tactics or weaknesses mentioned.
      Suggested role of units in the army:

      Display Spoiler


      Mounted Yeomens:
      Background, not 9th age official: peasants of courage and skills (by class standard, nowhere near that of a knight of course).
      Battle field role: fast cav, throwing weapons/bow, light lance.

      Mounted Sergeants:
      Background, not 9th age official: lesser nobility seeking to prove themselves worthy. Only way for the lesser nobles to earn the right to access the path for knighthood.

      Battle field role: Light troops, flankers, knight support, light lances or anti-infantry weapon.
      No barding, option to purchase heavy armor for a 3+ AS.

      Knights Aspirant:
      Background, not 9th age offical: Generic/suggestion: Young men of noble birth seeking to prove themselves worthy of becoming knights.

      Battle field role: Faster and cheaper knights, good at zone control, less reliable but no frenzy. No Lance formation. Not scoring.
      Movement 9", 8" if buying barding. Has heavy armor, Lance and shield.

      1)+2" on charges
      2) counter charge charge reaction (if enemy fails charge, make an out of sequence charge attempt)
      3) may make a free pivot at the end of the remaining move phase.

      Knight of the Realm.
      Background: the foundations upon which this noble Kingdom is built. Sworn to King and honor, each serves at the pleasure of a Duke, enforcing his commands upon enemy and peasant alike.

      Battlefield role. The go to all around knight, most numerous cavalry unit. Good impact, staying power and anvil function.
      AS 2+, Lance formation

      Suggestions to allow for more all around function:
      1) Lance formation: against standard or large models with more ranks than the KotR unit: gain 2x long reach and all able to attack does so as if in the front until the start of the players next turn.
      2) Can buy a anti-infantry weapon as supplement to lance: +1A or +1S +1AP (against standard size models)
      3) WIP

      Questing Knights:
      Background: the most pious of knights are blessed with visions from the Lady, causing them to forego lanceand wealth and embark on quests of hardship and danger. Foremost is the search for the Grail, a fabled relic sought by all who serve Her.

      Battlefield role: Target most threatening unit, anti-death star, grind

      1) Before start of battle, nominate two enemy units, all Questing Knights get offensive bonus, e.g. lightning reflexes and +1 attacks against them

      Grail Knights:
      Background: those few who earn the attentions of the Lady transcend all others. Rumoured to have drunk from the Grail itself, their hand is moved by divine purpose and they are as avatars of the Lady, enforcing her will and sitting in judgement, even over nobility.
      Battlefield role: True elites, capable of all roles but also damn expensive.

      1) keep as is

      light pegasus ([u][b]Knights of the e.g. Dawn Wind )[/b][/u]
      Background: not 9th age official. Mastering the art of aerial combat is so complex that rider and mount trains together from og young age. Those knights aspirants that prove themselves to be true horse masters may seek to become a member of the pegasus knights. Pegasus are stubborn and when of age they will not tolerate a new rider. Thus, young aspirants are matched with young pegasus of similar age with whom they grow and train.

      Battle field role: War machine hunters, opportunistic, catch fleeing units, only able to break smallest or weakest units.
      Swift M 9-10", March 18"ish , lightly armour and shield, no barding, AS4+ ish, light lances, hard target, no impact, no stump. Rider: Knights Aspirant.

      normal pegasus ([u][b]Knights of the Sun) [/b][/u]
      No change from v .1.9. Battle field role, Flankers, medium impact, heavy armour, not as fast as knights and easier to hit with shooting (not hard target).

      Role support knights by ranged weapons and defensive cheap infantry. Solo peasant lists should be sub-par.

      Serf Special rule:
      When a unit with Serf special rule is in a fight with a friendly unit of knights, two combat resolutions are made. One for the Peasants and the enemy unit and one for the knights and the enemy unit. For each, any casulties caused and suffered and any static combat resolutions bonuses conferred by the other friendly part is ignored. (option C in Duke Niemar's filthy peasants - insignificant rule tweak)

      Battlefield role: cheap defensive infantry
      1) Tower shields, +2 defensive skills -1 to agility or first rank gets distracting and -1 attack or +1 armour save on front

      No suggested change

      Battlefield role, harassing enermy fast components/ chaff for knights to gain the initiative

      Suggestion: if suffering a wound from brigand fire, enemy cavalry or warbeasts gets -1M to the start of the players next turn.


      Battlefield role:

      1) two options, an offensive buff to knights or defensive to infantry. Think Cadavar Wagon VC or EoS Buff Wagons. Aura or select a unit within 12"
      2) mount for Damsel converting veil tokens into blessings or similar benefits.
      3) Magic boost, perhaps makes our heritage spell into aura instead?


      Battlefield role: Grind, flying heavy support (consider not flying if otherwise becomes too expensive)

      1) monstrous beasts,
      2) single ridden monster without character

      Legendary lords: different 50x50mm killy knights that can do the work our generic nobles may not be able to.
      0-1, three different options, WIP

      Some of the many notable homebrews:

      Homebrew books:
      Cale's Kingdom: Yet another home brew KoE Version
      Duke Niemar's Homebrew Equitaine
      KoE Army Book Project
      Ludaman’s KoE
      Klexe KoE 2.0 view and what should be done.

      Product Owner - ID LAB

      Alone you may go faster but together we go further ;)

      The post was edited 13 times, last by Windelov: gramma, added qoutes ().

    • Thanks @Windelov for doing that, and thanks for calling.
      I'm confident that @Giladis and probably @Scottish Knight would be keen to follow this thread as well - but don't feel compelled to reply if you don't wish :) , to be aware is enough.

      Preliminary statements:
      As far as I recall,
      - KoE will be redone officially, but there has not been any formal decision to redo it sooner than later. I know that quite a few "higher-ups" have pushed for sooner, still, no decision was made that I would be aware of. IMO, chances are quite good that KoE would be redone sooner than most other AB - but that's just an opinion.
      - several KoE Homebrew have been made already by fans. I have seen Furion's, and there are other ones which have seen efforts put in. We should expect a good community's involvement, as long as we don't discourage them.
      - Homebrew may be used by T9A team as inspiration - or may not be. No promise was ever made on that.
      - besides, the process for designing FAB will be revised after Gold 2.0 hits. I am confident that the feeling from many in the community that T9A team does not listen to their wishes will become just a bad memory of the past. No guarantee there, only reasonable hope, but I have privileged information access to comfort that opinion.

      With this in mind, how worth is it to ask the community of KoE fans to provide ideas?
      I would say it is definitively worth.
      I am sure that the KoE fan community could help greatly T9A team to create a KoE AB which will satisfy best the community's desire for a spirited book, reflecting well their values of heroic fight in an Arthurian setting, as well as satisfying T9A pledge for a distinctive faction (i.e. specific playstyle, allowing all-cav competitive army lists) fitting the background.
      Sure, let's be realistic: there are probably many wishes which will not come true.
      Still, I am confident that the future task team in charge with KoE will endeavour to make this AB as spirited as possible, so they will definitively have a look to such a thread, as source of inspiration.
      Overall, this will be the best opportunity KoE fans will ever have to help define the spirit of what their AB will be.
      Just don't spoil this opportunity: be kind and respectful with the team, it will help that team to read you with a positive mind :) .

      I will eagerly follow the discussions here.

      Social Media Team

      - druchii.net contribution: The 9th Age - Dread Elves
    • @Windelov Wow. I'm impressed by the level of work you've clearly put into that book. I'll say that i would gladly pay money for this one to replace the current one, and then donate more in addition haha. A couple issues:
      • Maybe i went through it too quickly, but it seems quite powerful (like blessed armor, as much as i love it) though nothing the points can't limit, so upgrades/options are probably the way to go for that.
      • Also, I currently prefer the current virtues to the ones in your book for characters (i think its obvious why) however i see the fluffiness in them being picked up also by the R&F knights. If i had to pick... I'd pick your system overall
      But in the end it's a book i think every KoE player would dream of, fluff players and tournament players. I'm getting ready to leave to Spain so i can't add more nor spend too much time on it but i became pretty excited reading through it
    • thanks windelow, your book is another sign for why KOE needs to be redone first. that's so sad we have to face so much stubbornness about this.

      I liked the book. I can see that KOE has great potential for a new book, I really miss old Arthurian feeling especially. You should be around when somebody starts to write new book

      N.American Masters '20; First Place
      ETC '15-'16-'17; Team Türkiye
    • I really like the idea of super champions for more heroic armies, such as High Born Elves and Kingdom of Equitaine.

      I like that you considering alternative to the current force organization. I find the addition of requiring Knights of the Crown in order to take special units an interesting idea, but would probably turn into a balancing nightmare. I really hate the current force organization combined with max number of units and models; the current implementation just feels like a cudgel for balancing without adding to flavor.

      Replacing the blessing save with blessed armor hard caping the armor is an interesting idea and would streamline game play, one less save to roll. However, blessed armor would remove counter play since your opponent literally can do nothing about it, where with an Aegis save they at least could 'just' get holy attacks. It also penalizes your opponent for bring anything with more then ap 2, which just seems wrong. Finally, if blessed armor were stacked with an Aegis save then it would really powerful, keep in mind that a 1+/4++ Aegis has pretty much been removed from the game.
    • Finally some semblance of conclusion from the bickering and hair-tearing of last snowfalls eves.

      I really like the book, just lacking a change in power level for grail knights' statline, otherwise I can stand behind everything in it so far.

      Maybe the virtues are a bit dull and uninteresting too, for the moment, but the overall system is really nice, what with units taking them and all.

      Keep updating the book, @Windelov, I'll be sure to stick around for more!
    • Thx all,

      The Blessing and Virtues were never discussed to the extend that the concept was redefined. Thus the current suggestions are just ideas and is to be changed.

      For whether a 4+ cap is too powerful for knights, I will post the math.

      When doing this I had most of not all of the homebrews in front of me, plus the old legacy book and the current beta and current non-beta rules in front of me. I think we all would like to keep the current format of both Virtues and Blessing, however it was clear that those were similar if not identical in most aspects to legacy (blessing being all but the same).

      As most of you know, I don’t even play KoE. All I have here is based on the feedback you provided.


      Product Owner - ID LAB

      Alone you may go faster but together we go further ;)
    • I will keep the current version as one suggestion of closing the gaps, and then create another without the gap-fills, eg no suggestion for Virtues, Oaths Rules for trebuchet, blessing, and then we can discuss why we need something, how it should play and then do rules if needed.

      Should we do a prelim point setting to allow for playtesting and would there be an interest in doing so?

      @Archeron do you think any one in your group would be willing to help?

      Product Owner - ID LAB

      Alone you may go faster but together we go further ;)
    • Another thing I noticed. Grail lord is unable to ride a mount other than the horse on steroids, or even be on foot.

      Maybe such an imposing character should be able to be a centerpiece model. A Hippo or at least a peg would make him stand out far more than just riding with his grails all the time.

      Also, WDG lords can ride manticores. If our human demigod is to be their equal...

      Just a thought. No need to discuss it here if you feel it will clog the thread.

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Duke Niemar ().

    • Great work guys!

      Nice concepts emerging like the guardians of sacred places theme. Making stuff like that is great food for additional thoughts.

      So instead of trying to math it all out, maybe trying expand the possibilities even more?

      Some things you could change.
      I'm not fan of 4++ and 4++ as that seems to be possible without magic items? Also ambush overload seems to be bit out of feel for this army. Knights appearing all around from ambush feels bit out. Maybe limit ambushers? Also Scoring and LT is not used so would be good to remove it from core unit :). Also trubaudor makes trick I do not think is plausible, would rather see boost on heroic deeds and such.

      Would like to see teams take on "quests" mechanics.
      - Do X gain Y. could fit Trobador well. "when unit/hero does kills X gain" Maybe use roland bones there and add something else there?

      but would like to hear some ideas on that.

      I like these virtues more. They have theme and also help in Di bubble which is great.

      Can't ofc promise anything but will try to keep this as important document in KoE work when it happens.
    • Great comments,

      On Virtues vs blessing.
      One take would be that knights live by Virtues to gain some level of non-divine benefits as currently suggested. The currently selected virtues follow most world religions. Legacy virtues of eg “might” would almost overlap with the sins currently in the WoDG book. I thought we better keep them apart.

      One solution to still preserve legacy feel, is to allow divine blessings on heroic characters where the theme would allow for much more creative space then the legacy virtues?

      Blessed armor
      On the capped 4+ AS thing, this just reduces the min-max issue of a 2+ 5++ and fits with the theme in my mind. It has no effect on AP 0-2, and then kicks in rapidly from 3+. This means that against majority of hits, it will have no effect but only save your knights when fighting the most frightening creatures (where it then kicks in gradually but to a large effect). Again there was no concensus on this in the community so Should be discussed further.

      On ambush and Light troops
      Yes this will have to be toned down. I still think though that some flexibility might be needed if to move away from the gun line army without creating a grind army. Speed without manouvrebility is sometimes of limited value. I guess we will have to see how the Serf Knight interaction works and if that could be the driving force of the army.

      Let me clean Up the current rough draft removing all the gap fills to explore other options

      Product Owner - ID LAB

      Alone you may go faster but together we go further ;)

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Windelov: Gramma ().

    • Thanks for putting this up. It looks good and there are some great ideas in there.

      I have a few comments / questions:
      • What's the logic behind grinding attacks instead of supporting attacks if a cavalry unit is 5 wide?
      • I know why you used the name Paladins for the super champions but I'd choose a different term. Just so it's easier to differentiate between the character and the super champion. Love the idea though
      • Yeomen, Pegasus knights, holograph knights and Gryphon knights in core? I love your optimism :)
      • Liking the "Of Legends" category - may need to add gryphon, hippo and pegs in here.
      • Would you do a peasant revolt as an auxiliary list? Or have I missed something that would allow you to take an all peasant list?
      • I like your take on virtues but they're very weak as they are. I think the effects would need to be stronger but the idea is sound
        • I assume that this would work as the Character takes a virtue and it affects him and his unit?
      • Hereditary spell is ok but as per the below I don't like the loss of Aegis. I'd prefer this to become reroll failed to hit rolls and failed aegis saves.
      • I'd love to have Knights mace core [lexicon]cavalry[/lexicon], but I think this should be reserved for Questing knights. I think your nerf of Quests coupled with this option on Realms would mean they'd still be ignored in core. In short what should happen is Knights mace = Bastard Sword.
      • I like the spirit warriors but why make them [lexicon]infantry[/lexicon] with Move 6? Shouldn't they be [lexicon]Cavalry[/lexicon]-ised?

      My only real issue is that your book doesn't give me a feeling of a connection to the lady - it's just another army of humans with some (admittedly cool) special rules. For example:
      • No blessing - by removing the ward save it removes the feeling of the Lady defending the knights (unless you force her by casting a spell). Ok there's the blessed armour but that is still armour at the end of the day. Blessed armour is not as good at representing the Lady's protection as an aegis save is.
        • Don't get me wrong, I can see that Blessed armour is better than an Aegis save in a lot of situations (especialy for characters who can pile an Aegis save on top)
      • MR1 & Blessing on the damsels - the lady protects her own. Why is there nothing at all on the Damsels for protection? Would the lady really send her representatives into battle without any protection at all? I don't buy it.

      I would tweak Blessed armour to, Any attacks directed at model with Blessed Armour suffers a -1 to wound penalty. The Lady's blessing on the armour turns some full hits into glancing blows.

      And add the blessing on top - a flat 5++. I'd happily pay the cost for this on our knights. After all we are a majority Toughness 3 army
      Never argue with Idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
    • I still think though that some flexibility might be needed if to move away from the gun line army without creating a grind army.
      This calls for out-of-the-box thinking! Teleports? Counter charges? Combo-charges? Double moves? Poking units? skismishers that are open terrain? Taunts? Rewards from combats? Debuff for not fighting?

      all yours ;)

      for that this kind of "skunkworks project" is great!
    • Great, so at home with a bit of time to give feedback to all the great comments.

      • Could you elaborate on why the troubadour might not be possible?
      • Counter charge was discussed but difficult to implement, would be interesting but I would suggest we just start by removing ambush for all but the spirit guardians and see how that works out.
      • Could you elaborate on how the 4+ cap is bad in terms of game mechanics?
      • on the grind attacks. This was to represent the mass of mounted warriors pushing down enemy infantry as suggested by Klexe. To gain the benefit you would then have to have a wide cavalry formation (so the enemy couldnt just go around you), and mass with at least 2 ranks so to not just avoid and slip pass. By boosting the support attacks, you would gain that. However, it requires a lot abstract thinking to see the intention. Simply giving knights grind or stomp on first rank would be too easy to achieve with small units and result in single lines being the prefered play.
        • going back to Klexe's suggestion, this may be better done by creating a specilized knight. He had good ideas for the cataphract knight. My only concern is adding such a super heavy knight will double with the role of the Gryphen knights. Let's give it some more thoughts.
      • the [lexicon]Paladin[/lexicon] hero was renamed to Knight Marshall (and is now superior to the duke in CC). The only paladinon the table is the heroes of different knight units. The reason for this change was the feedback that [lexicon]KoE[/lexicon] characters seemed meehhh, and needed a substantial boost on stat line. Are you ok with the concept of having a fighter superior to the [lexicon]Duke[/lexicon] but who is inferior on Discipline (I would assume that this gives more interesting builds than a linear miniature duke)?
      • On core and adding dozens of things there. One of the suggestions, that we actually worked quite a lot with, was to see if we could make the unit selection be based on the Knights. The feedback was that Knights should be the core of all armies. Now mounted light cav, gryphen cav, pegasi and demigryphs are all conditioned by max 1 per units of Knights of Realm (and they now come at a starting size of 9), so you could say that this is just a more simple way of the same core concept. You build from your Knight units but do not have to consider percentages and whether or not taking a banner will break those 25% or so.
      • On Peasants, the feedback was that [lexicon]KoE[/lexicon] is THE knight centric army. Moreover, I seem to remember that "Strength in Numbers" being a hard or semi-hard weakness to [lexicon]KoE[/lexicon]. To me that translated into Knights being the "Core" section. That said, in this build, you could make an army with Knights Forlornand Peasants only led by a [lexicon]Damsel[/lexicon]] and with Balifs and Castallans running the show. Not optimal but possible and would fit the back. Again, if having a way out by a magical item or special ability is a need for some, I am happy creating it.
      • On [lexicon]Virtues[/lexicon]. Again, this is NOT a community suggestion but simply to try to align with what happened with WoDG. How about taking away [lexicon]virtues[/lexicon] from characters and instead give them Blessing/Favors of the gods. It is more or less the same concept as the current [lexicon]Virtues[/lexicon] but split it in two and pack it in a slightly different bubble wrap that may move it away from legacy material. A suggestion by Klexe / CaledorIV, just replaced [lexicon]Virtue[/lexicon] with Blessing and Favours
      Display Spoiler

      Divine Blessings in no particular order:

      One for killing monster

      One for killing infantry
      One for killing MW enemies
      One extra for Cavalry
      One for flying
      One for grail Oath (yes should be a Virtue imo)
      One for Duell

      [*]Divine Favors in no particular order:


      • On the Questing Knights, this was a suggestion in the thread that I thought made for an interesting and fluffy setup. And I think the Griffon Knights will take over on the Grind Role they had previously. Let's think outside the box on this one and see if there are more and better ideas. We should definitely avoid too much overlap.
      • You are right, Spirit warriors should be knights... Dont know what I was thinking. Ofcourse the spirit of the horselords fights on horses :)
      • On the Blessing and Blessed Armor.. I see that this does not resonate well. Again, it was hard to get new ideas as it seems to be so integrated to identity of KoE. However, we are really at legacy rules currently. I am all fine with removing the Blessed armor and making it a special item or something like that, and -1 to wound is pretty neat and simple. It has a slight edge to just give +1 Resistance that I kinda of like. Lets work on new ideas.
      • On the protecting the damsels. Yes sure, they need a bit of divine protection. Aegis 5+ seems fair, and I had intended for her to get the virtue of chastity (aegis +1 against magical attacks pushing it to Aegis 4+).
      @Duke Niemar
      • Grail lord needs to have other mount options, but it just became complex to put such a powerful lord on top of a Griffon or similar. On the other hand, and as you point out, so does a lot of other heroes.
      • I will look into your homebrew again for stats for Grail Knights. Could you just give a few hints to your reasoning?

      Product Owner - ID LAB

      Alone you may go faster but together we go further ;)

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Windelov ().

    • Lengthy read ahead, beware!

      The reason I use for upping the grail models is that they do NOT feel rare or powerful enough in the official versions.

      I have an Image of a grail knight to be exceedingly rare, and even more powerful. Much the same as a chosen warrior would be a lonely Island in a sea of lesser marauders and regular warriors.

      Now, chosens. Look at their statline, impressive indeed. So is the cost. But if you look at how many chosens you can field and their numbers become less impressive. When I face chosens I only see one unit, only 10 warriors. But I know each one is a small unit in itself.

      Grails in the official version, we have a 3-9 unit on a 0-2 restriction. That is a max of 18(!) knights. It is almost as many as I field in core. That is not rare, they are actually forming the most numerous unit type in the army, except peasants maybe, if you chose to take 2 units.

      In my version, they are more akin to a chosen on a warhorse, but instead of a max on 10 they are cappar at 6 to make up for that. There is also a 0-1 restriction on the entry which means I usually field max 6 knights. But each of those knights goes toe to toe with vampire knights, chosens, ever their equal.

      They are all built on the frame of humans, blessed or cursed by fickle gods to immense power. That is my take on it. Why is always the "good" magic weaker than the evil? And is there really any "good" magic in our setting?

      As for the grail lord and his mounts, why not? Choices is always the better part of content. Especially on characters, characters that we make into our alter egos, the ones that represent you on the battlefield.

      And because other character-based armies can put their killing machines on centerpiece models. Revenants for vampires, manticores for WDG, etc. Sure, the mounts can differ in concept, but choice is the key in my opinion.

      And design should always be narrative and immersive first, balanced and regulated second. Roles come afterwards.

      P. S. I reserve any grammatical mistakes, typed on my phone. D. S.
    • Wondering what would be the interest for adding a truly legendary mount associated with medieval legendary knights, let me name:
      the horse Bayard. See wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayard_(legend)

      The horse Bayard carrying the four sons of Aymon, miniature in a manuscript from the 14th century.

      This is a faerie horse which could carry simultanously four sturdy knights, and jump at incredible heights, like if it was flying.

      I have at home a comic strip and two old books about the Old French twelfth century chanson de geste Quatre Fils Aymon.
      Just to tell how popular it was among legends during medieval times.
      As current list of special equipment includes the Banner of Roland, I see no problem to tap into the legends associated with Charlemagne, like the 4 Aymon.

      This would be more authentic than pegasus, which were never used by any Chanson de Geste.
      It shouldn't be too hard to customize such a model.

      If you don't like it as a normal mount, at minimum I would recommend it in the list of special equipment. :P Because why not?

      Social Media Team

      - druchii.net contribution: The 9th Age - Dread Elves