Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 184.

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.

  • ID General Chat

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from Jomppexx: “Random thought on the infernal bastion: What if it were changed to have a crew of say 6-8 dwarves with flintlock axes or blunderbusses, maybe an option between them. The prophet potentially on it would get 360 LOS, same with the shooting weapon equipped crew. It keeps the same feel but makes it much more toned down as now it's not 20 shots anymore. Also makes joining it to immortals or melee focused units a realistic option. ” I'd do anything to get 360 back, but I think th…

  • ID General Chat

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from WhammeWhamme: “berti, I argued for implementing it because I found your (and I do remember it was you) suggestion on flavour to be neat. It was by no means needed; most caps in no way represent anything in-universe other than "it would make for an unfun game to play against seven monsters/cannons/whatever", but credit where it's due, you noticed something neat we could do there. (Reminder on the procedure: naming came AFTER final hand-off. The special rule was not called Fires of Indu…

  • Quote from WhammeWhamme: “Personally, I prefer a more relaxed approach to official background; it's cool and all and I love to see people follow it, but sometimes you want an army made out of adorable faeries, so you just model them some weapons on them and ignore the official fluff. WRT Immortals specifically, it wouldn't have to be masks, I could see a specific citadel using their own substitutes to produce their own brand of Immortals. ” I do too. It's just an additional step in the caring-ab…

  • I'm not the dude above, but the naming conventions were one of the aspects that really sullied me on the DL book. Couple of them are pretty good and I can't come up with a better one, but most of them really don't convey the things they are doing in game. And also as a side note, I really don't like how most of those manifestations are physical things, that should be modeled (if you are really anal about WYSIWYG), in a game that is model agnostic. It just feels weird to have this layer of "restr…

  • I'd take 18" range over march and shoot. It fits more to the style of the unrelenting wall of hot lead and ironclad angy. Aaand it might be a step closer to get back that sweet 360 no scope.

  • How would a stationary, almost like an AoS spell, unit or effect work with this game? I'm so glad ID got that one pride flag that can make a wall out of thin air, almost like an AoS spell. I've had a short-lived enthusiasm in Warma/Hordes games, and they had these cool stone totems which used for marking territories and, iirc, were used in game to teleport units and fling other spells. I just find the concept of magic imbued rocks full of elven runes zapping or spooking enemies really facinating…

  • Infernal Dwarves LAB FAQ

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Here's a thing I've been wondering. The Slave rule say this: "...suffers 1 hit with Armour Penetration 10 that wounds automatically, with no saves of any kind allowed." Why does it need to have an AP 10 if it also says no saves of any kind allowed?

  • Just echoing these two since they were the ones that I was to suggest: Quote from Estebanvol: “Keeping up with Kasocles suggestion #1. That one may be too strong ("may"). What about: Augment. One turn. 24" (Boosted Aura 12"): The unit gains Oil Skins rule that doesn't reduce the strength and the range of the attacks and are applicable to both cc and shooting (something like this). ” This I like because it gives a chance to get incendiary with full dwarf army. Although it should be worded more si…

  • Quote from 20phoenix: “Quote from Jarec: “Quote from WhammeWhamme: “Nothing is locked in, but "improve the quantity of shooting ID lists take" is unlikely to be a priority. Like, seriously, if all your favourite lists run 6 points of Fires of Industry, well... maybe consider what it would take for you to like lists that don't (and then share that with us). ” Is just that I really enjoy the feel and fluff of industrial dwarfs, and find it really confusing that the most industrial race has the mos…

  • Quote from WhammeWhamme: “Nothing is locked in, but "improve the quantity of shooting ID lists take" is unlikely to be a priority. Like, seriously, if all your favourite lists run 6 points of Fires of Industry, well... maybe consider what it would take for you to like lists that don't (and then share that with us). ” Is just that I really enjoy the feel and fluff of industrial dwarfs, and find it really confusing that the most industrial race has the most limitation to its industrial things.

  • Quote from WhammeWhamme: “If it sees less play, it will get cheaper until it sees play. ” Does this mean that the Engine costing 2 Industry points is here to stay? Cuz that's a huge deal breaker for me. It actually breaks all my fave lists. I've not started to whine about that yet, because I was so sure it was just some sort of test run or a mistake and would not be staying like that...

  • ID General Chat

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from DanT: “Ok, thanks :-)This is interesting. Let me check I have understood correctly: - The thing that is important to you, is not any of the mechanical advantages of having 360 shooting? - You don't think the 360 shooting is mechanically important to the model or army? - So your concern is not that you feel this is a reduction of power? - Your objection is that you feel that this tower needs to have 360 shooting for the flavour to make sense, and to match the image you have in your hea…

  • Quote from Kasocles: “- I have some issues with Incendiary in general. It seems very vassal dependant. What if I want to make a list without vassal? I believe you cannot get access to incendiary tokens at ALL. And based on 1 game, with two units with bows it seems you will only be shooting with oil skins to get some effect. - Hereditary spell; many have said it before, it is just boring. -1 Off/Deff, it is so common...It has a bit of flavour in the sense that it gets better with Incendiary, but …

  • ID General Chat

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from DanT: “@Jarec (and anyone else who wants the 360 back on the bastion). There is something I don't quite get. Why do people want the 360 specifically? What did people actually do with the this ability in actual games that can't be done now? Was it important to do this? Why/when/how? Do you consider this model to no longer be interesting and useful? (even if it got say a 100pt price drop)? ” It was something different, and fit it like a glove. Like a Vermin Magister, but for a whole uni…

  • ID General Chat

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from Wesser: “Well sure. If the unit firing from the tower is reduced to range 8 then 360’ is fine The whole shtick about Shrieking Horror is how to get it to shoot while maneuvering its base, keeping it in march range and in a position where is doesnt get charged. With 18 range on the guns Bastion have none of these issues ” And with the bastion you'd have to think your initial deployment since you can't move that well laterally, while also minding all units and terrain you can't fly, or …

  • ID General Chat

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    The 360 los would be kinda like an inverse flying. You can fly that Shrieking Horror behind enemy lines to have none of its facings threatened and still shoot. 360 los tower would do almost that but in the front of the enemy, where it is still in sights.

  • Quote from Peacemaker: “But the nerf to Rock Crusher seems totally fine. Why shouldn't it cost 2 industry points? ” Because Industry points were made to limit shooting.

  • ID General Chat

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from Wesser: “And the ability to threaten any target in a 21’ radius with no penalty to hit and basically eliminating the concept of positioning while not exposing a vulnerable facing ... is a mere luxury? Whats next? Extend the range of Shrieking Horrors to 36’? Or ADD fixed range to Mad Gitz? Stuff that allows you to easy-mode while not committing your units or allowing any counterplay thankfully isnt intended ” The new tower still threatens any target in a 21" radius; Having no hit pena…

  • ID General Chat

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from Wesser: “Because with 360 you could face down threats on multiple fronts without a care. It basically killed movement and maneuvering for a bargain price ” It still has to move and manoeuvre like others, it just has the luxury to shoot something else than the most threatening target it has to physically face.

  • ID General Chat

    Jarec - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from WhammeWhamme: “The argument that killed 360 line of sight for me was "a unit of infantry chasing the Bastion while the Benny Hill theme music plays". It wasn't the ability to spin in the middle of the battlefield, it was the ability to play avoidance (literally turn around, present your rear and move full speed away while shooting) I like it being in the middle of the battlefield picking targets as it likes. ” Remove the ability to march and shoot, and give it line which says it can n…