Dwarf Holds LAB Brainstorm/Ideas Thread

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!

  • Firthunands91 wrote:

    Random ideas I've been collecting for the last year and a half. I understand trying to implement most of them at the same time would probably make the book as OTT as current ID, they are just fun concepts I talked with my friends and other players, or that I saw around the forum and I liked (mainly from Ilovepeanut). All of it shouts making DH more elite, and I don't know if that would be intended. Funnily enough half the ideas I gathered are really similar to what ID has got... So it could be problematic. With those ideas I had in mind to move away from MSU, plus the shooting or inclussion of shooting models is more restricted that nowadays. I try to make them more about Discipline, units that won't flee away from a combat, even if they are losing. I also aimed to remove Special Rules that were too complicated, or give them something based on Universal Rules instead, trying to go for an easier to understand and play against book.

    • Battle Runes: Make them work in a similar way as BH, in the sense 1 instance can be carried by a unit without being a Magical Banner. Seekers have no access to them.
    • Runesmith: Casting range atleast 18'. Lose Magic Resistance.
    • Rune of Resonance gone. Too complicated, and a way of deleting yet another special item that takes 8 paragraphs to be explained.
    • Rune of Resolve: Augment, One Turn. The target may perform a 6" Magical Move and gains QTF. Basically our weakest rune, this would also help with our shooting and not staying back.
    • Rune of Reckoning: Augment, One Turn. The target must reroll failed to-hit rolls with its Close Combat and Shooting Attacks. Another way to make DH magic sinergize better with the DH army, and not just with their CC part.
    • Add Attribute Spell: Augment, One Turn. Range X'. The bearer gains Magic Resistance (1). If the unit contains other instances of Magic Resistance, it increases those Magic Resistance values by 1 instead. So Aether Icon is our Attribute.
    • Making Rune of Mastery an inbuild feature being 0/3 uses per game, with a chance of going wrong (ala Dark Shards or Power Shrooms). I know it would be autoinclude, but might spicy up such a poor Magic Phase,adding a bit more tactical play to it.
    • Mithril Armor: Negates 1AP. Given to Characters, Greybeards, KingsGuard, Deepwatch and maybe Forge Wardens. Oh, and Warmachines.
    • Grudges: No Hatred (DH has access to rr to hit via magic). Friendly Units in base contact with grudged Enemy Units gain Frenzy, Fearless and Battlefocus. It feels like these rules resemble a hateful mindset for our stunties?
    • Shield Wall: When using a Shield, the model gains Aegis 6++ against all melee attacks coming from the front. No 5++ if getting charged, but also not restricted to close combat. Short and clear.
    • Yer comin’ with me!: Close Combat Attacks made by models with this Attack Attribute can never wound on worse than 4+. Models are always removed at initiative step 0. Short and Clear. Makes them better but look further because I partially removed a key rule on them.
    • Sturdy: The Devastating Charge needs to go. It's too good on STR4 models (so everything in the book but Clan Warriors and Marksmen), and it makes Great Weapons not as valuable. -1 to SNS is nice but could just be moved to another place to keep the rule short and clear. I'd probably give them something related to their Discipline and going the extra mile for the clan. EG. Discipline Test taken by Units X' close to Friendly Infantry Units are suspected to Minimized Roll.
    • The bigger they are… Removed. Swiftstride moved to Seekers Models Rules (they don't wear armor, and are literally willing to die in combat!)
    • WALL BANNER. Yup. IMO the Wall Banner fits waaaaaay better in the DH nature than ID one.
    • Axe Skilled Rune. Dominant. A weapon engraved with this Rune follows the rules for Great Weapons The bearer can use a Shield simultaneously with and gets Parry. Instead Rune of Craftsmanship. I mean, if someone gets to master the Great Weapon use is DH, not their Evil Hairy Cousins or a Doomy Lord.
    • Rune of Smashing. Dominant. To avoid too powerful combinations.
    • Rune of Destruction. Dominant. Idem.
    • Rune of Storms/Quake. One Use only. Lasts One Turn. If activated, enemy units across the board or in a certain area have to pass a March Test to do so.
    • Rune of Grounding. Not RunicSmith only. Opens for magicless playstyle.
    • Rune of Mining. Deploy a Single Ruins Terrain Piece, more than X' away from Enemy Units. Miners can choose to Arrive to the Battlefield from there. Miners are the Essence of the DH, they are about Mountains.
    • Standard of Wisdom: Removed.
    • Standard of Swiftness: Remove limitation 0-1. Cannot be taken by core. (Cannot be taken by Seekers aswell, as they cannot take an enchantment at all).
    • Runic Standard of Steadiness. One use only. May be activated at the start of a Player Turn. The Unit Gains +1 aim. (I was thinking between this, or ignores Hard Target/Cover). Would help immensely.

    • Engineer. Not a leader. Underground Expert: Miners can rerrol Ambush rolls. Harder to build MSU. He also gets a great sinergy with Miners, making them more reliable to our will.
    • King: Aura of Bravery: Units in Commanding Pressence of a King auto pass Fear Tests, but get the -1 to Discipline.
    • Seeker: Remove Grim Resolve. Add Holy Willing: Attacks made with this enchanted weapon become Divine Attacks and Magical Attacks, and failed to wound rolls must be rerolled (Affects only attacks made with Close Combat and Shooting Weapons that are not enchanted). Yup, that's basically Inbuilt Blessed Inscriptions. Not Working with Weapon Enchantments should keep it fair. And finally DH gets access to Divine Attacks.
    • Warthrone and Shieldbearers: Cannot be Stomped.
    • Greybeards: 0-X Units per Army.
    • Marksmen: Warriors Upgrade. The Model does not suffer from negative to-hit modifiers from a Stand and Shoot Charge Reaction. Throwing Weapons, Pistols now suffer from SNS penalty, so maybe they can go back to a logical price. Also Marksmen being basically Warriors with Ranged Weapons is a reality, so just merging them would save space and opening for the next.
    • Miners moved to core. 0-X Units per Army. Str3Ap0. Only Pistols as Ranged Weapon Option. Again, Miners are the ABC of the DH.
    • KingsGuard: Stubborn if in Commanding Pressence of the General or a King. Lose Bodyguard. They help with them being more autonomous.
    • Deepwatch: Stubborn if in Contact of a model with Fear. Lose Bodyguard. A brick, will hold Monsters and such. The true anvil unit, but only against certain enemies. Maybe I'm too naive thinking that + mithril armor + their improved shield wall being for all melee in front would finally make them be great?
    • Seekers: 0-2 Units per Army. 0-X Models per Army. Swiftstride included into Global Profile. Only Unbreakable with a Dragon Seeker Inside. That's it, no base Unbreakable Status. I think it's a fair tradeoff for changing their Yer Coming With Me rule. And could help at making better internal competition since they got quite a hit in their staying power while the others improved theirs?
    • Busters. Several exclusive upgrades to choose from : Forge Repeater and Fly, Improved Chasis (+1AS, +1Str and AP to Grinding and Impacts), War Platform that gives some sinergy to its unit, Underground Drill (Ambush like UD). Yeah, I was waaaay too high when thinking about a War Platform upgrade. And yet again, astonished when I saw the ID book brought to life something similar. So, there's a chance?
    • Copters don't count towards Clan Thunder, Throwing Weapons Units do.
    • Forge Wardens: Shots 2, March and Shoot, Always 3+ Aim, Range 12', QTF, str4ap1.
    • Copters and Busters count towards Engines of War. Capped at total of units and individual models, not points. So trying to limit MSU, Gunlines or Flying Circus.
    • Warmachines get Mithril Armor. Makes no sense for them to be on Heavy armor, they are the pride, the Magnus Opus of the Dwarven. Let's just say, FLUFF REASONS.

    Let me know what you think about my BROKEN Book! Do you think my intention to make the book easier or less complicated is achieved? Was I fair when giving and taking rules to the army? Or am I just too biased?
    @Firthunands91 when I've read this I have one thought in my mind "Are you crazy?!". You want to nerf two of our (IMO) strongest units - seekers and miners?

    But then I've read all second time, and I need to say I love almost all! Really great job. There are a lot of great synergies that we lack at the moment. It looks like a great plan how to make dwarfs to look and feel like Dwarfs again - with MMU instead of MSU.

    I can live with s3 miners in core with somekind of pickaxe if they will be in core and have reroll to ambush thanks to engineer.

    You add a lot of really cool (and balanced stuff) but with some nerfs here and there. This is BALANCE! This is how every LABs should look like. I hope you would join DH LAB Team when the time will come. People from other LAB Team should learn from you how to start working on new books.

    I also really like @RumbaRoy idea with anvil and @xaby86 idea about grudge markers for units that will kill poor dwarfs. And clans of course!

    ...Bloody forest... damn tree-huggers and daisy-eaters... burn 'em all...
  • Instead of the +1 st on charge, perhaps even instead of grudges at all I would like to see another rule:

    Dwarfen anger: When a model of the unit is killed or wounded in CC the whole unit (including charakters inside) gains battle focus for next attack (so that it also works for units hitting before enemy, but a round later).
    So the rule has to have a trigger...a killed dwarf to make his friends angry.

    Most things in the list above I like. On runic items some work has to be done.
  • I was thinking about King and Overlord. Overlord is supposed to be so rich he can have any magic weapon he wants, but where does that leave King DH? We have always imagined that a Dwarf King would have mountains and mountains of gold in his halls, I don't think we ever imagined that there could be another one eclipsing our wealth, and it would be very impolite to make a rule for King to try to compete, it would be unoriginal. So I looked for an alternative rule, but it always came back to me. Then it occurred to me that his runes would be more powerful than other people's runes, they are wonders created by the best runic masters of old, inherited by the lineage since the foundation of the bastion, probably from the hands of the gods themselves. Inscriptions that had already been forgotten how to keep so many pider. So I thought about how to make the runes. Let's see what you think.
    The runes follow the normal procedure of 3 runes per object and you can't make the same combination but you can inscribe them in GW. I start from the following idea: runes have 2 effects, the first one always works, the other one is activated by spending a veil token (unless there is a rune that modifies this, we will have maximum 3 veil tokens) to the effect that is activated with veil tokens we will call it Ancestral Power or AP. Only one Ancestral Power can be activated per object.

    Runic Weapon Enchantments.

    Rune of Destruction.
    Attacks made with a weapon engraved with this Rune gain Multiple Wounds (D3).
    Ancestral power: The roll to determine the Multiple Wounds is maximized.

    Rune of Smashing.
    For each Rune of Might engraved on a weapon, attacks made with it gain +1 Strength and +1 Armour Penetration.
    Ancestral Power: Attacks made with a weapon engraved with this Rune that are allocated towards a model with Resilience 5 or more have their Strength set to 10 and their Armour Penetration set to 10.

    Rune of Penetration.
    Attacks made with a weapon engraved with one or more Runes of Penetrating gain +3 Armour Penetration.
    AP: Attacks made with a weapon engraved with one or more Runes of Penetrating gain +6 Armour Penetration.

    Rune of Quickening.
    The wielder of a weapon engraved with this Rune gains Lightning Reflexes.
    AP: The wielder gains +3 Agility when using it.

    Rune of Fury.
    For each Rune of Fury engraved on a weapon, the wielder gains +1 Attack Value when using it.
    AP: OUO. Replaces his attacks with a single attack that deals damage to 4x4 area, these attacks are not affected by the Multiple Wounds rule.

    Rune of Lightning.
    If the wielder scores at least one successful hit with a weapon engraved with one or more Runes of Lightning (consider each set of simultaneous attacks separately), each enemy unit that was hit suffers an additional D3 hits for each instance of this Rune. The hits are considered Special Attacks and are resolved with Strength 4, Armour Penetration 1, and Magical Attacks.
    AP: The hits have +1Ap.

    Rune of Returning.
    A weapon engraved with this Rune can be used as a Shooting Weapon with Aim 3+ and the following profile: Range 8", Shots 1, Str as user, AP as user, Quick to Fire, Accurate, Reload. Shooting Attacks with this weapon are affected by all Runic Weapon Enchantments on the engraved weapon (even if the effects are normally restricted to Close Combat Attacks).
    AP: The range is set at 18".

    Rune of Fire.
    At the start of any phase or Round of Combat, this Rune may be activated. If so, attacks made with a weapon engraved with this Rune become Flaming Attacks until the end of the phase.
    AP: The attacks are also divine.

    Runic Armour Enchantments.

    Rune of Resistance.
    Successful to-wound rolls against the model of the wearer of an armour engraved with this Rune must be rerolled.
    AP: The enemy attack is -1 to wound.

    Rune of Iron.
    The wearer of an armour engraved with
    ● A single Rune of Iron gains +1 Armour.
    ● Two or more Runes of Iron gains +2 Armour.
    AP: The wearer must reroll failed Armour Saves.

    Rune of Retribution.
    Whenever the wearer of an armour engraved with one or more Runes of Retribution rolls a successful Shield Wall Aegis roll (including Shield Wall stacked with Rune of Shielding), the attacking model suffers a hit with the Strength and Armour Penetration of the saved attack. This is considered a Special Attack.
    AP: the attacking model suffers two hits instead of one for each attack saved.

    Rune of the Forge.
    The wearer of an armour engraved with this Rune gains Aegis (2+, against Flaming Attacks).
    AP: Aegis (2+, against Lettal strike and toxic attacks)

    Runic Banner Enchantments.

    Runic Standard of Shielding.
    All friendly units within 6" of the bearer gain Aegis (5+,against Shooting Attacks).
    AP: The range increases to 12".

    Runic Standard of Swiftness.
    The bearer's unit gains Vanguard.
    AP: OUO. May be activated at the end of the Charge Phase, directly after all Charge Moves have been resolved. If the bearer's unit was successfully Charged during this phase, it may perform a Combat Reform (following the normal rules for Combat Reforms).

    Runic Standard of Dismay.
    Units Charging the bearer's unit suffer -2" Advance Rate for their Charge Range roll.
    AP: Units Charging the bearer's unit suffer -4" Advance Rate for their Charge Range roll.

    Runic Standard of Steadiness.
    The bearer's unit gains Quick to Fire.
    AP: The bearer's unit gains Battle Focus when it shoots.

    Runic Standard of the Anvil.
    Friendly units Charging enemy units Engaged in Combat with the bearer's unit must reroll failed Charge Range rolls.
    AP: Friendly units that manage to charge the enemy in contact get an additional +1Ag.

    Well, I skipped the Talismanic runes so as not to make it too long. The prices of runes would have to be recalibrated, but since runes are more expensive than other weapon enchantments in comparison, I estimate that only a few will increase in price and not much. Some need to be dimmed to 0-1 or Dominant.

    So let's see what you could do with a combo, to see an example. HW+shield with Destruction + Smashing + fury. 5At of S5 MW1d3, which by spending one token can be 5At of S10vsT5 MW1d3, or an attack on 4x4 area S5, or 5At S5 MW1d3 maximized.

    And this is where the King comes into play again. Our royal lord would have a rule, something like "Primeval Runes", that makes it possible to activate 2 ancient powers at once. Following the example above, he could have 5At, S10vsT5 MW1d3 maximized.
    Or Quickening + fire in GW. A king with 4At of S6 Ap3 Ag4 and fire attacks, with 1 veil token has Ag7 and with other token, divine attacks.
    I think this system looks very hard on paper, it's obviously stronger than what we have now but we have runes that are expensive today, so they either have a discount or they get better. I prefer our M3 characters to become more elite with better runes. Also, part of the balance is that we have a maximum of 3 tokens after the magic phase, so in the enemy combat phase we might not have any left and in our next magic phase we would have less energy dice.
  • Ahahah @Lakson thanks for the kind words, but I'm confident I'm not even close to being a good candidate for being part of any LAB team! Surely most my ideas look creativity and are more like a patch than proper rework. Anyways, I'm glad if you guys like some of those concepts.

    Keep in mind those are not only my ideas, and some of them have been talked with other guys with more experience than me, but obviously I only picked the ones that were more of my taste. As I said, I was determined to give DH better Discipline level and staying power to fit their nature (or what I think their nature is), while trying to make our characteristic elite unit feel really elite with KingsGuard, Deepwatch and Forge Wardens (this is really hard, because I'm sure most of use love Seekers, but as they currently are, they are just too good for us, and something needs to be done). I also tried to promote the use of medium sized units, but I'm not sure the changes would be correct.

    @berti your idea of dwarven anger is similar to other I had, but in the end I didn't consider because I thought it would be adding more rules. But what I had in mind is: when a character is killed, the enemy unit that did it gets grudged (so with my rules, frenzy, fearless and battlefocus against them), this could reflect the clan trying to avenge their leaders.
    Armies I play: :DH: :O&G: :OK: :SE_bw:
    My hobby's Blog
  • I don´t like the charakter thing.....the last things I loose are the charakters....nobody hits them.
    I would replace the current grudge mechanic and the +1ST on charge with it...so propably less rules than now.
    Just keep the no stand and shoot penalty for the rest...or perhaps even give it only to crossbows and handguns, even when it would be a real loss on the TW too.

    I like the idea on the runic items from Xaby86 a lot. Great idea to have those tokens involved and with the effects. Only allowing one to be activatet.

    I would also like some minor one use runes for 5-20 points mostly on the artefact section.
  • My opponents sometimes do attack characters, especially blacksmiths, to deprive me of the magic phase, and sometimes BSB.

    Maybe you could make Sturdy's activation different. DH has always been a reactive army in the game and with a stoic and overcoming background. Due to its high Discipline, its survival (stamina + armor) is an army that loses combats, but usually stands firm. Perhaps Sturdy's mechanics could be activated by receiving a charge and in the turn following a lost but not fled combat. I'm not talking about the effect, it could be +1S, or BF or anything else. The point is that such a mechanic would make us play looking for the enemy to attack us, looking for positions to resist and shooting him at the same time, plus it combines with Shield Wall, instead of having 2 opposite rules as now, one to attack and one to defend. It sounds very dwarf to say "I'll stand here, when you come for me I'll hit you very hard and if you make me angry I'll hit you again very hard". It would be an army that when things are going well, they don't need help, it's part of the dwarf thinking that if something works you shouldn't change it, but if things go wrong, you overcome it and you get strength from anywhere.
  • I would like a rule that is a benefit for all kinds of equipment. Actual +1 st on charge is not worth anything on GW (kingsguard and greybeards, miners and even on warriors St.6 is often, St.7 nearly always overkill)

    So I had prefered battle focus if a dwarf dies (to reflect the anger his buddies get) in CC, and afterwards they hit harder. In combination with shieldwall a smell benefit for HW/shield troops on top of the shield wall, while GW units tend to get higher value hits from the battle focus, so making up a little bit for the higher losses due to not having shield wall. (so GW is a little bit more appealing)
  • 1. King's guard could have basic bodyguard and maybe additional rule that represent their awesome fighting skills. e.g. Great Weapon with agi 1 would be awesome. Real bodyguards who strike before stomps!

    2. Some way to get re-rolls for miners ambush, or even underground ambush

    3. Deepwatch armour save 2+ would represent their true nature.

    4. Some tweaking for bound spells for sure,
    now these are too similar. I would like to see re-roll to armour save again.

    Dwarven bound spell could also be treated as regular spells where you just roll the dice. Or if not, the casting values could increase closer to the expected value of the dice 6+/9+.

    5. Different guilds and leader of the guild/clans with special rules that apply whole army or selected units. Two of these would of course be the Engineer's Guild and Seeker's clan

    6. Anything to prevent seeker spamming (if the leader is not from seeker's clan).
  • Hi guys,
    I really like the brainstorming around the future of the book. I have always enjoyed themed armies so maybe we could have armies with different guilds. You could get more points from one guild in your army and less from another.
    If the army belongs to a guild you can get special rules for the army (like hatred against monsters for the seeker guild) but heavier restrictions on the other guilds of the book.
    Like miner guild, with miners in core and maybe a drill tank that comes from under the earth like underground ambush. It could have more restrictions on engineering guild and war machines.
    Engineering guild with lots of high tech guns and toys but less access to seekers and elite troops.
    Seeker guild with more access to dragon seekers and vengeance seekers.
    Royal guild with stubborn kings guard and a king with proper synergy with the army.
    Rune Smith guild with extra bonus to the casting or dispelling.
    Just a thought here. It would be cool I think
  • BondageGoatZombie wrote:

    Isnt it unwise to dish out mechanical details when the general direction has not even been discussed? Going by the design guidelines published for the other LABs we should do something similar first, very rough.

    E.g. should our shooting be long range or medium range, mobile or static
    Should we focus on grinding or charging
    And so on
    Quite right, perhaps we should create another thread to discuss this.
  • xaby86 wrote:

    BondageGoatZombie wrote:

    Isnt it unwise to dish out mechanical details when the general direction has not even been discussed? Going by the design guidelines published for the other LABs we should do something similar first, very rough.

    E.g. should our shooting be long range or medium range, mobile or static
    Should we focus on grinding or charging
    And so on
    Quite right, perhaps we should create another thread to discuss this.
    Ah yes, perhaps I was a bit hasty in making this thread first.
    A LAB guidelines brainstorm thread could be in order. That thread is more about figuring out the players vision of what themes and playstyles they like about the army. It's also good if some background guys can give all the relevant info to give players something to go off. Otherwise most just default to WFB stuff.
  • I am convinced that together we could make some very attractive preliminary guidelines. What is certain is that we need some background to work on.

    PD: When my girlfriend falls asleep I will try to look for the ID or DE guidelines for inspiration (if anyone can pass me a link I would really appreciate it). I will try to make a draft in a few days if I have time.
  • In my opinion in a LAB for the DH we should question the rules the rules that are in place to see if they fit into the themes of the army. That’s what I tried to do in my homebrew file that has been at a shameful stand for a long time.

    Dwarves are the race of stone and metal.
    They are famous for their craftsmanship, tenaciousness and grudges.

    They have access to few weapon choices as their units will have a role of an anvil to stop the enemies or a hammer to crush them.

    ANVILS will be equipped with shields while HAMMERS will be equipped with great weapons.

    Regarding close combat dwarves are tough but lack in explosive power. I think of them as the opposite of Dread Elves.

    The devastating charge rule and the hatred from grudges go against these principles. What we need are rules that make use of the tough and tenacious nature of the DH warriors while still making charging an advantage for the dwarves. Without an incentive to charge we risk having static gunlines the go to option for DH.

    My solution was to have dwarves be removed as casualties at initiative step0 unless they have been charge in the turn. So that the weakness in initiative of the dwarves doesn’t penalise them in grinding; but doesn’t turn in an initiative advantage either.

    Concerning the armour. I think dwarves should have top tier armour for infantry but having a +2AS on infantry would be way to good. So I thought that giving them bonus armour on the charge would be a good idea so the advantage in combat of the dwarves wouldn’t come from that they killed more opponents but that they died less. In order to further accentuate the HAMMER role of the GW units they could benefit more from this effect.

    Regarding shooting the DH should be the polar opposite of the ID. ID units move like a lava trail towards their enemies bringing destruction with them along the path. DH shooting units are like stone fortresses, static and shooting effectively from a distance. I'd like to see "accurate" go into the marksmen profile as march-and-shoot in the ID profile. In order to differentiate between crossbows and handguns we could make dwarven crossbows with slighly better range (36") and dwarven handguns without unwieldy. It'd make sense to have dwarf marksmen with better equipment than their human counterparts and you can choose between having a better range or better reactiveness.

    Following the anvil/hammer logic seekers become a problematic unit because they will stick to anything they touch until the last dwarf standing while being able to deal lots of punishment.

    Since seekers are the embodiment of the tenacious side of the dwarves we can't really make them not unbreakable. I think the best way to deal with this problem is to give them another role that the standard well armoured infantry units can't fill. These dwarves are but-naked fighters, they should be move more freely than others. They should also be less numerous than other units; both from a gameplay and from a fluff point of view we can't have armies composed for the most part of seekers. This prevents them from being an all encompassing anvil/hammer unit.

    Sure they will fight till the last dwarf but if they are less numerous from the start killing them all is easier.

    From a fluff perspective dwarves are not a race that has numbers going for them. They can't just all go of to die in battle or their civilisation won't last long. My take on seekers fluff is that they are a guild specialised in monster hunting that dwarves may join in a quest for fame and glory, but since the risks of going against monsters is so high, taking the seeker oath is also considered a valid suicide method for dwarves that have lost everything.

    There's more to say but I think this wall of text is already long enough...
  • Dwarven Holds commentaries

    Army rules:

    Sturdy – destroying sturdy means destroying combat lists. Every little bit helps. DH combat is problematic anyways, see no reason why to weaken it. (Dwarfs are Agi2 army, we will repeat that here.)

    Rather should be made stronger – let´s make it first round of combat +1S +1 AP – dwarfs do not charge so often – even in this age. (Only downside, it would become very close to orcish „born to fight“)

    Shieldwall – is nice, but not so strong. Still does not cut it - either give shield units „holdstone ability“ on top – so they can do a real shieldwall (saga stuff, why not?) and wait for reinforcements OR make it stronger – 5+ aegis normal, 4+ if the enemy charged.

    There is real chance to turn dwarfs into elite super hard to crack infantry, they need just a bit. Why not?

    The game became so fast, that gunlines do not have a solid chance against good opponents, unless getting VEEERY lucky.

    Plus many of the secondary objectives brought with them the need to move or loose the objective. (Which is OK, why the guy who sits and shoots should be getting the glory?)

    Grudges – make them stronger. Hatred against one unit is OK, but it should be more. Battle focus mentioned here is fine, fearless also, frenzy is a bit questionable, maybe yes – it is only against one unit, so discourages those super unbeatable ultra big units – if fielded, the game gets even more epic feel. Why not?

    Dwarfs are slow, so the basic concept should be to make them more survivable, so they get to swing. Otherwise it is only the sluggfest of getting as many GW´s as possible and waiting for their turn to strike.


    Dwarf crafted weapons - Dwarfs are greatest smithes of all time. Yes? Their hand weapons have the same effect as those made by the vermin swarm!? All dwarfs should have +1 AP, when using a hand weapon or paired weapons, simply due to their superb craftsmanship. The edge is keen! Always.

    Eternium armour – gives 4 armour points – as expected from greatest smithes of all the time, they do have it. KG and DW + characters could have it.

    Guild crafted handgun – remove the unwieldy, dawi are great engineers and craftsmen, ok?

    The rest is OK.

    Battle runes

    Dwarf magic is weak. I do play regularly against OnG and will almost never cast anything. My oponent has no problem to stop the most important runes anytime he wishes. (Has no shaman, no bonuses to dispell, rolls well.)

    Battle rune range – 18“ from the runesmith.

    Rune of resolve – lets make it an attribute spell. Or let the attribute be something like +1AP/+1Arm. to a unit within 18“.

    Direct damage rune – this is missing – the anvil of doom should be able to do this – that is realy the essence of craftmanship to strike lightning with the runesmith´s hammer!

    Runic special items

    Weapon Enchantments

    Bring some small usefull runes.

    +1 Agility would be nice, +1AP would be fine too. Cheap like 10 pts. A rune, max 15.

    Speaking about too powerfull weapon runes is nonsense. Dwarf characters are slow. So when they finally get to swing, they should be really fearsome. It should HURT! Rune of destruction is D3 (not a D6 like in the 7th edition book), so that is no problem at all. It hurts, but is wielded by a 3“ advance move character. Oh, he is realy fearsome, he can (sometimes) get into the combat of his choosing...

    Armour enchantments

    Rune of Iron is expensive – why deny dwarfs their armour? Even the most infamous GW allowed for cheap armour upgrades to dwarfs. Either make it cheaper or revive the Rune of Stone +1 armour upgrade – and it cannot be increased.

    Rune of Adamantium - +1 Res. to bearers Resistance. Though, Yes, why not?

    Runic Artefacts

    I like those, they are realy funny. Magic phase breakers (Rune of Denial, Rune of Devouring, Rune of Harnessing) should be cheaper. Dwarfs allways were about breaking the enemy magic phase into debris, if they wished. Why not?

    A movement rune +1“ ADV + 3“March move, should be fine here. Something to add move to those combat dwarf blocks. Yes, wielded by a character, so You can choose, depending on situation, where to put the character and which unit to advance.

    I do like the Firthunands91 Rune of mining. Making miners more solid is a good thing. Combined with more miners reliability should be fine. (It is one of the few things I like from his suggestions. Too much of the rest, if accepted, would (AGAIN) force dwarfs into gunlines, as they would become crap in CC.)

    Runic Standards

    It is really questionable not to give dwarfs the ability to combine those runic banner enchantments. Master craftsmen and runic enchanters, yes?

    Minimal changes:

    Runic standard of shielding – make it cheaper – if you want to reinforce the combat style, anyway.

    Runic standard of swiftness – make it 0-2 per Army – to get more dwarfs into fight – will reinforce the MMU fighty approach, that is usualy more fun to play with or against. (What problem – dwarfs have to pay for it, so?)

    The rest is good as it is. Leave standard of wisdom, it is good as it is and gives few more chances to the poor dwarf magic phase.

    Maybe a runic standard of Harnessing, to reinforce the no magic approach.

    Please, why are dwarf handgunners not allowed to take a runic/magic banner enchantment? In the age of sylvan longbows and ID blunderbusses...


    The King

    Making the king more important to dwarfs would be fine. They are the pride of the clan and venerable ones, leading their people in war and peace... Making stubborn any unit he is joined to? Making it fight better? Battle focus?

    Dragon Seeker

    The Grim resolve is too expensive for what it does. Some sort of dwarf gods blessing (like firthunands91´s) would be OK.

    Rune lord

    Get him back. Res 5, old experienced, solid guy, who sends bolts of lightning all over the battlefield is interesting and not very ovepowered. Just gives the option for a guy who can last a bit. Give him the runic anvil war platform and let him show the true power of the runes!

    Some runes could work better, if he is in vicinity/on the battle field. Make dwarf runic army of sagas show their power again! (Limit gunpowder artillery in his army, if that feels too strong...)

    Runic smith

    Too expencive. Res4 guy 2 attacks – compare him to EoS prelate. And Runic smith has to buy those runes extra... With 2 runes, to equal him to an adept he is 195 pts. And those runes are easier to dispell, than those adept spells and not so powerfull as many spells out there are...


    Miners can re-roll ambush rolls, yes. (The rest of what firthu proposes is not very good. Why should not an experienced master engineer lead a dwarf mining expedition???)

    Riding grudge buster should be an option. Am surprised it is not already there...

    Re-rolling artillery-dice should be considered too. Dwarfs are reliable, yes...

    Anvil of Power – too expencive sitting duck. Either give it some higher defence, or make it cheaper.

    Could be remade into a war platform – to take that RUNELORD to battle, so the enemies of the dwarf race would know fear again! (Those runes get dispelled easily.)

    A solid alternative to the dwarf king on throne.

    Warthrone and Shieldbearers: Cannot be Stomped. Warhtrone at least for sure.


    Miners in core – yes of course. More fun to play. More options will be opened. Miners from special give very little sense. Mining expeditions are calling!

    Greybeards limitation to max.20 vanguard is a bit irritating – weakens the combat again. They are expencive as they are, a vanguarding greybeard with shield and GW costs already 26 pts. They have to have shields or they will die to enemy shooting. (All those complaining about dwarf gunlines are pretty fast in taking move away and shoot approach, when dwarfs start comming at them...), so why limit their number, please?

    5 pts. for a throwing weapon (5+) is also too much. No sense in taking it.

    Clan MarksmenGW option costs too much. Dwarfs are slow, giving them expencive GWs (when there is a limit on Clan´s Thunder, anyway) is pretty argh. (ID get great weapon for 3 and they have blunderbuss going with it... 18 pts, MUCH better armour and a deadly shooting weapon, plus GW is cheaper.)


    Deep Watch – Expensive and still weak. Give them better armour (hi, eternium) and give them those dwarf crafted hand weapons and we have a deal. 4 points of armour are not impressing really anyone. On a slow model, that strikes usualy last...

    Give them some blasting charges shooting option let them count to Clans Thunder for it. Make em strong. Keep stubborn. Loosing stubborn means end of story for them. Would be a pitty.

    KingsGuard: Stubborn if in Commanding Pressence of the General or a King. Lose Bodyguard. They help with them being more autonomous. (One of good Firthu suggestions) Iron Orcs have weapon master, but the cream of the cream in the dwarf lands are too stupid to use shields, when they get charged...

    Seekers – of course leave the unbreakable. They are no armour, almost always strike last blokes. They need to be unbreakable to do at least something. I have not seen a solid army fearing them – they get killed pretty fast, usualy. You´re comming with me should be even stronger, make it S6 attack, if You want them to be feared realy. (As they should be.)

    Vengenace seeker – compare him with the gnasher wrecking team and lower the price. Otherwise it is a funny option, that brings some flavour, competitivness is forgotten. They will not stop anything that matters but could become a viable option, now they are too expensive.

    Hold Guardians – expensive again. They get no regeneration, the LD is not very relevant – sending them alone in an expensive army (dwarfs are an expensive army) is stupid (die without suport), so they will be near the Ld 10 general. Make them harder or cheaper. They get outmanouvred too easily.

    Grudge Buster – funny, but expensive. Compare with the Sky sloop. Sky sloop shoots better, is faster, gets same impact hits. Grind attacks cost too much.Too expencive, too slow, too weak. It gets charged too often and killed too often. Good target for enemy shooting. Elven commander on Griffon is cheaper, and more deadly.

    Make more options for it- dwarfs could get some solid open top transporter (let dwarf units of 25 max be transported in it) – lets have one transporter, one cannon platform and one realy tough combat machine.

    Clan´s Thunder

    Forge wardens – S3 is good only against sylvan elves and those will make them their target priority, with possible kestrel charge very soon. 3 points of armour will impress maybe goblins, today. Give them shield. Give them 3+ at long range, 2+ at short range and S4, AP1, Wyrm slayer rocket upgrade for the champion. We can speak about a viable unit then. Till then, they are good only for fluffy games or forest clearing commando...

    Engines of War

    Dwarfs should be about reliability. If they should be so, then machines should be MORE reliable – e.g. having a better chance to hit. They are too luck dependend now. If the plan is to punish artillery, fine, give dwarfs more combat power and let only those with lucky dice use the artillery. If we want to be consistent, then another approach is needed.

    Elf commander on a griffon (glittering laquer and lance is 360 pts.) will take care off two cannons no problem – unless huge amount of shooting will go into killing him – or luck.

    2 cannons cost 500 pts. They are hitting a large model 1st turn on a 6+ (long range, yes remember the glittering laquer thingy), then one chance on a 5+. On the average the dwarf player will get in IDEAL circumstances 0,98 hits and then it is over for the cannon blokes. Charge, kill, overrun. Bye!

    Artillery is the only way to force other armies to play fair against dwarfs – have to fight them. Too often I heard – he had bad luck with artillery, so lost. Why that does not surprise me? Gunlines are pretty limited by the terrain pack, secondary objectives and percentages – 20% for arty is not too much at all. Dwarfs are supposed to be the best engineers in the game, so why not give them the artillery they deserve?

    In overall the design team can make the dwarf armies to be versatile – combat, mining and runic approach, or leave it at the attempt.

    Dwarfs are mostly an Agi 2 army. Every designer should keep that in mind, when thinking about the list as a whole, in my opinion.

    What has been done with the dwarf list so far, is not bad at all. Now it should be moved to the excellent level!
    Targ Ironfist, king of the Unicorn Clan is back.
  • ilovepeanut wrote:

    My solution was to have dwarves be removed as casualties at initiative step0 unless they have been charge in the turn. So that the weakness in initiative of the dwarves doesn’t penalise them in grinding; but doesn’t turn in an initiative advantage either.
    I liked this idea when it was brouht up a long time ago but I don't think they will impliment it.

    Targ Ironfist wrote:

    Sturdy – destroying sturdy means destroying combat lists. Every little bit helps. DH combat is problematic anyways, see no reason why to weaken it. (Dwarfs are Agi2 army, we will repeat that here.)

    Rather should be made stronger – let´s make it first round of combat +1S +1 AP – dwarfs do not charge so often – even in this age. (Only downside, it would become very close to orcish „born to fight“)

    A big problem I've always had with dwarves was the tripple march. I know I'm in the minority and most of you love it. But I always found it immersive, and felt it was just a 'hotfix' back in 1.2 or whenever it was implemented. And why do dwarves march farther than humans? or other races? There isn't much fluff regarding this. And the fluff that does exist from Lord of the Rings says that Dwarves are excellent SPRINTERS! So this would mean a good advance rate.

    Some people brought brought up the idea for Advance 5, March 8 for dwarves. Which I think would be a great change. Gives better incentive to charge. Get a big better reform/advance movement which helps infantry blocks.
    It fixes alot of problems with the Infernal dwarf march and shoot. And for Dwarf Holds, that 1 less march means the army can be made to take real advantage of it's other strengths in special deployment. And rework of the air units to fill the movement gaps.

    Targ Ironfist wrote:

    Shieldwall – is nice, but not so strong. Still does not cut it - either give shield units „holdstone ability“ on top – so they can do a real shieldwall (saga stuff, why not?) and wait for reinforcements OR make it stronger – 5+ aegis normal, 4+ if the enemy charged.
    I was always a fan of shield wall giving like +1 armour on first round of combat to the front. Ironbreakers can have the +1 armour all the time to the front.And then having the special plate that just gave a 6+ Aegis.
    That way core units can't be kept lower in points. The elites feel more elite. It creates interesting matchups for the units. And it helps reduce Ageis spam throughout the game.