What a perfect army book should not be capable of

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.

  • What a perfect army book should not be capable of

    After some doom and gloom I think it might be time to fantasize a bit about what the ideal O&G army book would be like. We will do this with no external constraints - Imagine that the Rules Team have been bribed/drugged/kidnapped and will rubber stamp literally anything we suggest (whether our opponents will want to play against us is out of our control though - we have to sell it to them).

    What is an army book/codex? It's a list of rules for units, points costs etc. But if you're a math nerd, an army book is simply the collection of all lists it is capable of producing - millions, trillions, .. of 'em. Each of these lists has a certain overall (average) winrate between 0% and 100% in a given metagame. Each list has good and bad matchups versus other races and other general list types. Each list has some ratio of how much the outcome is dictated by skill, and how much it is dictated by luck.

    That's all there is - crunch wise - to an army book. Many possible lists, each with some scores attached to them. And really, the most important lists are the good (high winrate) ones - which will usually be a very small fraction of the lists.

    What kind of list landscape should you get from a good book? Ideally:

    1. List-synergy: Not all lists should be equally good - because then there would be literally no skill in list building (this is called a book with no synergies)
    2. List-variety: There should not be a single dominant list, or a few powerful very similar lists that are good, and everything else is trash.
    3. Balanced: The best lists should have a 50% average winrate against the best lists from the opposition, assuming two skilled players.
    4. Non-Coin-Toss-y: The best, and ideally most good lists, should do better when the player driving them is more skilled
    5. Not-Too-Skewed: It should not be possible to build a list that has a massive winrate (>70%, say) against some poor victim army book (e.g. "Vamps"). There should not be an army in Ninth Age that has a massive winrate against all lists from our book.
    6. No-Autos, No-Ornaments: The good lists shouldn't all include a few "auto-include" units, there should not be any units that aren't even involved in a single good list type. No more shelf ornaments.
    7. Fluffy/Authentic-units: Units should have crunch that matches their fluff. Goblins shouldn't be brave combat monstrosities. Trolls shouldn't be great at pulling off complex tactics.
    8. Distinctive: You should not be able to straightforwardly map lists and tactics from one army onto another. Different armies should play differently
    9. Caters-to-tastes: There should be lists and mechanics in there that cater to people who have different gaming psychographic profiles
    10. Supports-legacy-models: most models that people have should be in the book.


    These are a actually a fairly demanding set of constraints. One way to start is to look at what the book is not allowed to do from the point of view of distinctiveness and skewness, since if you get that wrong you can't really undo it without a full rework:

    O&G cannot:
    • Build an elite, low model count army
    • Build an army that wins by having nothing but shooting with no support or defense (We're not Sylvan elves)
    • Have a combination of excellent shooting units and excellent combat units in the same army (We're not Empire)
    • Build a monster mash - a list where >50% of the points are monsters (We're not Lizards/Beasts/Warriors)
    • Build a list that is dominated by characters as damage dealers. (We're not KoE or Warriors)
    • Build a list that utterly dominates the magic phase
    • ... ( please suggest more!)
    O&G must:
    • have some mechanical element corresponding to disobedient, unreliable troops (but it's a negotiation as to what that is)
    • Have a decent amount of relatively low quality troops in any army, even if there are also some elite troops
    • @beerbeard O&G must include a greater element of randomness and uncertainty than any other army. Hilarity must then ensue.
    • ... ( please suggest more!)
    O&G can:
    • Build a chaff/shooting/dangerous terrain/countercharge list with goblins
    • Build a strategic goblin list that mixes WEAKER or MORE VULNERABLE combat units with good shooting and impact hits
    • Build a goblin impact hit based list with shooting support
    • Build a forest goblin list making use of terrain and ambushing and spider cavalry units. Maybe not?! Thanks @Shlagrabak
    • Build an orc combat horde that fills the table from side to side with infantry, good buff spells/auras but has poor shooting and few magic missiles
    • Build an orc list that mixes infantry and cavalry and aims to use them in combination (e.g. "ranks & flank")
    • Build a mixed race list that lacks the more specialized options of each race
      • E.g. goblins without their upgrades
      • Orcs but not Eadbashers
    • Have useful magic in our lists, e.g. useful combat buffs
    • ... ( :thumbsup: please suggest more!)


    General ideas about O&G races:
    • There must be multiple different competitive armies that represent different O&G races or perhaps combinations of races
    • An army consisting of mostly goblins must win in a distinct way to an army consisting of mostly orcs.
      • Orcs mostly should aim for a direct fight in the centre of the board, perhaps with some basic flanking
      • Goblins should do something else that involves them creating unfair fights, shooting, delaying the enemy
      • Feral Orcs should be the most direct race - pushing models forward with no holding back
        • In 8th edition there was an abomination of a list (and it was "the best" list too) with max artillery, fanatics and Savage Orc Big 'Uns who would patiently wait for the enemy to come to them :cursing: :thumbdown: - I never want to see that #$%^ again

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Onto more specific ways of achieving these goals. I have already posted some quite specific ideas about an equivalent of cults/bloodlines for O&G. The Orc and Goblin divorce is actually another way of increasing list variety. There are surely other ideas we/I haven't thought of.

    Let's assume that we go with something like cults/bloodlines, so that you have 4 top level choices: Primal, Badlands, Mountain, Massive. It doesn't have to be 4, though, this could change. The intended strengths and weaknesses of these tribes are in the other thread. A lot of things are still to be determined, but here I want to focus on what lists could come out of each tribe.





    Armywide/unit special rule/stats
    ________________________________________
    Justification/use/effect
    _____________________
    Type
    Live to Squabble: credit @arwaker
    All Greenhide races except Iron orcs take these 'non-bravery' tests on 3D6:
    - March tests, - combat reform tests, - post combat pivot, -quick reform, - restrain pursuit, - redirect charge

    Unlike other races, we must pass a leadership test to:
    - quick reform.
    Characterful, non-crippling version of unrulyNerf
    Live to Fight:
    All Greenhide race: orcs take these 'bravery' tests:
    - break,
    (if applicable) - panic, - fear, - terror
    on 1D6
    Orcs forte is fighting and grinding. Let's make sure that they aren't
    too easy to break.
    Buff
    Live to Sneak:
    All Greenhide race: goblins that are not monsters:
    - flee on swiftstride
    - may shoot and flee as a charge reaction. Resolve the stand & shoot as normal, then flee.
    - automatically rally when they flee into the edge of the board, unless they have been reduced below 25%.
    If they are fleeing a charge and the charger can contact them, they are destroyed,
    otherwise place the unit as close as possible to the point where it touched the edge.
    Goblins' forte is running away. Let's make them the best unit in the game at it.Buff
    Armory:
    Kleever : +1 to wound vs infantry, war beasts, cannot parry
    Kleevers: +1 to wound vs infantry, war beasts, +1A, two hands required
    Weapon options for elite orcs

    Note the lack of initiative bonus compared to usual additional hand weapon
    Buff
    Favor of Tuktek(X)
    X++ ward save, vs combat damage only
    Make Feral orcs want to be in combatNeutral
    Mother's kiss
    Shooting attacks with this rule have +1 to wound
    Alternative to poison attacks
    less powerful, still something
    Buff
    Feral Orc Ward Save only applies in combatNerf
    All Combat Characters: reduced magic item allowance
    Remove/Change Axe of the aporcalypse
    Remove some other magic items
    Make challenge-focused items
    De-emphasize characters as damage dealers, emphasize as
    spoilers vs enemy characters
    Nerf
    All Orc Characters: wounds +1, attacks -1De-emphasize characters as damage dealersNeutral
    All Orc Combat Characters: +1 WSDe-emphasize characters as damage dealersBuff
    Common Orcs with missile weapons renamed to "Runty Orcs"
    or possibly "Cowards", "Scabs", etc.
    get WS2 S3 thanks @beerbeard
    Fits fluffNerf
    Feral orcs cannot take missile weaponsFits fluffNerf
    Remove the old Born to Fight
    All Orcs S4 base
    Save on complexity - move it to the statlineBuff/Nerf
    Eadbashers on foot max size = 40We are a horde army. Give us the hordes back please.Buff
    Badlands only: Common Eadbashers:
    Heavy armour
    Can take Kleever(s),
    2A base, WS4 S4
    Common Eadbashers should be good in combat
    but distinct from feral
    Buff
    Primal only: Feral Eadbashers:
    2A base, frenzy,
    Favor of Tuktek (5+)
    Compensates for loss of BtFBuff
    Remove Feral Boar ridersPut Shelf Ornament unit out of its miseryNerf
    Primal only: Feral Mounted Eadbashers:
    Boar WS4 S4 M9
    Rider 2A base, Can take (Paired) Kleevers
    Shelf Ornament unit needs a lot of helpBuff
    Badlands only: Mounted Eadbashers
    Boar WS4 S4 M7
    Rider 2A T5
    can take Kleever + Shield and/or Lance
    + Shield
    Shelf Ornament unit needs a lot of helpBuff
    Badlands and Primal only: Great Green Idol:
    Affects Orc Units only
    Within 12'': units get +2 combat resolution
    if GGI in combat: Within 12'' also get +1 to hit
    Meaningful buff, source of
    +hit bonus if it is in combat

    Orcs want to fight
    Buff
    Forest goblins:
    Ld 7, Ini 1, Strider

    Can take scout
    Can take skirmish
    Can take Mother's Kiss

    Primal only: Can take: Creepy Crawlies Shooting attack: 24''
    range, S2, quick to fire, ignores cover and range penalties.
    Enemy units suffer -1BS for 1 game turn per wound from this attack
    Forest goblins
    can suppress enemy shooting by
    lowering enemy BS

    Mother's kiss is a way to buff
    shooting without making it as
    extreme as poison
    Buff
    Common goblins

    Judged by the strength of your enemies
    Enemy units that cost triple or more the points of the
    goblin unit must pass a
    leadership test on 3D6 if they decide
    to charge it. If they fail, they suffer a failed charge.

    Badlands only: Can take: (0-3/unit) Shady Gits:
    Place in the front rank. Cannot be attacked unless all R&F
    are also removed.
    At the end of a round of combat, after the enemy has had the
    opportunity to reform, you may remove one shady git
    and reform one enemy unit in base
    contact with the
    goblins following the rules for combat
    reforms.
    Common Goblin special rules:
    Judged by the strength of your
    enemies is a way to use common
    goblins as a strategic counter to
    expensive units, without making
    goblins good at fighting.


    Shady Gits are no longer really a
    damage dealer or assassin unit.
    They are used to reform an
    enemy unit, for example exposing
    it to a rear charge or flank charge
    Cave goblins

    Can take Nets as usual:

    Mountain only: (0-3/unit) Mad Gits: Aim to simplify by changing them to have
    fly and sweeping attacks.
    Gargantula is Primal, Mountain only

    Venom surge is Primal only but has Poison (4+)
    Armor save (4+) is Primal only

    Web Launcher is Mountain only
    Limit gargantula spam, but make it seriously scary for the Primal tribeBuff
    Trolls
    All cannot overrun or pursue broken enemies

    Make trolls more defensiveNerf
    Trolls
    All can make two vomit attacks from the front
    rank, one from supporting ranks
    All get 4 base attacks
    Make trolls a more specific anti-armor toolBuff
    Stone Trolls are Massive, Mountain only
    Movement nerf to M3
    Toughness increase to T5
    Make them more defensive - you can't cross the board with themNerf/
    Buff
    Common Trolls Massive, Badlands only
    Movement nerf to M4
    Make them more distinct from our cavalry unitsNerf/
    Buff
    Bridge Trolls are Primal only
    Cost increase
    Movement M5, Strider
    Bridge trolls are a more offensive troll, for the primal tribe that needs itNerf/
    Buff
    Gnasher Herd:
    Replace ITP with immune to terror and fear
    Can use fly when charging
    Explode if flee
    Explode if the enemy breaks from combat,
    but enemy is auto-caught
    Make gnashers more defensive
    not sure if this will have the intended effect
    Nerf/
    Buff
    ......















    TribePrimal TribeBadlands TribeMountain TribeMassive Tribe
    List1............
    List2............
    (tbc)




    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Everything here is just a bunch of ways of allowing and disallowing certain types of list, and perhaps there are better ways. Please post any suggestions in the comments! If you post a suggestion or change that I think is reasonable, I will add it and @ mention you.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The post was edited 28 times, last by Warboss_R'ok ().

  • It's really hard to disagree with what you say here. I think this is an excellent clarification of how complex it will be for the poor souls who will actually have the task of making our book in the end ;)

    Very interesting reading.

    I was thinking about point number 6: No-Autos, No-Ornaments
    This I think is very difficult. Because how do you create diversity without exposing any one unit as a "shelf ornament".

    Maybe a solution to this problem could lie in the way the underlying army synergies are constructed. Specifically I was thinking about the sort of in-built 3 folded division we have in the Orcs and Goblins types as we talked about before (savage, common, iron)/(cave, forest, common).

    The rules could be constructed in a way to reward 3 archetypes of lists, that are founded in those above mentioned ways OnG are supposed to work. So you could sort of go down the savage line to a certain extent, and get a boost to your savage orcs, or go down the common line to get a boost to the Common types of units. That way, maybe it would be easier to balance by making the different units worth including if you stuck to a specific archetype.

    Of course as others have mentioned before, there's a risk that this approach would limit the viable options by forcing the player to go down a certain line in order to be able to compete. But I still think that this way of approaching the problem, - by thinking about the underlying archetypes, - can be helpful to create an army book where all units could be valuable in certain situations.
    Cheers! :)
    Orc Forum
  • Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    Build a forest goblin list making use of terrain and ambushing and spider cavalry units
    Just pointing out that this is one thing that isn't supported by what people voted in the RT poll, on the contrary.

    MOBILITY - Deployment (ambush, scout, vanguard) : Pro 10%, Cons 34%
    Gerilla fighting (ambush, scout etc) : Pro 8%, Cons 57% (3rd most undesired playstyle)

    It does not mean that it has to be completely absent but it does suggest that it should be limited and not central. Probably a few units only and not in core.
  • I like the idea of this thread! I'll be very interested to see where it goes. I hope it stays positive.

    I see three main list types: Orc based, Goblin based, and full mixed.

    Within that I see Common, a Cave, and a Forest/Feral thematic options.

    "I was thinking about point number 6: No-Autos, No-Ornaments
    This I think is very difficult. Because how do you create diversity without exposing any one unit as a "shelf ornament"."

    If we are careful and make multiple list types based on the three main types, we can ensure every unit has a role somewhere but isn't required for success with all options.

    For O&G must: I would include the idea O&G must include a greater element of randomness and uncertainty than any other army. Hilarity must then ensue. This idea of randomness can serve the purpose of a "weakness" that can be countered by other strengths. (Two notes: The randomness should be fun, but not game-breaking like Animosity. Second, I know a lot of people may not like this idea, but I believe at least a level of uncertainty of outcome is very basic to the O&G theme.)

    O&G Community Support


    "I see you are a man who likes to talk. That is good, for I am a man who likes talking to a man who likes to talk." - Caspar Gutman
  • Warboss_R wrote:

    O&G cannot:
    • Build an elite, low model count army
    • Build an army that wins by having nothing but shooting with no support or defense (We're not Sylvan elves)
    • Have a combination of excellent shooting units and excellent combat units in the same army (We're not Empire)
    • Build a monster mash (We're not Lizards/Beasts/Warriors)
    • Build a list that is dominated by characters as damage dealers. (We're not KoE or Warriors)
    • ...

    Good post! Thsnk you, @Warboss_R'ok!

    But I'm disagree with you:

    * Build an army that wins by having nothing but shooting with no support or defense (We're not Sylvan elves)
    Mono goblins list (forest and night) should be able to win game with rain of poison arrows, mad gits, magic and artillery.

    * Have a combination of excellent shooting units and excellent combat units in the same army (We're not Empire)
    Orcs (including crossbows and archers) + trolls or chariots + artillery should be also valid and competitive lists.

    * Build a monster mash (We're not Lizards/Beasts/Warriors)
    Nope. OnG should have their way to build good monster mash with gargantulas, wyverns, giants and squigs.



    O&G must:
    • have some mechanical element corresponding to disobedient, unreliable troops (but it's a negotiation as to what that is)

    No. Low Ld and lot of units with frenzy, stupidity and move to random direction is way better solution than inviting even more special rules.
  • Gerfaks wrote:

    Mono goblins list (forest and night) should be able to win game with rain of poison arrows, mad gits, magic and artillery.
    Yes, lists with no orcs, or even just forest cave/common/forest lists should have a lot of shooting. They should have better shooting than orcs. But....
    • A list that does nothing but shoot makes for a boring game and some boring, one-dimensional list building too
    • Forest goblins have an affinity for spiders, and a possible link to bridge trolls. Cave goblins have gnashers, mad gits and stone trolls. Common goblins have chariots, common trolls, scrap wagons. What are these units supposed to do? Just hang out and watch?
    So my idea here is that the goblins rely on trolls, gnashers and chariots as "defensive" combat units to counter the enemy when they get to the goblin lines.

    Gerfaks wrote:

    Orcs (including crossbows and archers) + trolls or chariots + artillery should be also valid and competitive lists.
    The problem with this is that a list that does everything well is in danger of being very good, and causing all the units in it to get nerfed in order to achieve external balance. I think that nerfs to our artillery and nerfs to feral orc numbers have come from exactly this direction.

    SO IMO you can be very good at combat, or very good at shooting, but not both in the same list.

    Of course you can have some limited shooting in a combat list, or some counter-attack capability in a shooting list.

    Gerfaks wrote:

    * Build a monster mash (We're not Lizards/Beasts/Warriors)
    Nope. OnG should have their way to build good monster mash with gargantulas, wyverns, giants and squigs.
    (A monster mash is a list containing mostly monsters in terms of points for the benefit of people who haven't heard this phrase before...)

    We can't be good at every list type. IMO Monster Mash is fun to mess around with, but for a competitive game where armies aren't massively imbalanced in terms of what they can do, O&G have to have some lists that we cannot build. It's not fair to have a book that can basically build every possible list, and then books like dwarfs that don't have a single monster, or elves that can't field hordes.

    Leave it to the Saurians to field a bunch of dinosaurs.

    Having said that, I would like to see a bit more variety than just Gargantula spam. It would be cool to see Orc lists with 2-3 wyverns supporting a boar rider charge!

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Warboss_R'ok ().

  • Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    Gerfaks wrote:

    Mono goblins list (forest and night) should be able to win game with rain of poison arrows, mad gits, magic and artillery.

    Yes, lists with no orcs, or even just forest cave/common/forest lists should have a lot of shooting. They should have better shooting than orcs. But....
    • A list that does nothing but shoot makes for a boring game and some boring, one-dimensional list building too
    • Forest goblins have an affinity for spiders, and a possible link to bridge trolls. Cave goblins have gnashers, mad gits and stone trolls. Common goblins have chariots, common trolls, scrap wagons. What are these units supposed to do? Just hang out and watch?
    So my idea here is that the goblins rely on trolls, gnashers and chariots as "defensive" combat units to counter the enemy when they get to the goblin lines.


    I think it might be cool to have an affinity between Feral Orcs and Forest Goblins. I would rather see a Feral Orc cheiftan on a spider instead of a boar. I think it's @GrayGork who has a Feral Orc Lord on a Gargantula in his gallery? Wicked cool.

    Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    Gerfaks wrote:

    Orcs (including crossbows and archers) + trolls or chariots + artillery should be also valid and competitive lists.

    The problem with this is that a list that does everything well is in danger of being very good, and causing all the units in it to get nerfed in order to achieve external balance. I think that nerfs to our artillery and nerfs to feral orc numbers have come from exactly this direction.
    SO IMO you can be very good at combat, or very good at shooting, but not both in the same list.

    Of course you can have some limited shooting in a combat list, or some counter-attack capability in a shooting list.


    Here is where I propose a "Runty Orc" that is relegated to shooting and artillery work.


    Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    Gerfaks wrote:

    * Build a monster mash (We're not Lizards/Beasts/Warriors)
    Nope. OnG should have their way to build good monster mash with gargantulas, wyverns, giants and squigs.

    (A monster mash is a list containing mostly monsters in terms of points for the benefit of people who haven't heard this phrase before...)
    We can't be good at every list type. IMO Monster Mash is fun to mess around with, but for a competitive game where armies aren't massively imbalanced in terms of what they can do, O&G have to have some lists that we cannot build. It's not fair to have a book that can basically build every possible list, and then books like dwarfs that don't have a single monster, or elves that can't field hordes.

    Leave it to the Saurians to field a bunch of dinosaurs.

    Having said that, I would like to see a bit more variety than just Gargantula spam. It would be cool to see Orc lists with 2-3 wyverns supporting a boar rider charge!


    I think our mix of monsters is about right. I'd like to see Monstrous Cavalry options, including as mounts. The Wyvern needs help. And of course the GGI needs a lot of work. But currently I can (and do) take two Giants and a Gargantula, and it works pretty well.

    O&G Community Support


    "I see you are a man who likes to talk. That is good, for I am a man who likes talking to a man who likes to talk." - Caspar Gutman
  • One BIG rule we miss is rerolls in combat (both to hit and to wound, we have non of em).

    IMO O&G is a race that should 100% have a way to get hatred, it fits the army style and the fluff. Now I think a good way to do this is to add a passive aura to the GGI. All friendly units within 8" gain hatred. Your way of adding +2 CR is to strong I think, as static combat res is very, very powerfull. Also for the love of the green gods, make him otherwordly.

    We need rerolls, its silly we have non (specially since we lost both to wound and to hit rerolls when the new magic paths came in).

    Also remove the army specific buffs from both O&G and all other armies (like cave goblin hatred vs DH and DH + grudge vs O&G and VS). In 9th age having a build in advantage vs a specific army book makes no sense.

    Playtester

    :O&G: :VC:
  • Baldin wrote:

    One BIG rule we miss is rerolls in combat (both to hit and to wound, we have non of em).
    Granted, quite a lot of armies miss that, or have to rely on specific magic paths to get it, or can only get it on specific models in specific situations (KoE characters come to mind here).

    I personally Think that a AoE Hatred effect is too strong, I would prefer a weaker AoE or a more focused hatred effect
    I haz a blog! the-ninth-age.com/blog/index.p…-the-moment-aslo-batreps/.

    Mostly KoE and ID stuff. Now also some Void
  • Baldin wrote:

    rerolls in combat
    Yeah, though what I was thinking about was getting +1 to hit from the GGI

    Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    Great Green Idol:
    Affects Orc Units only
    Within 12'': units get +2 combat resolution
    if GGI in combat: Within 12'' also get +1 to hit
    And weapons for elite orcs that give +to wound

    Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    Armory: (Orc only)
    Kleever : +1 to wound, cannot parry
    Kleevers: +1 to wound, +1A, two hands, no +Ini
    Weapon options for elite orcs
  • It might be to strong indeed, however most armies actualy do have hatred/reroll to hit and/or rerolls to wound. My problem is that we have lost both. Gaining it through spells is, imo, very strong since you can hand it to the unit you want to have it (if the spell goes of ofc). And as for only specific models having it, it is still very powerfull on those units. O&G having 0 ways to get it is realy weird imo. Your statement that quite alot of armies miss it is, imo, false.

    In the list below I listen which armies can get rerolls on R&F units and left out single units. Rerolls are powefull if you roll many dice. One monster (like the VC Stregoi Count aren't taken into the list)

    Some armies can even get it very easily and on any unit they want. I oftenly play vs DH, BH, EoS, DE, VS, UD and lately SE. A quick scan of the army books give the following to different armies.

    BH: Basicly always hatred
    DL: Can give hatred to any unit through supreme aspect - Wrath
    DE: Cult of Nabh and killer instinct. Also can get reroll to wound on units with lethal strike through altar
    DH: Hatred on basicly everyting vs everything important (if throne and king is used), and rune of reckoning
    EoS: Add prelate/altar of battle for hatred. Blessing for reroll to wound
    SA: Hatred through Totem of Mixoatl, reroll 1's to hit, plaque of the snake god, predatory roar
    SE: Hatred on Dryads and reroll 1's to wound in forest
    VS: Hatred on many units
    UD: Hatred through Tomb Harbringer on any unit he is in

    Have reroll to hit/to wound AND can get spells to do so
    BH: Evocation
    DL: Divination and Evocation
    DH: Rune of reckoning - this is "only" a bound spell, so easy to counter
    EoS: Divination
    SA: Divination and Evocation
    SE: Divination
    UD: Divination and Evocation


    Through spells only:
    HBE: Divination reroll to hit
    VC: Evocation - reroll to wound. reroll to hit
    KoE: Divanition reroll to hit
    WoDG: Only with the battle shrine of Luse or Pestilence (as bound spell)

    No way to get eighter reroll to hit, nor to wound
    O&G (not counting cave goblins vs DH)
    OK - I put this here, but can get rerolls on to hit and wounds of 1's through dragonskin banner.
    ID

    So basicly 9/16 can get rerolls to hit/to wound on r&f units. 7 of which can also get it through magic
    4 others can get it though spells only
    and 3 can't get eighter at all

    Now I don't think we should have rerolls on all units, or be able to give it to any we want. But not having any form of rerolls (both to hit and wound) just makes no sense in an army that is mostly made for melee combat. Specially when some armies who have very strong shooting do gain them.

    Cheers
    Baldin

    Playtester

    :O&G: :VC:

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

  • Baldin wrote:

    It might be to strong indeed, however most armies actualy do have hatred/reroll to hit and/or rerolls to wound. My problem is that we have lost both. Gaining it through spells is, imo, very strong since you can hand it to the unit you want to have it (if the spell goes of ofc). And as for only specific models having it, it is still very powerfull on those units. O&G having 0 ways to get it is realy weird imo. Your statement that quite alot of armies miss it is, imo, false.

    In the list below I listen which armies can get rerolls on R&F units and left out single units. Rerolls are powefull if you roll many dice. One monster (like the VC Stregoi Count aren't taken into the list)

    Some armies can even get it very easily and on any unit they want. I oftenly play vs DH, BH, EoS, DE, VS, UD and lately SE. A quick scan of the army books give the following to different armies.

    BH: Basicly always hatred
    DL: Can give hatred to any unit through supreme aspect - Wrath
    DE: Cult of Nabh and killer instinct. Also can get reroll to wound on units with lethal strike through altar
    DH: Hatred on basicly everyting vs everything important (if throne and king is used), and rune of reckoning
    EoS: Add prelate/altar of battle for hatred. Blessing for reroll to wound
    SA: Hatred through Totem of Mixoatl, reroll 1's to hit, plaque of the snake god, predatory roar
    SE: Hatred on Dryads and reroll 1's to wound in forest
    VS: Hatred on many units
    UD: Hatred through Tomb Harbringer on any unit he is in

    Have reroll to hit/to wound AND can get spells to do so
    BH: Evocation
    DL: Divination and Evocation
    DH: Rune of reckoning - this is "only" a bound spell, so easy to counter
    EoS: Divination
    SA: Divination and Evocation
    SE: Divination
    UD: Divination and Evocation


    Through spells only:
    HBE: Divination reroll to hit
    VC: Evocation - reroll to wound. reroll to hit
    KoE: Divanition reroll to hit
    WoDG: Only with the battle shrine of Luse or Pestilence (as bound spell)

    No way to get eighter reroll to hit, nor to wound
    O&G (not counting cave goblins vs DH)
    OK - I put this here, but can get rerolls on to hit and wounds of 1's through dragonskin banner.
    ID

    So basicly 9/16 can get rerolls to hit/to wound on r&f units. 7 of which can also get it through magic
    4 others can get it though spells only
    and 3 can't get eighter at all

    Now I don't think we should have rerolls on all units, or be able to give it to any we want. But not having any form of rerolls (both to hit and wound) just makes no sense in an army that is mostly made for melee combat. Specially when some armies who have very strong shooting do gain them.

    Cheers
    Baldin
    So basicaly 18.75% of armies do not have acces to rerolls I would not call it being a lot :).

    I agree fully. From flugff perspective we should absolutly have it, morso than a lot of armies that actualy have it. And from army workings orcs at least should have some form of acces to both to hit and to wound rerolls (I am not sayung this should be easy or anything but it should be there). That could be actually preaty decent way to work in direction of fulfilling 1/3 of our main RT poll advantages that say we should be strong in both first turn of fighting (potential hatred and to wound reroll) as well as in grinding (potential to wound reroll)?

    I would make it so we could get it through magic or through special rules. Magic could be in form of some changes to what paths we have or by adding apropriate bound spells to, for example, GGI. Second case is better in that it can be limited to orcs as it should be acording to fluff.

    Best regards
    Sklodo
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.
  • Ye I think it would best be limeted to Orcs aswell. I think binding it to the GGI would be realy nice. That way you don't always have it, but GGI wouldnt be an auto-include eighter.

    Giving GGI otherwordly and changing his current aura to incite hatred to orcs, reroll to wound to goblins and +1 to wound for everything that isn't orc or goblin or something like that.

    I don't know, but losing combats that should be an easy win because the enemy can give its units rerolls to hit often times doesn't feel fair.

    Playtester

    :O&G: :VC:
  • Baldin wrote:

    Ye I think it would best be limeted to Orcs aswell. I think binding it to the GGI would be realy nice. That way you don't always have it, but GGI wouldnt be an auto-include eighter.

    Giving GGI otherwordly and changing his current aura to incite hatred to orcs, reroll to wound to goblins and +1 to wound for everything that isn't orc or goblin or something like that.

    I don't know, but losing combats that should be an easy win because the enemy can give its units rerolls to hit often times doesn't feel fair.
    Frankly with GGI I would go either with coherent aura doing one thing or with bound spells. With aura that do diferent things for diferent units it might slow the game or become to comlicated. Also if this should be aura is open for debate :).
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.