Raising champions is unfair

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 here! You can read all about it in the news.

Our beta phase is finally over. Download The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles, 2nd Edition now!

  • Raising champions is unfair

    Hello folks. I hope some game designer reads this post, and maybe he will agree with me at my point of view.

    The problem here is rule 13.K.c. "Raise wounds". It stats that you must raise champions that have been removed as casualties, and then the rest of R&F models.

    My point is that, once your champion is dead, it should remain dead for the rest of the game, exactly the same as characters.

    - They represent special individuals, not as important as real characters, but surely they are not mere warriors.

    - It creates an unfair advantage for armies capable of doing this. Theese kind of units can stop a powerfull character forever. I get this is the purpose of all champions, but I think that ONE champion per unit is enough.

    Thanks for your answers.
  • Merinus wrote:

    I guess everyone without VC or UD would agree... It kind of hurts. However since sometimes the champs are also musicians (ghouls) this complicates things.
    Don't see huge problem with ghoul champions not arising. They lose champion and musician, that's all.

    If it's too punishing, there is a simple solution by allowing them to purchase musician independently.
  • Champions should become an immortal part of the unit on the same basis as the rest of the command group - and the champion should recieve more interesting tasks than to be the fodder of greater foes.

    I can from the top of my head not think of a single military entity where there were not some primus inter pares at work. @Taki?

    To not render the challenge mechanic obsolete - perhaps allowing the Champion to issue challenges as per now is fine - but if he dies, the regiment that he belongs to will immediately and instantaneously nod to each other and one of them will pick up the headwear of their fallen champion.

    Since this would ofc lead to alot of challenges - there could be a VPS mechanic for winning challenges too. 100 bonus points for every single time a challenge has been resolved with a mortal outcome?
    Hermund Vigerust Endressòn Furu - Savage Sage of the Norse
    Faux-pro player and ETC vagabond.
    Enjoys the company of deluded nerds and women of unquestionably low morale.

    Do not fall to the folly of the best laid of plans - for the mind of man is fickle in the face of the dice gods.
    Give yer high fives where yer opponents dice have been blessed, and in equal give yer handshakes when they fall in malicious ways.
  • Unlike the other command group members, champions can die.

    I can see a necromancer arising some aditional skeletons or zombies, becouse they not have to be the same corpses that the fallen ones. But in the case of the champion, supose he has fallen in a duel in front of a Scourge of Wrath, who has destroyed his corpse, and break it into pieces. I can't see it being arised once after once.

    Units completely destroyed cannot be arised. Characters completely destroyed cannot be arised, even if they were part of a unit that stays in play. Champions should not be allowed to be arised once dead.
  • Dragus wrote:

    nigromant
    :love: :love: :love:


    Dragus wrote:

    But in the case of the champion, supose he has fallen in a duel in front of a Scourge of Wrath, who has destroyed his corpse, and break it into pieces. I can't see it being arised once after once.

    Units completely destroyed cannot be arised. Characters completely destroyed cannot be arised, even if they were part of a unit that stays in play. Champions should not be allowed to be arised once dead.

    These arguments are fair, but not a counterfute of my argument that _all_ military squads of _all_ sizes will _always_ find one in their midst that is the de facto leader of the group (as opposed to a general that is the leader of the collection of groups).
    Hermund Vigerust Endressòn Furu - Savage Sage of the Norse
    Faux-pro player and ETC vagabond.
    Enjoys the company of deluded nerds and women of unquestionably low morale.

    Do not fall to the folly of the best laid of plans - for the mind of man is fickle in the face of the dice gods.
    Give yer high fives where yer opponents dice have been blessed, and in equal give yer handshakes when they fall in malicious ways.
  • Ok, let's try other argument.

    I think the spells that arise wounds (or hit points) were designed with the purpose of healing NOT EMPTY wound-pools. For example, the R&C models of a unit share one common wound pool. As long as there is at least one hit point left in the pool, it can be re-filled by this kind of spells.

    But the champion has his (or her) own wound pool. And, as the rest of wound pools, once emptyed, it should not be allowed to heal it.
  • It's a very powerful combo and I don't think it should be allowed.

    The challenge mechanic is probably a bad idea overall. It creates a massive trail of complexity and crazy/unintuitive rule interactions for little gain.

    It would be acceptable to make a champion into a unit upgrade for certain units that set an enemy model's attacks to 0 for ONE turn and was then expended. Massive simplification, similar results.
  • Dragus wrote:

    Ok, let's try other argument.

    I think the spells that arise wounds (or hit points) were designed with the purpose of healing NOT EMPTY wound-pools. For example, the R&C models of a unit share one common wound pool. As long as there is at least one hit point left in the pool, it can be re-filled by this kind of spells.

    But the champion has his (or her) own wound pool. And, as the rest of wound pools, once emptyed, it should not be allowed to heal it.

    I can accept that argument as a fair way of viewing the situation. My argument is that it is not possible for the champion pool to be empty as long as there are models that are available in the unit pool. Because the unit will always self-assign a new champion. It is basic to the nature of military operations that units operate in this manner. One must have more say than the others. It is so basic that you even find this in animal hunting packs.


    Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    It's a very powerful combo and I don't think it should be allowed.

    The challenge mechanic is probably a bad idea overall. It creates a massive trail of complexity and crazy/unintuitive rule interactions for little gain.

    It would be acceptable to make a champion into a unit upgrade for certain units that set an enemy model's attacks to 0 for ONE turn and was then expended. Massive simplification, similar results.

    I concur that simplification of the challenge mechanic could save time. It would probably feel bland though. And your solution really only solves the situation of VeryBigThing vs Champion. I have had champions slay lords and live to recieve the glorious huzzahs of their peers.
    Hermund Vigerust Endressòn Furu - Savage Sage of the Norse
    Faux-pro player and ETC vagabond.
    Enjoys the company of deluded nerds and women of unquestionably low morale.

    Do not fall to the folly of the best laid of plans - for the mind of man is fickle in the face of the dice gods.
    Give yer high fives where yer opponents dice have been blessed, and in equal give yer handshakes when they fall in malicious ways.
  • Herminard wrote:

    Dragus wrote:

    Ok, let's try other argument.

    I think the spells that arise wounds (or hit points) were designed with the purpose of healing NOT EMPTY wound-pools. For example, the R&C models of a unit share one common wound pool. As long as there is at least one hit point left in the pool, it can be re-filled by this kind of spells.

    But the champion has his (or her) own wound pool. And, as the rest of wound pools, once emptyed, it should not be allowed to heal it.
    I can accept that argument as a fair way of viewing the situation. My argument is that it is not possible for the champion pool to be empty as long as there are models that are available in the unit pool. Because the unit will always self-assign a new champion. It is basic to the nature of military operations that units operate in this manner. One must have more say than the others. It is so basic that you even find this in animal hunting packs.

    If that's the case, why not allow all units to have champion forever? I mean, If the champion dies, why cannot another warrior be designed as the new champion?

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

  • Dragus wrote:

    If that's the case, why not allow all units to have champion forever? I mean, If the champion dies, why cannot another warrior be designed as the new champion?

    Yes - that is my exact argument. All units* should always have a champion. I belive it essential to military organisation of forces. It also adresses yer crux point for the topic - that the raising of champions is an _unfair_ mechanic. Hardly as unfair if it is globally accessible is it?


    (*note that the term Unit in this instance points to multientity conjoints and not to single model entities)
    Hermund Vigerust Endressòn Furu - Savage Sage of the Norse
    Faux-pro player and ETC vagabond.
    Enjoys the company of deluded nerds and women of unquestionably low morale.

    Do not fall to the folly of the best laid of plans - for the mind of man is fickle in the face of the dice gods.
    Give yer high fives where yer opponents dice have been blessed, and in equal give yer handshakes when they fall in malicious ways.
  • Herminard wrote:

    It would probably feel bland though. And your solution really only solves the situation of VeryBigThing vs Champion. I have had champions slay lords and live to recieve the glorious huzzahs of their peers.
    Well you could still kill the lord with R&F attacks.

    Would it feel bland? I don't know, but I don't actually fight with a champion, I just concede the model because it's a fight that's a waste of time to roll for. Especially with an Agi 2 Orc champion. So it's just a formalized version of what usually already happens, but without all the unintuitive rules about whether you have to apply breath weapons or impact hits to the unit (which AFAIK is complicated and I've forgotten exactly how it works).
  • Herminard wrote:

    Dragus wrote:

    If that's the case, why not allow all units to have champion forever? I mean, If the champion dies, why cannot another warrior be designed as the new champion?
    Yes - that is my exact argument. All units* should always have a champion. I belive it essential to military organisation of forces. It also adresses yer crux point for the topic - that the raising of champions is an _unfair_ mechanic. Hardly as unfair if it is globally accessible is it?


    (*note that the term Unit in this instance points to multientity conjoints and not to single model entities)

    Well, that should be HARDLY unfair to big characters (dragons, great daemons and struff like that)
  • I totally agree with the first post and I understand those who say that in a unit there must always be a leader who leads the unit, it is difficult to position...



    To solve that situation wouldn't it be good if a unit with a champion had a limit to its challenges? For example, it can only launch one challenge per battle. Let me explain it in another way: a unit with a champion can launch challenges until for whatever reason the champion dies (in a previous challenge, a spell, combat, etc...) Now it could be questioned if the champion resurrects or not, or if the champion must always be in the unit, no matter, the new champion (resurrected or next on the command list) can no longer launch challenges.
  • Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    Herminard wrote:

    It would probably feel bland though. And your solution really only solves the situation of VeryBigThing vs Champion. I have had champions slay lords and live to recieve the glorious huzzahs of their peers.
    Well you could still kill the lord with R&F attacks.
    Would it feel bland? I don't know, but I don't actually fight with a champion, I just concede the model because it's a fight that's a waste of time to roll for. Especially with an Agi 2 Orc champion. So it's just a formalized version of what usually already happens, but without all the unintuitive rules about whether you have to apply breath weapons or impact hits to the unit (which AFAIK is complicated and I've forgotten exactly how it works).

    Iron Orc Champion with a defensive magic buff? Temple Guard Champion with a defensive magic buff?
    I also like to see the blessings and curses of the dice gods in motion.
    Hermund Vigerust Endressòn Furu - Savage Sage of the Norse
    Faux-pro player and ETC vagabond.
    Enjoys the company of deluded nerds and women of unquestionably low morale.

    Do not fall to the folly of the best laid of plans - for the mind of man is fickle in the face of the dice gods.
    Give yer high fives where yer opponents dice have been blessed, and in equal give yer handshakes when they fall in malicious ways.
  • Dragus wrote:

    Herminard wrote:

    Dragus wrote:

    If that's the case, why not allow all units to have champion forever? I mean, If the champion dies, why cannot another warrior be designed as the new champion?
    Yes - that is my exact argument. All units* should always have a champion. I belive it essential to military organisation of forces. It also adresses yer crux point for the topic - that the raising of champions is an _unfair_ mechanic. Hardly as unfair if it is globally accessible is it?

    (*note that the term Unit in this instance points to multientity conjoints and not to single model entities)
    Well, that should be HARDLY unfair to big characters (dragons, great daemons and struff like that)

    If by hardly unfair you mean that the sitting duck battle line element cannot be roflstomped by an entity of far superior mobility and fighting prowess, unless said big characters bring some support of their own (like a unit with a champion) - then sure?

    xaby86 wrote:

    I totally agree with the first post and I understand those who say that in a unit there must always be a leader who leads the unit, it is difficult to position...



    To solve that situation wouldn't it be good if a unit with a champion had a limit to its challenges? For example, it can only launch one challenge per battle. Let me explain it in another way: a unit with a champion can launch challenges until for whatever reason the champion dies (in a previous challenge, a spell, combat, etc...) Now it could be questioned if the champion resurrects or not, or if the champion must always be in the unit, no matter, the new champion (resurrected or next on the command list) can no longer launch challenges.

    Letting each unit only defend its honour once is also a fair solution - IF champions also have other meaningful contributions to a unit :)
    Hermund Vigerust Endressòn Furu - Savage Sage of the Norse
    Faux-pro player and ETC vagabond.
    Enjoys the company of deluded nerds and women of unquestionably low morale.

    Do not fall to the folly of the best laid of plans - for the mind of man is fickle in the face of the dice gods.
    Give yer high fives where yer opponents dice have been blessed, and in equal give yer handshakes when they fall in malicious ways.
  • An easy solution to this problem AND to make challenges less annoying would be to allow champions to accept challenges, but not to issue challenges.
    This way, it wouldn't matter if champions can be raised again, and the ridiculous effect of a lowly champion stopping dragon lords from attacking a unit would also be gone. this was even proposed a couple of times before.