Pinned DE General Discussion

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

  • Giladis wrote:

    I am curious where did the notion of Alchemy being linked to DE industry I saw mentioned come from?


    I read it this before, anyway I always connect Alchemy with industry.


    Also what Path in your opinion would you pick to represent the philosophical teaching of the Nabh-Darag devine pair (if unsure what I am talking about check the DE background supplement :) )?

    The elven pantheon is inspired by the indoeuropean one. Nabh roughly corelates to Athena while Darag to Hephestus. So if you had to choose a T9A path best fitting to that pair which one would you choose? :)
    Hephaestus, Greek Hephaistos, in Greek mythology, the god of fire. ... A blacksmith and craftsman, Hephaestus made weapons and military equipment for the gods and certain mortals, including a winged helmet and sandals for Hermes and armour for Achilles.

    Obviously Alchemy and Pyromancy.

    Athena was a goddess of war, handicraft, and practical reason. Essentially urban and civilized, Athena was probably a pre-Hellenic goddess later taken over by the Greeks.

    Divination and maybe Thaumaturgy.

    Why not transform the Aegis from the Temple EExarch in a talisman made by the War Smith Temple?.
  • umbranar wrote:

    smithing is a bit weird for an army book with mainly light and heavy armour. Pretty much none of the entries has an armour better than 2.
    Smithing is an integral part of the mythological cycles of various warfare related deities usually cloaked in allegories. So pairing war and smithing was a natural choice for a society as militarised as the DE one.


    setrius wrote:

    Why not transform the Aegis from the Temple EExarch in a talisman made by the War Smith Temple?.
    Can you please elaborate I am not sure I understand your suggestion?


    As for the rest of the post you did not say which Path you would assign if you had to assign it to the pair rather than each individual deity. :)

    Advisory Board

    Background Team

    DE LAB TT

    THE SAUCY QUILL INN
  • So maybe give a choice between their respected paths and Cosmo for Exarchs. Or for Exarch that did not chose to be either War Smith nor Oracle to have acces to Cosmo at adept level and/or BSB without any other buff to units wielding blades of darag.

    Cosmo was supposed to be the "hereditary" path for the Elves yet no Daeb elf has access to it. That is of course if WO background is still of HBE origin and excluding Champion of Acolites with their 1 cosmo spell.
  • Giladis wrote:


    Why not transform the Aegis from the Temple EExarch in a talisman made by the War Smith Temple?.
    Can you please elaborate I am not sure I understand your suggestion?

    As for the rest of the post you did not say which Path you would assign if you had to assign it to the pair rather than each individual deity. :)
    if Darag is inspired in Hephaestus who is a blacksmith and craftsman. Why not the temple of Darag craft magic items to represent this? I mean a suppose that Blades of Darag are made in the temple of the War Smith.

    Why not do the same with the Aegis rule that have Temple Exarch and Warlock Acolytes? I mean turn them into magic items as Blades of Darag.
    I feel curiosity, can you explain me how Temple Exarch and Warlock Acolytes get the Aegis rule?
  • New

    @Mojzesz as previously stated TE not having access to Cosmology was part of a compromise between rules and background. The faction still has access to Cosmology and while the situation is not ideal it is acceptable.

    Would you have prefered TE having access to Cosmology but WO being reduced to 2 Paths? There not being a Path overlap between the two casters was an important design requirement.


    @setrius that would in general go against T9A design principles. We do not invent new things just to give a specific name to an already existing special rule. For example, there is no more barding in T9A but certain mounts give a better armour bonus to their rider representing barding. Here is the same situation.

    Advisory Board

    Background Team

    DE LAB TT

    THE SAUCY QUILL INN
  • New

    Giladis wrote:

    As for the rest of the post you did not say which Path you would assign if you had to assign it to the pair rather than each individual deity. :)
    Temple of War Smith I will give Alchemy and Pyromancy. If I assign one Alchemy I will give Pyromancy to HbE

    Temple of Battle Oracle I will give Divination and Thaumaturgy. If I assign one Thaumaturgy I will give Divination to Sylvan Elves, Treemens and Dryads
  • New

    Shame the greek pantheon is used as reference (itself surely being the merging of others) over the celtic tradition.

    For De, I would have prefer to see their interpretation of war and preparation to war more focused on mind and stratagem over foreseeing and pure material world crafting. I mean, major themes are : "dread" elves (reputation), "taming" (master of beast mind), "salver" (master of other rights and body) ; no need to add even more theme in here and align the philosophy of priest to the rest of the army, after all those gods have many aspect and there is many way to follow their will/wisdom/path.
    Witchcraft (also tied to DL and so Veil) is a good path for a priest about preparation of war, illusion and curse are a better way to victory as you (try to) control your opponent, with this aggressive way to deal no need for divination, your path is created by your will ! (it's more risky, but hubris is a sin for elves, no ?)
    Cosmology works well for the war itself, as it's a path that guide the (lives) give and take during the battle and ensure the final equilibrium is favorable to the DE.

    ...
    Well, that would be more my vision of DE, with a philosophy more fixed on the aggressive / control way of thinking instead of trying to explore everything halfway (crafting for magic while almost absent in the book, even vengeance for the H spell).
    For now (alpha 4) it don't tend to this and didn't give me hope to see that, I gave up playing DE.
    :UD_bw:

    Strider (Open Terrain)

    I hold no truth except mine. And I'm not sure about this last one.
  • New

    Minidudul wrote:

    Shame the greek pantheon is used as reference (itself surely being the merging of others) over the celtic tradition.
    I used greek examples because most people are familiar with them. Had I gone with Indo-European mythological archetypes I think I would have just confused many people.


    When building the Elven pantheon back in 2015 I took the IE mythological archetypes and tried to move them through evolutionary phases where the way they manifest in the understanding of the SE is closer to the bronze/iron age focal points among semi urbanised societies which could find most parallels in the way these were understood among the Celts alongside with sprinkling of various European elven lore. For the HE and later DE I took the exploration in the direction of how these archetypes manifested among later urbanised societies with a diversification based on particular focuses of these societies which result in the DE observance of the pantheon being more linked to Dorian greeks, Ethruscans and early republican Romans.

    All in all it took a couple of weeks of my time to try and get the right feel considering in T9A gods are existing beings which means there should be far less variation in the interpretation of the archetypes. To put it more precisely there should be no interpretation since a god is a thing so the focus is placed more on the way how worship is diferentiated and what gods are philosophically more aligned with which faction.

    Advisory Board

    Background Team

    DE LAB TT

    THE SAUCY QUILL INN
  • New

    DarkSky wrote:

    rolan wrote:

    Problem is, perception of srength is auto-include, twisted effegy depends on opponents army, and curse is only a useful choice if the heirloom isn't used.
    So instead of 1 we would have 2 useful spells on them with blades, and it would actually be choice to make. I have yet to see someone pick ancestral aid with acolytes, and Imyself didn't put them in a list because i had an cosmo master with heirloom, so no appealing spell selection left for acolytes.
    would it really be so bad to have a useful spell selection instead of a preselection?
    This is an interesting observation.
    If you think Ancestral Aid is too weak and PoS is auto-include, would you agree to give up PoS for a weaker Cosmo spell in order to get Spectral over Ancestral?

    That would turn things around without solving the issue, weaker spells would be altered sight, or truth of time, so we had another spell that is only useful with the right oppnent, and/or doesn't help that much. I really think blades instead of ancestral would create a meaningful choice.



    Additionally you touch on interesting aspects: Should the Acolytes have generic or specific spells? I think Effigy is an amazing spell, against the right opponent. Certainly stronger than many others. Would you be willing to trade "peak power" for "always usable"?


    Effigy is great, and should stay there, it i just that sometimes I see my opponents army and think "I don't need it this time" Plus having 1 spell that is specific is not the problem.



    Another aspect: I have heard the lack of ranged protection being an issue again and again. Are you really considering Effigy to be situational if that weakness is so profound?
    The spell is situational because some armies simply don't shoot, that is not a problem of the spell.
  • New

    I'd say that on a Conclave, it's good to have one great spell and the rest situational ones. If all the spells are great, it makes a pair of councils better than having a single wizard - This isn't ideal in my books, Councils should be supplementary units, not the main draw of magic...Unless it's designed the other way around, of course.

    The Acolytes are already damn attractive as is.
    Life is hard when you're a skeleton
  • New

    Palmu wrote:

    Even now, I can't come up with many situations where one of the three isn't useful. Granted, the Hereditary and Effigy kind of fill the same needs.
    But it is also good to have redundancy in spell selection, so the opponent can dispell one but not the other. That is what makes Paths like Druidism so strong. Don't let me cast Summers Growth, fine, here comes Stone Skin.
  • New

    not as natural a choice as Shamanism though - the background of DE and the beasts component clearly lends itself more to Shamanism than to Alchemy. DE equipment, weapons and armour is pretty meh so i just don't think the argument below holds water. the game designers just seem to want DE to have Alchemy. there's not a finite amount of Shamanism you know, there's plenty more left in the Shamanism mines!

    Giladis wrote:


    umbranar wrote:

    smithing is a bit weird for an army book with mainly light and heavy armour. Pretty much none of the entries has an armour better than 2.
    Smithing is an integral part of the mythological cycles of various warfare related deities usually cloaked in allegories. So pairing war and smithing was a natural choice for a society as militarised as the DE one.
    Current reigning #1 Dread Elf Kang in Australia, voted all-time best Dread Elf in the northern Sydney to Newcastle region by my peers, thanks guys
    :thumbup:
    Shamanism for Dread Elves - the most Beastly and Monstery of all armies!!!
  • New

    Palmu wrote:

    I'd say that on a Conclave, it's good to have one great spell and the rest situational ones. If all the spells are great, it makes a pair of councils better than having a single wizard - This isn't ideal in my books, Councils should be supplementary units, not the main draw of magic...Unless it's designed the other way around, of course.

    The Acolytes are already damn attractive as is.
    a pair of conclaves is not better than a single master, thanks to greater spell selection and casting bonus, not even better than 2 adepts.
    But at least with 4 useful spells you had the option of playing that way.
    What would be bad about that?
  • New

    Giladis wrote:

    @Mojzesz as previously stated TE not having access to Cosmology was part of a compromise between rules and background. The faction still has access to Cosmology and while the situation is not ideal it is acceptable.

    Would you have prefered TE having access to Cosmology but WO being reduced to 2 Paths? There not being a Path overlap between the two casters was an important design requirement.
    Yeah i do realize that that outcome of the path chosen for our wizards must be some kind of compromise and is not random by any means, but maybe we can jugle those path a lil bit ;)
    I would accept moving Cosmo to TE, if that would open up shamanism for WO at max adept level maybe. Trading 1 wizard master level path to 2 adept level paths.(As a disclaimer i simply do not use WO with Cosmo, so it would not hurt me that much).
  • New

    Mojzesz wrote:

    Giladis wrote:

    @Mojzesz as previously stated TE not having access to Cosmology was part of a compromise between rules and background. The faction still has access to Cosmology and while the situation is not ideal it is acceptable.

    Would you have prefered TE having access to Cosmology but WO being reduced to 2 Paths? There not being a Path overlap between the two casters was an important design requirement.
    Yeah i do realize that that outcome of the path chosen for our wizards must be some kind of compromise and is not random by any means, but maybe we can jugle those path a lil bit ;)I would accept moving Cosmo to TE, if that would open up shamanism for WO at max adept level maybe. Trading 1 wizard master level path to 2 adept level paths.(As a disclaimer i simply do not use WO with Cosmo, so it would not hurt me that much).
    Removing Cosmo from Master chassis would hurt our magic dammage pottential even more. (Snipe/ Unity in Divergence). Shamanism would turn us even more into a Buff Magic overall feal - which I deem not flavorfull IMO

    Dont get me wrong Cosmo is still good on a Adept but contributes to what I wrote above.

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