WDG book 2.0 discussion

  • Shane wrote:

    Thorek Ironbrown wrote:

    Hey all WDG people. I'm trying to make sense of my WDG model collection now with 2.0. I remember there being a promise way back from the team that models useable in 8th ed WHFB wouldn't end up being unsupported. Looking through the new AB though I can't seem to find entries for some, but it could be that I just don't see the connection (I rarely play WDG).

    For example, what would you use a daemonic steed as now? War Dais would make no sense.
    There's no use for full plate-armoured dudes on steed of lust/shadow chaser?

    Is there a list of models that basically became unsupported in the transition to 2.0 somewhere?
    I think it’s worth remembering just what could comcievably count as a “supported model” under T9A design structure.
    Most players who are upset at the changes consider a “supported model” to be a model that represents a unit which is functionally similar to what it previously had been, and which occupies a similar place in an army.

    On the other side, it would be ENTIRELY supportable given the arguments of “supported models” for, as an (extreme) example, all Infantry units in the Orcs and Goblins army to be folded into a single unit choice with a single base size.

    NO!
    I don't care if I play the army or if someone else plays it. There are models that are distinguishable, and they had their own different rules. I don't care if there role in the army changes.
    But I do care if I cannot ue them anymore.
    To me, one type of models represents one entry in the AB. So, staying with WodG, if I use my fallen beasts as wrewtched beasts, I cannot use my trolls anymore, if I use my trolls as wretched beasts, I cannot us emy fallen beasts anymore.
    The same goes for vortex beast or hellcannon as hellmaw, chimera or manticore as ridden chimera, blight kings or chaos ogres as forsworn.
    And I would feel the same if OnG players needed to decide whether to use orcs or blach orcs or savage orks as orcs, as those are also 3 distinguishable model types that need to represent 3 different units out of the book.
    I don't know where you get the idea that we only care for our own army and not for the game as a whole.



    Any of the players models would be useable, though some would need to be rebased, etc. I am obviously not saying T9A would do that or anything as ridiculous, but that action wouldn’t invalidate any models as that restriction currently functions. Any suggestion that it had would be “subjective”

    Additionally, players presented with this want to find work arounds, so things are suggested that are not implementable because they either go against a T9A core concept or would require a significant loss to the faction. Making a unit, let’s days Chais Ogres, available by having them be underpowered goes against the balance goal, goes against the no-unnecessary/un-used unit goal, and adds additional complexity to the faction, which means that the army needs to get weaker/simpler/less fully designed elsewhere to make that work.


    Wrath Priest has to be removed because it doesn’t have any standing to exist, as despite the title of “Wrath” remaining, the previous incarnation is no longer part of this game, and with it goes anything conceptually linked. There is no more Wrath = Anti-Magic because that’s not NewFluff
    People created a priest-like model in chaos armour, the model doesn't say "I'm anti-magic", so if you don't want to have an anti-magic character, then don't. But make up rules for a priest-like model in hellforged armour, as there were rules for such a model, so there should be new rules for the model.

    That is the important point: don't invalidate models. Find new rules for them if you must, but do so.
  • You seem to be misinterpreting my post. I of course care what happens to other armies, people play them and I want them to have the most possible fun.

    As to your point about models for units, one of the goals of the design here seems to be or have been to fold units that were too similar into single choices. Players of course want to be able to use their models, and players also have specific feelings towards what those models should represent (which is obvious, fun WotDG became the most balanced force in the game but Warriors has Goblin stats there would be a great deal of negative reaction). Where the ideal balance is should be debated.


    As to the point with the Wrath Priest, it’s entire identity was an anti-magic sub-par Fighter as a Wizard alternative. Warriors no longer have Anti-Magic Wrath, and so a Priest would require a complete re-design in that it nwould need an entirely new purpose that was distinct to both a Wizard and a fighter character, a position no model has occupied before in this army.

    It’s worth remembering, by my recollection, that the Priest was included in 9th for purely fluff reasons, because the guys working on WotDG were nice fellows who were trying to make us all happy with themed choices. Now that the fluff (GW) and the theme (no magic Wrath), no longer exist, and thus there is no mechanic for the Priest, that unit choice is gone.

    I liked the Priest, made one, ran one, was thankful to have it, but for me personally I am more bothered by the loss of the Hero level character, who would be a good stand-in for anPriest model.

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

  • rolan wrote:

    People created a priest-like model in chaos armour, the model doesn't say "I'm anti-magic", so if you don't want to have an anti-magic character, then don't. But make up rules for a priest-like model in hellforged armour, as there were rules for such a model, so there should be new rules for the model.
    That is the important point: don't invalidate models. Find new rules for them if you must, but do so.


    Trechnical you can add plate armor to the sorceror, and your good to go. Those models are still usable, this is just more of the blandness issue again where people would have liked to see Marks on the Sorcerors.

    And the community would have probably much appreciated a sperate model with some more rules, like Hell forged armor, or an interaction with the The Reckoning. Such as taking the model gives you starting soul tokens, or adding him to a barbarian unit makes them generate soul tokens. Maybe caping his wizard level at apprentice and adding marks.

    But I dont think this is a case of invalidating models, as you can build a charector with the right magic items to behave similar to the wrath priest, its just really in effecient and dosnt make sense to do so due to the way the rest of the army works.
    Keeper of the Zoo
    Images of Ma Stuff
    My Warriors of Ind/Sagarikadesha Painting blog

    In Northern CA? Give me a buzz or visit our FB Group: Norcal 9th Age
  • New

    Shane wrote:

    You seem to be misinterpreting my post. I of course care what happens to other armies, people play them and I want them to have the most possible fun.

    As to your point about models for units, one of the goals of the design here seems to be or have been to fold units that were too similar into single choices. Players of course want to be able to use their models, and players also have specific feelings towards what those models should represent (which is obvious, fun WotDG became the most balanced force in the game but Warriors has Goblin stats there would be a great deal of negative reaction). Where the ideal balance is should be debated.


    As to the point with the Wrath Priest, it’s entire identity was an anti-magic sub-par Fighter as a Wizard alternative. Warriors no longer have Anti-Magic Wrath, and so a Priest would require a complete re-design in that it nwould need an entirely new purpose that was distinct to both a Wizard and a fighter character, a position no model has occupied before in this army.

    It’s worth remembering, by my recollection, that the Priest was included in 9th for purely fluff reasons, because the guys working on WotDG were nice fellows who were trying to make us all happy with themed choices. Now that the fluff (GW) and the theme (no magic Wrath), no longer exist, and thus there is no mechanic for the Priest, that unit choice is gone.

    I liked the Priest, made one, ran one, was thankful to have it, but for me personally I am more bothered by the loss of the Hero level character, who would be a good stand-in for anPriest model.

    Frumious wrote:

    rolan wrote:

    People created a priest-like model in chaos armour, the model doesn't say "I'm anti-magic", so if you don't want to have an anti-magic character, then don't. But make up rules for a priest-like model in hellforged armour, as there were rules for such a model, so there should be new rules for the model.
    That is the important point: don't invalidate models. Find new rules for them if you must, but do so.

    Trechnical you can add plate armor to the sorceror, and your good to go. Those models are still usable, this is just more of the blandness issue again where people would have liked to see Marks on the Sorcerors.

    And the community would have probably much appreciated a sperate model with some more rules, like Hell forged armor, or an interaction with the The Reckoning. Such as taking the model gives you starting soul tokens, or adding him to a barbarian unit makes them generate soul tokens. Maybe caping his wizard level at apprentice and adding marks.

    But I dont think this is a case of invalidating models, as you can build a charector with the right magic items to behave similar to the wrath priest, its just really in effecient and dosnt make sense to do so due to the way the rest of the army works.
    The 2 of you go to great length explaining how I can put a wrath priest model to use with the new book. You are even right, that specific model might fit the description of a mage in WodG lists. But I was just mentioning him in addition to all the other models because in the quote I answered to, the wrath priest was mentioned, and it was said there that "it had to go".
    All the other models I mentioned that were invalidated ( and there we talk about models that were around for years, that you could buy in stores, and not a single character most likely self-made during the last couple of month) you didn't mention.
    Why don't you mention that those are really lost on the shelves as long as the WodG book doesn't get more entries? Why pick the single solvable part instead of admitting that whole units are useless now?
  • New

    rolan wrote:

    Shane wrote:

    You seem to be misinterpreting my post. I of course care what happens to other armies, people play them and I want them to have the most possible fun.

    As to your point about models for units, one of the goals of the design here seems to be or have been to fold units that were too similar into single choices. Players of course want to be able to use their models, and players also have specific feelings towards what those models should represent (which is obvious, fun WotDG became the most balanced force in the game but Warriors has Goblin stats there would be a great deal of negative reaction). Where the ideal balance is should be debated.


    As to the point with the Wrath Priest, it’s entire identity was an anti-magic sub-par Fighter as a Wizard alternative. Warriors no longer have Anti-Magic Wrath, and so a Priest would require a complete re-design in that it nwould need an entirely new purpose that was distinct to both a Wizard and a fighter character, a position no model has occupied before in this army.

    It’s worth remembering, by my recollection, that the Priest was included in 9th for purely fluff reasons, because the guys working on WotDG were nice fellows who were trying to make us all happy with themed choices. Now that the fluff (GW) and the theme (no magic Wrath), no longer exist, and thus there is no mechanic for the Priest, that unit choice is gone.

    I liked the Priest, made one, ran one, was thankful to have it, but for me personally I am more bothered by the loss of the Hero level character, who would be a good stand-in for anPriest model.

    Frumious wrote:

    rolan wrote:

    People created a priest-like model in chaos armour, the model doesn't say "I'm anti-magic", so if you don't want to have an anti-magic character, then don't. But make up rules for a priest-like model in hellforged armour, as there were rules for such a model, so there should be new rules for the model.
    That is the important point: don't invalidate models. Find new rules for them if you must, but do so.

    Trechnical you can add plate armor to the sorceror, and your good to go. Those models are still usable, this is just more of the blandness issue again where people would have liked to see Marks on the Sorcerors.
    And the community would have probably much appreciated a sperate model with some more rules, like Hell forged armor, or an interaction with the The Reckoning. Such as taking the model gives you starting soul tokens, or adding him to a barbarian unit makes them generate soul tokens. Maybe caping his wizard level at apprentice and adding marks.

    But I dont think this is a case of invalidating models, as you can build a charector with the right magic items to behave similar to the wrath priest, its just really in effecient and dosnt make sense to do so due to the way the rest of the army works.
    The 2 of you go to great length explaining how I can put a wrath priest model to use with the new book. You are even right, that specific model might fit the description of a mage in WodG lists. But I was just mentioning him in addition to all the other models because in the quote I answered to, the wrath priest was mentioned, and it was said there that "it had to go".All the other models I mentioned that were invalidated ( and there we talk about models that were around for years, that you could buy in stores, and not a single character most likely self-made during the last couple of month) you didn't mention.
    Why don't you mention that those are really lost on the shelves as long as the WodG book doesn't get more entries? Why pick the single solvable part instead of admitting that whole units are useless now?
    Oh, I'm agreeing that models shouldnt get invalidated. I dont think we are in opposition. It has already been discussed several times already in this thread. Its starting to get circular.

    I just hadn;t seen specific instances on what to do with Wrath priests so I added that.

    In generall this thread is starting to rehash and churn through the same arguments. You can see that the people involved in a solution are paying attention in this thread, they probably just stoped chiming in as well. I'm gonna bow out and see what the hot fix brings, and then see what there is to discuss with the WDG rework comming a couple months after that.
    Keeper of the Zoo
    Images of Ma Stuff
    My Warriors of Ind/Sagarikadesha Painting blog

    In Northern CA? Give me a buzz or visit our FB Group: Norcal 9th Age

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

  • New

    I'm using all my models. Which models aren't you using? For my old WoC GW models I'm using...
    All my character models
    Barbarians
    Mounted Barbarians
    Warhounds
    Chaos Warriors
    Chosen
    Knights
    Spawns
    Crushers
    The Steeds of Slaanesh dudes (can't think of the name)
    Trolls
    Ogres
    Dragon Centaurs
    Warshrine
    Giant
    Elder Dragon Centaur
    Chaos Dragon
    Hellcannon
    Mutalith/Bloodbeast
    ...I think that's all my models. I can't think of anything I own that I can't or haven't used in T9A. :thinking: What am I missing??

    Advisory Board

  • New

    Only problem I can see could be condensation of some entries with adding limits on top of that/price, like people having Manticore + 2x unmounted Chimera, more than 1 Mutalith & 1 Bloodbeast or few models of Ogres, Trolls, Spawns & Blightkings (or Once-Chosen conversions).
    I'm glad that idea about merging Warriors & Chosen wasn't done - that would cause REAL riot here.
    Current armies:
    WDG
    SA

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Armywide Signature Spells - Check! Maybe you could add something more? Success! We got Hereditary Spells!

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

  • New

    Grimbold Blackhammer wrote:

    I'm using all my models. Which models aren't you using? For my old WoC GW models I'm using...
    All my character models
    Barbarians
    Mounted Barbarians
    Warhounds
    Chaos Warriors
    Chosen
    Knights
    Spawns
    Crushers
    The Steeds of Slaanesh dudes (can't think of the name)
    Trolls
    Ogres
    Dragon Centaurs
    Warshrine
    Giant
    Elder Dragon Centaur
    Chaos Dragon
    Hellcannon
    Mutalith/Bloodbeast
    ...I think that's all my models. I can't think of anything I own that I can't or haven't used in T9A. :thinking: What am I missing??
    This statement would remain equally true if the only units in the Warriors list were Knights, Monstrous Knights, Light cav, a giant, and 1 unit of 20mm based Warriors.


    I was going to write a response to you @rolan, but @Frumious said everything that I was going to.
  • New

    Grimbold Blackhammer wrote:

    I'm using all my models. Which models aren't you using? For my old WoC GW models I'm using...
    All my character models
    Barbarians
    Mounted Barbarians
    Warhounds
    Chaos Warriors
    Chosen
    Knights
    Spawns I use them as wretched beasts, what should I use My trolls for?
    Crushers
    The Steeds of Slaanesh dudes (can't think of the name)
    Trolls
    OgresThey are out as I use blightkings (you forgot to mentioned them)as forsworn
    Dragon Centaurs
    Warshrine
    Giant
    Elder Dragon Centaur
    Chaos Dragon
    Hellcannon I use My mutalith as hellmaw, so the hellcannon is out
    Mutalith/Bloodbeast
    ...I think that's all my models. I can't think of anything I own that I can't or haven't used in T9A. :thinking: What am I missing??
  • New

    I'm just saying I have a use for all my models and I'd hope most other folks do too. As for the size of each individual's collection, that's up to each individual. While I own four Hellcannon models, I don't expect to use them all now unless my friends and I decide to play larger games. I mean there's really only so much the designers can do...

    Advisory Board

  • New

    The designers couldn't of given Wretched Beasts mutations to properly emulate or at least give nods at the various models being rolled into it? Would that be so complex and confusing, in the same army book that has two *completely* different rule sets and hugely different combat roles a Chimera based on weather it is 'broken' or not? <-- How is this Streamlining, this makes zero sense!

    Designers couldn't have included something to make the unit that is obviously intended to use the Hellcannon model to 'feel' like a cannon? Couldn't have given it a soul token mechanic, or a bound spell, or hell, even a breath weapon?

    The designers had plenty of room and frankly not a a huge amount of work to make each 'streamlined' unit pay homage to the models that they know full well most players use to represent certain things. It seems to be a case of T9A trying to distance itself from GW, but it has to accept that a large amount of the player base are players coming from GW with Warriors of Chaos armies and this project would be foolish not to pander to it's audience, at least somewhat.
  • New

    Grimbold Blackhammer wrote:

    I'm just saying I have a use for all my models and I'd hope most other folks do too. As for the size of each individual's collection, that's up to each individual. While I own four Hellcannon models, I don't expect to use them all now unless my friends and I decide to play larger games. I mean there's really only so much the designers can do...
    -Wretched beasts can be used as trolls or spawns = so either trolls or spawns are invalidated

    -hellmaw can be used as hellcannon or muthalit = so either hellcannon or muthalit is invalidated

    -forsaken one can be used as bloodbeast or muthalit = so either bloodbeast or muthalit is invalidated

    -karkadan can be used as DM or crusher = so either DM or crusher is invalidated

    -forsworn can be used as blight-kings/ogres or trolls = either ogres or trolls are invalidated

    -chimera can be used as chimera or manticore = so either chimera or manticore is invalidated


    So i dont really understand your post. If i have each of the mentioned models, then 50% of this models stay in the showcase with 2.0.
  • New

    Exalted Champion wrote:

    Grimbold Blackhammer wrote:

    I'm just saying I have a use for all my models and I'd hope most other folks do too. As for the size of each individual's collection, that's up to each individual. While I own four Hellcannon models, I don't expect to use them all now unless my friends and I decide to play larger games. I mean there's really only so much the designers can do...
    -Wretched beasts can be used as trolls or spawns = so either trolls or spawns are invalidated
    -hellmaw can be used as hellcannon or muthalit = so either hellcannon or muthalit is invalidated

    -forsaken one can be used as bloodbeast or muthalit = so either bloodbeast or muthalit is invalidated

    -karkadan can be used as DM or crusher = so either DM or crusher is invalidated

    -forsworn can be used as blight-kings/ogres or trolls = either ogres or trolls are invalidated

    -chimera can be used as chimera or manticore = so either chimera or manticore is invalidated


    So i dont really understand your post. If i have each of the mentioned models, then 50% of this models stay in the showcase with 2.0.
    I disagree only about Karkadan - it is explicitly stated that Karkadan - it is a collective name for large spectrum of huge ridden beasts. So it is only entry here that does not invalidate any models.
  • New

    Happy Aspid wrote:

    Exalted Champion wrote:

    Grimbold Blackhammer wrote:

    I'm just saying I have a use for all my models and I'd hope most other folks do too. As for the size of each individual's collection, that's up to each individual. While I own four Hellcannon models, I don't expect to use them all now unless my friends and I decide to play larger games. I mean there's really only so much the designers can do...
    -Wretched beasts can be used as trolls or spawns = so either trolls or spawns are invalidated-hellmaw can be used as hellcannon or muthalit = so either hellcannon or muthalit is invalidated

    -forsaken one can be used as bloodbeast or muthalit = so either bloodbeast or muthalit is invalidated

    -karkadan can be used as DM or crusher = so either DM or crusher is invalidated

    -forsworn can be used as blight-kings/ogres or trolls = either ogres or trolls are invalidated

    -chimera can be used as chimera or manticore = so either chimera or manticore is invalidated


    So i dont really understand your post. If i have each of the mentioned models, then 50% of this models stay in the showcase with 2.0.
    I disagree only about Karkadan - it is explicitly stated that Karkadan - it is a collective name for large spectrum of huge ridden beasts. So it is only entry here that does not invalidate any models.
    So where are crusher mounts?

    And isnt your crusher invalidated if you possess DM mounts and crusher mounts?

    So if you play your crusher as DM mount, what do you play your DM mount as?
  • New

    Happy Aspid wrote:

    Exalted Champion wrote:

    Grimbold Blackhammer wrote:

    I'm just saying I have a use for all my models and I'd hope most other folks do too. As for the size of each individual's collection, that's up to each individual. While I own four Hellcannon models, I don't expect to use them all now unless my friends and I decide to play larger games. I mean there's really only so much the designers can do...
    -Wretched beasts can be used as trolls or spawns = so either trolls or spawns are invalidated-hellmaw can be used as hellcannon or muthalit = so either hellcannon or muthalit is invalidated

    -forsaken one can be used as bloodbeast or muthalit = so either bloodbeast or muthalit is invalidated

    -karkadan can be used as DM or crusher = so either DM or crusher is invalidated

    -forsworn can be used as blight-kings/ogres or trolls = either ogres or trolls are invalidated

    -chimera can be used as chimera or manticore = so either chimera or manticore is invalidated


    So i dont really understand your post. If i have each of the mentioned models, then 50% of this models stay in the showcase with 2.0.
    I disagree only about Karkadan - it is explicitly stated that Karkadan - it is a collective name for large spectrum of huge ridden beasts. So it is only entry here that does not invalidate any models.
    Sorry, but not even that. If to me, my kardakans look like the old crushers, they will not look like the old DM. Just because somebody tells me that he would like me to happily mix my models doesn't make it happen.
  • New

    Just do it like it was said few times here - optional upgrade of Black Steed.
    Options:
    - Daemonblood - 50 pts

    Daemonblood: Model base's size is changed to 50x50mm, model gains +1 to Attack, +1 to AP.

    Forsworn:
    May replace all Armours, Weapons & Innate defense (1) with <insert troll rules> - 10 pts/model

    Doesn't have to be totally balanced (so it can be UP) and will keep quiet all criers...

    Edit:
    Only I feel so bored/tired by this crying? <X
    Current armies:
    WDG
    SA

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Armywide Signature Spells - Check! Maybe you could add something more? Success! We got Hereditary Spells!

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

  • New

    Daemonic mount was 50x50mm unlike karkadan’s (clearly crushers concept wise) which is 75x50 so its invalidated imo. Sure you can rebase it but thats not fixing the invalidation itself.

    I bought three varanguards back then to make two Lords and a Sorc lord on DM, but thats simply gone. For karkadan I own a box of six crushers that since I have already painted them it would be silly to use varanguards as karkadan now. At best Im hoping that varanguards can fit on 50x25 bases somehow as black steed mount.